What's in front counts more.

In-your-face calorie and fat numbers are jumping out of the front panels of dozens of food packages. They come on the heels of the 100-calorie packs of cookies and snacks that have been flying off the shelves, demonstrating that numbers that connect with consumers from the front of the package trigger a lot of sales.

Consumers have found it hard to get useful information out of back-panel labels for many years. A new survey released by Deloitte found that "less than 1/3 (26%) say companies now provide sufficient information on their products/packaging to assist in purchase decisions."

Forget about struggling through that panel on the back to extract something meaningful from the crowded lists on the back. Suddenly, there are fat and calorie bullets right on the front of Michelina entrees. Right below the item name on South Beach Living entrees, bold print says: "250 calories. 25 grams protein." The front-panel bullets on Kashi frozen entrees look just like the bullets on their ready-to-eat cereals. "Good deal," says the shopper, and pops one in her cart.

Bringing useful information to the front of the food package cuts through clutter. It may even raise the quality image of processed food by connecting with consumers at the moment of truth when purchase decisions are made. Retailers have known for years that prices in big type are more likely to be perceived as low prices--after all, the seller is loudly proclaiming them.

To look at how consumers perceived the information in different categories, we asked a cross section of shoppers on The Consumer Network panel to rate the helpfulness of the on-pack information in 20 food and 7 non-food categories. Here are the percents that rated the on-pack information Excellent or Good versus the percent that rated it Fair, Poor, or Awful in each food category.

Besides sell-by dates (which some consumers wish were larger and bolder but are almost always visible), most bottles of milk show the fat level, and many include prominent banners identifying them as ORGANIC or FROM COWS RAISED WITHOUT BSF. Most of our shoppers gave cheese good ratings, too, but some mentioned not understanding the difference between "cheese" and "cheese food," while others pointed out that they liked having the country-of-origin identified on specialty cheeses.

The big problem with the low ratings in many categories is the low level of trust that accompanies them. Many consumers feel that much would-be-useful information is withheld or provided in small, hard-to-understand print, so that the products will be purchased in spite of what's in them.

* "On product labels, print is often too small due to multi-lingual packaging, poor color choices, or deliberate efforts to bury the information. This is especially troubling in products that contain harmful ingredients or allergy information."

Fast food got very low ratings, and many of our respondents expressed annoyance about it.

* "Ingredient and calorie information should be printed on the bags or wrappers."

* "I stopped eating fast food because there's no information provided."

* "No one has time to look at pamphlets. They need information on the bags or wrappers!"

Among the other ratings I found especially interesting are those for steak (30% good) and ground beef (70% good). These ratings suggest that consumers are finding ground beef labels more useful than steak labels, at a time when beef brands like Black Angus are proliferating. Steak labels usually include the cut but don't include fat percentages, cooking times, or tem peratures that might help prospective buyers feel more confident of the taste they can expect to get for their investment. Perhaps that's why steak houses are doing so well these days, when other expensive restaurant formats are struggling.

The fish ratings are interesting, too. Consumers wrote:

* "I want to know where it was caught."

* "Is it okay for me to freeze it, or was it shipped frozen?"

* "Need to have cooking information (bake, fry, broil) and cooking times. Would like to try more varieties, but not sure how to cook. Guessing hasn't always turned out well."

* "On frozen fish, they should tell the weight of the breading versus the fish. I stopped buying it because I got some that was all breading."

Information is especially important in categories that consumers aren't sure they can trust. During my supermarket days, one of my nicest win-wins involved getting buyer/merchandisers to test new fish and seafood signs in a cross section of demographically matched stores. The test stores used signs that identified half of the products in the case as previously frozen:

Shinned frozen. Do not refreeze.

The buyer/merchandisers were sure the signs would kill the sales of thawed items, but fish and seafood sales went up in all the stores with the new signs, even for items that were flagged "do not refreeze."

Many things have changed since those signs were tested, but one thing hasn't: Consumers buy more when they trust the information that is provided to them. And it's very possible that front-panel numbers are perceived as more reliable and trustworthy to a degree that can help to rebuild consumers' trust in the quality of packaged foods.

The very low information ratings that our panelists gave to hot takeout foods reflect the fact that most supermarkets provide little or no information about their prepared foods. They also suggest that few of the shoppers participating in this survey shop at Wegmans, which provides the "full monty" on hot foods, including the same kind of nutrition alerts that appear on their private label products throughout the store. Here's the sign over Wegmans ready-to-eat chili, which is one of the products offered in their soup bar:

Wegmans homestyle recipe with beef, chunks of tomato, and a special blend of spices. Each serving (1 cup) contains 246 calories, 24g carbohydrates, 6g fiber, and 10g fat.) (HF) High fiber, (A) Allergies (contains fish).

Similar information on entrees and sides appears throughout the prepared food sections.

MASHED POTATOES. Russet potatoes, real butter, cream. Each serving (1/2) cup contains 120 calories, 4g fat, 16g carbohydrates, and 3g fiber.

As more consumers see more of this kind of information, general claims become less meaningful. One shopper pointed to the Oscar Mayer bologna and said: "That package says Light Bologna and this one says 98% Fat Free Bologna. Is there a the difference?"

Besides ingredients and calories, many consumers would like to see bigger and bolder expiration and sell-by dates (one company uses "enjoy by" dates), which are especially important in this economy, when so many consumers are doing their best to stretch their dollars.

There is nothing new about the power of numbers to sell products. There's a story about P & G's initial advertising of Ivory Soap, which became famous for floating and being 99 and 44/100ths percent pure. The story says that consumers didn't believe the ads, which said it was 99 and 99/100ths percent pure. When the claim was brought down to the lower number, consumers believed and bought, driving home the point that numbers sell when they are relevant and credible. ON-PACKAGE INFO RATINGS Ratings on 5-point scale: Good (4-5) Poor (1-3) Milk 82% 18% Cheese 73% 27% Ground beef (fresh) 70% 30% Refrigerated ready-to-heat 67% 33% Breads-packaged 66% 34% Frozen pizza 64% 36% Juices and drinks 63% 37% Bacon 58% 42% Chips 54% 46% Eggs 50% 50% Fresh chicken 49% 51% Fish 38% 62% Fresh meat, e.g., steaks 33% 67% Pet foods 31% 69% Pre-cut fruits/veggies 22% 78% Chinese takeout 18% 82% Packaged salads 13% 87% Takeout (hot ready-to-eat) 12% 88% Fast food burgers, etc. 8% 92% Fresh pizza 1% 99% Food average: 44% 56% Hair care 65% 35% Paper goods 56% 44% Cosmetics 50% 50% Small appliances 45% 55% Toiletries 42% 58% Electronics 37% 63% Plastic wraps, foils 33% 77% Non-food average: 46% 54% Note that the highest ratings went to milk, which provides a lot of specific on-pack information these days. The average rating of food categories was somewhat better than the average rating of non-food categories, but still under 50 percent.