I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

I've been in the consumer electronics repair game for a very long time, and
I realise that spares can't be kept for ever, but I really think that for an
item such as this, which I'm willing to bet being a Denon, set the owner
back a pretty penny when he bought it, should be supported by them for at
least 10 years, instead of it now being an otherwise perfectly good, piece
of written-off potential landfill.

If governments *really* want to make an ecological difference with regard to
consumer electronics, then they should stop pussyfooting around with all
this ineffectual lead-free crap complete with all the reliability and
service problems that it causes, and instead, make some serious efforts to
address the issue of spare parts availability and, even more importantly,
forcing the manufacturers to supply such parts at a realistic price, which
reflects the true cost price and storage. This would save a very great deal
of equipment, world-wide, from ending up as 'uneconomical to repair'
garbage, two weeks out of warranty.

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe that
poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the bone
on component speccing, along with poor design by fresh-out-of-university
graduates who know all of the theory and none of the practice. As far as the
cost and availability of spares go, I think that this is basic profiteering
on the former, and that both are driven by the company bean-counters. There.
That's my rant for the week ... d|:-(

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote in message
...
I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only
manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about
householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major
Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

I've been in the consumer electronics repair game for a very long time,
and
I realise that spares can't be kept for ever, but I really think that for
an
item such as this, which I'm willing to bet being a Denon, set the owner
back a pretty penny when he bought it, should be supported by them for at
least 10 years, instead of it now being an otherwise perfectly good, piece
of written-off potential landfill.

If governments *really* want to make an ecological difference with regard
to
consumer electronics, then they should stop pussyfooting around with all
this ineffectual lead-free crap complete with all the reliability and
service problems that it causes, and instead, make some serious efforts to
address the issue of spare parts availability and, even more importantly,
forcing the manufacturers to supply such parts at a realistic price, which
reflects the true cost price and storage. This would save a very great
deal
of equipment, world-wide, from ending up as 'uneconomical to repair'
garbage, two weeks out of warranty.

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe
that
poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the bone
on component speccing, along with poor design by fresh-out-of-university
graduates who know all of the theory and none of the practice. As far as
the
cost and availability of spares go, I think that this is basic
profiteering
on the former, and that both are driven by the company bean-counters.
There.
That's my rant for the week ... d|:-(

Arfa



I've never contacted main agents for spares.
If I can't get around it with a generic part or improvisation that's the end
of the repair as far as i am concerned, eg microcontroller with embedded
firmware, if thats gone then I cut my loses at that point.
Ever since hearing about Tektronix , Guernsey spares policy.
Every so often cut by half the number of spares on the racks, sell those off
at auction and double the price of the remainder, hence likes of £760 plus
VAT for small EHT oscillator transformer.

--
Diverse Devices, Southampton, England
electronic hints and repair briefs , schematics/manuals list on
http://home.graffiti.net/diverse:graffiti.net/

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only
manufactured in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of
this lead-free crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing
about householders and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then
allowing major Japanese manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

I've been in the consumer electronics repair game for a very long time,
and I realise that spares can't be kept for ever, but I really think that
for an item such as this, which I'm willing to bet being a Denon, set the
owner back a pretty penny when he bought it, should be supported by them
for at least 10 years, instead of it now being an otherwise perfectly
good, piece of written-off potential landfill.

If governments *really* want to make an ecological difference with regard
to consumer electronics, then they should stop pussyfooting around with
all this ineffectual lead-free crap complete with all the reliability and
service problems that it causes, and instead, make some serious efforts to
address the issue of spare parts availability and, even more importantly,
forcing the manufacturers to supply such parts at a realistic price, which
reflects the true cost price and storage. This would save a very great
deal of equipment, world-wide, from ending up as 'uneconomical to repair'
garbage, two weeks out of warranty.

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe
that poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the
bone on component speccing, along with poor design by
fresh-out-of-university graduates who know all of the theory and none of
the practice. As far as the cost and availability of spares go, I think
that this is basic profiteering on the former, and that both are driven by
the company bean-counters. There. That's my rant for the week ... d|:-(

Arfa


Couple of things:

Here - years ago when I got into Electronics repairs - I was told two
stories - one being companies keep parts for 5 years - the other 10, so who
knows. I'm not sure if they still follow those rules - but if they do - then
in one case - I can see where you would be SOL. On the other (10) years -
you should still be able to get them.

As to recycling - it is such a joke. When I was like 6 or so and in
Elementary School - we had "film strips" showing us "future" recycling
efforts using factories and so on to recycle all sorts of products. In say
the past 10 years - bins came out with "some of" the local garbage
contractors - to separate cans, glass, etc... - but that "fad" - died. So -
they can harp on recycling all they want - they're not enforcing it like
they think.

And I agree - this country - maybe the world - has become a dumping ground
for irrepairable electronics. "I" don't buy "anything" new - unless it is a
must.
I much prefer the old and it is a lot easier to maintain. My eyes don't
swear at me for trying to see the SMD........

On Sep 11, 6:28 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

I've been in the consumer electronics repair game for a very long time, and
I realise that spares can't be kept for ever, but I really think that for an
item such as this, which I'm willing to bet being a Denon, set the owner
back a pretty penny when he bought it, should be supported by them for at
least 10 years, instead of it now being an otherwise perfectly good, piece
of written-off potential landfill.

If governments *really* want to make an ecological difference with regard to
consumer electronics, then they should stop pussyfooting around with all
this ineffectual lead-free crap complete with all the reliability and
service problems that it causes, and instead, make some serious efforts to
address the issue of spare parts availability and, even more importantly,
forcing the manufacturers to supply such parts at a realistic price, which
reflects the true cost price and storage. This would save a very great deal
of equipment, world-wide, from ending up as 'uneconomical to repair'
garbage, two weeks out of warranty.

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe that
poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the bone
on component speccing, along with poor design by fresh-out-of-university
graduates who know all of the theory and none of the practice. As far as the
cost and availability of spares go, I think that this is basic profiteering
on the former, and that both are driven by the company bean-counters. There.
That's my rant for the week ... d|:-(

Arfa

Obtaining power transformers were always a problem unless they were
common. It wasn't unusual for a company not to stock many as they
rarely failed. I've seen it a few times in 35 years and always had
problems getting power transformers as a spare part.

carneyke wrote:


Obtaining power transformers were always a problem unless they were
common. It wasn't unusual for a company not to stock many as they
rarely failed. I've seen it a few times in 35 years and always had
problems getting power transformers as a spare part.

You`ll probably find that although most mains trannies never fail, you
sometimes get a particular item where the mains transformer is a common
failure be it windings or some built in protection device. On my bench
now is a huge Sony amplifier and a Denon with opencircuit primaries. The
Sony has failed because the thermal fuse embedded in the windings has
gone o/c simply due to the heat build up.

The mains tranny on a lot of equipment is a designated safety part. I`m
not sure how the law stands, but I think such a part has to be replaced
by a exact replacement from the manufacturer.

Ron(UK)

"Ron(UK)" wrote in message
...
carneyke wrote:


Obtaining power transformers were always a problem unless they were
common. It wasn't unusual for a company not to stock many as they
rarely failed. I've seen it a few times in 35 years and always had
problems getting power transformers as a spare part.

You`ll probably find that although most mains trannies never fail, you
sometimes get a particular item where the mains transformer is a common
failure be it windings or some built in protection device. On my bench now
is a huge Sony amplifier and a Denon with opencircuit primaries. The Sony
has failed because the thermal fuse embedded in the windings has gone o/c
simply due to the heat build up.

The mains tranny on a lot of equipment is a designated safety part. I`m
not sure how the law stands, but I think such a part has to be replaced
by a exact replacement from the manufacturer.

Ron(UK)

I always treat that as being the case, Ron, and would never dream of
substituting a mains tranny in one that was a 'commercial' repair to which I
have to put my name. The legal position, should anything go wrong with a
substitute, is a potential nightmare. I see a lot of high end AV amps, as
well as group PA amps, and seem to have seen an increase in failures of
mains trannies recently - last 12 months maybe. And not just open primaries
which are, as you rightly say, often down to a failed thermal fuse embedded
in the windings. As you have a couple on the bench right now, I wonder if
you feel that you have seen an increase in the incidence of tranny failures
?

In the last few weeks even, I have had three transformers with short circuit
primaries (yes, that's *short* circuit ...) One was a Marshall PA amp, and
another was a StudioMaster mixer desk / PA. The third was a Musical Fidelity
300 series Nuvista separate power supply unit ( ridiculously big and heavy )
which had its heater transformer short on the primary side. Both the
StudioMaster and the MF were torroidals, which I have not really had a lot
of trouble with in the past.

In any event, I was able to obtain manufacturer's direct replacement
trannies for all of them, without a problem. In the past, I have not had a
problem with Denons, or any others, either ordering direct from the
manufacturers, where whoever I'm doing the repair on behalf of has a direct
acount, or via third party spares agents, which is the only way that a
number of the manufacturers will sell parts anyway, dealer or not.

As far as how long to keep spares for, I'm sure that there did used to be a
legal obligation in the UK, but I'm not sure for how long. Whether or not
that is still the case, I've no idea. I do, however, feel that manufacturers
of 'better' quality equipment, such as Denon are, should keep spares for
their products, which are an expensive investment for their owners in the
first place, for let's say 10 years. I don't think that is unreasonable. I
would be pretty hacked off if I went to get a new starter motor for my 7
year old car, and got told "sorry pal, it's scrap. Part no longer available
...."

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:
"Ron(UK)" wrote in message
...
carneyke wrote:

Obtaining power transformers were always a problem unless they were
common. It wasn't unusual for a company not to stock many as they
rarely failed. I've seen it a few times in 35 years and always had
problems getting power transformers as a spare part.
You`ll probably find that although most mains trannies never fail, you
sometimes get a particular item where the mains transformer is a common
failure be it windings or some built in protection device. On my bench now
is a huge Sony amplifier and a Denon with opencircuit primaries. The Sony
has failed because the thermal fuse embedded in the windings has gone o/c
simply due to the heat build up.
The mains tranny on a lot of equipment is a designated safety part. I`m
not sure how the law stands, but I think such a part has to be replaced
by a exact replacement from the manufacturer.

Ron(UK)

I always treat that as being the case, Ron, and would never dream of
substituting a mains tranny in one that was a 'commercial' repair to which I
have to put my name. The legal position, should anything go wrong with a
substitute, is a potential nightmare. I see a lot of high end AV amps, as
well as group PA amps, and seem to have seen an increase in failures of
mains trannies recently - last 12 months maybe. And not just open primaries
which are, as you rightly say, often down to a failed thermal fuse embedded
in the windings. As you have a couple on the bench right now, I wonder if
you feel that you have seen an increase in the incidence of tranny failures
?

