I love family reunions. My cousins are bold and brassy. They’re loud, and quick with a funny story. They’re also cheap. At a New Year’s Day reunion last week, we swapped tales of extreme penny-pinching. One of my cousins told this story, which I thought was hilarious.
A couple of years ago, my cousin Mart decided to buy a new pair of boots. On his way to the Oregon Coast, he stopped by the Wilco Farm Store in Oregon City to see if they had anything in his size. He wears size 9-1/2 Extra Wide, and can’t always find the shoes he needs.
As it happened, they did have a pair in his size. These boots normally cost $159, but they were a special order that had never been claimed. Because the store couldn’t sell them, they marked them down to $60.
Mart, being from a long line of penny pinchers, was quick to point out to the cashier that the store was having a sale: $50 off all Justin boots. “So I owe you $10, right?” he asked. The cashier was hesitant, but went to check with her manager. In the end, Mart got the boots for $10.
The whole weekend at the coast, Mart was pleased with his shopping prowess. He told the story to his family, and everyone got a kick out of it.
On the drive home, he decided to stop by the store again to see if he could find another good deal. Sure enough, he found a pair of size 6 Justin boots marked at $50. “I thought I was going to walk out of there with those boots for free and just give them to one of my nephews,” he told me at the family reunion.
When he went to the cash register to pay, he was greeted by the same woman he’d dealt with a few days previously. She frowned when Mart suggested that because these boots were marked at $50, and because all Justin boots were $50 off, that he should get them for free. She went to talk to her manager. But before she could get very far, another checker stepped in to say that these boots were an exception — they were already marked down.
Mart made a good-natured fuss. Ultimately, the store agreed to sell him the boots for $25. He gave them to a nephew.
Mart ended his story on a sad note. “After I bought those boots, I couldn’t wear them,” he sighed. “They had too much of an arch. I had to give them to my brother, Scott.” And that’s how my penny-pinching cousin Mart got two pairs of Justin boots for $35, but ended up with nothing.
At Tuesday’s reunion, I also learned that another cousin recently moved with her husband and nine of her eleven children to 100 acres in Oklahoma. The catch? There were no buildings on the land when they bought it. The entire family is currently living in a hastily constructed 16 foot by 40 foot building with no running water. Not all of their siblings think this is a Good Thing, but I think it sounds adventurous.
This article is about Frugality, Funny Money, Real-Life Saturday, 5th January 2008 (by J.D. Roth)


RSS Feeds
Facebook
GRS Twitter







January 5th, 2008 at 7:38 am
“The entire family is currently living in a hastily constructed 16 foot by 40 foot building with no running water. Not all of their siblings think this is a Good Thing, but I think it sounds adventurous.”
Hahaha! I think it’s adventurous as well. It’ll be a lifetime memory to build a house there and have that sense of accomplishment.
January 5th, 2008 at 8:40 am
That’s an amusing story. I take it that your cousin didn’t try on the boots before buying them?
And I understand the appeal of adventure, but I think I’ve been exposed to a few too many large families whose parents do crazy things which negatively impact their children. (Not saying that it is case with your relatives, just that I’d be highly skeptical.)
January 5th, 2008 at 9:35 am
11 children? That is not a very effective way to pinch pennies.
January 5th, 2008 at 11:00 am
To think of children only in terms of their financial value is disturbing.
January 5th, 2008 at 11:12 am
It is a great story to illustrate that a “Deal” isn’t always a value!
Moving to the open land sound like an adventure, when you know you can leave in two weeks and go back to your warm bed!
As a desendant of Sod-house Dakotans, I say they were built of sturdier stock! Sounds like they are doing what the want though so good for them!
January 5th, 2008 at 11:36 am
To have children when you can’t afford to provide for them is disturbing.
January 5th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I’m confident that my cousin and her husband are doing a fine job of supporting their family. Though they’re not currently Mennonite, they come from hardy Mennonite stock where big families are the norm. They’re raising strong, intelligent children, and I’m sure the family is doing quite well. They’re all just living in small building this winter while they make plans to build a house on the land they’ve purchased.
January 5th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Great story…11 children in these days and times…crazy.
January 5th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
What I really disliked was the analysis of how “effective” having 11 children was as a “way to pinch pennies”. My family is not a flexible part of my budget that I can reduce or eliminate in order to save money.
January 5th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I have to admit that a “hastily constructed 16 foot by 40 foot building with no running water” does not sound like adequate housing for 13 people. Do they have heat? Do they have bathing facilities? What are the fire codes for the area? Is sewage being disposed of properly? Is it safe?
Assuming it is safe, I see no reason why they shouldn’t have as many children as they want and are able to feed.
January 5th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
“I love my cigar, but take it out of my mouth once in awhile.” But onwards.
I realize that some store owners try to take you for everything you’ve got, are generally nasty people, etc. But many more are not, they’re just folks trying to make a living. And getting rid of a pair of special order boots which are otherwise never going to go away might be worth just getting $10, especially if the special-ordering customer put some money down and forfeited it. And yes, a store owner should check his or her inventory to be sure there isn’t an already marked down item in the stash of stuff they’re putting on special. To be clear, there is no shame in simply making an offer on an item, the store owner can always say no (that said, you should take a “no” with good grace).
Still, some folks seem to take a certain glee in finding the mistakes of retailers and taking advantage of them. Big stores can absorb these, but do that often enough to a small store, and the store is going to go away.
Retail stores often have a 50% margin, that is, the wholesale cost is doubled when the item is retailed. Sounds outrageous, but when you look at all the costs that have to come out of that extra 50%, there isn’t a huge amount of actual profit built in there. Especially on something as volatile as clothing or footwear, you have to account for theft and the fact that a certain percentage of merchandise is going to have to be sold for cost at the end of the season. Add in “clothing rental” (that is, stuff people buy, wear once or twice, and then bring back claiming they never wore it) and that manufacturers and wholesalers generally don’t take back merchandise which isn’t defective, meaning if you give a refund you’ve essentially not only lost a sale but had the merchandise removed from your stock as well…it’s a tough game. And that’s not even considering paying the clerks, store rent, taxes or electricity.
To me trying to get something on a “technicality” is not much different than keeping an extra $10 a cashier accidentally hands you while making change. Lots of people do, but I think it’s at best ethically questionable. At best.
So by all means be frugal and even cheap, just don’t go too far.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:44 am
I think this behavior is pretty tacky. I’m all for frugality, but this kind of thing smacks of saying, “Ah, I’m going to screw over that store. Ha ha ha.” It’s one thing if it’s Wal-Mart, but it sounds like this place was a mom-and-pop kind of place.
Like Roger said, if you pull this kind of stunt, it really eats into the retailer’s bottom line. I don’t really care of Megacorp’s stock flounders, but I do when it’s a small business.
January 7th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
The image of 11 people living in a 16×40 building without running water stuck with me this weekend. I thought maybe I was misjudging the space at first, but I did a quick drawing to scale in SketchUp. The image is here:
http://tinypic.com/fullsize.php?pic=71pk4nt&s=1&capwidth=true
The rectangle is 16×40, each of the figures in the image are approx. 5′7″ tall. Seems like close quarters to me for a winter… particularly without running water.