costco

When it makes sense to cheat on the envelope system

Dave Farquhar Saving money ,

So I’m only a week into the family budget and I’ve already cheated on it. Look inside the envelope containing my lunch money, and you’ll find $8, a few loose coins, and an I.O.U. for $30.

I can explain. Really.For the last couple of years, lunch has usually been a Healthy Choice frozen meal. They’re easy to find on sale, they heat up quickly, they have a pretty wide selection, and there’s practically no work ahead of time involved with them. Unfortunately, I found a lot of them have hydrogenated oils and high fructose corn syrup in them. The only thing healthy about those is the calorie count.

Not wanting to slowly poison myself, my wife went looking for an alternative. She found one: Kahiki, a line of Asian-inspired frozen meals. They’re made with natural ingredients and usually weigh in at a reasonable 300-400 calories. There’s just one problem: They’re a lot more expensive than Healthy Choice.

This weekend my wife and son were away, so I had to fend for myself. I wandered into the nearest grocery store Saturday night looking for something to eat when I spotted a display of Kahiki on sale at two for $6. I bought four.

Later that night I told my wife, and she reminded me that each of those packages has a 55-cent coupon in it. That drops the price to $2.45, a very appealing price point for a Scottish miser like me. So I cut out the coupons, went to the store, and bought four more. I then proceeded to walk out to the car, cut out those four coupons, walk back into the store, and use the fresh coupons to buy four more. Then I did it all again. Pretty soon I could cut the coupon out of the package without even opening it by following landmarks on the outside.

If anything, I felt guilty only buying $30 worth. At $2.45 a pop, I can come in $11 under budget for next month. And if Costco gets another shipment of the Thai noodles I like any time soon, I can eat those a couple of times a week at $1.09 a pop and save even more.

Maybe I’ll buy another four late in the week. I already have the coupons cut out.

How to clean up your computer before you sell it

Dave Farquhar Hardware , , , , , , ,

I went to a huge garage sale this morning. I walked home with a 7-year-old Dell 15" LCD monitor. What I paid for it wouldn’t buy lunch for my wife and me. When I got it home and saw how well it worked, I felt guilty.

So if you’re thinking of selling some computer equipment, take my tips (as someone who attends literally thousands of garage sales every year) for getting decent money for it.The main reason I got this monitor for so little is because it looked like it sat in a dusty garage or attic for several years. It was filthy. I’ve seen identical monitors sell for 50 bucks as recently as June. Identical except for the dirt, that is.

I cleaned the monitor up using nothing more than an old dish towel and some all-surface biodegradable cleaner I buy at Costco. But dish detergent would work in a pinch. Dampen the towel, wring it out, add a bit of cleaner, and clean all the surfaces except for the screen. You’ll get more money if it looks like the unit was taken care of. You want it to look like you just bought its replacement yesterday.

You’ll also get more if you can demonstrate it works. Run an extension cable or two if necessary, and hook the stuff up so shoppers can see it in action. Many shoppers assume bargain-priced computer equipment at garage sales doesn’t work. In my experience, about half of it does. So I pay accordingly.

Finally, price realistically. These are the same people who get up at 4am the day after Thanksgiving to wait in line until Office Depot opens. I know because I do that too, and I see the same people I see every Saturday. So you’re competing with Black Friday’s prices, with used equipment.

That said, a working computer that runs Windows XP decently (and has a legal copy of XP on it) should fetch $75-$100, depending on its speed. A 1 GHz PC will run closer to $75, while a 2 GHz PC will fetch $100. And at that price, it should sell fairly quickly.

If a computer is decent but doesn’t work, it won’t sell for much. I’ve paid $10 for computers that need hard drives before, and I’ve passed on $10 computers that need hard drives. Sometimes I regret not buying that Pentium 4 that worked except for the hard drive, but my back hurt that day and I didn’t feel like lugging it home.

CRT monitors are hard to give away these days, but if you can demonstrate it works and it looks presentable, a 17-inch monitor is worth $10-$20. Your best bet for getting rid of one of those, though, is to bundle it with a working computer that runs Windows XP.

A working 15-inch LCD monitor should sell for $50 without any trouble.

