I mean, there's a curve for sure, but my coffee table was like $35 and has lasted over 5 years now. A several hundred dollar table would have to last me for decades in order to even come close to breaking even. Is it the nicest thing I own? Far from it, but it's functional, affordable, and even if I have to replace it tomorrow I'd say it has held up.
The couch I bought from the Brick over a decade and a half ago is still holding up. Sure, it has endured some wear and tear and I wouldn't mind replacing it, but it's not dead yet.
The idea of speculating out literally longer than I'm going to live is nice in theory, but without kids I'm not super worried about whether or not things end up in someone else's hands. I'm also considering possibly purchasing a home instead of renting for the rest of my life, which may require a slight downsizing, which would mean buying into items to outlast me might just lead to needing to store them for years or decades (incurring higher costs) or sell them (likely for vastly less than I got originally).
There is certainly a curve present, and like with my PC purchases I strive to futureproof to a reasonable extent, but that also has to be balanced against existing resources. If I had several thousand dollars to spend on a couch or table, I suppose I could, but that's money that isn't going into a condo down payment in a few years, or cutting back on the opportunities to take a trip or vacation and have an experience.
I get that it's literally being laid out as a good investment that will last decades, but that's being said in amidst a group that, based on what people have said in a variety of threads, aren't generally rolling in cash for a variety of reasons (education loans, cost of living, etc).
Which isn't to say it's bad advice, but it's advice aimed at people in specific financial situations, which may be a good number of thread/forum participants, but I have doubts it's anywhere near the majority.
Other factors like having children (hard on possessions in the best of times) and whatnot also factors in. Short of falling on said coffee table, I wouldn't be surprised if it had many years left in it. Sure, it's not the most robust construction, but when you're 6'3" of handsome and mass, I'm sure that a bad trip is going to be a rough day on anything that isn't designed to military standards anyways.
Edit: I think the boots thing makes sense as an object that sees regular daily wear and tear. A coffee table might not see any noteworthy degradation in any given week, month, or even year. A couch is likely closer, as something that will have people crashing on it (perhaps literally now and then), but a $500-1000 one lasting for 10-15+ years doesn't seem so 'inefficient' as to be noteworthy. As stated above, living changes (or death) are likely to happen before a high end one even breaks even, given some of the numbers thrown around.
That said, I've been pondering a replacement to said couch, and boy prices have gone up in those 15+ years.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
+3
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
edited March 2020
I'm not advocating for people to buy $4000 furniture, Forar. I'm saying that doing so is a contributing factor in how having money seeds keeping money.
I own several expensive things I brought home from the family furniture shop in that range. Most of what I have bought for myself has been either Ikea quality stuff that I then put some work into to make better or things I made for myself in my garage. People get what they can afford. But buying expensive things isn't always a con, often its a divider between socioeconomic classes that are perpetuated generationally.
In the 40s everything was hardwood (or, worst case, treated pine) and typically lasted as long as you needed anyway. It was also a lot cheaper to get quality furniture. The rise of MDF and overseas markets sweatshop producing furniture caused the majority of the economic jump in materials costs. A typical, medium range bed would be about $200 USD (today's money) including a headboard in the 50s, now its well over $1400. Part of that is systematic inflation by a shrinking total of big box stores like Rooms to Go putting local producers mostly out of business anywhere but the highest end manufacturing, the other is that hardwood logging is much more restrictive (mostly in very good ways), but enough that it has eaten into the ability to have better, more lasting furniture.
The flipping boom of the 80s and 90s led to the idea of redoing your house more than once or twice ever, which was also very bad for furniture costs.
Enc on
0
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
Also, MDF is really bad, leaks formaldehyde gas, and generally isn't good to have around, so all that Ikea stuff is likely not great for you health-wise. That said, most medium range folks have the same and the average US household already has so much MDF everywhere in it that the ppm of gas is already high in your house and picking something else probably isn't going to help all that much.
I'm not advocating for people to buy $4000 furniture, Forar. I'm saying that doing so is a contributing factor in how having money seeds keeping money.
I own several expensive things I brought home from the family furniture shop in that range. Most of what I have bought for myself has been either Ikea quality stuff that I then put some work into to make better or things I made for myself in my garage. People get what they can afford. But buying expensive things isn't always a con, often its a divider between socioeconomic classes that are perpetuated generationally.
