You bring up some great points. Many people don’t realize how much they “save” on a purchase actually ends up costing them in the end. Its easy to see why people look at what will be left in their bank account before making a purchasing decision. I think if there were a website that showed the actual cost of buying something, it would be a great educating tool to show people the financial ramifications of their purchase.

Ash Sud
ZippGo Green Moving

Free is such a deceiving word and brings to mind a saying from my first economics course: TANSTAAFL, which basically translates to “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”.

Things, at the surface, might be “free” in that you don’t pay anything (e.g. cash) to gain access, but in reality, the hidden costs still exist and require a payment of sorts, a great example being the amount of time you devote to using these “free” items.

That being said, cheap is not always good enough, quality is often directly related to price. If I find something of great quality for a low price, I’m ecstatic.

Although, when it comes to wine, I’ve tasted some bottles that would cost $$$$ and they’ve been utter swill, granted one particular wine (a first growth Bordeaux) was probably stored poorly, but I still wouldn’t have paid for it…fortunately I didn’t pay for it.

I try to be somewhat value oriented, but I don’t always go for the “cheap” option. So, I’ll try to buy organic food and I’d rather shop for specific clothing brands that I know will fit will/won’t wear out so fast instead of “just another old t-shirt”. There are two kinds of value: the kind that has the immediate low price (i.e. less initial hit on the bank account) or the longer usability/life span.

@ Ash – Definitely love the idea of such a website. Good Guide is kind of like that where it shows the environmental and health benefits and risks of products, but it doesn’t connect that to the price. I imagine that will be the next step in the environmental movement. Thanks for the comment!

@ Brian – The time factor is a great one to bring up, and one I didn’t think of right off the bat. Of course, that’s one of the most valuable things you can sacrifice. For instance, last night I came home and spent an hour on the internet, and I’m not sure what I accomplished, ha.

Also, interesting you bring up wine since there are so many studies on wine that show that your perception of a quality wine is often based on price and most people can’t tell the difference between a good and bad wine. Which makes me wonder, do we think some items are quality just because of the price?

@ Shirin – Love your two definitions of value. I’m the same way in that I try to buy things that I truly love regardless of the price because that means I’m more likely to keep the item longer. That said, I often miscalculate my love for expensive items and feel guilty later. Gotta work on that : )

I’m cheap with some things but am willing to splurge (and it it’s not cheap, then it is a splurge).

I shop at Wal-Mart for as many things as I can, especially toiletries, canned and frozen food. I don’t think those things work or taste any worst because I paid bottom dollar for them

Of the same token, I drive a Corolla, an economically and gas-conscious vehicle, have an IPOD touch at the top of my wish list, and often lust over clothes on the Banana Republic clearance rack.

I’ve gone around and around with friends about the economic and social ramification of cheap goods and services on the environment, small businesses, and quality. I see the points of both arguments, but at this point in my life my monetary bottom line is most important.

Those with money have the luxury to spend more of it.

The website idea is fantastic, and I’d love to see someone tackle it. Of course, it probably wouldn’t be free ;) Something like that would require a large undertaking and constantly updating it would be quite the task. That said, I’d still pay $10-50/year for that kind of service.

Time is tricky sometimes. Progress usually requires activity, but activity does not equal progress; and with social networking overload, it’s easy to convince ourselves otherwise. I imagine productivity would go up on sites like Facebook if they started charging, even $1/month, as people would be conscious of the amount of time they’re spending – because, hey, it’s just something we do when we pay for a service.

On a philosophical note, I find myself increasingly cynical of the way we make purchase decisions. We get really pissed when the waitress accidentally adds another $3 Coca-Cola to our tab, only to go out and knock a few $6 beers back, buy an extra shirt at Target for $10, and grab $2 worth of gum on the way out of the grocery store.

It’s the flip side of that that makes me cynical: what COULD we be doing with that money? Charity? Feeding the poor? Helping 1 in 6 American children find their next meal today? It is a human duty that we fail at everyday: helping other humans meet the same quality of life all humans should have (as declared in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights).

This, to me, is the deeper question underlying the concept of “free” in our capitalist economy. If we’re so eager to discuss what we should/shouldn’t be spending our money on, why not get to the root of our woes? Sorry, didn’t want to be preachy, hope I’m not getting too far off tangent here.

