News The Pixel Watch 3 'no-repair policy' shouldn't surprise you

jondc70

New member
Aug 24, 2024
1
0
1
Visit site
Ostensibly the "pay to use" part keeps the premiums down for everyone else. If replacement was free, the premiums for everybody would be higher
 

Golfdriver97

Trusted Member Team Leader
Moderator
Dec 4, 2012
35,504
385
83
Visit site
"Google could give you a total coverage amount like you see in car insurance policies and none of us would like it, but at least we would know exactly what we are paying for. Or Google could try to incorporate service costs into the price itself and nobody would be happy because the unit price goes up by $10."

There is another option: don't buy this watch. I agree that if you buy insurance, it should cover the loss. This...this is ridiculous, Google—pure, unadulterated ridiculousness.

I was starting to consider getting one. Now...nope.
 

gmschoen

New member
Feb 21, 2018
3
1
1
Visit site
Thank you for including the deductible amount with the premium price. When you include the deductible cost with the premium you see what a terrible idea these plans are if you're the buyer. At $138, assuming one covered loss in two years, compared to a $349 retail price (often discounted,) the value is lacking. If you're someone prone to breakage, have a physical job, or engage in extreme or intense exercise these aren't the devices for you. They're held together with glue instead of screws. The more durable or repairable devices have a higher purchase price.