In the 40s everything was hardwood (or, worst case, treated pine) and typically lasted as long as you needed anyway. It was also a lot cheaper to get quality furniture. The rise of MDF and overseas markets sweatshop producing furniture caused the majority of the economic jump in materials costs. A typical, medium range bed would be about $200 USD (today's money) including a headboard in the 50s, now its well over $1400. Part of that is systematic inflation by a shrinking total of big box stores like Rooms to Go putting local producers mostly out of business anywhere but the highest end manufacturing, the other is that hardwood logging is much more restrictive (mostly in very good ways), but enough that it has eaten into the ability to have better, more lasting furniture.
The flipping boom of the 80s and 90s led to the idea of redoing your house more than once or twice ever, which was also very bad for furniture costs.
Yeah, the fact that lumber was artificially cheap for nearly a century throws a lot of comparisons out of whack since we try to not just clear cut the State of Michigan again. Trees take a lot longer to grow than people think, and time is money.
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
HamHamJ on
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
I'm not advocating for people to buy $4000 furniture, Forar. I'm saying that doing so is a contributing factor in how having money seeds keeping money.
I own several expensive things I brought home from the family furniture shop in that range. Most of what I have bought for myself has been either Ikea quality stuff that I then put some work into to make better or things I made for myself in my garage. People get what they can afford. But buying expensive things isn't always a con, often its a divider between socioeconomic classes that are perpetuated generationally.
In the 40s everything was hardwood (or, worst case, treated pine) and typically lasted as long as you needed anyway. It was also a lot cheaper to get quality furniture. The rise of MDF and overseas markets sweatshop producing furniture caused the majority of the economic jump in materials costs. A typical, medium range bed would be about $200 USD (today's money) including a headboard in the 50s, now its well over $1400. Part of that is systematic inflation by a shrinking total of big box stores like Rooms to Go putting local producers mostly out of business anywhere but the highest end manufacturing, the other is that hardwood logging is much more restrictive (mostly in very good ways), but enough that it has eaten into the ability to have better, more lasting furniture.
The flipping boom of the 80s and 90s led to the idea of redoing your house more than once or twice ever, which was also very bad for furniture costs.
Yeah, the fact that lumber was artificially cheap for nearly a century throws a lot of comparisons out of whack since we try to not just clear cut the State of Michigan again. Trees take a lot longer to grow than people think, and time is money.
Well and new growth isn't the same quality as old growth wood.
I know plenty of folks that could afford nicer furniture but choose Ikea because they want to get rid of it in 1-2 years for some new style.
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
Maybe like... the super rich but the regular rich most definitely do not.
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
Maybe like... the super rich but the regular rich most definitely do not.
I can't think of anyone who replaces their kitchen appliances every 5 years, and I definitely want to have the same couches we just bought until we die. Brown leather chesterfields are timeless and look good everywhere. But then I very strongly identify with the better less, but better approach.
Hell, I have shoes that are older than some good friendships. And I'm looking forward to being able to say that to my future kids when they do something stupid.
moniker on
+16
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
As someone who sold these things to rich people during the height of the flip markets, no. They actually don't with furniture! They take legacy pieces and reupholster or refinish them for the cost you would pay for a new piece at Ikea. Most times, if you have a very expensive couch, or chest, or bed, they keep those things generationally and update them to fit their current place. You rarely find a top 5% house just getting all new everything in a remodel for their furniture. Appliances, sure. That's almost seasonally for certain demographics, but not the furniture itself.
Appliances are not furniture, though. That's a totally different thing.
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
Washers don't become obsolete after 5 years.
+29
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
Also, the idea of "changing your style" as a regular thing is a very modern trend. While repainting and occasionally reupholstering curtains, furniture, etc. has been a thing for a long time, total remodels is a trend that really only gained a lot of traction in the 90s with the sunbelt boom. It's a bad an unsustainable idea and channels like HGTV do a very bad job at perpetuating false norms.
It's rather like the Wedding ceremony, media booms in the 80s and 90s lead to our current nonsense, while before that they were a much lower-cost affair.
And shoes man I’m wearing some super nice long wing oxfords manufactured in the 60s- I get them recrafted every 3 or 4 years for half the cost of a new pair that wouldn’t last even 2 years
+2
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
edited March 2020
My last post in this thread for a bit: you want good furniture? Go antiquing and refinish it yourself/hire someone to do it for you. Get an old, ugly, hardwood piece and then take the time to make it what you want.
