> Plus the new TV probably has more features than the old one.
That right there would kill the repair incentive for me. I keep my stuff for a long time, so a failure is partly welcome. Your new $300 TV in today's dollars is probably cheaper than my old and feature-poor TV. I'm almost like a small distance time traveler every time I buy something more complicated than a pair of socks.
> If it doesn’t, buy another one. TVs are ridiculously inexpensive now.
If you buy a mediocre one, sure? Good OLED TVs today still cost thousands. They are a big ticket purchase for most buyers. Hesitance in breaking them open is entirely sensible.
I find it hard to believe that the manufacturer sold it for less than that. Maybe they had to get rid of that unit, but selling that far below cost cannot be profitable.
> There is no reason to make this assumption (about smart TVs costing less) in the first place.
Sure there is. 99% of everything else I've ever experienced in my life have had a positive correlation between features and price. I'm actually struggling right now to think of another product where—in general—more features are cheaper than fewer. Other than television sets, I cannot think of one right now. (Maybe if I spend some time on it, I can think of another) Therefore, knowing what I know about prices of things, it is totally reasonable to assume that TVs follow the pattern.
> What are birthdays for if not throwing out trash and replacing it.
You are free to send me a couple grant for my birthday to buy a new equivalent TV with display port connectors. Except you can't even do that because such a TV does not exist.
>Because if WalMart has the same TV for $40 less, the customer will go there to buy. //
It used to be ready paying meant getting more quality, longer life, easier to replace parts. Now, it seems unrelated. The cheapest one may well be the best one, or a at least the expensive one has all the corners cut too.
There are situations where this isn't the case. And this may be a middle vs bottom of market thing. But expensive stuff is often the same crap with a brand logo.
> The consequence is that I really dread buying things and have no ability to make an impulse purchase.
Having also grown up with limited means, I am deliberate about purchases. Unlike you however the lesson I learned growing up was that I don't need to buy "the best" of flashiest item, because that often was out of our reach.
> It also shocks me that so many people don't know how to repair anything
I hate wasting money on new "toys" (things I don't need but enjoy), and I also enjoy repairing stuff. My solution to both is buying Thrift store or garage sale electronics, perform repairs if necessary, put them to use and sell them off when I acquire a better replacement.
I definitely agree, but I also believe this applies to some products more than others, and I think there are also diminishing returns as you pay more.
For example, I can say I’ve probably owned 3 refrigerators over the past 20 years (two different homes), and probably paid less than $5000 total. The refrigerator in the last home is probably still going strong, and the one in this home will probably last another 5-10 years at least, and definitely longer than we’ll be in this home.
I think we may have had one repair call at the last home, and none yet on this one (though I’ll admit that the ice maker is currently out, and I’ve not taken the time to diagnose it, and may or may not need a repair call).
Would I pay 2x if I knew I was guaranteed not needing a repair call. Maybe, but not definitely. Would I pay 10x though? Definitely not (unless I was gaining other benefits).
But I also believe I did decent research before purchasing all of these, and that probably played more of a role vs. how much I paid.
But again, will agree that a lot of times you do get what you pay for. I’ve been bitten before by trying to save money.
I just also believe that people with money can tend to overpay for things with diminishing returns, and there’s a balance that can be struck between quality and cost. And I’ve also been bitten by overpaying for something that wasn’t worth the premiums cost in the end (e.g. upper end computer parts can definitely have diminishing returns).
> You only buy new when the old one breaks down right?
Are you kidding? You must not live in the US.
People buy new phones despite the old one working. My phone is almost 6 years old. No one I know keeps phones around that long. Becoming rare to see anyone keep one for even 4 years.
I lived on cheap, used furniture. There's a glut of it, because people buy new furniture despite their old ones being just fine.[1]
People often change their cars even though they're not even 10 years old.
They change their shirts even though the old ones are not worn out.
And so on. There are not that many things people keep till they break down.
[1] They cost about 10% of a new one. Heck, do this experiment: Buy an expensive table/bed. Don't even assemble it. Immediately put it on the used market. Note how know one will buy it for even half the price. I have one that I can't sell for 20% of the price. Unless it's some fad item or office chair.
> a TV which is next to worthless after a couple of years
Oh, wait, you won't get it, you expect to throw away perfectly working devices frequently.
The desk looks like there is maybe $50 worth of materials and maybe 2 hours worth of work there (I'm taking for granted they know what they're doing and can do a lot of it pretty efficiently). So that's what, between $100-$200 material and labor. Where is the other $1300 of value coming from?
They most certainly would deny you in Massachusetts (not that my town has a dump; I have a dumpster) and none of the consumer recycling places like Best Buy will take TVs over about 35 inches or so. You'd have to trek around to find a commercial recycler and, at that point, I'm just going to stick it in the back of my garage until the end of time.
In any case a more significant project than I need to take on right now. What I have is fine.
> So the reason quality is lower is because no-one will pay for quality anymore.
Unwilling or unable? I can't find a way to distinguish something that's expensive because it's high quality from something that's expensive due to branding. Price is an unreliable signal, brand is an unreliable signal, reviews can't take longevity into consideration, So I just buy cheap shit and hope for the best.
That right there would kill the repair incentive for me. I keep my stuff for a long time, so a failure is partly welcome. Your new $300 TV in today's dollars is probably cheaper than my old and feature-poor TV. I'm almost like a small distance time traveler every time I buy something more complicated than a pair of socks.
reply