 |
| CNN |
Summary: Venus et Fleur is a company which sells boxed roses that supposedly “last an entire year.” The flowers are processed with a special wax-based solution which contributes to the immense longevity of the flowers. The company is founded by two entrepreneurs, Seema Bansal and Sunny Chadha who got the idea for this company after Chadha sent wilted flowers to his girlfriend, Bansal, one Valentine’s Day. The company’s sales took off after Khloe Kardashian posted a picture on Instagram of the box of Venus et Fleur flowers she received. Based on this success, the couple began sending flowers to more celebrities such as DJ Khaled and Gigi Hadid in hopes of further publicizing their brand. They plan to open up three more distribution centers in the U.S. and internationally, in order to meet “the growing demand”---currently they are selling about 80,000 arrangements per year.
Analysis: If I were to consider the marginal costs and benefits of these flowers, I suppose that they would be worth it, as most people value pleasing those they love at more than $39; therefore, if you are already going to buy flowers, the benefit of upgrading to these might seem to override the cost. However, I personally do not think this marginal benefit analysis is compelling enough for me to buy these flowers because fresh flowers serve the same purpose and are cheaper. Yes, they don’t last as long, but what can you do with a flower that lasts a year?
Questions:
- “A single red rose costs $39, while a box of 42 costs upwards of $399.” At this cost, would you buy these flowers?
- Do you think that events such as Valentine’s Day hold significant meaning? Or are they just excuses for businesses to get consumers to buy things?
Source: CNN Money
30 comments:
Personally, I would not buy a rose for $39. To be honest no flower is worth that much even if it does last an entire year. In my opinion, I don´t celebrate Valentines Day, however, I do know some people who do. I do think businesses use these kinds of holidays to make a lot of sales and market their new products.
I personally wouldn't buy these roses because I wouldn't care about having a rose for an entire year; however, I think if someone loves roses and wants them in their house for a year, then the product is worth it. According to Google, a single rose typically costs $3.50, and only lasts about a week (if I'm being generous). If someone wanted a rose in their house an entire year, then this $39 rose is obviously cheaper than buying a $3.50 rose about 52 times, as long as it does actually last close to a year. I think businesses definitely capitalize off of Valentine's Day, but I think the intentions behind the day are generally good. Going all out to show your love for someone isn't a bad thing, but I think sometimes it gets misrepresented, however annoying/extravagant it may seem.
If one rose costs $39 each, there is no way that I would buy one. I mean what are you going to do with a single rose? I would rather pay for a dozen so I can place them in a vase or something. I am also someone who gets pretty bored with things so I probably would not want to keep the same rose for a year. I also know people buy flowers for the smell of them and I'm not sure these smell the same as fresh roses.
As for the second question, I do think that Valentines Day holds a significant meaning. In my opinion, all holidays hold a specific meaning since it is a day we take to stop from our busy lives to remember our loved ones or to remember a cause such as Veterans Day or President's day. I think that these holidays are good opportunities for businesses to advertise and sell to consumers and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. These businesses see a good opportunity to make money and are being smart about it.
I also would not buy these rose for $39. I don't value flowers much and having it last a year doesn't really change the value for me. Also, purchasing a single flower for such a high price seems a little outrageous. I'm sure you could find something that is a lot more special for your significant other for $39. But as Erin said, if you are going for value, it would be cheaper to buy the single rose that lasts a year than a rose each time one dies. As for whether Valentines day holds significant meaning, it doesn't for me. Much like mother's and father's day, I think that Valentine's day is mainly just another Hallmark holiday where businesses are able to make large sums of money. Although I don't think Valentine's day is meaningless, I don't think that it is as meaningful or significant as holidays like Christmas.
I would personally definitely buy one of these flowers, especially if the full box of them is such a bargain price. The whole purpose of flowers, at least in my own opinion, when given as a gift, is to have them for viewing purposes. The solution these flowers are put in that makes them last longer solves this very problem, thus making them worth significantly more than the average flower. As for the second question, of course these flowers are an excuse for businesses to get people to buy things for valentine's day. That is number one motivation for any company, to get people to buy things that they are selling. However, if the product they are selling is a quality product that solves a dilemma for consumers, then it should be bought, and definitely shouldn't be viewed as a scam.
Although from a value perspective, a rose that lasts for a full year and costs $39 is a very good deal compared to your average rose. But who would even want a rose for that long? And while I don't believe there to be a significant meaning to Valentine's day, that doesn't mean it doesn't make people happy. If people are happy, then it can't be a bad thing. In my opinion one large act of love for Valentine's day is inferior to showing love and affection to your friends, family, and significant other at all given times. We should learn not to stick all these kind of things into one day, like being thankful on Thanksgiving, being generous for Christmas, and caring for your loved ones on Valentine's day. These should all be something we should incorporate into our daily lives, regardless of an arbitrary day that occurs once a year.
Personally, I would get one flower. It would be interesting to study how the flower acts over the year, and it would be a nice romantic touch. But any more than one flower would break the bank. I think Valentines day is similar to Thanksgiving, abused by companies to make money. Though the sentiment and meaning holds significance and meaning, expectations are usually too high, and things usually go to the ruff. Why take one day to remember those we love, why shouldn't it be all year? Love is also an especially hard emotion to convey, so companies are able to abuse this by convincing consumers that the more expensive the gift is, the more love in your heart. What a trap!
Julia, regarding the scent of the flower, the company actually claims that these flowers can retain "the rose's texture, shape, and even some of its scent." But even if the flower does smell fresh the whole year, I agree with you in thinking that buying this is quite an unnecessary expenditure.
I agree that $39 is too high of a price for one flower, and I cannot justify paying that much for something so small without a useful purpose. However, I think that Tilman's idea of purchasing one flower and studying it as time progresses is interesting, as I would like to see if like a natural rose, this one begins to wilt and lose its petals, and if it lasts the full year like the company claims it does. Addressing the second question, I don't really participate in Valentine's Day, but I'm sure that to others, this day holds significant value. In general though, I believe that companies use this day as a way to make bank by raising their prices to try to sell to the masses that celebrate this holiday.
I don't think I would buy a single flower for $39 either, regardless of how long it will last, because after some time it loses its value. There are many more effective and useful things you can buy with those $40 if you intended on buying something for a valentine. I think days like Valentine's Day can hold significant value to different people because it is what you make of it. For some, Valentine's Day may be very important, as it holds religious value as well. For others, it may not matter at all, in which case businesses would not be making profit of these people. However, businesses definitely do take advantage of those that celebrate the day.
I, personally, would not use my money on something so ridiculous as a $39 rose. I think that Valentine's Day is somewhat significant when you have a significant other, but other than that I don't think it would matter. I also think businessmen use Valentine's day as a way to get consumers to buy things, but I don't think businessmen would be able to do that if people didn't think Valentine's day held a significant meaning.
I would definitely buy these roses because its hella flex. Think about it. You are flexing literally 400 dollars worth of goods right there. Not everyone can be balling like you can. I would rather buy a 39 dollar rose that last a year than some cheap safeway roses that last only like a week. It's the same thing with designer. Would you want to buy couple hundred dollar LV wallet or buy an off brand wallet for 10 dollars. It's preference and affordability. I personally would go for the more expensive one because A. its flex and B. treat yourself with something nice. The roses do have meaning if you buying it for someone. #flex
Valentine's Day is a day for people to tell how much they love their significant other. I disagree with Stephen. Money is not the only thing that should be considered in a relationship. It's not about how long a rose last or how many branded things you buy. It's more about how you treat your significant other in the long run. Just because you buy some expensive rose or branded items, it doesn't really mean anything. In fact, it would probably feel like you're trying to win her over by flashing all this money at her. Not everyone wants to receive a rose on Valentine's Day either. If it's truly a day for couples to celebrate them being together, wouldn't it be a lot better to buy something that is only meaningful to the both of you instead of a rose, which everyone who can afford it can buy it? These are just excuses for businesses to get consumers to buy these things. Valentine's Day does have meaning if you give it meaning, instead of a rose-buying day.
Companies have over glorified Valentines day for a better part of a century. $39 for on rose is ridiculous even if the rose lasts a full year. Doing some research, a rose lasting one year is actually quite poor. Normal roses, can last upwards of 5 years (still attached to the plant I am guessing though).
At this cost, I would definitely buy one SINGLE ROSE. It lasts an ENTIRE YEAR. A regular house plant, that I could definitely kill in less than a year would cost about the same. In fact, I did some research and a rose plant (depending on the breed) costs from 20-40 already. Though the alternative is a single, depending on your personal aesthetic this price could be well worth it. I think holidays Valentines Day hold significant meaning. I believe this because I think meaning can be assigned to things at differing levels for each individual. While these events certainly offer businesses the opportunity to sell more, no one is actually required to spend anything.
I personally would not buy these roses because they're so expensive and rather than just buying expensive roses for your significant other, I would rather spend some quality time with them. The whole idea of having roses that last a whole year is pretty interesting, and I can see why someone would buy it. I think Valentines Day does hold a special meaning because even if you don't have a significant other, it's always a day to spread love. As for companies and businesses I do believe they take this special day to an advantage to sell and raise prices on roses and other Valentines Day goods.
I wouldn't buy these roses for my significant other, not for my mom, not for my grandma, not for my sister. From an economic standpoint, it is purely illogical. I am not made of money here, people. Celebrities, on the other hand, can surely afford these $39 roses; $39 is less than pocket change to them, I presume. This product is not even useful, either. Like Emily said: what are you going to do with a rose for a whole year? The most you could possibly do it look at it. I guess, from the receiver's point of view, if a rose symbolizes one's love for another, and I received one of these, I would first ask why on earth someone spent $39 on a rose. I would then consider it to be romantic? Maybe as a symbol for everlasting love? I don't know. This product should stay aimed at celebrities who can blow hundreds of dollars on useless things like this. There are better things to do with your person that don't include dropping $39 on a single rose.
It seems a bit ridiculous to buy something so extravagant, a rose for $39 dollars? That money can be spent on more practical neccessities- groceries, bills, etc.- why would you buy a rose that lasts forever. Plastic roses are a dollar at the dollar store and, if kept in the right condidtions, could probably last forever as well. Making something for your valentine, or even blessing them with your presense, is probably a more meaningful gift than a infinity rose. It's just a buisness trying to play people for more money.
I personally wouldn't buy a single flower for $39 because it's not necessarily in my price range, however, if you have the money to spend I'd understand why one would spend that amount of money on flowers. Most people buy flowers to show appreciation and they usually wilt in the next few days, however flower arrangements are already priced around $200 so if paying $399 would mean that the flowers could last a whole year, it could be worth it. But if you don't have the money to spend, I don't think it's worth it to spend almost $400 on flowers, while the money could be better put to use elsewhere. I think that Valentine's day is significant as it is a day where you show your appreciation and love just a little extra, however one should be showing appreciation and love on a daily basis. But, Valentine's day does hold a special meaning, it's just a special day to spread love. I do not believe that businesses use Valentine's day as necessarily an excuse to make profit and get consumers to purchase special heart, or love personalized products. However, it is definitely a good way for businesses to make money, but I don't think it is necessarily an excuse, it's just a holiday that businesses can take advantage of, and benefit from, just like Christmas.
I think that I would by one flower for $39. Many people always say that it is the thought that counts and I believe sometimes giving the more expensive gift, when you have the resources to, will cause your significant other to appreciate you even more. If you get your significant other flowers on a daily basis, how would you top it on Valentines Day? By simply getting these flowers. I believe that Valentine's Day has a significant meaning, but at the same time has a commercial aspect. Just like Christmas, of course companies will benefit from people buying gifts.
I definitely would not buy these roses. I don't think having one rose will satisfy anyone (unless you're on the Bachelor). I disagree with people who say that buying an expensive gift (aka these flowers) for your significant other will allow them to appreciate you more. Valentines day is literally just a "hallmark" holiday, and I am confused on why people can't appreciate your significant other on literally any other day.
I would not buy these roses! I believe that Valentines Day is special because it is the one day where you really pamper your significant other. However with these roses lasting year round, I think that this might take away from the holiday. I think that anyone would be just as happy receiving roses from Safeway.
I would not buy those flowers. While these roses might be cheaper in the long run as compared to fresh flowers, as each bouquet of high quality fresh flowers from a florist costs around $40-60 and many people often buy their significant other flowers every few months, I think the sentiment of handing someone flowers for specific occasions rather outweighs the pragmatism of immortal roses. Under the surface,Valentine's Day continues to exist because of its commercial value, but it doesn't change the fact that people still use Valentine's to express love. Thus, I think Valentine's Day is still a meaningful and worthwhile holiday, even if it is propagating blissful ignorance.
I don't think I would buy these flowers. I do like Valentines day because I think it is a good reminder for us to show the people in your lives how much we love them, whether it be a significant other, parent, sibling or friend. However, I don't think that showing someone how much you love them means that you should spend nearly $500 on flowers for a person. While it is a really cool idea and I would be flattered if I received roses that lasted an entire year, I don't think it is necessary.
I wouldn't buy this company's roses since their prices are a lot higher than other companies that sell preserved roses. I bought a small pot of these preserved roses at the local farmer's market over a year ago for a little more than the amount Venus et Fleur sells for just one, and they're still in the same condition that I bought them in. I really like the small bunch that I have and do think that the flowers are worth some extra money, but the prices here seem ridiculous. We just learned in class today about the substitution effect, which is when two goods are similar people will buy the cheaper one, and I think it's relevant to this article and my experience. This company's products are promoted by celebrities and seem to be geared more towards them, but if there's a cheaper option for the same item and of the same quality, then I did and I think others will buy the cheaper one, and in that case it would be worth it.
I personally wouldn't buy these flowers as it is in my eyes, a waste of money. However, in class, Mr. Felder mentioned in the Google slide that as one's income increases, so does one's spending. Using this rational, if I was as filthy rich as the Kardashians and DJ Khaled, yeah I probably would buy these because $400 bucks is nothing to me in comparison to what I would be making. If you were to think about the science behind these, it is actually pretty amazing to extend the "life" of an object for over a year keeping it pretty on your dinner table or buffet. I think your question about Valentine's Day and its significance is sort of a separate topic but does fall back on this idea of whether something is "worth it." I do believe that Valentine's Day is significant if you have a significant other to share it with because it is a way for us to slow down our busy lives and show how much we care about someone.
Although I agree that the price of these roses are somewhat costly, I think Tilman makes an interesting point. Showing love for our special others should be an everyday thing, not limited to one day of the year. If these roses indeed last a year long, I think they can serve as a good reminder of lasting love and emotional bonds. However, I guess they may be less traditional than natural flowers.
I would not want to buy these pricey roses. I would rather support a local florist as it is cheaper and I'm supporting my areas local business. I think the idea is very interesting but simply just is not worth it.Tillman brought up a great point that we should show love for people everyday. Buying real flowers I think is the most authentic way.
I don't really know if I would buy the flowers. I kind of like the traditional-ness of purchasing normal flower. But, if I had to buy them, I would buy one flower and not an entire box of them, like Winston and Tillman said. I think that having just one of these flowers COULD be a considered a considerate gesture, as it is a reminder of long-lasting love. Then again, like Julia said, what is someone going to do with a flower for an entire year? Just put it in a vase and look at it? I feel like at some point you would just forget that it was there in the first place, and thus forget the original significance that it had when it was first purchased. Overall, I think that it is a kinda cheesy product that sounds nice in theory, but would be very underwhelming if it was actually purchased for you.
Personally, I would love to receive a Venus et Fleur flower. However, paying for it… not so much. Though their beauty is captivating and could serve as a reminder of their significant other every time they catch a glimpse of them, the $39 dollar cost is not enough to justify the preserved flowers. At that point, there would be more of a reason to purchase the 42 roses for $399, which comes out to $9.50 per rose. With that massive cost, it would then make more sense to purchase something that has more longevity to it, such as jewelry. Moreover, I’m sure that this company has great quality control especially with such great publicity, but roses are plants (a concept!), so there’s a greater likelihood that imperfections may be found on the roses, thus decreasing the value, and possibly the desirability, of the flowers.
I believe Valentine’s Day has some meaning to it, but it’s become inflated to this be-all, end-all day for relationships. I mean come on, it’s adorable (albeit cheesy). But, this shouldn’t be the primary day someone shows their love for their significant other, and the amount or type of things purchased for a loved one should not be indicative of a loving relationship.
Post a Comment