Will The Last One Out Please Turn Off the LED Smart Bulb?
May 27, 2020 8:54 AM   Subscribe

General Electric exits the lightbulb business after finally finding a buyer for its lighting unit and will be selling off its last consumer-facing business after more than 120 years of operation. The lighting business is GE's oldest segment, dating all the way back to the company's founding through a series of mergers with Thomas Edison's companies in the late 1880s and early 1890s.

Boston-based GE said today it would divest the lighting business to Savant Systems, a smart home management company also based in Massachusetts. The companies did not disclose financial terms of the deal, but sources told The Wall Street Journal that the transaction was valued at about $250 million.
posted by JoeZydeco (40 comments total) 9 users marked this as a favorite
 
GE is less of a company, and more a gigantic pile of debt that happens to have employees.
posted by aramaic at 8:59 AM on May 27, 2020 [27 favorites]


As a long-time GE shareholder (don't ask), I have become accustomed to quarterly reports that consist of long paragraphs describing how they have exited yet another entire industry. These are followed by clenched-teeth assurances that the enormous write-downs are actually Just Fine, and also wait until next year, and she's from Canada so you'll never meet her.

They do still make some things, but not nearly as many as they did 20 years ago. In conclusion, I hate Jack Welch.

(I am not a very dispassionate investor, I grant you.)
posted by wenestvedt at 9:09 AM on May 27, 2020 [20 favorites]


“What would you say...you do here?”
posted by Huffy Puffy at 9:32 AM on May 27, 2020 [9 favorites]


Of course Jack Welch is lionized by the business community. He looted the company and made shareholders really happy. For a short period of time.

I'm of the opinion that most non-salary executive compensation and bonuses should be legally required to be escrowed pending long term performance. The toxic myopia in corporate governance is one of the primary motivators for companies to reward sociopathic management.
posted by tclark at 9:33 AM on May 27, 2020 [27 favorites]


Boston-based GE

Ha. Ha ha. Ha ha HA HA HA. They bought an extremely desirable development parcel in the Seaport District neighborhood. The state gave them $87 million to lure them there. It was a big news story at the time: a 12-story office building, create 800 jobs. WBUR said, "Boston has picked up a heavyweight. With $130 billion in annual sales, the top 10 Fortune corporation will be by far Massachusetts’ largest public company. That’s a big ego boost for the region, after years of losing corporate headquarters, from Gillette to EMC to Facebook."

Instead, a few CEOs later, they quietly announced that they were selling the property for $252 million, which would include reimbursing the state, and they now lease an old NECCO factory building there with about 250 employees. Ah well.
posted by Melismata at 9:41 AM on May 27, 2020 [8 favorites]


GE is less of a company, and more a gigantic pile of debt that happens to have employees.

I mean, just look at the org chart.
posted by nathan_teske at 10:02 AM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


GE decided it didn't want to sell lightbulbs anymore. Lightbulbs. An essential item in every household and business, from the poorest to the wealthiest, with endless potential for marketing segmentation, and constantly-evolving R&D potential for industry-specific applications. GE no longer wanted a direct connection to one of the most recognizable Great American Innovation Stories in the patriotic mythology of the United States.

That is some fucked-up entitlement.
posted by desuetude at 10:13 AM on May 27, 2020 [16 favorites]


GE decided it didn't want to sell lightbulbs anymore. Lightbulbs.

Right. Lightbulbs aren't even a basic commodity anymore, with not just smart technology but also exposed fixtures where the design of the lightbulb is a differentiator.
posted by The_Vegetables at 10:18 AM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


They do still make some things, but not nearly as many as they did 20 years ago.

So I guess the old nickname "Generally Hectic" no longer applies.
posted by Greg_Ace at 10:45 AM on May 27, 2020


GE makes quite a few very expensive things. Also, they own lots and lots of very expensive assets that they lease to others. They're a bank with a vestigial manufacturing operation.
posted by wierdo at 11:31 AM on May 27, 2020 [6 favorites]


I wonder if the sixth sigma is “sell it off”
posted by Huffy Puffy at 11:42 AM on May 27, 2020 [4 favorites]


What about my new GE refrigerator? Oh...
GE Appliances is an appliance manufacturer based in Louisville, Kentucky, USA. It is majority owned by Haier.
posted by mkb at 11:51 AM on May 27, 2020 [3 favorites]


They do still make some things, but not nearly as many 

Specific Electric?
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 12:04 PM on May 27, 2020 [16 favorites]


GE decided it didn't want to sell lightbulbs anymore. Lightbulbs.

The last time I bought a light bulb for a reason besides "gee, this fixture didn't already come with lightbulbs" was in the middle of Obama's first term. Well, we bought a house last year and my wife replaced some of the existing bulbs with fancier looking "Edison" bulbs.

