[over]

I think the misogyny claim is because the analogy portrays the choice between a rich woman and poor woman as obviously being in favor of the rich woman, and on top of that it characterizes the poor woman as needy and annoying. Further, he says girl instead of woman. And so basically he ridicules the entire point of marriage which is to commit to your equal life partner, not end up with the best deal, the best girl/wife-object to be purchased. And in doing this he's also denigrating the two competing companies.

But then again, it does reflect a lot of marriage decisions, particularly in high society, so it's probably appropriate. This is actually what happens when personal life starts to look like business life. So probably... better not to be so brazen about it because it's a bit chauvinistic. Honesty isn't always the best policy, sometimes you have to consider people's feelings and reactions.