(no subject)
I just read this very interesting article and was wondering if anyone wanted to discuss it.
Link to the entire article: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Savinganddebt/Savemoney/P107710.asp
Luxuries you can live without -- and should
$200 jeans? $800 sheets? Paying a premium now for image and brand cuts into our real quality of life down the road.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it wasn't that long ago when the mere concept of Williams-Sonoma (or Restoration Hardware, Crate & Barrel, et. al.) would have struck most folks as . . . nutty.
The things we can't live without...
In case you have NO idea what I'm talking about, please scroll through this list of once-ordinary goods and services that now come in versions ranging from the merely overpriced to the truly outrageous:
• Pots: Now known as "cookware." Please think nothing of paying $125 for an All-Clad omelette pan. Eggs not included.
• Jeans: The $200 pair of designer denims is back. Which is good, because that pair of $75 Diesels just isn't cutting it anymore.
• Knives: Still called "knives," but a set of prestige Henckels can set you back up to $1,500.
• Cosmetics: The switch from Vaseline Intensive Care lotions ($2.49) to skin-sensitive Neutrogena ($7.99) is a slippery slope to Kiehls ($25) -- but then why not go ahead and splurge on La Mer, which starts at $90 for a fraction of an ounce.
• Strollers: There's no limit to what you can splurge on baby gear, so I'll just use this brief example: If you invested the $700 you're inclined to spend on the trendy Bugaboo stroller, your child could retire with an extra $100,000.
• Sheets: Now called "linens." It's amazing that people can justify paying $800 for 1,000-threadcount Royal Crest sheets when 20 years ago no one had any idea how many threads per inch their sheets had.
• Sneakers: Now called "athletic footwear," and they have us paying $150 for a pair of Air Jordans instead of $25 for a pair of Keds. But price isn't the only problem. We also expect to own several pairs for all the sports we do.
• Watches: Now they're "timepieces, but it's no longer about telling the time. For about $20, you can buy a watch with a quartz movement that won't lose a minute in the next 10,000 years. But even without the optional encrustation of diamonds, you'll still fork over $7,500 and up for a Rolex President or pay a couple hundred thousand for a Cartier watch. And we're still talking about a plain-looking gold watch -- not something Liberace would have worn.
• Chocolates: It was the humble Hershey Bar that won WWII. Then along came Godiva at $16 a pound. But why not spend $84 a pound on Debauve & Gallais chocolates with (note all the place-specific names that make ordinary ingredients sound exotic) Piedmont hazelnuts, Turkish grapes, Bourbon Island vanilla and West Indies rum as ingredients. Now, try saying that list of ingredients without the place names and see if you still want to cough up $84.
• Scotch: I can remember when people used to get excited about a bottle of Johnnie Walker Black, which will set you back about $50 these days. How could we have been so pedestrian? Now, nothing less than 30-year-old single malt will do. Price tag: $250 and up.
• Bathrobes: You can get a nice flannel for about $50, or one made from Egyptian cotton (what's wrong with Texas cotton, anyway?) for $250. But really, the one we're all secretly lusting after is the $6,000 Daniel Hanson robe constructed (not made) with silk-trimmed pashmina. And where the hell did pashmina come from? Cashmere wasn't good enough anymore?
• TV: Sure, you could spend $700 for a 36-inch conventional TV, but that's so '90s. Why not spend $5,000 for a 60-inch plasma screen? It'll only cost you a few thousand more to acquire a house with a living room big enough.
• Wine glasses: Now called "wine stems," shelling out $130 for a set of six Riedel glasses is just the beginning. Now you need eight sets, each with a slightly different shape to "enhance individual grape varieties and styles of wine." And to think I used to believe that what was in my 6-for-$6 Ikea glass was all that mattered.
I, in no way, am standing on a soap box. I myself own several of the more “luxury” items the auther spoke of. In December I purchased a 10pc All Clad set of cookwear which get pricy. I like to defend my purchase by saying that it I did get a discount, which is hard to come by with that manufacturer. I also believe that in 10 years I’ll still be using it - making the cost appear minimal (to me) for the amount of use I will gain from my new cooking set. However, had it not been on sale I’m sure I would have found a way to justify the purchase at some point.
