The familiar rule ‘replace it when a repair costs half as much as new’ leaves out diagnostic fees, warranties, installation and the time you expect to keep the appliance. No worksheet can predict the next breakdown, but recording the same categories for both paths makes the uncertainty visible. This is a decision method, not a test of any particular product.
- Repair: ₩20,000+₩90,000=₩110,000
- Replace: ₩300,000+₩30,000=₩330,000
- Extra outlay: ₩330,000−₩110,000=₩220,000
- Assume ₩20,000/year saving → simple 11-year payback
Failure risk, warranties and changing prices are excluded. It does not predict 11 years of repaired-machine life.
Hypothetical KRW costs and energy savings. ₩220,000 divided by ₩20,000/year is simple arithmetic, not current market prices.
- Check existing coverage
- Itemize repair quote
- Record full replacement cost
- Compare time and uncertainty
Start with coverage and an itemized repair quote
Check the receipt, manufacturer's warranty and any paid service contract. The US FTC warns that such contracts can have deductibles, exclusions and claims restrictions. ‘Still under warranty’ does not automatically mean this particular fault is covered.
Ask for diagnosis, parts, labour, call-out or shipping costs, repair warranty and parts availability as separate entries. If the cause is not confirmed, mark the quote provisional rather than treating it as a guaranteed final price.
Build the replacement total separately
Add purchase price, delivery, installation and removal of the old unit; subtract only discounts you can actually use. If comparing energy costs, check that label assumptions and your usage are comparable. A claimed saving is not automatically your household's saving.
Record non-price factors too: a safety fault, repeated breakdowns, waiting for parts or a change in needed features. ENERGY STAR discusses frequent repairs and rising energy bills as signals for heating and cooling systems. Its specific equipment-age thresholds should not be copied to every small appliance.
Understand what a payback figure cannot promise
Imagine a repair costs ₩110,000 in total, replacement costs ₩330,000 including installation, and you assume the new unit would save ₩20,000 in electricity each year. The extra ₩220,000 divided by ₩20,000 gives a simple 11-year payback.
That arithmetic ignores future failure, energy-price changes, usage, warranties and resale value. It does not predict that the repaired machine will last 11 years. If those factors matter, write optimistic and cautious scenarios instead of one magic number.
A worked example
A useful sheet might show repair: ₩20,000 diagnosis plus ₩90,000 parts and labour = ₩110,000; replace: ₩300,000 unit plus ₩30,000 delivery and installation = ₩330,000. Put coverage, expected downtime and comparable running costs in separate columns. These amounts are hypothetical, not current market prices.
| Item | Repair | Replace |
|---|---|---|
| Diagnosis fee | — | — |
| Parts and labour | — | — |
| Call-out and transport | — | — |
| Replacement purchase price | — | — |
| Delivery, installation and old-unit removal | — | — |
| Warranty coverage and duration | — | — |
| Waiting time | — | — |
| Annual running cost and estimate basis | — | — |
| Unconfirmed items and source material needed | — | — |
Copy this blank table into your private notes, record each quote’s currency and basis, and mark unknowns ‘unconfirmed’ and inapplicable items ‘not applicable’.
Common questions
Does a repair over 50% of new price always mean replace?
No. Coverage, installation, expected use and failure risk differ.
Can I decide from energy savings alone?
No. Compare estimates under the same conditions and also consider safety and repairability.
What if I have no quote yet?
Ask whether diagnosis costs extra, then obtain a written breakdown before comparing.
Official sources checked
This is general information; individual circumstances and product or agency instructions may differ.