3 ms·

It's not a "too bad we can't make it more durable because that would increase the parts cost" situation, at least not solely. It's also a "how can we make this

by est31 4y ago

It's not a "too bad we can't make it more durable because that would increase the parts cost" situation, at least not solely. It's also a "how can we make this product break quickly and make it badly repairable so that you have to buy a new one" situation, aka planned obsolescence.

kube-system 4y ago
In monopolistic industries, this happens. But in other consumer markets, value manufacturing still win, because of significant information disparities and/or consumer preferences. If your competition makes a shitty fridge for $1000 with bearing that will fail at 15 years on average, and you make the exact same thing with bearings that will last 30 years for $1010, most people will look at the exterior, say “these look the same”, and buy the competitors model. And you can advertise that all you want, and next week your competition will put $3 of extra steel in the door handle to make it feel more solid than yours and write the word “professional” on the door. Now your product looks like a bad deal. Now you might say that people are making bad decisions. But are they really? Most Americans don’t keep their house for 30 years, so why do they care if the fridge fails before then? It’s someone else’s problem. This is why market positioning is a complicated discipline. It isn’t just “make a good thing for a good price”
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  It is a bit of a lemon market, because no one can tell (or few can) from the claims, looks, etc. how reliable it will actually be. I am keen to research stuff online more. I avoided buying the more expensive "Zip" water system, and instead got a RO system and my own chiller. An RO system is mostly plastic and pipes, with most of the $ going into the cartridges. So good value for money. Ugly... but it is under your sink so who cares. It was cheaper (about 1/3 of the price all up), and all the Zip users bemoan how unreliable it is. I also remember anecdotally how many times I have seen an out of order tap of theirs in an office or other place. They also don't filter quite as well as an RO (but they do filter well enough if taste is the concern). You don't always get better buy paying more, or going with the famous brand. I think you have to research all the things.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    In the mass consumer market there really isn’t much variation in the design lifetime. Everyone prioritize low construction costs and shoots for about the same timeline (last long enough that you don’t piss people off or get warranty work). Most of the difference in observed reliability isn’t planned, but circumstantial: bad design decision, etc. If you really want something engineered differently, you need to look at something where cost is not prioritized, which won’t be something that costs 20% more, or even 100% more. It’ll probably cost at least an order of magnitude more at least.

by est31 4y ago

kube-system 4y ago

In monopolistic industries, this happens. But in other consumer markets, value manufacturing still win, because of significant information disparities and/or consumer preferences. If your competition makes a shitty fridge for $1000 with bearing that will fail at 15 years on average, and you make the exact same thing with bearings that will last 30 years for $1010, most people will look at the exterior, say “these look the same”, and buy the competitors model. And you can advertise that all you want, and next week your competition will put $3 of extra steel in the door handle to make it feel more solid than yours and write the word “professional” on the door. Now your product looks like a bad deal. Now you might say that people are making bad decisions. But are they really? Most Americans don’t keep their house for 30 years, so why do they care if the fridge fails before then? It’s someone else’s problem. This is why market positioning is a complicated discipline. It isn’t just “make a good thing for a good price”

quickthrower2 4y ago
It is a bit of a lemon market, because no one can tell (or few can) from the claims, looks, etc. how reliable it will actually be. I am keen to research stuff online more. I avoided buying the more expensive "Zip" water system, and instead got a RO system and my own chiller. An RO system is mostly plastic and pipes, with most of the $ going into the cartridges. So good value for money. Ugly... but it is under your sink so who cares. It was cheaper (about 1/3 of the price all up), and all the Zip users bemoan how unreliable it is. I also remember anecdotally how many times I have seen an out of order tap of theirs in an office or other place. They also don't filter quite as well as an RO (but they do filter well enough if taste is the concern). You don't always get better buy paying more, or going with the famous brand. I think you have to research all the things.
- kube-system 4y ago
  In the mass consumer market there really isn’t much variation in the design lifetime. Everyone prioritize low construction costs and shoots for about the same timeline (last long enough that you don’t piss people off or get warranty work). Most of the difference in observed reliability isn’t planned, but circumstantial: bad design decision, etc. If you really want something engineered differently, you need to look at something where cost is not prioritized, which won’t be something that costs 20% more, or even 100% more. It’ll probably cost at least an order of magnitude more at least.