Thoughts on protection plan

bigaudiofanatic

Yesterday I went to best buy and bought a canon elph for 125 bucks. The reason I bought it was the old kodak camera, I used for car audio pictures finally had a hard fall and died "thank god never really liked it:p" But it lasted me 2 years about. But being that this canon is smaller and maybe a bit more fragile, I have been considering buying the 2 year protection plan for 35 bucks. I understand that if they can not repair the camera and it gets replaced with a new one that the warranty is fulfilled and I would have to buy it again. I have 14 days to decide.

What are your thoughts?

coolsax

for $100 camera there's no need for it in my opinion, in fact I don't think there's a generally a need for it at all.. I have never once (knock on wood) had an item fail on me within 3 years after my purchase. TV's, camera's, computers etc. everything has always lasted for me. I don't think its worth the extra money.. in your case its an extra 30% of what you paid for the camera.. on the off chance it fails on you within 3 years.. please keep in mind you bought a 125 dollar camera which in todays world is a pretty disposable price point, and you may want a more advanced one in less than three years which will probably be at the same price point, who knows.

j allen

If you buy the extended warranty, it'll never break. If you don't...

kevhed72

Best Buy extended warranties are a scam. From what I have heard, there is a clause buried in the warranty basically stating if a particle of sand or whatever is found in the camera when it is sent in (even if the particle doesn't even exist and there may be something else wrong with the camera)...then the warranty is void.

I have not purchased any type of warranty to date that has 'paid off' IMO

bigaudiofanatic

I use to work for bb and I understand about how they can void it. But I heard for the most part people get a new one or get it repaired without paying anything. BUT they have to re buy the warranty again.

snow

Why you would ask about whether or not to pay 35 bucks for a 2 year warranty that can only be used once on a $100.00 camera is a mystery to me that would be like paying 15k for a 2 year warranty on a 50k car or truck flat out a ripoff and stupid both. Perhaps I need to get into the warranty business :eek: It seems to me that maybe 1 out of a 1000 or perhaps as high as 1 out of 10,0000 would have a return due to failure. Now were not insuring the hope diamond here either

REGARDS SNOW

Toxis

would you spend $700 on a 2 year warranty for a 2k TV? I really hope not.

CCNJ

I'm not a big fan of the protection plans. The stores push really hard selling these because they are very profitable for them. I avoid them on most purchases. I would certainly not pay $35 dollar protection on a $125 item.

Toxis

I bought one on my fridge and it's almost over (a year and a half left is all) and I have yet to need it. Electronics, never buy 'em. Buy quality, treat it right and you never need a warranty.

nooshinjohn

+1.... forget the warranty. If you really want to spend the extra cash on something, I will let you order me a pizza from Gino's East. PM me and i will give you the my address for the delivery guy.

bigaudiofanatic

snow wrote: »

Why you would ask about whether or not to pay 35 bucks for a 2 year warranty that can only be used once on a $100.00 camera is a mystery to me that would be like paying 15k for a 2 year warranty on a 50k car or truck flat out a ripoff and stupid both. Perhaps I need to get into the warranty business :eek: It seems to me that maybe 1 out of a 1000 or perhaps as high as 1 out of 10,0000 would have a return due to failure. Now were not insuring the hope diamond here either

REGARDS SNOW

If you read the warranty can only be used once if they replace the camera if they repair it you keep the warranty.

Non the less I do not think I am going to get it.

Big Dawg

It's like this: Best Buy will actually do what the plan claims it will do, for the most part, because it is good, profitable business. They want people to want to keep buying the warranties. If they need to replace 1 out of 5 cameras as a result of the warranty, that means they are getting 5 * $35 = $175 to replace a $125 camera. They just made an extra $50.

This doesn't mean it was a bad choice for you. All insurance, including this kind, is based on risk-aversion. If you can afford the insurance, but not replacing the camera, then it may make sense for you. However, if you buy a camera, and a cell phone, and an iPod, and a toaster, and a vacuum cleaner, each for about $125, and spend $35 apiece to insure them, then you are betting that more than one of them will need to be repaired within 2 years and under the terms of the warranty. That seems unlikely. Thus, you are better off without buying the insurance, but instead, "self-insuring" your purchase.

I'm not the only one who feels that way. Warren Buffet, who's made a few good financial choices (and who owns a rather large insurance company) once said something like, don't buy insurance, buy the insurance company. Think about it.

On the other hand, don't blame me if the camera fails and you didn't get the warranty due to my advice.

madmax

I self insure all my stuff. If you look at everything you buy only some very small percentage of items will ever have a problem but the cost of insuring all of them is very high. Yeah, it will suck when that $2700 TV craps out but I can guarantee you I've saved way more than that by not buying into this BS overall. Buy a few lottery tickets instead, maybe you will get lucky.
madmax