My favorite table I have was a lime green, gaudy leaf-printed coffee table from the 60s that I stripped, refinished black, covered the top with wine corks that I halved after buying a trashbag of them from a restaurant for like $20 bucks, and put a piece of beveled glass on. I could probably sell it for over $1000, but I only spent about $80 in the end, plus about 20 hours.
Nor can i think if a pair of boots or work shoes that would have been tossed rather than re-soled after a few years. My dad has been wearing his loafers for 30 years now at least
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
If I buy a washing machine and dryer that lasts me 20 years, I will be happy, because they are washing and drying my clothes, which is their main function. I don't need the latest bells and whistles or a fourth or fifth heat setting to accomplish this goal. If you're replacing your washer/dryer every 5 years, you're treating them as a luxury rather than a necessity.
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
My anecdote - the dresser and nightstand I've had since I was like 8 is from my dad's former, very wealthy boss. I don't plan on ever getting rid of it, but hopefully refinishing it cause their current, good condition value is in the thousands. I'd never have spent that myself.
Also, it's fashionable again since it's mid century modern.
I'm not advocating for people to buy $4000 furniture, Forar. I'm saying that doing so is a contributing factor in how having money seeds keeping money.
I own several expensive things I brought home from the family furniture shop in that range. Most of what I have bought for myself has been either Ikea quality stuff that I then put some work into to make better or things I made for myself in my garage. People get what they can afford. But buying expensive things isn't always a con, often its a divider between socioeconomic classes that are perpetuated generationally.
In the 40s everything was hardwood (or, worst case, treated pine) and typically lasted as long as you needed anyway. It was also a lot cheaper to get quality furniture. The rise of MDF and overseas markets sweatshop producing furniture caused the majority of the economic jump in materials costs. A typical, medium range bed would be about $200 USD (today's money) including a headboard in the 50s, now its well over $1400. Part of that is systematic inflation by a shrinking total of big box stores like Rooms to Go putting local producers mostly out of business anywhere but the highest end manufacturing, the other is that hardwood logging is much more restrictive (mostly in very good ways), but enough that it has eaten into the ability to have better, more lasting furniture.
The flipping boom of the 80s and 90s led to the idea of redoing your house more than once or twice ever, which was also very bad for furniture costs.
shopping at west elm for furniture when it goes on a decent sale, bought all mine on 40% off works out quite well. My dinner table is solid wood and i paid 650 for it. my media console is solid wood stained really nicely and matches the tables and i paid like 1100. two chairs i got for 175 a piece and a love seat for 225. most of their stuff is garbage mdf and costs the same as the solid wood but you can find really nice stuff on sale if you wait.
Why the hell would you even want to have the same couch for 80 years? Frankly the Sam Vines Theory is pretty bullshit because the whole metaphor doesn't work in the first place. Rich people will throw that pair of boots away in a year too because they are no longer fashionable.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
The only way a washer would be obsolete for me is if it either no longer got my clothes clean or it didn't accept modern detergent or something like that.
If it looks old and busted but still works, who cares, it's in a closet anyway.
Aside from smart features (and if you've been paying attention there's several reasons you shouldn't be getting things with smart features) no appliance is going to be obsolete in five years. Hell, non-HE washer/dryer units are not substantially improved over ones from 40 years ago, let alone 20.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
Oh no? People will get a glimpse an unfashionable appliance in the dim corner of my basement laundry room and judge me for it?
(To say nothing of the fridge in this house, which works perfectly well despite slightly predating the Falklands War...)
You might want to consider replacing the fridge for a new energy star model. Aside from A/C that's probably the biggest energy suck in your home. Which is needlessly burning both money and probably coal or gas at your local power plant. Which, efficiency gains over ~5 years aren't that significant, but over 40 years... it probably predates most applicable efficiency regulations.
For the past 26 years of my life, everything I own either fits in the trunk and back of a mid size sedan every 4 years or gets tossed. And because I have massive student loans, I need to live like this for another 20 more years if I want to salvage my retirement. If I use a piece of furniture, it's either plastic, furnished, or built into the room, because it's not coming with me.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
When I moved here I had not much {3 microwave sized boxes a overseas bag and my 3 day pack} I have far more right now then I did 10+ years ago.
