Value is all in your perception. Many men (by which I mean the vast majority) would think that paying $250 for a pair of shoes is not good value, when they can buy shoes that do the same damn thing for $80 from the Myer sales. Because someone has told you that Loake shoes are good quality, you are now prepared to pay $250 for them and think you are ahead - but only because you value certain characteristics in your shoes (Goodyear welting, better quality leather), and perceive that as "better" than a pair of Indian made, glued sole shoes.
Other people don't have the same set of values for shoes or jackets or any number of things. For most people a jacket is just an extra layer to keep the cold out. They don't care about surgeon's cuffs or hand sewn buttonholes. The fact that you are prepared to pay a certain amount for these things is a reflection on you, not the article itself. Any given item may have a million values placed upon it by a million individuals (or one individual a million times), but it's still the same item.
Could not have said it better myself. Just because Ethan says so does not make it so. It is very easy to reframe things to suit your point. Judging by the number of people here who are in the legal profession, the irony is quite exquisite.