4 ms·

Your method is just as risky - say after you've just spent 5K on your camera an unavoidable bill of $4K shows up? Now you have no extra money and have to dip in

Your method is just as risky - say after you've just spent 5K on your camera an unavoidable bill of $4K shows up? Now you have no extra money and have to dip into Credit (potentially with high interest). Your best strategy would have been to have $5K on hand and still use financing if the terms are favorable - it keeps your funds at steady level, allows for future planning and gives you opportunities to invest or otherwise grow your capital. And yes, people without savings pay for that, it sucks to be such people but they are paying regardless if you take advantage of the financing scheme.

happyopossum 4y ago
Then you sell the camera and pay off the bill. Sheesh - it's a camera, not a life support machine...
- pandaman 4y ago
  I think you might be overestimating the liquidity of the used camera market a little bit.
  - Sakos 4y ago
    Does it matter? Even if he only gets half the price back, that leaves 1500 left of the debt he has to pay out of pocket. If he's paying monthly for the camera, he suddenly has a $4000 bill on top of whatever of the $5000 debt remains unpaid. I think I'd rather be in the former situation.
    - pandaman 4y ago
      Even if not having any debt is extremely important to you then you are still out of 2500 on your camera transaction, which is pure loss here. However some people consider not just an amount of debt but its other qualities too and for them having debt of $5000 with 0% APR might be preferable to having $1500 debt with, say, 20%+ APR. At the end you need to count a monetary balance and compare a ($2500) loss on camera together with the interest paid on your $1500 loan against paying $5000 for the camera. If math is hard consider your end state: 1. Without the camera, without $5000 + interest on the $1500 you borrowed. 2. With a $5000 camera, without $5000 you paid for the camera. The state of the $4000 bill is the same in both cases, which state you prefer?
      - Sakos 4y ago
        > If math is hard Get fucked, mate.

happyopossum 4y ago

Then you sell the camera and pay off the bill. Sheesh - it's a camera, not a life support machine...

pandaman 4y ago
I think you might be overestimating the liquidity of the used camera market a little bit.
- Sakos 4y ago
  Does it matter? Even if he only gets half the price back, that leaves 1500 left of the debt he has to pay out of pocket. If he's paying monthly for the camera, he suddenly has a $4000 bill on top of whatever of the $5000 debt remains unpaid. I think I'd rather be in the former situation.
  - pandaman 4y ago
    Even if not having any debt is extremely important to you then you are still out of 2500 on your camera transaction, which is pure loss here. However some people consider not just an amount of debt but its other qualities too and for them having debt of $5000 with 0% APR might be preferable to having $1500 debt with, say, 20%+ APR. At the end you need to count a monetary balance and compare a ($2500) loss on camera together with the interest paid on your $1500 loan against paying $5000 for the camera. If math is hard consider your end state: 1. Without the camera, without $5000 + interest on the $1500 you borrowed. 2. With a $5000 camera, without $5000 you paid for the camera. The state of the $4000 bill is the same in both cases, which state you prefer?
    - Sakos 4y ago
      > If math is hard Get fucked, mate.