12 ms·

What we really need is financial penalties on companies that make stuff deliberately hard to repair. Set up a department of the Consumer Rights Bureau (or whate

What we really need is financial penalties on companies that make stuff deliberately hard to repair. Set up a department of the Consumer Rights Bureau (or whatever it's called) where people can report devices the've been unable to fix due to deliberate obfuscation/etc., and that forces manufacturers to refund the consumer the entire purchase sum of that device no matter how old it is. Anecdote: my washing machine recently broke the main bearing, and I was going to fix it. Even found a nice teardown/reassembly vid on Youtube of the exact same model (a bit older than mine). After 2 hours of work, I discover Bosch has gone from using screws on the outer drum to plastic welding it shut. So fixing it means replacing the entire assembly, costing 2/3 of a new machine and with a four week delivery time for the part. I learned this is only done to screw consumers over, and that all manufacturers do it now. The drum still has all the mounting tabs for being screwed together, so they're literally just saving $0.30 on screws.

J-dawg 10y ago
That is utterly infuriating. Stuff like this really shakes my faith in capitalism. To think that someone in charge at Bosch has actively decided to 1. Screw over the customer 2. Impose a massive external cost on society and the ecosystem. I honestly wonder how they sleep at night. The market clearly can't fix this issue, so regulation must be the only option.
- vidarh 10y ago
  Markets can fix the issue. But the market may need regulation to ensure externalities are captured. E.g. taxing energy and recycling costs, and taxing based on expected lifetime (e.g. a tax that reduces the longer full repair warranty you offer). For the "taxing recycling cost" we have an example in the case of bottles. Norway for example has a reducing bottle tax that starts at a certain rate for non-recyclable drinks containers or containers that are recyclable but aren't. The tax rate then drops proportional to your proven recycling rates, and falls away completely if your rate is high enough. Having distributors take back failed products is great, but it's insufficient in that they have no reason to encourage consumers to return broken products, and often have a strong disincentive to (they end up having to pay or the transport and recycling). Basically, we should expect companies to either make society good for environmental externalities related to their products, or pay what it costs society to make other arrangements, so that these costs end up getting priced into the products so we can make our buying decisions accordingly.
- icebraining 10y ago
  To think that someone in charge at Bosch has actively decided to 1. Screw over the customer 2. Impose a massive external cost on society and the ecosystem. Alternatively, they know that very few people did repair the old versions (barely anyone know how to do it themselves, and labour costs in the developed world make it uneconomical to call someone) and they decided to reduce waste (and costs, win-win) by cutting down on the number of screws. I don't know what actually happened, but it's unproductive to assume malice. The reality is that for the most part, markets optimize for what's valued for the consumers, and "easily repairable" is not a feature people value that much.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Bosch were, I believe, one of the external contractors implicated in the VW "defeat device" scandal. > 1. Screw over the customer 2. Impose a massive external cost on society and the ecosystem. Those are both tremendously effective ways of making money in a capitalist system. That's why so much is spent on lobbying against regulation.
userbinator 10y ago
So fixing it means replacing the entire assembly, costing 2/3 of a new machine and with a four week delivery time for the part. I learned this is only done to screw consumers over, and that all manufacturers do it now. The drum still has all the mounting tabs for being screwed together, so they're literally just saving $0.30 on screws. Alternatively, it's telling you to cut it open and screw it back together. If they really didn't want you to repair it, they'd omit the mounting tabs entirely. This sort of arrangement is not uncommon in the automotive world, where the factory will glue/weld something shut but still leave provisions for you to reassemble with different fasteners. The fact that official service manuals will show the procedures for doing this mean it's not that they want you to replace the whole part.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  Yeah, I started trying to cut it open, but it soon became clear I would never be able to put it back together and have it 100% watertight. Which is kind of a hard requirement in this case.
  - sokoloff 10y ago
    If the channel for the rubber gasket is still there, you could. The old way was a rubber gasket (think "gigantic O-ring") and screws. The new model's plastic welding obviated the need for the gasket, but I bet the provision is still there if the screw bosses are still there. Also, if you're tackling this repair, it's wise to make sure you can get the old bearings off the "spider" and that the spider isn't cracked from vibration. On our washer, I couldn't get the large bearing off the spider without trashing the spider and back half of the tub, and that made the repair overall uneconomical. If you can get yours off, then order the parts. This also suggests replacing the bearings when they first start to make noise (a bit of a growl) or when the inner tub has some axial play relative to the outer tub (not to the door seal or frame of the washer, as that's from the suspension system). It would suck to order $50-75 worth of parts and not be able to do the repair anyway. You "have" to replace the seal and large bearing. I don't think it makes any sense not to replace the small bearing as well while you're in there. I also buy the tub seal gasket, though I've never felt the old one wouldn't have been fine to re-use (if present).
sokoloff 10y ago
