California Puts Brakes on Sriracha Sauce Delivery

New laws keep bottles of spicy condiment from reaching distributors until mid-January

  • Share
  • Read Later
Lucy Nicholson / Reuters

Bottles of Sriracha hot chili sauce, made by Huy Fong Foods, are seen on a supermarket shelf in San Gabriel, California October 30, 2013.

Fans of spicy Sriracha sauce should consider stockpiling a few bottles after California’s Department of Public Health set out stricter rules for delivery.

According to the Associated Press, Huy Fong Foods will be unable to meet fresh orders until the middle of next month due to new regulations that require bottles of the piquant condiment be held for 30 days before shipping.

The setback comes soon after Huy Fong was sued for emitting “eye-burning odor” from its production facilities in southern California. In November, a judge ordered the firm to cease operations until experts determined how to reduce the pungent emissions.

[AP]

4 comments
MichaelThornton
MichaelThornton

Wow. That's some lame reporting. Your article lacks any substance beyond the headline telling us we won't get are hot sauce for a month. Why is California regulating the aging time of hot sauce and what is there precedent for doing so? Try some actual reporting or maybe take a few night classes at the local annex

to improve your skills

Bullsgt
Bullsgt

David Stout are you an intern? I'm getting used to Time mag's slippage to the bottom of the journalism barrel but this is by far the worst article so far.


Are there Razzy awards for dreadful journalism? 

ToughButFair
ToughButFair

Is there any possibility that we lowly, paying, subscribers of Time Magazine could learn the REASON for these new California state regulations which require this private, for-profit, California corporation to place a 30-day hold on its product before delivering it to retailers?


What's the point of Time Magazine reporting this "news article", if it doesn't even explain to us paid subscribers the who, what, when, why, how, how much, or how often of this topic?


If the only point of this so-called "news article" is for Time to reciprocate in some agreement with the Associated Press for financial advantage/benefit to Time and/or the AP - or if the real purpose of this so-called "news article" is commercial product promotion/advertising and/or to disseminate some political bias, either way very poorly and thinly disguising this as "news" - then Time Magazine, once a highly-esteemed and well-respected US news publication, really does need to very carefully re-examine its entire business model, along with its professional editorial/journalistic news reporting policies.


This is a truly pathetic example of irresponsible "news" reporting - and it represents the very worst of the lowest-common-denominator-required to keep ordinary Americans totally dumbed-down and subservient to the crony capitalist 1%-ers - who now control far too much of our nation - and who seem already to own outright the entire state of Texas.


Shame on you, Time Magazine.  Shame on you.

ToughButFair
ToughButFair

Is there any possibility that we lowly, paying, subscribers of Time Magazine could learn the REASON for these new California state regulations which require this private, for-profit, California corporation to place a 30-day hold on its product before delivering it to retailers?


What's the point of Time Magazine reporting this "news article", if it doesn't even explain to us paid subscribers the who, what, when, why, how, how much, or how often of this topic?


If the only point of this so-called "news article" is for Time to reciprocate in some agreement with the Associated Press for financial advantage/benefit to Time and/or the AP - or if the real purpose of this so-called "news article" is commercial product promotion/advertising or political bias, either way very poorly and thinly disguised as "news" - then Time Magazine, once a highly-esteemed and well-respected US news publication, really does need to very carefully re-examine its entire business model, as well as its professional editorial/journalistic reporting policies.


This is a truly pathetic example of irresponsible "news" reporting - and this represents the very worst of the lowest-common-denominator-required to keep ordinary Americans totally dumbed-down and subservient to the crony capitalist 1%-ers - who now control a very large part of our nation - and who already own outright the entire state of Texas.


Shame on you, Time Magazine.  Shame on you.