I can`t rightly say that I have, as I don't do anywhere near as many
repairs as I did even just a couple of years ago. The vast majority of
faults are solder related now.

Most of the stuff these days is so cheap to buy that no one wants to
spend any money on repairs. I have a pile of Behringer stuff that`s
scrap simply because parts aren't available to anyone, it seems even
their own service depts don't have spares!


In the last few weeks even, I have had three transformers with short circuit
primaries (yes, that's *short* circuit ...) One was a Marshall PA amp, and
another was a StudioMaster mixer desk / PA. The third was a Musical Fidelity
300 series Nuvista separate power supply unit ( ridiculously big and heavy )
which had its heater transformer short on the primary side. Both the
StudioMaster and the MF were torroidals, which I have not really had a lot
of trouble with in the past.

The lower end Marshall gear is crap isn't it. I havent seen any of the
new generation of Studiomaster gear, but the old stuff was great. I dont
have any great confidence in most modern sound equipment these days.

There`s really no excuse for a toroidal transformer primary going s/c
all by itself is there?


In any event, I was able to obtain manufacturer's direct replacement
trannies for all of them, without a problem. In the past, I have not had a
problem with Denons, or any others, either ordering direct from the
manufacturers, where whoever I'm doing the repair on behalf of has a direct
acount, or via third party spares agents, which is the only way that a
number of the manufacturers will sell parts anyway, dealer or not.

I`ve really lost interest in doing repairs, seems like far too much
hassle for not enough return.


As far as how long to keep spares for, I'm sure that there did used to be a
legal obligation in the UK, but I'm not sure for how long. Whether or not
that is still the case, I've no idea. I do, however, feel that manufacturers
of 'better' quality equipment, such as Denon are, should keep spares for
their products, which are an expensive investment for their owners in the
first place, for let's say 10 years. I don't think that is unreasonable. I
would be pretty hacked off if I went to get a new starter motor for my 7
year old car, and got told "sorry pal, it's scrap. Part no longer available

Ohhh don't get me started on the price of spares for cars! At least
Dick Turpin wore a mask.

Ron(UK)

On 9/11/07 3:28 AM, in article ,
"Arfa Daily" wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

I've been in the consumer electronics repair game for a very long time, and
I realise that spares can't be kept for ever, but I really think that for an
item such as this, which I'm willing to bet being a Denon, set the owner
back a pretty penny when he bought it, should be supported by them for at
least 10 years, instead of it now being an otherwise perfectly good, piece
of written-off potential landfill.

If governments *really* want to make an ecological difference with regard to
consumer electronics, then they should stop pussyfooting around with all
this ineffectual lead-free crap complete with all the reliability and
service problems that it causes, and instead, make some serious efforts to
address the issue of spare parts availability and, even more importantly,
forcing the manufacturers to supply such parts at a realistic price, which
reflects the true cost price and storage. This would save a very great deal
of equipment, world-wide, from ending up as 'uneconomical to repair'
garbage, two weeks out of warranty.

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe that
poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the bone
on component speccing, along with poor design by fresh-out-of-university
graduates who know all of the theory and none of the practice. As far as the
cost and availability of spares go, I think that this is basic profiteering
on the former, and that both are driven by the company bean-counters. There.
That's my rant for the week ... d|:-(

Arfa


Good rant, but........

have you any proof of government responsibility?

"Don Bowey" wrote in message
...
On 9/11/07 3:28 AM, in article ,
"Arfa Daily" wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and
DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only
manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about
householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major
Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

I've been in the consumer electronics repair game for a very long time,
and
I realise that spares can't be kept for ever, but I really think that for
an
item such as this, which I'm willing to bet being a Denon, set the owner
back a pretty penny when he bought it, should be supported by them for at
least 10 years, instead of it now being an otherwise perfectly good,
piece
of written-off potential landfill.

If governments *really* want to make an ecological difference with regard
to
consumer electronics, then they should stop pussyfooting around with all
this ineffectual lead-free crap complete with all the reliability and
service problems that it causes, and instead, make some serious efforts
to
address the issue of spare parts availability and, even more importantly,
forcing the manufacturers to supply such parts at a realistic price,
which
reflects the true cost price and storage. This would save a very great
deal
of equipment, world-wide, from ending up as 'uneconomical to repair'
garbage, two weeks out of warranty.

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe
that
poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the
bone
on component speccing, along with poor design by fresh-out-of-university
graduates who know all of the theory and none of the practice. As far as
the
cost and availability of spares go, I think that this is basic
profiteering
on the former, and that both are driven by the company bean-counters.
There.
That's my rant for the week ... d|:-(

Arfa


Good rant, but........

have you any proof of government responsibility?

Responsibility for what ? Trying to force eco-friendliness on us all ? Why
yes then !! The half-arsed ill thought through RoHS legislation championed
by most of the governments in europe will do for a start. Then there's
national government provoking local government into introducing eco
legislation that leaves ordinary citizens with a fine and a criminal record
for accidentally putting a paper envelope into a rubbish receptacle
designated to be for glass ... Given those, I think that government has
amply demonstrated that they want to get their snouts stuck into all this
eco nonsense, so if they are going to do the job, they might as well do it
properly, and do something that really *will* make a difference, like
legislating on spares availability and pricing.

Arfa

Meat Plow wrote:
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 10:28:31 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

A few years ago I bought a 1981 Honda CB750-F that had 5K miles on it for
$800.00 US. The bike was and still is in near mint condition. One problem
is that the alternator does not charge. Back in 1982 I bought an identical
CB750-F new off the lot. The alternator failed in that one too, shorted
windings in the rotor. Come to find out that this is a common problem.
About 3 years after I bought the used bike, I contacted Honda for a price
on the complete alternator assemb. Much to my chagrin the parts are, you
guessed it, NLA. Now my options are finding used (and possibly defective)
parts on the internet or taking the rotor and stator to a company in a
nearby town that can rewind them. I haven't made a decision yet since I've
been riding Harleys for a few years now but my girlfriend who can ride
wants to ride my Harley and I have let her a few times but would rather
put her on the Honda for obvious reasons Well at least until I can
afford to buy another Harley or she wins the lottery and buys me "the bike
of my dreams" like she said she would LoL.


Have it rewound by a good shop. Most of the used ones I have found were
crap. Or hit http://www.electrexworld.co.uk/ 125 bucks for a new one.
Mine came from them. Better than factory and fit like a glove.

--
Steve W.
Near Cooperstown, New York

Arfa Daily wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

Why do you think the problem here is related to daft eco-legislation ?

Graham

On Sep 11, 11:33 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"Don Bowey" wrote in message

...

On 9/11/07 3:28 AM, in article ,
"Arfa Daily" wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and
DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

snip
I've been in the consumer electronics repair game for a very long time,
and
I realise that spares can't be kept for ever, but I really think that for
an
item such as this, which I'm willing to bet being a Denon, set the owner
back a pretty penny when he bought it, should be supported by them for at
least 10 years, instead of it now being an otherwise perfectly good,
piece
of written-off potential landfill.
snip
Arfa

Good rant, but........

have you any proof of government responsibility?

Responsibility for what ? Trying to force eco-friendliness on us all ? Why
yes then !! The half-arsed ill thought through RoHS legislation championed
by most of the governments in europe will do for a start. Then there's
national government provoking local government into introducing eco
legislation that leaves ordinary citizens with a fine and a criminal record
for accidentally putting a paper envelope into a rubbish receptacle
designated to be for glass ... Given those, I think that government has
amply demonstrated that they want to get their snouts stuck into all this
eco nonsense, so if they are going to do the job, they might as well do it
properly, and do something that really *will* make a difference, like
legislating on spares availability and pricing.

Arfa

Not sure what it's like in the UK but in the US the manufacturer pays
tax on items on the shelf so after a short time it isn't worth keeping
spares. In the US I believe there is a mandated 7 year parts
availability but I don't know if that is from date of introduction or
date of end of production though nowadays that may be on the order of
months anyway.

I opened a small transformer (not a big Sony or Denon) and found a
resistor sized picofuse under the top layer of insulation and replaced
it with the same size/value fuse. Would that be a possibility for the
Denon and would that pass the legal requirements ? (I suspect not)

GG

wrote:

I opened a small transformer (not a big Sony or Denon) and found a
resistor sized picofuse under the top layer of insulation and replaced
it with the same size/value fuse. Would that be a possibility for the
Denon and would that pass the legal requirements ? (I suspect not)

If anything went wrong, you'd probably find yourself explaining your
actions to a judge.

Ron(UK)

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and
DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only
manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about
householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major
Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

Why do you think the problem here is related to daft eco-legislation ?

Graham

You are missing the point Graham. The problem itself is not due to the eco
legislation, but a solution to a lot of electronic equipment going to
landfill, or even recycling, *could* be. The point that I was making was
that governments have all jumped on the eco-hysteria-save-the-planet
bandwagon by legislating in a draconian way on issues that were not much of
a problem in the first place, for example lead in solder. Whilst they are
doing this - and causing endless further problems for manufacturers and
service organisations alike, to say nothing of screwing with the established
energy budgets to make and service the stuff, and buggering long established
reliability figures for particular technologies - they are totally ignoring
the thousands of tons of equipment that are being written off and going to
landfill daily, because manufacturers either won't supply parts to repair
that equipment, or make the parts so expensive that the item becomes not
*worth* repairing. How easy would it be to legislate on this simple
'solution', and make the manufacturers hold the spares for a particular
length of time, and make them sell them to repair organisations for a
sensible price that reflects what it has cost them to buy and store them? I
write off a couple of DVD players a week, because the manufacturers want
more for the laser as a spare part, than the item cost in the first place,
or that they just won't supply it as a part. Even if you take into account
that electronic equipment going to landfill is on the decline due to
recycling initiatives for end-of-life products being put formerly into place
(the WEEE Directive), it would still be better, energy budget-wise, to
repair rather than recycle.

So that's the point I was making - that I thought it was well 'off', that a
'reputable' major manufacturer like Denon, could no longer supply a vital
part such as the mains tranny for an otherwise perfectly servicable item
that was only a few years old. Thus, the item was going to become just so
much more landfill, or have to be recycled, when governments could quite
easily address this 'real' problem, that we all know exists but they seem
not to, and knock it on the head.

See what I'm saying now ?

