3 ms·

Those Garmins will be worth 0 in 10 years, or 30. These ones will keep working and could be worn by his grandchildren easily, if basic care is taken and they ar

by jajko 2y ago

Those Garmins will be worth 0 in 10 years, or 30. These ones will keep working and could be worn by his grandchildren easily, if basic care is taken and they are not stolen or lost.Their value could be low or also very, very high. Passions should not be primarily measured in TCO or returns, then no vacation ever makes any sense since you just spend money, no expensive clothing, no expensive car, no restaurants just eating cheap salads whole life and so on. Also one should live in tiniest cheapest shed to maximize earnings. You see where this goes

michaelt 2y ago
> Those Garmins will be worth 0 in 10 years, or 30. Sure, but even if I replace my Garmin every 5 years for the next 100 years, I'll only have spent $4000, so I'll still be $6000 better off. Or if I put that $10,000 into an investment that returns 2% above inflation? I can have a new Garmin every year and 100 years later, I'll also still have $10,000 And if I'm needing a new Garmin every year I'm either very careless or very passionate about having the latest gadgets. So will that $10k watch really be my last ever watch? Almost certainly not. > Passions should not be primarily measured in TCO or returns Yes, I agree - as I said in the first paragraph of my post. If you're buying a luxury watch because you like luxury watches, there's nothing wrong with that. But pretending a $10k watch saves you money is just wishful thinking.
lazyhummingbird 2y ago
Record players, CD players, and MP3 players were meant to become worthless after the advent of each successive device with the final myth being the idea that streaming would consolidate all the spending into the smartphone. These rumors have always been greatly exaggerated. Now, kids are buying up old iPods, CD players, and your uncle’s Technics receiver (mid even for its day) above their historical MSRP. There are three questions at issue: 1. Is the point of this watch to be a sound, efficient investment? No, clearly it is meant to be a personal luxury object and experience. It’s ok to indulge, but seem to agree that this watch is an extravagance —and thus it is wonderful but fundamentally beyond purely rational. 2. Is this watch a good investment, money-wise? It would be if it appreciated, and it may. It could also wind up (ha) depreciating, as ochs and junior make many similar pieces and OP is wearing it actively enough to damage it. 3. Is a series of lower end, 4-year supported, shorter lasting goods ($500 for 4 years) a worse decision than one, long lasting, analog artifact ($100000 for 80+ years)? I think that’s up to each person.

by jajko 2y ago

michaelt 2y ago

> Those Garmins will be worth 0 in 10 years, or 30. Sure, but even if I replace my Garmin every 5 years for the next 100 years, I'll only have spent $4000, so I'll still be $6000 better off. Or if I put that $10,000 into an investment that returns 2% above inflation? I can have a new Garmin every year and 100 years later, I'll also still have $10,000 And if I'm needing a new Garmin every year I'm either very careless or very passionate about having the latest gadgets. So will that $10k watch really be my last ever watch? Almost certainly not. > Passions should not be primarily measured in TCO or returns Yes, I agree - as I said in the first paragraph of my post. If you're buying a luxury watch because you like luxury watches, there's nothing wrong with that. But pretending a $10k watch saves you money is just wishful thinking.

lazyhummingbird 2y ago

Record players, CD players, and MP3 players were meant to become worthless after the advent of each successive device with the final myth being the idea that streaming would consolidate all the spending into the smartphone. These rumors have always been greatly exaggerated. Now, kids are buying up old iPods, CD players, and your uncle’s Technics receiver (mid even for its day) above their historical MSRP. There are three questions at issue: 1. Is the point of this watch to be a sound, efficient investment? No, clearly it is meant to be a personal luxury object and experience. It’s ok to indulge, but seem to agree that this watch is an extravagance —and thus it is wonderful but fundamentally beyond purely rational. 2. Is this watch a good investment, money-wise? It would be if it appreciated, and it may. It could also wind up (ha) depreciating, as ochs and junior make many similar pieces and OP is wearing it actively enough to damage it. 3. Is a series of lower end, 4-year supported, shorter lasting goods ($500 for 4 years) a worse decision than one, long lasting, analog artifact ($100000 for 80+ years)? I think that’s up to each person.