@ Monica – I definitely think you have to make choices when you’re not making a large salary. For perspective, my first salary out of college was $27,250. Seriously. I thought since I would be doing what I loved, it wouldn’t matter, but I turned out to be wrong on both counts. Anyway, the point is, I think you can still make good choices when the monetary line is most important… it’s more difficult, certainly, but the choice is there.

@ Tyler – I think the website idea should be integrated into all other sites. And I see that that’s the direction things are going. For instance, when I buy a bar of soap, what’s the environmental and health costs? How much is it really costing? That should be available each time you make a purchase. and I think you’re right, when you try to think about the larger picture of what you could be doing with the money, it becomes overwhelming and more difficult… no easy answer there.

It’s like that saying “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.”. It’s hard to be both ethical and frugal, especially in this economy.

Let’s take something you cited in your video: Not Shopping at Wal-Mart.

On one hand, Wal-Mart’s prices are hard to beat on most items (7.19 for a giant box of mozzarella sticks!) and those low prices are why Wal-Mart is doing well. Not only does this save money, but the leftover money can be put to good use, such as paying bills and investing in stocks. Also, there is the convenience of having everything in one place and knowing you won’t be running around town for everything (which saves gas which saves even MORE money!)

On the other hand, there are numerous issues with the Wal-Mart corporation in general. These issues include worker treatment, jobs being shifted overseas, running small businesses down to the ground, and so on. ,They tend to care less about customers and more about money. Worse off, they tend to sometimes be the only real culture in small rural towns, which means they are indirectly imposing their rigid conservative beliefs on them. I understand that this is not just with Wal-Mart, but they are the biggest and ones who can make changes happen more readily.

The problem is that people will go with whatever is cheaper, no matter the cost in the long run. I don’t support Wal-Mart (although I work there…), but for some people, their low prices is what keeps them fed.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that ultimately this: “Cheap, Fast, or Ethical – Pick two and stick with ‘em”. It’s sad that our society has come to this, but I’m glad there is still an “Ethical” option.

- Reginald Bluth

@ Reginald – Thanks so much for the comment and your analysis on Walmart. It’s interesting to hear from a Walmart worker who gets paid by Walmart but doesn’t support them. You make some great points and definitely illustrate the difficulties many are facing in the current economy. I especially like the conclusion – “choose two – cheap fast or ethical.” I’m with you that I’m glad ethical is an option still too. And interesting that this is what many product categories have come down to. Thanks again!

From a marketing perspective, it’s interesting because the consumer likes to be and feel conscious. When they’re buying Seventh Generation and know the ethical implications and sustainability behind the product it feels right and smart. What’s $1-3 dollars different? For me, it does make a difference and the dollars don’t matter. I haven’t stepped foot in a Wal-Mart in probably 1.5 years.

When it comes to food, free and cheap isn’t worth it to me either. It’s usually processed, not good for you and honestly, tastes bad. However, I love me some coupons, cheap deals on flights and Alice.com. All of those to me are good enough because I feel like they’re still sound decisions.

If it’s free, it just may be “good enough” for us to be irrational about the decisions we make! Because I am currently in Salzburg, Austria, I’ll use the local specialty to illustrate my point:

Austria is famous for its chocolate. Salzburg is especially renowned for its Mozartkugeln. They aren’t cheap, either. Each Mozartkugel may be priced up to $2. Suppose you walk in a confectionery to buy a box — say 10 — Mozartkugeln for yourself, only to find that the store has Hershey’s Kisses and Mozartkugel both on sale: You can pay $11 for a box of Mozartkugeln, or you can get 30 Hershey’s Kisses for … gasp! … FREE! Would you walk out the store with $11 less in your pocket, or would you walk out with a bag full of free Kisses?

If you have to pay for something anyway (be it more expensive or less expensive), then Monica has a great point. Some things don’t make a difference, such as toiletries and frozen food; other things are simply smart choices, such as buying a Corolla instead of investing in the upkeep (and eventual recycling! ugh!) of a hybrid……

Oh, but this is not the end of the story yet. I think I’ll have to start my own blog someday to thoroughly analyze this matter, “Is free good enough? — and when is it cheap enough?” ;)

@ Grace – Ha, thanks for the Alice shout-out : ). We’re very similar in our thoughts. Looking at the comments here and over at Brazen however, something that has me thinking is whether or not we simply assign more value to items that are more expensive or have environmental attributes? And with companies constantly trying to green-wash, how can you know if you’re making the right decisions?