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and
DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power
transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the
surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only
manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about
householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major
Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

Why do you think the problem here is related to daft eco-legislation ?

Graham

You are missing the point Graham. The problem itself is not due to the eco
legislation, but a solution to a lot of electronic equipment going to
landfill, or even recycling, *could* be. The point that I was making was
that governments have all jumped on the eco-hysteria-save-the-planet
bandwagon by legislating in a draconian way on issues that were not much
of a problem in the first place, for example lead in solder. Whilst they
are doing this - and causing endless further problems for manufacturers
and service organisations alike, to say nothing of screwing with the
established energy budgets to make and service the stuff, and buggering
long established reliability figures for particular technologies - they
are totally ignoring the thousands of tons of equipment that are being
written off and going to landfill daily, because manufacturers either
won't supply parts to repair that equipment, or make the parts so
expensive that the item becomes not *worth* repairing. How easy would it
be to legislate on this simple 'solution', and make the manufacturers hold
the spares for a particular length of time, and make them sell them to
repair organisations for a sensible price that reflects what it has cost
them to buy and store them? I write off a couple of DVD players a week,
because the manufacturers want more for the laser as a spare part, than
the item cost in the first place, or that they just won't supply it as a
part. Even if you take into account that electronic equipment going to
landfill is on the decline due to recycling initiatives for end-of-life
products being put formerly into place (the WEEE Directive), it would
still be better, energy budget-wise, to repair rather than recycle.

So that's the point I was making - that I thought it was well 'off', that
a 'reputable' major manufacturer like Denon, could no longer supply a
vital part such as the mains tranny for an otherwise perfectly servicable
item that was only a few years old. Thus, the item was going to become
just so much more landfill, or have to be recycled, when governments could
quite easily address this 'real' problem, that we all know exists but they
seem not to, and knock it on the head.

See what I'm saying now ?

Arfa


Arfa - I agree - however I wonder - big business "usually" has a hand in
"buying" votes and forcing some legislation. Are they forcing this sort of
action so people must continue to buy "new" as opposed to having repaired?
They harp on recycling - yet the programs which "were" in effect around
here - died off - and it doesn't seem to be such a big deal. And yet - as
you say - here we are dumping tons of products made unrepairable - because
of those same groups of people (politicians, etc).

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and
DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only
manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about
householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major
Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

Why do you think the problem here is related to daft eco-legislation ?

Graham

You are missing the point Graham. The problem itself is not due to the eco
legislation, but a solution to a lot of electronic equipment going to
landfill, or even recycling, *could* be. The point that I was making was
that governments have all jumped on the eco-hysteria-save-the-planet
bandwagon by legislating in a draconian way on issues that were not much of
a problem in the first place, for example lead in solder. Whilst they are
doing this - and causing endless further problems for manufacturers and
service organisations alike, to say nothing of screwing with the established
energy budgets to make and service the stuff, and buggering long established
reliability figures for particular technologies - they are totally ignoring
the thousands of tons of equipment that are being written off and going to
landfill daily, because manufacturers either won't supply parts to repair
that equipment, or make the parts so expensive that the item becomes not
*worth* repairing. How easy would it be to legislate on this simple
'solution', and make the manufacturers hold the spares for a particular
length of time, and make them sell them to repair organisations for a
sensible price that reflects what it has cost them to buy and store them? I
write off a couple of DVD players a week, because the manufacturers want
more for the laser as a spare part, than the item cost in the first place,
or that they just won't supply it as a part. Even if you take into account
that electronic equipment going to landfill is on the decline due to
recycling initiatives for end-of-life products being put formerly into place
(the WEEE Directive), it would still be better, energy budget-wise, to
repair rather than recycle.

So that's the point I was making - that I thought it was well 'off', that a
'reputable' major manufacturer like Denon, could no longer supply a vital
part such as the mains tranny for an otherwise perfectly servicable item
that was only a few years old. Thus, the item was going to become just so
much more landfill, or have to be recycled, when governments could quite
easily address this 'real' problem, that we all know exists but they seem
not to, and knock it on the head.

See what I'm saying now ?


Does that transformer have an internal thermal fuse? I have dug out
and replaced a lot of them over the last 20 years on all kinds of
electronics.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
...
Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

I have just had a Denon AVR1800 AV amp come across my bench. It is a
reasonably sophisticated model with six channels and Dolby Digital and
DTS
modes, optical inputs and so on. It has an open circuit power
transformer
primary. Enquires to the Denon spares agent came back with the
surprising
news that it is "no longer available".

Now this is not what I expect from a company like Denon, given that
according to the date codes on all the components, it was only
manufactured
in 1999. So what are governments doing, by forcing all of this
lead-free
crap on us in the name of eco-friendliness, and squealing about
householders
and their lack of recycling responsibility, and then allowing major
Japanese
manufacturers to get away with stuff like this ?

Why do you think the problem here is related to daft eco-legislation ?

Graham

You are missing the point Graham. The problem itself is not due to the
eco
legislation, but a solution to a lot of electronic equipment going to
landfill, or even recycling, *could* be. The point that I was making was
that governments have all jumped on the eco-hysteria-save-the-planet
bandwagon by legislating in a draconian way on issues that were not much
of
a problem in the first place, for example lead in solder. Whilst they are
doing this - and causing endless further problems for manufacturers and
service organisations alike, to say nothing of screwing with the
established
energy budgets to make and service the stuff, and buggering long
established
reliability figures for particular technologies - they are totally
ignoring
the thousands of tons of equipment that are being written off and going
to
landfill daily, because manufacturers either won't supply parts to repair
that equipment, or make the parts so expensive that the item becomes not
*worth* repairing. How easy would it be to legislate on this simple
'solution', and make the manufacturers hold the spares for a particular
length of time, and make them sell them to repair organisations for a
sensible price that reflects what it has cost them to buy and store them?
I
write off a couple of DVD players a week, because the manufacturers want
more for the laser as a spare part, than the item cost in the first
place,
or that they just won't supply it as a part. Even if you take into
account
that electronic equipment going to landfill is on the decline due to
recycling initiatives for end-of-life products being put formerly into
place
(the WEEE Directive), it would still be better, energy budget-wise, to
repair rather than recycle.

So that's the point I was making - that I thought it was well 'off', that
a
'reputable' major manufacturer like Denon, could no longer supply a vital
part such as the mains tranny for an otherwise perfectly servicable item
that was only a few years old. Thus, the item was going to become just so
much more landfill, or have to be recycled, when governments could quite
easily address this 'real' problem, that we all know exists but they seem
not to, and knock it on the head.

See what I'm saying now ?


Does that transformer have an internal thermal fuse? I have dug out
and replaced a lot of them over the last 20 years on all kinds of
electronics.



Hi Michael. Trust you are well ? I guess that it very possibly does.
However, it's not at all visible, and 'digging' is probably what would have
to be done to get to it. If it was my own, I might go down that road, but as
it belongs to a customer of one of the stores that I do work for, I wouldn't
dream of doing anything to a designated safety component such as a power
transformer, other than replace it with a manufacturer's original.

In these days of responsibility and culpability and litigation and whatever
else, I went past the "mend it whatever" stage some years back and now, sad
as it sometimes is, for my own protection I never tamper with or sub any
parts that might represent a safety issue to either person or property. If
the faulty part is no longer available, then that's it as far as I am
concerned. It leaves my shop as "Unable to repair due to lack of
availability of manufacturer's parts." If the owner then wants to take it up
with the manufacturer, or take the item to a back street 'bodge it up'
merchant who will get it going for them, and then disappear a few weeks
later back to whichever eastern european country he came here from, then
that's up to them, and their own responsibility.

I would guess that the situation amongst 'reputable' repair agents must be
much the same over there. The US has always been a long way ahead of the UK
I think, when it comes to lawyers and the compensation culture ??

Arfa

On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:03:00 -0400 "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote in Message id:
:

Does that transformer have an internal thermal fuse? I have dug out
and replaced a lot of them over the last 20 years on all kinds of
electronics.

I've never tried that - I assume then, that you don't need to remove
windings? Or is it not quite so easy?

"JW" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:03:00 -0400 "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote in Message id:
:

Does that transformer have an internal thermal fuse? I have dug out
and replaced a lot of them over the last 20 years on all kinds of
electronics.

I've never tried that - I assume then, that you don't need to remove
windings? Or is it not quite so easy?

As Michael says, sometimes you can get the old fuse out, particularly if
it's just slipped into a card 'pouch' in the windings, but more often than
not these days, they seem to be buried deep in the tranny, where you would
likely do damage to the winding's insulation integrity, trying to get it out

Arfa

On Sep 11, 6:28 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe that
poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the bone
on component speccing, along with poor design by fresh-out-of-university
graduates who know all of the theory and none of the practice. As far as the
cost and availability of spares go, I think that this is basic profiteering
on the former, and that both are driven by the company bean-counters. There.
That's my rant for the week ...

I think you are about 30 degrees tangentally off the mark on the
causes, but pretty much dead-on with the results.

Keep a couple of points in mind:

a) Most "Name" manufacturers, even Denon, Sony, Yamaha, and Nakamichi
job out mostly all the content in their equipment. Vertical
integration such as in the past (Use names lost in the dimness of time
such as Philco or RCA that made _everything_ inside their equipment
except the wire from tubes to coils to speakers to the cabinet itself)
has pretty much vanished in the electronics industry.

b) Computerized manufacturing techniques within specialty
manufacturing facilities pretty much makes "similar" parts in long or
short runs commodity items vs. custom (bespoke) items after the first
50 or so roll down the line.

c) Keep in mind that WalMart is not the only end-user that chokes its
vendors and suppliers for lower prices. Consumer electronics
manufacturer end-users have an interesting technique of not paying for
inventory until it is actually installed in the item. So the supplier
is not about to make stock much further in advance than is certain to
be needed. He might not get paid for them.

So, Denon/Yamaha/Sony wants 12,000 transformers to a certain
specification. They _WILL NOT_ make them internally, but will job them
out to a transformer maker who will then deliver them *just in time*
as needed. Should the need be greater, the supplier will make more -
also just in time. Should the contract be cancelled, you can also bet
that he will have no surplus in his inventory either. Denon/Yamaha/
Sony then will make a bet on the number of spares that might be needed
(if any), buy them and then stop. They will also make an actuarial
decision as to how long they will support an item such that they might
consider a later run of such specialty parts... And that will be a
cold calculation: The cost of a later run vs. a very few ****ed off
customers who likely wanted something "new" anyway. Where do you think
that calculation will fall? Especially if that costomer can be made to
smile with a $25 gift certificate?

That they are slowly and almost inexorably putting the repair shops
out of business is simply not their concern. As to warranty issues, it
would be far cheaper for them to do again what is done in the US,
pretty much replace any failed items (under warranty) out-of-hand with
the 'latest' version and trash the failed unit rather than maintain an
actual warranty service station with technician salaries, parts,
shipping/receiving and so forth. All that they really need is the
shipping/receiving bit. Keep in mind that if *you* are paying $499.99
at Best Buy/Circuit City for a AV receiver, it likely cost Denon/
Yamaha/Sony something under $100 to make and ship.

The "Government" has not a damned thing to do with it. It is the
consumer that drives these things... and the average consumer is well-
and-truly hypnotized into believing that "old" is junk and not worth
fixing. And that same thoroughly hypnotized consumer will be damned
before he is willing to subsidize his neighbor's job by supporting
reasonable trade policies and the consequential higher prices.

As in most things, we pretty much get exactly what we deserve... and
exactly what we wish for.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

wrote in message
ps.com...
On Sep 11, 6:28 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:

Oh, and before everyone starts on the conspiracy theories about how the
manufacturers only want it to last just out of warranty so that they can
sell you another, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking. I believe
that
poor reliability is down to the manufacturers cutting the cost to the
bone
on component speccing, along with poor design by fresh-out-of-university
graduates who know all of the theory and none of the practice. As far as
the
cost and availability of spares go, I think that this is basic
profiteering
on the former, and that both are driven by the company bean-counters.
There.
That's my rant for the week ...

I think you are about 30 degrees tangentally off the mark on the
causes, but pretty much dead-on with the results.

Keep a couple of points in mind:

a) Most "Name" manufacturers, even Denon, Sony, Yamaha, and Nakamichi
job out mostly all the content in their equipment. Vertical
integration such as in the past (Use names lost in the dimness of time
such as Philco or RCA that made _everything_ inside their equipment
except the wire from tubes to coils to speakers to the cabinet itself)
has pretty much vanished in the electronics industry.

b) Computerized manufacturing techniques within specialty
manufacturing facilities pretty much makes "similar" parts in long or
short runs commodity items vs. custom (bespoke) items after the first
50 or so roll down the line.

c) Keep in mind that WalMart is not the only end-user that chokes its
vendors and suppliers for lower prices. Consumer electronics
manufacturer end-users have an interesting technique of not paying for
inventory until it is actually installed in the item. So the supplier
is not about to make stock much further in advance than is certain to
be needed. He might not get paid for them.

So, Denon/Yamaha/Sony wants 12,000 transformers to a certain
specification. They _WILL NOT_ make them internally, but will job them
out to a transformer maker who will then deliver them *just in time*
as needed. Should the need be greater, the supplier will make more -
also just in time. Should the contract be cancelled, you can also bet
that he will have no surplus in his inventory either. Denon/Yamaha/
Sony then will make a bet on the number of spares that might be needed
(if any), buy them and then stop. They will also make an actuarial
decision as to how long they will support an item such that they might
consider a later run of such specialty parts... And that will be a
cold calculation: The cost of a later run vs. a very few ****ed off
customers who likely wanted something "new" anyway. Where do you think
that calculation will fall? Especially if that costomer can be made to
smile with a $25 gift certificate?

That they are slowly and almost inexorably putting the repair shops
out of business is simply not their concern. As to warranty issues, it
would be far cheaper for them to do again what is done in the US,
pretty much replace any failed items (under warranty) out-of-hand with
the 'latest' version and trash the failed unit rather than maintain an
actual warranty service station with technician salaries, parts,
shipping/receiving and so forth. All that they really need is the
shipping/receiving bit. Keep in mind that if *you* are paying $499.99
at Best Buy/Circuit City for a AV receiver, it likely cost Denon/
Yamaha/Sony something under $100 to make and ship.

The "Government" has not a damned thing to do with it. It is the
consumer that drives these things... and the average consumer is well-
and-truly hypnotized into believing that "old" is junk and not worth
fixing. And that same thoroughly hypnotized consumer will be damned
before he is willing to subsidize his neighbor's job by supporting
reasonable trade policies and the consequential higher prices.

As in most things, we pretty much get exactly what we deserve... and
exactly what we wish for.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA


I agree with most of what you say, but the original point was that the ball
game has changed again, and now "eco-policy" is playing a hand, and that eco
policy is government driven, because they all want to be seen to be 'doing
their bit' for saving the planet. It allows them to do more world stage
posturing, and more 'mine's bigger than yours' speeches - look at the way
Blair was before we finally got rid of him. It's as much about politics, as
it is about any genuine desire to affect the planet for the better.

The RoHS directive dealing with lead-free solder is a classic example of
government "we want to be seen to be doing something" pseudo-science driven
eco policy. If everyone in the business is totally honest, I don't think
there are very many that you would find that believed in the validity of the
science that drove this legislation in the first place, or believe even now
that the world is ecologically a better place for it, or that the equipment
is just as reliable as it was. In short, the end result in terms of eco
improvement is probably at best net zero, and more likely, it has actually
had a net negative impact due to the higher temperatures involved in
production, and the greater amount of kit being scrapped as a result of bad
joints on LSIs that render it not economically viable to repair out of
warranty. It just seemed to me that things like lead-free solder were a
dubious waste of time and money that had no discernable impact on the
environment, whereas an issue like spares availability, which would be
actually quite easy to legislate on - if only on the cost that manufacturers
sell them out at when they are still available - could have a huge and
genuine impact on the amount of kit being scrapped for what amounts to no
good reason. Does that make sense ?

Arfa

On Sep 18, 11:51 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
It just seemed to me that things like lead-free solder were a
dubious waste of time and money that had no discernable impact on the
environment, whereas an issue like spares availability, which would be
actually quite easy to legislate on - if only on the cost that manufacturers
sell them out at when they are still available - could have a huge and
genuine impact on the amount of kit being scrapped for what amounts to no
good reason. Does that make sense ?

Makes sense, but I think it is incomplete. I once made a bad joke to a
Brit about how the included "u" (colo-u-r, flavo-u-r) is specifically
responsible for the destruction of the British Empire, and had GB
dropped such silly nonsense 300 years ago, the compounded savings in
print, ink, paper, space and so forth would have made all the
difference to their present third-tier status. (Do a search on: MEIHEM
IN CE KLASRUM for giggles) He was furious, but laughing at the same
time.

As to lead-free solder, it is a technology problem more-so than an
environmental problem to get it right. I use it on occasion (5% silver
content by choice) but I prefer my 63/37 and as I work 90% on vintage
stuff, I have no "requirements" hanging over me, and as it is a hobby,
not a business, even less so. My view is therefore distorted on the
magnitude of the problem.

But, equipment failure and spares for it is an entire mind-set that is
only accidentally and peripherally related to any level of Government
regulation. Do a reality check: That Denon with the wonky
transformer.... your customer who wants it repaired after 7 years is
the exception, hardly the rule. And here in the US, such a customer
would be a rare beast indeed as the US has near-perfected the tissue-
paper economy and the need to keep the inventory turning. Also the US
still operates under the delusion that there is infinite space and
that one's trash miraculously disappears from the curb each week
without fuss or concern. So, the Government ceases to regulate spares
as companies may easily demonstrate that there is no demand for them,
and where there is a tiny demand they can assuage a customer with a
simple bribe.

You are at that point where the decision between repair and scrap is
felt most keenly. It is a daily part of your reality and you see the
volume of scrap generated directly relative to the total. The
individual who tosses out a US$39 CD player for a bad internal fuse or
slipped belt has no clue how much of this crap gets tossed, nor do
they care... they have been hypnotized not to. But all-and-at-the-same-
time, they will get all warm and fuzzy reading about how "their"
representative or government has saved the world from heavy metal
poisoning.

I sympathize, but I see the problem as being much closer to, if not
"at" home, not in some governmental chamber. After all, 100% of the
individuals responsible for the RoHS directives were either elected or
appointed by those elected. We get exactly what we deserve. Joe and
Jill Sixpack are not overly concerned with much of anything more than
perhaps-3 meters beyond their line-of-site, and rely on what they are
given by way of the tabloid press or pre-digested 30-second TV items.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 18, 11:51 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
It just seemed to me that things like lead-free solder were a
dubious waste of time and money that had no discernable impact on the
environment, whereas an issue like spares availability, which would be
actually quite easy to legislate on - if only on the cost that
manufacturers
sell them out at when they are still available - could have a huge and
genuine impact on the amount of kit being scrapped for what amounts to no
good reason. Does that make sense ?

Makes sense, but I think it is incomplete. I once made a bad joke to a
Brit about how the included "u" (colo-u-r, flavo-u-r) is specifically
responsible for the destruction of the British Empire, and had GB
dropped such silly nonsense 300 years ago, the compounded savings in
print, ink, paper, space and so forth would have made all the
difference to their present third-tier status. (Do a search on: MEIHEM
IN CE KLASRUM for giggles) He was furious, but laughing at the same
time.

As to lead-free solder, it is a technology problem more-so than an
environmental problem to get it right. I use it on occasion (5% silver
content by choice) but I prefer my 63/37 and as I work 90% on vintage
stuff, I have no "requirements" hanging over me, and as it is a hobby,
not a business, even less so. My view is therefore distorted on the
magnitude of the problem.

But, equipment failure and spares for it is an entire mind-set that is
only accidentally and peripherally related to any level of Government
regulation. Do a reality check: That Denon with the wonky
transformer.... your customer who wants it repaired after 7 years is
the exception, hardly the rule. And here in the US, such a customer
would be a rare beast indeed as the US has near-perfected the tissue-
paper economy and the need to keep the inventory turning. Also the US
still operates under the delusion that there is infinite space and
that one's trash miraculously disappears from the curb each week
without fuss or concern. So, the Government ceases to regulate spares
as companies may easily demonstrate that there is no demand for them,
and where there is a tiny demand they can assuage a customer with a
simple bribe.

You are at that point where the decision between repair and scrap is
felt most keenly. It is a daily part of your reality and you see the
volume of scrap generated directly relative to the total. The
individual who tosses out a US$39 CD player for a bad internal fuse or
slipped belt has no clue how much of this crap gets tossed, nor do
they care... they have been hypnotized not to. But all-and-at-the-same-
time, they will get all warm and fuzzy reading about how "their"
representative or government has saved the world from heavy metal
poisoning.

I sympathize, but I see the problem as being much closer to, if not
"at" home, not in some governmental chamber. After all, 100% of the
individuals responsible for the RoHS directives were either elected or
appointed by those elected. We get exactly what we deserve. Joe and
Jill Sixpack are not overly concerned with much of anything more than
perhaps-3 meters beyond their line-of-site, and rely on what they are
given by way of the tabloid press or pre-digested 30-second TV items.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA


At this point, I have to disagree. The political situation may be different
either side of the Atlantic, but the people responsible for the RoHS
directive certainly weren't directly elected individuals. Rather, they were
'scientific advisors', as you say, appointed by the elected officials, and
we have no direct say over who they choose, and what drives them to make
those choices. Also, bear in mind that more and more of my country's
legislation now comes from Brussels, introduced by people that we definitely
didn't vote for. It's a bit like your laws being created from Moscow,
because you both belong to NATO ...

With the current eco hysteria that abounds in Europe, anyone who suggests
anything that seems to address those dreadfully trite phrases "global
warming" or "climate change" or "carbon footprint" are immediately embraced
as heroes and given massive publicity and grants to carry on their good
work, whilst anyone who dares to dissent, is practically thrown in jail. I
am quite sure that the eco hysteria that these people generated over lead in
solder, slid directly off the back of the 'lead in petrol' issue, with no
reality to back up the theory, other than the shared use of the word "lead",
which the great unwashed had been taught to associate with "brain poisoning"

As far as the customers go, I still think that you are missing the point.
OK, I'll accept that the customer who keeps his kit for 7 years is probably
something of a rarity in general now, but not so much so amongst the Denon /
Yamaha / Marantz etc brigade, where the kit was bought as being 'good name'
stuff, and a premium was paid for that. But take the average priced stuff -
your Panasonics and Sonys and JVCs and so on. I think that most owners would
realistically expect to get at least two years from their investment, and
probably three. So imagine how they feel when the laser fails in their nice
home cinema kit after 15 months, and then I have to tell them that even if I
give them the parts at trade price, it's still going to cost three quarters
of what they paid for it in the first place. Apart from Panasonic or whoever
having just lost a customer for life, that bit of kit is going to wind up
scrapped, and on its way to landfill. If the part had been available at a
realistic cost, there would have been no such outcome.

No matter how you cut it, or 'justify' it even, it is simply wrong that
manufacturers price the spares so high, when you consider what it cost them,
that it makes repairing their equipment within a reasonable lifespan,
financially impractical. Given that Euro-government managed to force the
whole industry to adopt RoHS with all the problems both forseen and
unforseen that that entailed, then the point that I make riding on this, is
that it would be in comparison, very easy for them to legislate on the
issue, and force manufacturers to make parts available at a practical price.
This would then actually have a real measurable impact on the amount of
electronic equipment being scrapped, unlike RoHS, which actually increases
the amount from soldering failures which are impractical physically to
repair.

Trust me when I tell you as a service engineer, that the scrapping of
relatively new equipment for either lack of spares, or impractically priced
spares, is now a huge problem compared to a few years ago, and getting
bigger. Over here at least ...

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

See what I'm saying now ?
Arfa

Nope. What you're asking for are government mandated inventory
levels. We already have some of that in the US in the auto industry,
where manufacturers are required to make parts available for 5(?)
years after date of manufacture. The result has been a flood of
counterfeit parts, most of which are junk. The manufacturers also
have disbursed the cost of stocking useless inventory to the buyers of
new cars.
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/genericauto/

That's the problem with your suggestion. The $40 CD/DVD player will
cost considerably more if the manufacturer is expected to inventory
all the parts inside, in individual coin bags, as individual SKU's.
Since the real cost is warehouse space and accounting overhead, the
cost will be substantial. Incidentally, the most difficult problem
with China manufacturing is storage space.

So, what percentage of a manufacturing run is ever expected to be
repaired? Well, I'm only familiar with the wireless and
communications business. In the public safety and government sector,
it's 100% of the radios sold. Note that these are $1,000 radios.
However, in the consumer sector, the radios are essentially throw
away, and are rarely repaired. Fortunately, many of the parts are
generic, but that was accidental, not intentional. So, what is the
difference between a $50 (high end) FRS/GMRS/MURS radio, and a $1,000
public safety radio? Well, quite a bit, but little of it justifies
charging 200 times more. What does justify the cost is that the
manufacturers of high end radios stand behind their products, with
extensive (authorized) dealer networks, and in depth parts stocking.
Now, extrapolate the commodity $40 CD/DVD player into such an
operation, and methinks you'll end up with a $1,000 player.

Is a $40 CD/DVD player even worth repairing? At my shop rate, that's
about 30 minutes of repair time, assuming I use no parts. I can
barely test the unit and fill out the paperwork in 30 minutes, much
less fix anything.

The laws of unintended consequences also applies here. The intent is
to have your Denon xformer available at a reasonable cost. Instead,
you're going to be offered a "power supply sub-assembly" or some
manner of board exchange program, instead of the individual parts.
This would probably satisfy the letter of the proposed law, but would
dramatically increase your cost of the parts to the point where the
device would be easily deemed uneconomical to repair. For example, I
can buy individual parts and pieces for the older HP LaserJet II, III,
and 4 printers. However, parts for all of the recent HP economy
printers are offered only as sub-assemblies.
http://partsurfer.hp.com/cgi-bin/spi/main
Try to find some of the tiny and easily broken inkjet printer parts
and pieces.

There are plenty of things that can be done to improve the land fill
problem. My favorite is subsidized recycling and reclamation. This
is being done locally by a senior citizen's group, where they break
apart cell phones, computahs and electronics, and sell the scrap to
metal recyclers.
http://www.greybears.org/computer.html

What are you going to do with all the inventories of repair parts
after the 5(?) year limit expires? More land fill? Incidentally, I
bought the obsolete parts inventory from several repair shops and
radio shops. The volume of the junk is far more than justifiable.
I've tried to sell the mess but nobody was interested.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Incidentally, I bought the obsolete parts inventory from several
repair shops and radio shops. The volume of the junk is far more
than justifiable. I've tried to sell the mess but nobody was interested.

Many Hams would be interested in the radio parts either locally or
on the 'net. Do you have weekly swap meets in your area?

Regards,

Michael

msg hath wroth:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Incidentally, I bought the obsolete parts inventory from several
repair shops and radio shops. The volume of the junk is far more
than justifiable. I've tried to sell the mess but nobody was interested.

Many Hams would be interested in the radio parts either locally or
on the 'net. Do you have weekly swap meets in your area?

Yes, we have swap nets, but I don't participate. Too tedious. Hams
are also notoriously cheap. I can sell complete radios, but not piles
of parts.

I brought a huge pile of parts (nicely sorted and labelled) to several
radio club meetings. Grab what you need, and leave a donation for the
club. The Motorola Radius vintage parts went fast, but none of the
older stuff. I had to haul almost the entire mess back home. There's
just no demand for Micor, Mitrek, Pageboy I and II, etc parts. I'll
probably throw together some kind of shopping site, or eBay store, and
unload the mess.

The problem is that todays hams are no better than todays consumers.
They just don't build or repair anything. Those that do, are in their
60's or older, and are not doing much. I've offered the pile to those
that still build and repair things, but they weren't interested.

Most are as lazy as I am. If I need a small part, it's often easier
to order it from a vendor, than to dig through the mess trying to find
it. I have my parts pile fairly well organized in a mixture of coin
bags, plastic bags, boxes, and drawers, but it's still a pain finding
some obscure part. The other nice thing about ordering new parts is
that I can be fairly sure they will actually work.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
news
"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

See what I'm saying now ?
Arfa

Nope. What you're asking for are government mandated inventory
levels. We already have some of that in the US in the auto industry,
where manufacturers are required to make parts available for 5(?)
years after date of manufacture. The result has been a flood of
counterfeit parts, most of which are junk. The manufacturers also
have disbursed the cost of stocking useless inventory to the buyers of
new cars.
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/genericauto/

That's the problem with your suggestion. The $40 CD/DVD player will
cost considerably more if the manufacturer is expected to inventory
all the parts inside, in individual coin bags, as individual SKU's.
Since the real cost is warehouse space and accounting overhead, the
cost will be substantial. Incidentally, the most difficult problem
with China manufacturing is storage space.

So, what percentage of a manufacturing run is ever expected to be
repaired? Well, I'm only familiar with the wireless and
communications business. In the public safety and government sector,
it's 100% of the radios sold. Note that these are $1,000 radios.
However, in the consumer sector, the radios are essentially throw
away, and are rarely repaired. Fortunately, many of the parts are
generic, but that was accidental, not intentional. So, what is the
difference between a $50 (high end) FRS/GMRS/MURS radio, and a $1,000
public safety radio? Well, quite a bit, but little of it justifies
charging 200 times more. What does justify the cost is that the
manufacturers of high end radios stand behind their products, with
extensive (authorized) dealer networks, and in depth parts stocking.
Now, extrapolate the commodity $40 CD/DVD player into such an
operation, and methinks you'll end up with a $1,000 player.

Is a $40 CD/DVD player even worth repairing? At my shop rate, that's
about 30 minutes of repair time, assuming I use no parts. I can
barely test the unit and fill out the paperwork in 30 minutes, much
less fix anything.

The laws of unintended consequences also applies here. The intent is
to have your Denon xformer available at a reasonable cost. Instead,
you're going to be offered a "power supply sub-assembly" or some
manner of board exchange program, instead of the individual parts.
This would probably satisfy the letter of the proposed law, but would
dramatically increase your cost of the parts to the point where the
device would be easily deemed uneconomical to repair. For example, I
can buy individual parts and pieces for the older HP LaserJet II, III,
and 4 printers. However, parts for all of the recent HP economy
printers are offered only as sub-assemblies.
http://partsurfer.hp.com/cgi-bin/spi/main
Try to find some of the tiny and easily broken inkjet printer parts
and pieces.

There are plenty of things that can be done to improve the land fill
problem. My favorite is subsidized recycling and reclamation. This
is being done locally by a senior citizen's group, where they break
apart cell phones, computahs and electronics, and sell the scrap to
metal recyclers.
http://www.greybears.org/computer.html

What are you going to do with all the inventories of repair parts
after the 5(?) year limit expires? More land fill? Incidentally, I
bought the obsolete parts inventory from several repair shops and
radio shops. The volume of the junk is far more than justifiable.
I've tried to sell the mess but nobody was interested.


