5 ms·

As a repair shop owner, I can shed some light on this. The iPhone X battery is relatively simple to replace as a third party. The only negative is that the phon

As a repair shop owner, I can shed some light on this. The iPhone X battery is relatively simple to replace as a third party. The only negative is that the phone won’t be as water-resistant as before; though we do replace seals, it won’t be sealed like the factory did. (I just had one of our stores replace the battery on my iPhone XS with an extended capacity battery, which was well worth the tradeoffs since my phone lasts an additional 3 hours now.) So your iPhone that just needs a new battery will sell for a lot. AirPods batteries, on the other hand, are completely unreplaceable, and believe me when I say we’d love to repair them. They’re small and Apple has filled the cavity around them with glue, meaning even if we had a replacement battery they’d be impossible to replace without damaging the AirPod itself. This is extremely upsetting to me, as someone who invests in and runs third-party repair shops at least in part for environmental reasons. Apple needs to do better on their smaller devices, AirPods included.

otterley 6y ago
Considering that Apple's battery service fee is $49 per AirPod, that tells me that the residual value of a failed AirPod (a single one, not both) is $99.50 - (depreciation) - $49, so $50.50 in the best case, and almost certainly nonzero in the worst case. It's probably safe to assume that in light of how they're constructed, Apple does not repair a unit when received and send the original repaired unit back. The customer likely receives a refurbished unit. But we do not know what Apple subsequently does with the failed units, so it's unfair to assume without evidence that they incinerate them or bury them in a landfill. They may well possess some trade secret that allows them to be able to repair them in a factory and ship them out later as refurbished units. There are technologies that are much more economical at scale (especially achievable with Apple's resources) that are probably infeasible for a mom-and-pop shop. And possibly more environmentally friendly, too (cf. trains vs. trucks).
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- 542354234235 6y ago
  > so it's unfair to assume without evidence that they incinerate them or bury them in a landfill. It isn't an assumption without evidence. It is an assessment based on a detailed breakdown of the product, a knowledge of the generally understood state of the technologies involved in reclamation. This isn't the random opinion of a shop owner. iFixit has a detailed breakdown and assessment, and they are generally considered experts in the field. What is unfair to assume without evidence is that Apple has some sort of super secret tech no one else knows about to repair them. That is simply a claim without evidence. >Considering that Apple's battery service fee is $49 per AirPod, that tells me that the residual value of a failed AirPod (a single one, not both) is $99.50 - (depreciation) - $49, so $50.50 in the best case, and almost certainly nonzero in the worst case. Airpods with Wireless charging case: $159 Retail. Wireless Charging case: $79 Retail. Assessed retail value of Airpods: $80 ($40 each). Apple replacement of damaged Wireless charging case: $69 ($10 discount off retail). Airpods: $69 each ($30 more than they cost new retail). Apple “battery repair” of Wireless charging case: $49 ($40 less than retail). Airpods: $49 each (again, $10 more than new retail value). Given this, there is absolutely no evidence that the Airpods have any reclamation value to Apple and they are just selling you a new ear pod for more than you paid as part of the original product. Apple makes more money per unit on “battery repair” and damage replacement than off the original purchase.
  - otterley 6y ago
    > What is unfair to assume without evidence is that Apple has some sort of super secret tech no one else knows about to repair them. That is simply a claim without evidence. Apple knows how to do all sorts of things in the manufacturing process that even competing companies having resources similar to Apple's scale (Samsung, LG, et al.) can't seem to accomplish. iFixit certainly doesn't have resources anywhere near Apple's. So I wouldn't put recycling/repair tech past them. It's certainly plausible. The rest of your math is largely fictional because you can't buy a pair of new AirPods without the charging case. There's a market for them (most likely in the black market because they're almost certainly stolen), but they're certainly going to be less than the cost of the combination less the price of a new charger.
    - 6y ago

otterley 6y ago

Considering that Apple's battery service fee is $49 per AirPod, that tells me that the residual value of a failed AirPod (a single one, not both) is $99.50 - (depreciation) - $49, so $50.50 in the best case, and almost certainly nonzero in the worst case. It's probably safe to assume that in light of how they're constructed, Apple does not repair a unit when received and send the original repaired unit back. The customer likely receives a refurbished unit. But we do not know what Apple subsequently does with the failed units, so it's unfair to assume without evidence that they incinerate them or bury them in a landfill. They may well possess some trade secret that allows them to be able to repair them in a factory and ship them out later as refurbished units. There are technologies that are much more economical at scale (especially achievable with Apple's resources) that are probably infeasible for a mom-and-pop shop. And possibly more environmentally friendly, too (cf. trains vs. trucks).

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
542354234235 6y ago
> so it's unfair to assume without evidence that they incinerate them or bury them in a landfill. It isn't an assumption without evidence. It is an assessment based on a detailed breakdown of the product, a knowledge of the generally understood state of the technologies involved in reclamation. This isn't the random opinion of a shop owner. iFixit has a detailed breakdown and assessment, and they are generally considered experts in the field. What is unfair to assume without evidence is that Apple has some sort of super secret tech no one else knows about to repair them. That is simply a claim without evidence. >Considering that Apple's battery service fee is $49 per AirPod, that tells me that the residual value of a failed AirPod (a single one, not both) is $99.50 - (depreciation) - $49, so $50.50 in the best case, and almost certainly nonzero in the worst case. Airpods with Wireless charging case: $159 Retail. Wireless Charging case: $79 Retail. Assessed retail value of Airpods: $80 ($40 each). Apple replacement of damaged Wireless charging case: $69 ($10 discount off retail). Airpods: $69 each ($30 more than they cost new retail). Apple “battery repair” of Wireless charging case: $49 ($40 less than retail). Airpods: $49 each (again, $10 more than new retail value). Given this, there is absolutely no evidence that the Airpods have any reclamation value to Apple and they are just selling you a new ear pod for more than you paid as part of the original product. Apple makes more money per unit on “battery repair” and damage replacement than off the original purchase.
- otterley 6y ago
  > What is unfair to assume without evidence is that Apple has some sort of super secret tech no one else knows about to repair them. That is simply a claim without evidence. Apple knows how to do all sorts of things in the manufacturing process that even competing companies having resources similar to Apple's scale (Samsung, LG, et al.) can't seem to accomplish. iFixit certainly doesn't have resources anywhere near Apple's. So I wouldn't put recycling/repair tech past them. It's certainly plausible. The rest of your math is largely fictional because you can't buy a pair of new AirPods without the charging case. There's a market for them (most likely in the black market because they're almost certainly stolen), but they're certainly going to be less than the cost of the combination less the price of a new charger.
  - 6y ago