4 ms·
I think what the article is trying to say is "Buy the best quality that you can afford". Unfortunately the Author has completely conflated Quality with Price.
by suprgeek 14y ago
I think what the article is trying to say is "Buy the best quality that you can afford". Unfortunately the Author has completely conflated Quality with Price.
Higher price != Better Quality (not always anyway)
- denzil_correa 14y agoAnd to be fair to the author, he mentions the same > This doesn’t always work. Sometimes a cheaper product is actually better. But consider removing price as the default decision criteria.
- jamiecurle 14y agoIndeed, quality lives in many places and has many faces. The price tag is rarely one of either.
- EzGraphs 14y agoThe main point - rule of thumb - that can be derived: consider removing price as the default decision criteria Most of the comments here (and parts of the original article) are elaborations on applying this principal. So price is not necessarily correlated with quality, but using price as a default decision criteria results in suboptimal outcomes (stuff that is not really "better" or consumers that are happier or otherwise benefited).
- denzil_correa 14y agoOnce again the author asks you to consider removing the price as a decision criteria. He's still exactly talking about the same thing as you are. :-)
- zurn 14y agoThat wouldn't really mean anything unless using "afford" in the absolute sense (eg. max out your credit next time you're buying shoes).