Keyboards and mice are giveaways. I literally wish I had a dollar for every time someone’s tried to give me a keyboard. Anyone who wants one already has too many. The lone exception to this rule is an optical mouse. But a new, mid-range Microsoft optical mouse sells for $20-$25 on sale, so don’t expect to get more than $5-$10 for one. I paid $2 for one this year, and it didn’t work. I was willing to take a chance at that price, but no higher.

So is a Costco membership worth it?

Dave Farquhar Saving money , ,

One gift my wife and I gave ourselves after paying off our mortgage was a Costco membership. We didn’t get one before we paid off that debt, just in case it wasn’t worth it. I’d carried a Sam’s membership for years but found I didn’t use it much. So is a Costco membership worth it?

I think Costco is worth it, with caveats.My wife and I eat whole-grain bread without trans fats or high fructose corn syrup. It’s hard to find anything that meets that criteria. At grocery stores, only a couple of national brands make the grade, and they cost $4 per loaf. We go through one a week, on average. Costco’s house brand makes the grade, and two loaves cost $4. So buying bread at Costco every other week saves us $104 a year, plus about $6 in sales tax. For us, that covers the $50 membership.

I recently read some advice from Andrew Tobias. Johnny Carson asked him what the best investment for $1,000 would be, and Tobias said non-perishable consumer staples. Everyone thought he was kidding, so he clarified. Buy $1,000 of nonperishable necessities (stuff like toilet paper, toothbrushes, shampoo, soap, and the like) on sale, and the return on investment is tremendous.

And you beat inflation. Let’s say inflation continues at 10% annually for a couple of years, which seems likely. By that measure, a toothbrush that costs $3 today will cost $3.63 in 2010 if I’m doing the math right. So if I behave and use four toothbrushes a year, I automatically save $2.56 by buying them today instead of 2010.

Needless to say, I feel pretty good about getting that 10-pack of Oral B toothbrushes today for $9.99 minus a $2 coupon. I saved $20 over buying them one at a time at Kmart. And I got a 20% return on investment.

About those coupons: Costco sends out coupons every couple of weeks. They don’t make substitutions when a hot seller runs out, so get there early. Today we spent $122 and used $15 worth of coupons. We only bought things we knew we’d use: shampoo, baby wipes, coffee, toothbrushes, bar soap, and laundry detergent.

Looking at it from an investor’s viewpoint, $68 worth of the stuff we bought had coupons, so we saved 22%. Where else am I going to get a 22% return on a $68 investment?

So when the next batch of Costco coupons comes in, we’ll look them over and buy anything that we’ll be able to use. I don’t know if $15 is a typical savings over the course of two weeks, but that would be $390 a year if it is.

As for the savings of the regular prices over retail, I looked into that too. The toothbrushes cost $3 if purchased singly, but slightly less in larger quantities. The laundry detergent gives 110 loads for the price of 64 loads purchased most other places. The shampoo isn’t a great deal, basically giving you a name brand for the price of a generic on an ounce-for-ounce basis, but with a $2 coupon it’s a good deal. Coffee is in essentially the same boat, but when you can get Maxwell House for the same price per pound as Chase & Sanborn, do it. If you’ve never had it, Chase & Sanborn makes Folgers taste like your favorite $5-a-cup coffee.

I don’t remember the specifics on how baby wipes and bar soap compared, but the prices were favorable. Even without a coupon, I would have saved something.

The two things I don’t like about Costco is that if they run out of a product with an active coupon, they won’t substitute a similar product. I also don’t like the hard sells on the executive membership. As you wait in line at the register, an associate will hound you to upgrade to the executive membership, which costs $50 more per year. The benefit is a 5% rebate at the end of the year on your purchases. Once I heard them tell one person, “Well, you’ve already spent $3,000 here, so you would have paid for the executive membership three times over.”

I just publicly analyzed to death what I spent this week, so I guess I don’t care much if my line-mates know what I’ve spent at Costco this year, but I know some people will resent that. Personally I don’t resent that, but I do resent the tone I usually get. I’m careful with my money and I’d like to think I’m pretty good at handling it.

Right now I know we’re spending $100 a week there, but I don’t know how long that will last. This week we bought a 170-ounce bottle of laundry detergent. A couple of weeks ago we bought 250 ounces of dishwasher detergent. Once we have a Costco-sized quantity of everything like that, will we still spend $100 a week? Maybe. But it could just as easily drop to $35. I don’t think it would drop to $19, which is the point where the membership doesn’t pay for itself, but I don’t know that yet, and if I don’t know that, there’s no way a Costco employee can know that either.