When I move I am taking the fridge with me maybe the stove. THe washer I had to rebuild a few years ago so it too is a maybe. The Fridge replaced one my father had since the mid 80's so had finally gave up [just getting rid of it was a epic journey of frustration} Getting the new one was a lesson of math {I figured out you were basically paying for the freezer at $3 a cubic CM} But getting a fridge was a bizarre choice since this was the start of the smart screen ones which I did not want}
As for furniture my brother has an interest in reupholstery so he is going to strip the table and refinish it but the couch and one of the chairs he is going to take them down to the frame and redo them getting the cloth and springs is the only problem
0
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
Re: furniture costs, it depends. Your MDF fiberboard mass market stuff applies to most of what I've seen on here. A couch or table in the 3 grand range tends to be the better bargain in the long run though. A hardwood, craftsman-quality high-end couch will survive 80 years or more with only needing reupholstery of a couple hundred bucks every decade or so. Most of what you buy in the 800-1800 range at places like Rooms to Go and Ashley are essentially the same things you can get off of Amazon or at Ikea for 150-400 (specifically, mdf and fiberboard composites, assembled cheaply (if at all) with weak stress points that will eventually give even with careful care). Over the same time you end up paying more.
It's one of those things that allows the rich to stay rich with the Sam Vimes Theory.
/former high-end furniture salesperson
If you do Ikea it helps to buy the solid pine stuff and assemble it with wood glue. We've got some stuff that's approaching 10 years now without noticeable wear. Not as good as the hardwood, but a hell of a lot better than particleboard.
Okay, so the solution to late stage capitalism and vulture capitals destroying lives is buying expensive boots and antique furniture. And the company that was deliberately gutted is actually at fault, because... people dont buy furniture anymore, or they buy too much furniture? Im still confused about that part.
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
The main problem with obsolete appliances is that when they break you can’t get the parts. Presumably appliance companies do this to encourage you to buy a newer model.
Okay, so the solution to late stage capitalism and vulture capitals destroying lives is buying expensive boots and antique furniture. And the company that was deliberately gutted is actually at fault, because... people dont buy furniture anymore, or they buy too much furniture? Im still confused about that part.
The problem with late stage capitalism is it’s a race to oligarchy so capital’s customer base is being left behind
The main problem with obsolete appliances is that when they break you can’t get the parts. Presumably appliance companies do this to encourage you to buy a newer model.
With just-in-time manufacturing and the way inventory is taxed it isn't usually to their benefit to keep lots of parts around. Still, I've never had a problem with washers, dryers or dishwashers finding parts. It's usually the fridge or microwave that needs replacing instead of repair. Sometimes you get lucky and they upgraded the part that broke (I assume due to excessive within-warranty repairs) so your appliance will work better after repair than when it was new.
+4
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
Okay, so the solution to late stage capitalism and vulture capitals destroying lives is buying expensive boots and antique furniture. And the company that was deliberately gutted is actually at fault, because... people dont buy furniture anymore, or they buy too much furniture? Im still confused about that part.
The company is usually always in the wrong, but as Inertia said being poor is more expensive than being rich. If you can save up and buy things you can maintain, rather than replace, you typically save money in the long run. It's not a solution, but a strategy to mitigate your costs.
Solutions have to be state-sponsored means to create equity between labor and capital.
The main problem with obsolete appliances is that when they break you can’t get the parts. Presumably appliance companies do this to encourage you to buy a newer model.
With just-in-time manufacturing and the way inventory is taxed it isn't usually to their benefit to keep lots of parts around. Still, I've never had a problem with washers, dryers or dishwashers finding parts. It's usually the fridge or microwave that needs replacing instead of repair. Sometimes you get lucky and they upgraded the part that broke (I assume due to excessive within-warranty repairs) so your appliance will work better after repair than when it was new.
I imagine it also ties back to cost of repair versus replacement. Why spend $50-100+ repairing a microwave when I can get a brand new on for that much or less? It won't necessarily be a high end model with a dozen new bells and whistles (that most consumers won't use anyways), but it's not a pile of shit either. I had one microwave for over half a decade when it finally stopped working and had to be replaced. My current one has to be around that as well, no sign of needing replacement yet.
