Over wood pellets flavoured with oil.
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/923959-traeger-grills-class-action-says-wood-pellets-contain-flavored-oil/

https://www.classaction.org/news/class-action-alleges-traeger-pellet-grills-uses-flavored-oils-to-mask-true-quality-of-bbq-wood-pellets

I have never used Treager pellets but I was under the impression they used oils. Their advertisements says natural hardwoods and not a specific woods.

Looks like someone is trying to make a cheap buck.  At best, this will result in Traeger changing the wording on their packaging.

 Makes perfect sense when you think about it.  Traeger pellets are all priced equally except for some speciality blends..So how can a basic wood such as alder cost the same as cherry or apple etc. Any wood

worker knows wood prices vary a lot depending on wood species.

Traeger uses base woods, either alder or oak, then either adds ~ 30% of the wood they claim the pellets to be to it, or, in the case of hickory and mesquite, liquid smoke.. All their pellets get sprayed with oil,

soy I believe, to lube the pellet forming dies..It reduces friction = less energy and some other small benefits. No other pellet manufacturer I know of sprays oil on the wood prior to pellet forming. They rely

on the lignin in the wood as a lube as well as the binder.

Good post Darwin!

I tried Traeger pellets briefly when I first started using a pellet grill.  I didn't care for all the ash they produce and the smell didn't seem right.  Now I see why.  I've been using B&B pellets and have been happy with the results.  And they tell us what's in them.  Two thirds oak and one third flavor wood.  And the meat market and HEB carry them, so they're easy to come by.  Although if Cookinpellets were around here I'd use them.  Good find Darwin!

Looks like someone is trying to make a cheap buck.  At best, this will result in Traeger changing the wording on their packaging.

Class action suits are often misunderstood. 

They are lying about their product. It is clearly false advertising and they should be held accountable. Nowhere on the bag does it say Mesquite flavored hardwood. The bag states 100% hardwood pellets but deceives with a giant Mesquite label. The class action is intended to show damages beyond the individual plaintiff who might simply be satisfied with a refund, allowing Traeger to continue their false advertising campaign.

Looks like someone is trying to make a cheap buck.  At best, this will result in Traeger changing the wording on their packaging.

Class action suits are often misunderstood. 

They are lying about their product. It is clearly false advertising and they should be held accountable. Nowhere on the bag does it say Mesquite flavored hardwood. The bag states 100% hardwood pellets but deceives with a giant Mesquite label. The class action is intended to show damages beyond the individual plaintiff who might simply be satisfied with a refund, allowing Traeger to continue their false advertising campaign.

I agree with the misrepresentation.  I don't agree that someone feels they are not getting the flavor labeled on the bag.  All of their products smell and taste the same because they burn so clean.

Looks like someone is trying to make a cheap buck.  At best, this will result in Traeger changing the wording on their packaging.

Class action suits are often misunderstood. 

They are lying about their product. It is clearly false advertising and they should be held accountable. Nowhere on the bag does it say Mesquite flavored hardwood. The bag states 100% hardwood pellets but deceives with a giant Mesquite label. The class action is intended to show damages beyond the individual plaintiff who might simply be satisfied with a refund, allowing Traeger to continue their false advertising campaign.

I agree that is the theory behind class actions.  The practice is much different. 

Having represented insurance companies who were faced with defending -- but not necessarily indemnifying -- these types of suits, my take was that once you reached an agreement as to what the plaintiff's attorneys were going to get, they would sell their plaintiffs down the river.  The attorneys walk away with multiple millions, the class action plaintiffs get coupons for 3 free bags of pellets.

>They are lying about their product. It is clearly false
> advertising and they should be held accountable.

I think that most grilling pellet manufacturers also misrepresent their product. Most list a flavor wood on the bag, but the bag only contains ~30% of that wood. A few of them have the actual percentages listed on their websites, but the bag label doesn't explain that. Most folks that buy them think that the listed wood is all that's in the bag.

Anyone that's been pellet grilling for a while knows the story of Traeger and their patent for using oils for flavoring base woods. The story's been retold hundreds of times on many smoking forums. First time I've heard of a lawsuit though, be interesting to see what becomes of it and if they and others are forced to change their labels.

I agree with both Members to a degree.  100% Hardwood is correct?  Lying I have to disagree with, deceptive marketing I agree with.

Its like a few places around her have signs saying Fresh Steamed Crabs...I think they are hoping folks minds just see the 1st and 3rd words...


As my Uncle Maximus used to say...Caveat emptor .

They are lying about their product. It is clearly false advertising and they should be held accountable. Nowhere on the bag does it say Mesquite flavored hardwood. The bag states 100% hardwood pellets but deceives with a giant Mesquite label.

I think that most grilling pellet manufacturers also misrepresent their product. Most list a flavor wood on the bag, but the bag only contains ~30% (X% can be 25% to 60%) of that wood.

Anyone that's been pellet grilling for a while knows the story of Traeger and their patent for using oils for flavoring base woods. The story's been retold hundreds of times on many smoking forums. First time I've heard of a lawsuit though, be interesting to see what becomes of it and if they and others are forced to change their labels.

True.  I've been annoyed by it for years but disregard it and, in response, don't use any of their products.  There are several companies whose products and services I boycott.  They don't notice the revenue reduction.

Bump!

It's been six months.  Can a PF member tell me how this was resolved?

 
 I am curious as well as to the status of this lawsuit.

 Just thinking about pellets..   Did Joe Traeger use "food grade" pellets when he developed the original pellet grill? Not... It became a marketing ploy. At first, the fear of God was instilled in Traeger owners by

 stating that not using genuine Traeger pellets would void their warranty. That eventually dissipated due to legal reasons. 

 As I have always believed. Traeger could give pits away if their high profit margin pellets were used exclusively.

Just my 2 cents worth...

I used Traeger pellets for a VERY short time and was not happy with them.   To me they were not a clean burning pellet  at lower smoking temps and I found metal in one bag that looked like a nail or a large staple.    The price was way out of line as well

I've used Traeger Gourmet Blend quite a bit, less than $20 at Costco for 33 lbs., and I've been very happy with them.