What I do know is that it’s become pretty easy for us to justify the $50 membership. The key is to buy things only because you need them, not because it’s a good deal. It’s not a good deal if it spoils. And use the coupons they send you. So far, storing Costco-sized quantities of shampoo and toilet paper isn’t a problem, but maybe you should talk to me in a year about that.

How I survived a weekend in July in the midwest without air conditioning

Dave Farquhar St. Louis ,

The air conditioner went out this week. Based on the local shop’s estimate, we’re probably looking at $3400 to fix it, which is more than the cost of a newer, better unit.

On Friday they bubble-gummed it together to get us through the weekend. It only got us through Friday night.

Here’s how we survived, and actually stayed halfway comfortable.I actually survived worse earlier in life. My high school wasn’t air conditioned, and unless temperatures reached 100 degrees, they didn’t call off school for heat. So on a day when the high was 87 or 89, I would have had to tough it out.

In college, I lived in a building without air conditioning that my uncle once derisively called "that old barn." School started in August, and temperatures often were still in the 90s, or worse, while I was there. Window air conditioners were banned, because the building’s decrepit wiring couldn’t handle more than a couple of units running at once.

So here’s what I did this weekend to keep things cooler, based on what I learned then and what I’ve learned since about saving energy.

First, any time it was cooler outside than inside, we opened the house up as much as possible and blasted fans as hard as possible to get as much cooler air circulating as we could. Besides running the central air conditioner’s blower (just the blower), we ran ceiling fans and portable fans. I wish we’d had more fans, in retrospect.

But once it started warming up, we actually did something controversial. We closed the house back up again, but that’s not all we did. I took a bunch of white foam-core board left over from a long-ago project and put those in any windows facing the sun. The white surface would reflect heat-causing light back out of the house. Then I pulled the shades down and closed them, and drew the curtains. Any place I could see a sunbeam, I would block it using any means possible. When I ran out of foam, I’d use anything else white.

I think my neighbors already think I’m nuts. Now I’m sure a couple of the busybodies down the street are talking about having me committed. It’s funny how little you care what other people think when you’re trying to keep cool.

Besides, I don’t care what they think because it worked. Today the high was 87 degrees, and the hottest it got in the house during the day was 80. Yesterday, without taking these measures, it reached 82 in the house. Two degrees makes a bigger difference than it sounds.

To determine if it was cooler inside or outside, I religiously checked the local newspaper’s web site and weather.com. A good thermometer would be even better, but I didn’t have one of those. And besides, now I need an air conditioner, so I need to save money.

The temperature is on its way down now, as I write, but some parts of the house are still getting punished by sunlight. We’ve opened the windows on the portions of the house that are receiving shade, and we’ve moved the fans to draw air through those areas. As shade conquered sunlight, we opened more windows. It hasn’t cooled off enough outside to make the temperature in the house come down yet, but getting more air moving made the house feel cooler.

To get relief, during the hottest parts of the day we would get out. Yesterday we went to Costco to stock up on necessities (we lingered in the walk-in produce fridge a lot longer than we needed to). This morning we went to church of course, and then after that we went and ate lunch at the mall food court and walked around the mall for a couple of hours.

Besides that, we also tried to avoid doing things that would cause heat. I kept as many lights off as possible, since light bulbs generate heat (even compact florescents). Unfortunately we had to run a load of laundry through the dryer, but we did that early in the day before things started heating up. When we cooked, we used the microwave. I also turned off anything else I could, since all watts of electricity used have to turn into heat one way or another.

We survived. Actually we did better than survive. I’ll daresay that for most of the day, we were actually comfortable.

I’ll add one other thing, and this is something that came to mind because we’ve been shopping for windows. If you have double-hung windows, you can open them from both the top and the bottom to get a chimney effect. Warmer air escapes through the upper window, drawing cooler air in through the bottom. In the days before air conditioning, this was how people cooled their houses. They fell out of fashion for many years, but now they’re back in fashion because you can open them just from the top, and a child can’t fall out of a window if it’s opened that way.

Today, the chimney effect is just secondary, but it can save you energy in the months when you just barely need A/C. We’ll be getting double-hung windows for that reason.