Oh dear, I'm losing the will to live here ... I'm really not proposing
trying to make manufacturers hold mountains of spares at their governments'
behest. That said, I do think that they should have to hold spares that are
of a specialist nature in their kit, such as lasers, for a reasonable time.
There is absolutely no reason at all why every new design that they produce,
should have a new type of laser fitted. A DVD laser is a DVD laser is a DVD
laser. Up until recently, most of the main manufacturers had a small array
of their favourite types, that appeared in all of their products. In the
last couple of years, that seems to have gone out of the window, which
contributes to the scrap equipment situation.

As far as the $40 DVD goes, of course it's not worth repairing, but the
reality is that it shouldn't be $40 in the first place. This is just a
reflection of Chinese expansionism forcing itself on the global market, and
not caring about the piles of junk going to landfill, that it is leaving
behind because of the price. If world governments want to see landfill from
scrapped equipment reduced, then they need to legislate against this
nonsense of giving away DVD's at the supermarket checkout. And don't say
that it can't be done, it can. Governments have imposed import levies on
foreign goods many times to protect indiginous industries. I seem to recall
that fairly recently, your government did it to mine over steel imports ...
The only thing that's stopping them is the fear that if they are seen to be
making $40 DVDs $100 by imposing a $60 recycling tax on them, the great
unwashed will see them as money-grabbing killjoys, and they will lose their
elevated pig-at-the-trough politician status. They can't have it both ways.
Either they just shut up and ignore the environmental impact of allowing
checkout DVDs, or they do something proper about it.

So what's wrong with passing on the cost of stocking spare parts to the
consumer ? It makes the item a more realistic price in the first place, and
will encourage owners to "mend and make do", instead of "toss and buy new"

Your argument about expensive kit being 100% repaired is self-defeating in
the case of Denon, for instance. People buy Denon instead of Ying Tong
because it is expensive, and they expect to have repair inventory available
for it for a realistic time, because of that.

But aside from all that, the point that everyone is missing is that where
spares *are* available, they are unrealistically priced by the
manufacturers, and that leads to totally unecessary scrapping to landfill.

I don't care how big your warehouse is or where it's located, or how many
times you have to ship an item around the world before it comes to rest, or
how many bags you have to put it in or what your admin costs are or what
your postage costs are or any of the other 'justifications' that get trotted
out, NO manufacturer can justify marking up a laser that cost him $1 to buy
to $150 as a suppliable spare part. If it really cost that to supply, then
he must have some serious issues with his business model. If he really can't
supply said part for a realistic $15 - $20, then the retail cost of every
player needs to go up by 50c to cover the cost of spares inventory. The
consumers can't bleat about ecology and landfill over their Sunday paper,
and then refuse to pay for it. And the only way that will come about, is if
governments do something to legislate for it, which they easily could.

Now do you see what I'm saying ?

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

Oh dear, I'm losing the will to live here ...

I don't think it's necessary to commit suicide in order to prove a
point on usenet.

I'm really not proposing
trying to make manufacturers hold mountains of spares at their governments'
behest. That said, I do think that they should have to hold spares that are
of a specialist nature in their kit, such as lasers, for a reasonable time.

Think of the wording for such a law. What constitutes spares? If the
product is outsourced, who's responsible for the spare parts? If
there are no spare parts left over after a production run, is the
manufacturer responsible for obtaining such spares? How long is
"reasonable". At what price structure? I would have extreme
difficulty producing such a law that would not involve some level of
mandatory parts inventory stocking levels.

There is absolutely no reason at all why every new design that they produce,
should have a new type of laser fitted.

Got it. Once a manufacturer is committed to a particular design, they
are required to continue to use that design for some "reasonable"
amount of time. Perhaps a government inspector should be invited to
design review meetings to insure compliance with what appears to be
the required use of obsolete parts?

The Bureau of Obsolescence Department of the Ministry of E-Waste
perhaps?

A DVD laser is a DVD laser is a DVD
laser.

Not so. Progress in design has also been through small incremental
improvements in manufacturing. In the rush to deliver product, many
designs contain fundamental inefficiencies that are only cost
effective to replace as production volume increases. The result is a
continuous series of somewhat compatible but different parts. Design
changes in other areas of the DVD player may precipitate a mechanical
change in the DVD laser, such as the ribbon cable, thus producing yet
another DVD head mutation.

Up until recently, most of the main manufacturers had a small array
of their favourite types, that appeared in all of their products. In the
last couple of years, that seems to have gone out of the window, which
contributes to the scrap equipment situation.

Sure. As long as the manufacturer supplied the parts to the
outsourced vendor in China, it was highly beneficial to use common
parts and sub-assemblies. However, once the design has been
optimized, it gets sent out to clone houses, that bid on producing a
"compatible" device, using the basic design owned by the manufacturer.
When switching to the new outsourced vendor, they will have their own
collection of favorite parts. In the case of the CD/DVD laser
assembly, it will probably be similar, but not identical. Slight
re-design for a change of vendor to accommodate parts handling
variations is fairly common.

As far as the $40 DVD goes, of course it's not worth repairing, but the
reality is that it shouldn't be $40 in the first place.

Got it. Just tax the hell out of consumer electronics, so that the
price will be sufficiently high to convert the current throw away into
a major investment worth keeping. Surely you jest.

However, let's pretend that the eco-mania continues and such a law is
proposed. Of course, it wouldn't be a direct taxation on the consumer
as there would be rioting in the streets. You can easily increase
costs to the producers through mandatory inventory stocking levels and
the associated documentation and storage costs. The math is easy
enough. Break down the parts list for a $40 CD/DVD player and add up
the total. Typical is about 20 times the cost of the finished unit.
So, if you built the $40 CD/DVD player from components inventory, it
would easily be made to cost $800. If you demand that parts inventory
stocking levels be 10% of the production run, that would add about $80
to the cost of the $40 player, which should be sufficient for your
purpose.

Of course that doesn't include handling, which can be substantial. An
exercise I did for my (former) customers was to calculate the cost of
shipping an empty box. That's a product that costs zero to produce
and with zero components and labor costs (including production test).
However, it still has all the necessary overhead, such as QA,
packaging, documentation, support, parts, handling, warranty handling,
etc. I refer to it as the "cost of shipping an empty box". It varies
radically with manufacturer, but a manufacturer that has their own
production facilities runs about $150 to $300. One's that are heavily
outsourced and use fulfillment houses, is much less.

So, what's the cost of receiving your CD/DVD laser, if the
manufacturer decides to give you the part for free? Probably about
$100 in stocking and handling costs.

This is just a
reflection of Chinese expansionism forcing itself on the global market, and
not caring about the piles of junk going to landfill, that it is leaving
behind because of the price.

Really? Much of the world's e-Waste is going to China and India as
scrap. They *WANT* the scrap because in those countries, it's still
economical to re-use the parts. Officially, both countries have
banned the importation of such hazardous waste, but unofficially, they
welcome it.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002920133_ewaste09.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3307815.stm
(lots more...)

If world governments want to see landfill from
scrapped equipment reduced, then they need to legislate against this
nonsense of giving away DVD's at the supermarket checkout.

We have a start on your proposed solution. In California, we are
charged a tax on CRT and LCD monitors at the time of purchase to
support the inevitable disposal of the devices, due to their lead
content. Never mind that most comply with RoHS and have very little
lead in them. Never mind that LCD's have almost no lead. Never mind
that glass encapsulation is what's used for nuclear waste disposal to
insure that it doesn't leak into the environment. Never mind that the
tax is not in any way related to the lead content. Is this the type
of thoughtless law that you want? It's probably what you're going to
get.

And don't say
that it can't be done, it can. Governments have imposed import levies on
foreign goods many times to protect indiginous industries. I seem to recall
that fairly recently, your government did it to mine over steel imports ...
The only thing that's stopping them is the fear that if they are seen to be
making $40 DVDs $100 by imposing a $60 recycling tax on them, the great
unwashed will see them as money-grabbing killjoys, and they will lose their
elevated pig-at-the-trough politician status. They can't have it both ways.
Either they just shut up and ignore the environmental impact of allowing
checkout DVDs, or they do something proper about it.

That's a very real fear. Whenever you generate an added expense
through legislation, someone has to pay the price. It's invariably
the consumer that pays. Governments don't produce anything. All that
they can do is inefficiently take money from one group, and give it to
another. If you want to give money to the scrap metal recyclers, to
subsidize their worthy cause, the money has to come from some other
group. I can also supply lots of examples of taxing unrelated groups
to (inefficiently) support worthy causes.

So what's wrong with passing on the cost of stocking spare parts to the
consumer ?

Lousy value received for cost incurred.

It makes the item a more realistic price in the first place, and
will encourage owners to "mend and make do", instead of "toss and buy new"

"Realistic" and "over taxed" seems to be indistinguishable here. I
still remember the days of $1,000 CD drives. I vaguely recall paying
$400 for one that used a "cd caddy". Wanna bring back those days? I
can afford a $40 player. I can't afford a $400 player.

Your argument about expensive kit being 100% repaired is self-defeating in
the case of Denon, for instance. People buy Denon instead of Ying Tong
because it is expensive, and they expect to have repair inventory available
for it for a realistic time, because of that.

A bit of topic drift. Actually, extended warranty sales peak in the
mid range products. Nobody buys an extended warranty for throw away
products because a replacement is expected to less than the cost of
the warranty. For very expensive hardware, the warranty is usually
included in the price, where the consumer has no choice and is
generally expected to protect their investment. However, the mid
range products (i.e. big LCD and Plasma displays) are where the
extended warranty pays. These go for about 15% of the purchase price
per year and are pure profit for the dealer, who does nothing other
than sell the warranty, and then outsource the repairs. These people
expect to have their expensive displays for much longer than the throw
away $40 CD/DVD player. So, they invest in insurance.

So, how about a compromise? Instead of raising the initial cost of
consumer electronics, just offer government backed electronics
warranties. The money would go to the starving repairmen to subsidize
their losses because nobody wants $40 CD/DVD players repaired. It
would delay the dumping of the $40 player because the consumer would
now get a "free" repair job instead of being force to purchase a
replacement. A simple coupon labeled "good for one government
sponsored out of warranty repair" in the box should work. If a free
repair isn't sufficient incentive, the government might consider
subsidizing the re-manufacture and rebuilding businesses and give the
consumer rebuilt exchange. Since such an operation will require
stocking parts, you just might get your spare parts.

But aside from all that, the point that everyone is missing is that where
spares *are* available, they are unrealistically priced by the
manufacturers, and that leads to totally unecessary scrapping to landfill.

Unrealistically or unprofitably? Try my exercise of "shipping an
empty box". What it would cost for *YOU* to ship an empty box to a
customer? You can get a clue by the handling costs charged by some
eBay vendors. Most start out with fairly reasonable handling charges
and rapidly escalate to much higher charges based upon losing money on
small items. Anyway, your cost of shipping an empty box is the
minimum charge for anything you sell and ship.

