Of course, I know the answer is “yes,” and I’m just late to the party.
I had a stereo from the mid-80s that, around 6 years ago, stopped working. I’ve been carrying it around since then, waiting to get it fixed, not quite willing to throw it away because a) it’s a pretty high-end unit, and was quite expensive when purchased, and b) it’s from my child hood, and I am a severe victim of nostalgia.
Anyway, I took it into a shop with a $40 fee just to look at it (which would be applied to any repairs done).
They called and said, “sorry, not fixable.”
Ok, so now I’m out $40, but I got rid of that doorstop, anyway.
I hop on ebay and craigslist, to kind of scout out the costs for a used stereo, as I’ve dug my record player and tape deck out of the closet and want to get a sound system up and running again.
Anyway, the stereo I spent $40 to throw out goes for around 3x that amount on ebay. Ok, no problem.
I find something decent in the price-range I want to spend ($40-80), and, low-and-behold, it is, shall we say, less than fully operational upon arrival.
So, I could take it in for $40, and either be told the whole thing is garbage and I’m out another $40 (plus the cost of the thing), or they’ll fix it, which I imagine will be more than the $40.
Aaanyway, the issue here is that I could probably get something brand new that fits my needs (though not my aesthetic, and not as simply) for $150. How can a budget minded person justify a $40 evaluation-fee for repairs?
I guess I need to overcome my desire to make do with old, less-featured, but still useful goods, and resign myself to buying something newer, more capable, with a longer life span, and cheaper to boot.
And, as an IMHO, I’ve always found it bizarre when the economical thing to do is throw things away and buy replacements, rather than fix what you’ve got. I understand (mostly) why many things are that way, I just don’t like the feeling of throwing something away when there is potential usefulness in it.