And as for the air conditioner itself? What we had was a cheap low-end unit, something often used by contractors and people who plan on selling a house quickly. Since we plan on staying in the same house for a good many years, we’re buying a high-end replacement. It will cost a lot more, but doing the math, it should pay for itself in about 10 years. Or, given the way the local electric company has the state government wrapped around its finger, probably a lot sooner.

Plus, the high-end models come with better warranties, which suggests the manufacturers have more confidence in their longevity. Or, it could be that they just have higher profit margins so they can afford to back them with better warranties, but I’d rather pay for higher energy efficiency than for extended warranties.

Does window insulation film work?

Dave Farquhar Saving money , , , ,
Does window insulation film work?

I spent the afternoon putting plastic window insulation film on my windows. It was supposed to be a short project, and I do get better at it every year, but it still ended up taking about an hour per window. Was it worth it? Does window insulation film work?

Window insulation film is a cheap, effective way to save money and make your house more comfortable in the winter. It can cut your heating bills by 30 percent.

Read more

10/28/2000

Dave Farquhar General , , , ,

~Mail Follows Today’s Post~

Microsoft hacked! In case you haven’t heard, some hackers in St. Petersburg, Russia, had access to Windows source code for three months and the intrusion was only discovered this week. This could end up being a very good thing for you and me, believe it or not. (And this is even assuming the hackers didn’t fix any of the bugs they found.) As security consultant Andrew Antipass told Wired magazine, “It is interesting in a kind of cruel way that Microsoft has been eaten by the monsters it created.”

Microsoft has always been oblivious to security in their products. The only way they were going to learn was to be bitten, and hard. Now something has happened that calls their network infrastructure into question, the security of their products (which they’ve tried to present as more secure than Unix) into question, and even the integrity of the code they’ve produced in the last three months into question–Microsoft can say what they want about it being impossible to change the code. Of course they’re going to say that. Will the public believe it? Some will believe anything Microsoft says. Others wisely will believe exactly the opposite of anything Microsoft says. Still others (like me) will believe the worst no matter what Microsoft says.

If this incident doesn’t force Microsoft to start taking security seriously, nothing will.

The downside, however, is that if the hackers did indeed get Windows and/or Office source code, vulnerabilities become potentially easier to spot (not that access to Linux source code has significantly increased the number of vulnerabilities–remember, most hackers are script kiddies at best, writing in batch languages, and aren’t any more proficient in C++ than you or me).

All of this overshadowed Microsoft’s Internic entry being hacked (Apple’s entry got hacked too, though less creatively), which you can read about in The Register.

Enough of this computer junk. Let’s talk about music.

Review of U2’s All That You Can’t Leave Behind. If U2 were to call it quits right now and we had to pick out U2’s defining album, this would be it. That’s not to say it’s their best album–it’s awfully difficult to match the raw energy and wonder of Boy, the raw power of Achtung Baby, and if this one sells like The Joshua Tree, it’ll only be because there are so many fewer bands making good music in 2000 than there were in 1987.

That said, U2 seems to have finally answered the quintessential question of how to sound like U2 without sounding like selling out. For the past 13 years, every time U2 released an album, people expressed disappointment that it didn’t sound like Joshua Tree. But others would point to the inevitable single track on each album that did sound like Joshua Tree, then wave it in the band’s face: Can’t you do anything original?

You can divide U2’s music into roughly three phases: 1979-1983 (Boy through War), 1984-1989 (Unforgettable Fire through Rattle and Hum), and 1991-1997 (Achtung Baby through Pop). Although the band has reinvented itself with every album — sometimes for the better and sometimes not — they tend to hold on to their sound for a couple of albums at a time before they make major changes.

But the album title might as well be referring to those sonic changes: This album manages to incorporate all of those previous sounds while not sounding too much like any of the previous albums. You could take the defining song off any previous U2 album, drop it randomly into this album’s mix, and it would manage to fit.

The Edge’s jangly guitar? It’s there. Larry Mullen’s precise, militaristic drumming? It’s there. Adam Clayton’s low, thumping bass? It’s there. And of course, there’s also Bono’s wailing vocals. The experimentation? That’s there too, and that’s the bit that always scares people.

Make no bones about it: U2 is a rock band, and this is a rock record. But listen closely, and the experimental elements are still there. The synths are there. The sequencers are there. So is the drum machine. In fact, they lead off the album. But whereas in the past they have sometimes been the focus, now they complement the band’s sound rather than defining it.

