Peanut butter and jelly sandwich


#1

Peanut butter and jelly sandwich

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/Peanut-Butter-Jelly-Sandwich.jpg/250px-Peanut-Butter-Jelly-Sandwich.jpg

http://bits.wikimedia.org/skins-1.17/common/images/magnify-clip.png
A peanut butter and jelly sandwich
The peanut butter and jelly sandwich (PB&J or peanut butter and jam sandwich in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom) is a sandwich, popular in North America, that includes a layer of peanut butter and either jam or jelly on bread, commonly between two slices, but sometimes eaten open-faced.
A variation uses two layers of peanut butter.[1]
A 2002 survey showed the average American will have eaten 1,500 of these sandwiches before graduating from high school.[2]

Contents

[hide]
[LIST]
[]1 Variations
[LIST]
[
]1.1 Sealed crustless sandwich
[/LIST]
[]2 See also
[
]3 References
[*]4 External links
[/LIST]

[edit] Variations

Some variants add[1] honey, chocolate or maple syrup, the hazelnut-chocolate spread Nutella, marshmallows, raisins, bananas, butter, marshmallow fluff, potato chips, cheese, other dried fruit, or another slice of bread. Other variations include slices of fresh fruit besides bananas such as apples or strawberries.
In 1968, The J.M. Smucker Co. introduced Goober, which combined alternating vertical stripes of peanut butter and jelly.
[edit] Sealed crustless sandwich

In December 1999, two independent inventors, Len Kretchman and David Geske, were granted U.S. patent,[3] “Sealed Crustless Sandwich” for a peanut butter sandwich that would have a long shelf life. The J.M. Smucker Co. bought the patent from the inventors and developed a commercial product based on the patent called Uncrustables. Smuckers then invested US$17 million in a new factory[4] to produce the product. By 2005, sales of Uncrustables had grown to $60 million a year with a 20% per year growth rate.
Smuckers attempted to enforce their patent rights by sending out cease and desist letters to competitors, and by expanding their intellectual property coverage via the patenting of a machine to produce Uncrustables sandwiches in high volume U.S. Patent 6,874,409 “Method and apparatus for making commercial crustless sandwiches and the crustless sandwich made thereby”. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, however, rejected the viability of the patent citing its similarity to existing processes such as that of fashioning ravioli or a pie crust.[5]
[edit] See also

[LIST]
[]Fluffernutter
[
]Peanut butter, banana and bacon sandwich
[/LIST]
[edit] References

[LIST=1]
[]^ a b “Smucker The History of the Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich”. June 16, 2005. Retrieved 22 September 2006.
[
]^ “PB&J is A-OK”. Prepared Foods 171.10 (): p.32(1). Prepared Foods. Oct 2002.
[]^ U.S. Patent 6,004,596
[
]^ “Smucker profits up 16% in fiscal 2005; integration progress seen”. Bakingbusiness.com. June 16, 2005. Retrieved 22 September 2006.[dead link][dead link]
[*]^ “Court rejects J.M. Smucker’s PB&J patent”. MSNBC.com. 8 April 2005. Retrieved 22 September 2009.
[/LIST]
[edit] External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Peanut butter and jelly sandwich
[LIST]
[*]Flickr: Photos tagged with “peanutbutterandjelly”
[/LIST]

Categories: American sandwiches | Peanut butter

[LIST]
[*]Log in / create account
[/LIST]

[LIST]
[]Article
[
]Discussion
[/LIST]

[LIST]
[]Read
[
]Edit
[*]View history
[/LIST]

[LIST]
[]Main page
[
]Contents
[]Featured content
[
]Current events
[]Random article
[
]Donate to Wikipedia
[/LIST]

Interaction

[LIST]
[]Help
[
]About Wikipedia
[]Community portal
[
]Recent changes
[*]Contact Wikipedia
[/LIST]

Toolbox

Print/export

Languages

[LIST]
[]Dansk
[
]Español
[]Esperanto
[
]Français
[]日本語
[/LIST]
[LIST]
[
]This page was last modified on 29 June 2011 at 21:42.
[]Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
[
]Contact us
[/LIST]


#2

did that not tip you off that this was fake? besides that, i can clearly see some mugen characters in this vid (street fighter special ops).


#3

Dude it’s obviously mugen. lol


#4

The weird thing is, he showcases the 3 highlight girls from the respective companies (though I think Cammy would’ve been a better choice but she doesn’t have chi channeling powers…) but he ends up only showing 2 at the end…and having the logo real small for capcom…like “DC VS MARVELcapcom”


#5

it says mugen in the tags.


#6

How about the fact that the “game” looks like complete fucking ass? If this game was in the works I would assume it would look and handle better than MvC2, not like XvSF.


#7

Yeah,it’s MUGEN.

This board was explode if it were DC vs Marvel(Produced by Capcom)


#8

to those saying it is mugen it isnt even mugen it’s flash animation.


#9

Even for MUGEN (or Flash or whatever) that looks horrible.


#10

Damn that looked lame as hell.


#11

crack kills, sir. thats obviously nothing official. especially since it says it isnt. if that game were official. that shit would be a sticky with 10, 000 replies by the second day


#12

TC loses…perfect…#cue score noise#

grade SS.


#13

Well, to make some worthwhile discussion out of this, has Capcom ever tried to get the DC license? Apparently Marvel has something against us 2D fighters, and I’m sure if Capcom just asked DC if they wanted a DC Vs. Capcom game, they would freak out and let them get the license

Anyone know of this?


#14

Hanna Barbera vs. Capcom

PHEAR MY TOP CAT/JOHNNY QUEST/MEGA MAN TEAM LOLZOR!1!!


#15

DreamTR said that Capcom got the DC license on IRC a few days ago. For what type of game? I don’t know.


#16

reality check. not everyone on the planet has a hard on for capcom games. granted capcom has the dc license now. but last time i checked, and everyone else too, that fighters are not hot sellers unless the name says tekken, soul calibur, mk, or doa. i dunno if DC would freak out, they just wanna get paid and make sure their IP’s are represented properly.

marvel probably has nothing against 2d fighters, but once again, gasp, this is a business, and mvc2 for instance, wasnt a big seller. it probably wasnt worthwhile to even hold on to the license cuz it probably cost capcom too much and they were probably not even breaking even on the deal cuz the games werent selling well, no matter how well it was made. i dont know much about their business contract, but marvel coulda also been promised a set percentage of royalties, and again, not selling well, so that equates to little money. so best move? get some shit company with huge marketing power to sell the IP to the masses (ahem EA…Activision).


#17

I think David Sirlin talks about this in one of his interview’s with bunkei(alphaism radio), if I remember correctly he states that a project like DC vs Capcom almost happened at one point and that he could’ve been involved, but to be sure I should probably listen to it again becuase its been a while.