Most gift spending is judged at the till and never again. A different question: what did it cost per year of actually being wanted?
It is not a trick to justify spending more. Applied honestly it argues for spending less on several things.
The arithmetic
| Gift | Cost | Realistically lasts | Per year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16-page photo magazine | ₹599 | 20+ years | Under ₹30 |
| Print pack | ₹270 | 5–10 years on a wall | ₹27–54 |
| Photo diary | ₹699 | 20+ years, if written in | ₹35 |
| Hardcover album | ₹1,299 | Decades | Under ₹65 |
| Chocolates | ₹500 | A week | ₹26,000 |
| A plant | ₹500 | Two years, optimistically | ₹250 |
| A gadget | ₹5,000 | Three years | ₹1,667 |
| Clothing | ₹2,000 | Two or three years | ₹700–1,000 |
The chocolates row is deliberately absurd. It makes the point that this measure only works for things meant to last, and consumables are not failing at anything.
Where it genuinely changes a decision
Between two keepsakes. ₹599 for 16 pages against ₹1,099 for 40. If both last twenty years, the question is whether the extra pages will be looked at — not whether ₹500 is affordable today.
Between a keepsake and an object. A ₹5,000 gadget at ₹1,667 a year against a ₹699 book at ₹35. If both are wanted, the book is doing something the gadget is not.
On whether to buy the cheap version. A padded book that gets shelved and never reopened costs its full price divided by one. Cheapness does not help if the thing fails.
Where the arithmetic breaks
⚠️ It assumes the thing is actually wanted for those years. A beautifully made book of the wrong sixty photographs lasts twenty years in a cupboard, which is not the same as lasting twenty years.
Longevity is a property of the content, not the paper. This measure quietly assumes you got the content right, and that assumption is doing most of the work. How to choose the photographs →
It also ignores what the recipient pays. Storage, dusting, the obligation to keep something they do not want. A gift with a long life and no welcome has a cost per year that lands on them. What a gift costs the person receiving it →
What actually determines the years
Not price. Two things:
Whether it is irreplaceable. An object with a better version available gets replaced. An object made from someone’s own life does not.
Whether it survives a house move. The only honest audit anyone performs on their belongings, and it happens every few years.
Frequently asked
How long does a printed photo book last? Stored indoors and closed, decades. Light and humidity are what age it, not time.
Is cost per year a good way to judge a gift? For things meant to last, yes. For consumables it is meaningless — they are not failing at anything.
Does spending more make it last longer? Barely. Content decides whether something is kept; paper decides whether it survives being kept.
What is the lowest cost per year here? A 16-page magazine at ₹599, at under ₹30 a year over twenty years.
What breaks the arithmetic? Getting the content wrong. A book nobody wants lasts just as long in a cupboard.
Part of our guide to what a photo magazine costs. See also: how long printed photos last and what gifts do people actually keep.
Made to last: Photo magazines from ₹499 · Hardcover albums from ₹1,299