When is it ok to buy cheap?

[Janne]

Cheap quality footwear = glued on soles.
My brand new CAT boits got stored in my wardrobe for 4 years. Sole lasted about 25 steps before it came off.
Shoes on and walk into taxi.
Driven to airport.
Step out from taxi, get trolkey.
Halfway between trolley point and taxi front half of sole flipped open.

Watch wife start laughing like a maniac. She said my foot and boot looked like a duck quacking!

Open luggage, take on packed shoes.
Throw CAT boots in trashcan.
$100.

 

[snappingturtle]

My womans knickers could maybe clean the spokes on the rims.......

Well Janne if your donating I will make use .....I can just see it now...the post come's and..... Sammi's "like hay there's a parcel here!"
(me) "well cool open it!"
(Sammi) "right mister Toy! what woman posted you her nickers!? (notable growl in her voice)
(me ) ummmm........well there's the forum and this guy "janne" and this is not going to go well is it.........

 

[Janne]

You just tell her I am a 57 year old guy with similar interests as yours!
She might accept that. Not.

 

[Janne]

As several had written, cheap does not mean crap.
Mora, used army stuff.
Much more can be found.

For camp duty or short stretches I find the oldfashioned Converse, but they are getting ridiculously expensive. Last ones I bought were about $45. But they last.
Super quality.

 

[Duggie Bravo]

Nice, no offence taken and I do understand about the scarce resource that is used.

It was merely, a poor, example of when buying something cheap means you can replace them easily and cheaply which can have an unexpected benefit to the individual.

Alternatively when you have something expensive, you will be reluctant to replace even when it needs to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Janne]

Cheap Chinese made wood gas stove (£10.45). Best buy I ever made.

Is it cheap?
Trangia 1-2 person full kit £57 at Millets ( now reduced to £46!)

 

[KenThis]

In general, when I purchase anything I do my homework.
I like to read as much as possible about any potential purchase, pros, cons, reviews, specs, etc.

I tend to find that the choices can be broadly split into three.
Cheapest - This could be a knockoff, unbranded, lack of quality etc.
Medium - What most stuff falls into, with pros and cons.
Expensive - Either made to survive the apocalypse or by a brand leader.

I am generally not interested in the cheapest or the most expensive.
Cheap usually means no cover if it fails.
Expensive usually means you are paying a premium for a name.

When I'm looking at the rest of the options I am usually weighing up mininum requirements, cost, aesthetics, future proofing etc.
When I have a choice of a few options I then start looking at the cheapest available online by known retailers.
This whole process can be iterative and it might take me a long time to finally make a decision.
Once I have made my decision though, I no longer think about cost so much, I am then just worried about it being fit for purpose and it's aesthetics.

This does change slightly for some classes of things. Luxuries that I will handle a lot, I tend to let my personal aesthetics sometimes rule my head. But I find that what I prefer is not always what the majority prefer. I often prefer functional and robustness, so I'm usually not paying over the odds.
Consumables I'm far more likely to err towards cheapest, especially materials I use in my hobbies or projects, as long as they are fit for purpose.

 

[KenThis]

What I'd like to add is that I see no reason for shaming anyone for choosing to buy cheap and replace often.
As I see it personal circumstance play a large part in what people can afford.
I understand the ecological impact on the planet and the humanitarian impact on what was called the 'third world' by 'Western' commercialism.
However I don't think someone buying the cheapest they can is the problem.
As John Fenna sort of paraphrased Terry Pratchett and Samuel Vimes, poverty can be a trap that leads to further poverty.
I have the utmost respect for anyone who is able and willing to consider the planet etc. when making a purchase. However it is not always possible when the choice might be the cheapest available or doing without.
Furthermore I don't believe that the person who buys 5 pairs of shoes in 5 years only to wear them out and them end up in landfill is the problem.
I believe the person who buys a new car every 3 years or redecorates the house every year or gets the newest iPhone or buys unecessary clothes every week is the problem.
Built-in obsolescence is the problem, and the fact that the majority of people tend to accept it. The foundation on which the temple of capitalism is based..
But this is probably into the realms of politics so I'll stop there.

