[QUOTE=Coldfire]
Work harder. It’s worth it. 
Well, maybe not $5000, but my stereo is about $2000, and it definitely sounds a lot better than an entry-level Sony kit.
[QUOTE]
Can I interest you in some 24k .75u gold-plated connectors? I’m also selling fine spun, oxygen free aluminum wire, $10/foot.
Well, I wouldn’t buy a $12 watch, but I do love my Timex, and they are in the range of $30-$100, usually. And just what do you mean by “chronograph” functions? A cheap watch tells time, that’s the primary chronograph function! Most also have stopwatches, alarms, usually at least one alternate time zone, countdown timers, etc… Breaking easily? Nah. A Timex is a GOOD watch. They are designed to take abuse. I’ve dropped mine hundreds of times onto tile, asphault, concrete, and even off a three story building onto a driveway, and all I’ve ever had to fix on it in the few years I’ve had it are a couple battery replacements and a new band. And even if it does break, I can buy several of them and still not pay 1/5 of what you might pay for a “designer chronograph” (did I also mmention I hate that word? It’s a watch!.) Fail if the go underwater? Hardly. My Timex is guarenteed to 100m of depth. I don’t think it will actually see more than 10m, but it can go up to 100m if I need it to .
As far as aestetics go, these watches look very nice and are under $100. That finishes my rant on watches.
I do have one thing to say about sunglasses, though. While I don’t think it’s neccesary to pay through the teeth for them (meaning in the $100 or more range,) I do feel that a cheap one is not the way to go, as they are usualyl just colored plastic that does NOT protect against UV rays. In fact, since they make it dark, your pupil opens wider and letsa in MORE UV rays. So whenever buying sunglasses, the first requirement should be that it block UV rays. After that, it’s up to you on how you want it to look and how much you want to pay.
Bouv: I guessed you missed the part where I wear a Timex ‘Expedition’. I was referring to the comment about $12 watches being as good as a $40 Timex. They aren’t. Really cheap watches are stamped plastic junk. They may keep time, but they are nowhere near as good as a mid-range Timex.
By “Chronograph functions” I mean stopwatches, countdown timers, split-lap functions, etc. Yes, any watch is a ‘chronograph’, but in the watch world I’ve always seen the word used to describe watches that have additional chrono functions.
The biggest problem I have with my Timex watch is the cheap crystal. It’s plastic instead of glass (or sapphire!), and started getting scratched from the first day I owned my watch. I used to use my Dremel tool with a buffing wheel to clean the scratches off periodically, then one day I held the buffing wheel on one spot too long - and melted the crystal. Now I have a big smeared part on the watch that annoys me, but it still works as well as the day I bought it so I can’t bring myself to buy a replacement.
From what I’ve seen, bottled water is not predominantly bought by those people who live in areas where there is foul tasting water. If you have the misfortune to attend meetings with stacks of consultants, you can tell how wankerish it will be by the number of bottles of water around the tables. They are like a ticket of passage for those who see themselves as being very important. I will buy bottled water- but for practical reasons. Such as on an international flight which is very long.
Actually, I buy bottled water because my tap water tastes horrible. I have well water and on some days it tastes strongly of iron and on others it tastes strongly of sulfer. Neither taste is particularly pleasant and so I have bottled water.
I don’t get sam stone’s response to my post at all. Not in the least. I am just baffled and then some.
In my experience, the cheaper watches, esp. the plastic case, etc. ones last far longer. And if something goes wrong, I get another one from WalMart for practically nothing. What is so freaking hard in understanding this? If you think that $500 watches are magically protected against day-to-day use, you are deluding yourself. There is no basis in reality for such beliefs.
Who the h**l cares what a watch in my pocket looks like??? Sheesh. And just to be clear about wrist watches, you might like to know that there are millions of Americans who consider the Rolex wearing idiots, well idiots. There are an immense number of actually worthwhile things a person could spend the money on instead. So Mr. BigShot walks into the break rooms shows people his brand new Rolex, has to mention the price of course, and after he leaves everyone breaks out laughing. That’s what most people really think of that nonsense. (Of course their ads don’t highlight this issue, what a surprise.)
This is not a thread bashing all expensive things. Just the stupid items, regardless of price (but it helps if the cost is out of line with purpose). So I like carpeting over bare hardwoodfloors (which is the opposite of what the rich snobs like, btw), but not so much for looks but for comfort. I do like boxy, practical cars. Anyone who shells out an extra $20k for a car just for looks is from the low end of the gene pool. Who in their right mind actually believes a $25k car is “better” than a $12k car? (I priced out a Mazda Protege for $12k a year ago. Nice. But since my 1987 323 is still running fine, cost $7k, that just didn’t make financial sense.) I’ve never known anyone who was truly happy with a luxury car over time. Grinning ear-to-ear for a month or two and then reality sinks in. After a couple years of more-money-down-the-drain they get really defensive. I like name brand frozen OJ over the store brand because it tastes better. But I’m not going to pay $5 a can for imported Peruvian frozen OJ that comes in a designer can.
