Cree LED bulb labeling problem

I recently had a Cree bulb I purchased in early 2013 (product code BA19-08027OMF-1U100, UPC 813959019319, this bulb: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...w-800lm-2700K-for-13-97&highlight=cree+6+watt) replaced under its 10 year warranty. This was supposedly a 9.5 Watt 800 lumen bulb (though I cannot measure that because it's now dead). The replacement is a slightly different bulb (product code BA19-08027OMF-2U100, UPC 810048025978) that is labeled on the packaging 9.5 Watts. However, removing the bulb from the package, although it has that product code stamped on the side, it also has 13.5 Watts stamped on the top. I have other Cree bulbs with that same product code, but they are stamped 9.5 Watts on top. All bulbs are labeled (packaging and bulb) 800 lumens.

a.) What gives?

b.) Curiously, both of the latter 2 bulbs, in spite of their package or on-bulb labeling, consume the same 11 Watts according to my Kill-A-Watt (which has proven quite accurate in other circumstances). Right there between 9.5 and 13.5. So again I ask "What gives?"

Is Cree just getting sloppy with labeling? Or more honest?

One last observation - the replacement bulb has NO sticky coating on the glass; all the others (including the one with the same product code) do.

Well it looks that they us bang in the middle of the two rateings, so I should say Mr government has been round and told em off. If the best case senario is 9w the average is 11 watts, the disclaimer is 13 watts is my theory on it. People like me may be sending them back if there energy efficient expensive 9 watt bulb suddenly took 50% more power and was about th same as a floresant bulb costing 90% less, even if they do come on a bit quicker.

If I had to take a wild guess: That bulb you sent under warranty has been discontinued. To honor the warranty on replacement bulbs, they are probably using leftover glass bulb covers from the TW series (or just replacing the TW LEDs with the normal ones), which are rated at 13.5W.

I don't know how labeling works for household appliances like that, but my guess is that it's OK if it the rated power is higher on the bulb than it actually consumes, either because it is not considered false advertising if you get better than what's written, or because the writing on the side is the part that's actually important. Or it could be a refurbished bulb (no idea if they are doing that or not) that had the wrong bulb cover put on.

I've noticed some varaiations on these bulbs. I can't remember the numbers off the top of my head, but they say something like "48mA" another says "56mA" for the same wattage/CCT. Again, I just made these numbers up because I can't remember the exact figures. Take a look at the top of the bulbs to compare.

This was strange too:

Ive just come across this, are there new airholes. In it? Apparrently according tocree, less chips and driving them harder is the new way forward, rather than saving cash on the electic over the bulbs 20 year life!
http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/...-loses-heat-sink-to-engineer-cheaper-led-bulb

I'd rather save 2 watt hours per hour, at 10c a kwatt hour youd soon see the saving!