3 ms·

I don't buy too much into the 'build to fail' argument. Rather, I think it's just a matter of consumers choosing features and price over longevity. You can't re

I don't buy too much into the 'build to fail' argument. Rather, I think it's just a matter of consumers choosing features and price over longevity. You can't really prove longevity here and now. Of course you can build up a reputation but it takes time and might not pay off. Anecdote 1: Miele has a very good reputation. They also cost three times as much as the volume sellers and have a much lower market share. Sorry, no evidence of that claim. The closest is an article [1] claiming they produce 850.000 units per year. Anecdote 2: I just replaced a cheap ($200) oven from Ikea (made by Whirlpool). Most likely the heater had broken. Inspection, parts and repair would probably cost the same as a new one. It had lasted 5 years, just past the warranty. We bought a new one, same model. It's simply too cheap to repair. My conclusion: Lousy quality is our own fault - we do have options. [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/12092140/Why-pricey-Miele-has-the-cheapest-products-on-the-market.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandcon...

TeMPOraL 10y ago
Blaming consumers for choosing price over longevity is like blaming water for flowing downhill. Both phenomena are perfectly predictable, so there's really no one with agency to blame there - just like a bunch of water molecules can't reverse the flow of a river, a bunch of consumers won't change this dynamic. Instead, one should focus on those who willingly profit off such phenomenas. Now, you could argue that with sufficiently intense competition, companies will keep outdoing one another in selling cheapest crap. That indeed is a predictable and well-known failure mode of the market economy. The question is, whether appliance market suffers from too intense competition, or if there is a place for a lifetime-appliance supplier there. If there isn't, then IMO a good solution would be extended mandatory warranty periods (25+ years) and/or requirement to use user-servicable components and release full schematics when company goes out of business or cancels a product line.
- lowkeyokay 10y ago
  Fair enough. My point though is that there is the option to by a better washer but most people - including myself - choose the cheaper option.

TeMPOraL 10y ago

Blaming consumers for choosing price over longevity is like blaming water for flowing downhill. Both phenomena are perfectly predictable, so there's really no one with agency to blame there - just like a bunch of water molecules can't reverse the flow of a river, a bunch of consumers won't change this dynamic. Instead, one should focus on those who willingly profit off such phenomenas. Now, you could argue that with sufficiently intense competition, companies will keep outdoing one another in selling cheapest crap. That indeed is a predictable and well-known failure mode of the market economy. The question is, whether appliance market suffers from too intense competition, or if there is a place for a lifetime-appliance supplier there. If there isn't, then IMO a good solution would be extended mandatory warranty periods (25+ years) and/or requirement to use user-servicable components and release full schematics when company goes out of business or cancels a product line.

lowkeyokay 10y ago
Fair enough. My point though is that there is the option to by a better washer but most people - including myself - choose the cheaper option.