Everyone loves Girl Scout cookies, of course. The Samoas are my favorites. But every woman I know is hopelessly devoted to the Thin Mints.
The latest boxes were four bucks a pop, which is fine, because we're getting fat while supporting a good cause, right? And they are the greatest slim, minty, chocolaty cookie in the world.
OR ARE THEY?
That said, there are things to consider here. The Back to Nature brand was $4.30 a box, and it's only 6.4 oz, while the $4 Girl Scout box is 9 oz. And as I exposed a couple of weeks ago, Kraft owns Back to Nature, so it's not like the cookies are so expensive because Ma and Pa Greengrass are lovingly forming each organic artisinal cookie by hand. Still, if my wife is right, and she always is, you have to ask yourself: Is it worth it to spend more money for fewer cookies if the quality is higher?
Me, I've generally been a quantity over quality guy. A bucket of cold Evian in your face may be bracing, but a swimming pool's worth of tap water will really get your attention.
We don't keep cookies around here much; they never last long anyway. (It's the dog's fault!) (Not really.) But since Girl Scout stuff is only around for part of the year, I'd say, if you support the Girl Scouts and want to help them pay the rent....
|Midtown Manhattan: Not Cheap.|
....then buy the Thin Mints when you can and go for the
Meanwhile, there's another strange cookie scandal involving my Samoas, which Babble fearlessly exposed last year. I thought the name had been changed because of political correctness ("Stop insulting the Samoans! Struggle is reals, yall!") and then changed back due to customer ire, but it turns out to be more complicated an issue. (Hint: TWO bakeries!) (!!)
Who knows what cookie secrets have yet to be revealed? Margarine in the Trefoils? Savannah Smiles named for the late adult film actress rather than the town in Georgia? Peanut spread rather than peanut butter in the Do-Si-Dos? Is there a merit badge for COVER-UPS?