Here’s the thing. I complain a lot about people the author is speaking of. I see it in a lot of people I know. I think in some ways you can place me in the same category BUT I tend to think I’m different. Am I really different? I don’t know, in which case I’m just a hypocrite. I’m a marketing companies favorite client. I love pretty things and will justify having them. Where I think I’m different is that I will save money before purchasing those items. It’s not as though I am broke, living check to check and then going out and getting an SUV and flat screen. Instead I just keep saving a little money here and there so eventually I can have the things I want. Money always goes into my savings account first. I’m not sure this actually makes my way better but I definitely tell myself it does. Is that horrible of me?
But this comment stuck me:
Sometimes, the difference in quality is real, but the price you have to pay for it far exceeds whatever you might gain in durability, usefulness or design.
I have ALWAYS wanted luxury bed sheets. I spend most of my time at home sitting in bed so I give my sheets more thought then most people. In December I purchased three sets of sheets. One set was on sale at Hold Everything and the entire set with comforter was $108. I love them and think they are softer then most sheets I have. I purchased another comforter set on Neiman Marcus that are labeled luxury. They were on sale so I justified the purchase even though they were still expensive. The comforter was $250 (no sheets included). I have to admit they are the softest and pretties sheets EVER. Then I went to the Frette Linen sample sale. These are the linens to the starts and I was so freaking excited at the thought of possibly being able to afford a set. I only ended up getting a bed skirt and pillow cases. The cases were $15 marked down from $100. Let me tell you, they are gorgeous but in no way soft or even nice feeling.
Anyways.. I guess I’m just wondering if I’m any different then the people descried in the article. Does putting money in your savings account first, getting luxury items on sale *sometimes* and occasionally shopping at the cheaper stores really make you any different? And if I’m not, does it make me a bad person? No, I know I’m not a bad person but you know what I mean.
Link to the entire article: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Savinganddebt/Savemoney/P107710.asp
Luxuries you can live without -- and should
$200 jeans? $800 sheets? Paying a premium now for image and brand cuts into our real quality of life down the road.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it wasn't that long ago when the mere concept of Williams-Sonoma (or Restoration Hardware, Crate & Barrel, et. al.) would have struck most folks as . . . nutty.
The things we can't live without...
In case you have NO idea what I'm talking about, please scroll through this list of once-ordinary goods and services that now come in versions ranging from the merely overpriced to the truly outrageous:
• Pots: Now known as "cookware." Please think nothing of paying $125 for an All-Clad omelette pan. Eggs not included.
• Jeans: The $200 pair of designer denims is back. Which is good, because that pair of $75 Diesels just isn't cutting it anymore.
• Knives: Still called "knives," but a set of prestige Henckels can set you back up to $1,500.
• Cosmetics: The switch from Vaseline Intensive Care lotions ($2.49) to skin-sensitive Neutrogena ($7.99) is a slippery slope to Kiehls ($25) -- but then why not go ahead and splurge on La Mer, which starts at $90 for a fraction of an ounce.
• Strollers: There's no limit to what you can splurge on baby gear, so I'll just use this brief example: If you invested the $700 you're inclined to spend on the trendy Bugaboo stroller, your child could retire with an extra $100,000.
• Sheets: Now called "linens." It's amazing that people can justify paying $800 for 1,000-threadcount Royal Crest sheets when 20 years ago no one had any idea how many threads per inch their sheets had.
• Sneakers: Now called "athletic footwear," and they have us paying $150 for a pair of Air Jordans instead of $25 for a pair of Keds. But price isn't the only problem. We also expect to own several pairs for all the sports we do.
• Watches: Now they're "timepieces, but it's no longer about telling the time. For about $20, you can buy a watch with a quartz movement that won't lose a minute in the next 10,000 years. But even without the optional encrustation of diamonds, you'll still fork over $7,500 and up for a Rolex President or pay a couple hundred thousand for a Cartier watch. And we're still talking about a plain-looking gold watch -- not something Liberace would have worn.
• Chocolates: It was the humble Hershey Bar that won WWII. Then along came Godiva at $16 a pound. But why not spend $84 a pound on Debauve & Gallais chocolates with (note all the place-specific names that make ordinary ingredients sound exotic) Piedmont hazelnuts, Turkish grapes, Bourbon Island vanilla and West Indies rum as ingredients. Now, try saying that list of ingredients without the place names and see if you still want to cough up $84.
• Scotch: I can remember when people used to get excited about a bottle of Johnnie Walker Black, which will set you back about $50 these days. How could we have been so pedestrian? Now, nothing less than 30-year-old single malt will do. Price tag: $250 and up.
• Bathrobes: You can get a nice flannel for about $50, or one made from Egyptian cotton (what's wrong with Texas cotton, anyway?) for $250. But really, the one we're all secretly lusting after is the $6,000 Daniel Hanson robe constructed (not made) with silk-trimmed pashmina. And where the hell did pashmina come from? Cashmere wasn't good enough anymore?
• TV: Sure, you could spend $700 for a 36-inch conventional TV, but that's so '90s. Why not spend $5,000 for a 60-inch plasma screen? It'll only cost you a few thousand more to acquire a house with a living room big enough.
• Wine glasses: Now called "wine stems," shelling out $130 for a set of six Riedel glasses is just the beginning. Now you need eight sets, each with a slightly different shape to "enhance individual grape varieties and styles of wine." And to think I used to believe that what was in my 6-for-$6 Ikea glass was all that mattered.
I, in no way, am standing on a soap box. I myself own several of the more “luxury” items the auther spoke of. In December I purchased a 10pc All Clad set of cookwear which get pricy. I like to defend my purchase by saying that it I did get a discount, which is hard to come by with that manufacturer. I also believe that in 10 years I’ll still be using it - making the cost appear minimal (to me) for the amount of use I will gain from my new cooking set. However, had it not been on sale I’m sure I would have found a way to justify the purchase at some point.
Here’s the thing. I complain a lot about people the author is speaking of. I see it in a lot of people I know. I think in some ways you can place me in the same category BUT I tend to think I’m different. Am I really different? I don’t know, in which case I’m just a hypocrite. I’m a marketing companies favorite client. I love pretty things and will justify having them. Where I think I’m different is that I will save money before purchasing those items. It’s not as though I am broke, living check to check and then going out and getting an SUV and flat screen. Instead I just keep saving a little money here and there so eventually I can have the things I want. Money always goes into my savings account first. I’m not sure this actually makes my way better but I definitely tell myself it does. Is that horrible of me?
But this comment stuck me:
Sometimes, the difference in quality is real, but the price you have to pay for it far exceeds whatever you might gain in durability, usefulness or design.
I have ALWAYS wanted luxury bed sheets. I spend most of my time at home sitting in bed so I give my sheets more thought then most people. In December I purchased three sets of sheets. One set was on sale at Hold Everything and the entire set with comforter was $108. I love them and think they are softer then most sheets I have. I purchased another comforter set on Neiman Marcus that are labeled luxury. They were on sale so I justified the purchase even though they were still expensive. The comforter was $250 (no sheets included). I have to admit they are the softest and pretties sheets EVER. Then I went to the Frette Linen sample sale. These are the linens to the starts and I was so freaking excited at the thought of possibly being able to afford a set. I only ended up getting a bed skirt and pillow cases. The cases were $15 marked down from $100. Let me tell you, they are gorgeous but in no way soft or even nice feeling.
Anyways.. I guess I’m just wondering if I’m any different then the people descried in the article. Does putting money in your savings account first, getting luxury items on sale *sometimes* and occasionally shopping at the cheaper stores really make you any different? And if I’m not, does it make me a bad person? No, I know I’m not a bad person but you know what I mean.