quality : price ratios

stickonatree · Feb 1, 2009

killing time until SB, someone indulge me. IMO, anything above a certain pricepoint has only tiny increments of what we perceive as increased quality. the graph below (drawn using a state-of-the-art drawing program) illustrates what i mean. do you agree, disagree, or have other theories/ideas? discuss.

HalfCanvas · Feb 1, 2009

I don't think you're curve is quite right (much too steep in places and not steep enough in others), but it also largely misses the point, I think. This is not your fault. You are actually thinking logically/rationally. But, what I've noticed through the years is that customers aren't paying premiums for those tiny incrimental increases in quality (for example, is a Kiton shoe really twice as good as an EG shoe?). Instead, they are paying for what that incriment represents. It represents an idea and an ideal, a representation that the wearer *cares* enough about this incriment to pay dearly for it.

stickonatree · Feb 1, 2009

Originally Posted by HalfCanvas

I don't think you're curve is quite right (much too steep in places and not steep enough in others), but it also largely misses the point, I think. This is not your fault. You are actually thinking logically/rationally. But, what I've noticed through the years is that customers aren't paying premiums for those tiny incrimental increases in quality (for example, is a Kiton shoe really twice as good as an EG shoe?). Instead, they are paying for what that incriment represents. It represents an idea and an ideal, a representation that the wearer *cares* enough about this incriment to pay dearly for it.
actually, we are on different faces of the same coin. i understand the individual choices in styles, ideals, arts, or whatnots separate from an objective quality, and made this thread to make fun of it in a subtle way. but now not so subtle.

Cary Grant · Feb 1, 2009

this ignores a key factor in the price of luxe items: scarcity. Use Ferrari as one of the best known examples of how to keep price high almost independent of quality.

HRoi · Feb 1, 2009

i think that looks good as a price: perceived value curve (except i would make it much steeper on the top end where JL and EG are). price vs. quality (as defined in objective criteria like leather grade, construction, etc) would actually be a much much flatter curve throughout the spectrum, IMO

newtrane · Feb 1, 2009

That are interesting thoughts indeed.

\tPrice\tQuality\tP/Q
VASS \t5\t10\t0.5
LOBB\t7\t8\t0.875
GUCCI\t8\t2\t4
..
POOLE\t8\t10\t0.8
ARMANI\t7\t2\t3.5

etc.

The lower the P/Q ratio the better (in the SF universe).

Avebury · Feb 1, 2009

Originally Posted by stickonatree

killing time until SB, someone indulge me. IMO, anything above a certain pricepoint has only tiny increments of what we perceive as increased quality. the graph below (drawn using a state-of-the-art drawing program) illustrates what i mean.

do you agree, disagree, or have other theories/ideas? discuss.

I appreciate the time that has gone into this, but I think it is bollocks.

Cards & Cubs · Feb 1, 2009

I love this graph. Your conflation of "AE, Alden, C&J benchgrade, etc." into one category is an ingenius decision, assuming that your intention is to set off a firestorm of debate. I can't think of a more economical way of pissing off so many SFers.

Kudos!

stickonatree · Feb 1, 2009

Originally Posted by Cards & Cubs

I love this graph. Your conflation of "AE, Alden, C&J benchgrade, etc." into one category is an ingenius decision, assuming that your intention is to set off a firestorm of debate. I can't think of a more economical way of pissing off so many SFers.

Kudos!

not sure what you mean. those 3 i listed all are about the same in build quality, both from my own inspections as well as many SF threads. CJ benchgrade has quite inflated prices.

DocHolliday · Feb 1, 2009

I want a certain level of quality, but, beyond that, have made peace with the fact that I will pay a premium for aesthetics. Not retail, usually. But a premium.

Quiller · Feb 2, 2009

x26 · Feb 2, 2009

Originally Posted by Quiller

Hehe, You sure are Right there.

HRoi · Feb 2, 2009

some of the "crap you would not wear if broke" is actually far to the right of your x-axis

ChicagoRon · Feb 2, 2009

So.. I think the OP is trying to explain diminishing returns, but the innate logical flaw is that Quality is NOT a function of price.

If it were, you would have to put Prada and Gucci above AE and Alden.

A more useful tool for this analysis would be quadrants.

ChicagoRon · Feb 2, 2009

Regression will give you a covariance statistic that will tell you how much price helps quality in general, but is still no help if you are faced with the option to buy an equally priced pair of Gucci or C&J.

However, using quadrants a shopper could consider exactly how much quality he wants for the price. What's interesting is that while price is 100% objective, quality is probably 50/50.

quality : price ratios

Distinguished Member

Senior Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Member

Senior Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Classic Menswear Featured products

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Definitely full canvas only

Half canvas is fine

Really don't care

Depends on fabric

Depends on price

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: