Do extended warranties make sense

[Starbuck1975]

A few years ago, I purchased a Nikon Coolpix point and shoot digital camera...I didnt purchase an extended warranty for it at the time...well, the mechanism that controls the retracting lense died on me a few months after the manufacturer's warranty was over...and hence I was out a camera.

I am in the market for a new point and shoot digital camera, and the price range for what I want is $200 to $300.

Now, I have personal article floater insurance, but that only covers theft, or damage due to dropage and such...if the camera were to fail due to a mechanical failure or use, I am out of luck.

Problem is, most electronics stores slap nearly another $100 on the camera for a comprehensive repair/replacement plan.

Do others typically use these extended warranties, or do you just risk it?

 

[BoomerD]

For me, if the warranty isn't too high when compared to the initial purchase price, I'll often get the extended warranty for, say 3 years, but if it costs 1/4 of the replacement cost...then no.

 

[Xyo II]

Text
Since it was posted here earlier this week.

 

[vi edit]

If's it's under 15% of the value of the product, I'll consider it depending on the length of coverage.

The last 3 "major" purchases I've made I got the extended warranty. On two the warranty easily paid for itself. The third one still has two years to go.

I paid $600 for a Canon G2 when it first came out and I picked up the warranty for $70. A year in the camera died. Got to upgrade to a G3 for free.

I also bought a 50" RPTV HD set and picked up the warranty. 2 years in I lost two of the light guns. Warranty was $300. It would have cost me over $600 to have those replaced.

When I bought my D-Rebel I opted for the $60 warranty. So far I haven't needed it.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Thank you for the consumer reports article...I did a search for warranties before posting this thread, but couldn't find anything...the article is rather insighful into making an informed decision about extended warranties.