Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 16:18
Hi Allan
Quite logical.
If you buy it and never switch it on it has cost you say $1,800 (at least in my case).
Now it will always have cost $1,800, but you could look at it and say, if I switch it on twice, it will have cost me $900 to switch it on each time. If it's 100 times than it has cost me $18 each time I switched it on.
Let me help you out further. It is just one simple measure of cost and value...
But let's use tyres, as an example (maybe it's just a phone thingy that confuses it).
If you buy a tyre today for $350 and drive
home with it on, say 10 kilometres
shop to
home there on the Sunshine Coast, than that tyre has cost you $35 per kilometre driven, so far.
But when you do your big outback trip and return with 10,000 kms under the tyre's belt the cost has reduced to $0.035 per kilometre driven...Perhaps it might be a useless measure, for some, but if you were running a trucking fleet it might have some relevance...
No need to explain you aren't running a trucking fleet (are you?).
But hey, let's not get all worked up on that particular point I made.
My blog outlines what we do with our Sat phone and our rationale as too why.
And my point to Shaker is that unless you use it regularly you may not know something has gone amiss when you need to use it - that's Murphy's Law for you...
But each to their own.
My way of looking at it works for me and helps rationalise the purchase on a cost only basis (yes,yes, there are other considerations - that's why we have one).
But hey, Mrs Landy points out that I'm usually wrong at least once per day.
Perhaps today's "wrong" is the way I presented my view...or maybe it is spending (way) too much time debating on an internet
forum what is essentially "my viewpoint"
Good luck out there; got to go, Mrs Landy has just asked have I rearranged the sock draw that she's be nagging me about...
Baz - The Landy
FollowupID:
888504