There's a wide grey area between 'this will outlive you' and 'this is trash that will fail 1 day after the warranty is up'. Like, I picked up a fairly nice wood dinner table and chairs off a craigslist like site, for several hundred dollars (still a substantial discount off new). However, the chairs began to give out to wear and tear after a few years, and needed replacing. The table itself is pretty good, aside from where a kid carved their first initial in it while I wasn't looking (it's a long story), but a tablecloth covers that.
Which is to say that even with 'future proofing' of purchases, life happens to things. We can strive not to be a part of stuff like this trend in fashion I'm hearing about where people buy crap for $3 and it's considered a victory if it gets worn twice before being thrown out (in contrast, I still have a few t-shirts from when I was in high school a very, very long time ago). Some things will simply wear out in time. We can strive to do better and aim higher, but at the end of the day whether or not something like a microwave or fridge lasts X years or Y years isn't entirely in our control, assuming it's used and cared for properly, all else being equal.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Being able to maintain things requires an investment in tools, and a bit of leisure time, too. I kept a washer and dryer going much longer than it would've made financial sense if I hadn't already had the needed tools and had needed to hire a repairman.
Self maintaining and repair entirely has to do with how much you consider it work/draining and how much you value your time.
If I'm solving a problem and learning about my car/appliance at the same time I'll usually fix it myself, once I know what the problem is and how much work it is to fix I will often pay someone.
Everyone should invest in at least a small toolbox because it will generally save you money over time to do small stuff.
Paying people to repair stuff is embarrassing to me
/sigh
It shouldn't be. Maybe I could have replaced the heat exchanger in my furnace when it went bad but it would have taken me 5x longer, I would risk damaging other parts that I am not familiar with, and I can't get the same price for replacement parts that dealers can. With the rebate they got me (Bryant's apology for bad engineering on their part) I'll bet the labor was close to a wash compared to doing it myself and the work they did comes with a warranty to boot.
There's no shame in trusting professionals. They're professionals for a reason.
It's not a question of solutions or late-stage capitalism or whatever. The point of a discussion of the specific aspects of the furniture market is just to make it easier to understand why the companies in question are having some of the troubles they are. Why are vulture capitalists swooping in on some of these husks? Because it seems like the change in the market and consumer behaviour is making a lot of previous business models difficult to execute successfully.
And this is especially true in the retail space, where overall movements in the larger consumer market are making life difficult for everyone.
And private equity (or at least, the kind this thread is discussing) have basically become an ever-present threat to any company that shows a hint of weakness. Swooping in on them and destroying them quickly and horribly.
Paying people to repair stuff is embarrassing to me
/sigh
It shouldn't be. Maybe I could have replaced the heat exchanger in my furnace when it went bad but it would have taken me 5x longer, I would risk damaging other parts that I am not familiar with, and I can't get the same price for replacement parts that dealers can. With the rebate they got me (Bryant's apology for bad engineering on their part) I'll bet the labor was close to a wash compared to doing it myself and the work they did comes with a warranty to boot.
There's no shame in trusting professionals. They're professionals for a reason.
The thing about the 'anyone can do it' ethos of DIY is that it is entirely true, but also applies to literally everything. Anyone can learn most everything. That's how professionals became professionals in the first place. Nobody is born with that knowledge innately. The handyman/ carpenter/ HVAC specialist is no different than you... aside from years of training and effort and learning from mistakes. And doing something better, quicker, without having to buy some particular tools that'll just collect dust when you're done has value. Because while I could re-tile that hole in the wall, my first time doing it is going to look worse than someone who has retiled a thousand holes in walls. Similarly, I could learn how to reset a broken arm. But... I'd rather trust someone with experience to do it better than me. But if you need somebody to rewrite your library catalog? I'm your guy.
Paying people to repair stuff is embarrassing to me
/sigh
It shouldn't be. Maybe I could have replaced the heat exchanger in my furnace when it went bad but it would have taken me 5x longer, I would risk damaging other parts that I am not familiar with, and I can't get the same price for replacement parts that dealers can. With the rebate they got me (Bryant's apology for bad engineering on their part) I'll bet the labor was close to a wash compared to doing it myself and the work they did comes with a warranty to boot.
There's no shame in trusting professionals. They're professionals for a reason.
We've spent thousands of dollars for professionals to fix the things the last owner tried to do himself. We do a few things ourselves, but otherwise I've experienced enough shoddy workmanship that I've learned I'm better off paying someone to do it right.
