This is a bit off topic, but if you want to profit in the long run your best bet is to buy electronics that have a good quality rating and a history of lasting for years, and to buy them used when the next generation of electronics comes out to replace them. Go on craigslist or half.com and buy a slightly used TV or laptop from a decent company.
A possible reason some people stay poor is because they rent to own rather than buy used.
But overall consumer electronics make up a very small % of most people’s budgets. Even young, single males (ie me), who make up a huge market for personal electronics, probably don’t spend too much on them as a % of income.
Even though it’s not planned obsolescence, quality of things besides electronics is a huge problem. People buy $15 Wal-Mart jeans made of inferior fabric, then scratch their heads when the crotch rips as they climb into their car. Particle-board furniture that breaks as soon as you try to move it. Wristwatches that lose minutes per month, or die with a quick dunk in the sink. Cars are better quality, but cheap parts from the consumer auto zones don’t last as long as OEM parts. Our cheapness affects other parts of our life. The continuing cycle of idiots that don’t value air travel has made air travel hellish (they drive the prices down to the point that there are no more perks or comforts).
Sure, why wouldn’t they? They have done such things historically; the original Corningware was made of a much superior material named Pyroceram, that lasted much longer than the modern stuff ( and in fact many are still around for just that reason ). But a product that has to be sold once per person cuts into profits, so new products were sold using the Corningware name that are made of far inferior materials, and manufacture of Pyroceram cookware discontinued.
Another example would be nylon stockings; the first ones were very durable; so they started making extremely flimsy stocking that developed runs easily. And then advertised such “sheer” stockings as superior, more stylish; convincing women to buy the inferior products and thus conniving in their own scamming.
I go along with that for the most part. We use our VCR 3 to 5 times a week and have for about 15 years or more - but then again, we bought the best JVC out at the time. Same with televisions - our current one makes the second we’ve had since 1980. We do without until we can get quality, take routine maintenance seriously, and things usually last.
There are exceptions but they are often bought to be exceptions. We got a cheaper Sauder kit microwave cabinet to use while I made one to fit our needs. Knowing me as well as I do I figured that was 2-5 years. It lasted those five and was still OK enough to pass on to someone for else. It showed some wear and sagged a bit here and there but it basically did the job it was designed for.
Engineers don’t need schooling – they know how to design & build products that will last for years. But they work for penny-pinching CEO’s who constantly demand they make it cheaper.
There’s a difference between “cheaper” and “of less quality”. Cheaper is good. Of less quality means you sell only to cheapskates who expect nothing better, or that you’ll go out of business since your products falls below your competitors’ standards. If your price is even a little too high, you lose customers; if your quality is a little too low, you lose customers. Hell, even your advertising, if not done right, will lose you both money and customers.
Making money in business is much harder than a lot of people around here seem to think it is.
In the UK, the sale of goods act holds that goods sold must “conform to contract” - ie, they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (ie they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description), and a claim can be lodged at any time up to six years after purchase. If a claim is lodged within six months of purchase, then the expectation is that the goods were faulty when sold, unless the seller can prove otherwise. After six months, the consumer has to prove that the item was faulty (usually by demonstrating normal and reasonable use).
This means that there is an expectation that goods should last a reasonable time, and that community expectations play a part. So a TV can reasonably be expected to last (values pulled out my arse, but they gel with figures I have read) 3-5 years, a fridge 7-10 years, a washing machine 5-7 years. If a item fails sooner than that, then if the consumer can demonstrate reasonable use, it should be repaired or replaced by the seller (who has to pursue the manufacturer for recompense).
Makes buying an extended warranty a bit pointless.
Interesting idea, but doesn’t this jack up the price of the goods? Last I checked, computer equipment, for example, was about 25-50% more expensive in Britain than here.
Quoted for truth. I’ve had a few instances where I decided to buy what I perceived to be the higher quality, more expensive product, just to have it die just as fast as every other piece of crap I’ve bought. There’s no real good correlation between quality and price in a lot of cases.
And there are plenty of examples where the cheapest absolutely is good enough, but marketers put out expensive versions to get whatever money they can from clueless consumers. Look at electronic cables – for the vast majority of cases, the 99 cent audio cable is just as good as the $40 Monster cable. An audio engineering studio could benefit from quality cables that can survive being yanked on multiple times every day for years, but they sure ain’t buying Monster…
Thankfully there are a few categories where you can buy higher quality (of course, at a higher price). Usually these products are primarily used by businesses where they demand a quality piece of kit. For example, you can get laser printers (meant for a small office) that will last quite a while, and are easily serviceable, but you have to be willing to spend 5-10x as much as the cheapest throwaway inkjet you can get at Best Buy. Also, power tools and cookware are other areas where you can buy as much quality as you want, since there are lots of businesses out there that rely on these as the tools of their trade. Of course, there are marketers still trying to make you buy the cheap stuff at a higher price – by slapping the name of a celebrity chef on crap, or a sticker saying “contractor grade” on plastic tools you buy at Walmart. But you can still buy the $300 blender used by the local coffee shop, or the $250 cordless drill favored by most professional carpenters.