It's not "only" to screw consumers over. IMEstimation, vanishingly few consumers would repair a washer with a bearing failure, most because they assume the service call and repair would be $400+ and the new machine only about double that, so might as well just buy a new one. And the failure mode either sounds dramatic (like a jet engine coming apart in the spin cycle) and/or the machine starts putting brown grease onto the clothes, making people believe the problem is not a simple one. I went through this with my in-laws who were all set to buy a new one when I noted that I could get the parts for under $100 delivered and tackle it when they came in. Most people just "call a guy" or "buy a new one" rather than tackle disassembly of their washer. (And that part is pretty daunting; when replacing them, I always assume that they start with the bearing and seal at the beginning of the assembly line and build the rest of the washing machine around that. :) ) In addition to saving money on the screws, the manufacturer could save money on the rubber tub gasket that seals the two tub halves together when fastened with screws, and save over a dozen assembly operations, all of which are likely manual (inserting the gasket, and inserting and tightening 12+ screws) That might save the manufacturer $5-7, which appears as $20-30 by the time the machine hits the retail floor. Consumers will buy a $799 washer before they'll buy an otherwise seemingly identical $819 washer. If consumers want repairable items, they need to be willing to buy (and sometimes/often pay more) based on that preference. For every consumer that lost money by having a hard to repair in the field tub, a few dozen saved $20+ on the initial purchase. It's unclear whether consumers won or lost overall on the trade, because that seal and then washer failure does seem to be what tends to do in the front loaders. It's pretty clear that the Earth lost, but that there might be more to gain by "training" people to repair their old stuff (or accept slight imperfections in old gear rather than discarding at the first hint of imperfection). That's a form of "nudging" as stated in the article.
- tmptmp 10y ago
  >>And the failure mode either sounds dramatic (like a jet engine coming apart in the spin cycle) and/or the machine starts putting brown grease onto the clothes, making people believe the problem is not a simple one. Great insight. I wonder how far we (as in general society) have come from the science/technology aspects of our day to day life. Even repairing simple machines like a washing machine is almost beyond the ability of most people even with the availability of all tools needed. I conjecture that despite the availability of information, the percentage of people with hacker-mindset is declining. Companies are to blame for this (obfuscation etc), no doubt, but societal culture also seems to play a very important role here. The society doesn't seem to value such knowledge anymore much. Am I missing something?
pingec 10y ago
I inherited a 35 years old washing machine, it is used about once a week. Every 10 years the bearing needs replacing and I had to replace the water pump one time. Still going strong... That's about 20€ in spare parts every 10 years. The savings in electricity and water with a new machine are tiny compared to savings by not having to buy a new machine in the first place and then replace it every 5 years...
- pyvpx 10y ago
  are they, though? I have an older (less than 10 year old) Panasonic washing machine and if the ratings of newer machines are to be believed, when comparing with the dedicated water meter I have connected to the current one, a new one might pay for itself in water savings in about 4 years. I'm just not sure I believe the newer models ratings. mine is much more efficient in water use on paper than what the water meter clearly states.
  - pingec 10y ago
    It depends how expensive water is for you. I would not trust the ratings at all though. Funny story about new "more efficient" machines... a neighbor bought a new BEKO machine (before that she had a CANDY I think). She says the new machine uses so little water you cannot even see the actual water inside. All you see is soaked clothes. She says that the results are worse compared to the old CANDY and that the clothes get damaged more easily. Due to EU regulations there is no more "add extra water" feature like in older machines. So what she does is she waits for the machine to pump water inside then she pours 6L of water through the detergent dispenser. Now that's progress :)
    - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
      > Due to EU regulations there is no more "add extra water" feature like in older machines Not sure I buy this, I just bought a new Miele (to replace the broken Bosch) that has a dedicated "Water Plus" button.
juliango 10y ago
France recently passed a law that makes it illegal for companies to take deliberate steps to reduce the shelf life of a product in order to increase its replacement rate. Of course in practice it will be difficult to prove, but still having a law is a good start.
afsina 10y ago
No. Just do not buy stuff from companies that make hard to repair goods. Or make campaigns about it.
mhandley 10y ago
On the other hand, I've repaired my Bosch washing machine twice in the last year. Once to replace the pump (somehow it ate a pair of tweezers - still not sure how!), and once when one of the mounting brackets for the main drum suspension springs failed. Both were remarkably easy repairs, though the design of the mounting bracket seemed like it was designed to eventually fail after a certain amount of use (or perhaps abuse). The important thing was that although Bosch don't sell the parts anymore, compatible parts were easily available online from a third-party parts supplier. The Internet seems to have really enabled such niche suppliers to thrive.
- atburrow 10y ago
  Some parts on a washing machine are definitely designed to break. For example, the couplings [1] on a washing machine are usually made of a plastic material. They are designed to break when introduced to various amounts of stress. Breaking under stress protects the motor from damage (which is a lot more expensive to replace). It's definitely frustrating when the washer breaks down for this reason, but the repair is extremely cheap (< $5 for the actual part, more for labor) if you do it yourself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling
  - woobar 10y ago
    In my old washer this coupling will routinely break almost each year. After ten years I have mastered the replacement process (removing the case, turning machine upside down, and detaching the motor) in under 15 minutes. Pro tip: if you decide to DIY, order half a dozen of these [1] couplings in advance. [1] https://www.amazon.com/3364003-3364002-REPLACEMENT-KITCHENAID-AP3963893/dp/B00FAEFNU8 https://www.amazon.com/3364003-3364002-REPLACEMENT-KITCHENAI...
Paperweight 10y ago
I'm no communist, but sometimes I wish there was less model churn "innovation". Just have a standard "Model T" washing machine that covered 95% of the market. Patents expired, several generic manufacturers, economies of scale, new and used parts readily available, websites dedicated to it...

