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

The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

english.elpais.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 824 posts

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#711

Post by Dylan16807 »

trod1234 wrote: post #625
cyanydeez wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to factor in planned obsolescence. The fundamentals of the market simply does not make sense when your product is cheap and lifecycle is long. Think of the LED bulb. It would make more sense for the government to manage the few resources needed and for them to maximize the lifecycle of a lightbulb.

Uhh, you are aware that planned obsolescence is only incentivized in fiat markets based in money-printing which aren't real markets. Absent boom-bust, and the related fraud/true-up that happens cyclically, you have sustained growth mirroring population growth, without the chaotic whipsaw, as well as other factors of general wear and tear that make sustain demand. Less cost, and cost that follows real stable value wit…

> Uhh, you are aware that planned obsolescence is only incentivized in fiat markets based in money-printing which aren't real markets.

I have no idea why you're claiming that. What should I read?

But you're not going to get rid of business cycles by not having 2% inflation or whatever, and those cycles don't seem strong enough to impact product lifetimes all that much. "chaotic whipsaw" is a big exaggeration.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#712

Post by lenkite »

WalterBright wrote: post #652
lenkite wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't do well in the US due to ideological aversion, no policy incentives and lack of funding platforms like community investment trusts. But they are quite successful in other nations. Amul in India for example.

> due to ideological aversion Nobody cares if they're buying from a collective or a conventional business. > no policy incentives Are you saying they should get special government incentives not available to businesses? > lack of funding platforms Nobody is stopping anyone from funding a collective. The reason they don't is they won't get ownership shares in return. That's one of the problems with a collective.

> Nobody cares if they're buying from a collective or a conventional business.

Before buying, you need to startup and produce.

> Are you saying they should get special government incentives not available to businesses?

Its the other way around. They are not eligible for incentives that are available to traditional corporations. They cannot issue traditional equity. There are also no equivalent cooperative-friendly structure like a Delaware C corporation which allows for friendly taxation and non-liability for the debts and legal obligations of the corporation. Difficult to apply R&D Tax Credit like corporations since it cannot carry forward credits due to legal constraints. Cannot claim Payroll Offset like startups do, etc.

The system in the US simply does not give incentives to cooperatives to the same extent that it facilitates corporations.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#713

Post by oxag3n »

bo1024 wrote: post #131
drdec wrote: post #98

Most of the people on this board are upper middle to lower upper class (thinking American, apologies to my non US friends). Such people can afford products outside the grasp of most Americans. What naturally happens to such products is that the manufacturers find a way to broaden their customer base. They find ways to bring the price point down so they can sell more. For most people this is a boon. They can afford a…

Your parents, lower middle class in the 80s, could afford a washing machine that lasts 40 years. You, lower middle class in the 2020s, can afford with the same resources a washing machine that lasts 5 years and is no more effective than your parents' (but has an app). In the sense of the parent comment, you are fortunate that the magic of capitalism currently produces such cheap washing machines that even people as p…

Bought Speed Queen TC5 9 years ago - ugly, no app or buttons, but runs as a tank, cleans much better and faster, no detergent residue.

When I asked movers to replace existing LG with my speed queen, they asked why - LG looks so much better.

It's what consumer wants, others go a-11.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#714

Post by [deleted] »

mousethatroared wrote: post #649
Zambyte wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The state of modern personal electric vehicles (PEVs) is outstanding though; good enough to replace owning a car for most people! I personally have been riding an electric scooter this summer, and paired with a nice backpack, it has comfortably replaced all of my regular driving. For people who want to carry more than me, an e-bike with panniers or a cargo e-bike would likely meet your needs. Electric longboards and…

I have two problems with EVs: - I believe they're more immoral than ICE vehicles. They're existence displaces batteries for hybrids (yes I did the math) - They're not practical for me for my use scenario. I have kids.

[deleted]

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#715

Post by SwordAndCitadel »

panick21_ wrote: post #179
SwordAndCitadel wrote: post #59

Capitalism is the reason for declining quality. The incentive isn't to make quality products and services - the incentive is to monopolize an industry, and then squeeze every last cent from the captured consumers. Line must go up!

And yet almost no industry is actually a monopoly, funny how that works. Even even if it is, most of the time its only in certain region. And even then, often the pricing power of those 'monopolies' is not very strong. In fact, historically most monopolies were state sanctioned, and that is still mostly true. Literally non of the things mentioned in the article are monopolies. Cloths, absolutely not even close to a m…

I would argue that almost every industry has been increasingly monopolized. Look at the historic number of players in every major industry - it's indisputable that the trend has been towards consolidation, not increased competition. What's more - the companies that dominate various industries are majorituly owned by the same financial entities, which in turn own each other.

Think of the biggest players in each industry, and search to determine who owns the most stock in those companies. You will find the same organizations over and over again - Blackrock, Citadel, States Street, etc.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#716

Post by Zambyte »

mousethatroared wrote: post #649
Zambyte wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The state of modern personal electric vehicles (PEVs) is outstanding though; good enough to replace owning a car for most people! I personally have been riding an electric scooter this summer, and paired with a nice backpack, it has comfortably replaced all of my regular driving. For people who want to carry more than me, an e-bike with panniers or a cargo e-bike would likely meet your needs. Electric longboards and…

I have two problems with EVs: - I believe they're more immoral than ICE vehicles. They're existence displaces batteries for hybrids (yes I did the math) - They're not practical for me for my use scenario. I have kids.

I'd love to see your math on how my 50 pound electric scooter is more immoral than a 2 ton ICE car.

Also I don't see your point about kids.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#717

Post by Amaury-El »

A lot of stuff looks flashier and cheaper now, but when you actually use it, something just feels off. Older versions from the same brand often felt more solid and better designed. It’s not just that quality dropped. It feels like the focus has shifted from durability to profit, faster updates, and short-term user metrics.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#718

Post by eviks »

n_e wrote: post #440
layer8 wrote: post #176

Many comments here are arguing that quality has actually gone up over the past decades. However, a common experience for me is that I own something of good quality from 5/10/15 years ago and now buy the successor model from the same brand, but the product has gotten worse, being cheaper made. And I have a hard time finding a replacement that matches the quality of the old version. It’s a regularly reoccurring frustra…

I've been surprised to see that several cycling products have gotten better over time. For example I have bought these bottles https://www.zefal.com/en/bottles/545-magnum.html three times over ten years: - the first time, the mouthpiece was attached by two plastic prongs. The prongs eventually failed - The second time I bought them, the mouthpiece was attached by four prongs - The last time I bought them, the hard pl…

How easy would it be do discover this info without personal experience?

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#719

Post by creer »

nicoburns wrote: post #667
WalterBright wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But people here say they want superior products. So why do they buy the cheapest, instead?

The product people really want often isn't on the market at all. I speak of a product that is: - Mass produced at scale - High quality and will "last a lifetime" (a long time) - Repairable when it breaks down I believe that many people would happily pay a 20%, 50% or even 100% markup for such a product, but often often all of the available mass produced options are shitty quality (and the choice is between a bargain…

> 20%, 50% or even 100% markup for such a product

I don't know that this is realistic. Like you recognize, there ARE usually boutique higher quality products - at significantly higher prices. There are also nearly always product management-based, "higher end" product lines. And the quality of these is only sometimes better. And they are not often repairable probably.

I think there is a significant issue with achieving "Mass produced at scale" together with "lifetime and repairable (ie, parts available and easy to replace)". Without people going out of their way to be evil, see lightbulb lifetime mgt, it's easy to be too expensive to miss the "mass produced" window, and your price might be much higher. Not just 20% higher.

Chinese companies built massive factories to corner the market on specific products. Years ago, see the halogen torchiere market. Suddenly the world was flooded with torchiere halogen lamps for an insanely low price. ... a price so low that nobody could really complain that spare parts were not available. These stunts must have been very expensive. An all or nothing bet on a market.

Nowadays, you get factories that make ALL the models of, say, steam irons for basically ALL the brands. These factories take care of some of the issue of quantity-related low price, by sharing parts and processes between all these brands. But could they be competitive in price on smaller runs of steam irons with replaceable parts? Plus the cost of stocking and distributing these parts? I don't know.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#720

Post by whatever1 »

This a result of the investors demand for more profits, every single year.

The only way to achieve this, reliably, is to squeeze your cash cow until it bleeds. Reduce BOM, introduce more ads, lock down repairs, introduce an annual subscription for a crucial function etc

Post reply on HN