ITV results are bad news, but what are they going to do about it?
Well it seems blame the regulator, the economic conditions, the growth in digital TV and the internet.
Have blamed everything it seems tat they are going to cut cost and look at revenue generation.
Cutting costs is what Charles Allan did for several years. Outside observers could say that this drove out creativity, drove away viewers and eventually led to where they are today.
Carolyn Fairbairn (ITV’s group strategy director) says that the TV advertising model is broken. That advertising rates in the UK are the lowest in Europe. She was speaking at the London Business School (3rd March 09) in a debate titled “Future of UK PSB Television”
Is the advertising model broken? There are lots of commercially funded TV channels in the UK that seem to be doing OK. Sure its harder but ITV has failed to adapt so from their perspective it is broken.
Who cares? No one really ITV is not delivering the audiances that the advertisers want or the programming the viewers want. Michael Grade, in an interview today (BBC Radio 4) when questioned about his strategy of using content creativity, to grow the business, said, that ITV were creating content for which they could generate a return on investment for their shareholders. The interviewer queried, “So what about the viewers?” To which Micheal Grade had a long pause (almost “I hadn’t thought about that” moment) before claiming that the content was attracting audience. NOT ENOUGH OF THE RIGHT ONES MICHAEL.
The denial of what is going on is what happens in many industries where the dynamics change and the incumbent/dominant players are unable/willing to make the changes necessary. Example the British Motorcycle industry when the Japanese arrived. The mechanical digger industry when hydraulics came along and the computer industry as generic PC’s took over from mainframes and narrow word processing systems.
ITV strategy must be to get cheaper home grown talent and innovative content. Don’t pay through the nose for Ant and Dec for Simon Cowell.
Use ITV 3 and 4 - try an Opendoor slot for independent producers, armature groups and University media departments (maybe even consumers) to showcase programmes. A talent slot rather than a talent show. Themed so that it isn’t random what consumers will see – Comedy, Drama, Music etc This may not be right but try something other than blaming everything else.
Put your viewers first and if they come back so will the advertisers.
Wednesday, 4 March 2009
Monday, 2 March 2009
Just ahead of the curve BT and Ch4
Comforting to know that I may be just ahead of the curve.
BT emerges as suitor to merge with cash-strapped Channel 4
BT emerges as suitor to merge with cash-strapped Channel 4
Friday, 27 February 2009
The Future of Channel 4.
The Future of Channel 4.
Call me simple, but I just don’t get it.
Channel 4 in the UK is predicted to be insolvent/bankrupt or otherwise financial unable to continue within the next few years.
There has been some talk of merging it with one of the other UK broadcasters – the benefit would be synergies could be realised that reduced the cost.
Ch4 is owned by the government but is funded solely through advertising. It has a Public Service obligation that has meant it has not adopted the “me too” (Strictly Come Dancing –BBC begat Dancing On Ice) strategy of ITV or stick with tried and trusted popular formats (I’m a celebrity…) also a strategy of ITV.
Ch4 has a very credible record in producing innovative, challenging programming over its life. Not having to provide a return to shareholders should mean that more of its revenues can go into continuing this innovation. Merging with a commercial broadcaster ITV or Ch5 may give operational cost synergies but it will also add the cost of servicing shareholders.
When the Chairman of Ch4 says he favours privatisation over merger that doesn’t seem to make sense either – there are not operational cost synergies but the burden of servicing shareholders would arrive. This will inevitably be followed by the finance people that understand nothing about creativity (as demonstrated in ITV (Charles Alan) and simply drive cost out and stick to tried and trusted formats that eventually become stayed and boring.
Privatising Ch4 could mean that Luke Johnson (the Chairman) gets some kudos and a pay rise, for chairing a private company. This is the only driver I can see for suggesting it. I can’t see that if Ch4 is destined to become financially insolvent, as it is,why (unless there are costs that they already know can be cut) its future would be any more secure if privatised
While there might be some other genuine reason I am sceptical. Following the £600k p.a. pension payments to the failed head of RBS I am fed up with individuals benefiting from stripping the country’s assets and cultural heritage or screwing the tax payer.
Here is a thought…maybe not good for Ch4, but BT is struggling with BT Vision and could derive some synergies from acquiring Ch4. It would also be less challenging to maintaining the plurality of UK broadcasters.
Call me simple, but I just don’t get it.
Channel 4 in the UK is predicted to be insolvent/bankrupt or otherwise financial unable to continue within the next few years.