The light bulb business isn't what it used to be.
posted by sideshow at 12:07 PM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


It is scary to think that most of the light bulbs in my house have an MTBF greater than mine. They will be illuminating someone else long after my lumen quota has dimmed... however, a bright light on the horizon is the bulb hanging in my barn. Way up high. Regular bulb of the 'old' style with a long neck. Still burning after many years more than it should and I have lived here a long time...
posted by IndelibleUnderpants at 12:53 PM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


> GE decided it didn't want to sell lightbulbs anymore. Lightbulbs. An essential item in every household and business, from the poorest to the wealthiest...

It might be a good time to get out. GE and other incandescent light companies made good book for nearly a century by manufacturing flawed lightbulbs, ensuring recurring sales at a considerably higher rate than properly-made bulbs (which would not have cost more to make).

LEDs upended that for two reasons: LED manufacturers were not members of the incandescent cartel. They had a vested interest in pitching the lifespans of LEDs* as a selling point. They also had, as a major selling point, the advantage of not having to build light fixtures around the standard E26 bulb; they could be flat, tall, skinny, hidden behind architectural features without fear of leaving scorch marks or having to be accessed for replacements every nine months.

So GE and its peers were in no position to flood the market with cheap, inferior bulbs to drive out competitors. The variety of fixtures with built-in lights, and the variety of socketable configurations, mean that monopolizing the market is impossible. For that matter, the light bulb as such is, at this point, a legacy design; in the coming decades the classic light bulb is going to go the way of the telephone handset; still recognizable, still present in everyday life, but no longer ubiquitous because it's going to be as cheap and easier to install small lights with built-in LEDs wherever a full-sized light sconce would have been.

*(A digression worth noting: LEDs gradually fade over time. The published use life for an LED lamp is actually how long it takes for an LED to be half as bright as it was when new. Your LED bulbs are gaslighting you, and surely the LED manufacturers know that; they'll be ready to sell you new integrated ceiling lamps and strip lights in five years.)
posted by ardgedee at 1:12 PM on May 27, 2020 [5 favorites]


Fading over time? I wish. Most of the LED bulbs I've bought -- like most of the CFLs before them -- have crapped out long before their published lifetime.

They're better than incandescents, yes, but commodity LED bulbs do feel like they're built to the lowest possible price with corresponding low quality.
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 1:37 PM on May 27, 2020 [4 favorites]


the incandescent cartel

Byron, is that you?
posted by Harvey Kilobit at 1:43 PM on May 27, 2020 [4 favorites]


General Electric poisoned the Hudson in NY and the Housatonic in MA, but it's a new era, and new challenges await.
posted by Iris Gambol at 1:59 PM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


in the coming decades the classic light bulb is going to go the way of the telephone handset; still recognizable, still present in everyday life

And is, like the phone handset (and floppy disk), destined to become a ubiquitous icon that nobody will know the origin of.
posted by Greg_Ace at 2:01 PM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


GE and other incandescent light companies made good book for nearly a century by manufacturing flawed lightbulbs, ensuring recurring sales at a considerably higher rate than properly-made bulbs (which would not have cost more to make).

No, they weren't flawed light bulbs. They were intentionally engineered that way as a trade off between electrical efficiency and lifespan.

A long life bulb is less efficient and uses more electricity over its lifespan for the equivalent amount of light. So you can save money by having your bulb last longer, but you spend more money on electricity. Instead, the "cartel" optimized their bulbs to save money on electricity at the cost of more bulbs. Note that this is exactly the same trade off for LED bulbs. You spend more money on bulbs but make it up in electricity savings. GE wasn't cheating people. They were saving them money by making more efficient bulbs.
posted by JackFlash at 2:44 PM on May 27, 2020 [4 favorites]


Fading over time? I wish. Most of the LED bulbs I've bought -- like most of the CFLs before them -- have crapped out long before their published lifetime.


I've installed 1000s of A19 LED bulbs in the last four years. I've had maybe a dozen or so early failures. I've had exactly one that was bad out of the box (which used to be like 1 in 50 for incandescent). Like CFLs the original cheap retail units weren't exactly quality but the yields are up and I rarely have problems with them now even for bulbs I only pay $2.50 a piece. Dedicated fixtures which don't have the heat sink limitations of bulbs seem to last forever if you aren't buying them at the dollar store.

Regular bulb of the 'old' style with a long neck. Still burning after many years more than it should and I have lived here a long time...

