“Cost-per-wear” is something I’m coming across more and more, and I’m not sure I buy into it. Mostly, I think it’s just another roundabout way to justify spending money. Here’s why…
What is “cost-per-wear”?
Basically, it works like this: You purchase an item of clothing (or an accessory), and each time you wear (or use) it, you divide the original purchase price by the total number of times you’ve worn it. That dollar amount you come up with is your cost-per-wear. Pretty simple, really.
So, for example, if you spent $100 on a pair of shoes, and you’ve worn them 20 times since buying them, you’ve spent $5 per wear. Makes sense, right? Of course it does, it’s basic math you can do
on your cell phone’s calculator in your head.
You can also estimate your cost-per-wear for an item you’re looking at buying. Key word: estimate. You can look at the cost, divide it by the number of times you think you’ll wear the item, and come up with your estimated cost-per-wear.
Reality, or simply a justification?
Well, I suppose it’s both really. I mean, the more you wear something, the more value you’re getting out of it, both in terms of your purchase price, and the value of that piece to you personally. If you carry the same purse every day for an entire year, and you spent $20 on it, the cost-per-wear is minimal, and you could use that knowledge to justify spending more than $20 on a purse you’re going to “wear” 365 times.
And right there is the justification aspect of it. Cost-per-wear is a reality, but you can also use it to justify spending more money on something you know you’re going to use or wear often. And that kind of justification is actually a good one, because you know you’ve already gotten your money’s worth out of a similar item.
It’s certainly easier to justify having spent a lot of money on an article of clothing that you think you’re going to wear it often. It’s also easier to think in terms of cost-per-wear when it comes to buying things you don’t need, especially when they’re on sale. But that’s where it becomes pure justification. When you’re looking at price tags and thinking, “well, if I buy this and wear it 5 times it’ll be just $22.50 per wear, which really isn’t that bad”, you’re using cost-per-wear to justify the purchase. And that’s bad.
Of course, it’s hard to tell what the cost-per-wear is until you’ve actually purchased (and worn) the item. So really, I think you’re far better off looking at the actual item cost instead of justifying spending a lot (or even a little) money on something by saying, “well, but if I wear it just 5 times, the cost-per-wear is only $32.99.” Seriously. If you’re using cost-per-wear to justify spending any amount of money, chances are, you don’t need to be spending the money, and you don’t need whatever it is in your closet.
And this coming from someone who used to be able to justify nearly any purchase.
Here’s where it gets really screwy.
Some people take it as far to say that the $100 item actually becomes a $5 item once you’ve worn it 20 times. No joke, I’ve actually seen that sentiment before, followed by a smiley-faced note saying it’s “so cool” how “that” works.
Sorry, folks, but $100 spent is $100 spent no matter how many times you wear something. I hate to break it to you, but you don’t get money back each time you wear something. The money that left your bank account, stays out of your bank account. An item doesn’t magically become cheaper the more you wear it. Nope. Chances are, it’ll lose monetary value, but the value to you might actually increase with wear.
But wearing your $625.00 Louboutin pumps 10 times doesn’t suddenly transform them into shoes that cost you $62.50 and put that $562.50 back into your bank account. Nope. Cost-per-wear doesn’t work that way.
Cost-per-wear is not an excuse to purchase something.
I know, I alluded to it before. But I’m saying it flat out. Right now. You shouldn’t be using your estimated cost-per-wear to justify spending any amount of money on something. That’s not the point of cost-per-wear, and all that using cost-per-wear as a justification is going to do for you is drain your bank account.
Cost=per-wear can be used to justify an expensive item, but it can also justify a cheap item just as easily (if not easier). It’s one thing to say, “the cost-per-wear of this $100 pair of shoes is only $10 if I wear them 10 times”, but it’s far easier to say, “this dress doesn’t quite fit me right, but it’s only $3, and if I wear it twice, that’s just $1.50 per wear” and use that super-small number to justify the purchase.
Bottom line? If you’re going to use cost-per-wear, you need to be smart about it.
How to evaluate cost-per-wear smartly.
You can use cost-per-wear to make smart purchases. You can look at items you wear often and what you paid for them, figure out the cost-per-wear, and then use that to determine how you spend your money. Items that are definitely you in terms of style might be worth looking at from a cost-per-wear standpoint. And, if you come up with a number that makes sense to you in terms of cost-per-wear, then it might make purchases easier to make.
For example, I know that I’d wear the hell out of a studded motorcycle jacket–I have quite a few variations of moto jackets right now, and could easily replace 2 of my really cheap ones with a single high-quality one without feeling guilty. So if I came across one that I loved I could look at the actual cost, and then think about my maximum cost-per-wear amount to see if it would be a smart purchase.
Classic wardrobe pieces are also often ones that looking at cost-per-wear makes sense. Why? Because those classic pieces are the ones that never go out of style, so usually purchasing items that will stand up to lots of wear over long periods of time makes sense. And let’s face it, often, those long-wearing pieces often cost more money. So making sure that you’re going to get a good value on your dollar makes sense, especially if you’re shelling out a lot of those dollars on one single item.
But don’t forget, you still have to take into account what you’re initially spending, and make sure you can afford that. Obviously. Looking at my moto jacket example above, I might find the perfect jacket for me, but if it’s $3,000 it doesn’t matter that I’ll wear it 120 times (or more), making my cost-per-wear just $25. I still can’t afford $3,000, perfect jacket or not.
But cost-per-wear doesn’t really matter.
Let’s face it, if price is something you’re concerned about, the cost-per-wear doesn’t really matter in the end. If you’re shopping around for the best deals before you commit to buying something–comparison shopping, finding bargains, no impulse purchases, and using coupons–chances are, you’re already getting your money’s worth out of the things you buy because you’re being smart with your spending to begin with.
If you wear things in your closet “to death”, then (again) you’re also getting good bang for your buck, and cost-per-wear doesn’t matter much either. If you’re able to wear items until they are no longer wearable, then the value you’re getting likely surpasses what you spent on the item.
And if you’re the type to splurge on items “just because”, chances are, you just aren’t concerned about cost-per-wear. You want something, so you buy it, that’s it. Cost-per-wear is more than likely insignificant to you, and won’t matter if you start looking at it.
The same goes for you folks who buy items and then just let them sit in your closet. You’re not bothering to evaluate cost-per-wear as it is, so why does it matter? It doesn’t.
What are your thoughts on cost-per-wear?
Had you heard of it before now? If not, it is something you think you’ll start looking at in terms of your closet and buying new things, or do you think it’s just another way to justify purchases?
Do you currently evaluate cost-per-wear? If so, are you finding it changes how you spend and/or what you buy? What’s been your best buy to date in terms of cost-per-wear?
Either way, chime in here or over on the Suburban Style Challenge Facebook Page!