My wife has a theory and it goes a little like this;

"Women shop more than men but men spend more than women."

Is she right? Does she have a valid theory?

Her theory tests the age-old stereotype that woman have a genetic-DNA-thingy that propels them forward in the shopping stakes. For it may just be that men are the ultimate consumers.

When she first shared this enlightening theorem with me I balked at the notion but as I contemplated it further I realised that she may just have a point.

Taking my spending habits as a test case scenario I quickly realised that the majority of purchases that I made were above $500; laptop, iPaq, trip to Tasmania, VW Kombi project, software and I'm saving for a Canon 400D.

My wife, on the other hand, buys lots of clothes. Frocks, dresses, shoes, jeans - you name it she's buying it. In fact, more than half of the times that she goes shopping she will come back with something. The difference is though, that she will have only spent a maximum $10-20 on her shopping trip and she only shops like this once of twice per month.

So, while she seems to ALWAYS be shopping - while I never go - she ends up spending far less than I do. What's wrong with this picture?

Posted by Stuart at 6:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Here's a great concept in matching customers with their banking needs - SavingsAccounts.com. It's a site that, while in its early days, may have the potential to really gel with online clients looking for a one-stop website.

Their claim;

SavingsAccounts.com is the perfect place to find the perfect online savings account for you. We can help you find the bank offering the highest returns with the specific account features that best suit your individual needs.

is certainly going to meet a need in the future but I think they still have quite a job ahead of them.

Here are some of the features that I'd like to see on this site;

• Either a tabular quick view of each financial institution displaying what they offer by showing a tick mark or similar. Or, a form where you could select the type of account requirements you were after and then a list that could be sorted by location, best rate, institution credit rating, monthly service fees etc was presented.


• Illustrated dates for when each of the interest rates were last updated so that the user could tell if they were current.


• A more complete list of financial institutions - currently it is only displaying 12 which includes some of the majors but certainly does not offer the full gamut on offer.


• A savings calculator - how great would it be to have a calculator available to estimate your savings based on each banks offerings. It may even be more beneficial to have a savings calculator whereby you could compare the same savings pattern and time period over a number of financial institutions.

So, while it's a good start, the true test will come as this website grows and offers users better tools to assess their options. After all, it is intended for this purpose.

This is a sponsored post. Click to read my views on sponsored posts.

Posted by Stuart at 6:32 AM | Permalink

No posts for a whole month. Not one. Not even a follow-up comment on theirs or any other blog.

Could you imagine it? The Technorati 100, the blogosphere's most popular blogs all taking a break from blogging for 1 complete month.

What would happen? Would they still remain in the Top 100 or will they have been replaced because we found time to seek out some different reading material.

Without a doubt, a million (probably an under-estimation) ...maybe a gazillion smaller bloggers would take the opportunity to spruik their wares hoping to attract the bored and restless. Hoping to make the list themselves many would chase links faster than a rabid hyena amidst a herd of frightened gazelle. Yet, would they be able to achieve a spot in the Top 100 in a leadership vacuum over 30 days?

If you take the average number of new blogs linking to Engadget (Ranked #1) everyday (approx. 24) and multiplied that by 31 days in the month, you would only have 744 new links to increase your rating. Not bad if your blog is sitting just below the Top 100 but not enough if you're a newcomer.

Even Cute Overload's daily linking from new blogs (running about 11 per day) shouldn't usurp their 100th ranked spot.

However, the interesting dilemma is that readers may have just created a new blog reading habit over the past 30 days and may not return when the Top 100 begin re-posting.

Or, are they just that good? Would we pine for their return as we do for the next season of Lost?

Posted by Stuart at 12:05 PM | Permalink

If Jack Bauer can save the world in 24 hours (every year) imagine what you can do with an extra day?

Sure. You're not trying to save the world but your financial world might need a little assistance. In fact, if you've got problems sticking to your budget then I can guarantee that the 48 hour rule may be the lifesaving tip you've been looking for.

48 hours. That's all I have? That's all you need...

Imagine this picture for a second. You accompany your partner or spouse to the shopping district - as an obligatory duty that one performs for a loved one. As they head into their favourite shop you begin browsing some shop windows that interest you. And then it happens....

Sitting on the shelf, at a heavily reduced, never-to-be-repeated price is that [insert that product you've been lusting over since Christmas] - and it's the last one in the shop. You know it's not in the budget and if you buy it it's going to set you back a couple of months financially.

Or, you're doing your exercises in front of the TV when an infomercial appears showing you how their product will give you a 6-pack in three weeks. Not only that, it will tone your thighs, buttocks and pecs so well that you might even consider entering the Mr. Universe competition starting in a few months.

If you phone in the next 30 minutes and pay via your credit card you will also claim your special DVD that shows how George Clooney used the product to land his movie deals.

We've all been here and we've all had to face an on-the-spot decision that could change our current fiscal wellbeing.

This is where the 48 hour rule comes into play. The 48 hour rule is when you force yourself to walk away from the deal for at least 48 hours. If after that time, you still feel that the product or service is worth getting then go for it. Get it. Buy it and feel confident that you made a good decision.

What you will find though is that when you have time to think something through your perspective is not clouded by all the marketing hype. You might even find yourself asking the question, "What the hell was I thinking?"

Why do you think infomercials always offer such good gifts to entice your response within the next 30 mins? Because they know that if you have time to think about it you will probably work out that it's a piece of junk that doesn't deserve the light of day let alone your purchase.

It's taken us a while to master but we're getting pretty good at it these days. The true benefit though, is that we can now stick to our budget and save for the things we really want rather than the things others want for us.

Posted by Stuart at 7:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

It's not until a crisis strikes that we realise our lives are so fragile. One minute you're paying the bills and enjoying the moment, the next you're only a moment away from being consumed by them. And it only takes a moment...

As teenagers, we thought we were invincible and that the world would be tamed in our lifetime. But, as we mature and accept more responsibilities time takes on another dimension. We begin to have families, borrow for our house or business and take far less risks.

When we consider that a crisis could happen at any time we're faced with two choices - save for an emergency fund or take out some insurance in case of emergencies. They are no longer the only two options as emergency loans seem to sprout up everywhere offering us the cash when we need it most.

But are they are as helpful as what the advertisers would like us to believe?

Prior to emergency loans, crisis insurance was the ugly duckling that puritan money handlers would steer away from. They would espouse the virtues of storing an emergency fund that might be as big as 3-6 months worth of your salary that should only be used in extreme emergencies.

Nowadays more and more are turning to cover themselves with the insurance and emergency loans are the proverbial 'ugly duckling'. Is it a tag that is rightfully deserved or does it have its benefits?

If you consider that most crisis insurance policies charge a premium of between 1-3% of your salary annually and 95% of people will never use it, it might be worth running the sums. If you took out an insurance policy when you began working and continued to support it during the course of your working life how much money do you think you would have spent?

While saving an emergency fund that can carry over a bad period is the preferred option it is interesting to consider that emergency loans may be the best alternative. The money spent forking out for premiums year after year for crisis cover (which can only be claimed when you become ill and not for just losing your job) may be a complete waste of money.

At least utilizing an emergency loan would only occur when, and if, you needed it. The chance is you may never need it. And, if you do, you still may save thousands from purchasing emergency insurance.

Posted by Stuart at 6:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)