3 ms·

Is it even realistic for a company to sell $1000 appliances that last 20 years? I know we can build such an appliance, because they did in the 80s, but can a pu

Is it even realistic for a company to sell $1000 appliances that last 20 years? I know we can build such an appliance, because they did in the 80s, but can a public company survive selling them?

bombcar 3y ago
It's quite possible, because most appliances don't actually last that long, because the average appliance disposed/thrown away is likely still working (or could be with a minor fix). The worst example of this is kitchen remodels; the average kitchen that is remodeled is not falling apart and absolutely unusable; it's usually a 7-10 year old kitchen that just doesn't "look right". Cars are an appliance that is more expensive, but they last 20 years these days (average age of a car on the road today is 12 years). It's actually informative to spend a day where everything you look at, you think about how old it is. This includes things like doors, windows, floors, etc. Most are much older than you might think.
JohnFen 3y ago
That it used to be the standard strongly indicates that yes, that's a realistic expectation. However, it isn't a path toward extracting every last dime from customer pockets. The real problem, in my opinion, is that companies no longer prioritize making good products, but making good pickpocketing machines.
- ineptech 3y ago
  Eh, when something goes extinct I'd say that's evidence that it isn't viable. That's the paradox of capitalism: anything that can be ruined eventually will be. I'd pay 2x or 3x for 30yr appliances for environmental reasons, but I don't think the company that makes such a thing could raise the capital to build them in the first place.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > when something goes extinct I'd say that's evidence that it isn't viable. It depends on the thing, but in general I don't think that assumption is terribly valid. The problem is that "viable" and "maximally profitable" are two different things. Companies have decided to chase the latter exclusively -- but that's a choice to satisfy short-term greed, it's not a reflection on what a viable business has to look like. I think it's more reflective of how much the exercise of capitalism has degraded since those times.
    - ineptech 3y ago
      I don't think choice is involved here, public and capital-financed companies that aren't maximally greedy get eaten by those that are. When your competitors raise enough capital to undercut you in the short term, you don't survive to the long term unless you raise more capital as well, and you can't both offer the highest returns, one of you is going to end up buying the other, and only after all the corners have been cut and every customer that can be screwed has been screwed. It's a race to the bottom that doesn't necessarily have a solution. Isn't this essentially how Maytag went tits up? To compete with the cheap foreign appliances they took on a bunch of debt, and then cut costs to service the debt, resulting in the "amanatags" that destroyed the reputation for quality they'd built over 3-4 generations?

Is it even realistic for a company to sell $1000 appliances that last 20 years? I know we can build such an appliance, because they did in the 80s, but can a public company survive selling them?

bombcar 3y ago

It's quite possible, because most appliances don't actually last that long, because the average appliance disposed/thrown away is likely still working (or could be with a minor fix). The worst example of this is kitchen remodels; the average kitchen that is remodeled is not falling apart and absolutely unusable; it's usually a 7-10 year old kitchen that just doesn't "look right". Cars are an appliance that is more expensive, but they last 20 years these days (average age of a car on the road today is 12 years). It's actually informative to spend a day where everything you look at, you think about how old it is. This includes things like doors, windows, floors, etc. Most are much older than you might think.

JohnFen 3y ago

That it used to be the standard strongly indicates that yes, that's a realistic expectation. However, it isn't a path toward extracting every last dime from customer pockets. The real problem, in my opinion, is that companies no longer prioritize making good products, but making good pickpocketing machines.

ineptech 3y ago
Eh, when something goes extinct I'd say that's evidence that it isn't viable. That's the paradox of capitalism: anything that can be ruined eventually will be. I'd pay 2x or 3x for 30yr appliances for environmental reasons, but I don't think the company that makes such a thing could raise the capital to build them in the first place.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > when something goes extinct I'd say that's evidence that it isn't viable. It depends on the thing, but in general I don't think that assumption is terribly valid. The problem is that "viable" and "maximally profitable" are two different things. Companies have decided to chase the latter exclusively -- but that's a choice to satisfy short-term greed, it's not a reflection on what a viable business has to look like. I think it's more reflective of how much the exercise of capitalism has degraded since those times.
  - ineptech 3y ago
    I don't think choice is involved here, public and capital-financed companies that aren't maximally greedy get eaten by those that are. When your competitors raise enough capital to undercut you in the short term, you don't survive to the long term unless you raise more capital as well, and you can't both offer the highest returns, one of you is going to end up buying the other, and only after all the corners have been cut and every customer that can be screwed has been screwed. It's a race to the bottom that doesn't necessarily have a solution. Isn't this essentially how Maytag went tits up? To compete with the cheap foreign appliances they took on a bunch of debt, and then cut costs to service the debt, resulting in the "amanatags" that destroyed the reputation for quality they'd built over 3-4 generations?