@ Gene – Thanks for the comment! I’m pretty sure that I would walk out with the Mozartkugeln AND the Hershey’s Kisses : ). Interesting the point of view that some things don’t make a difference…. I’m going to have to think on that one some more. Off to read your post now, just saw it pop up on Twitter : )

Rebecca , you really do an amazing blog and this is my first post to you. However, I think you are making a common logic error by thinking about Wal-mart in absolute terms. Not that I have Wal-mart-philia by any means but, they are so logistically efficient they are actually a very “green” company. Their annual report takes a lot of pride in that. I guess I just don’t follow the irony if all things and humans are interconnected, why exclude Wal-mart from the equation?

We will probably agree to disagree on this one!

@ Nate – Thanks for the kind words! I agree that Walmart is taking great strides in being green, not only in a business efficiency angle, as you point out, but also in real, actual green initiatives which is exciting to see. But I know too much other stuff about Walmart through the news and business that makes me not want to support them because by doing so would cause more harm than good in the “we’re all connected” sphere… happy to elaborate if you have questions, but I can ramble on quite a bit, I’ll warn you. I appreciate you sharing your perspective!

I’ve recently struggled with this question myself. I even started shopping at Wal-Mart, but only for prepackaged goods. If I can get a box of Stash tea at Wal-Mart for $1.83 and the same box at Randall’s/HEB/Kroger is $2.50, then why wouldn’t I buy it at Wal-Mart? I do however draw a line when quality is compromised (I don’t buy meat or produce at Wal-Mart). I also do not buy a store brand item that I don’t like as much as a name brand item. I am willing to try a store brand item, but if I like the name brand better, then I continue to buy it instead.

This is also a good question to pose for clothing, handbags and household products. I am a huge supporter of U.S. Cotton and the local U.S. farmer. I recently stopped buying certain sheet brands because they have started importing their cotton from other countries. There’s a big “prestige” that comes along with the ‘egyptian cotton’ label, but I honestly believe we should support some of the hardest working people in our country: farmers. I also do this with various food products. Some examples are rice and produce.

I think you have to narrow this down a bit more, because free is relative. So is cheap. I’ll gladly buy the Wal-Mart brand cereal or toothpaste, but a Wal-Mart brand TV? No thanks, I did that once to save money and I still regret it, but I got what I paid for.

For the most part, I’d say that “You get what you pay for” saying rings true. I once tried GamezNFlix, a service that lets you rent games and movies. I chose it because it was the cheaper alternative to using Netflix for movies and Gamefly for games. It took 3 months of terrible super slow service for me to cancel my subscription. Now I pay for both Netflix and Gamefly, and my entertainment needs are always met.

As I said with Wal-Mart cereal, that’s not true in all things, and it sort of depends on the person, and what you’re willing to spend money on. To a game nerd like me, a first party peripheral is always better than a third party accessory, despite the added cost. To a casual player like my older brother, purchasing a knock-off Xbox controller is no big deal. So maybe it should be you get what you are willing to pay for.

When I was growing up, my mom bought everything cheap, so I always thought that’s how it should be done. Now that I’m older I see the importance of quality. For example, after college, I discovered the amazing-ness of Victoria’s Secret bras, and for someone like me who is…um…well-endowed, it’s important for me to invest in a good bra. Before I would always do what my mom taught me and go to Kmart. But now I know better. It might seem silly to spend $40 on a bra, but I know in the long run, it’s the best decision. A $40 bra will last longer than Kmart bras and my boobs will look better in it, making me feel better. After realizing this, I’m not as hesitant to spend a little extra on quality.

I know, I’m way late to the “free” party, but I’ll comment anyway. For me, I value good customer servcie, a great shopping experience, and honesty. I love to shop and I usually do most of my shopping at Nordstrom. I’m completely willing to pay a premium for great customer service and a great shopping experience. If you bought it at Nordstrom, they do complimentary basic alterations, of which I fully take advantage. If you bought something at Nordstrom, you can return it at Nordstrom, no questions asked, ever. Because of these “free” perks, I’m a loyal Nordstrom customer.

Something someone said about Wal-Mart seemed a little off. It was along the lines of Wal-Mart causing small, local businesses to shut down. In all actuality, Wal-Mart doesn’t cause the businesses to close their doors, we do. As consumers, by choosing Wal-Mart over local businesses we’re deciding where to take our money. Once I realized that, I stopped shopping at Wal-Mart. I recently moved and I don’t think I could even find a Wal-Mart near me!

How very true! (you get what you pay for)