 

[Robson Valley]

Time and again, I find that I go to the Field & Stream Magazine "Best-of-the-Best" gear reviews. Every category imaginable.
I'm not so sure that you get what you pay for and F&S pulls no punches.
From the reviews, I learn also what might be "good enough" for the few times I use something.
Also pretty funny to see what some people will spend heaps of money on for a weekend in a pay-per-use campground.

 

[snappingturtle]

Fixed that for you ST.

I should of seen that coming! mind you its a image in my head for some reason I do not find without merit.......

 

[snappingturtle]

You just tell her I am a 57 year old guy with similar interests as yours!
She might accept that. Not.

You mean we both like to offer are woman's nickers to people on-line?

 

[MikeLA]

[QUOTE
Furthermore I don't believe that the person who buys 5 pairs of shoes in 5 years only to wear them out and them end up in landfill is the problem.
I believe the person who buys a new car every 3 years or redecorates the house every year or gets the newest iPhone or buys unecessary clothes every week is the problem.
Built-in obsolescence is the problem, and the fact that the majority of people tend to accept it. The foundation on which the temple of capitalism is based..
But this is probably into the realms of politics so I'll stop there.[/QUOTE]

Like this comment to me says it all, very good points

 

[daveO]

Remember the kids story the kings clothes. A lot of the buying is peer pressure and commercialism. We live in a materialistic world. I tent to think about it for a while “do I really need it” then buy or don’t

Hence the popularity of 'flash sales' on-line these days. They're cleverly designed to reduce the amount of time you have to ponder about buying something and so are more likely to rush into a purchase.

There's a lot of talk these days about developing a 'sharing economy' where people would be able to rent or borrow things rather than buy them. In a utopian society it would mean no need for cheap 'disposable' goods when you could rent something of quality to do the job. It sounds great in theory but is probably only really suited to densely populated areas.

The problem with cheap is that it downgrades everything around it. When stuff becomes so cheap that it negates the need to buy decent quality items instead then it kills the middle of the market. The top end stuff becomes very desirable and can stay pricey but your average person can't afford it. The middle range stuff has to drop in quality to keep up with the cheap stuff until it isn't worth buying.

I like to buy things second hand and I enjoy repairing what I have. I still think it's important though to keep spending disposable income but to choose where you spend it so it does good rather than sending it abroad or whatever. It's interesting in my job because the local economy is very important to my income. I buy less meat these days but I get it from the local butcher or the farm shop. The butcher is one of my clients so all the money I spend with him gets paid back to me for the work I do for him. The farm also give me work occasionally so it's good to keep them happy. It's the same with a lot of local shops and businesses.

 

[Janne]

People seem to have forgotten the notion of saving then buying.
Sacrifying that second pint, putting the money in a jar.

I am lucky to be in a financially quite strong position, but still save for things by not buying something that is cool for at the moment, then I put the same money in a jar.

Makes the things I have saved for much more valuable and fun to have!

 

[Janne]

Using a plastic card to pay has removed the perception of real money. To type in a code and a green button is different from counting out the cash in paper and metal form.

 

[Duggie Bravo]

To buy something cheap just to throw it away after one year's use is, as far as I'm concerned, totally immoral; just completely wrong in all respects. To base any purchasing decision soley on your own convenience is unacceptable when you consider the environmental problems we now face; it's just unsustainable and is a prime symptom of the disease called affluenza.

There's just more to it than personal considerations now, and the sooner we all face that fact the better the chance we have of collectively bettering the place we, and everybody else, live in.

Every purchase, everyone makes is down to personal considerations and to make things more convenient for them. There is very little that anyone buys that is an essential purchase, that they couldn’t make or grow if it wasn’t inconvenient.
The very purpose of this thread is to discuss buying things that we don’t really need and to ask whether we are justified in spending more or to spend less.