There has been some talk of merging it with one of the other UK broadcasters – the benefit would be synergies could be realised that reduced the cost.
Ch4 is owned by the government but is funded solely through advertising. It has a Public Service obligation that has meant it has not adopted the “me too” (Strictly Come Dancing –BBC begat Dancing On Ice) strategy of ITV or stick with tried and trusted popular formats (I’m a celebrity…) also a strategy of ITV.
Ch4 has a very credible record in producing innovative, challenging programming over its life. Not having to provide a return to shareholders should mean that more of its revenues can go into continuing this innovation. Merging with a commercial broadcaster ITV or Ch5 may give operational cost synergies but it will also add the cost of servicing shareholders.
When the Chairman of Ch4 says he favours privatisation over merger that doesn’t seem to make sense either – there are not operational cost synergies but the burden of servicing shareholders would arrive. This will inevitably be followed by the finance people that understand nothing about creativity (as demonstrated in ITV (Charles Alan) and simply drive cost out and stick to tried and trusted formats that eventually become stayed and boring.
Privatising Ch4 could mean that Luke Johnson (the Chairman) gets some kudos and a pay rise, for chairing a private company. This is the only driver I can see for suggesting it. I can’t see that if Ch4 is destined to become financially insolvent, as it is,why (unless there are costs that they already know can be cut) its future would be any more secure if privatised
While there might be some other genuine reason I am sceptical. Following the £600k p.a. pension payments to the failed head of RBS I am fed up with individuals benefiting from stripping the country’s assets and cultural heritage or screwing the tax payer.
Here is a thought…maybe not good for Ch4, but BT is struggling with BT Vision and could derive some synergies from acquiring Ch4. It would also be less challenging to maintaining the plurality of UK broadcasters.
Tuesday, 17 February 2009
What Media Business Are You In?
Wachovia has, not surprisingly, forecast that Radio (or is that wireless?) is not the place to invest if you want to get a return before the new millennium.
This news has awakened an old bug of mine. Do these various, so called, media companies know what business they are in? We have Cinema, Radio, Press, TV (terrestrial, Cable, IP VoD and Satellite) as the principle media industries. But have they asked themselves the question, “What business are we in?”
I was once told that the head of Black & Decker had said “I am not in the business of selling drills, but of selling holes”.
When the aeroplane was developing as a passenger transport technology did the railways recognise that they where in the mass transport business or did they see themselves as train operators. The answer is plain to see (pun intended).
The Cinema industry failed to see themselves in the entertainment business otherwise they would have been in radio. Having failed to make that leap TV was the next obvious leap to miss.
Like most, in all areas of media, they have ring fenced themselves by the technology, instead of being in the entertainment business. In the early days of TV (et al) it is easy to fall into this trap as understanding and using the technology is /was the biggest barrier to entry. One you understand the business the biggest barreir should be that understanding the market and not technology.
Why did ITV, in the UK, buy Friends Reunited? I’d love to see that business case. What were supposed to be the synergies?
News Corp is one of the few companies that has a spread itself across the technology delivery options and also vertically integrated for content production. But these are by no stretch of the imagination truly integrated. They just share the same owner.
If I ran ITV I would: -
• Concentrate on getting exclusive innovative content (deliberately left out quality). Making it in-house would mean I could reap the value from the IPR too.
• Changing the name to something less Television orientated - Granada is one that is easily out of the bag. To develop an international brand then something that described the business/organisation like GBE (pronounce Geebee – Great British Entertainment).
• Launch a radio channel
• Launch expatriate channels in Spain, US etc
• Look at developing a Live Events arm (broadening the entertainment remit and provide a source of content for TV and Radio)
• A coordinated pan GBE website with merchandise sales, streaming, downloads, recommendations etc.
• Develop home grown (low cost) talent pipeline.
• Investigate developing IPR into computer games.
Become an entertainment company ….
This news has awakened an old bug of mine. Do these various, so called, media companies know what business they are in? We have Cinema, Radio, Press, TV (terrestrial, Cable, IP VoD and Satellite) as the principle media industries. But have they asked themselves the question, “What business are we in?”
I was once told that the head of Black & Decker had said “I am not in the business of selling drills, but of selling holes”.
When the aeroplane was developing as a passenger transport technology did the railways recognise that they where in the mass transport business or did they see themselves as train operators. The answer is plain to see (pun intended).
The Cinema industry failed to see themselves in the entertainment business otherwise they would have been in radio. Having failed to make that leap TV was the next obvious leap to miss.
Like most, in all areas of media, they have ring fenced themselves by the technology, instead of being in the entertainment business. In the early days of TV (et al) it is easy to fall into this trap as understanding and using the technology is /was the biggest barrier to entry. One you understand the business the biggest barreir should be that understanding the market and not technology.
Why did ITV, in the UK, buy Friends Reunited? I’d love to see that business case. What were supposed to be the synergies?
News Corp is one of the few companies that has a spread itself across the technology delivery options and also vertically integrated for content production. But these are by no stretch of the imagination truly integrated. They just share the same owner.
If I ran ITV I would: -
• Concentrate on getting exclusive innovative content (deliberately left out quality). Making it in-house would mean I could reap the value from the IPR too.
• Changing the name to something less Television orientated - Granada is one that is easily out of the bag. To develop an international brand then something that described the business/organisation like GBE (pronounce Geebee – Great British Entertainment).
• Launch a radio channel
• Launch expatriate channels in Spain, US etc
• Look at developing a Live Events arm (broadening the entertainment remit and provide a source of content for TV and Radio)
• A coordinated pan GBE website with merchandise sales, streaming, downloads, recommendations etc.
• Develop home grown (low cost) talent pipeline.
• Investigate developing IPR into computer games.
Become an entertainment company ….
Monday, 16 February 2009
What we need is more credit !!
The politicians and financers are all saying that we need to prop up the banks so that they can loan more money. Their logic is, if we can borrow money we can buy cars, houses holiday’s furniture etc.
My logic is: - If I want to buy a car for 10,000 (pounds, dollars, euro or whatever). I can save 400 a month so in 25 months time I can buy the car outright. Or I can buy it now – get a loan and pay off with my 400 so in around 35 months (19% APR) I can own my car.
Its cost me an extra 4,000 and taken me 10 months longer. When I make the final payment its value is a fraction of its original value.
If I save and buy then I can afford (given everything stays the same) to buy a new car every 25 months. Using a loan I can only afford it every 35 months. Given that the residual value is higher after 25 months I can probably use it as a larger deposit and get a better car.
If I chose to keep the car for 35 months I now have an extra 4,000 to spend on furniture, house, holiday etc.
The encouragement to borrow is the same madness that got us into this mess.
It is better to have a penny in your pocket and owe nothing rather than have a pound (dollar, euro) in your pocket and owe a penny
My logic is: - If I want to buy a car for 10,000 (pounds, dollars, euro or whatever). I can save 400 a month so in 25 months time I can buy the car outright. Or I can buy it now – get a loan and pay off with my 400 so in around 35 months (19% APR) I can own my car.
Its cost me an extra 4,000 and taken me 10 months longer. When I make the final payment its value is a fraction of its original value.
If I save and buy then I can afford (given everything stays the same) to buy a new car every 25 months. Using a loan I can only afford it every 35 months. Given that the residual value is higher after 25 months I can probably use it as a larger deposit and get a better car.
If I chose to keep the car for 35 months I now have an extra 4,000 to spend on furniture, house, holiday etc.
The encouragement to borrow is the same madness that got us into this mess.
It is better to have a penny in your pocket and owe nothing rather than have a pound (dollar, euro) in your pocket and owe a penny
Friday, 6 February 2009
BskyB unhappy with Ofcom's suggestion
Here are some key phrases used by BskyB in its response to Ofcom’s consultation on the UK Pay TV Market
“…it [Ofcom] is proposing the imposition of radical and highly interventionist regulation of a sort unseen in any developed market economy.”
“…the damaging effects on investment incentives that would result
from the confiscatory nature of Ofcom’s proposals,…”
“…- compulsory supply - would require Sky to license the intellectual property in its channels to third party retailers. This is one of the most Draconian remedies available to a competition authority. Moreover, this proposal is accompanied by proposals for detailed ex ante regulation, including price control,…”
“…Ofcom’s proposed intervention seeks effectively to impose on Sky an obligation to subsidise other market players, by forcing Sky to reduce its wholesale prices to “support entry into the market by new retailers”.”
“…to eliminate any risk of excess profitability in Sky’s premium sports and movies channel supply business, it would impose cost-plus based price controls.”
“Ofcom’s proposed intervention could, for example, reduce incentives to invest on the part of Sky and other operators, and diminish innovation levels,…”
“It is noteworthy that the European Commission’s intervention in the sale of
rights to broadcast Premier League football resulted in consumers who wish to view all live matches broadcast having to pay more than they were prior to the intervention.”
BskyB’s response is 140 pages long and it goes on in a consistent vain. I have a lot of sympathy with Sky’s argument. However, when BT was forced to open up the local access to Sky I didn’t hear any objections. BT is forced to sell its Broadband services to BskyB (and others) at wholesale prices that are then marked up and sell on to consumers.
This was imposed by the same regulator and the difference was that sky benefited from similar measures imposed in one area but cries “Fowl” when pointed at them.
Their argument holds some truths such as …BT is now reluctant to invest in fibre to the home as BT would probably have to allow competitors to have access and would not make the return on the investment that balanced the risk.
“…it [Ofcom] is proposing the imposition of radical and highly interventionist regulation of a sort unseen in any developed market economy.”
“…the damaging effects on investment incentives that would result
from the confiscatory nature of Ofcom’s proposals,…”
“…- compulsory supply - would require Sky to license the intellectual property in its channels to third party retailers. This is one of the most Draconian remedies available to a competition authority. Moreover, this proposal is accompanied by proposals for detailed ex ante regulation, including price control,…”
“…Ofcom’s proposed intervention seeks effectively to impose on Sky an obligation to subsidise other market players, by forcing Sky to reduce its wholesale prices to “support entry into the market by new retailers”.”
“…to eliminate any risk of excess profitability in Sky’s premium sports and movies channel supply business, it would impose cost-plus based price controls.”
“Ofcom’s proposed intervention could, for example, reduce incentives to invest on the part of Sky and other operators, and diminish innovation levels,…”
“It is noteworthy that the European Commission’s intervention in the sale of
rights to broadcast Premier League football resulted in consumers who wish to view all live matches broadcast having to pay more than they were prior to the intervention.”
BskyB’s response is 140 pages long and it goes on in a consistent vain. I have a lot of sympathy with Sky’s argument. However, when BT was forced to open up the local access to Sky I didn’t hear any objections. BT is forced to sell its Broadband services to BskyB (and others) at wholesale prices that are then marked up and sell on to consumers.
This was imposed by the same regulator and the difference was that sky benefited from similar measures imposed in one area but cries “Fowl” when pointed at them.
Their argument holds some truths such as …BT is now reluctant to invest in fibre to the home as BT would probably have to allow competitors to have access and would not make the return on the investment that balanced the risk.
Tuesday, 27 January 2009
Being Green or just common sense?
I never take out extended warranties as I have found if it lasts 12 months, it will probably carry on working for several years. We have tended to replace equipment because there is something better, or when it breaks down. In the case of our first washing machine, a Creeda, after 15-years. However, the main reason I don't take out extended warranties is because I can generally repair the equipment quicker and cheaper myself.
I know that most people are afraid to take the back off a TV – “Danger” stickers reinforce the fear. “No user serviceable parts” are a challenge for me. Unplugged from the mains (and antenna) and there is little that you can do wrong. Taking out a few screws and having a look, it wont bite and you can always simply put it back. Most electrical and electronic devices have plug in modules these days, maybe a retaining screw or two. The point being, there are no special tools required in most cases to repair stuff.
I come from a time when, as a teenage, I understood 90% to 100% of the technology in my home. That applied to the 12” black and white TV and the valve radio. It also applied to “technologies” of the plumbing, woodwork and gas. In my adult life I have kept up this understanding. I am always interested to find out how things work, from businesses to people to computers and more.
So why is this important? People block up ventilation holes to stop drafts and kill themselves in their ignorance, or spill hot coffee and are surprised that it is hot or expect that cruise control will steer the camper van down the road while they go and make a cup of coffee in the back. Clearly most people are not that stupid and survive without thinking too deeply about how anything works, until it goes wrong. Even then they use their disposable income to call some “skilled” person in to put it right.
Anyway I digress…having always had a go at repairing stuff when a Morphy Richards (retro looking) toaster packed up on me a few years ago I looked in the top and could see that one of the heating elements had a gap in it. It had blown. The special anti-tamper screws were no obstacle, simple a minor challenge. Having removed the damaged element (6-screws and a couple of push on connecter like those on the back of you car head light – not rocket science) and called Morphy Richards to order a replacement. “Oh no we don’t have spare parts for those…they are not meant to be serviced!” “Throw it away and send us a copy of your receipt and we’ll send you a replacement.”
