
Fewer, Better Things - craigcannon
http://themacro.com/articles/2016/06/startup-school-cuyana/
======
akeck
My current approach to buying and stuff: Never "buy", only "invest". That is,
always consider return (happiness, time, money, etc.). Invest in experiences
in the exploratory manner of an Angel investor. Invest in things in the more
conservative manner of a Series A investor [1].

[1] See "7\. Fundraising gets harder" in
[http://www.themacro.com/articles/2016/06/how-not-to-
fail/](http://www.themacro.com/articles/2016/06/how-not-to-fail/)

~~~
tedmiston
Related: Buy It For Life (BIFL) -
[https://www.reddit.com/r/buyitforlife](https://www.reddit.com/r/buyitforlife)

While the community will point out regularly that not all things can be bought
for life, many can if you're willing to spend more upfront for higher quality.
For example, spending $20 on a pair of socks with a lifetime warranty vs. $2
for a pair that'll last a year.

I also see Jansport backpacks and Craftsman tools mentioned similarly.

~~~
teddyh
A.k.a “The Sam Vimes "Boots" Theory of Economic Injustice”:

“ _The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they
managed to spend less money._

 _Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus
allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an
affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then
leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those
were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so
thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the
feel of the cobbles._

 _But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who
could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his
feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap
boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would
still have wet feet._

 _This was the Captain Samuel Vimes ‘Boots’ theory of socioeconomic
unfairness._ ”

[http://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Sam_Vimes_Theory_of_Economi...](http://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Sam_Vimes_Theory_of_Economic_Injustice)

~~~
icebraining
Hence the usefulness of credit, as long as one uses it wisely.

------
jacquesm
I really can't stand the whole 'Marie Kondo' bs. Ask your grandparents about
quality and you can skip the nonsense. Buy what you need, save before you
spend, buy quality and repair your stuff rather than throwing it away. It's
just common sense.

This stuff only works on people that are easily pushed by marketing and
advertising to fulfill needs they didn't have in the first place and end up
with houses full of things they can easily get rid of. Fortunately for Miss
Kondo the same people are also easily sold a book that they didn't really
need. Who thought an 'organizing consultant' was something we would one day
take serious.

~~~
manachar
Common sense is not universal, common, or necessarily sensical.

I did not grow up with parents who raised me this way and had little to no
contact with grandparents. My parents were also often cash strapped.

You and I know that saving up for quality products is a better approach. I
learned it by watching my parents buying a cheap stand mixer every two years
(max) growing up. Then I worked at a kitchen store and learned that there were
some KitchenAids still working after 75 years. I saved up my paycheck and may
have been one of the only 17 year olds to ever buy a KitchenAid. I'm still
using it over 15 years later.

Thing is... I didn't have three kids, a mortgage, and other more pressing uses
for my money. Once you get into a debt spiral you rarely have the cash needed
to purchase the stuff of the quality you need to make it last. Instead you buy
crappy stuff at the dollar store to make until the next paycheck.

Of course, they do still purchase more things than I do as they haven't
learned the other part of this lesson -- if you can't afford the quality
version you should probably make do without it.

Also note, the equipment, space, and know-how for repairing things is not
available to many (probably most).

~~~
JimmyAustin
“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they
managed to spend less money.

Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus
allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an
affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then
leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those
were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so
thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the
feel of the cobbles.

But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could
afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry
in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would
have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have
wet feet.

This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”

― Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms: The Play

~~~
bllguo
eh. ignores the time value of money though.

~~~
jerf
No, it doesn't. Think about it harder.

------
torgoguys
I get what they are saying, I think, but do not trust them to be the
messengers. Perhaps if their website didn't have new collections of items each
season, and had a more stable catalog, I might believe them more that they are
creating more timeless items (that you should only buy a few if) than just
items that are fashionable at the moment.

~~~
tedmiston
^ this

A related startup is Cladwell. They kept the vision of building a set of
basics, but instead of making clothes built a recommendation engine to
understand your preferences for clothes that you can already buy. They
actually just got into 500's Batch 17.

[https://angel.co/cladwell](https://angel.co/cladwell)

------
roymurdock
I thought this headline might have been referring to a new YC strategy to
invest in fewer startups.

Funny that a curation-focused startup is making its way through the
VC/incubator world, which runs on high-volume, high-risk bets ;)

~~~
white-flame
Exactly. I was just about to post:

"Fewer, Better Things" is kind of antithetical to startup culture in general.
Stop expecting me and others to constantly buy new products or services, for
every little money-making whim some kid cooks up.

------
grecy
I have spent a lot of my life pondering these questions, and have figured out
a way to spend a lot less money than the majority of my peers.

So much so I quit my job and drove Alaska->Argentina for 2 years, then after
working for a few more I've quit again and am spending 2 years driving around
Africa.

My thoughts on how to do it here: [http://theroadchoseme.com/work-less-to-
live-your-dreams](http://theroadchoseme.com/work-less-to-live-your-dreams)

------
mkagenius
Side note: some of the urls are served over http, for example:
[http://www.cuyana.com/j2tajaxcheckout/index/cart/](http://www.cuyana.com/j2tajaxcheckout/index/cart/)

------
paulsutter
Everything in the article is a nonsense storyline. If they can build a sales
ramp they will succeed. If they can't, they won't. The only measure is
traction. Later they can explain it with this nonsense, and people will even
believe it. But lacking traction, this is solely nonsense.

