stated that “despite consumers’ proclaimed interest in repairability, evidence suggests that they might be content with product lifespans, and not genuinely interested in fixing their devices.”[1] Citing to “the limited market success of … phones that are specifically optimized to allow unlimited repair and upgrades,” the authors state that “it remains unclear whether consumers truly value the ability to repair and upgrade devices.”[2] However, the study’s authors also noted:
[A]lthough repairability scores varied among the different phone models examined… it is possible that consumers were unaware of the fact that some phones are easier to repair than others. Since repairability scores are not commonly advertised, it remains unclear whether given sufficient information regarding product repairability and functional durability in general, economic lifespan of more functionally durable models would increase. Future work should examine the effect of making repairability information more salient to consumers.[3]
A second study, from the 2017 Product Lifetimes and the Environment (“PLATE”) conference found that the appearance of electronic goods was only “moderately” important to consumers,[4] as opposed to longevity and reliability, which were “extremely” important.[5] Another paper out of the 2017 PLATE conference, authored by employees of environmental ministries or attached agencies in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, and Italy, looked at the planned obsolescence of products and concluded that “[m]anufacturers and consumers interact with one another and influence product development and consumption patterns. The lack of information concerning durable and repairable products causes an asymmetry in the market balance and leaves consumers unable to make the best buying decisions regarding to their own needs.”[6]
Apple’s experience with its battery replacement program also suggests that, given a choice between a low-cost repair and buying a new mobile phone, many consumers will opt for
- ↑ Tamar Makov et al., What Affects the Second-Hand Value of Smartphones: Evidence from eBay, at 4 (June 2018) (internal citations omitted), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jiec.12806 (examining listings on eBay during two ten-day periods in 2015–2016 for Samsung and Apple mobile devices and finding that repairability of device did not affect depreciation of device’s value).
- ↑ Id.
- ↑ Id. at 15.
- ↑ The consumers in this study were from the United Kingdom.
- ↑ A. Gnanapragasm et al., 2017, Consumer perspectives on product lifetimes: a national study of lifetime satisfaction and purchasing factors. IN: Bakker, C.A. and Mugge, R. (eds.) PLATE: Product lifetimes and the environment: Conference Proceedings of PLATE 2017, 8–10 November 2017, Delft, the Netherlands. Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 144–148, at 146. Notably, this point was echoed by Microsoft in its comment: “Our customers demand mobile products that are thin and light, durable and long lasting, and have the maximum possible usage times.” Microsoft comment, at 5.
- ↑ E. Ober et al., Planned obsolescence: the government’s choice?, PLATE: Product lifetimes and the environment: Conference Proceedings of PLATE 2017, 8–10 Nov. 2017, Delft, the Netherlands, Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 315–318, at 318 (2017). While this report does not reach planned obsolescence, the paper by Ober et al. nonetheless contained relevant information and insights into the issues that are addressed by this report.
35
