I have been on an app buying spree of late. The app market has whizzed so far ahead that I find it quite unrecognizable from the days of my first feeble attempts at app development. Quite rightly so. The potential is almost infinite, with nearly 60% of the world having access to smartphones. Advent of technology on such a massive scale was hitherto impossible, but smartphones and their app stores have tapped into this market with gut wrenching efficiency. Easy to imagine, of course, that with such an extensive customer base, there is room for everyone — from indie developers, to mega corporations. With such forces in play, the app market has witnessed what one would expect from most other commodity markets that have sustained demand — quality of products tends to go up, while prices tend to go down. It is perhaps only in such economies of scale that one could imagine buying something that has millions for dollars in investment for less than the price of a coffee.

A few weeks back, a certain John Oliver discussed the inhumane conditions in which workers in garment factories in Asia and Africa work so that brands like Gap and Walmart can keep prices eye-wateringly low. For less than the price of a coffee, you can get decent quality clothing made by a worker halfway across the world, shipped to either a store near you even even to the comfort of your own home. Imagine. For less than the price of a coffee.

On my last trip up north, I got a pleasant notification from Uber. ‘Ride with Uber today for less than the price of a coffee!’ Pretty neat, I thought to myself. The promotion let me make a single ride up to 10 miles away(translated to a trip from the airport to my friend’s place), for less than the price of a coffee.

Quite incredible, I felt, the things than one can do for less than the price of a coffee. Makes one feel if it is actually coffee that is overpriced just to make everything else seem cheaper. Our friendly neighborhood coffee shop — Starbucks, is no stranger to selling overpriced coffee. It is well known that they operate on a huge profit margin, build brand value with an almost vulgar number of stores, but then that is a different discussion altogether. It is not their fault that coffee is used loosely as an alternate form of monetary value. Makes you wonder, doesn’t it? Why are apps not ‘cheaper than hot dogs’? Or why doesn’t John Oliver use the phrase ‘cheaper than a pint of beer at your local pub’? And why can’t Uber simply call it ‘a ride for less than a gallon of gas’. They could have easily used those terms, but for some reason, chose not to. Which brings us to the question of ‘why coffee’?

Is it because it is easily relatable? After all everyone drinks coffee, right? But then everyone buys a can of soda as well, but then ‘for the price of a can of soda’ doesn’t sound quite romantic, does it? Sounds almost … cheap. Comparing something to the price of a gallon of gas, on the other hand, sounds rather … crude. (Crude? Oil? Get it? No? Ok.) Coffee seems to hit the spot. It is interesting to note that all the products that are using the price of a coffee for comparison, seem to be appealing to the same demographic — the young and upcoming generation. They are the ones most likely to spend on apps, watch a John Oliver video and hitch a ride with Uber. Comparing things to the price of coffee just sticks and sounds much more trendy than comparisons with a bag of carrots.

Moreover, here was another interesting anecdote. An acquaintance of mine recently cancelled his Amazon Prime membership (costing about 99$ a year) citing rising expenses. He seemed convinced by the fact that it was this membership that was making him compromise on his standards of living month after month, till I reminded him that he drinks a ‘Grande’ cup of coffee at his local Starbucks every single day. That’s 7$ a day, 210$ a month, over 2500$ a year. I suggested maybe the coffee consumption rates might have more to do with his complaints at the end of every pay cycle than his Amazon Prime membership (knowing how much he loves online shopping). He just shrugged and said a coffee a day ‘is okay’. Seemed quite interesting that he viewed his coffee expenses as merely spending some disposable income — not to be factored into his monthly expense reports.

Suddenly, comparisons with coffee seem to make all the more sense. Companies are not only trying to suggest how inexpensive their products are, but they are imploring their largest customer base, the young demographic, to spend their disposable income on their products. Comparisons with a gallon of gas, not only sounds less ‘hip’, but also appeals to the section of the brain that keeps track of monthly expenses and keeps them in check. Now, corporations wouldn’t want that, would they. They want to appeal to the section of the brain that considers spending that little bit of money ‘is ok’. And of course, sound trendy at the same time.