3 ms·
Really hard to read for me. I don't know the way the author expresses her ideas is hard to grasp. The basic idea of course is right: You need to fake status if
by erikb 11y ago
Really hard to read for me. I don't know the way the author expresses her ideas is hard to grasp.
The basic idea of course is right: You need to fake status if you don't have it, if you want some of the benefits.
But what is missing is some data. Because if we think that further, you can certainly overspend on that hope that one day someone let's you in on something because you have status. And probably many people do overspend on that (I'm thinking about the golden $10k Apple watch here as an example). There must be a way to evaluate how much is good and when it starts to hurt you. And I guess there should be a lot of science on that.
- danans 11y agoThere is a comment below the original article which makes the point that even knowing the threshold is itself a form of privilege in the particular case of "dressing to impress".
- erikb 11y agoWhich comment do you mean? Ctrl-F for "threshold" and "dressing to impress" didn't yield anything. Skimming the first three comments didn't either. Also what's the point? I don't really agree with "knowing <X> = privilege" but let's say it's true. Then what? Does that change what should be the best decision? Does it change how we react on incomplete information? Knowing that there is a threshold at which returns start to diminish is a good point, because it tells you to look for clues of when to stop spending on status symbols. Having an expensive watch might help you, but the $60k watch might not improve your situations 10x of what a $6k watch would do. Now if we add that the knowledge of the threshold is privilege, what does it change? Of course the person who has that knowledge makes better decisions. But knowing that it is a privilege to know that threshold doesn't give any more change to the decision making process. Or at least I don't see it.
- semi-extrinsic 11y agoThis is just semi-anecdotal, but for watches I don't think there's really a lower threshold when it comes to price. My watch is the $90 (sadly out-of-production) Casio MDV-102 [1] which is a real cult classic. I have it on a black and grey Nato strap ($10) and it does get me compliments from watch connoiseurs from time to time. But I guess there's a definite knack to recognizing cult classics though. [1] http://forums.watchuseek.com/f220/review-casio-mdv102-duro-200-super-illuminator-diver-472351.html http://forums.watchuseek.com/f220/review-casio-mdv102-duro-2...
- dagw 11y agoPeople don't generally spend $60k on a watch to impress watch connoisseurs, but to impress people who know nothing about watches. The reason Rolex is so popular is not really because they are great watches (they are), but because everybody knows that Rolexes are expensive.
- TheCoelacanth 11y agoI think these are the comments in question: > Becca Mills > November 11, 2013 > I was thinking this, too, but then it occurred to me that being able to determine exactly where that line is (the line between looking comfortably professional and looking like a poor person trying to fake their status by flaunting an exorbitantly expensive bauble) is itself a matter of privilege. You might have to be “in the club” to be able to perceive the subtle messages various clothing/accessory choices, combined with the rest of your presentation, can send. Or at least you’d have to have studied “the club” from the outside with an unusually perceptive eye. > tressiemc22 > November 13, 2013 > Yes, Becca. If everyone knows where the line is the status symbol loses most of its utility.