They pull out a unexpected tricks as well. Listening to “When I Look At the World” for the first time, I half expected to hear Frankie Vallie filling in on lead vocals. Bono’s soaring falsetto doesn’t reach as high anymore as Vallie did in his prime, but the crafty veteran vocalist makes what he has left work. Meanwhile, in the tracks “New York” and “Grace,” Bono manages to out-Lou Reed the real article, though as a closer “Grace” is just not up there with U2’s great closing tracks of the past (War’s “40,” Achtung Baby’s “Love is Blindness,” Pop’s “Wake Up Dead Man,” or Joshua Tree’s “Mothers of the Disappeared”).

The biggest surprise is track 8. In that track, titled “In A Little While,” U2 finally succeeds in sounding soulful. So much of Rattle and Hum was contrived, a bunch of Irish guys in their late 20s trying to sound like B.B. King or Bob Dylan, and they clearly hadn’t lived long enough yet to pull it off. Now in their early 40s, they nail it.

The opening track and first single, “Beautiful Day,” is a good introduction to the album. That song’s sonic elements are for the most part present throughout. Like most U2 songs, to the casual listener it sounds good immediately. As one who picks apart lyrics, I initially didn’t like the song because it seemed too superficial. So what if it’s a beautiful day? Even a no-talent Kurt Cobain wannabe like Gavin Rossdale can say that! Only upon closer listening does the real meaning surface: the story of someone who has lost everything, yet never felt better. That sounds a lot like me. It probably sounds like you too, or someone you know.

So, how’s it stack up? Most people rank War and The Joshua Tree as U2’s finest albums. I buck convention and place Achtung Baby (their amazing 1991 comeback) and Boy (their 1980 international debut) ahead of those two. At the bottom, I’d rank October, Rattle and Hum, Zooropa, The Unforgettable Fire, and Pop. All That You Can’t Leave Behind definitely blows away the lesser five albums.

However, the album falls a bit flat after the first four delightful tracks. It picks it back up again for a track or two here and there, but the immediate greatness that grabbed you when you first heard The Joshua Tree or Achtung Baby just isn’t there throughout. And the superstrong emotions that drove and held together those great albums aren’t here.

This is probably the album of the year, and many bands go their entire careers without recording anything as good as U2’s worst. This effort borders on greatness, but just doesn’t quite manage to cross over.

Strong points: The first four tracks.
Weak points: “Peace on Earth;” “Wild Honey;” “In a Little While,” though good, doesn’t seem to fit (seems to be there only to settle a bet from 1989); “Grace” is a good track but ill-suited to end a U2 album.

And a survey. I’m considering a one-day-per-page format, like Frank McPherson and Chris Ward-Johnson use. When marking up by hand, a weekly format is much easier. When using Manilla, it really makes no difference.

If you don’t want to join the site in order to vote, feel free to just e-mail me. Members can vote here. (I do wish there was an option to open discussions and voting to non-members. I can see why some people would want to require membership, but that should be optional. So it goes.)

~~~~~~~~~~

From: “Dan Bowman” < DanBowman@att.net >
To: <dfarq@swbell.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 11:03 AM
Subject: Music reviews

Now I’m really glad I spent my discretionary funds yesterday! After reading your review (the class is watching a movie while I make copies),
I’m real tempted to pick up the album.
Then again, I have a Costco run set for after class…

Have a great weekend,

dan

~~~~~~~~~~

Don’t look too hard; it’s not available until Tuesday. I got a chance to hear it a few times and I got sick of seeing reviews from people who just listened to the 15-second clips available on the music store sites and said, “This is the best U2 album ever!” based on that, so I wrote it up. Good practice anyway. I think it’s been 3 1/2 years since I’ve written a music review of any significant length.

I wanted to strike a balance between “this may be the year’s best album” and “this is the best album ever!” because it’s not (it’s not even U2’s best).  Hopefully I did that. But I remember when I wrote up a review of Pearl Jam’s No Code in 1996, people said I was too harsh and shouldn’t have compared it to the past (though looking at that album’s longevity or lack thereof, I’m inclined to think I was right).

Reviews are tricky business but I want to stay in practice, so I may start doing a review a week just to get and stay sharp.