From: b on
On 8 dic, 11:21, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: Thing
is, the
> stuff is so cheap now that it's hardly worth worrying about service once the
> warranty is out. I was looking just the other day at a 22" fully featured
> LCD TV for my newly remodelled kitchen. Built in Freeview receiver, HD,
> 1000:1 contrast ratio etc etc. UK£179 ! That was from Argos and was some
> 'never-heard-of' brand, and you would probably say that being in the trade,
> I ought to know better, but c'mon ... 179 quid ?? Got to be worth a punt at
> that hasn't it ? Anything lost really, if it's naffed-out after 2 years ?
>
> Arfa

Arfa,
I sympathise with what you say here, and from a purely practical
consumer standpoint it is hard to disagree. However, this throwaway
approach is somewhat abhorrent, and has environmental costs which are
borne by us all, through taxes for waste treatment and public
recycling schemes - the manufacturers have only a limited liability
for what happens to their shoddy junk when it expires.

A lot of time and money are needed to deal with the after effects of
this mentality. And worse still, it is particularly the poorer folk in
the third world who bear the brunt - the drive for more raw materials
(metals, minerals etc) leads to civil wars and instability in places
like the congo for example. To keep the costs of our monitors, tvs and
dvds down, whole countries end up being privatized (or should that be
privateered!) and the wealth from their resources exported.

It's not only the production process, but hazardous e-waste from the
first world often ends up in slums in India and Nigeria where the
local water supplies are contaminated....the list really is almost
endless when you look into it a bit.

Anyway, not having a pop at you, my intention is just to comment on
the situation we're all in. but I think more people should be aware
that their buying decisions do have consequences, affecting people
unseen by them. B

From: Arfa Daily on

"b" <reverend_rogers(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6eaa30cf-be0e-4475-a162-28b9d0eee8b8(a)v15g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On 8 dic, 11:21, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: Thing
is, the
> stuff is so cheap now that it's hardly worth worrying about service once
> the
> warranty is out. I was looking just the other day at a 22" fully featured
> LCD TV for my newly remodelled kitchen. Built in Freeview receiver, HD,
> 1000:1 contrast ratio etc etc. UK�179 ! That was from Argos and was some
> 'never-heard-of' brand, and you would probably say that being in the
> trade,
> I ought to know better, but c'mon ... 179 quid ?? Got to be worth a punt
> at
> that hasn't it ? Anything lost really, if it's naffed-out after 2 years ?
>
> Arfa

Arfa,
I sympathise with what you say here, and from a purely practical
consumer standpoint it is hard to disagree. However, this throwaway
approach is somewhat abhorrent, and has environmental costs which are
borne by us all, through taxes for waste treatment and public
recycling schemes - the manufacturers have only a limited liability
for what happens to their shoddy junk when it expires.

A lot of time and money are needed to deal with the after effects of
this mentality. And worse still, it is particularly the poorer folk in
the third world who bear the brunt - the drive for more raw materials
(metals, minerals etc) leads to civil wars and instability in places
like the congo for example. To keep the costs of our monitors, tvs and
dvds down, whole countries end up being privatized (or should that be
privateered!) and the wealth from their resources exported.

It's not only the production process, but hazardous e-waste from the
first world often ends up in slums in India and Nigeria where the
local water supplies are contaminated....the list really is almost
endless when you look into it a bit.

Anyway, not having a pop at you, my intention is just to comment on
the situation we're all in. but I think more people should be aware
that their buying decisions do have consequences, affecting people
unseen by them. B

I hear what you're saying, and of course, I agree in principle. However, I
have to make a living repairing this junk, and it is unfortunately necessary
to make the call that a piece of kit is not worth repairing, more and more
often these days. Just think about it. If you own a TescoSonic home cinema
system and it stops reading discs, you are probably going to bring it to
someone like me. Before we even start, you are going to baulk at having to
pay my time to look at it. Then when I tell you that I can't get the laser
that it needs anyway, you are just going to chuck it in the bin, and buy
another with a shiny new 2 year warranty on it. Even worse is when you pay a
coupla hundred quid for say a Panasonic system, and that one fails just out
of warranty. This time, I can get the laser from Pan, but it's going to cost
you �115 trade, and then I'm going to charge you another 35 quid to fit it.
The sums just don't work out. Not your fault. Not mine. Just the way it is
now.

At least the legislation and basic structures are now in place to recycle
this stuff,(weee directive) and it is the manufacturers who are responsible
for the costs of this, not the taxpayer directly (although I guess that the
manufacturers will be building the costs into their wholesale prices to
their distributors)

It is also a little unfair to level criticisms at the consumer and the
repair trade, for causing the stuff to go to an early grave. This should be
levelled at the manufacturers. It's also not my fault, or yours, that kit
gets shipped to third world countries for dismantling, and that the job is
not done in a way that preserves their environment. If you feel really
strongly about it, you should be lobbying the governments that allow the
recycling directives to be implemented in this less-than-ideal way.

Oh, and you're OK. I know that you're not having a go at me ... d;~}

Arfa