| ▲ | pedalpete 14 hours ago |
| We regularly get contacted by people in Europe who want to buy our product, but we haven't been providing support due to the cost of certs, and other regulatory needs (medical/wellness device). We want to help people in the EU, but with laws like replaceable batteries, it's going to push us further and further away from being able to do that. Our product is designed to be refurbished, but not user-replaceable. At the same time, how many products do people give up on because of battery life, and is this a non-issue with future battery chemistries? Do people replace their phones because the battery isn't good anymore, or is it more likely they've broken the screen, cameras, etc to the point where it doesn't make sense to replace those anymore? Or they just want the newest thing? |
|
| ▲ | wkat4242 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > Do people replace their phones because the battery isn't good anymore, or is it more likely they've broken the screen, cameras, etc to the point where it doesn't make sense to replace those anymore? Or they just want the newest thing? This is why repairability isn't restricted to just the battery. And buying the newest thing every year is kinda frowned upon here in the EU now. I'm sure some people still do it but most people aren't flashing their new phone around anymore. And phones have become boring anyway. The latest Samsung S25 is mostly the same as the S23, exact same form factor, cameras. Just a bit faster and a bit more memory. But the government sets a baseline here to stimulate sustainability. I really agree with it, this planet has to be usable for a lot longer. And economic growth isn't everything. We have to move away from consumerism for the sake of it and I think we're making good inroads here in the EU. Not to mention it means there's more money left over for important stuff like doing things with friends. |
| |
| ▲ | lurk2 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | > And buying the newest thing every year is kinda frowned upon here in the EU now. Is there any evidence that Europeans aren’t buying new phones at the same rate that they used to? | | |
| ▲ | poulpy123 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > Is there any evidence that Europeans aren’t buying new phones at the same rate that they used to? I bet it is the case, not because it is frowned upon, but because tpeople have less money, the prices of phone increased a lot and the increase of performance and usefulness is plateauing. | |
| ▲ | sho_hn 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Some sources say so, e.g. "Declining Replacement Cycles Among Consumers" on https://www.marketdataforecast.com/market-reports/europe-sma... And https://www.unibocconi.it/en/news/disposable-smartphones-tri... has replacement cycles in Italy going up. Anecdotally, 2023/24 all media in Germany was full of ads for shops trading refurb phones. Most of those talked lower prices, but some mentioned sustainability. | | |
| ▲ | lurk2 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | The first article does not look to be informative; it values the EU smartphone market at around 465 million USD, which is impossibly low. If you assume a smartphone is valued at $1,000, a market of that size would only amount to 465,000 devices sold; this is around 0.01% of the EU’s population. The second article links to a paper which appears to be more informative (though it has not been peer reviewed): https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5117319 Notably: > For example, in the United States, the average expected life span (replacement
cycle length) of consumer and enterprise smartphones was 2.67 and 2.54 years, respectively, in 2023, while in the UK almost 30% of surveyed consumers use their smartphone up to two years and 41% up to 4 years. and > Furthermore, evidence shows that European, American and Chinese consumers have reduced the replacement rate of their smartphones, increasing their average life cycle (see Figure 1). These data suggest that consumer preferences are changing, and new opportunities arise for companies who want to find new profitable ways to meet the needs of their customers. | | |
| ▲ | ZiiS 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is standard to list market size data in units of $1,000; i.e. that report is 465 billion USD. | | |
| ▲ | lurk2 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Those numbers would be more realistic, amounting to around a thousand dollars spent per each EU citizen per year; this seems a little high if replacement rates are hovering around 3 years on average, but not impossible like the other figure. What I don’t understand is why it would be written “USD 448.87 million.” This convention is common in accounting and finance as well, but they usually make an indication of it in a column header. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | poulpy123 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > We regularly get contacted by people in Europe who want to buy our product, but we haven't been providing support due to the cost of certs, and other regulatory needs (medical/wellness device). I understand your point but being safe is not an option > Do people replace their phones because the battery isn't good anymore I just had to change the battery of my phone, and I wish that it would have been just a swap to do. Actually because it wasn't, I add to buy a temporary phone the time I needed to have the parts and the tools |
|
| ▲ | julian_t an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Do people replace their phones because the battery isn't good anymore Yes. I'm not bothered about the latest thing, and every phone I've replaced has been because of two things: the battery has degraded until it's unacceptable, or it no longer gets OS updates. |
|
| ▲ | daenney 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > We want to help people in the EU, but with laws like replaceable batteries, it's going to push us further and further away from being able to do that. We want to help people, but only if and when it’s profitable for us to do so on terms we decide for you. |
| |
| ▲ | protocolture 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > A market doesnt want our products, we wont provide those products to that market. The terms seem at least, largely influenced by the laws euros seem happy with. Regulation has a cost. | | |
| ▲ | littlestymaar 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | e-waste also have a cost. And regulations are here to make businesses internalize this cost instead of letting society as a whole pay it out. |
| |
| ▲ | sequoia 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > We want to help people, but only if and when it’s profitable for us If s/he is running a company and not a charity, this is responsible, understandable, and predictable. | | |
| ▲ | bojan 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Of course, but that makes "help" a weasel word. They want to be able to sell their product, that they possibly strongly feel will help the buyers. | |
