We all know there is a really big price difference in many things,shoes,ladies hand bags,clothes, etc....most everything we have the opportunity to buy, has a cheaper brand variety and a top end expensive brand version.

Do you really believe that the extremely expensive version of some item is that much better in quality,workmanship or whatever else used to make it than the cheaper brand version of the same item.

And are people just buying a high end brand name for status or is this stuff really better in your opinion,examples will be appreciated
Thanks people

I was just talking to someone about this today.

She asked me about the saddle she wanted to buy for her horse... the priciest (and therefore the most hungered after by the witless doyennes in dressage) is the Stuben. Which is actually quite crap - for the horse below and the rider above.

The very best saddle you can ever buy, no matter which type it is, is the Jeffries. Mid-price range, it has a wide gullet that doesn't narrow at any point and keeps the spine free of weight being put on it; its heavily flocked underneath, which again helps with weight distribution on the horse's back; and it has a wide and very deep seat so that the rider naturally "slides" to the lowest point and isn't sitting toward the back of the seat, which would bear down on the horse.

You buy a Jeffries saddle and you just drop it onto your horse's back - it will look like it was made to fit.

Then there's the much more expensive Stuben... and, well, you can brag to everyone that it's a Stuben, lol.

Quality and craftsmanship can certainly vary wildly.
Many bargains are actually complete wastes of money.

That said, Yes, some folks by designer/named items purely to flaunt their wealth or create an illusion of wealth or buy into a lifestyle illusion.
Most of the cheaper goods have someone else paying the price further down the chain, be they people working in sweatshop conditions or farmers barely existing to meet the wholesale price demands of supermarket chains.

It will all come home to roost eventually.

Cheap, though, is rarely if ever good.

I disagree that cheap is never good...

For example: the brand 'Nurofen' is primarily Ibupofen if you take the time to look at the ingredients. Now, said brand retails at around £2.50 to £3.00.

Pop to your local chemists (if you still have one) and you can purchase the same amount of Ibuprofen (if not double) for about 40p. Does exactly the same thing but probably won't have a shiny box.

Also, plastic boobies. They're all much the same, but the point is, as with most everything that has been 'designed', they're designed to fail after a certain time. This is how the money is made long-term, with repeat custom. You'd think, paying to have something artificial put inside you, manufacturers would do everything within their power to ensure some sort of 'lifetime' guarantee, wouldn't you? Not so and for very good reason.

We used to at least attempt to design such attributes into our goods but all that went for a burton a long, long time ago. Go and check your local charity/furniture stores, and you'll soon see exactly what I mean.

If you're looking for quality, try and aim for something that has survived the blitz and is still in fairly good nick...furniture-wise, anyway.

feather wrote:
In regards to food it can be known as loss leading...perfectly good high quality food sold at a loss by supermarkets (they make so much profit they just make up the difference elsewhere on other goods whose price is raised)...said to simply be a marketing ploy...but i feel it is more sinister and a coherent attack by the corporations on targeted food sectors...i have looked into some products that are made loss leaders and it tends to happen globally at the same time...too much of a coincidence.

end result is global bulk prices for targeted product goes down, independant farmers gives up, corporations take over, loss leading then stops, job done.

novum wrote: I agree. Exactly the same with the clothing trade to be fair.

Oh and reduce the average income to remove choice by compelling people to 'cheaper' brands controlled by corps.

I do like the extra cushion and support of high end sneakers and I know how to get them on sale.

As for clothing, name brand really does not make a difference unless it's a special material.

When it comes to food I would never shop at Walmart even if I spend more money at Whole Foods.

In America I will say homes and cars can change a persons quality of life substantially.

Obviously there are poor neighborhoods full of drugs gun violence and high crime to stay out of.

There is alot of land in the US and many places to travel so a quality car will make a impact.

RealAmerican wrote:
The shoe quality is really noticeable to me also,a cheap pair of sneakers will mess you up,Asics in my opinion are noticeably better than most and my choice and not the most expensive.
I am kind of surprised you don't buy food at Wally world for some reason,I guess I didn't think you where that health food minded

Of course there are some high end goods that are made very cheaply using child labor which cost a fortune and there are also goods that are made by workers who are well paid etc and perhaps the materials are higher quality. Both items could be costly but only one is really worth the extra cost, to me at least. One is about brand recognition or lifestyle/ trend/fashion etc the other one is about ethics.

Sometimes I will perhaps trust a name brand more than a brand I have not heard of before, when it comes to electronics for example.

Interestingly I have worked in retail for both grocery and electrical.

I used to be a manager at Lidl and they would sell things like baked beans for 9p which they would sell by the pallet load each week or less. They apparently lost money on these sorts of items but that got people in the store where they might buy alcohol or one of the "specials" or something like that.

I also worked for the electrical store Tempo and the returns for the cheaper goods were a lot more but then they sold a lot better too. Some of the bigger brands were not immune to returns but returns were rarer. So it depends of course. Lots of other factors need to be taken into account.

I should add that I try to feed my family higher priced organic foods and the like because I think it will be better for them in the long run and I also do not shop at Walmart but that is less about quality and more about ethics since they sell a lot of organic items in walmart last time I was in one.

what about legit knock offs

they've got the logo look the same, etc but aren't
www.stihl.co.nz/beware-of-dangerous-fakes.aspx

So where's the bargin here