J-dawg 10y ago

That is utterly infuriating. Stuff like this really shakes my faith in capitalism. To think that someone in charge at Bosch has actively decided to 1. Screw over the customer 2. Impose a massive external cost on society and the ecosystem. I honestly wonder how they sleep at night. The market clearly can't fix this issue, so regulation must be the only option.

vidarh 10y ago
Markets can fix the issue. But the market may need regulation to ensure externalities are captured. E.g. taxing energy and recycling costs, and taxing based on expected lifetime (e.g. a tax that reduces the longer full repair warranty you offer). For the "taxing recycling cost" we have an example in the case of bottles. Norway for example has a reducing bottle tax that starts at a certain rate for non-recyclable drinks containers or containers that are recyclable but aren't. The tax rate then drops proportional to your proven recycling rates, and falls away completely if your rate is high enough. Having distributors take back failed products is great, but it's insufficient in that they have no reason to encourage consumers to return broken products, and often have a strong disincentive to (they end up having to pay or the transport and recycling). Basically, we should expect companies to either make society good for environmental externalities related to their products, or pay what it costs society to make other arrangements, so that these costs end up getting priced into the products so we can make our buying decisions accordingly.
icebraining 10y ago
To think that someone in charge at Bosch has actively decided to 1. Screw over the customer 2. Impose a massive external cost on society and the ecosystem. Alternatively, they know that very few people did repair the old versions (barely anyone know how to do it themselves, and labour costs in the developed world make it uneconomical to call someone) and they decided to reduce waste (and costs, win-win) by cutting down on the number of screws. I don't know what actually happened, but it's unproductive to assume malice. The reality is that for the most part, markets optimize for what's valued for the consumers, and "easily repairable" is not a feature people value that much.
pjc50 10y ago
Bosch were, I believe, one of the external contractors implicated in the VW "defeat device" scandal. > 1. Screw over the customer 2. Impose a massive external cost on society and the ecosystem. Those are both tremendously effective ways of making money in a capitalist system. That's why so much is spent on lobbying against regulation.

userbinator 10y ago

So fixing it means replacing the entire assembly, costing 2/3 of a new machine and with a four week delivery time for the part. I learned this is only done to screw consumers over, and that all manufacturers do it now. The drum still has all the mounting tabs for being screwed together, so they're literally just saving $0.30 on screws. Alternatively, it's telling you to cut it open and screw it back together. If they really didn't want you to repair it, they'd omit the mounting tabs entirely. This sort of arrangement is not uncommon in the automotive world, where the factory will glue/weld something shut but still leave provisions for you to reassemble with different fasteners. The fact that official service manuals will show the procedures for doing this mean it's not that they want you to replace the whole part.

semi-extrinsic 10y ago
Yeah, I started trying to cut it open, but it soon became clear I would never be able to put it back together and have it 100% watertight. Which is kind of a hard requirement in this case.
- sokoloff 10y ago
  If the channel for the rubber gasket is still there, you could. The old way was a rubber gasket (think "gigantic O-ring") and screws. The new model's plastic welding obviated the need for the gasket, but I bet the provision is still there if the screw bosses are still there. Also, if you're tackling this repair, it's wise to make sure you can get the old bearings off the "spider" and that the spider isn't cracked from vibration. On our washer, I couldn't get the large bearing off the spider without trashing the spider and back half of the tub, and that made the repair overall uneconomical. If you can get yours off, then order the parts. This also suggests replacing the bearings when they first start to make noise (a bit of a growl) or when the inner tub has some axial play relative to the outer tub (not to the door seal or frame of the washer, as that's from the suspension system). It would suck to order $50-75 worth of parts and not be able to do the repair anyway. You "have" to replace the seal and large bearing. I don't think it makes any sense not to replace the small bearing as well while you're in there. I also buy the tub seal gasket, though I've never felt the old one wouldn't have been fine to re-use (if present).

sokoloff 10y ago

It's not "only" to screw consumers over. IMEstimation, vanishingly few consumers would repair a washer with a bearing failure, most because they assume the service call and repair would be $400+ and the new machine only about double that, so might as well just buy a new one. And the failure mode either sounds dramatic (like a jet engine coming apart in the spin cycle) and/or the machine starts putting brown grease onto the clothes, making people believe the problem is not a simple one. I went through this with my in-laws who were all set to buy a new one when I noted that I could get the parts for under $100 delivered and tackle it when they came in. Most people just "call a guy" or "buy a new one" rather than tackle disassembly of their washer. (And that part is pretty daunting; when replacing them, I always assume that they start with the bearing and seal at the beginning of the assembly line and build the rest of the washing machine around that. :) ) In addition to saving money on the screws, the manufacturer could save money on the rubber tub gasket that seals the two tub halves together when fastened with screws, and save over a dozen assembly operations, all of which are likely manual (inserting the gasket, and inserting and tightening 12+ screws) That might save the manufacturer $5-7, which appears as $20-30 by the time the machine hits the retail floor. Consumers will buy a $799 washer before they'll buy an otherwise seemingly identical $819 washer. If consumers want repairable items, they need to be willing to buy (and sometimes/often pay more) based on that preference. For every consumer that lost money by having a hard to repair in the field tub, a few dozen saved $20+ on the initial purchase. It's unclear whether consumers won or lost overall on the trade, because that seal and then washer failure does seem to be what tends to do in the front loaders. It's pretty clear that the Earth lost, but that there might be more to gain by "training" people to repair their old stuff (or accept slight imperfections in old gear rather than discarding at the first hint of imperfection). That's a form of "nudging" as stated in the article.

