5 ms·

If only they made crappier products that break more often, at least then their stock shareholders would think it's a good company. This exemplifies everything t

by odbol_ 10y ago

If only they made crappier products that break more often, at least then their stock shareholders would think it's a good company. This exemplifies everything that's wrong with capitalism and planned obsolescence.

duncan_bayne 10y ago
In what way do you think that strategy is an inescapable consequence of capitalism?
- sdegutis 10y ago
  Capitalism isn't a bad idea, it just needs proper regulation. What we have is an unregulated mess which gives both stupid and unscrupulous execs the advantage.
  - duncan_bayne 10y ago
    That doesn't answer my question, at all. What is it about capitalism that makes the strategy you describe a) inevitable, and b) worthy of regulation (since you brought that up)? Also, I disagree that the modern economy is unregulated. Quite the contrary, in fact. And it's regulation, bailouts and crony capitalism that protect companies who make awful products.
    - rhizome 10y ago
      What is it about capitalism that makes the strategy you describe a) inevitable, and b) worthy of regulation (since you brought that up)? The profit motive covers (a).
      - wyager 10y ago
        No, it doesn't. Consumers value products that last a long time. This is a big reason Apple is the world's largest computer computer company despite charging more for the same transistor counts. People are actually willing to pay a huge premium for reliable stuff that they don't have to junk after a year. The market gets it right.
      - NoPiece 10y ago
        It doesn't cover why it would be an inescapable consequence.
      - PKop 10y ago
        A company that built lasting products of high quality wouldn't earn profits? Hmmmmmm[0] [0] https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAAPL&fstype=ii&ei=VtAbWMHSI86je5Kuv_AJ https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAAPL&fstype=ii&ei=...
        odbol_ 10y ago
        haha is this a joke? Apple basically forces you to upgrade your phone every two years, by releasing a mandatory OS update that makes older phones slow as dirt. I'm talking about my mom's 1957 Ford pickup that still runs great today. I'm talking about the Ostrisizer can opener from the 1970s that my family still uses in their kitchen. 5 years lifetime for a $800 product is not "built to last".
        ceejayoz 10y ago
        A 1957 Ford pickup is going to be an absolute deathtrap in an accident. I'm not sure that's a great example. Not quite that exact combo, but you get the idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U
        PKop 10y ago
        I had my MacBook Pro for 6 years before I upgraded, and didn't really need to. Are there many better examples within the computer / smartphone industry than Apple? Capitalism allows $1000 to buy progressively more powerful computers year after year. Oh but you're talking about pickup trucks and can-openers. Oh ok my bad. Were those created by socialist / communist economies now? What are we even talking about here? Did capitalist economies develop these things or not? Does the profit motive not motivate the auto company and can opener company to produce a better product?
        odbol_ 10y ago
        We're not talking about capitalism vs. communism. We're talking about capitalism vs. consumerism, aka Planned Obsolescence. Capitalism _could_ produce products (even high-tech products like phones) that last for longer than 2 years (e.g. swappable chips/boards/screens, etc), but it doesn't, because the rapid, constant growth demanded by investors is antithetical to making products that are built to last.
stephenhess 10y ago
Or.. its just a reflection of the market they're in. Understanding how much innovation opportunity is left in a market/category is a huge part of identifying whether you should continue to invest there or elsewhere.
ghaff 10y ago
It's not really about "crappier products that break more often." It's about not giving people compelling reasons to buy upgraded versions or not expanding into new product areas (as they've just recently done with their drone). And, yes, if you're a company with shareholders, you can't get away with selling a product and then have your sales dwindle when you don't follow up with anything people want to buy.
WalterBright 10y ago
Leica cameras have always been quality products and that didn't hurt them at all. A Leica will last forever.
- gregshap 10y ago
  Leica is privately owned, which does make it easier to choose less growth. As a public company you need to grow or return enough steady dividends to make it worthwhile for people to keep their money invested in you.
- usrusr 10y ago
  But Leica as a company would have never reached the valuation Gopro enjoyed (and now suffers from, we would not have this conversation if the Gopro brand had not inspired unrealistic expectations)
return0 10y ago
Or maybe they shouldnt build the company around one product. If they made a crappy product, someone else would make a better one, and people would buy that one.
wyager 10y ago
"This hypothetical scenario that I just made up and isn't what's actually happening here is everything wrong with capitalism."
tolmasky 10y ago
That's the second half of the equation. The first half was "video editing is harder than they hoped so they sell it". Maybe focus on making the product EVEN better (vs worse) by identifying how to make the process after the video is shot better. Aka don't ruin resale value, instead focus on WHY people are reselling them and fix that. Maybe make an iMovie style tool for common go pro uses.
vacri 10y ago
GoPro's market segment requires toughness and reliability. It's the central plank in their offering. They'd never have built their name if they made shoddy stuff.
narrator 10y ago
It's not them, if their product broke, someone else in China would have made a better one. I think consumer video in the last 10 years went from expensive and ok quality to dirt cheap and professional quality. The same thing that happened to audio happened to video. Now all of that GoPro tech is hitting smart phones and ultra cheap Chinese knock offs.. The whole consumer electronics space has been eaten by the smartphone. Same thing is happening to Apple. The cutting edge is slowing down or is too good already and everything is starting to get super cheap and commoditized. It's hard for premium brands to get an edge.