| ▲ | Epa095 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, and that's exactly why we need regulations, and can't leave it to the market! |
| |
| ▲ | widowlark 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is, I believe, the definition of a free market choice | | |
| ▲ | fao_ 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | And this is why regulation exists, QED lol | | |
| ▲ | wkat4242 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, a free market isn't the answer to everything. It will never optimise for sustainability unless this is a conscious consumer choice factor. It's way too important to leave it to that though. Hence regulation. | | |
| ▲ | flawn 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Just change the underlying economic incentives - but nobody is even barely there yet, except maybe the EU. Doughnut Economics, when are you going to save us (& the planet)? |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | blitz_skull 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Uh... yeah. It's called a business. |
|
|
| ▲ | carlm42 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So it's 2025 and we're building more disposable electronics? I'm sorry but I think the EU is not the problem here. |
| |
| ▲ | blitz_skull 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's an unfair representation of the situation. There's nothing about this device that implies "disposable". The EU is definitely the problem here. I think the problem is the EU loves legislating entrepreneurial creativity into the dirt. | | |
| ▲ | sho_hn 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not having a replacable battery - a part that wears predictably and is critical to operation - makes this device disposable. There's more important things than "entrepreneurial creativity". Not everything that can make sense as a business plan makes sense for the world. We can survive without rings that allow us to mutter voice notes into our fists while walking around. | | |
| ▲ | nasmorn 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It does not have a rechargeable battery. I could even understand non replaceable in this form factor. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | atwrk 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| BTW this also works the other way: I find myself to avoid US products more and more because they tend to come with inbuilt obsolescence, or, for digital products, with dark patterns preventing subscription cancelling. |
|
| ▲ | daemonologist 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Speaking personally, I've never broken/damaged a phone. Since the Pixel 1 started requiring removal of the screen in order to swap the battery, 100% of my phone replacements have been because the battery isn't good anymore. (Granted, I would've gotten a new phone eventually regardless, when the old one stopped receiving security updates.) Currently trying to stretch a Pixel 7 until 2027. |
| |
| ▲ | littlestymaar 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > (Granted, I would've gotten a new phone eventually regardless, when the old one stopped receiving security updates.) And that's why the EU also mandate a 5-years software support period (and I wish it was even more). |
|
|
| ▲ | ra 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Regs aside; I'd more likely be a buyer if you offered a discount on replacements when customer returns "years" old expired ring. |
|
| ▲ | maest 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Our product is designed to be refurbished, but not user-replaceable. Why? |
| |
| ▲ | bigiain 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm not who you asked that question, but I'd guess it's because it requires "proprietary tools, thermal energy, or solvents to disassemble the product." It'd be hard to design/manufacture a device that reliably remains waterproof after a typical not-specially-skilled owner opens it up to replace a battery. It's really common to hear of people damaging watches due to water ingress after battery replacements, getting seals or orings seated just right isn't something every user is going to be able to do. I can imagine some medical devices have similar sealing requirements, perhaps even more robust sealing methods since they might need to be exposed to regular disinfection grade cleaning with chemicals harsher then just water. I could easily understand why a company may design a medical device that its heat-glued together for sealing purposes in a way that can only reasonably be done (and redone) at the factory. I killed an original Pebble when I Dremelled it open to replace the battery, and failed to hot glue seal it well enough and it got wet inside. Having said that - I dislike this design choice for the Index 01. I can see myself becoming reliant on this right before they sell out to Garmin or whoever and tell all their customers to FOAD again. Trust is very hard to win back. | |
| ▲ | Tempest1981 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Design inherently involves trade-offs. Size, weight, cost, water resistance, etc. |
|
|
| ▲ | jasonwatkinspdx 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I may not be a typical user, but I've run my last few iphones and macbooks until the battery gave up the ghost. I haven't really needed more features or raw horsepower for quite some time, so the battery ends up being the limit I hit. |
| |
| ▲ | torton 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | iPhones and MacBooks can be serviced to replace the battery. My iPhones typically get a fresh battery around the 3-year mark, or whenever the battery health dips below 80%, and do a second tour of duty with someone in the family. In all cases so far, the OS goes out of support and apps stop working before the second battery degrades. | |
| ▲ | leephillips 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I use Android, but this is me, too. I keep it until the battery goes bad or until it breaks. | | |
| ▲ | dandellion 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | In my last two phones I had to replace the battery 2 and 4 years in. One because it swelled, the other because it couldn't hold charge. Both cases I got a few extra years of usage from the phone. I'm in the EU, and I support this sort of regulation. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Loic 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| My personal experience: Electric toothbrush and razor. I especially hate the razors, you can replace the head, they could last a lifetime, but the battery is practically dead after two years. Toothbrushes are improving, the last one has 3 years of service and still work ok. |
|
| ▲ | lawn 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I guess Core use the same excuse to only provide 30 day warranty, using a loophole to avoid the annoyance of having to provide a proper warranty? |
