posted on
November 17, 2009 at 03:12PM
In response to
bluescreens's post from
November 10 2009 05:50AM
Extending a defect-only warranty is an option, though it doesn't do terribly much.
For instance, if your refrigerator fails, who eats the cost of replacing all the food? The manufacturer? Nope. The credit card? Nope. Consumer Reports? Nope. You do.
If you have a power surge, who eats the cost to fix your appliance? The manufacturer? Nope. The credit card? Nope. Consumer Reports? You do.
If you have a normal wear-and-tear issue, who eats the cost to fix your appliance? The manufacturer? Nope. The credit card? Nope. Consumer Reports? Nope. You do.
If you have cosmetic defects, who eats the cost to fix that? The manufacturer? Nope. The credit card? Nope. Consumer Reports? Nope. You do.
If the product (even a Consumer Reports recommended product) fails in the 3rd, 4th, 5th year, who eats the cost to fix that? The manufacturer? Nope. The credit card? Nope. Consumer Reports? Nope. You do.
If you need to rent a replacement while the appliance is being fixed to get along with your normal life, who eats the cost for that? The manufacturer? Nope. The credit card? Nope. Consumer Reports? Nope. You do.
Who covers complete cost to replace for up to 5 years should it be necessary? The manufacturer? Nope. The credit card? Nope. Consumer Reports? Nope. You do.
And, keep in mind that almost every objection Consumer Reports has with "extended warranties" pertains almost exclusively to "extended warranties," and not the much more robust suite of benefits and services provided by a Master Protection Agreement. Generally, it's superstition, rumors, and the cheap junk plans offered by some competitors that give the worthwhile plans a bad reputation, and that's unfortunate.