Something expensive will never be of true quality!
Just a random thought about value....
Something expensive will never be of true quality (with respect to its price).
Agree or disagree?
the reason I say this is that by simple logic.
If you knew the cost of making something. You would not say it is expensive if its price was reasonable.
Also by selling at a price that reflects true quality with respect to price. It is difficult for the seller to get a huge margin. Hence the item should be cheap.
In thinking through this I realise there are so many semantics that must be fixed.
What do we mean by quality, value, cheap, expensive? If something is of good quality and of good price with respect to its cost price. Should the word used be cheap?
Does cheap mean cheap with respect to one's financial ability or a question of taste/ethics?
The reason it is important to fix definitions is that in a situation with two people evaluating the same product at a price, given that both are poor. Say, something of good quality and of good price with respect to its cost price: one may say it is cheap the other may say its expensive, even though both cannot afford it given their current financial ability.
It is a matter of perception. And our social values on value have been manipulated by marketeers throughout time.
Value Investing is a lot like that. Recognising true value entails knowing what are your values and how willing and how much are you able to change. This is in no way saying that there is a ONE dogma of what exactly is the right measure of value. The truth is that value will always be subject to one's perception. The only "fixed rule" that I am hung up about, would be that one must be sure that the perceptions one holds are that truely held by oneself.
It was one reason why I left by church, I realised at some point that, my pastors vision, was not mine. And hence I left.
May you make your own decisions, puny investor ;)
Something expensive will never be of true quality (with respect to its price).
Agree or disagree?
the reason I say this is that by simple logic.
If you knew the cost of making something. You would not say it is expensive if its price was reasonable.
Also by selling at a price that reflects true quality with respect to price. It is difficult for the seller to get a huge margin. Hence the item should be cheap.
In thinking through this I realise there are so many semantics that must be fixed.
What do we mean by quality, value, cheap, expensive? If something is of good quality and of good price with respect to its cost price. Should the word used be cheap?
Does cheap mean cheap with respect to one's financial ability or a question of taste/ethics?
The reason it is important to fix definitions is that in a situation with two people evaluating the same product at a price, given that both are poor. Say, something of good quality and of good price with respect to its cost price: one may say it is cheap the other may say its expensive, even though both cannot afford it given their current financial ability.
It is a matter of perception. And our social values on value have been manipulated by marketeers throughout time.
Value Investing is a lot like that. Recognising true value entails knowing what are your values and how willing and how much are you able to change. This is in no way saying that there is a ONE dogma of what exactly is the right measure of value. The truth is that value will always be subject to one's perception. The only "fixed rule" that I am hung up about, would be that one must be sure that the perceptions one holds are that truely held by oneself.
It was one reason why I left by church, I realised at some point that, my pastors vision, was not mine. And hence I left.
May you make your own decisions, puny investor ;)
Labels: value
posted by god_is_good478 at 8:42 PM
0 comments
| 