Depending on how far your barn is from your service and the size of the feeder it's possible the bulb is experiencing a significant undervoltage which will extend it's life at the cost of reduced efficiency.
posted by Mitheral at 2:49 PM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


Dedicated fixtures which don't have the heat sink limitations of bulbs seem to last forever if you aren't buying them at the dollar store

Curiously enough, the most reliable led bulbs I've had were from the dollar store costing a buck or less apiece. The best seem to use some kind of neat ic that handles all the current regulation and dimming without any other components other than a couple of capacitors and diodes, all mounted on a single pcb along with the LEDs, on an aluminum substrate for heat sinking. No buck transformers or other stuff. Extremely simple. Mind boggling to me, and fascinating to see how they do dimming. The whole bulb is lightweight, durable and cheap to make, with really good power factor and use a fraction of power of comparable incandescent. I like hacking light fixtures, and find these cheapie a19 bulbs are easily modified to give tally good directional lighting, too.

The least reliable bulbs, and I've had perhaps a dozen in the last ten years, were all recognizable brand name bulbs that cost significantly more than a dollar. Go figure.
posted by 2N2222 at 4:03 PM on May 27, 2020 [3 favorites]


Im curious about the efficiency of different led bulbs. Some of them seem to run quite hot for the same nominal light output.
posted by Pembquist at 4:04 PM on May 27, 2020


Im curious about the efficiency of different led bulbs. Some of them seem to run quite hot for the same nominal light output.

That might be interesting, though I have to say I haven't had a decent bulb that was rated way off than what it's supposed to be. A 10W bulb will test at about 10W, give or take about 1.5W. I don't have a decent way to measure light output, but they generally seem comparable to what they advertise. The tricky thing is that 10W worth of heat is 10W worth of heat, whether it comes from an LED bulb or an incandescent. The difference is that 10W incandescent's heat is distributed around the glass envelope, with no direct contact with the filament, whereas a 10W LED's heat radiates from whatever heat sinking it may have, which is a much smaller area than a comparable glass envelope. So it might seem more than 10W.

Shitty bulbs I've come across seemed to suffer mostly from insufficient heat sinking and more complicated designs which makes that lack of heat sinking even more critical. And the cheapest bulbs I've come across are advertised wildly above what they are capable of. These are usually straight from China via ebay or aliexpress. They're usually advertised as 6-10W, but actually measure around 1-2W. These usually have rudimentary capacitive dropper circuitry which is reasonably reliable, but not ideal for bulbs over about 2W, and tend to have poor power factor,too. That being said, they have a purpose, and I have several around the property in various duties.
posted by 2N2222 at 5:41 PM on May 27, 2020 [2 favorites]


Would hope bulbs are not made obsolete any time soon. I really prefer bulbs. In replacing our porch light, most options seemed to be ridiculously expensive sconces with integrated LED lights. Same MTBF as a stand-alone LED bulb. But a $15 sconce with a $1 bulb is way cheaper than a $30+ one with integrated LED, so in 5 years when I replace it I’ll only be spending another $1 for a new bulb. Same goes for interior lighting; we have a few lights with integrated LEDs and they are always more expensive than a fixture with a screw socket + a stand-alone LED bulb.
posted by caution live frogs at 7:49 PM on May 27, 2020 [1 favorite]


20 years ago, if you told me we were doing to ditch fluorescents for LED lightbulbs, I would maybe have believed you. But if you told me the LED bulbs would be so shitty they'd flicker at 120 Hz like a cheap magnetic ballast, I would have rolled my eyes.

And yet here we are! If you have a newer smartphone, take a 240 fps video and you can see the flicker.
posted by ryanrs at 3:55 AM on May 28, 2020 [3 favorites]


> Byron, is that you?

Hah. Not my coining. It's from the IEEE article I linked to.
posted by ardgedee at 7:48 AM on May 28, 2020 [1 favorite]


> You spend more money on bulbs but make it up in electricity savings. GE wasn't cheating people. They were saving them money by making more efficient bulbs.

If an efficient $2 bulb costs $2 less per year in electricity to operate, but only lasts nine months rather than ten years, it does not save the user money.

Bulbs with shorter lives might arguably have been better for consumers in the early part of the 20th century when electricity was relatively expensive, but during the postwar boom electricity became significantly cheaper and at best the "savings" would have been a diversion of funds from electricity producers to lightbulb manufacturers.
posted by ardgedee at 6:02 PM on May 28, 2020


A 100 watt light bulb that lasts for 2000 hours uses 200 kW-hr of energy. At $.10 per kW-hr (which is low), it costs $20 to operate. Retail price for an incandescent bulb was like 99 cents.

Energy cost dwarfed bulb retail cost. It was the equivalent of a free phone with a 2-year contract.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 6:42 PM on May 28, 2020 [2 favorites]


They leased an old NECCO factory but they're not making the grey NECCO wafers? The bastards.
posted by away for regrooving at 1:02 AM on May 29, 2020


Funny you mention the NECCO wafers! :)
posted by Melismata at 7:19 AM on May 29, 2020


So this major has been doing tests and exams hoping to be promoted to Lt. Col, and appears before the committee. They tell him he passed except for one final pro-forma question about military history - 'What famous military leader lost the battle at Waterloo?' And they tell him, that just to help him, there's a little something in the fridge in the kitchen that will tell him the answer, should he not know it. So the major is off to the kitchen, comes back, and claims to know the answer.

