One of the reasons: Products are not taxed by their environmental real price. If environmental damage incurred with "new" (materials, shipping, disposing the older products after a only a few years) would be calculated in the final consumer price, then durable products, and fixing rather buying new, would be the better consumer option. New products are "cheap" in store, are "cheap" by saving manufacturer need to handle support and fixes, but they are very expensive for the environment.
Well, at least recycling is still widely practiced by journalists.<p>Every time there is an article about planned obsolescence, we hear about how old appliances lasted forever and how it was better before, yet there is never any actual statistics about the problem, nor any kind of proof that manufacturers are doing it maliciously.<p>More onto the point, old appliances could also have been of higher quality than today on average, probably because some of them were luxuries back then.
Historically, the intentional reduction of the lifetime of light bulbs from 2.500 to 1.000 hours by the big manufacturers (Philips, GE, OSRAM) in 1940 is probably one the first large-scale examples of this, unfortunately today ubiquitous, practice.<p>In my own experience I had two cases where this effect was very visible:<p>I still own a HP Laserjet 4 that I bought for 50 $ on Ebay in 2001. By that time it already had printed more than 60.000 pages (judging by the test page output), and until today it still keeps churning out more and more pages at 600 DPI and less than 1 cent per page (a refurbished toner costs around 40 $ and lasts for around 7.000 pages). The printer itself is probably the sturdiest piece of equipment I've ever seen, weighing in at more than 10 kg and containing lots of metal parts. Comparing this with the current HP model, which consists mostly of plastic parts, still effectively prints only at 600 DPI and for which a 2.000 page toner can easily cost in excess of 80 $ kind of makes you wonder where all the R&D spending in the printer industry went to.<p>Concerning the washing machine example from the article: I still own on an old Miele Lavamat which has been in service since 1989 (!) and still works flawlessly to this day. New machines are more energy-efficient of course (saving about 50 % of electricity and water compared to the 1989 model) but seem to have a much shorter lifespan as well.<p>BTW, a while ago Arte (a French/German TV channel) showed a really interesting documentary on this "planned obolescence" ("Kaufen für die Müllhalde" - "Buying for the Junkyard"; unfortunately only in German and French <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVFZ4Ocz4VA" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVFZ4Ocz4VA</a>).
Some appliances haven't really changed much over the years: toasters, irons, kettles. But some appliances have improved their energy efficiency (e.g. fridges and freezers) and some are a little bit more enviromentally friendly (e.g. washing machines).<p>If you have a (front-loading) washing machine that's still running from 20 years ago, it's probably using more water than a front-loading machine purchased today.<p>Let's say I buy a top-of-the line Miele washing machine for £1300 ($2000 / €1580) [1] that's built to last 20 years. But 5 years after buying this washing machine, new washing machine models start using 25% less water. I can continue using my washing machine, but it's no longer as efficient as newer models. On the other hand, by keeping my current machine I'm not adding to the growing scrapheap of discarded consumer products. So, for some appliances there is a trade-off between longevity and the possibility that future appliances may be more energy efficient.<p>[1] Yes, you really can buy washing machines for £1300 <a href="http://www.johnlewis.com/miele-wkh-120-wps-washing-machine-8kg-load-a-energy-rating-1600rpm-spin-chromeedition/p1163636" rel="nofollow">http://www.johnlewis.com/miele-wkh-120-wps-washing-machine-8...</a>
Inevitable Wikipedia link: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons#Asymmetric_information" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons#Asymmetr...</a><p>It's impossible for a consumer to know that a supposedly high-quality washing machine will last longer than a cheap washing machine - longevity reviews are impractical with a changing market.<p>In the past, manufacturers have overcome this by offering a guarantee. But, does a manufacturer guarantee even act as a true guarantee? How many claims are brushed off with an excuse? How many white goods manufacturers will exist in their present form in N years time?
There are some rose tinted spectacles going on here.<p>White goods in yesteryear times were not that reliable or as good as the author imagines them to have been. They broke down, had design faults, had poor choice of materials and so on.<p>Some things, particularly microwave ovens, are disposable. You spend £30 and get a new one. You don't get it serviced for £££ or buy the parts. Washing machines are a bit more borderline, you can order a new belt or heating element and put it on all by yourself, following some guide on Youtube and getting the parts from eBay.
Speed Queen: <a href="http://www.speedqueen.com/home/en-us.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.speedqueen.com/home/en-us.aspx</a><p>Commercial-style. No frills. Made in USA.
Washer has something like 8 moving parts. No plastic.
Another of the reasons: Products are manufactured with lots of automation, and the workers have 3rd world wages. Products are repaired manually for 1st world wages.
Re: the mixer that cost "a month's wages"...<p>We bought a new washer/dryer 2 years ago. Already needed service in the first year, and the washer is rusting already, and it's out of warranty. These weren't the cheapest, but not most expensive - around $800/each, IIRC. There were some cheaper, and many far more expensive (some $1200-$1500 for each unit).<p>The problem with "well, these are using lesser quality parts" argument is... I seem to have no choice. <i>AND</i> I'm skeptical that the $1800 washer is actually going to last any more than the $800 washer, given the track records.<p>When the identifiers are SQ-WSHR-2700 ($800) and SQ-WSHR-2720 ($1800), both built in the same manufacturing facility, and the sales blurbs just show one has 3 extra cycles and an "eco-cycle"... what incentive do I have to trust that one is actually going to last 15 years while one will only last 3?
The article didn't answer any of the questions I had. It reads a bit like someone was asked to expand the title into two thousand words. Half-thought explanations, some anecdotes, but almost no data.<p>So both prices and lifetimes have dropped... but how much and how fast? Are we paying more dollars per lifetime year?<p>What about interventions to fix the incentives in the market? What's been tried? Who's pushing for reform? Are we likely to see any? Are there some reliable signals of long lifetime we can incentivize?
For something like a washing machine, I think I personally see older, second hand goods as worthy competitors for new ones, in terms of their likely remaining life expectancy. The fact they tend to be cheaper seems almost perverse.<p>Edit: May be of interest: <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/buyitforlife" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com/r/buyitforlife</a>
Unfortunately the real reason is manufacturers are better at being able to make machines to meet consumer expectations. In the past they tended to over engineer machines - now they are able to build the absolute minimum level people are willing to accept in order to meet a price point.
The assumption that these things should be cheap is not new.<p>I bought my first washing machine - a high speed front load type - about 12 years ago. It was ~$1k, but for several reasons I thought it was a good buy. The cashier made a big deal about it when I went through the checkout line, laughing loudly at my stupidity for purchasing such an expensive model and actually exhorting the cashier in the next lane to do the same. Didn't I know that I could have got a washing machine for $300 or less? I was really embarrassed; I've never bought another appliance in-store.<p>I'm still using the washing machine. I have had no problems with it and it would not surprise me if it's the last washing machine I ever buy.
My grandmother's Maytag washing machine from the mid-1950s was still working up until about 5 years ago. It suddenly stopped working and all it needed was a new belt. However, this was in a house that we were selling and had no need to keep a machine long-term.<p>We sold the washing machine and dryer to a film studio/prop company for enough money to buy more than a dozen washing machines.
When I'm in the store shopping, yes I want all the latest features and options and a nice color. But once I get it home, really the only thing I want is for it to be indestructible.<p>A company with a reputation for insanely high durability would definitely garner a premium. It's like innovators dilemma making a machine which would last 50 years with minimum maintenance, but if a startup offered such a machine and could demonstrate superior engineering, I think it's a winning recipe, although it's a slow growth play not a rocket ship.<p>Reminds me of the cost analysis posted recently on the Tesla showing it might be cheaper than an Odyssey, due to massively higher residual value and lower maintenance and upkeep. Could you make the Tesla of kitchen appliances, I think you could!
I've noticed a vicious cycle much like many of you that I'd blame on the manufacturer more than the consumer. It goes like so: consumer buys expensive product, product lasts 10 years then breaks, consumer can't buy same product again so they buy similar product from same manufacturer but product is now cheaper. Product lasts 5 years. Consumer is upset that product didn't last and wonders why they spent so much money. Consumer buys 3rd product from same or different manufacturer but buys cheaper or cheapest model due to not wanting to waste money. Product lasts 2 years. Consumer vows to only buy cheapest product from now on. Manufacturer continually offers cheaper products that last less and less.<p>Manufacturers will have a hard time convincing consumers that their products will last because of what the last decade had shown us so the only solution is not to offer a product so cheap that people will take a chance on it because then people will think the quality goes in hand with the price. Nay, the solution is to warranty the product much longer and earn the trust of the consumer.<p>Manufacturers likely won't do this because a 20% profit margin on an expensive product lasting 10 years isn't nearly as appealing as 3 3.333-year lifespan products at 40% margins each.<p>Manufacturers don't need their product to last long, just longer than their competition's products.
I've tried to counter this with buying commercial/business oriented items. E.g. my 8 year old HP nx6320 (since discontinued) is built like a tank and still works absolutely fine (I still see them working as cash machines/receipt printers in shops). Because it is a business segment machine, it cost me a fortune at that point of time. I bought a new lighter/smaller Dell because I was tired of hauling the HP and it is also a business segment machine. It would be interesting to see how long it goes before having problems.
Well, there are still brands that are long-lasting, but also pricey. I bought a Miele washing machine for $1100 in 2006 and fully expect it to last 20 years. This brand has a reputation for lasting.
Washing machines haven't changed <i>that</i> much. The main points of failure are the heating element, the onboard computer and the brushes on the motors. That last one is where repairmen get you - they say your machine is "practically dead" (the brushes usually last 5-7 years), buy a new one or replace the motor (usually expensive). Older machines had induction motors that lasted forever (but used more power and were louder).
I recently came across Bundles[1], one of the companies trying to fix this. I saw them pitch at Demo Day of a Smart Energy themed accelerator programme and was very impressed by what a single entrepreneur has already achieved in such early stages.<p>[1] Their website seems to only be in Dutch so far: <a href="http://www.wasbundles.nl/" rel="nofollow">http://www.wasbundles.nl/</a>
Staber has an interesting design. Top-loading horizontal-axis washers. They were featured on "How It's Made" a few years ago. Not cheap, but seems to be made from quality materials (stainless-steel tub and basket).<p><a href="http://www.staber.com/washingmachines" rel="nofollow">http://www.staber.com/washingmachines</a>
What is this comment from the website about ???<p>"28. imemomeme
JUST NOW
Must say I don'y approve of the term white goods and the connotations that can be formed."
Two words: Planned Obsolescence
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence</a><p>Washing machines - Drum Support/Spider is made from special aloy DESIGNED to corrode in soapy water! This allor is often the ONLY not painted part of the whole drum :)
<a href="https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=corroded+spider+washing" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=corroded+spider+was...</a><p>If you want quality product you need to buy Miele for example at minimum 4x garbage washing machine price.<p>Even brands like Audi are doing it nowadays, designing parts of the engine to fail just outside waranty period.