Paying people to repair stuff is embarrassing to me
/sigh
It shouldn't be. Maybe I could have replaced the heat exchanger in my furnace when it went bad but it would have taken me 5x longer, I would risk damaging other parts that I am not familiar with, and I can't get the same price for replacement parts that dealers can. With the rebate they got me (Bryant's apology for bad engineering on their part) I'll bet the labor was close to a wash compared to doing it myself and the work they did comes with a warranty to boot.
There's no shame in trusting professionals. They're professionals for a reason.
We've spent thousands of dollars for professionals to fix the things the last owner tried to do himself. We do a few things ourselves, but otherwise I've experienced enough shoddy workmanship that I've learned I'm better off paying someone to do it right.
I had a hand in building three houses starting when I was five. By no means would I say I am professional, but I do have enough experience to be confident in most common household repairs. Drywall patching? Easy. Installing a toilet? Gimme an afternoon. Tile and grouting? Okay, yeah, that's going to take some planning and forethought. About the only ones I leave to professionals are electrical in nature. Because I don't feel like accidentally killing myself or burning the house down.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
Posts
The couch I bought from the Brick over a decade and a half ago is still holding up. Sure, it has endured some wear and tear and I wouldn't mind replacing it, but it's not dead yet.
The idea of speculating out literally longer than I'm going to live is nice in theory, but without kids I'm not super worried about whether or not things end up in someone else's hands. I'm also considering possibly purchasing a home instead of renting for the rest of my life, which may require a slight downsizing, which would mean buying into items to outlast me might just lead to needing to store them for years or decades (incurring higher costs) or sell them (likely for vastly less than I got originally).
There is certainly a curve present, and like with my PC purchases I strive to futureproof to a reasonable extent, but that also has to be balanced against existing resources. If I had several thousand dollars to spend on a couch or table, I suppose I could, but that's money that isn't going into a condo down payment in a few years, or cutting back on the opportunities to take a trip or vacation and have an experience.
I get that it's literally being laid out as a good investment that will last decades, but that's being said in amidst a group that, based on what people have said in a variety of threads, aren't generally rolling in cash for a variety of reasons (education loans, cost of living, etc).
Which isn't to say it's bad advice, but it's advice aimed at people in specific financial situations, which may be a good number of thread/forum participants, but I have doubts it's anywhere near the majority.
Other factors like having children (hard on possessions in the best of times) and whatnot also factors in. Short of falling on said coffee table, I wouldn't be surprised if it had many years left in it. Sure, it's not the most robust construction, but when you're 6'3" of handsome and mass, I'm sure that a bad trip is going to be a rough day on anything that isn't designed to military standards anyways.
Edit: I think the boots thing makes sense as an object that sees regular daily wear and tear. A coffee table might not see any noteworthy degradation in any given week, month, or even year. A couch is likely closer, as something that will have people crashing on it (perhaps literally now and then), but a $500-1000 one lasting for 10-15+ years doesn't seem so 'inefficient' as to be noteworthy. As stated above, living changes (or death) are likely to happen before a high end one even breaks even, given some of the numbers thrown around.
That said, I've been pondering a replacement to said couch, and boy prices have gone up in those 15+ years.
I own several expensive things I brought home from the family furniture shop in that range. Most of what I have bought for myself has been either Ikea quality stuff that I then put some work into to make better or things I made for myself in my garage. People get what they can afford. But buying expensive things isn't always a con, often its a divider between socioeconomic classes that are perpetuated generationally.
In the 40s everything was hardwood (or, worst case, treated pine) and typically lasted as long as you needed anyway. It was also a lot cheaper to get quality furniture. The rise of MDF and overseas markets sweatshop producing furniture caused the majority of the economic jump in materials costs. A typical, medium range bed would be about $200 USD (today's money) including a headboard in the 50s, now its well over $1400. Part of that is systematic inflation by a shrinking total of big box stores like Rooms to Go putting local producers mostly out of business anywhere but the highest end manufacturing, the other is that hardwood logging is much more restrictive (mostly in very good ways), but enough that it has eaten into the ability to have better, more lasting furniture.
The flipping boom of the 80s and 90s led to the idea of redoing your house more than once or twice ever, which was also very bad for furniture costs.
