The crazy economics of protecting our shiny things.

[quisquose]

I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the world on convincing us that after spending more money than we can afford on the latest shiny thing, we should then spend another 10% on things to protect it.

 

These shiny things have a depreciation half-life measured in weeks, what’s the point in wrapping them in expensive cotton wool?

 

I realised the folly of this game many years ago when I spent £250 on a digital camera, and then another £25 on a protective screen and a nice slip case to keep it in. After four years of ownership I wanted to upgrade and so put the camera on eBay. I got £20 for it - that’s less than I'd spent on the damn things to keep it shiny. If only I’d not bothered, I thought to myself, the annoyance at having to remove the camera from its packaging, all those photo opportunities missed, would have been avoided.

 

I now imagine with amusement the early adopters scanning the specifications of the iPhone 4 or whatever, and convincing themselves that they must have one because it is so much better than the iPhone 3GS. “Ooh look, it’s only 9.3mm instead of 12.3mm, I must buy one, and slap a plastic case on it”.

 

So this is just an appeal to use your shiny things as nature manufacturers intended. They will look nicer, be much more user friendly, and you will probably save money.