Value thinking – buying lasting goods an environmental innovation
If you're new here at 2thinknow, and you're interested in the latest ideas on trends, companies and innovation, subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for your visit!
ANALYSIS,
The innovation zeitgeist is to be found in returning to an old paradigm.
Innovation is the old sensible paradigm
Buy goods that last and are reparable. That is the paradigm.
For environmental and quality of life reasons, this is now an emerging innovation trend in the infancy stages of innovation.
But I’m not saying that this is now easy.
Remember our grandparents repaired what they bought?
Our grandparents saved and purchased long-term value goods. We may think we are wealthier, but our families are often driven by consuming as a primary conduit to happiness.
That is, many people feel sad if they can’t shop. I don’t advocate not shopping if that’s what floats your boat.
I merely advocate shopping for more high-value goods that last. You will feel better, look better and be making a positive social change.
Repeat-use durable goods are a trend and market that will increase in value long-term.
Let’s look at 2 formerly ‘durable goods’ men’s suits and men’s shoes.
Quality Suits
My grandfathers, father-in-law and possibly yours had suits that lasted 25 years.
My quality suits these days at a comparable cost and an even higher ‘premium’ level, last about 2-3 years and require constant repairs.
For starters 99% of suits are not lined in the pants. By default USD $1000 suits do not have a saddle piece in the crotch to prevent wear. Most tailoring of pockets are not as strong as they were in the past.
On the positive side, most do have tailors’ tape on the cuffs. And the fabric quality is often excellent. And the experience is consistent at least.
Price is not an indicator of quality. Some expensive suits are ‘fused’ in the jacket front, meaning they ‘pucker’ when exposed to heat.
I am an extremely educated consumer on clothes, but even I cannot find a single quality suit of comparable quality to those my grandfather owned in Australia.
Not even for the princely sum of USD $3000 in
Europe is the remaining bastion of quality, and even there large-retail is reducing quality. Blame H&M and ‘Made in China’.
So what do guys do?
At the average price the average man pays of USD$300 for a suit, most are disposable, and this is what most men do, buy 2-3 of these and when one wears out in 12-18 months, buy another. It’s actually the cheapest option for many.
Most men just dry clean them whenever they start to look shabby, and throw out when worn out. More disposable thinking.
One premium menswear outfitter in
And now that premium menswear store is selling suits for USD$2-3000. Do you think they will last better? I have had a look. I don’t think so.
The only suit in my wardrobe not requiring repairs is a suit I purchased made in
In their defence most consumers are not educated about purchasing suits. Consumer education has improved, but most people buy brand not quality.
What to do – where’s the innovation in suits?
What we have to do is buy suits in
German suits are among the best made ‘off-the-rack’. Edouard Dressler is good.
We have to become educated consumers again. Not ignorant disposable consumers of throw-away merchandise.
The French lead the way, as does broader
Where’s the problem with trade economics?
Despite the ‘gains-from-trade’ theory which is like most economics. That is, a theory which in isolation sounds really quite reasonable; until you realize all goods end up in the lowest cost producer, like China.
Economics by it’s own admission relies on rational educated consumers. That’s one big presumption.
Economics could also be said to be a discipline that generally fails to account for strategic defence and cultural factors.
Economics is one useful framework. Economics is too dominant. There are alternate pluralistic frameworks to inform thinking.
For another viewpoint, tell Machiavelli or Sun-Tzu you outsourced food production and basic goods to other countries, and they will counsel you against it.
Coles, Woolworths and big-box retailers act against the national interest daily. They can force suppliers such as farmers to trade at or below cost. They drive out true diversity. Coles & Woolworths become the gatekeepers of public taste & quality.
But back to suits. Quite frankly I preferred when we could buy local made suits of a high quality. We haven’t been delivered cheaper prices, rather we have received increasingly lower-quality goods, at ever more stratified prices.
A Hugo Boss suit to my mind is not a good suit. Nor is off-the-peg Armani. Both are made in low-cost of production factories and marked-up.
A good suit is a well made suit, and requires a skilled tailor and great material.
And can be made cheaper in small custom or semi-custom runs, than big production. Reward your tailors and craftsmen.
Where’s my Shoes?
This one is easy. Buy a pair of English-made Churches.
Prince Charles owns several pairs. Tony Blair is another owner.
And of course I have 3 pairs in various ages of ownership.
The pair I was married in, I purchased back in 1999. They still look good.
On average a pair of Churches will last 10-15 years. 20 is not out of the question.
They will also look good, and adapt to your feet.
This assumes your Churches are cared for with proper leather polish and cleaning products, such as those made by Angelus. Beeswax and natural based products. Do not use Kiwi or anything with silicon.
They will need re-soling by a licensed shoe store, like Churches on Jermyn St in London or McClouds in Queen St, Melbourne (where I get mine done).
Of course you can apply rubber soles over the leather shoes to avoid resoling every 1-2 years. I happen to like leather soles.
Churches are hand-made leather shoes, that are sewn not glued. They last for yonks. Churches look good and can last up to 15 years.
