Should Subway be sued over selling footlong subs that are only 11 inches long? While shortchanging us on bread may be a letdown, it’s not actually a reason to sue the company. So put the rulers away, and just enjoy your sub!
FYI
Should Subway Be Sued Over An 11in. Footlong Sub?: Legal Briefs
-
01/24/13
by Eye Opener
EyeOpenerTV
Advertisement
-
NightcapTV
Go to WaterMyYard.org to find out how much to water your lawn needs. It’s less than you think. #LawnvsLake #WaterIQ #NTMWD4 hours
-
NightcapTV
Half of the water used on your lawn is wasted due to overwatering and runoff. #LawnvsLake Water smarter so both win. NorthTexasWaterIQ.org.10 hours
-
NightcapTV
Your morning commute is looking good so far. #DFWtraffic12 hours
2 Comments to “Should Subway Be Sued Over An 11in. Footlong Sub?: Legal Briefs”
January 24, 2013 at 6:36 PM
People should be more concerned with the lack of MEATthey put on the sandwich rather than the shortage of bread!
January 27, 2013 at 9:42 PM
The 1” difference in the bread should be the least of anyone’s concerns. What you SHOULD be concerned about is the ingredients used in their breads. Their bread contains L-cysteine. L-cysteine is derived from either duck feathers, hog hair, or worse…human hair. Human hair is mainly used in products from China, but is used in the US as well. For all the vegetarians who thought Subway was safe….wrong. It is blatant false advertising. I’m sure that meat-eaters also didn’t know they were eating such disgusting ingredients when Subway has made billions claiming their food was healthy.