5 ms·
Light bulbs are a bad example of the dangers of cartels. Incandescent filaments are much more efficient at higher temperature but burn out quicker. In the commo
by spqr0a1 7y ago
Light bulbs are a bad example of the dangers of cartels. Incandescent filaments are much more efficient at higher temperature but burn out quicker. In the common case, savings from reduced electricity cost more than offset the increased replacement rate for bulbs in accessible fixtures.
Short-lived bulbs were good for the customers. In a market with perfect information people would have chosen them on their own. Unfortunately of 3 categories of information needed for an informed decision (lifetime, power usage, and light output) purchasers only had a good measure of how often they replaced bulbs. Usage patterns are too complex for improvements in a single bulb to be obvious on a power bill, and human brightness perception is roughly logarithmic so it’s not visually obvious how much brighter different bulbs are.
Whether it was motivated by greed or not, the Phoebus cartel is an example of big business successfully advocating for the interests of the general public in the presence of information asymmetry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incandescent_light_bulb#Light_output_and_lifetime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incandescent_light_bulb#Light_...
- readams 7y agoThey could have printed electricity costs on the packages. Instead they artificially limited competition. That doesn't sound like they had anyone's interests but their own in mind.
- barrkel 7y agoIncandescent bulbs are labeled and classified by their electricity consumption. It's literally in the product description: 40W bulb, 60W bulb, 100W bulb, etc.
- simonh 7y agoCost is based on both consumption and efficiency, not consumption alone because with a more efficient bulb you can illuminate a given area with fewer bulbs.
- KC8ZKF 7y agoThe cartel disbanded in 1939. Were the bulbs labeled and classified by power consumption before then?
- readams 7y agoyou need to know watts and lumens. It's not rocket science.
- JohnJamesRambo 7y agoI’m sure they were doing it for the greater good of the consumer...
- mrguyorama 7y agoAh yes, how good for the consumer it is to collude to increase prices and offer zero competition.
- Scoundreller 7y agoYou sound like a Canadian dairy farmer :)
- core-questions 7y agoShut up and drink your bag of milk
- Scoundreller 7y agoi kept it at room temperature for 3 months and it already went bad. Merde I’m going back to France.
- pronglehorfer 7y agoIn this case, it actually was. That's what makes it such an interesting study. Anyone who touts the Phoebus Cartel as evidence of cartels being good is an idiot, of course. The price-fixing aspects, not so much, lol.
- TomMckenny 7y ago> human brightness perception In how many uses cases is anything other than perceived brightness relevant? Increased costs to provide something the consumer doesn't want is exactly the kind of thing competition is likely to reduce. The market doesn't always work but it's also very hard to determine what is wrong and how to fix it. If market equilibrium leads to destroying the ozone, it's easy. But if the market means fewer lumens per dollar (or even per joule), that is less obviously bad.
- VectorLock 7y agoAn argument that the Phoebus Cartel was actually working in the interests of the general public? I'm impressed.
- dwoozle 7y agoWell it’s possible for the unintended consequences of an action to more than cancel out the intended consequences.
- jcfrei 7y agoThe wikipedia article you linked quotes a source which directly contradicts what you are saying. From: https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-history/dawn-of-electronics/the-great-lightbulb-conspiracy https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-history/dawn-of-electronics/t... > Their lightbulbs were of a higher quality, more efficient, and brighter burning than other bulbs. They also cost a lot more. Indeed, all evidence points to the cartel’s being motivated by profits and increased sales, not by what was best for the consumer. It would have been straightforward for them to manufacture higher voltage, less brighter lamps with a longer lifespan. They didn't.
- nothrabannosir 7y ago> Unfortunately of 3 categories of information needed for an informed decision (lifetime, power usage, and light output) purchasers only had a good measure of how often they replaced bulbs. I may be dating myself, but I have never in my entire life seen a light bulb sold without the wattage displayed front and center. It is by far a more accessible metric than when it dies, by which time I have long forgotten where in time immemorial I bought that particular bulb.
- lolc 7y agoYes I don't remember the lifetime of bulbs. Except for some pathological examples. So really the only thing we have is power usage which does correlate somewhat with light output.