Like I said, I am just stunned, amazed, baffled, etc. by that post. It must be some sort of a joke.
sam stone, you gotta be the adman’s dream consumer.
I’ve never owned a Rolex, but if I could easily afford one I would. There is nothing wrong with aspiring to quality items- I don’t want to live in a cave and eat beetles because that is cheap.
Sam Stone, I did indeed miss the part where you said that, I apologize. However, part of my point remains valid in that you do mention that sometimes it is nice to want to own something that looks really nice, even at the cost of function. I agree, which is why I mentioned the Timexes that look just as nice as a $500 or $1000 watch. I don’t know if you would buy one of these if you just wanted a nice looking watch, but I never would if I get one just as nice to look at (and maybe even a little more durable) for 1/5 the price. Just seems silly, is all.
Go here
Then go here and click on the big watch to get into the page, and then click “Blue Max” at the top of the lefthand column.
These are similar watches, yet I’m sure the second one sells for hundreds more because of the brandname associated with it. Granted, it has gold, but big whoop-de-do. I think gold looks gaudy anyway, so it actually deters from the look for me, but that is just my opinion. If you like the look of gold that much more than stainles steel, then by all means pay five times the price for a watch.
The current (Jul/Aug 2004) issue of Cook’s Illustrated has a test of bottled vs. tap water, and from their results, I think it’s probably more accurate to say that some, not most, cities have tap water that is on par with the bottled products. And some city waters are truly foul:
And about designer clothes…
So I guess you don’t consider Ermenegildo Zegna or Corneliani to be designer labels?
ftg said:
you’re moving the yardstick. You didn’t compare a Timex to a $500 watch. You compared a Timex to a $12 watch. Maybe the difference is that I’m in Canada, where $12 doesn’t go as far, but around here a $12 watch is JUNK. It’s made out of thin stamped plastic with a generic digital watch module inserted into it. I’ve owned a couple of them, and hated them. Cheap plastic bands, buttons that stick, tiny displays with poor backlighting if there is backlighting at all.
My $40 Timex has ‘indiglo’, which is the best backlight out there. The entire face glows bright blue when I need it. It is an analog/digital, because I prefer analog for telling time and digital for precision. It has a sweep second hand which I find useful and aesthetically pleasing. It is waterproof and guaranteed to 166 feet, which at least means I don’t have to worry about it in the shower or while swimming. It has a good quality cloth strap, and metal buttons. It also has a rotating compass bezel, which is actually useful if you learn how to use it. It kicks the ASS of a $12 watch.
I’m not sure whether there is more ignorance in that statement or intolerance. It pisses me off when people choose someone else’s foible or hobby and piss all over it, when they do the same thing themselves in other areas. Are you going to tell me there’s nothing you’d like to be extravagent about? Nice car maybe? Or a Harley instead of a Honda? or perhaps a vintage Rickenbacker guitar? Or a beautiful painting? Or a killer bicycle? NOTHING?
Maybe you are one of those rare ascetic who wants for nothing and lives a simple life. My grandparents were like that. They had half a million dollars in the bank, lived in a $70,000 house and drove a 20 year old car. If so, that’s fine. You’d still be wrong to call people who don’t think like you ‘idiots’. But if there are things in your life you like to splurge on, then you’re just a hypocrite.
Actually, you know who thinks that way? A) People who don’t understand watches, B) People who are jealous, and C) People who are intolerant of others.
I have friends who have half their net worth sunk into guitar collections. They love them. I have a friend who rides a $4000 mountain bike. I paid $149 for mine at Sears. On the other hand, I have a $1000 pool cue.
If you want to play the ‘idiot’ game, tell me - Who’s dumber: a person who spends $5,000 on a Rolex which is has for the rest of his life, or someone who spends $5000 on a European vacation? How do $500 watches stack up against, say, $500 ski boots? Who are you to judge which is the smarter purpose, when both purchases are frivolous?
Now I’m sure you’re just intolerant of others. You define the ‘stupid items’ as “things I don’t buy”, and get to pretend that everyone around you is dumber than you are.
Me. I’d ask the opposite - Who in their right mind thinks a $12K car is ‘just as good’ as a $25K car? The very notion is ridiculous. To YOU, perhaps this is true. Because you value cars differently than others. So you go ahead and buy whatever you want, and feel good about it. But to call other people stupid because they don’t share your values is arrogant and insulting.
I have no trouble seeing how a $100,000 Mercedes is better than a $25,000 Ford. I can see the quality of the leather. I see the high tech 455 HP engine. I can see the beautiful hand-polished wood with inlays where the Ford has plastic. I can see the fine tolerances, the quality of the switchgear, etc. The thing is, for me I would not get 4X the value from one, so I wouldn’t buy it even if I can afford it. Other people feel differently. They are no more stupid than you or I.
And I’m stunned and amazed that you can be so small-minded about this stuff. We started this conversation talking about things that don’t make economic sense and are sold at inflated prices through good marketing. You veered off into extreme examples ($12 watches are all you need, $12K cars are just as good as $25K cars), and then called anyone who disagrees with you an idiot.