What most manufacturers do is unload their parts inventory to
distributors and vendors that can handle the low volume and low
per-shipment charges. Once that is done, there's no incentive to
re-use those parts in future products.

I don't care how big your warehouse is or where it's located, or how many
times you have to ship an item around the world before it comes to rest, or
how many bags you have to put it in or what your admin costs are or what
your postage costs are or any of the other 'justifications' that get trotted
out, NO manufacturer can justify marking up a laser that cost him $1 to buy
to $150 as a suppliable spare part.

I see. So $1 for the hardware cost is deemed reasonable, but $150 for
the massive overhead required to stock, inventory, package, document,
ship, warranty, and transact the part is not reasonable. Well, the
charges are based on the same formula used to price the original $40
CD/DVD player. Figure on a minimum of about 5 times cost to sales for
products, and about 20 times for anything that has to sit in inventory
waiting for someone to purchase. Your laser was probably sitting in
their warehouse for several years before you needed it. That's really
lousy stock turnover compared to the CD/DVD player, that probably was
delivered just in time and never saw a warehouse. The electricity,
staffing, rent, paperwork, etc for the warehouse can just can't be
ignored. At $150, you're probably correct that it's overpriced.
However, much of that $150 are real expenses.

If it really cost that to supply, then
he must have some serious issues with his business model. If he really can't
supply said part for a realistic $15 - $20, then the retail cost of every
player needs to go up by 50c to cover the cost of spares inventory.

I see. You want the consumer to pay for the inevitable repair in
advance. Well, that can be done by time of purchase taxation, where
the revenue would go to subsidizing the expenses of the parts
warehouse. I doubt that a "save the parts jobber" campaign would have
much of an effect in Congress, but it's worth trying.

As for the business model, just put $20 in an envelope and let it sit
for a few years. Disburse your expenses for storing the envelope over
those years. Don't forget the cost of the envelope, guard service,
verifying its contents (inspection), determining that it's still there
(inventory control), finding it after someone moved it, and a proper
percentage of your office rent. Also, shrinkage (theft), inventory
taxes, depreciation, obsolescence, and inflation. You also have to
make a profit to justify the exercise. Now, after a few years,
someone wants to purchase your $20 envelope. What's it worth then?

The
consumers can't bleat about ecology and landfill over their Sunday paper,
and then refuse to pay for it.

Oh yes they can and do so quite effectively. The trend is that as
long as someone else pays, it's just fine. Let the government pay, or
let the evil manufacturers pay, or pass the cost back to the
manufacturers. It really doesn't matter who gets to pay as long as
it's not the consumer.

Locally, a group wanted to install a light rail rapid transit system.
Are the expected light rail commuters suppose to pay for their own
transit? Nope. The evil automobile drivers were expected to pay for
it.

And the only way that will come about, is if
governments do something to legislate for it, which they easily could.

I think of government as more of a problem than a solution.

Now do you see what I'm saying ?

Sure. You're suggesting that every problem has a government solution.
If you look to government for solutions to all your problems, soon all
you will have left is government. If that's insufficient, please
consider that of all the possible solutions to problems, the LEAST
efficient is to have the government do it. The only reason we even
have a government is that some problems (i.e. war) can only be solved
by huge organizations, of which the government is the largest. When a
huge organization tries to solve small problems, they usually fail
miserably.

Arfa

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

Oh dear, I'm losing the will to live here ...

I don't think it's necessary to commit suicide in order to prove a
point on usenet.

I'm really not proposing
trying to make manufacturers hold mountains of spares at their
governments'
behest. That said, I do think that they should have to hold spares that
are
of a specialist nature in their kit, such as lasers, for a reasonable
time.

Think of the wording for such a law. What constitutes spares? If the
product is outsourced, who's responsible for the spare parts? If
there are no spare parts left over after a production run, is the
manufacturer responsible for obtaining such spares? How long is
"reasonable". At what price structure? I would have extreme
difficulty producing such a law that would not involve some level of
mandatory parts inventory stocking levels.

There is absolutely no reason at all why every new design that they
produce,
should have a new type of laser fitted.

Got it. Once a manufacturer is committed to a particular design, they
are required to continue to use that design for some "reasonable"
amount of time. Perhaps a government inspector should be invited to
design review meetings to insure compliance with what appears to be
the required use of obsolete parts?

The Bureau of Obsolescence Department of the Ministry of E-Waste
perhaps?

A DVD laser is a DVD laser is a DVD
laser.

Not so. Progress in design has also been through small incremental
improvements in manufacturing. In the rush to deliver product, many
designs contain fundamental inefficiencies that are only cost
effective to replace as production volume increases. The result is a
continuous series of somewhat compatible but different parts. Design
changes in other areas of the DVD player may precipitate a mechanical
change in the DVD laser, such as the ribbon cable, thus producing yet
another DVD head mutation.

Up until recently, most of the main manufacturers had a small array
of their favourite types, that appeared in all of their products. In the
last couple of years, that seems to have gone out of the window, which
contributes to the scrap equipment situation.

Sure. As long as the manufacturer supplied the parts to the
outsourced vendor in China, it was highly beneficial to use common
parts and sub-assemblies. However, once the design has been
optimized, it gets sent out to clone houses, that bid on producing a
"compatible" device, using the basic design owned by the manufacturer.
When switching to the new outsourced vendor, they will have their own
collection of favorite parts. In the case of the CD/DVD laser
assembly, it will probably be similar, but not identical. Slight
re-design for a change of vendor to accommodate parts handling
variations is fairly common.

As far as the $40 DVD goes, of course it's not worth repairing, but the
reality is that it shouldn't be $40 in the first place.

Got it. Just tax the hell out of consumer electronics, so that the
price will be sufficiently high to convert the current throw away into
a major investment worth keeping. Surely you jest.

However, let's pretend that the eco-mania continues and such a law is
proposed. Of course, it wouldn't be a direct taxation on the consumer
as there would be rioting in the streets. You can easily increase
costs to the producers through mandatory inventory stocking levels and
the associated documentation and storage costs. The math is easy
enough. Break down the parts list for a $40 CD/DVD player and add up
the total. Typical is about 20 times the cost of the finished unit.
So, if you built the $40 CD/DVD player from components inventory, it
would easily be made to cost $800. If you demand that parts inventory
stocking levels be 10% of the production run, that would add about $80
to the cost of the $40 player, which should be sufficient for your
purpose.

Of course that doesn't include handling, which can be substantial. An
exercise I did for my (former) customers was to calculate the cost of
shipping an empty box. That's a product that costs zero to produce
and with zero components and labor costs (including production test).
However, it still has all the necessary overhead, such as QA,
packaging, documentation, support, parts, handling, warranty handling,
etc. I refer to it as the "cost of shipping an empty box". It varies
radically with manufacturer, but a manufacturer that has their own
production facilities runs about $150 to $300. One's that are heavily
outsourced and use fulfillment houses, is much less.

So, what's the cost of receiving your CD/DVD laser, if the
manufacturer decides to give you the part for free? Probably about
$100 in stocking and handling costs.

This is just a
reflection of Chinese expansionism forcing itself on the global market,
and
not caring about the piles of junk going to landfill, that it is leaving
behind because of the price.

Really? Much of the world's e-Waste is going to China and India as
scrap. They *WANT* the scrap because in those countries, it's still
economical to re-use the parts. Officially, both countries have
banned the importation of such hazardous waste, but unofficially, they
welcome it.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002920133_ewaste09.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3307815.stm
(lots more...)

If world governments want to see landfill from
scrapped equipment reduced, then they need to legislate against this
nonsense of giving away DVD's at the supermarket checkout.

We have a start on your proposed solution. In California, we are
charged a tax on CRT and LCD monitors at the time of purchase to
support the inevitable disposal of the devices, due to their lead
content. Never mind that most comply with RoHS and have very little
lead in them. Never mind that LCD's have almost no lead. Never mind
that glass encapsulation is what's used for nuclear waste disposal to
insure that it doesn't leak into the environment. Never mind that the
tax is not in any way related to the lead content. Is this the type
of thoughtless law that you want? It's probably what you're going to
get.

And don't say
that it can't be done, it can. Governments have imposed import levies on
foreign goods many times to protect indiginous industries. I seem to
recall
that fairly recently, your government did it to mine over steel imports
...
The only thing that's stopping them is the fear that if they are seen to
be
making $40 DVDs $100 by imposing a $60 recycling tax on them, the great
unwashed will see them as money-grabbing killjoys, and they will lose
their
elevated pig-at-the-trough politician status. They can't have it both
ways.
Either they just shut up and ignore the environmental impact of allowing
checkout DVDs, or they do something proper about it.

That's a very real fear. Whenever you generate an added expense
through legislation, someone has to pay the price. It's invariably
the consumer that pays. Governments don't produce anything. All that
they can do is inefficiently take money from one group, and give it to
another. If you want to give money to the scrap metal recyclers, to
subsidize their worthy cause, the money has to come from some other
group. I can also supply lots of examples of taxing unrelated groups
to (inefficiently) support worthy causes.

So what's wrong with passing on the cost of stocking spare parts to the
consumer ?

Lousy value received for cost incurred.

It makes the item a more realistic price in the first place, and
will encourage owners to "mend and make do", instead of "toss and buy new"

"Realistic" and "over taxed" seems to be indistinguishable here. I
still remember the days of $1,000 CD drives. I vaguely recall paying
$400 for one that used a "cd caddy". Wanna bring back those days? I
can afford a $40 player. I can't afford a $400 player.

Your argument about expensive kit being 100% repaired is self-defeating in
the case of Denon, for instance. People buy Denon instead of Ying Tong
because it is expensive, and they expect to have repair inventory
available
for it for a realistic time, because of that.

A bit of topic drift. Actually, extended warranty sales peak in the
mid range products. Nobody buys an extended warranty for throw away
products because a replacement is expected to less than the cost of
the warranty. For very expensive hardware, the warranty is usually
included in the price, where the consumer has no choice and is
generally expected to protect their investment. However, the mid
range products (i.e. big LCD and Plasma displays) are where the
extended warranty pays. These go for about 15% of the purchase price
per year and are pure profit for the dealer, who does nothing other
than sell the warranty, and then outsource the repairs. These people
expect to have their expensive displays for much longer than the throw
away $40 CD/DVD player. So, they invest in insurance.