You are misunderstanding me if you think that I buy something just to throw it away after 1 year, I bought things, in this case shoes, that I knew had a limited life span, and I recognised they were priced accordingly. I merely point out the advantage of changing my footwear annually.

Recycling uses a tremendous amount of energy, some will argue whether that is a good use of limited resources?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chomp]

Using a plastic card to pay has removed the perception of real money. To type in a code and a green button is different from counting out the cash in paper and metal form.

I love being able to go online for a quick purchase, the downside is after a couple of glasses the judgement is a bit iffy and you can 'justify' buying stuff you can't when sober.
As for what's cheap, there are a LOT of decent torches for very little, the cheap Cree's for example, its hard to argue with a torch that throws out that muchf light for about a quid and a half, I spend more on the batteries. Mora (already mentioned) and a good nose round forums like this can lead to the odd bargain. It might come from the other side of the world and take 3 weeks but if you need it NOW that's why God invented Amazon Prime. I don't need the best of gear for everything and sticking with the torches, its easy to carry a couple of cheap ones than 1 really expensive one. As per the OP, I've got and use reasonably frequently one of the 'new' Karrimors, not a patch on the 'old skool' ones but its a comfortable enough bag and I don't regret buying it

Whatever the item, if it does what you need it to then it works. Like a lot of guys I do like the 'shiny shiny though', I 'm sure I'd 'upgrade' on some things after a lottery win.

 

[Erbswurst]

Yes, @Janne , that's right.

The "Räven Jacket" from that foxes looks very similar to the Bundesheer Jacke zum Kampfanzug KAZ 02 from the Austrian Army. It costs new 30 €, used 15 €.
The räven jacket costs 270 €.

;0)

The Austrian is made in Austria or Germany.
Where the other is produced in Asia I don't know.

Both are made from a polyester cotton mix.

;0)

 

[Fadcode]

"I believe the person who buys a new car every 3 years or redecorates the house every year or gets the newest iPhone or buys unecessary clothes every week is the problem.
Built-in obsolescence is the problem, and the fact that the majority of people tend to accept it. The foundation on which the temple of capitalism is based."

Surely the newer the car, or phone the more likely they are to be eco friendly and in the case of the car they should be less polluting, I agree that there is built in obsolence in virtually everything, (especially the Iphone) and to some extent there has to be otherwise whole industries would fail, but we also have to accept that economies of scale have reduced the price of some goods to an affordable level, take modern TV's for instance and other white goods, also the lengths of warranty on some goods now testify to their quality. Its just a pity that we don't make these goods ourselves like we used to do, but in relation to the costs of manufacture in the third world as well as in eastern Europe we just cannot compete. We are a consumer society and in many aspects have lost the skills to make the things we need and want,

To some extent we are supporting the third world by importing the cheap goods, but also probably not improving their working conditions much, so its I suppose a case of we are damned if we do and damned if we don't,

 

[Janne]

Yes, @Janne , that's right.

The "Räven Jacket" from that foxes looks very similar to the Bundesheer Jacke zum Kampfanzug KAZ 02 from the Austrian Army. It costs new 30 €, used 15 €.
The räven jacket costs 270 €
The Austrian is made in Austria or Germany.
Where the other is produced in Asia I don't know.

Both are made from a polyester cotton mix.

;0)

You need to increase the cost per unit for a civilisn design and customer, as they are made in far less numbers. The armies order only a few sizes in huge, huge numbers, over many years.
Also you do not know how much the army paid per unit, or how much the sports shop paid for one unit ( of the Fjällräven)

The F. Greenland skirt is USD 110 in the official online Fjällräven shop, and £80 in Britain, so I think your dealer is trying to screw you!

Fjällräven manufacture? Maybe somebody owns one and can tell what the label says?