3 ms·

> “I don’t know why Samsung insists on charging so much for service parts,” Wiens says, visibly frustrated. “The prices that we see are out of line with what we

> “I don’t know why Samsung insists on charging so much for service parts,” Wiens says, visibly frustrated. “The prices that we see are out of line with what we know components actually cost to manufacture.” Wiens starts to elaborate but stops himself. He clarifies that he would love to discuss this more, but his contract with Samsung prevents him from doing so. I mean, it's pretty easy to guess: They want to run the spare parts division at a profit, they know they've got no competition (except used parts off recycled phones) and like some car makers, they know that means they can charge through the nose. Wikipedia tells me [1] Samsung released 17 distinct model numbers in 2023, and 30 in 2022. Presumably a lot of those have custom, nonstandard screens with rounded corners and curved edges and camera notches and folding and fingerprint readers and whatnot. So presumably the minimum order quantity is huge - they can't just hold a few spare screens and make more on demand, they probably have to buy (and pay for) several years of spares upfront. And of course every phone will have multiple parts, different subassemblies (do you want to order the screen with or without the fingerprint reader?) and maybe different colour schemes as well. And any spare parts you make and don't sell are wasted. So it's very easy for a spare parts division to be very inefficient, if it's not well managed. If they're determined to run the division at a profit - that inefficiency gets passed right along to the end user. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy#Release_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy#Release_history

altdataseller 2y ago
Its also easy for me to see as a 3rd party. Perhaps ifixit should manage the whole manufacturing and logistical aspect of maintaining all those spare parts themselves? Too unprofitable? Too much hassle? Oh..
- michaelt 2y ago
  ifixit might be able to do a better job, yes. It's their core business rather than an afterthought, after all. But part of the problem can only be solved by Samsung. They're the ones releasing 30 phone models in a single year - and the ones making design decisions like having six different screens available for the same phone because the coloured bezel is glued to the screen. And of course if Samsung buys screens for $50 and sells them to ifixit for $100, holding 1000 in stock requires half the capital outlay if Samsung does it.
chuckadams 2y ago
If Samsung were straight with everyone and actually said as much as you did, that would go a long way toward rebuilding the relationship. But we all know that isn’t the real reason for the markup, or at least not the full reason.
Zak 2y ago
Selling parts for a profit is inconsistent with an order limit of 7 parts per repair shop per quarter. A likely explanation is that Samsung hopes people who cannot get their old Samsung device repaired will buy a new Samsung device. Samsung seems insufficiently concerned customers will hold Samsung responsible for the problem and buy a device from another manufacturer. I call this behavior market leader syndrome.
initplus 2y ago
This is a rod Samsung has made for their own back though. Fewer SKU's, and more shared parts between models would be better for consumers and for the planet.

altdataseller 2y ago

Its also easy for me to see as a 3rd party. Perhaps ifixit should manage the whole manufacturing and logistical aspect of maintaining all those spare parts themselves? Too unprofitable? Too much hassle? Oh..

michaelt 2y ago
ifixit might be able to do a better job, yes. It's their core business rather than an afterthought, after all. But part of the problem can only be solved by Samsung. They're the ones releasing 30 phone models in a single year - and the ones making design decisions like having six different screens available for the same phone because the coloured bezel is glued to the screen. And of course if Samsung buys screens for $50 and sells them to ifixit for $100, holding 1000 in stock requires half the capital outlay if Samsung does it.

chuckadams 2y ago

If Samsung were straight with everyone and actually said as much as you did, that would go a long way toward rebuilding the relationship. But we all know that isn’t the real reason for the markup, or at least not the full reason.

Zak 2y ago

Selling parts for a profit is inconsistent with an order limit of 7 parts per repair shop per quarter. A likely explanation is that Samsung hopes people who cannot get their old Samsung device repaired will buy a new Samsung device. Samsung seems insufficiently concerned customers will hold Samsung responsible for the problem and buy a device from another manufacturer. I call this behavior market leader syndrome.

initplus 2y ago

This is a rod Samsung has made for their own back though. Fewer SKU's, and more shared parts between models would be better for consumers and for the planet.