Carl McIver wrote:
"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
oups.com...

It is NOT a conspiracy - it is the result of accountants
over-ruling engineers. The demand is to lower costs, at any cost.
The engineers then have to decide where to cut costs.


The engineers are TOLD by the MBA accountants where to cut costs.

Good designs are allowed to turn to bad designs to cut a fraction of
a penny.

The sooner the product dies after warranty, the sooner the customer
will be buying another NEW item.

From their competitor? What manufacturer wants to take that
chance?

As has been pointed out, the repair inventory is considered a "profit
center" which is code for gouge the customer if he wants to repair
the item.

If you have to stock, for thirty years, a part that exists only on
a small handful of machines out there, how much would that part
_really_ cost after overhead for that _entire_ period gets figured
in? And since machines change design every few years, there are
simply thousands and thousands of parts all in the same situation. It's for that reason I quit
bitching about the prices of replacement
parts at car dealers. I may pay more, but I'm assured that it will
be there more so than any other source. That assurance costs money.


And yes it IS a conspiracy....to get more of the public's money.

I'm calling you out on that one. Perhaps if all the brands and
manufacturers of appliances were consolidated so much that they _had_
to be in cahoots, I'd be more inclined to believe you, but your
appliances are built all over the world now, by a variety of
companies competing hard for your business, not just once, but again
and again, and that means that one company with a good product will
never say a word to a competitor about how they do a better job. I
certainly wouldn't, and the way to make money in appliances is to
build a better product that gives the customer the value for the
dollar they are willing to pay. Folks that want a top of the line
appliance will pay extra for the appearance of better quality, and if
it can be proved they're getting their money's worth, they'll spend
even more. What it costs me when a product fails, wastes my time, and
the hassle and frustration of resolving the situation, means far more
to me than the initial cost of a product. I've paid that price too
many times, as I'm sure we all have at one time or another, so back
to the point of the most bang for my buck is why companies competing
for my precious dollar will not conspire with each other. All it
takes is for one of them to refuse to conspire and the conspirators
lose, leaving that one to earn my money.

The trouble is that there is no easy to way get a real handle on what
products on offer will last significantly longer with most appliances.

And its arguable how many really care that much about that sort of
thing now with the appliances so cheap and so trivially affordable.