Of course they will cost you between USD$400-800 depending on where and what type you buy. The classic is the black cap-toe oxford.
However, the alternative is buying a good pair of Florsheims that will last 18 months in rotation, thus requiring replacement every 1-2 years costing you USD $100+ per year, and engaging in wasteful disposable thinking.
And you will never feel like a king, except in Churches. Churches are proper shoes.
The Essential problem
We are buying products that look like the real deal but are a pale imitation.
We need to buy the real deal, the products that work and last.
And price or brand is not always an indicator. We need to become educated consumers, but moreover educated citizens.
To have the time to do so, we need to remove complexity.
But also governments have to legislate to protect quality.
All you laissez-faire people out there, here’s why: A free market presumes perfect information about the goods or services.
This presumption is not true.
The reality is that there is a vast amount of information asymmetry regarding goods and services, as well as the true price of properly made goods versus marked-up disposable imports.
In short, the bulk of our citizens are not engaged to take the time in their busy lives to learn about product quality. So the rest of the market are forced to suffer their preference. Advertising is the easiest means of product research for most consumers.
Where to from here?
Simple. We need to become educated consumers.
And we need to realise that disposable thinking is not in our short, medium or long-term interest.
There will be a lot of business opportunity and innovation created by the rise of ‘value thinking’ and the decline of ‘disposable thinking’
It’s time you started thinking how we can buy things that last in all areas of our life.
When we reject ‘disposable’ goods, we are becoming more in tune with the past and the end of manipulation of unnecessary consumption.
A free market works only based on the presumption of educated consumers.
So for the free market it is time that we became those educated consumers, and stopped accepting disposable goods that travel huge distances to reach us, incurring massive environmental costs.
Stop buying Chinese if you have the intellect and money not to.
It is food for thought folks.
Take care,
Christopher
Speaker. Author. Editor-In-Chief. Executive Director of Innovation, 2thinknow.
4 Responses to “Value thinking – buying lasting goods an environmental innovation”
What's your View?
Or Follow us on Twitter or StumbleUpon
I agree with you Christopher and am very glad that someone is bringing it up.
In 1991, one of my cousins from Europe gave me a cardigan as a gift.I have used it all the time since and washed it in washing machine and dry it in the dryer.
The cardigan still looks as good as it did, when was given to me, 16years ago and it is my favourite.
Fact, it was a very good quality and done properly by qualified people, made in Germany.
In the last few years I have bought jumpers or cardigans and haven’t been happy with the. Why? They don’t look as good the old one and what is more, had to throw them out after using them once or twice.
Fact : Very poor quality, jumpers pilling, made very cheap. They are All made in China, don’t last and don’t wear well.
I miss things made in Australia or New Zealand, Germany, Italy, which are well known for their high quality of goods!
In Australia we should be able to buy locally from our own state.
So we are buying more and more unnecessary disposable goods, just because they seem cheap!
We have been give this only option, because big corporations can’t get enough of cutting their costs and that’s all they care.
It is time to reject it!
So, yes we have to stop buying goods made in China!
I disagree with the basic premise that “disposable goods” are always bad thing. I agree that everyone needs to become a more educated consumer, and this includes total cost of ownership (i.e., initial costs plus any repairs/storage/maintenance for the life of the object), function to be performed (including social impacts/”brand flashing”) as well as disposal consequences (land fill or recycle). Not all goods made in China are worthless; not all goods made at higher prices in the UK, USA, Italy, France, etc. are preferable. I currently do not own a suit as it does not make economic sense - I rent one when the infreqent need arises. I currently own 2 pair of Neil M shoes (well-made leather shoes; made in the USA; look like they will last as long as your Churches) with custom-made orthotics (which no shoe company will provide at cost and I can transfer to other shoes); $400 USD for the orthotics, $190 USD for each pair shoes. I also have a pair of New Balance tennis shoes that have an integral arch support, fit well, and provide the function I desire (probably made in Asia somewhere; around $40 USD). I suspect that the cost of your grandfather’s suit (adjusted for inflation) would disuade your grandfather from purchasing it now (given the options now available). Disposable items are not always bad; not so with blanket statements.
I understand your point Zap. Indeed not all disposable goods made in China are bad such as plastic containers.
Big companies are cutting costs to the point that is unnaceptable by the consumers.
It is shocking when you hear many medications are being made in China and as a result of the low costs and quality these medications are dangerous for people to use.
Last couple of days we hear that some of the kids toys made in China have to be taken of the shelves too because of the risk health!
We have been warned some vegetables imported from China have been sprayed with dangerous chemicals!
These are real issues that effect our health!!
Do the big companies have to go that far?
They are playing with consumers health in different ways these days!
I took just a very simple example in my previous comment to make my point.
We can live with jumpers made in China for a while, but we can not put our health to the risk, just because some cold hearted CEO wants to get a fat payout at the consumer’s expense! Eva
Nov 10th, 2007 at 11:21 pm
[…] read more | digg story […]