tmptmp 10y ago
>>And the failure mode either sounds dramatic (like a jet engine coming apart in the spin cycle) and/or the machine starts putting brown grease onto the clothes, making people believe the problem is not a simple one. Great insight. I wonder how far we (as in general society) have come from the science/technology aspects of our day to day life. Even repairing simple machines like a washing machine is almost beyond the ability of most people even with the availability of all tools needed. I conjecture that despite the availability of information, the percentage of people with hacker-mindset is declining. Companies are to blame for this (obfuscation etc), no doubt, but societal culture also seems to play a very important role here. The society doesn't seem to value such knowledge anymore much. Am I missing something?

pingec 10y ago

I inherited a 35 years old washing machine, it is used about once a week. Every 10 years the bearing needs replacing and I had to replace the water pump one time. Still going strong... That's about 20€ in spare parts every 10 years. The savings in electricity and water with a new machine are tiny compared to savings by not having to buy a new machine in the first place and then replace it every 5 years...

pyvpx 10y ago
are they, though? I have an older (less than 10 year old) Panasonic washing machine and if the ratings of newer machines are to be believed, when comparing with the dedicated water meter I have connected to the current one, a new one might pay for itself in water savings in about 4 years. I'm just not sure I believe the newer models ratings. mine is much more efficient in water use on paper than what the water meter clearly states.
- pingec 10y ago
  It depends how expensive water is for you. I would not trust the ratings at all though. Funny story about new "more efficient" machines... a neighbor bought a new BEKO machine (before that she had a CANDY I think). She says the new machine uses so little water you cannot even see the actual water inside. All you see is soaked clothes. She says that the results are worse compared to the old CANDY and that the clothes get damaged more easily. Due to EU regulations there is no more "add extra water" feature like in older machines. So what she does is she waits for the machine to pump water inside then she pours 6L of water through the detergent dispenser. Now that's progress :)
  - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
    > Due to EU regulations there is no more "add extra water" feature like in older machines Not sure I buy this, I just bought a new Miele (to replace the broken Bosch) that has a dedicated "Water Plus" button.

juliango 10y ago

France recently passed a law that makes it illegal for companies to take deliberate steps to reduce the shelf life of a product in order to increase its replacement rate. Of course in practice it will be difficult to prove, but still having a law is a good start.

afsina 10y ago

No. Just do not buy stuff from companies that make hard to repair goods. Or make campaigns about it.

mhandley 10y ago

On the other hand, I've repaired my Bosch washing machine twice in the last year. Once to replace the pump (somehow it ate a pair of tweezers - still not sure how!), and once when one of the mounting brackets for the main drum suspension springs failed. Both were remarkably easy repairs, though the design of the mounting bracket seemed like it was designed to eventually fail after a certain amount of use (or perhaps abuse). The important thing was that although Bosch don't sell the parts anymore, compatible parts were easily available online from a third-party parts supplier. The Internet seems to have really enabled such niche suppliers to thrive.

atburrow 10y ago
Some parts on a washing machine are definitely designed to break. For example, the couplings [1] on a washing machine are usually made of a plastic material. They are designed to break when introduced to various amounts of stress. Breaking under stress protects the motor from damage (which is a lot more expensive to replace). It's definitely frustrating when the washer breaks down for this reason, but the repair is extremely cheap (< $5 for the actual part, more for labor) if you do it yourself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling
- woobar 10y ago
  In my old washer this coupling will routinely break almost each year. After ten years I have mastered the replacement process (removing the case, turning machine upside down, and detaching the motor) in under 15 minutes. Pro tip: if you decide to DIY, order half a dozen of these [1] couplings in advance. [1] https://www.amazon.com/3364003-3364002-REPLACEMENT-KITCHENAID-AP3963893/dp/B00FAEFNU8 https://www.amazon.com/3364003-3364002-REPLACEMENT-KITCHENAI...

Paperweight 10y ago

I'm no communist, but sometimes I wish there was less model churn "innovation". Just have a standard "Model T" washing machine that covered 95% of the market. Patents expired, several generic manufacturers, economies of scale, new and used parts readily available, websites dedicated to it...