On the contrary. I pride myself on getting good value for everything I buy. The last vehicle I bought was worth $29K Canadian, and I spent almost six months in research before I bought it. I got our house for a song. I wear a $40 Timex. I buy $60 shoes and wear them for years. I buy most of my clothes at the thrift store. See my post above about the 80% rule - I follow it religiously. But for me, that doesn’t mean buying the cheapest stuff around, because after 20 years of both my wife and I working professionally, we can afford a little better. So I buy thrift clothes, which I don’t care about, and sink the money into my house, which I do care about.
It’s all about deciding what you really value, what you can afford, and then looking for the best deal within those margins. Everyone’s value system is different, and I would never sneer at someone because their choices aren’t mine.
And in fact, economists are right - most buying decisions ARE ‘rational’, when compared against each individual’s utility function. This isn’t the thread to go into economics, but it’s true - if people didn’t behave rationally in an economic sense, the economy would stop working.
There truly are products out there that are ‘stupid’ to buy in the sense that they don’t do what they claim to do, and people with a modicum of knowledge should be able to see that. Tarot readings, copper bracelets, magnet therapy, homeopathic medicine, etc. This is another category completely, and one in which the proper response is to educate the people who believe in it.
Good advice, Eve. (Not surprising, of course, since this is Eve, we’re talking about, but still. 
)
Seriously, bottled water is a huge scam, IMNSHO. It is not noticebly purer than any other kind of water. In fact, it is often less pure. (Of course impurities is what makes water taste good. If you don’t believe me drink distilled water sometime.) I use a water filter on my tap water, but that’s for taste. I’m not really worried about the safety of the municipal water supply. I just got used to unusually pure water while I was in the military and found I liked it that way. (We made our own, and had to ADD bleach to make it safe to drink, not for any biological reasons - just because if water is too pure it acts as a diarhettic agent.) That doesn’t mean that I don’t see the advantages to bottled water bottles, or that I won’t buy it when I am thirsty and on the road. Just that, in general, none of the marketing strategies for selling bottled water really seem to stand up to the light of day.
Of course I also remember when Perrier had to issue a recall for the benzene leak in their plant. :eek:
The tap water in every apartment I’ve lived in in southern California has been horrid. It tastes OK when you first pour it, but it takes on a sickening aftertaste if it sits for 5 minutes. I take my 5 gallon jug to the water store and fill it up for 20 cents a gallon for filtered water. No aftertaste, even if it sits for hours.
I think ftg and bouv are sort of missing the point on watches. I freely admit that a $40 Timex tells great time. But I like the design and engineering that goes into a mechanical or automatic watch. If that’s not your thing, fine. And ftg rolls out the “you just want an expensive Rolex to show off” line. I’m not looking for a Rolex. In fact, most people probably haven’t heard of the watches I’m looking at. Not everybody buys to be conspicuous.
And, bouv, I agree that many of those Timex you linked too look nice. But many of them are direct design rip-offs of higher end watches. So the aesthetic pleasure you can get from one of those Timex watches is due, at least in part, to the high end watch market.
Also women seem to be much more apt to get rid of clothes than men, so there’s little in the way of decent men’s clothes that makes its way into thrift shops.
The great dividing line of sunglasses are whether the lenses are made of glass or plastic. I wouldn’t spend $300 on a pair of sunglasses, but at the same time I refuse to wear plastic lensed ones. Some cheap things are a waste of money.
May I ask if you only buy the cheapest products? Do you only eat pastas too, because the only thing which matters is to feed yourself and pastas are cheap? Do you live in the smallest appartment/house you managed to find because it’s cheaper? Do you buy the cheapest shoes, the cheapest clothes?
If not, why exactly? You don’t need good-tasting food, good-looking clothes, a large bedroom, etc…anymore than ** Sam Stone ** needs an expensive and aesthetic watch.
If yes, what do you do with all the money you’re sparing?
In my 2nd post I clearly give an example of an item where I purposefully buy name brand over store brand. So I don’t buy the cheapest all the time. I wanted to make that quite clear and so I inserted it into the post. I’m sorry if you failed to read that part.
In fact, if you have read my posts on consumer electronics in other threads I am quite upset about the flood of ultra-cheap TVs, VCRs, etc. These make no sense economically because of their ultra short lifespan. So I am always suggesting to people to buy the VCR that costs $40 more, etc. But there is not point in buying a $2K stereo. (And don’t forget the “unidirectional digital ready” speaker cables!)
There is such a thing as being too cheap. That’s why I splurge on the $12 watches and not the $2 ones. Those would last at most a couple weeks in my pocket. $12 is very far from the bottom of the barrel, very far.
And now, here is the real kicker for people who don’t like to read and understand other people’s posts:
My watch is a Timex. I am not ranting against Timex, they are my first choice in $12 watches! (Casio 2nd.)
Now go back and look at some responses to my posts and have a laugh like I did.
As opposed to, say, calling other people idiots because they don’t share your opinion?
I would still like to know how the OP, who buys $200 Zegna shirts and $1200 Corneliani pants, justifies calling people who buy designer clothes “sheeplike” and irrational.