Sonos are dicks

https://twitter.com/atomicthumbs/status/121066298882844262

HN discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21895086

They’re giving away coupons to upgrade if you brick your old device. If you want to resell or give it away you’re free to do so, you just don’t get a coupon for that. I really don’t see the problem.

The problem is they are giving a discount if you buy a new (upgraded) device but by doing so you brick your old device. A perfectly usable, functional, working device. It’s the ultimate in planned obsolescence. I’m surprised they’ve not been called out for the practice earlier - it’s pretty ridiculous.

I still don’t see the problem. How else can they be sure you’re upgrading? Mail it back to them? That would be a money losing endeavor.

The only reasonable alternative would be to not offer an upgrade discount at all, and of course most companies selling physical devices don’t.

I agree that it’s good for profitability. I recall reading that Lego had some issues because their products lasted for such a long time. It’s pretty terrible for the environment though. It’s forcing you to throw away otherwise perfectly usable equipment.

The idea is you recycle the components. And yes, that is vastly more wasteful than giving it to someone else that can use it, no doubt about it. But how else do you offer upgrades, other than rendering the entire model obsolete for everybody?

The same way every other electronics manufacturer does. Making upgrades attractive by offering improved products/features and sales (and not software bricking perfectly usable devices).

I don’t understand why you think this is an acceptable practice. I’m very much pro-business and not especially environmentally conscientious but even I can see this is a terrible thing to do. It’s so wasteful.

Obviously I meant how do you offer a discount on upgrades.

By offering sales (discounts) on your new products and making those products more attractive than the old models by improved features.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s an ingenious business model. It’s also completely terrible for both the environment and the consumer. I’m a proponent of small state (minimal interference) but these types of practices should be banned. Sonos should be legally prevented from following this business model.

Sonos could immediately cure the worst of these image problems by setting up something so you could re-license a recycled device for the $120 value (or whatever the amount is) someone got for hitting recycle.

Speakers as a Service?

I feel like we’re speaking different languages. Do you get what this thread is about? Sonos is offering coupons to upgraders. I have sonos in my living room. If I wanted to buy another sonos for my bedroom, that isn’t an upgrade. They need some way to ensure it’s a replacement and not an addition.

The licensing thing is a possibility, I suppose. Maybe they could invalidate your speaker’s serial, soft-bricking it, in exchange for an upgrade coupon worth $X. Then if you gave it away to someone rather than recycling the components, they could relicense it for $2X.

I feel the same way :)
Yes, I understand - I own Sonos devices too.

The problem is that they should not be allowed to force the consumer to replace the product. The consumer should own the device once purchased.

When you buy a new computer does your old one automatically brick itself? - How about if I offered you a discount on the new model? :)

A subscription service is a better idea - if they also provided a method of transferring old devices to new customers (so the original purchaser can sell it on or give it away). Even so, this is still pretty shady too.

Nobody is being forced, you just won’t get the upgrade discount. You can give it away, resell it, whatever you want. Just no coupon.

I will never, ever, buy hardware that requires a subscription.

I think I understand why we disagree. You see this as acceptable because the consumer still has the choice? - I see it as the company incentivizing non-eco-friendly practices whilst simultaneously impacting consumer rights.

They’re incentivizing less eco-friendly practices, I would agree with that, and it reads hypocritical next to “sustainability is non-negotiable” on their website. They do encourage users to actually recycle their devices but they don’t force that anywhere and I imagine quite a few toss them in the garbage.

I don’t see an impact on consumer rights given this is the consumer’s deliberate choice.

The atrocious eco-unfriendly policy is the point of the OP and this thread, not consumer rights. Who gives a fuck about their profitability in offering upgrade discounts? Better they don’t offer the $120 discount at all, if it requires consumers brick the previous device.

I understand where you’re coming from now :)
I disagree though. laughs

How can a company offer a “Club a baby seal for a discount coupon” program, unless you make a video when you club a baby seal? There’s no other way to do it, because otherwise people would lie about clubbing baby seals. So I don’t see the problem. Nobody is forcing anyone to club a baby seal.

This guy capitalisms.