What a completely wasteful process. Green wasn’t such a big issue but it angered me that the only practical reasons why it was not serviceable where the anti-taper screws and the lack of basic expendable components – more for the land fill!
So back to recent events! It always seems that just after Christmas and all that expense, January turns into the month where a whole load of unexpected problems and outlay turn up. Amongst these this year the washing machine blew a fuse. I replaced the fuse and the machine responded by flashing 4-times pausing the repeating the 4 flashes in a continuous loop. A quick look in the user manual tells me that this means the door is not shut – clearly it is, so there has to be something else. Following the logic?
A washing machine is clearly a bit more complicated than a toaster, so I look around on the internet for a service manual. Hopefully a chink of light to help me know what I am doing. I’ll have a go at anything but being informed action improves the chance of success. I contact Zanussi and Electrolux and their service agents but none will supply me with a service manual – “They are trade only… You could hurt yourself!” “We would be liable”
I hate the woman that bought the coffee from McDonalds spilt it and then successfully sued because it didn’t have a warning on it that it was hot. I recently heard about a woman that successfully sued because there was no warning about the cruse control on her camper van. She had put the cruise control on and gone into the back to make some coffee. Apparently she had not realised that she still had to steer. These people fuck it up for the rest of us big time.
Anyway being sane and with some grey cells in working order I want to work on MY property. They sold me the machine. I own it. If I want to hit it with a hammer or take it for a swim (is there a warning about that?) or play with it, that is up to me. Why won’t they give me the information to make it as safe as possible? (Please use a life jacket when going for a swim with your washing machine) But oh no “we’ll send a service engineer around” £50, which I decline. “But what will you do?” “I’ll take it apart without the service manual.” “That’s dangerous and we don’t advise that.” “It’s more dangerous because you won’t sell me a manual and I understand why you don’t advise it. It’s because you want to charge me £50.”
Now you may think this reckless but in a washing machine there are a very limited number of components. The most common problems include the motor, the heating element and the pump.
Eventually I find a site offering a generic washing machine and dishwasher manual http://www.2ndwave.co.uk/manual.html . This is not the most up to date manual but the basic are right on, and it will at least show you how to get into the thing.
Eventually I discover that the programmer has been blown by a short circuit in the interlocking door catch. Unfortunately I don’t discover this until I’ve spent £30 and waited 3 days for the new door lock to turn up (lots of places that will sell you the parts – including Zanussi’s service agent – but no manual! “It’s OK to blow yourself up as long as we didn’t give you any help in avoiding it!”).
The programmer will cost £175 to £189 including VAT + delivery. The act of replacing it is easy a couple of clips and three or four idiot proof multi-way plugs – I only have to take two screws out and slide the top off. But the cost presents me with a dilemma. If I spend £175+ and having replaced it, it goes bang, I’m £170+ down the drain.
If I get someone to repair it, they will want to charge their labour. They will also want at least some cover for the risk that it goes bang on them. So looking at around £250 – new machine £278. So in the dawn of a green age I throw what is otherwise a perfect machine away.
And that, you may say, is that. But what angers me is that this 4-year old machine looks brand new. The inside isn’t even dusty. The £170 for the programme is ridiculous. A quick search of the internet and you can get a simple laptop (with far more processing power) for less. An observational note to Zanussi is pending a response and I have to move on… the washing is piling up.
Before I end I just want to go back to the beginning… if I’d have taken out an extended warranty for an additional 3-years it would have cost me £185 and have run out in November last year..
So when the good, the great and the politicians tell me to be green they are taking to the converted, at the bottom of the chain. Maybe a chat with the top of the chain about their designs would be worth it for the sake of the planet!
Thus endeth the rant.
I know that most people are afraid to take the back off a TV – “Danger” stickers reinforce the fear. “No user serviceable parts” are a challenge for me. Unplugged from the mains (and antenna) and there is little that you can do wrong. Taking out a few screws and having a look, it wont bite and you can always simply put it back. Most electrical and electronic devices have plug in modules these days, maybe a retaining screw or two. The point being, there are no special tools required in most cases to repair stuff.
I come from a time when, as a teenage, I understood 90% to 100% of the technology in my home. That applied to the 12” black and white TV and the valve radio. It also applied to “technologies” of the plumbing, woodwork and gas. In my adult life I have kept up this understanding. I am always interested to find out how things work, from businesses to people to computers and more.
So why is this important? People block up ventilation holes to stop drafts and kill themselves in their ignorance, or spill hot coffee and are surprised that it is hot or expect that cruise control will steer the camper van down the road while they go and make a cup of coffee in the back. Clearly most people are not that stupid and survive without thinking too deeply about how anything works, until it goes wrong. Even then they use their disposable income to call some “skilled” person in to put it right.
Anyway I digress…having always had a go at repairing stuff when a Morphy Richards (retro looking) toaster packed up on me a few years ago I looked in the top and could see that one of the heating elements had a gap in it. It had blown. The special anti-tamper screws were no obstacle, simple a minor challenge. Having removed the damaged element (6-screws and a couple of push on connecter like those on the back of you car head light – not rocket science) and called Morphy Richards to order a replacement. “Oh no we don’t have spare parts for those…they are not meant to be serviced!” “Throw it away and send us a copy of your receipt and we’ll send you a replacement.”
What a completely wasteful process. Green wasn’t such a big issue but it angered me that the only practical reasons why it was not serviceable where the anti-taper screws and the lack of basic expendable components – more for the land fill!
So back to recent events! It always seems that just after Christmas and all that expense, January turns into the month where a whole load of unexpected problems and outlay turn up. Amongst these this year the washing machine blew a fuse. I replaced the fuse and the machine responded by flashing 4-times pausing the repeating the 4 flashes in a continuous loop. A quick look in the user manual tells me that this means the door is not shut – clearly it is, so there has to be something else. Following the logic?
A washing machine is clearly a bit more complicated than a toaster, so I look around on the internet for a service manual. Hopefully a chink of light to help me know what I am doing. I’ll have a go at anything but being informed action improves the chance of success. I contact Zanussi and Electrolux and their service agents but none will supply me with a service manual – “They are trade only… You could hurt yourself!” “We would be liable”
I hate the woman that bought the coffee from McDonalds spilt it and then successfully sued because it didn’t have a warning on it that it was hot. I recently heard about a woman that successfully sued because there was no warning about the cruse control on her camper van. She had put the cruise control on and gone into the back to make some coffee. Apparently she had not realised that she still had to steer. These people fuck it up for the rest of us big time.
Anyway being sane and with some grey cells in working order I want to work on MY property. They sold me the machine. I own it. If I want to hit it with a hammer or take it for a swim (is there a warning about that?) or play with it, that is up to me. Why won’t they give me the information to make it as safe as possible? (Please use a life jacket when going for a swim with your washing machine) But oh no “we’ll send a service engineer around” £50, which I decline. “But what will you do?” “I’ll take it apart without the service manual.” “That’s dangerous and we don’t advise that.” “It’s more dangerous because you won’t sell me a manual and I understand why you don’t advise it. It’s because you want to charge me £50.”
Now you may think this reckless but in a washing machine there are a very limited number of components. The most common problems include the motor, the heating element and the pump.
Eventually I find a site offering a generic washing machine and dishwasher manual http://www.2ndwave.co.uk/manual.html . This is not the most up to date manual but the basic are right on, and it will at least show you how to get into the thing.
Eventually I discover that the programmer has been blown by a short circuit in the interlocking door catch. Unfortunately I don’t discover this until I’ve spent £30 and waited 3 days for the new door lock to turn up (lots of places that will sell you the parts – including Zanussi’s service agent – but no manual! “It’s OK to blow yourself up as long as we didn’t give you any help in avoiding it!”).
The programmer will cost £175 to £189 including VAT + delivery. The act of replacing it is easy a couple of clips and three or four idiot proof multi-way plugs – I only have to take two screws out and slide the top off. But the cost presents me with a dilemma. If I spend £175+ and having replaced it, it goes bang, I’m £170+ down the drain.
If I get someone to repair it, they will want to charge their labour. They will also want at least some cover for the risk that it goes bang on them. So looking at around £250 – new machine £278. So in the dawn of a green age I throw what is otherwise a perfect machine away.
And that, you may say, is that. But what angers me is that this 4-year old machine looks brand new. The inside isn’t even dusty. The £170 for the programme is ridiculous. A quick search of the internet and you can get a simple laptop (with far more processing power) for less. An observational note to Zanussi is pending a response and I have to move on… the washing is piling up.
Before I end I just want to go back to the beginning… if I’d have taken out an extended warranty for an additional 3-years it would have cost me £185 and have run out in November last year..
So when the good, the great and the politicians tell me to be green they are taking to the converted, at the bottom of the chain. Maybe a chat with the top of the chain about their designs would be worth it for the sake of the planet!
Thus endeth the rant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)