The Essential View: There’s no precise boundary that we can draw between collecting and overconsumption. Instead, we can think about when it becomes the case that acquisition has outrun appreciation. This is especially relevant in the world of luxury, because it typically promises—or at least implies—that we can have long relationships with timeless items. This leads to a way of thinking about purchases based on what makes each of us happiest.
Rule #12: The correct number of bikes to own is n+1
While the minimum number of bikes one should own is three, the correct number is n+1, where n is the number of bikes currently owned. This equation may also be re-written as s−1, where s is the number of bikes owned that would result in separation from your partner.
That’s a humorous saying from the world of high-end cycling enthusiasts, but it’s considered something of a truth among members of that community. If you know someone who races bicycles, ask them the correct number of bikes one should own. I’ve never known such a person not to say n+1.
When you think about it, n+1 has a certain logic in the world of cycling. There are different types of cycling (road, track, mountain, etc) on different types of surfaces (pavement, cobblestones, dirt, etc) and in different conditions. In other words, a serious cyclist always has a plausible answer to the question, “What would another bicycle add?”
But n+1 is a strange formula when you think about it. There’s no destination. However many of a thing you own today, the correct quantity tomorrow is one more.
I was thinking about this recently as I noticed examples of people amassing what seem like huge collections of luxury goods. They seem focused on n+1. They don’t seem to have a destination—just one more. And that led me to wonder:
When does n+1 stop describing collecting and start describing overconsumption?
As it turns out, there isn’t an easy way to answer that, but we can at least learn something from the exercise.
There isn’t a magic number
Apply a bit of logic to the question and you’ll pretty quickly realize—as I did—that there isn’t a magic number. There can’t be. If there were, then you’d have to be able to say something like:
n of item x is collecting, but n+1 of item x is overconsumption
And that’s a silly formulation. Three watches is fine, but four and you’re a hoarder? Five handbags is fine, but six and you have an addiction? Please.
And yet we look at certain people and their luxury habits and something strikes us as wrong.
