Minimalist basket.
Can you believe the people in this thread? They want to stop the ones who want a rock to wind a string around
Look I’m not defending the price, but it’s clearly a rock which has had something (probably rattan) wrapped around it in a decorative fashion. The photo clearly shows the back side, where the wrapping is not decorative. Note the two out-of-focus examples in the background, where the decorative wrapping can be seen. So yes, it’s a stupid knickknack meant for someone’s house, perhaps as a paperweight. And I’m sure you all have some things in your homes that are also stupid knickknacks, whether that’s a Lenox vase, a Hummel figurine, or a pair of Waterford crystal candlesticks. (All of these are examples of stuff in my parents’ house, some of which I appreciate and some which I think is stupid kitsch.)
That would be demand-side inflation. Money has no intrinsic value, believe it or not, and this sort of thing happens when people have a lot of money.
I can’t believe I didn’t think of that. I just assumed that you would always decorate both sides. But, if you didn’t, it would make perfect sense for the price sticker to be on the back.
My previous comment was just based on teh idea that even rich people aren’t stupid enough to pay $190 for a rock with a single wrap around it, making it more likely the price was part of the art–making it a satire on rich extravagance and money wasting.
- It’s not a rock, it’s a stone
- It’s not a wrap, it’s a sling (with the convenient self-storing feature)
- Inspired by the Biblical story of David and Goliath, it’s for defeating giants. One can’t put a price on that. Apparently, one was purchased by both the Cowboys and the Falcons.
It’s the original rock in rock ‘n’ roll.
Suckers. That’s not just a rock with twine wrapped around it. It’s a hollowed-out stone with $200 shoved inside. The twine is covering the hole.
You buy that and you’re walking out of the store $10 richer.