Cheap Doesn't Equal Lower Quality

clubhonda on 16/11/2021 - 17:22
Last edited 16/11/2021 - 19:06 by 1 other user

I keep seeing some members who equate high sticker price for a item to better quality, and hopefully they will see the light with this new article. It's not always about the brand (eg Vitamix cough cough). OEMs can be just as good

Anko microwave from Kmart versus $490 Smeg: Experts at Choice put brands to the test

Quite clarification: When I say cheaper, I don't mean to say that rock bottom absolute lowest price point items are superior in quality. But often the premium priced products really aren't that good. For example, the POCO X3 Pro which is only $300, but it's a lot better than some of the branded phones out there, a Toyota Corolla is way more reliable compared to a Jeep, Range Rover or a Maserati, and some Chinese OEM headfi can sound a lot better than premium brands etc.

Electrical & Electronics

Comments

  • CyberMurning on 16/11/2021 - 17:29
    -1

    mostly means lower quality. but expensive doesnt mean good (read apple).
    only with price error , you get cheap and good for certain.

    • dogboy on 16/11/2021 - 18:40
      +5

      It is frustrating when people equate price to quality. A lot of times it just means they have not done their research and think throwing money at things can get them the best in class. This is rarely the case from experience.

      • Settero on 16/11/2021 - 19:29
        +5

        Why does it frustrate you? If you trust a lower priced no name product to be as reliable as a more expensive product with a established brand , you do you, others don't want to gamble on quality ( them being right or wrong is irrelevant it's still a gamble )

        • StickMan on 17/11/2021 - 16:51

          It might frustrate them because the unchecked higher and higher spending of the average consumer for no particular reason drives prices up. So then the 'cheaper' end of the scale gets more expensive for no reason at all.

      • HeWhoKnows on 17/11/2021 - 11:23
        -3

        Higher price ALWAYS equates the BEtTTER QUALITY.

        Many here are confusing better quality with good or better value as we are all focused on better deals and better value.

        The question hence becomes
        Is it worth paying more for better quality?

        The answer is
        Depends on the difference in price and the difference in quality.

        To quote OPs example of Kmart appliances
        They are cheap and they work well for a while at least and that will suffice for those that don’t have high expectations but they are definitely not of the same quality and build of the brand names.

  • Keplaffintech on 16/11/2021 - 17:35
    +18

    I think as a rule of thumb, cheap does equal lower quality. There are always exceptions to the rule though.

    • HeWhoKnows on 17/11/2021 - 11:33
      -2

      Cheap is ALWAYS lower quality
      It’s whether you find that cheaper item is acceptable quality and many do.
      But the cheaper item is made via some sort of cost savings (lower quality) in manufacturing

  • Mokr on 16/11/2021 - 17:36
    +6

    Smeg - known for good looking but not that great performing goods

    also the kmart microwave feels not as nice to use as other machines

    • deme on 16/11/2021 - 18:10
      +3

      Smeg is shit. I'd rather buy kmart than smeg.

    • boomramada on 16/11/2021 - 19:52
      +1

      Definitely Smeg is shit, I thought Panasonic or Sharp would be the top of the rang for microwaves.

    • coffeeinmyveins on 16/11/2021 - 21:40
      +3

      Smeg is for rich housewives who don't care how much it costs, prefer how it looks, and don't mind that it is 80% of the word "smegma"

      • JownehFixIT on 17/11/2021 - 10:51
        +1

        66.66666%?

      • ozbjunkie on 18/11/2021 - 00:30

        We plant the seed, nature grows the seed…

        What were we talking about?

        Vivianne

  • coxjon on 16/11/2021 - 17:40
    +1

    I have about 30 sub $5 aliexpress Apple Watch bands. I have 3 official apple ones that came with my watches, the genuine ones are all stained!

    • Speckled Jim on 17/11/2021 - 09:00

      Agreed!
      All of my watches are fitted with silicone bands from Ali/eBay. Two were originally fitted with very bright silicone bands, but they severely narrowed their versatility. Quick-release bands FTW!

  • FireRunner on 16/11/2021 - 17:43
    +8

    Generally it does. They have to cut costs to bring it to a cheap price
    Either lower quality design, lower quality components or both.
    However, some brands can just rip you off so I think "expensive doesn't always mean high quality" is a better statement

    • Kangal on 16/11/2021 - 19:35

      Or less performance. Or fewer features.
      …the biggest thing for the 21st Century is "Less Marketing".

      You pay $900 for a Samsung versus $600 for Xiaomi, and it could be a case where the Xiaomi may in fact be the better overall product. Weirdly, both OEMs may actually have similar profit margins respectively. So that $300 difference is the cost of: Marketing, Ads, Corporate Deals… also Paying higher Wages to their staff.

  • RockyRaccoon on 16/11/2021 - 17:44
    +3

    Problem is that the dummies believe in the "get what you pay for" which is of course always right, because isnt that, being what you paid.

    The real deal is to get best value for your money.

