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

231–240 of 357 posts

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#231

Post by crazygringo »

atopal wrote: post #210
crazygringo wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 apartmen…

I don't understand where the idea comes from that IKEA sofas fall apart after 5 years. All of their sofas come with a 10 year warranty, even the cheapest ones. Here's one at the $850 price point: https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/uppland-sofa-blekinge-white-s19... Their more expensive ones come with a 25 year warranty and still only cost $2,500: https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/stockholm-sofa-seglora-natural-...

It is a very "limited" warranty:

https://www.ikea.com/us/en/files/pdf/40/04/4004a9de/seating_...

If the sofa breaks, then sure it's covered.

But it explicitly doesn't cover fabric or leather coverings -- and good luck trying to convince them that the foam padding has gone all flat.

Whereas in my experience, how long a sofa lasts is determined precisely by how long the coverings and cushions last. (I've never in my life seen a sofa break.)

So the IKEA warranty is irrelevant there.

Your UPPLAND sofa may work great for 30 years in a guest room where it's sat on 5 times a year.

But good luck getting it to last 10 years in the living room where the whole family is using it every day and kids are climbing all over it. (Of course, more expensive IKEA sofas do tend to last longer than the cheapest ones -- people are usually talking about the cheap ones.)

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#232

Post by [deleted] »

photon_lines wrote: post #226
borski wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that sofas haven’t come down significantly in price. These shittier products aren’t actually much cheaper than, for example, a custom made sofa. I know this because I just bought a custom made sofa. But the quality is incomparable.

Yes but this is once again where the free-markets and economics come in: if the mass-produced ones match the custom-made ones in price, consumers will start switching to custom-made sofas. The mass-production suppliers will either have to 1) lower the price of their sofas or 2) increase the quality of production to match the quality of the custom-made ones. Both 1 and 2 are great for consumers and this is why competi…

[deleted]

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#233

Post by vinnyvichy »

renewiltord wrote: post #202
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".

I don't understand why people constantly find contempt and condescension in things that are not good fits. I think emotionally non loaded interactions are possible here. VCs are in the business of risky business. Their objective is to fund businesses that will grow very large or collapse very fast and where there is lots of uncertainty as to which and where money increases the likelihood of the former outcome. That's…

>I think emotionally non loaded interactions are possible here.

And proceeds to use emotionally loaded words like "moron" and "imbecile". No, the contempt comes from thinking that their way of living is intellectually(/morally) superior, hence, not a lifestyle. For perception of contempt, that's from not wanting their way of living to be seen as intellectually(/morally) deficient.

The very best VCs should be able to keep the contempt hidden, perhaps with profit rationalizations, like you, or moral rationalizations, like a dang, but I understand the curiosity to see if, when we put geohot+bunnie against 2 very equanimous VCs, which team will win the social media battle ;). Especially if we give your fave team a 1-dang handicap

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#234

Post by modeless »

spondylosaurus wrote: post #27
sokoloff wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High quality furniture is still being made and sold, just not for $300 for a couch. Cheap shit is going to be cheap shit. Growing up, furniture was something that was expensive, carefully shopped for, and hand delivered fully assembled. I see the availability of cheap (to make and to transport) furniture as filling a gap in the market previously not addressed, but if you’re in a position to buy a piece you’d like to…

IKEA shelves and stuff are cheap (in both senses of the word, generally, although some pieces do hold up surprisingly well), but their couches in particular are somehow both crazy expensive and wildly uncomfortable. I remember trying one in the showroom that felt like a massive hard frame with some sagging cushions tacked on, and it was about a thousand bucks.

A thousand bucks isn't crazy expensive. This guy spent ~$6,000 (inflation adjusted) on this couch he thinks is so great.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#235

Post by buffalobuffalo »

thrance wrote: post #148
buffalobuffalo wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that such mockery isn't very charitable, but there is an underlying line logic to their thinking. We know that a system like North Korea's is possible. We know a system like ours is possible. We don't have any evidence that any other system is actually possible. Sure you could imagine something better. But such a system could very easily have fatal flaws you didn't imagine. In fact, North Korea started as jus…

I think North Korea was always an authoritarian state from the get go, it was built by the soviets over the ruins of the Korean war. It's just coated in a socialist paintjob just like many other dictatorships. You're right in that reverting to a previous system will always be a temporary solution, but I don't believe there is any perfect system able to endure until the end of times. "Do you want to live in North Kore…

Sure. I agree Many of those things would be a net benefit. So why don't we have them?

It seems to me, the main reason is that representatives won't vote for them. Why not? Mainly because their financial and political incentives are structured in such a way that they can't. Why are these incentives like this? You can keep peeling back layers of the onion like this forever, but as some point you realize it's just due to structures of the system that will recreate themselves in any similar system. Like how wings evolved separately in different evolutionary branches but all conform to a similar structure. Any capitalist economic system will have methods for vested interests to inhibit many types of positive change.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#236

Post by _fat_santa »

Anon1096 wrote: post #213
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…

I've had my IKEA sofa for close to a decade, saying you need to change it every 5 years is not even close to true. There's a perception that more expensive=will last longer, but it just doesn't hold out in reality. Oftentimes the mass market product really is just a solid product.

Not sofas but office chairs, currently sitting on an IKEA Markus chair that my parents bought for me when I was in the 7th grade. I'm 30.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#237

Post by renewiltord »

vinnyvichy wrote: post #233
renewiltord wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people constantly find contempt and condescension in things that are not good fits. I think emotionally non loaded interactions are possible here. VCs are in the business of risky business. Their objective is to fund businesses that will grow very large or collapse very fast and where there is lots of uncertainty as to which and where money increases the likelihood of the former outcome. That's…

>I think emotionally non loaded interactions are possible here. And proceeds to use emotionally loaded words like "moron" and "imbecile". No, the contempt comes from thinking that their way of living is intellectually(/morally) superior, hence, not a lifestyle. For perception of contempt, that's from not wanting their way of living to be seen as intellectually(/morally) deficient. The very best VCs should be able to…

Okay, well I think there's a difference between "They think I'm an idiot because I do this" and "I'd have to be an idiot to do this". And maybe you disagree. But it seems like it resonates with some audience at least. Which suffices for me.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#238

Post by crispyambulance »

verisimi wrote: post #52
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".

> In conversation with venture capitalists, you hear the phrase “lifestyle business”, meaning one that is doing nicely and rewarding the people who run it and which isn’t planning for unbounded growth. The words “lifestyle business” are always, of course, uttered in a voice dripping with contempt. This makes me wonder what other type of business is there? How do VCs describe their business, what is their aim? Is it t…

It's OK, when many folks say "venture capitalists" they always utter it in a voice dripping with contempt as well (I certainly do).

"Lifestyle business" is what EVERYONE did back in the day before mega corporations. I come from a long line of shoemakers, tailors, and various artisans. All "lifestyle businesses". I expressed interest in following in their footsteps but my parents had sent me to college and always laughed at the idea of me taking up the family business. They had always felt it was too much of a hard life and as is typical for immigrants "wanted better for me". Ironically, artisanal work is now highly valued and I probably would be making far more money now (and have unbreakable job security) if I had somehow convinced my parents to apprentice me.

I suppose the closest thing to a lifestyle business in tech would be freelance consultants. It's more of a thing for certain people who typically have already spent a career in mega corps or VC-driven start-ups. I can't think of many people who have STARTED as freelancers-- other than some small number of academics.

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#239

Post by meristohm »

Title a play on Octavia Butler's Parable of the Sower?[0]

Other cultures don't use sofas, and I'm curious if they were originally a thing for royalty (like flat green lawns and white bread and so many other "luxuries" we royal Americans went in for), and I would vote for leaving ours (IKEA, so not the worst in terms of PFAS coating and other toxins, but also not great) with the house when/if we move, and sitting on the floor again, which my spouse and I did early on, influenced by our time in Japan (and our relative lack of money).

I appreciate this article about valuing local repair shops. I did the same with a pair of boots, and will continue to pay for such service, not least because I like getting to know craftsmen.

[0] https://worldcat.org/title/parable-of-the-sower/oclc/2825552...

Re: Parable of the Sofa

#240

Post by grantc »

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".

Calling this a lifestyle business seems off. I'd wager for most, these are livelihood businesses; lifestyle sounds more of an affectation. Or, more simply, these are small businesses, full stop. We have a working term for these and many political forces claim to be about the. Then again, many or most political forces accomplish much less than they propose.
Post reply on HN