Here is a debate that I recently heard on the radio. Can cheaper be better?
In my experience, yes. A typical example is the use of wet shaving goods.
I have tried many methods of shaving, foil, wet/dry electric and of course the traditional razor.
One thing that I have never done is bowed to advertising pressure and bought into the superstar brands. i.e. those that use high profile sport stars to promote their products.
The reason for this is simple: cost.
I can buy 10, perfectly acceptable, disposable razors for 99p. Possible, I could get them even cheaper.
These razors last for about 5 shaves. I shave every three days thus the annual cost becomes £33.
If I were to buy a more expensive shaving system, then initial outlay is £30, with 14 blades, refill blades are £6 per 4.. Assuming that I can get 5 shaves per blade, the annual cost becomes £45.
Similarly, for shaving gel I can get shaving gel for £1 at the lower end or pay as much as £5, or £20 if I want mid-range designer???
Consumption of this product runs at about 1 can per month.
Thus, if I were to buy the heavily advertised brands, shaving would cost me £105, but to employ my cheaper brand variety, costs £45 at the outside.
A man starts shaving at 16-ish, with a life expectancy of 86 years, than 70 years of shaving would cost £3150 at the lower end, without inflation factored in, and £7350 at the top end.
A £4200 difference would mean that if I saved the difference, I could add £16395 to my pension pot....
Recognising that this is a hypothetical assumption based on my own experiences.
Thanks for reading.