    For example if you just want a phone then you dont get value for your money by buying a high end full featured phone

    Whereas if you want a great camera, apps, video, games, phone, etc etc then a cheap $25 3G isnt good value either.

    • Mokr on 16/11/2021 - 19:12

      A lot of the costs of the goods are after market service etc.

  • fantombloo on 16/11/2021 - 17:44
    +1

    Maybe a false equivalence.

    Cheap generally does mean low quality. Expensive however does not necessarily mean high quality.

    If you have experience with expensive low quality then cheap items will automatically come across as high quality for the price. Sometimes low quality is more than enough for a job.

  • th123 on 16/11/2021 - 17:47

    Is that what you said when someone rocked a Ferrari next to your Honda?

    • clubhonda on 16/11/2021 - 18:57
      +8

      Indeed, Ferraris were known to be quite rubbish in quality, and it took a Honda to wake them up to improve - "In 1990, when the first Acura NSX went on sale, it sent shock waves through the sports-car world. Here was a mid-engined, aluminum, two-seat exotic that in comparison tests beat up Porsches and slapped around Ferraris yet was civilized, easy to drive, and practical. And at $60,000, it was two-thirds the price of the Ferrari 348tb. The NSX became the car that forced Porsche and Ferrari to reevaluate their core products"

      https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15150454/acura-advanced-s…

      • skillet on 17/11/2021 - 08:10

        Reminds me of the GTR.

      • Speckled Jim on 17/11/2021 - 09:03
        +1

        Years prior to that, US magazine Road & Track dared mention a Honda "econobox" with Porsche, Lotus and Corvette in the same sentence(s).
        That was the Mk1 CRX.

  • scrimshaw on 16/11/2021 - 17:47
    +2

    Think we sort of had this conversation before

    AskOzb: What's something you used to buy high quality of, until you tried lower quality and decided it wasn't worth it?

    many kitchen appliances are outrageously expensive, e.g a DeLonghi kettle at the RRP of $139 when all it does is boil water. I'd say many small appliances often belong in the category where "cheap doesn't mean bad" because of how simple the appliance is. I've been using the same $49 kettle and toaster combo for nearly 4 years now and it still works fine.

    The more complex the device is, the more likely that a lower price will have a detrimental impact on it's usability and longevity. Like laptops.

    • ihbh on 17/11/2021 - 09:38

      It's hard to beat Kmart or BigW on sale.

      I've got a Kmart $30 glass kettle with the blue light that's getting on a decade. The lid came lose, so I threw it; it still boils water like it did before.

      The $7 toasters from Kmart are cheap but not the highest quality. They die after about 2 years, but value in use is pretty good. I'm just concerned about sustainability and recycle with ewaste.

  • bazingaa on 16/11/2021 - 18:01

    for kitchen appliances, the ultimate decision making power is with the missus.

    • 78zeros on 16/11/2021 - 18:10
      +3

      Do we really need to perpetuate tired stereotypes?

      • bazingaa on 16/11/2021 - 18:12
        +6

        that is what happens to me, so I let her choose whatever she likes to make her happy :D

    • Mokr on 16/11/2021 - 19:14

      Aka how the device looks with their colour scheme

    • loropy9 on 16/11/2021 - 22:03
      +3

      That’s stereotype. In our case the Mr decided to upscale from Westinghouse to Smeg. Now we are $400 poorer and we have a brand new absolute crap, uneven baking Smeg. I understand that the richards buy Smegs for the looks. They don’t need it for cooking.

  • Nutrino on 16/11/2021 - 18:05
    +1

    of course there are exceptions….. whats the point of this thread?

  • deme on 16/11/2021 - 18:15
    -1

    This post contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed.

    I keep seeing some members [by whom?] who equate high sticker price for a item to better quality, and hopefully they will see the light with this new article. It's not always about the brand (eg Vitamix cough cough). OEMs can be just as good

    • clubhonda on 16/11/2021 - 18:59

      They are intentionally vague because what's the point of naming and shaming ozb members? The real point of the post, is to share the latest result from Choice that shows that less is sometimes more. I think that's pretty clear here.

  • Jugganautx on 16/11/2021 - 18:44
    +1

    Expensive doesn't mean better quality.

    • coffeeinmyveins on 16/11/2021 - 21:41

      especially when smeg is literally just designer shit. The guts are shit.

  • JimmyF on 16/11/2021 - 19:20
    +3

    "Experts at Choice"

    Ahhhh see, this is a opinion piece now. Gone are the days that you could trust Choice and the reviews. Now days its all reviews by wannabe people who rarely have any idea of what they are reviewing, so just make wild statements on what they think.

    • Kangal on 16/11/2021 - 19:38

      I concur

  • mbck on 16/11/2021 - 22:19
    -1

    Choice…the people who say floor cleaners are useless. Just use water.

    I mean yeah that's how the hospitals, restaurants,etc does it everyday…just water.

    Lol

    • terrys on 17/11/2021 - 19:15
      +1

      "floor cleaners are useless. Just use water."