While a decent rule of thumb, there are plenty of counterexamples.
Note, too, that “planned obsolescence” was originally not a mechanical obsolescence, but rather a social obsolescence. A key example is the automakers, who in the 1950s came out with new models each year, with major design changes. The idea was that someone driving a three-year-old car would feel he was hopelessly out of style, and thus buy a new one.
This is a complete fallacy, of course.
Pretend last month my car needed $200 in repairs, thanks to an intentional design flaw. If nothing breaks on my car this month, the $200 I didn’t spend on repairs doesn’t just vanish, sucking life out of the economy. What actually happens is that I’ll spend that $200 on something else I want more than a brand-new fuel injector (an iPhone, say). That iPhone spending will stimulate the economy just as much as the car repair, and at the end our overall wealth is higher (since I have an iPhone I didn’t have before). Or, if I decide I don’t need an iPhone, and stick the $200 in my savings accouint, it means someone else can borrow it from the bank and invest it in something productive that will make us all better off down the road. [*Yes, at certain points in the inflation-recession business cycle, there’s an excess of saving, but for the rest of the time, more saving is always a good thing in the long run].
There is simply no way that things breaking is good for the economy.
Maintenance may help the cheap crap of today a little but I’m not sure if it does enough to really make a difference. Go back 30 years and you could maybe double the life of something more “throw-away” but my feeling is today you are buying yourself months at best. Add to that how things are assembled today (fasteners instead of screws make some maintenance really tough) and its hard to get a win.
After some experience when I was a young, dumb bachelor, I developed the Skillet Theory. Soon after moved out on my own, I bought a cheap $5 skillet at the drug store, used it for maybe 6 months, then picked it up and the handle broke off. I bought another one…and another…eventually it dawned on me to buy the best possible product I could afford for the job. I now have Revereware skillets and pots, as well as an iron skillet. None were unaffordably expensive, but the Revereware has been around 20+ years (I’ve only had the iron skillet for about 18 months or so).
But sometimes you just don’t need a high quality product (or at least, the highest quality). In that case, the lesson becomes buy the right tool for the job. Maybe you need something short term – why buy a fireproof safe that’ll last for 100 years if you’re just cleaning out a closet and throwing everything away? You can use disposable garbage bags or cardboard boxes (and maybe find a place that’ll recycle them).
How about this: my (analog) clock radio gave up the ghost last night. It was a Westinghouse my parents gave me when I was 11 years old. I’m 47. That’s quality!
Well, thats not terribly fair. Marketing research reveals a lot of what things should cost because people are unwilling to pay more or will do without/go to competitor when a certain price is reached.
Im only willing to pay x amount for a car. That car is expected to last 5-7 years. I wont pay 2 * x for a car that is expected to last 10-14 years. The CEOs understand this.
PO is something of a conspiracy theory. When it was revealed car manufacturers were building cars to last at most 10 years, some people lost their minds. Turns out the market wants cars that last this long, as its long enough, and at around year 6 or 7 a lot of people are itching for a new car, especially if there are new features to be had like side airbags or traction control. Or better mpg. Or a cute color. Who knows.
I can buy electronics that last a crazy long time. A $500 cisco switch is overkill for my apartment, even though its MBTF is high, so I just buy the $50 linksys and wait for it to die in a couple years. A server grade hard drive is overkill for my rig at home, but like the cisco switch, it lasts a long time. Instead I prefer to get the low price drive and upgrade every so often. Heck, there’s a 20% increase in drive speeds every 18 months or so, so I dont mind. The CEOs understand this.
And we engineers ourselves – without waiting for our CEO or chaiman to come breathe down our necks – are always looking for cost saves as well. Sure, in the design of a car we have a cost to meet, but that cost can come from any part of the car. If we can get a supplier to sell us a seat for 1¢ cheaper, then that’s significant. If I approve a different type of stud that 0.5¢ cheaper, then that’s really significant. If I go to a supplier and recommend a cheaper, non-destructive test method, then we get half of that cost back to us.
At every stage we evaluate durability. If something fails durability, then we try to fix it for free, or even spend more money.
The question we should all be asking, then, is what’s a durability failure? Six years? Some 150,000 miles? What’s your expectation versus our durability lab’s expectation?