Audemars Piguet stops due to coronavirus

[conkers]

It is a shame you find it a “silly notion”, “pretend” and “moral facade”.

Not much point in me commenting further since you have already formed your opinion.

[Sg6067]

Originally Posted by conkers

It is a shame you find it a “silly notion”, “pretend” and “moral facade”.

Not much point in me commenting further since you have already formed your opinion.

You tagged me yesterday so I reiterated my viewpoint. I also for the most part ignored your friend’s less than friendly comment toward me, to which you “cheers” him. It’s a shame you have no rebuttal, but ok let’s agree to disagree.

[westoque]

I believe both conkers and SG have a point. Leaning towards conkers though.

conkers says $1000 is a big difference, which it is, regardless of how much money you have.

SG is saying that if you have $1,000,000, then $1000 is negligible. If you can spend $100,000 on a watch, then $1,000 is basically nothing. Which is completely not true (depending on the person mostly)!

I'm leaning towards conkers here saying that if a watch is $100,000, if I can save $1,000 on it, I'd gladly take it! Even though I have the money, I'm not arrogant to say $1,000 is nothing, think about it, if you did 5 $100,000 purchases that had $1,000 off, then you'd save $5,000, you can basically buy on Omega!

[Kilometerman]

This is a well-documented cognitive bias.

Let’s say you were about to buy a new calculator, and you drive to the store, and they have it for $40. But the sales person says that at another location 20 minutes away, they have the same calculator on sale.

How much cheaper would it be for you to go to the other store?

Ok, now let’s say you’re going to buy a new computer. The store has it for $4000. The sales person tells you that the location 20 minutes away has the same computer on sale.

How much cheaper would the computer have to be for you to drive to the other store?

People usually answer these questions in terms of percent of the price, and the responses are usually different. But the logical answer to the question should be “how much is 20 minutes of your time and driving worth?” And it should be the same dollar amount in both instances, if one is thinking rationally.

One doesn’t save percents of dollars, one saves dollars.

Many people won’t bother over a 1-2% difference in price. But for large ticket items, the money adds up. You wouldn’t overpay $1000 for a calculator, but you might for a six-figure watch? It’s human nature to do it this way, but not necessarily logical.

[dauster]

Originally Posted by Kilometerman

This is a well-documented cognitive bias.

Let’s say you were about to buy a new calculator, and you drive to the store, and they have it for $40. But the sales person says that at another location 20 minutes away, they have the same calculator on sale.

How much cheaper would it be for you to go to the other store?

Ok, now let’s say you’re going to buy a new computer. The store has it for $4000. The sales person tells you that the location 20 minutes away has the same computer on sale.

How much cheaper would the computer have to be for you to drive to the other store?

People usually answer these questions in terms of percent of the price, and the responses are usually different. But the logical answer to the question should be “how much is 20 minutes of your time and driving worth?” And it should be the same dollar amount in both instances, if one is thinking rationally.

One doesn’t save percents of dollars, one saves dollars.

Many people won’t bother over a 1-2% difference in price. But for large ticket items, the money adds up. You wouldn’t overpay $1000 for a calculator, but you might for a six-figure watch? It’s human nature to do it this way, but not necessarily logical.

There is something in me that doesn’t like spending more than necessary on any item no matter how small or big, so I can totally relate to anyone spending a lot of money on watches, cars or even shoes but at the same time wanting to spend the least amount of money possible. It’s probably cognitive bias but I can’t help it.