Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Parable of the Sofa

tbray.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 357 posts

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#191

Post by rcpt »

istultus wrote: post #171

Let me posit an ad-hoc theory built on our anchoring bias in regards to price and our inability to think in terms of inflation/hyperbolic discounting: tl;dr - Once a cheap alternative is on the market, us frugal folks can't imagine paying for what was once the default and only option, distorting our understanding of what constitutes good quality * He says buying a new sofa of the same quality today would cost upwards…

The Ikea sofa makes a lot of sense if you don't think you'll stay in the same place for very long.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#192

Post by acdha »

rocqua wrote: post #88
contrarian1234 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are two issues that are going in parallel 1. fixing stuff As long as some dude on the other side of the world is willing to make a new sofa and send it to you for cheaper than it is to fix it locally, the idea of fixing it locally will just never take off. You can ban/limit international trade, but then you're just screwing over poor people on the other end of the world for a "feel good" kind of thing 2…

This is indeed hard to solve. But there is need for a solution. Not because I want a good couch for 4 figures, but because we should have more sustainable and goomd couches. Not just for reducing environmental impact, but also for improving quality of life and financials for all but the poorest, by letting them actually get long lasting furniture. Currently anyone who would produce that needs to compete with IKEA, an…

> Currently anyone who would produce that needs to compete with IKEA, and somehow needs to convince customers that their furniture will last longer.

To be honest, IKEA isn’t the problem here. Their stuff is above average quality / longevity until you’re at least a couple levels up in the market. The last time we were looking for furniture, it was eye-opening to see how many companies are trying to charge 2-4 times more for IKEA or lower quality furniture, where something looked nice from across the showroom but if you looked closer it was all sawdust and cheap plastic components.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#193

Post by crazygringo »

istultus wrote: post #171

Let me posit an ad-hoc theory built on our anchoring bias in regards to price and our inability to think in terms of inflation/hyperbolic discounting: tl;dr - Once a cheap alternative is on the market, us frugal folks can't imagine paying for what was once the default and only option, distorting our understanding of what constitutes good quality * He says buying a new sofa of the same quality today would cost upwards…

Not to mention that when you pay $5000 for a sofa today, you don't really know if you're actually getting a sofa that will last 25 years or not, because you're not an expert in sofa construction techniques and frankly don't want to become one. So you might get totally ripped off.

Whereas if you pay $800 for the IKEA sofa every 5 years, you know you're actually getting what you're paying for.

Plus people move apartments, move houses, move cities. Sometimes every 5 years or even more often. The sofa that fit in the old apartment is too wide for the new one. Or the style that made sense in your prewar apartment looks silly in your modernist one. Or now you have kids and you need it to be stain-resistant. Or what felt like a cool trendy leather couch when you were 25 now looks tacky and vulgar to you when you're 34.

For a lot of people, a sofa that's a fifth the price, that lasts a fifth as long, isn't a bug -- it's a feature. Quite simply, your sofa needs change.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#194

Post by frugalmail »

thrance wrote: post #76

It's weird how many people here will shout against any (assumed) critic of capitalism. "So you want to live in North Korea???". No, I don't. What I want is a system where we can get quality products that are not manufactured by slaves on the other side of the world, and that didn't require burning 3 bathtubs of gasoline. And our system definitely ain't it.

What are you talking about. You can commission making the furniture you want, heck you can even get an Amish craftsman to use non mechanical tools to build it. The reality is the folks in non capitalist countries often sit on the ground on pillows and sometimes don’t have couches because of the cost. Thanks to capitalism people can decide whether they want to spend mid 5 figures for a high quality couch or go with an affordable $1500-$800 couch. In raw time, the couch doesn’t cost mid five figures, if you want that, you need to know a family member willing to sacrifice opportunity cost to make you that couch. Otherwise you pay a luxury premium because they can make more, making the cheap stuff.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#195

Post by abhayhegde »

Micoloth wrote: post #110

Every time I read takes like this I think people forget why big brands exist? Small business (or “lifestyle business”) vs big brand is often framed about being high quality vs cheap price, because in practice it often is. But in theory the two things are completely unrelated. Yes fixing stuff is good for the planet. But big brands could offer customer service just fine if people wanted it. Small business vs big brand…

> Every time I read takes like this I think people forget why big brands exist?

I think the article made a great point why big brands exist -- to deliver on the promise of unbridled growth, often leading to enshittification.

> But big brands could offer customer service just fine if people wanted it.

The experience suggests that they usually offload that to a third-party vendor to cut costs and we all know that does not track as good as small, family owned, locally sourced, your trustworthy shop.

> But, surprise, this second option doesn't scale.

True. Probably does not have to. A sufficiently wide distribution of such businesses is just as good.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#196

Post by ghaff »

PontifexMinimus wrote: post #172
contrarian1234 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are two issues that are going in parallel 1. fixing stuff As long as some dude on the other side of the world is willing to make a new sofa and send it to you for cheaper than it is to fix it locally, the idea of fixing it locally will just never take off. You can ban/limit international trade, but then you're just screwing over poor people on the other end of the world for a "feel good" kind of thing 2…

> not making cheap crap. You can find some way to disincentivize making cheap stuff. Ban IKEA.. etc. As I type my keyboard is sitting on an Ikea desk. It's cheap, it's simple, it does the job and I'm happy with it. Cheap stuff is not the problem. Crappy cheap stuff (and crappy expensive stuff!!!) is. For example, I have two radios in my house that I don't use? Why because the crappy power leads have frayed and I can…

I've got plenty of relatively cheap things in my house, including a few from Ikea, that are perfectly good for what I use them for. And I've also bought things like relatively high-end small appliances that crapped out in short order.

And it's often very hard to tell which is which in advance--and it may very well be the luck of the draw in any case.

Even an obviously cheaper Ikea dresser I have in my bedroom. Yeah, it's cheaply made and was sort of a pain to assemble. But it looks and works fine and I'm not sure I could have even gotten a hardwood dresser that cost 5x as much into the space.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#197

Post by etrautmann »

geokon wrote: post #189
bunnie wrote: post #42

The bit about "lifestyle business" always being uttered in contempt resonated with me. I always assumed it was just me being overly sensitive to folks expressing concern over my life choices, urging me to snap out of my "mid-life crisis" and do something "useful" like raise money and scale up, or "apply myself" at famous institutions with "real impact".

Damn. I wouldn't expect that pressure give your rep. Is this from people in the industry, or people outside that don't get it? In all honestly, to me you are one of the few people that come to my mind when I think of someone working on a project that's tangible and with "real impact". Precursor is so out of the box and cyberpunk and outside the confines of what institutions are working on Hope in the future you get t…

I wasn’t familiar but I assume this is what you’re referring to?

https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/precursor

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#198

Post by rossdavidh »

Joeboy wrote: post #152
parpfish wrote: post #136

I always thought “lifestyle business” meant something else. In this article it means “small business that supports the lifestyle of its owner/employees” I thought it meant that it was a business that provided a non-essential usually-trendy “lifestyle goods/accessories” for its customers.

I thought the "lifestyle business" negativity was chiefly around trendy businesses that are only viable due to being covertly subsidized, eg. by family money.

This is what I hear the phrase "lifestyle business" used for, to distinguish between the immigrant family restaurant (real business that pays the bills of the people who own it) from the "twenty items each on their own display table with a spotlight" store (funded by spouse, trust fund, or money they got when they cashed out of their previous job).

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#199

Post by abhayhegde »

po wrote: post #115

> How would we get there from here? I’m not smart enough to figure out what the regulatory regime is that would ban most of what private-equity does and tilt the playing field in favor of resilient lifestyle businesses. One good way is to pay attention to the details, learn how things are made (YouTube helps with this!) and not be impressed by shitty work, in general. I buy plenty of MDF-built products but I also kno…

That is a good point. I would also think that buyers must vote with their money. Stop buying cheaply made products as much as possible, when an alternative slightly-expensive yet well made things exist. Of course, easier said than done, especially when money is a constraint.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#200

Post by snowwrestler »

Folks, not everything is “late stage capitalism.” Furniture repair has been the domain of small businesses forever. And they are in crappy little out of the way places because that’s where real estate is cheap, and they don’t need foot traffic. Customers come find them when they need furniture repaired.

Furniture repair is also not a “lifestyle business.” That phrase is not a synonym for small business. Furniture repair is hard work and low margin. Customers are intermittent so it’s hard to take time off (because you risk losing a significant project).

A lifestyle business is a business that people set up who are trying to fund their preferred lifestyle. For example, a single person SaaS that creates monthly passive income, like half the people here on HN are trying to set up.

I worked for a lifestyle business: the owner was an entrepreneur with 2 successful exits and did not need to work. But he had set up a tech consultancy so he could work on a few interesting projects a year and funnel all his favorite expenses (new tech gadgets, cars, travel, etc) through a tax-advantaged business entity.

He picked his lifestyle and then built the business around that. Most small businesses are the other way around: the owner has to adapt their lifestyle to the business, in order to stay in business.

Post reply on HN