Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree with most of your responses. I was not suggesting that I was comparing the quality of food at a $5.95 buffet to a fine restaurant. Nor was I suggesting a Super 8 was better than the Ritz. I was suggesting that an $800 dinner, including 2 artfully arranged carrots and a square inch of meat, is a rip off, which it is.
I am used to staying in hotels which I guess would be classified as business class. Hotels with big fluffy beds, pristine linens and very good amenities, including the free stuff I mentioned. I do not go to a hotel because I want spa services or a concierge. My point is I did not enjoy the Gaylord, for example, which charged for every little thing, any more than I've enjoyed a Holiday Inn Express with a super bed and a free breakfast, etc.
I get what you're saying! I've often had the same observation.The more you pay, the less you get, especially in hotels. We don't stay in dumps, but the more pricey hotels charge out the nose for every little thing---parking, breakfast, local phone calls, I'm surprised they haven't put a meter on the toilet to charge per flush! Usually there's NOTHING to eat in such places, not even a candy machine. Your only option is the overpriced restaurant, where you can't get a meal for ANY price! No matter what you pay, you get a dib of this, a dab of that, guess its so esquisite you couldn't stand another bite! Just don't pay cash in such places---the waiter runs off with your change, thinking its his tip, and you have no paper trail to protest.
Hey, I just rough it with the rest of the bums---Hampton Inn, Springhill Suites, Hilton Garden, I know.....such a miserable world
Not my kids---we cancelled cable! I'm through paying $150+/month for them to learn to dis us as parents, watch what would be considered porn in "our" day, think foul, vulgar language is acceptable, and think we as parents owe them every piece of crap advertised!
Good for you! Internet and cable access can be valuable tools to increase kids' knowledge quickly and help make them globally competitive. However, if they are unsupervised and undisciplined the advantages are usually lost. Kids have more opportunities to learn more and accomplish more in their lifetimes than ever before. There was an article in the Sunday NY Times about two weeks ago - front page if I remember - which told the story of a Chinese family working 18 hours a day to send their daughter to a technical college. Their hope was for her to get a good paying job and help support them in old age. They were giving their very lifeblood for her future.... and theirs. The poor people in China value education and opportunity that much. It just made me think about the folks I knew in college who didn't take it seriously and others I know now who fritter away education opportunities. sorry for the diatribe....
I agree, the cost of staying at a high end hotel is a lot more than just the cost of the room.
So, not only is the room more expensive, you're paying for all the amenities.
Quote:
but you usually don't have room service, a full restaurant or concierge amenities as you would at a full-service Hilton
Except, you pay for each of those things when you order them, and then ON TOP of that, your room is costlier. You also have to tip everyone.
If you had free internet, you wouldn't even need a concierge. You can find recommendations to restaurants online and even reserve online.
The same goes for restaurants. The entrees are smaller, but they still cost more than a full course meal at a chain restaurant. There are plenty of restaurants that get great reviews that don't cost an arm or a leg.
This is the Frugal Living forum. It's about getting the most bang for your buck.
This is the Frugal Living forum. It's about getting the most bang for your buck.
Absolutely.
My point was that different people have different preferences for the "bangs" that they like to get for their "bucks". What one person may not consider to be a good value for a given expense, another may find to be well worth the cost. There is some level of subjectivity involved - value received for the cost paid (for anything) is not an absolute across the board. I would guess that every poster on this board has something that they enjoy, and pay money for, that others would feel to be not worth the expense.
And the point can also be made that frugality is somewhat relative as well. Say you have two households: Household 1 consists of a family of four and an annual income of $75,000; household 2 consists of a couple with no children and an annual income of $150,000. Assuming all other factors are equal between the two households (little to no debt, saving / investing a significant portion of their income, etc.), what may seem like an extravagant / high expense for someone in the first household may not be seen the same way for those in the latter household. That couple making $150k per year can splurge on the occasional, higher-priced item (be it a meal, travel, some gadget, etc.) if they so choose, and still be saving more than the first couple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wolf
I think there is a reason for demand for those high priced ripoffs.
Most likely because some do not perceive them as, "ripoffs" and actually feel like they are getting a good value for their money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wolf
Posters need to defend them in a vain attempt to impress others.
Sad !
No more "sad" than those posters who look down their noses at those people who they perceive as not being frugal enough...or not practicing frugality in the right way.
"You get what you pay for" is one of the great myths. There is often little relationship between the quality of goods and their prices.
I partially disagree. Granted, to your previous post, just because something costs more does not mean that it is always better. But, on the flip side, higher quality items will often cost more than those of lower quality. One needs to make educated decisions in how to spend their money so that they are getting the best value for their money.
Take clothes for example. A more expensive suit or pair of shoes may very well be of higher quality than a cheaper item (better tailoring, higher quality materials, a higher degree of durability, etc.). But a $20 or $25 cotton t-shirt from a higher-end clothing store is pretty much equivalent to those that one can get in a 3-pack for $7 from Target.
In addition, the value in an item of clothing (sticking with this example) is also going to depend on the individual. For someone buying a pair of dress shoes that they may only wear once in a while, say on infrequent occasions, or maybe just to church on Sundays (if that's your thing), a less expensive pair is likely a good value for them. But for another person who wears dress shoes all day, every day, they may find a more expensive pair to be a better value for them, as a more durable pair that will last longer with a lot of constant use will provide a better return on the cost in the long run.
My contractor keeps telling me that you have to spend money to save money.
Agreed - depends on what you're buying of course. Doesn't apply to everything
The concept I certainly like, but most probably misconstrue it and use it as an excuse to splurge on stuff they don't need (and can use for the foreseeable future) but want.
"You get what you pay for" is one of the great myths. There is often little relationship between the quality of goods and their prices.
Many years ago, I drew the short straw and had to take a number of European colleagues on a shopping trip through Cleveland. Most of the Europeans would spend a day or two buying tons of consumer goods (clothing, toys, etc.) that they would ship home.
These guys would insist on shopping at the MOST expensive stores in town when they could buy IDENTICAL products at Kohl's or the like for 30% less. They INSISTED that the higher priced goods were better, even though they were identical items from the same brand. My wife a retail buyer at the time showed one of the guys that every feature was identical ... but he insisted that the expensive pair from Dillard's HAD to be better as after all, it was $40 more expensive. I told him using that logic that he should shop in London and pay $150 for the same jeans.
You get what you shop for.
Maybe they liked the general experience of Dillards better, who knows.
I've shopped at Kohl's on occasion, either with a coupon, or with merchandise credit. My MIL used to have a habit of buying tons of clothes for the kids that weren't the right size. While some of the merchandise might be identical to what is at Dillards, much of it is also more similar to say Target. Some of the clothes for young women(think the Kohl's store brand) were of horrendous quality.
Sometimes when I had the merchandise credits I honestly had trouble figuring out what to buy with it...they wouldn't have the right sizes in stock for the kids's clothes, sometimes I ended up buying socks or towels.
That's why there is a British saying:
We are not
rich enough
To buy
Cheap stuff.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
