Hopefully I’ve worded the question right.
I was once told (I could never verify if it was true) that a crocs company once almost went bankrupt after they made their crocs practically indestructible. Whilst the story was most likely bullshit, it makes me wonder: if a company can make a product that is practically indestructible, is it ethical for them not to make them indestructible, so people will buy more from them?
The way I look at it is, on one hand, I feel like they should make products to the highest quality if they can so that the consumer has to spend less money and that less is wasted, but at the same time if it leads to the company going bankrupt, what of the workers and their families? So I can’t decide, what do you think?
lower quality products are not always cheaper to produce.
Can you provide an example please?
Samsung washing machines. Even if it’s top-of-the-line they’ll still sabotage it by using the spider arm as the sacrificial anode so that it breaks just out of warranty. Doesn’t matter if you paid $2000 for it; it’s still shit.
sneakers of all kinds. the materials and manufacture is essentially the same. its all marketing bs.