<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Valentine Chocolates by Ethel&#8217;s Chocolates</title>
	<link>http://sugarsavvy.net/2007/02/12/valentine-chocolates-by-ethels-chocolates/</link>
	<description>Candy bars, artisanal chocolates, bubble gum and every sugary thing in between.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:30:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Sugar Savvy - &#187;</title>
		<link>http://sugarsavvy.net/2007/02/12/valentine-chocolates-by-ethels-chocolates/#comment-14807</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 11:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://sugarsavvy.net/2007/02/12/valentine-chocolates-by-ethels-chocolates/#comment-14807</guid>
					<description>[...] Oh me, oh my! Several months ago, we reviewed Ethel&#8217;s Chocolates here on Sugar Savvy, and also by me over on Fit Fare. The overall reaction here on Sugar Savvy was that they were good chocolates, but not exceptional enough to be called gourmet. In fact, several noted that they appeared to be mass produced. One tester even asked if they were from Target. Truth be told though, I liked them for the most part (the milk chocolate wasn&#8217;t special though). Well AOL City Guide voters apparently are ga-ga over them and recently named Ethel&#8217;s Chocolates the best in Chicago. I wonder if it&#8217;s the cool concept of Ethel&#8217;s chocolate lounges or the beautiful packaging that helped the good, but not great, chocolates take the title. Or perhaps their other chocolates - the non-Valentine&#8217;s Day themed ones - are tastier than the sexy little love bites. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Oh me, oh my! Several months ago, we reviewed Ethel&#8217;s Chocolates here on Sugar Savvy, and also by me over on Fit Fare. The overall reaction here on Sugar Savvy was that they were good chocolates, but not exceptional enough to be called gourmet. In fact, several noted that they appeared to be mass produced. One tester even asked if they were from Target. Truth be told though, I liked them for the most part (the milk chocolate wasn&#8217;t special though). Well AOL City Guide voters apparently are ga-ga over them and recently named Ethel&#8217;s Chocolates the best in Chicago. I wonder if it&#8217;s the cool concept of Ethel&#8217;s chocolate lounges or the beautiful packaging that helped the good, but not great, chocolates take the title. Or perhaps their other chocolates - the non-Valentine&#8217;s Day themed ones - are tastier than the sexy little love bites. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Fit Fare - &#187; Be Sweet to Your Lover&#8217;s Heart</title>
		<link>http://sugarsavvy.net/2007/02/12/valentine-chocolates-by-ethels-chocolates/#comment-9780</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:27:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://sugarsavvy.net/2007/02/12/valentine-chocolates-by-ethels-chocolates/#comment-9780</guid>
					<description>[...] Ethel&#8217;s Chocolate Lounge recently provided us with samples (read more about one group&#8217;s take here) of their love collection and our editor-in-chief Cate O&#8217;Malley asked if I could somehow work a review into Fit Fare (Did you say chocolate?!? Of course!). I was so excited to see that package in my mailbox and even more psyched to discover the satin-y, plush pink box with a brown ribbon. Very nice packaging, indeed. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Ethel&#8217;s Chocolate Lounge recently provided us with samples (read more about one group&#8217;s take here) of their love collection and our editor-in-chief Cate O&#8217;Malley asked if I could somehow work a review into Fit Fare (Did you say chocolate?!? Of course!). I was so excited to see that package in my mailbox and even more psyched to discover the satin-y, plush pink box with a brown ribbon. Very nice packaging, indeed. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
