When purchasing merchandise, do you buy quality or quantity?

[JMapleton]

It seems many people these days fill their lives with large amounts of cheap things. I myself prefer to have a small amount of nice things, instead preferring to save up money to buy something nice, instead of purchasing something right away and it being cheap.

Case in point, this week I bought a new telescope. Televue 76 APO refracter and a TV Nagler eyepiece. I bought a Vixen mount for it. Translation: I bought a friggen expensive telescope, but I know it will last and if I need to, I can sell it for almost what I paid for it. Some people I spoke to thought I was crazy for spending that much, well, it holds it's value and I'm getting something I know I will enjoy and I will not lose interest a few months later because it's not a POS.

Many people would choose an inexpensive telescope, but then it's resale value is almost nothing.

My question for the day is, in general, do you buy for quality and less quantity? Or more quantity and less quality?

 

[lxskllr]

Quality, unless I need it fast, and am short on cash.

 

[Kelvrick]

How much did you pay for your telescope? Show example of a used one selling for the almost the same amount.

It depends on what it is. There is a balance to everything, although I do see a lot of trash getting purchased but not everything is "buy once, cry once" difference in quality where if you don't buy good stuff, it will break.

 

[destrekor]

Depends on the merchandise in question.

Electronics?
I almost always try and go for high quality. I would like things to last so that if I ever need to repurchase a similar item, it won't be for a very long time. Especially true if it's something that has a lot of use and will be something that can potentially serve that purpose for a long time. That way, it's a justified expense and won't need to worry about paying for the same thing for a long time.

A lot of other things, if I immediately know it just won't have a long lasting purpose on it's own, I won't pay top dollar.

 

[Blackjack200]

But what if you could have gotten a telescope that is 95% as good for half as much money?

I try to look at value when I buy things, not just quality and price.

Ken Rockwell consistently advises novice photographers to buy the least expensive DSLRs on the market because they can do almost everything that the more expensive DSLRs can do, but the photographer can buy nicer lenses with the money they save.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

 

[Ika]

Depends on what it is. Clothing? If it fits, quantity. Electronics? If I'm going to use it often, quality, unless I don't need it to be quality.

This is not a simple question that can be answered with two poll choices.

 

[JMapleton]

How much did you pay for your telescope? Show example of a used one selling for the almost the same amount.

I did get a discount for reasons I will keep to myself. However, right now I could sell the telescope for more than what I paid for it on the used market.

But even if I had bought it full price, I could have still sold it for 75% of retail price.

Take some cheap reflector people pay $150 for, those are hard to sell for much more than $30 or $40 used.

 

[JMapleton]

Depends on what it is. Clothing? If it fits, quantity. Electronics? If I'm going to use it often, quality, unless I don't need it to be quality.

Sounds like you buy mostly quantity unless you absolutely need quality.

 

[MAKENITO]

Sounds like you buy mostly quantity unless you absolutely need quality.

This is I.

 

[wiredspider]

Get the best of both by buying good quality for cheap

 

[Kelvrick]

Get the best of both by buying good quality for cheap

Thats what slickdeals is for.

 

[JMapleton]

Get the best of both by buying good quality for cheap

Rarely available, in my opinion. "Top Quality" I guess is relative and up for debate.

 

[Blackjack200]

I did get a discount for reasons I will keep to myself. However, right now I could sell the telescope for more than what I paid for it on the used market.

But even if I had bought it full price, I could have still sold it for 75% of retail price.

Take some cheap reflector people pay $150 for, those are hard to sell for much more than $30 or $40 used.

Without getting into your special discount which you refuse to discuss, the telescope sells for $1,700 new at adorama, with a used copy available on Amazon for $1,066. By this standard the people who buy a "cheap reflector" are doing about $524 better than you.

Rarely available, in my opinion. "Top Quality" I guess is relative and up for debate.

Except, of course, when buying high end telescopes.

 

[JMapleton]

Without getting into your special discount which you refuse to discuss, the telescope sells for $1,700 new at adorama, with a used copy available on Amazon for $1,066. By this standard the people who buy a "cheap reflector" are doing about $524 better than you.

Not so much, my point is, I buy nice things because I'm rarely dissapointed with them. What about the cheap reflector telescopes where they're dissapointed because they cannot split Polaris or see Saturn's moons with it and they end up never using it? They wasted all their money.

See the logo on my avatar? 7 jeans. I buy "baller" jeans because I've wasted too much money for too long on jeans that shrunk, wore out easily, looked ugly after a month, and just plain felt like sandpaper. I got fed up with cheap clothes (anything less than $100), I always get burned with them (maybe it's just me).

7 For all Mankind Jeans and Ralph Lauren classic polo shirts are two examples when I will happily spend the money because they last a long time and never let me know. I'd rather happily spend $100 than waste $30.

 

[Blackjack200]

Not so much, my point is, I buy nice things because I'm rarely dissapointed with them. What about the cheap reflector telescopes where they're dissapointed because they cannot split Polaris or see Saturn's moons with it and they end up never using it? They wasted all their money.

See the logo on my avatar? 7 jeans. I buy "baller" jeans because I've wasted too much money for too long on jeans that shrunk, wore out easily, looked ugly after a month, and just plain felt like sandpaper. I got fed up with cheap clothes (anything less than $100), I always get burned with them (maybe it's just me).

7 For all Mankind Jeans and Ralph Lauren classic polo shirts are two examples when I will happily spend the money because they last a long time and never let me know. I'd rather happily spend $100 than waste $30.

I only wear Brooks Brothers oxford shirts to work, and I do it for a number of reasons:

- I don't have to iron them
- They look great
- Most of the management and high performers at my firm wear them too (they are very distinctive for oxford shirts)

But, I recognize that they are a luxury. I don't buy BB pants because they don't have the same advantages. You don't need to iron wool pants, and any well fitting pair of pleated wool pants will look pretty close to any other pair.

I've spent good money on casual clothes too (although I don't as much any more because I just don't have the money to spend) but I've never found they lasted me any longer than quality non-designer stuff.

I guess that my point is that it's not always better to spend more, you have to look at each individual case.

 

[JMapleton]

I guess that my point is that it's not always better to spend more, you have to look at each individual case.

This is true. Plenty of brands are overpriced with mediocre quality (think Bathing Ape or Billionaire Boys Club, neither which I wear nor do I wear clothes that resemble them). But I'm simply speaking in general.

In general the more you pay the more you get and there is a fad in this country where having lots and lots of cheap crap rules.

 

[Cdubneeddeal]

Quality always. For example, I would pay $25.00 for a mediocre pair of jeans that last half as long as a pair of Levi's that I would spend $10 more on. You do that math.

 

[grrl]

Quality always. For example, I would pay $25.00 for a mediocre pair of jeans that last half as long as a pair of Levi's that I would spend $10 more on. You do that math.

The problem with that example is Levis suck now.

 

[Cdubneeddeal]

The problem with that example is Levis suck now.

Really? That's kind of funny since all of my jeans are Levi's and most of them are over two years old and not one them are worn down.

 

[grrl]

Really? That's kind of funny since all of my jeans are Levi's and most of them are over two years old and not one them are worn down.

I still wear Levis occasionally because I like the fit, but their quality is no where near what they used to be.

 

[PM650]

Condoms in quantity, everything else - quality.

 

[pyonir]

This is not a simple question that can be answered with two poll choices.

This.

 

[JimmiG]

Little quantity and low quality. I'm a student.

 

[guyver01]

neither.

I want "bang for the buck" .. so i go for Value.

High Price doesn't always necessarily mean quality.

And i never buy in "bulk" unless its beef.

 

[PsiStar]

This is like your taste in women ... quality or quantity ... what is "quality" versus what is "quantity":awe: