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