I’m having a hard time wrapping my brain around this Daniel Gross piece blasting gift cards. I bought gift cards for all of my family this Christmas. My reasons?

1. I haven’t lived at home for awhile, so I don’t know what my family is into these days. My brother is 18. My sister is 16. I’m not going to pretend to be hip enough to know what kind of gift they’d actually enjoy.

2. Isn’t it better to give them something they can use, instead of something they’ll inevitably need to go to the trouble of taking back or returning (for, most likely, a gift card)?

If the purpose of the gift is to show the person you find them important enough to think about over the holidays, but you’re also considerate enough not to burden them with something they don’t want, I think gift cards fit the bill just about right.

For a significant other, yes, they’re probably a little tacky. But for everyone else? I think they’re swell.

Here are Gross’s criticisms, and my failure to comprehend them , in order…

1) “Buy a gift card and you’re essentially lending cash to the retailer today that is paid back through merchandise tomorrow, or next week, or next month…Wal-Mart and Neiman-Marcus can borrow all the cash they want from banks or the bond market on rather favorable terms. Do they really need us to extend short-term interest-free loans to them?”

It’s hard not to pick up a bit of anti-corporatism in this criticism. Perhaps gift cards are in essence a short-term, interest free loan. So what? You’re essentially buying a hassle-free gift for someone you feel is worth giving a gift to. It isn’t as if you’re paying interest. I’m guessing that you chose the store you did because you’re fond of it. Why is Grossman so upset that the business benefits too? Is he so wary of doing anything to benefit business that he’d rather put his gift recipient through the trouble of returning something they didn’t want?

2) And gift cards frequently carry a price for their recipients. Walking into a store with free money in your pocket is like walking into an all-you-can-eat buffet after fasting–you’ll feel psychologically impelled and entitled to consume more than usual, because the short-term cost will seem lower.”

That’s one of the reasons retailers issue gift cards in low denominations. The Neiman-Marcus $50 gift card won’t go very far on its own. Ditto for the $10 card at Wal-Mart.

Again, so the heck what? If you give someone a $100 Best Buy gift card, and he uses it to buy a $150 XM Satelite Radio receiver he’s been wanting, your gift was still worth $100, even though your recipient spent $50 of his own money upon cashing it in. He isn’t “out” $50. He still got $150 worth of merchandise for $50.

Again, Gross’s gripe here seems to be that the store got more than you had originally intended, and so you were somehow snookered. But if you thought enough of the store to purchase a gift card there in the first place, are you really going to be offended if the recipient of your gift spent more than the exact amount you put on the gift card? Are you really going to feel cheated?

As for Wal-Mart, a $10 gift card actually does go pretty darned far (I suspect Gross doesn’t frequent many Wal-Marts). Further, given that Wal-Mart has pretty much everything, just about anyone can pay a visit and get full value from such a card, even if it’s only to stock up on paper towels and toothpaste.

Finally, my guess is that most $10 gift cards are the kind of things most folks (grandparents, for example) buy for kids — not the kind of recipients likely to produce substantial “uplift,” and in any case certainly a gift of more value what grandparents typically give, which studies show is basically dead weight.

3. Finally, depending on the recipient’s self-esteem and level of paranoia, gift cards can seem a wee bit paternalistic and controlling…Give your teenager $50 and she might blow it on midriff-baring halter tops at Abercrombie & Fitch. But that J. Crew gift card can be spent only on presentable clothing. Dismayed that your boyfriend’s recent reading list extends only as far as Maxim? A Border’s gift card could send a message. For the insecure male on your list, a Thomas Pink gift card could be a not-so-subtle hint that his shirts are blighted with ugly stains.

This is Gross’s least convincing argument of all. If you’re paranoid or of low self-esteem, just about any gift short of cash will reek of paternalism and control. If you’re concerned that your teen is going out in slutty A&F gear, is buying her a turtleneck and knee-length denim skirt J Crew any different than getting her a $50 gift card from the same store any less “controlling?” And can’t you buy Maxim at Border’s, in addition to a host of other laddie mags?

Frankly, my take on this angle is the exact opposite of Gross’s. I think a gift card is a great way to introduce someone you’re fond of to a business you’re fond of — thus, rewarding both, and doing so while diminishing the risk of giving your friend something he doesn’t want. A gift card to a favorite store the recipient isn’t aware of or has never visited let’s him know you like the store, think he would like the store, but still gives him enough room to select from anything in the store. A gift card to a favorite restaurant is a great way to spread the word about the place to people you think might find it enjoyable. Give a gift card to your favorite artsy movie theater, clothing boutique, or local record shop and you’re helping the shop while giving your friend a tip on where to find a good movie, pair of pants, or indie record — and the first visit’s on you!

Gross interprets all of this as, “you think I have bad taste.” I interpret it as “you think highly enough of my taste that you’d recommend things you like to me.”

Interestingly, Gross overlooks the types of gift cards that actually are evil — the cards (typicall from malls and shopping centers) that devalue each month your recipient doesn’t use them, expire, or have extra restrictions or fees — and don’t make that fact clear upon purchase.

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 6th, 2005 at 6:08 pm by Radley Balko and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.