Skip to main content

Why I Gave Up Thinking Expensive is Always Better

Earlier on, I wrote a post about why being stingy in one's expenses is also stupid. I witnessed some of my elders brag about how stingy they are, saying it's "some sacrifice". Sure, it's never ideal for children to get everything they want. However, it's not ideal for children not to be deprived of everything they need. Back on track, I think one of the many misguided things I've had was to assume expensive is always better. Sure, one needs to pay a higher price for better quality. I should expect to pay a higher price when I order tea or coffee from a tea store or coffee shop. However, there are some things in the world that are just plain overpriced.

I would like to use a classic film scene to illustrate a point. As the holidays hit, maybe some people who were either parents or children in the 1990s may remember Jingle All the Way. It's one stupid film that delivers a smart message in some way. It can be a message against last-minute shopping and giving in to peer pressure. There was also the scene where Arnold Schwarzenegger's character Harold entered the warehouse. The crooked Santa charged USD 300.00 for a fake Turbo Man toy. If I'm not wrong, the USD to PHP dollar exchange rate at that time was around PHP 25.00 to PHP 30.00+. I'll just use PHP 27.1429 based on this USD-PHP exchange rate history. That would mean Harold would've been ripped off of PHP 8,142.87 over a bootleg Turbo Man toy if he were a Filipino and not an American! Today, the value of USD 300.00 would be PHP 17,001.00. Sure, the film was full of illogical scenes (such as the bomb not killing the police officer) but it's a satire I love to use to make fun of bad habits. The whole bootleg Turbo Man toy proved that expensive isn't always the best. 

Back on the topic, there's always this mentality that one's lifestyle is an indicator of one's wealth (read here). There's that assumption that I had with another former enemy of mine, who's now living a rather modest life. That guy once foolishly said that so and so was richer because so and so had more stuff than me. I also remember some person I'm avoiding due to his toxic attitude. That toxic guy was practically handed over almost everything by his widowed mother and older siblings. The guy doesn't even know the value of money. The toxic guy only seemed rich because he had this and that. Later on, the toxic guy ran into a lot of trouble. People who were once impressed by him gossiped about his fall.

It's a misconception that expensive is always the best. I got into stupid fights with materialistic people because of this and that. I always felt bad that I never had the most expensive luxury cars. Now, I understand that I'm actually spending much less for repairs if I buy middle-priced items. I remember having my laptop fixed and I was glad it wasn't a luxury brand. I hear that some luxury cars aren't fuel-efficient. There are times I hear that expensive clothes and shores are only bought for the brand and not for the quality. I hear that very expensive restaurants don't have good taste. I guess I'm glad I usually skip any restaurant that's unjustifiably expensive. I could understand why I'm spending nearly PHP 700.00 for a goat biryani in an Indian restaurant. It was justifiably expensive because it was a huge serving. What would be stupid if I got charged PHP 5,000.00 for just one plate of food that didn't even taste good.

The Investopedia points out as to why people buy luxury goods:

Are Higher-Priced Goods Really of Higher Quality?

One possible explanation for this is the human tendency to overemphasize the positive elements of a product and ignore its disadvantages. For example, in the case of Apple Inc. (AAPL), consumers wait overnight for new releases of iPhones, iPads, and Mac computers. This despite the fact that Apple products are not technologically unique or superior.

In fact, Samsung makes phones with better features (compared to most models of the iPhone), and Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) and Xiaomi make phones that typically have a cheaper price point. Nevertheless, Apple experiences a high degree of brand loyalty and seems to break sales records year after year.

Because some people perceive non-luxury goods as inferior simply by virtue of them being non-luxury (and not on the basis of their characteristics or qualities), they also come to the irrational conclusion that higher priced goods are of better quality. Contrary to the evidence, they may believe that you get what you pay for, regardless of whether the goods are actually better than their more affordable counterparts.

In my case, I want to go for what I pay for and not how much I pay for. I could go ahead and pay higher for better specifications. I'm willing to spend more money to get the best quality. I can't expect anything that's ridiculously cheap to serve me well. If I had to spend a certain huge sum--I should get what I pay for. I would pay PHP 300.00 for a certain delicious and heavy meal. However, I wouldn't pay PHP 3,000.00 for a meal that turns out to be nothing more than ego inflation. Some places may look fancy but the prices are unjustifiable. Why would I serve regular coffee for the same price as premium coffee? As a person who goes to teahouses and coffee shops (though I put them in the same category), I can understand why their tea and coffee are more expensive. It's higher quality and they have longer operating hours. Meanwhile, a canteen that charges the same price for regular coffee with the same price as premium coffee will turn off people. It's because target markets are very important. 

