How nice would it be if Fairphone would implement a circular business model with a monthly fee for example, where ownership continues to stay with the seller and not with the buyer (us). This would really change the system. The current setup unfortunately is a linear model that supports producing a lot of parts.
Within a period of 3 years only, I am left with: 2x broken bottom modules, 2x not-functioning batteries, 1x back-case, and 1x complete FP2 – not clear how and by whom this will be recycled… Moreover, I am 750 Euros lighter. A high price to pay for a sustainable cause that in the end is not too sustainable.
Fairphone offered me to buy a new FP3 for almost the full price, after having spent 750 EU in 3 years on the FP2. And unfortunately, I am not the only costumer that spent a great amount of Euros to keep the FP1 or FP2 running, and in the end -in less than 3 years- was offered nothing more than buying a new phone; a tricky decision for a business that is depending so much on a green, good-willed, supportive and faithful costumer base
Sad and unfortunately: I just decided to leave the FP for what is it. It is a nice initiative, but not a sustainable one. In order to be sustainable, I will buy a 2nd hand Samsung which works surely for another 3 years and thus safes the planet a lot of resources.
Any suggestions to promote with FP to implement a circular business model, feel free to respond.
"Fairphone is currently experimenting with a service based smartphone offering — working with a local insurance company on a trial to offer Fairphone as a service, where the phone is leased not owned.
[The article is mixing in interview bits with Bas van Abel]
‘If you sell a phone every three to five years to a person you can also survive as a company. It’s not that you can’t survive. But — having said that — one of the things we are experimenting with is Fairphone as a service… And the beautiful aspect around running a product as a service is on the profit and loss of the company. When I sell you a phone you become a cost center right away as a customer, because all the after sales, everything around it basically is cost,’"
That sounds nice, but I had extensive contact with costumer service (where I also expressed my frustration and gave them options/advice). In the end costumer service said ‘sorry’ and could not offer more than advicing me to buy a new phone. So unclear if this experiment is going to fully be implemented.
Part of sustainability is software support. I am not sure Samsung will give you 3 years of software support on whatever model you are buying.
Batteries of FP2 should last about 500 cycles up to 90% performance, so if you need. So that you consumed 2 batteries in 3 years, is normal. That you are 750 EUR lighter is probably because your core module broke after more than 2 years. This could’ve happened with any smartphone though. That you have 2 broken bottom modules, I doubt you bought both of them, or they both went broken in the first year?
The first quote from the article contained “working with a local insurance company on a trial to offer Fairphone as a service”, so I assume it’s not open for end users yet.
Which I think is understandable. In an experiment I’d rather start to deal with 100 people of the same company than with 100 people with no relation at all (like central support or contact persons). I’m pretty sure that reduces administrative overhead and Fairphone can focus more on the actual experiment.