did I pay too much?

[Danoff]

So I went to the video store this weekend and perused the selection. After being thoroughly disgusted that I had already seen almost everything that I had wanted to see in the store I decided to watch Spiderman for the second time. Quality film, I recommend it.

I think it was a 4 dollar rental and we got the movie for a week (or was it 5 days). Oh right, it’s due on thursday (sept 18th), I guess that’s 5 days. Anyway, the wife and I sit down to watch the movie with some bad popcorn that we ended up throwing away and watch the whole thing straight through. Pretty good – we discussed the quality of the film, how it was similar to other superhero movies, what was done well, and what was done not so well.

The next night we sit down and decide to watch the movie through with the director’s commentary (after all we did spend 4 bucks to get this movie for 5 days). So we turn on the commentary and the guy starts out by introducing himself and saying that he was the director (or whatever he was) of Spiderman and then he says:


“which you paid too much to see.”


The wife and I are immediately saying to each other, no we didn’t! We thought it was worth 4 bucks (which we still do), we made a conscious decision to spend that money and we felt we got our money’s worth (as did Hollywood video). This is how capitalism works. We weren’t tricked in to spending 4 bucks. Even if we hadn’t liked the movie (which was not the case) it still was apparently worth 4 bucks to find out if the movie was good.

What’s your take on the situation? Was the condescending director correct? Did I spend my money unwisely? Could it have been possible for a person to pay too much to see a movie? Could they pay too much for anything they freely choose to buy?

 

[milefile]

Like electricity?

 

[Danoff]

Well, I think maybe you have a point. I wonder if it is possible to pay too much for electricity.

If I'm using it to stay alive then yes because the government has fixed the price (sorta). If I'm using it to be comfortable, then no because I still choose to fork over the dough.

Maybe that's flawed reasoning...

 

[LoudMusic]

I think it's relative to the object in question and the individual making the choice.

I believe this is a function of supply and demand. There aren't a whole lot of movies that fit the Spider-Man nitch, so $4 might be about right. But if there were ten of them a year, you'd expect to pay a lot less because of competition in the marketplace.

$4 ... not bad for having it for 5 days, but honestly, are you going to take use of it for a full 5 days? They should charge $2 for overnight. They'd be making more than double the profit and the customers would be much happier.

 

[Danoff]

Ah but they cash in on the late fees. They count on procrastination and forgetfulness and end up making bucketloads of cash.

I still haven't finished watching the special features DVD. Spiderman is going to get me 3 evenings worth of entertainment. That's $1.33 per night. Estimate 2 hours of entertainment per night and that's like 70 cents per hour. Take in to account that there were two people watching it and we're down to 35 cents per hour per person. I'm not even going to try to account for the additional entertainment I get from talking about it on this website.

You're correct though. My point wasn't really how much I paid, but that I had made the decision that it was worth it so I had automatically not paid too much. I thought that the director guy was awfully conceited for telling me that he thought I spent my money badly by renting his film.

It made me ask the question though, how could one ever spend too much on something? People always decide that it's worth it, so that means they consider it a fair trade right?

 

[Duke]

I would have to say, if he willingly and knowingly charges too much for his products,and is willing to gloat about it, that you should avoid overpaying for any more of his work by not buying or renting them.

 

[Mopar Muscle]

Originally posted by neon_duke
I would have to say, if he willingly and knowingly charges too much for his products,and is willing to gloat about it, that you should avoid overpaying for any more of his work by not buying or renting them.

But he has the balls to tell us!

 

[Duke]

So? I've got balls too. I don't need to pay someone else to display theirs.

 

[Danoff]

The fact that he told me is not what concerned me. He honestly thinks someone is making too much profit at some point in the chain. That’s fine. What concerned me is that I am not sure that anyone ever really pays too much. I suppose that there are times when people make uninformed decisions about purchases and end up buying something that they didn’t think they were buying. In that case, perhaps, they paid too much (I came up with this this morning).

So I think if you make a reasonably informed purchase (because you might be willing to suck up some money to not have to get ridiculously informed), then as long as you’re not being tricked somehow or forced to spend the money, then you can’t really pay too much – because that’s how the free market works.

So I don’t really take offense to the guy who says I paid too much. He probably meant it as a joke - though it does qualify him as ignorant and arrogant. But he clearly does not understand how capitalism works. I shopped around for video stores. I picked out a movie. I decided it was worth the money to rent it – so I did. I think that was a fair transaction.

I’m still really interested in a discussion about whether someone can pay too much and under what circumstances. When did you feel like you paid too much for something?

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Prehaps the director felt that most people would be watching his commentary having purchased the DVD. Most DVDs in the UK are £16, which is probably too much, yes. He may feel that his slice of that £16 is paltry and that therefore the rest of the £16 is wasted.

But I agree that whether something costs too much or not is a function of it's price, and your ability and willingness to pay that price.

One should never forget that when discussing how much things cost, either. For example, my wife thinks it's ridiculous to spend £400 on a camera when one can buy a camera for £30. I think it's ridiculous to spend £300 on a suit when one can buy a suit for £75.

She likes expensive clothes, I like expensive cameras, neither of us is wrong.

The director is, as Danoff suggests, conceited in saying that you paid too much (even if you had purchased rather than rented), because you made the decision. He is also biting the hand that feeds him, and cowardly taking advantage of a one-way medium of expressing his opinion, safe in the knowledge that there is unlikely to be any significant comeback or backlash.

To me, $4 to watch that drivel (which is mitigated only by the Kirsten Dunst wet-shirt moment) is too much, so I would be in agreement with the director.

 

[Danoff]

To me, $4 to watch that drivel (which is mitigated only by the Kirsten Dunst wet-shirt moment) is too much, so I would be in agreement with the director.

Sounds to me like for you, it would be a loss even if you got the rental for free. You'd pay not to watch it.

 

[Mopar Muscle]

Originally posted by neon_duke
So? I've got balls too. I don't need to pay someone else to display theirs.

good point.