The best way to get the best value is, "Do I get what I'm paying for?" It's all about the value of the money. It's not about how expensive something is but whether or not I was able to get the best out of it. Will spending more now make me save more in the future? Those are important questions I ask myself a lot. 

Popular posts from this blog

Venezuela as a Cautionary Tale on #SahodItaasPresyoIbaba, Nationalistic Pride, Welfare State Economics

The Sunday Guardian Years ago, I wrote about Venezuela's pride and protectionism , under a more "formal" style of writing compared to my latest posts. I decided to use an even "less formal" and "less academic" tone since I'm not writing a term paper. Instead, it's like how a professor and a student discuss the thesis using first person over third person, using contractions, etc., while the thesis doesn't use such tones. Back on track, I thought about the arrest of Venezuelan President Maduro can spark debate. Was it a violation of sovereignty? I'm no expert on international law. However, Venezuelans can be seen celebrating Maduro's arrest. Right now, I'm using Gemini AI and Google search to help me find some sources for this blog. It's because I don't want my blog to become another gossip central, but a place to discuss facts with my own personal opinions (making sure they don't  derail the facts).  I used Venezuela ...

Venezuela's Pride and Protectionism

The Telegraph Venezuela is an oil-rich country yet it's a very poor country. Somebody could go ahead and give every unthinkable reason such as "foreign investments caused it" (a blatant lie) and "It's because America had economic sanctions in Venezuela". Yet, the answer can be found in several causes such as corruption. Yet, China and Vietnam, which can be seen to still have a good amount of corruption, are far more successful. The answer also lies in one policy--economic protectionism . The very idea that a country that first world countries used "protectionism" to succeed is a lie as proven by Venezuela's ongoing crisis. A common-sense examination of one root cause of Venezuela's continuing crisis Forbes magazine mentions this in "What Do Investors Need To Understand About Venezuela's Economic Crisis?" by Nathaniel Parish Flannery on December 21, 2016: Venezuela is far and away the worst-managed economy in the Americas . Ad...

Davide vs. Mahathir: Which Lolo Should Filipinos Take Economic Advice From?

The real issue isn't that something is old or new. Instead, if something old or new still works, or doesn't work! Many modern laws are built on some ancient principles, while adjusting to the current times!  The Constitution of Japan is actually older than the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, it's more effective for the reasons that (1) their constitution is silent when it comes to regulating economic activities (ex., protectionist measures), and (2) it's a parliamentary system. Honestly, it's a pretty straightforward constitution compared to ours! As Mahatir Mohamad turned 100 today, I would like to raise up Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. once again. The problem isn't Davide's age but his unwillingness to embrace change when needed (read here ). This time, it's time to bring up a contrast between wise old people and unwise old people. A young person can be right where the old person is wrong. A young person can be wiser because he or she lea...

Filipino Manufacturing's Golden Age ENDED Because of the Filipino First Policy

Here's a picture from the Dose of Disbelief Page on Facebook. Here's something that it wrote: Filipinos once trusted locally made products more than imports. Before World War II, the label "Made in the Philippines" carried prestige, not stigma, reflecting a strong sense of national confidence in domestic production. Local products such as shoes, cigars, textiles, furniture, and food were often preferred over imports. This preference was rooted in the belief that local goods were better adapted to local conditions, tastes, and were often of comparable, if not superior, quality. This period showcases a strong historical era of consumer nationalism and thriving local industries. We need to look into the context of Filipino history  If we look at the Philippine history timeline , we must account for 1935-1940, during which the Philippines was under the Commonwealth government. Independence was declared from Spain on June 12, 1898. However, there was a transition period w...

Filipino Businesses Need More Competition Than Democracy

Enterprise League Oftentimes, I remembered the number of complaints I get such as the Internet being so slow, the recent Typhoon Odette restoration being rather slow, high-cost but low-quality services, and that there's just not enough supply. However, the same people who are complaining about what I just mentioned earlier also said that I'm crazy when I told them to invite foreign direct investments (FDI) such as multinational corporations to invest here. Their line of reasoning goes from every weird direct line such as saying that multinational corporations (MNCs) are the form of the new "imperialism", that only the MNCs will get rich if we let them do business in the Philippines, that MNCs will exploit the people, that it will be overly relying on foreigners, and I don't know where they get such thinking. When I ask them for the solution--they just say that "Let's just do everything ourselves and rely on ourselves." Such logic is really stupid one...