      I cleaned kitchens, hostels, offices and homes for 5 decades. There is very little that won't clean with either water and vinegar, water and bicarb, or plain water given a microfibre cloth.

      The aged care home in a cognitively impaired care organisation I trained at used a proprietary microfibre system and water for 90% of the cleaning.

      Choice - the people who compared wildly over-rated 'magic' cleaners to using just water and found that the additive made little or no difference in direct comparison to just using water. - save where water was useless and a lipid or alcohol based solvent was required.

      • mbck on 17/11/2021 - 19:27
        -2

        Ofc wow. I mean yeah stupid hospitals using their disinfectants. Just use water and some specially treated microfibres. Boom done.

        Deep clean from covid with disinfectants and cleaning products? Pfft just tell these business to use good old elbow grease and water.

        Ps did anyone look at how choice does the test?

        Small amount of grease put on a tile, then scrubbed 20 times.

        I'm pretty sure people don't scrub a small area 20 times let alone the whole house floor lol. Flawed methodology. Flawed results.

  • baker bob on 17/11/2021 - 02:17
    +1

    I have a rule that when I buy a new appliance I get the cheapest available to start with and if it's crap I'll replace it with a better brand. Toaster, kettle, slow cooker and microwave are all cheapies from kmart and going strong for over 10 years and I'm happy with what they do. I do have a vitamix though, cheap blenders just dont cut it for me. I bought a cheap stand mixer posted on OzB but again, was garbage compared to higher end ones which I use now.

    • clubhonda on 17/11/2021 - 22:47
      +1

      I bought an Aldi Kuchef blender for less than $100 which is similar to a Vitamix around 7 years ago and it has only very recently died and I used it for everything, nuts, soups, etc and it spins to 10k rpm. Basically the Vitamix patent expired a while back and this was just an OEM using similar tech. And despite the price, it kept going and going. For 7 years of use at less than $100, I'd say give it a try the next time you're in the market for one.

  • tabitha731 on 17/11/2021 - 07:47

    Absolutely agree, cheap doesnt always equate to poor quality. I have so many appliances or items in general that have lasted me decades. Its all about how well you look after the items.

  • Drj55 on 17/11/2021 - 08:20

    There are so many variables here but surely generally higher price mean better materials, lower tolerances, higher standards, more features, better design, more safety features etc etc. To say a carolla is better than a Ferrari because it is more reliable is a bit laughable. I mean these cars fill niches so different they aren't even comparable by any standard.

    What I would say though, is that you're always better off getting what you want at the best price. A dyson may not be "worth it" to you but you're better getting it $200 off than retail.

    • Speckled Jim on 17/11/2021 - 09:06

      Toyota-Ferrari is a bad example.

      I'd say VW <-> pretty much anything, but for argument's sake, Kia. Or Hyundai.

      Every generation gets taken in by Euro-chic. Dose badges doh!

  • ihbh on 17/11/2021 - 09:34
    +2

    I have a relative who was sold a Monster Cable by Gerry's crew a long time ago!

    • BigBirdy on 17/11/2021 - 10:16
      +1

      Ha ha, my missus was conned into buying one of their fancy powerboards to “protect her investment” TV. Powerboard died 12 months later, TV still going more than 10 years on.

  • Darayus on 17/11/2021 - 09:39

    It all depends upon how much you like to boast and show your wealth. You don't mind having Euromaid dishwasher in your house but if you want to to show every guest they visit your kitchen then you want Miele or Smeg. Both performs well but then you feel elevated when your guest praise your wealth.

    Same is with Watches, its said cheap watch shows you what time is it and expensive watch shows time who you are.

  • bamzero on 17/11/2021 - 11:33

    In some cases, same factory, same product, different label, different price tag.

  • Ugly on 17/11/2021 - 13:06

    Quality, Price and Value
    *It's unwise to pay too much, but it's more unwise to pay too little. When you pay too much you lose a little money, that's all. When you pay too little you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought is incapable of doing the thing you bought it to do.
    The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it's well to add something for the risk you take. And if you do that, you will have enough to pay for something better.
    There is hardly anything in the world that some men cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey. *John Ruskin (1819 ~ 1900)

    • clubhonda on 17/11/2021 - 18:03
      +1

      This is why the internet, and research, are a great leveller which cuts out a lot of the marketing bullshit and allows someone who wants to, to engage in research to sift the trash from the treasure. Businesses are keenly aware that a lot of consumers equate price with quality, and may not always do their research, and have a lot of pricing strategies they use to extract maximum profit. Prices are not a reflection of the costs of goods, but a reflection of what is the highest price a merchant thinks they can get away with for the goods.

  • peteru on 17/11/2021 - 19:30
    +1

    Experts at Choice

    🤦

    Yeah, right.

    Choice evaluations have never been helpful to me. Invariably their testing methodology is lacking and their scoring mechanisms are bizarre. After reading a few of their reports, I came to the conclusion that their so called experts do not take the time to read the manuals for the tested products and often fail to operate the equipment correctly.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join