Yeah, the fact that lumber was artificially cheap for nearly a century throws a lot of comparisons out of whack since we try to not just clear cut the State of Michigan again. Trees take a lot longer to grow than people think, and time is money.
Edit: Or like appliances. You buy a washer that will last 20 years, congratulations you now own an obsolete POS washer for 15 years.
Well and new growth isn't the same quality as old growth wood.
I know plenty of folks that could afford nicer furniture but choose Ikea because they want to get rid of it in 1-2 years for some new style.
Maybe like... the super rich but the regular rich most definitely do not.
I can't think of anyone who replaces their kitchen appliances every 5 years, and I definitely want to have the same couches we just bought until we die. Brown leather chesterfields are timeless and look good everywhere. But then I very strongly identify with the better less, but better approach.
Hell, I have shoes that are older than some good friendships. And I'm looking forward to being able to say that to my future kids when they do something stupid.
As someone who sold these things to rich people during the height of the flip markets, no. They actually don't with furniture! They take legacy pieces and reupholster or refinish them for the cost you would pay for a new piece at Ikea. Most times, if you have a very expensive couch, or chest, or bed, they keep those things generationally and update them to fit their current place. You rarely find a top 5% house just getting all new everything in a remodel for their furniture. Appliances, sure. That's almost seasonally for certain demographics, but not the furniture itself.
Appliances are not furniture, though. That's a totally different thing.
Washers don't become obsolete after 5 years.
It's rather like the Wedding ceremony, media booms in the 80s and 90s lead to our current nonsense, while before that they were a much lower-cost affair.
My favorite table I have was a lime green, gaudy leaf-printed coffee table from the 60s that I stripped, refinished black, covered the top with wine corks that I halved after buying a trashbag of them from a restaurant for like $20 bucks, and put a piece of beveled glass on. I could probably sell it for over $1000, but I only spent about $80 in the end, plus about 20 hours.
If I buy a washing machine and dryer that lasts me 20 years, I will be happy, because they are washing and drying my clothes, which is their main function. I don't need the latest bells and whistles or a fourth or fifth heat setting to accomplish this goal. If you're replacing your washer/dryer every 5 years, you're treating them as a luxury rather than a necessity.
But my old one doesn't stream Netflix!
Also, it's fashionable again since it's mid century modern.
shopping at west elm for furniture when it goes on a decent sale, bought all mine on 40% off works out quite well. My dinner table is solid wood and i paid 650 for it. my media console is solid wood stained really nicely and matches the tables and i paid like 1100. two chairs i got for 175 a piece and a love seat for 225. most of their stuff is garbage mdf and costs the same as the solid wood but you can find really nice stuff on sale if you wait.
Oh no? People will get a glimpse an unfashionable appliance in the dim corner of my basement laundry room and judge me for it?
(To say nothing of the fridge in this house, which works perfectly well despite slightly predating the Falklands War...)
The only way a washer would be obsolete for me is if it either no longer got my clothes clean or it didn't accept modern detergent or something like that.
If it looks old and busted but still works, who cares, it's in a closet anyway.
You might want to consider replacing the fridge for a new energy star model. Aside from A/C that's probably the biggest energy suck in your home. Which is needlessly burning both money and probably coal or gas at your local power plant. Which, efficiency gains over ~5 years aren't that significant, but over 40 years... it probably predates most applicable efficiency regulations.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
When I move I am taking the fridge with me maybe the stove. THe washer I had to rebuild a few years ago so it too is a maybe. The Fridge replaced one my father had since the mid 80's so had finally gave up [just getting rid of it was a epic journey of frustration} Getting the new one was a lesson of math {I figured out you were basically paying for the freezer at $3 a cubic CM} But getting a fridge was a bizarre choice since this was the start of the smart screen ones which I did not want}
As for furniture my brother has an interest in reupholstery so he is going to strip the table and refinish it but the couch and one of the chairs he is going to take them down to the frame and redo them getting the cloth and springs is the only problem
If you do Ikea it helps to buy the solid pine stuff and assemble it with wood glue. We've got some stuff that's approaching 10 years now without noticeable wear. Not as good as the hardwood, but a hell of a lot better than particleboard.