"General Electric!"
posted by DreamerFi at 11:52 AM on May 29, 2020


Then a grenade went off in the kitchen and the major said, "Oh, I know! Linoleum blown-apart!"
posted by straight at 3:19 PM on May 29, 2020 [3 favorites]


GE and other incandescent light companies made good book for nearly a century by manufacturing flawed lightbulbs, ensuring recurring sales at a considerably higher rate than properly-made bulbs (which would not have cost more to make).

No, they weren't flawed light bulbs. They were intentionally engineered that way as a trade off between electrical efficiency and lifespan.


Here is a long article published in IEEE Spectrum in 2014 about the lightbulb cartel in its various aspects, including the conspiracy to shorten the life of the bulbs, which the author believes was quite real :
On 23 December 1924, a group of leading international businessmen gathered in Geneva for a meeting that would alter the world for decades to come. Present were top representatives from all the major lightbulb manufacturers, including Germany’s Osram, the Netherlands’ Philips, France’s Compagnie des Lampes, and the United States’ General Electric. As revelers hung Christmas lights elsewhere in the city, the group founded the Phoebus cartel, a supervisory body that would carve up the worldwide incandescent lightbulb market, with each national and regional zone assigned its own manufacturers and production quotas. It was the first cartel in history to enjoy a truly global reach.
...
The cartel’s grip on the lightbulb market lasted only into the 1930s. Its far more enduring legacy was to engineer a shorter life span for the incandescent lightbulb. By early 1925, this became codified at 1,000 hours for a pear-shaped household bulb, a marked reduction from the 1,500 to 2,000 hours that had previously been common. Cartel members rationalized this approach as a trade-off: Their lightbulbs were of a higher quality, more efficient, and brighter burning than other bulbs. They also cost a lot more. Indeed, all evidence points to the cartel’s being motivated by profits and increased sales, not by what was best for the consumer. In carefully crafting a lightbulb with a relatively short life span, the cartel thus hatched the industrial strategy now known as planned obsolescence.
A belief which he backs up with quotes from internal company documents and citations.
posted by jamjam at 5:03 PM on May 29, 2020 [1 favorite]


It appears both these things are true:

a) bulb manufacturers created a cartel to limit the sale of bulbs to units that would last 1000 hours instead of 2000 or 10,000 hours.

b) the efficiency and efficacy gains of a 100W 1000 hour bulb verses 125W 2000 hour bulb saved money for end users in the long run even though some of those savings were funnelled to the cartel.

Even if it was a complete wash the efficiency gains would have translated into reduced carbon emissions, lower line losses, lower generating needs, lower transmission costs, lower distribution losses.

And in cooling climates it would have meant lower room temperatures.

One of the fun things is that GE made generating, distribution, transmission, and service equipment. It's possible that the increased bulb sales were in part offset by reduced sales in other areas.
posted by Mitheral at 8:09 PM on May 29, 2020


I FPP'ed the IEEE Spectrum article on the Phoebus Cartel back in 2014: Good light costs so little.
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 11:59 PM on May 29, 2020 [2 favorites]


Without knowing the wattage and lumen output of 1000 hour bulbs and 2000 hour bulbs, you can't really say one is more efficient than the other.

Maybe the 125W bulb generates 25% more light, making it a wash for efficiency. Maybe not, but I'd expect a higher wattage filament to have a greater output of visible light relative to the amount of infrared and have a commensurately higher color temperature, given that all else remains the same.
posted by wierdo at 12:19 AM on May 30, 2020


A higher color temperature requires a higher actual temperature; this is how you get halogen bulbs, to get the filament to hold together for longer. Even then, you go from like 2700K to like 3000K.

The cheap way to make the bulb last longer is to reduce the temperature, which, yeah, you get less light for your watts.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 7:15 AM on May 30, 2020


Without knowing the wattage and lumen output of 1000 hour bulbs and 2000 hour bulbs, you can't really say one is more efficient than the other.

Yes, you can. The physics that determine the trade off between efficiency and lifespan were well understood even 100 years ago. It is why they could make a bulb with a rather precise 1000 hour lifespan. There's no free lunch here. Longer lifespan means less efficient.

Mitheral chose his numbers for a reason. A 2000 hour bulb of 100 watts puts out about 25% less light than a 1000 hour bulb. So to make a 2000 hour bulb as bright as a 1000 hour bulb, you have to design it to use 125 watts instead of 100 watts.
posted by JackFlash at 7:16 AM on May 30, 2020


« Older Pandemic song from Seattle   |   bee venom therapy Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments