Size does matter! Part 2

So I've received comments and questions on my last post, when I compared the 2008 eyeshadow palette to the 2009 eyeshadow palette. Someone commented if I could check the grams and I did. Both are stated to have 5.3 grams but the 2008 states "net wt 5.3 grams" and the 2009 states "total net 5.3 grams". Currently I don't have the earlier holiday palettes, they're at home and I'm away for college so I don't have those to compare to.

I still think that the 2009 Mac eyeshadows are smaller because
- its obvious that the packaging is more expensive
- the economy
- the pricing for the eyeshadow palettes did not change since 2004 (maybe longer but that's when I started collecting these palettes)

I don't see why Mac would spend more on packing and have the same amount of product and still charge the same price? Plus the wording is different? Why not keep the wording the same?

Plus when I told the manager of my local counter that the eyeshadow palettes got smaller. She agreed with me which confirmed my suspicions and that's why I posted my thoughts on the sizing.

Don't get me wrong, it would be nice to be wrong on this so I would actually have more eyeshadows than I thought.