Some people say you can’t put a price on love, but the National Retail Federation (NRF) will let you know this year it is about $130 for the average lovebird, only a slight increase from last year’s average of $125.
However, national Valentine’s spending is projected to reach $18.6 billion—all the gifts, candy, and flowers one’s heart could possibly desire. The Federation said that the reason for such a slight increase is that consumers are spending more cautiously than in the past.
According to NRF, a little more than half of America’s sweethearts will be buying candy—about $1.6 billion worth. A third will give flowers, estimated at about $1.9 billion. Other popular gifts include jewelry ($4.4 billion), clothing ($1.6 billion), and about $1.5 billion in gift cards.
More star-crossed lovers than ever before will be giving gifts found online. The NRF projects that the average lovestruck male will spend almost $90 more than his female counterpart.
It’s no wonder, with the way prices of traditional Valentine’s gifts skyrocket near V-day-- Particularly roses, a staple for smitten Americans.
There are a few good reasons. First, the sheer volume of roses that have to be grown, harvested and packaged means that producers won’t have very many blooms to sell just before and just after the fact.
This number of roses also requires an enormous number of transport vehicles to ensure timely delivery.
With the price increase, florists and growers usually absorb a lot of the production cost, which can be upwards of five times the norm.
Unless your Valentine is crazy for red roses, consider replacing them with something personal or unique, like freesia, gardenias, or lilies, which all signify affection.
Remember, you don’t have to be in love to celebrate: although shoppers will spend the most on the significant other, more than 60% said they planned on showing their love for family members, and 25% said they’d be buying gifts for friends. Oddly enough though, fewer people planned to buy gifts for their coworkers than for their pets.
Read More