Higher cost doesn't equal better quality - add your example

When making a purchasing decision, a logical assumption is that paying a higher or more expensive price results in receiving a better quality final product. What is your experience with the correlation of price and quality? Share your experience below and enter in our a badge challenge.

Do you have any examples that prove or disprove the statement, ‘Higher cost doesn’t equal better quality’.


Buying Organic is a big one. Yes there are legitimate arguments for organic food. However many people believe it equates to better overall quality, even though there is no evidence for that.


Good point. When ‘organic’ fruit and vegetables come through the same supply chain as the rest then the freshness is the same. The same cultivars are grown by both methods for commercial use, cultivars selected for looks and durability not flavour or nutrition. You are paying much for freedom from listed inputs which does not equate to food quality.


I’d reckon local, state/territory and federal government would be three examples near the top of the list …


:joy::rofl::smile::sweat_smile: (is that 20 characters?)


Using the Choice product reviews, it is common for cheaper products to outperform more expensive ones.

One example is with the laundry detergents where the best performing is less than 1/5 of the price of the second best performing. Cleaned up with that one!

Another example is peanut butter, where the product that came in second was 2.5 times the price of the one that came in first. Laying it on a bit thick doesn’t matter.



Parliament alone is 226 characters, mostly over-employed to the Nth degree based on the ‘quality’ of their work. Imagine how good it could be if the ACL covered them!


My example would be supercars. One can pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for either cars which can toast marshmellows (like Ferrari) or look good on the back of a tow truck (most other highly strung supercars).

One could buy say 10-20 cheaper and far more reliable Japanese or Korean hatches or sedans for the the same price.


You neglected to account for how much faster a $1 million supercar goes on the Monash Freeway, M7, etc, in peak traffic. I think it goes as fast on the truck? :smiley:

Undated that I saw, but https://www.ranker.com/list/fragile-supercars/richard-rowe

and https://www.hotcars.com/supercars-that-were-built-to-crumble-and-10-that-are-built-like-tanks/


Not everyone understands or measures quality and value the same way.

Too many of us have a way of living that is supporting an industry that claims to add value. Think marketing. It adds costs to many consumer products, but does not improve the genuine quality of the product for the consumer. Or worse in promoting product quality and performance attributes that do not exist?

Purchase any up market glossy and over priced magazine in architecture, interior decorating, fashion or beauty. The quality of the magazines is better than most hardcovers. The value of the advice and recommendations - pointless. :rofl:

Although you do get lots of points apparently when you use your carbon black finish titanium credit card to fund the solution!


Conclusion, buying over priced things is not always pointless after all! :rofl:


One can purchase a 10 million dollar yearling at the Yearling Sales, and a $10,000 Yearling at the same sales.

Your cheaper purchase may run faster, train more easily and earn millions of dollars more than your more expensive purchase…

Which just goes to prove that bloodlines that win Horse Races do not necessarily breed horses that will run fast…

The sport of Kings…

but not this King!

Natalie King