Actually a spatula is one of my growing list of "there's no way that wasn't designed to break". Wooden-handled spatula with silicon head, the spatula handle looked like it went in to the silicon and provided a strong head. But instead the silicon was designed to look as if the wood continued in to it, but instead there was a very narrow wooden extension a couple of millimetres thick. This was an expensive branded spatula from a specialist store.
The spatula snapped at the interface of the head and handle; you could make it much stronger _and_ use less material.
It wasn't this one, https://cdn.cutleryandmore.com/products/large/35515.jpg, but same exterior appearance where the handle appears to extend in to the silicone.
Hmm, same amount of material constructed in an equally difficult manner will last decades (until the silicone degrades) or last a couple of years if the wooden handle is designed with a super narrow breakable section conveniently hidden in the head ... I'm happy if the survive long enough to need scrubbing with bleach and putting in the microwave for a minute to kill any bacteria/mold on them.
I have paid for and thrown away several cheaper skillets during my lifetime.
You tell me the difference in cheap and planned obsolescence ?
I think a good system of borrowing high end equipment within your local community would be far more environmentally friendly, but that doesn’t really fit the macho all American DIY persona very well.
Though they don't necessarily have high-end stuff; the one here has mostly middle-of-the-road items.
FWIW I inspected several rollers, not just the cheapest and they all appeared to have the flaw of very short metal "tang", and hollowed out plastic handle, just that bit too thin meaning it flexes too much. If the "tang" was a cm longer then they'd be fixable with a bit of old broom handle (drill hole, add epoxy, ...).
I'm not suggesting it's a conspiracy, just a natural part of the race to the bottom that Western Capitalism creates.
It's the same pressure that leads to reducing the food volume and keeping a packet the same size - "hey boss, we can reduce ingredient costs 2%".
So, "we want to reduce material volume", so the 'tang' is shortened until the thing just holds together, and the plastic is thinned so that as the plasticiser leeches out, and the extra pressure of the shortened tang acts on it, then it snaps. "If we reduce materials this much it'll break within 20 hours of use", which the boss thinks is perfect because they're optimising locally for profit and not globally for "keeping the planet livable".
The argument for some kind of business that provides this durable goods and tools swapping service is interesting. It might be worth tackling with a start up. But ultimately users would have to validate that idea. No idea if it's viable.
Would you not go to a tool library? You wouldn't need to talk to anyone, just like checking out a book, check out a tool, pay a hire/membership fee.
[0]:"You never actually own a Patek Philippe – you merely look after it for the next generation."
Another example is high-fashion, where things aren't necessarily made any better than low end goods, and it probably doesn't matter because rich people (women mainly, it seems) will wear an item once. So again longevity isn't really a factor as long as it appears to be well made.
Longevity is a luxury. It is not to be expected in ordinary goods; they are expected to last for a short time and then get junked, soon to be replaced with new items.
I'm skeptical of this, at least to this extent. What company is going to invest the engineering resources to reliably design a particular failure mode in something as inconsequential and cheap as a paint roller?
It's probably far more mundane. Aim to reduce cost/increase profit > use less materials, or use cheaper materials, or use a cheaper-to-make design.
>but what capitalist company wants to make goods that last a lifetime
Serious question?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/30sand40s/32-brands-with-lif...
for example. But then The North Face is on there, and I'd never heard that offered a lifetime warranty (my jacket lost its waterproofness and needed replacing), and they also only give 1 year warranty on several items (half the statutory warranty in the EU).
IIRC Dr.Martens limit their free repairs to a particular sub group of their boots?
Could you give examples of companies with lifetime warranties that you consider successful examples of capitalism? I'd guess to qualify they'd at a minimum have public share ownership.
I don't agree with your criteria. And asking for "lifetime" warranties is not what you originally claimed.
But, looking around at some of the "highly durable" objects I have that were made by profit-seeking companies:
- books
- furniture (Møller teak chairs from the 60s)
- All-Clad pans, Le Creuset enamel dutch oven
- Wüsthof chef's knife
- Barbour waxed cotton jacket
- Iron Heart denim
- Good, repairable shoes (Crockett & Jones, Oakstreet Bootmakers)
Look at something like the handle on a paint roller. A wooden handle will probably last a lifetime, plastic handle - with carefully measured amount of plastic - can be designed to break the second time you use it: At which point we go to the shop and buy another cheap piece of crap that will do the same.
Honestly I think a cm more metal in the handle, and a few grams more plastic and they'd last a lifetime ... but what capitalist company wants to make goods that last a lifetime, that harms profits.