by odbol_ 10y ago

duncan_bayne 10y ago

In what way do you think that strategy is an inescapable consequence of capitalism?

sdegutis 10y ago
Capitalism isn't a bad idea, it just needs proper regulation. What we have is an unregulated mess which gives both stupid and unscrupulous execs the advantage.
- duncan_bayne 10y ago
  That doesn't answer my question, at all. What is it about capitalism that makes the strategy you describe a) inevitable, and b) worthy of regulation (since you brought that up)? Also, I disagree that the modern economy is unregulated. Quite the contrary, in fact. And it's regulation, bailouts and crony capitalism that protect companies who make awful products.
  - rhizome 10y ago
    What is it about capitalism that makes the strategy you describe a) inevitable, and b) worthy of regulation (since you brought that up)? The profit motive covers (a).
    - wyager 10y ago
      No, it doesn't. Consumers value products that last a long time. This is a big reason Apple is the world's largest computer computer company despite charging more for the same transistor counts. People are actually willing to pay a huge premium for reliable stuff that they don't have to junk after a year. The market gets it right.
    - NoPiece 10y ago
      It doesn't cover why it would be an inescapable consequence.
    - PKop 10y ago
      A company that built lasting products of high quality wouldn't earn profits? Hmmmmmm[0] [0] https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAAPL&fstype=ii&ei=VtAbWMHSI86je5Kuv_AJ https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAAPL&fstype=ii&ei=...
      - odbol_ 10y ago
        haha is this a joke? Apple basically forces you to upgrade your phone every two years, by releasing a mandatory OS update that makes older phones slow as dirt. I'm talking about my mom's 1957 Ford pickup that still runs great today. I'm talking about the Ostrisizer can opener from the 1970s that my family still uses in their kitchen. 5 years lifetime for a $800 product is not "built to last".
        ceejayoz 10y ago
        A 1957 Ford pickup is going to be an absolute deathtrap in an accident. I'm not sure that's a great example. Not quite that exact combo, but you get the idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U
        PKop 10y ago
        I had my MacBook Pro for 6 years before I upgraded, and didn't really need to. Are there many better examples within the computer / smartphone industry than Apple? Capitalism allows $1000 to buy progressively more powerful computers year after year. Oh but you're talking about pickup trucks and can-openers. Oh ok my bad. Were those created by socialist / communist economies now? What are we even talking about here? Did capitalist economies develop these things or not? Does the profit motive not motivate the auto company and can opener company to produce a better product?
        odbol_ 10y ago
        We're not talking about capitalism vs. communism. We're talking about capitalism vs. consumerism, aka Planned Obsolescence. Capitalism _could_ produce products (even high-tech products like phones) that last for longer than 2 years (e.g. swappable chips/boards/screens, etc), but it doesn't, because the rapid, constant growth demanded by investors is antithetical to making products that are built to last.

stephenhess 10y ago

Or.. its just a reflection of the market they're in. Understanding how much innovation opportunity is left in a market/category is a huge part of identifying whether you should continue to invest there or elsewhere.

ghaff 10y ago

It's not really about "crappier products that break more often." It's about not giving people compelling reasons to buy upgraded versions or not expanding into new product areas (as they've just recently done with their drone). And, yes, if you're a company with shareholders, you can't get away with selling a product and then have your sales dwindle when you don't follow up with anything people want to buy.

WalterBright 10y ago

Leica cameras have always been quality products and that didn't hurt them at all. A Leica will last forever.

gregshap 10y ago
Leica is privately owned, which does make it easier to choose less growth. As a public company you need to grow or return enough steady dividends to make it worthwhile for people to keep their money invested in you.
usrusr 10y ago
But Leica as a company would have never reached the valuation Gopro enjoyed (and now suffers from, we would not have this conversation if the Gopro brand had not inspired unrealistic expectations)

return0 10y ago

Or maybe they shouldnt build the company around one product. If they made a crappy product, someone else would make a better one, and people would buy that one.

wyager 10y ago

"This hypothetical scenario that I just made up and isn't what's actually happening here is everything wrong with capitalism."

tolmasky 10y ago

That's the second half of the equation. The first half was "video editing is harder than they hoped so they sell it". Maybe focus on making the product EVEN better (vs worse) by identifying how to make the process after the video is shot better. Aka don't ruin resale value, instead focus on WHY people are reselling them and fix that. Maybe make an iMovie style tool for common go pro uses.

vacri 10y ago

GoPro's market segment requires toughness and reliability. It's the central plank in their offering. They'd never have built their name if they made shoddy stuff.

narrator 10y ago

It's not them, if their product broke, someone else in China would have made a better one. I think consumer video in the last 10 years went from expensive and ok quality to dirt cheap and professional quality. The same thing that happened to audio happened to video. Now all of that GoPro tech is hitting smart phones and ultra cheap Chinese knock offs.. The whole consumer electronics space has been eaten by the smartphone. Same thing is happening to Apple. The cutting edge is slowing down or is too good already and everything is starting to get super cheap and commoditized. It's hard for premium brands to get an edge.