The problem with late stage capitalism is it’s a race to oligarchy so capital’s customer base is being left behind
Being poor is more expensive than being rich
We need better regulation and redistribution
With just-in-time manufacturing and the way inventory is taxed it isn't usually to their benefit to keep lots of parts around. Still, I've never had a problem with washers, dryers or dishwashers finding parts. It's usually the fridge or microwave that needs replacing instead of repair. Sometimes you get lucky and they upgraded the part that broke (I assume due to excessive within-warranty repairs) so your appliance will work better after repair than when it was new.
The company is usually always in the wrong, but as Inertia said being poor is more expensive than being rich. If you can save up and buy things you can maintain, rather than replace, you typically save money in the long run. It's not a solution, but a strategy to mitigate your costs.
Solutions have to be state-sponsored means to create equity between labor and capital.
I imagine it also ties back to cost of repair versus replacement. Why spend $50-100+ repairing a microwave when I can get a brand new on for that much or less? It won't necessarily be a high end model with a dozen new bells and whistles (that most consumers won't use anyways), but it's not a pile of shit either. I had one microwave for over half a decade when it finally stopped working and had to be replaced. My current one has to be around that as well, no sign of needing replacement yet.
There's a wide grey area between 'this will outlive you' and 'this is trash that will fail 1 day after the warranty is up'. Like, I picked up a fairly nice wood dinner table and chairs off a craigslist like site, for several hundred dollars (still a substantial discount off new). However, the chairs began to give out to wear and tear after a few years, and needed replacing. The table itself is pretty good, aside from where a kid carved their first initial in it while I wasn't looking (it's a long story), but a tablecloth covers that.
Which is to say that even with 'future proofing' of purchases, life happens to things. We can strive not to be a part of stuff like this trend in fashion I'm hearing about where people buy crap for $3 and it's considered a victory if it gets worn twice before being thrown out (in contrast, I still have a few t-shirts from when I was in high school a very, very long time ago). Some things will simply wear out in time. We can strive to do better and aim higher, but at the end of the day whether or not something like a microwave or fridge lasts X years or Y years isn't entirely in our control, assuming it's used and cared for properly, all else being equal.
Paying people to repair stuff is embarrassing to me
/sigh
If I'm solving a problem and learning about my car/appliance at the same time I'll usually fix it myself, once I know what the problem is and how much work it is to fix I will often pay someone.
Everyone should invest in at least a small toolbox because it will generally save you money over time to do small stuff.
It shouldn't be. Maybe I could have replaced the heat exchanger in my furnace when it went bad but it would have taken me 5x longer, I would risk damaging other parts that I am not familiar with, and I can't get the same price for replacement parts that dealers can. With the rebate they got me (Bryant's apology for bad engineering on their part) I'll bet the labor was close to a wash compared to doing it myself and the work they did comes with a warranty to boot.
There's no shame in trusting professionals. They're professionals for a reason.
And this is especially true in the retail space, where overall movements in the larger consumer market are making life difficult for everyone.
And private equity (or at least, the kind this thread is discussing) have basically become an ever-present threat to any company that shows a hint of weakness. Swooping in on them and destroying them quickly and horribly.
The thing about the 'anyone can do it' ethos of DIY is that it is entirely true, but also applies to literally everything. Anyone can learn most everything. That's how professionals became professionals in the first place. Nobody is born with that knowledge innately. The handyman/ carpenter/ HVAC specialist is no different than you... aside from years of training and effort and learning from mistakes. And doing something better, quicker, without having to buy some particular tools that'll just collect dust when you're done has value. Because while I could re-tile that hole in the wall, my first time doing it is going to look worse than someone who has retiled a thousand holes in walls. Similarly, I could learn how to reset a broken arm. But... I'd rather trust someone with experience to do it better than me. But if you need somebody to rewrite your library catalog? I'm your guy.
I repair my clothing with patches and darning.
This is only worthwhile to do because I enjoy it. There is no way repairing clothing is financially viable. It's just too cheap to buy new.
We've spent thousands of dollars for professionals to fix the things the last owner tried to do himself. We do a few things ourselves, but otherwise I've experienced enough shoddy workmanship that I've learned I'm better off paying someone to do it right.
I had a hand in building three houses starting when I was five. By no means would I say I am professional, but I do have enough experience to be confident in most common household repairs. Drywall patching? Easy. Installing a toilet? Gimme an afternoon. Tile and grouting? Okay, yeah, that's going to take some planning and forethought. About the only ones I leave to professionals are electrical in nature. Because I don't feel like accidentally killing myself or burning the house down.