So, how about a compromise? Instead of raising the initial cost of
consumer electronics, just offer government backed electronics
warranties. The money would go to the starving repairmen to subsidize
their losses because nobody wants $40 CD/DVD players repaired. It
would delay the dumping of the $40 player because the consumer would
now get a "free" repair job instead of being force to purchase a
replacement. A simple coupon labeled "good for one government
sponsored out of warranty repair" in the box should work. If a free
repair isn't sufficient incentive, the government might consider
subsidizing the re-manufacture and rebuilding businesses and give the
consumer rebuilt exchange. Since such an operation will require
stocking parts, you just might get your spare parts.

But aside from all that, the point that everyone is missing is that where
spares *are* available, they are unrealistically priced by the
manufacturers, and that leads to totally unecessary scrapping to landfill.

Unrealistically or unprofitably? Try my exercise of "shipping an
empty box". What it would cost for *YOU* to ship an empty box to a
customer? You can get a clue by the handling costs charged by some
eBay vendors. Most start out with fairly reasonable handling charges
and rapidly escalate to much higher charges based upon losing money on
small items. Anyway, your cost of shipping an empty box is the
minimum charge for anything you sell and ship.

What most manufacturers do is unload their parts inventory to
distributors and vendors that can handle the low volume and low
per-shipment charges. Once that is done, there's no incentive to
re-use those parts in future products.

I don't care how big your warehouse is or where it's located, or how many
times you have to ship an item around the world before it comes to rest,
or
how many bags you have to put it in or what your admin costs are or what
your postage costs are or any of the other 'justifications' that get
trotted
out, NO manufacturer can justify marking up a laser that cost him $1 to
buy
to $150 as a suppliable spare part.

I see. So $1 for the hardware cost is deemed reasonable, but $150 for
the massive overhead required to stock, inventory, package, document,
ship, warranty, and transact the part is not reasonable. Well, the
charges are based on the same formula used to price the original $40
CD/DVD player. Figure on a minimum of about 5 times cost to sales for
products, and about 20 times for anything that has to sit in inventory
waiting for someone to purchase. Your laser was probably sitting in
their warehouse for several years before you needed it. That's really
lousy stock turnover compared to the CD/DVD player, that probably was
delivered just in time and never saw a warehouse. The electricity,
staffing, rent, paperwork, etc for the warehouse can just can't be
ignored. At $150, you're probably correct that it's overpriced.
However, much of that $150 are real expenses.

If it really cost that to supply, then
he must have some serious issues with his business model. If he really
can't
supply said part for a realistic $15 - $20, then the retail cost of every
player needs to go up by 50c to cover the cost of spares inventory.

I see. You want the consumer to pay for the inevitable repair in
advance. Well, that can be done by time of purchase taxation, where
the revenue would go to subsidizing the expenses of the parts
warehouse. I doubt that a "save the parts jobber" campaign would have
much of an effect in Congress, but it's worth trying.

As for the business model, just put $20 in an envelope and let it sit
for a few years. Disburse your expenses for storing the envelope over
those years. Don't forget the cost of the envelope, guard service,
verifying its contents (inspection), determining that it's still there
(inventory control), finding it after someone moved it, and a proper
percentage of your office rent. Also, shrinkage (theft), inventory
taxes, depreciation, obsolescence, and inflation. You also have to
make a profit to justify the exercise. Now, after a few years,
someone wants to purchase your $20 envelope. What's it worth then?

The
consumers can't bleat about ecology and landfill over their Sunday paper,
and then refuse to pay for it.

Oh yes they can and do so quite effectively. The trend is that as
long as someone else pays, it's just fine. Let the government pay, or
let the evil manufacturers pay, or pass the cost back to the
manufacturers. It really doesn't matter who gets to pay as long as
it's not the consumer.

Locally, a group wanted to install a light rail rapid transit system.
Are the expected light rail commuters suppose to pay for their own
transit? Nope. The evil automobile drivers were expected to pay for
it.

And the only way that will come about, is if
governments do something to legislate for it, which they easily could.

I think of government as more of a problem than a solution.

Now do you see what I'm saying ?

Sure. You're suggesting that every problem has a government solution.
If you look to government for solutions to all your problems, soon all
you will have left is government. If that's insufficient, please
consider that of all the possible solutions to problems, the LEAST
efficient is to have the government do it. The only reason we even
have a government is that some problems (i.e. war) can only be solved
by huge organizations, of which the government is the largest. When a
huge organization tries to solve small problems, they usually fail
miserably.

Arfa


I give in. I just lost the will to live totally. Click. BANG

On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:37:39 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

I give in. I just lost the will to live totally. Click. BANG

Suicide is the sincerest form of self criticism.

Actually, you deserve a fate worse than death for quoting 300 lines of
my drivel to add just one line. Failure to edit quotes is a capital
crime. I especially hate to read my own drivel again.

So, does this mean that you conceed the point, give up on suggesting
that governments actually solve problems instead of creating them, and
offer endless gratitude for me starting you on the road to righteous
behavior? Or have you simply resigned yourself to paying $150 for a
$1 part and getting on with life?



--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:37:39 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

I give in. I just lost the will to live totally. Click. BANG

Suicide is the sincerest form of self criticism.

So how come you're still with us then ... ?


Actually, you deserve a fate worse than death for quoting 300 lines of
my drivel to add just one line. Failure to edit quotes is a capital
crime. I especially hate to read my own drivel again.

Did you count them all ? Actually, you deserve a fate worse than death for
posting them in the first place ...

And, as always, you miss the point yet again. I did it purely to highlight
that it *was* 300 lines of "drivel" - your word, and a very appropriate one,
I might add.


So, does this mean that you conceed the point, give up on suggesting
that governments actually solve problems instead of creating them, and
offer endless gratitude for me starting you on the road to righteous
behavior? Or have you simply resigned yourself to paying $150 for a
$1 part and getting on with life?

Neither.

Now off you trot to bed - it must be getting late over there - past seven I
would guess, and work on your next effort of "Does the US Postal Service
lose $295 on every package it ships ?", for your next high school debating
challenge ... d;~}

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:


"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:37:39 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

I give in. I just lost the will to live totally. Click. BANG

Suicide is the sincerest form of self criticism.

So how come you're still with us then ... ?

Because I don't read or believe my own drivel, unless someone reposts
it where I'm forced to read it. I have myself entered in my own kill
file, so that doesn't happen. Were I to actually read my own drivel,
dire events, too horrible to think about, are likely to happen.
However, suicide is unlikely as I'm having far too much fun
antagonizing anyone with differing opinions.

Actually, you deserve a fate worse than death for quoting 300 lines of
my drivel to add just one line. Failure to edit quotes is a capital
crime. I especially hate to read my own drivel again.

Did you count them all?

No. My newsreader software did it for me. However, I just noticed
that the entire message, including quotes, was 300+ lines. My guess
is I contributed about half of them. The exact innumeration will be
left as an exercise for the accountants.

Actually, you deserve a fate worse than death for
posting them in the first place ...

That's usually what someone suggests after reading my drivel. I
generally judge the effectiveness of my arguments by the violence of
the reaction. However, as much of what is posted in this newsgroup
consists of one-line comments of little value, are you perhaps
suggesting that I do the same? If so, it would be difficult to point
out the errors of your data, the fallacies in your logic, the futility
of your suggestions, and still have room for the traditional insults
and degradations. It's a difficult task, but I think I can accomplish
it in perhaps 3 or 4 lines of drivel instead of 300+ line. Would that
stay my fate worse than death?

And, as always, you miss the point yet again. I did it purely to highlight
that it *was* 300 lines of "drivel" - your word, and a very appropriate one,
I might add.

Much of what I post is drivel and of little importance. Were it
really important, I would have charged you for the research,
consulting, and advice, as I do my (paying) customers.

So, does this mean that you conceed the point, give up on suggesting
that governments actually solve problems instead of creating them, and
offer endless gratitude for me starting you on the road to righteous
behavior? Or have you simply resigned yourself to paying $150 for a
$1 part and getting on with life?

Neither.

Ok, you've given up on the repair job. I understand and hopefully, so
will the customer. Try not to consider it a personal loss or failing
in your ability to do everything necessary to make the customer happy.

Now off you trot to bed - it must be getting late over there - past seven I
would guess,

Correct. I decided it would interesting to visit my office to see if
the mess is still intact. I plopped down in my overstuffed easy chair
and immediately fell asleep. When I awoke, there was a reply to your
message inscribed on the screen. I hit "Send Message Now" and went
back to sleep. It's amazing how well I write when asleep.

and work on your next effort of "Does the US Postal Service
lose $295 on every package it ships ?", for your next high school debating
challenge ... d;~}

I was on the debating team in High Skool and various colleges that I
attended. I specialized in supporting lost causes, unpopular
opinions, and futile positions, and did fairly well. I would have no
difficulty demonstrating that it would be in the best interest of the
US to privatize the post office, thus saving $295 per package lost on
government retirement funds, pensions, government subsidies, etc.
http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=285219&NewsAreaID=2

Arfa

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

I was on the debating team in High Skool and various colleges that I
attended. I specialized in supporting lost causes, unpopular
opinions, and futile positions, and did fairly well.

See? I just knew you would be ! Note. Everything trimmed to one line for
your continuing comfort and convenience ...

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

I was on the debating team in High Skool and various colleges that I
attended. I specialized in supporting lost causes, unpopular
opinions, and futile positions, and did fairly well.

See? I just knew you would be ! Note. Everything trimmed to one line for
your continuing comfort and convenience ...

Arfa

That's not quite what I was suggesting. Perhaps this will help:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/genesis.txt
I'll convert it to HTML one of these daze.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

I was on the debating team in High Skool and various colleges that I
attended. I specialized in supporting lost causes, unpopular
opinions, and futile positions, and did fairly well.

See? I just knew you would be ! Note. Everything trimmed to one line for
your continuing comfort and convenience ...

Arfa

That's not quite what I was suggesting. Perhaps this will help:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/genesis.txt
I'll convert it to HTML one of these daze.



Oh boy. What are we gonna do with you then ? That's amusing, albeit written
in a very jaded style. I'm not sure which categories you think apply to you
and I.

As to my comment, it was exactly what I was intending. Are you familiar with
the word "facetious" ? I expect that you probably spell it wrongly over
there, so read it slowly, and it may well come to you. I was doing
'facetious' in my comment. Facetiousness is a big part of British humour,
which of course you will not understand. It is often subtle in nature, which
again will be a problem I guess, for a SoCal ... d;~}

And that, my friend, is about it. I think we have probably done it to death
from every angle now, and kept the lurkers amused for a few days. Catch ya
next time !

Arfa