or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Good Natured Advice Thread (improving a business wardrobe)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Good Natured Advice Thread (improving a business wardrobe) - Page 527

post #7891 of 37396
I understand clags' dilemma. What I am saying is I don't really have that issue.

If I like A more than B, as long as I can afford A, I don't really factor in is that price bump commensurate to how much more I like it better than B. Because I know I will be most happy buying what I like the most. That is what I have found personally.

I always endeavor to get what it is that I like most. If I can't afford A, however, as long as I do like B, I will get it, if it is something I need/want.
post #7892 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

I understand clags' dilemma. What I am saying is I don't really have that issue.

If I like A more than B, as long as I can afford A, I don't really factor in is that price bump commensurate to how much more I like it better than B. Because I know I will be most happy buying what I like the most. That is what I have found personally.

I always endeavor to get what it is that I like most. If I can't afford A, however, as long as I do like B, I will get it, if it is something I need/want.

 

That's very interesting! I suppose we all maximise our utility in different ways.

post #7893 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyface View Post

I think Claghorn's query was more of the nature of how much more are you willing to pay for a marginal increase in quality. The same is often debated in shoe threads: are you willing to pay twice the price of Carmina for Edward Green, even though the quality of EG is only 1.1x as good?

I've never understood these kinds of statements. "Quality", if it even means anything, is not a number. When you divide one not-number by another not-number, you again get a not-number. So I don't know what this 1.1x could possibly mean.
post #7894 of 37396
If you were more of a nerd, you would see, like Clags, that everything has a number/value to it.

For me, not so much.

---

MF - horses for courses. its what makes things interesting.
post #7895 of 37396
What I think he means though, is, lets say Carminas cost $500, and lets say that is a fair price, and make that the baseline.

Now, are EGs that much more luxurious/constructed that much better, that you could say it justifies spending $1200. Are they quantifiably $700 "better"?

I think its a fair question if that is your perspective.

But my perspective is, do I like the EGs (really GGs for me) better at all? Do they speak to my heart? If so, whatever the bump is, if I can afford it, it will usually be "worth" it.
post #7896 of 37396
As long as there's a price associated with the choices, it's hard not to try to quantify the differences. If a pair of shoes costs 2x a pair you consider to have acceptable quality/desirability, what are you getting for your extra money? In a sense, if you don't intuitively think the differences make it 2x the quality/desirability, then you'll decide it's not worth it, right?
post #7897 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarbutch View Post

As long as there's a price associated with the choices, it's hard not to try to quantify the differences. If a pair of shoes costs 2x a pair you consider to have acceptable quality/desirability, what are you getting for your extra money? In a sense, if you don't intuitively think the differences make it 2x the quality/desirability, then you'll decide it's not worth it, right?

You can think about whether the shoes are worth that much more to you, sure. But this has nothing to do with some objectively measured "quality". Is a $100 bill 2 times the "quality" of a $50 bill?

It's not a nerd vs not nerd thing. I think the attempt to quantify stuff like this is counter productive because it leads people to focus on the quantifiable aspects of a good, and imagine that "quality" is linear in those aspects.
post #7898 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbelragazzo View Post


I've never understood these kinds of statements. "Quality", if it even means anything, is not a number. When you divide one not-number by another not-number, you again get a not-number. So I don't know what this 1.1x could possibly mean.

 

Economists/statisticians put numbers on everything, so I'm sure you could put a number on quality as well. You could have people score the quality of shoes in the same way the quality of cars is determined. Just score the several parts of the shoe, such as leather, stitching, last, durability, nr. of issues in a year, etc. Weigh those parts and come up with an overall 'quality' score. Compare that quality with the price and you can make a price/quality ratio. Some parts can be more objectively determined than others. Everyone can see sloppy stitching, but some lasts will appeal more to some than to others.

 

Of course the 1.1 number is entirely fictional, but it was merely an example. As Stitchy explained, it took Carmina as a baseline of 1.

 

For example, I have shoes that cost €160, €260 and €340. I can compare the initial quality: how does the stitching look, how does the last look, how does the leather feel, etc. Then, after a year of wearing all three shoes approximately equally much, I can compare the long term quality. For example, the soles of the 160 shoe split twice, and I had to stop by the cobbler several times. The leather looks very wrinkled as well, and doesn't feel as nice the other shoes.

 

So, I can score the shoe on all of those things, add the costs of the cobbler to the purchasing price, and come up with a price quality ratio. The shoe that has the best price/quality ratio after a year is the shoe that I will be purchasing more often. It's only a sample of one for each brand, but you could also take expert reviews from industry insiders, or SF reviews from trusted people into account when making a buying decision. I think it's a good way of maximising your utility within a certain budget. As it is now, I'd rather have 1 Carmina than 2 Meermin shoes.

post #7899 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarbutch View Post

As long as there's a price associated with the choices, it's hard not to try to quantify the differences. If a pair of shoes costs 2x a pair you consider to have acceptable quality/desirability, what are you getting for your extra money? In a sense, if you don't intuitively think the differences make it 2x the quality/desirability, then you'll decide it's not worth it, right?

No, not really, because that is only if the cheaper option is a starting point, or even a factor. See, the way I look at it is like this:

Lets say GG shoes cost 1300, or a certain SC costs 1500. The question is, Do like it? Do I love it? Do I yearn for it? Do I think it is luxurious and well made? Does the brand mean something to me? If yes, then that item is worth that price for me. And if it is worth that price, then the fact that something else is comparable to it, but cheaper, does not really matter, because what I want is worth the price being asked. At that point, its just a matter of can I afford it or not?

And if I cant, what can I do to make it so I can afford it? If there is no way, only then do I begin to consider alternate, and perhaps less expensive, options.
post #7900 of 37396
I am an economist, and I'm telling you, few of our kind would think of doing such a thing and calling it "quality".
post #7901 of 37396
Even the consumer reports or the wine tasting people would, I hope, not claim that the actual number that they attach to a product has any real objective meaning. It's an aggregation of scores on different aspects. The aggregation itself represents the preferences of the magazines. They have no objective meaning.
post #7902 of 37396

Perhaps quality is not the best word, but it does measure an important variable. Had I only looked at the initial purchase price, I would've kept buying Meermin. But the sloppy stitching, the stiff leather, the soles and heel splitting and the costs of replacing that made the shoes more expensive than Carmina, and they looked worse for it. 

 

How would you suggest one decides which shoes to buy or to go for B&T jackets or MTM jackets? I'm always looking for ways to spend my money more wisely, although one could argue that spending money on clothes is altogether not very wise.

post #7903 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyface View Post

Perhaps quality is not the best word, but it does measure an important variable. Had I only looked at the initial purchase price, I would've kept buying meermin. But the sloppy stitching, the stiff leather, the soles and heel splitting and the costs of replacing that made the shoes more expensive than Carmina, and they looked worse for it. 

How would you suggest one decides which shoes to buy or to go for B&T jackets or MTM jackets?

You decide whether you'd rather have the additional money (or whatever else you would buy with it) or the item in question. That is all.
post #7904 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyface View Post

I'm always looking for ways to spend my money more wisely, although one could argue that spending money on clothes is altogether not very wise.

False economy. Naked people have little to no influence in society.
post #7905 of 37396
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbelragazzo View Post


You decide whether you'd rather have the additional money (or whatever else you would buy with it) or the item in question. That is all.

 

I had a feeling you were going to say that. Thank you for the interesting discussion!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Good Natured Advice Thread (improving a business wardrobe)