[shellfishgene]

Im not a farmer and have no interest in tractors, however just from general media consumption it seems to me the John Deere and self-repair issue has been talked about at lengths for many years now. Do they really have such a stranglehold on the market that there are no alternatives? I would assume every potential buyer now knows about the repair issues, and can buy a different brand.

[bluGill]

As a john deere employee not speaking for my company, repair issues are non existent to most customers. They go to the dealer and buy any part or tool they need, including the same scan tools the dealer uses.

Everytime I dig into someone complaining about right to repair I find someone who wants to bypass emissions controls.

[joshspankit]

This is a very dangerous insight. It implies that if we just let companies have the power that they’ll use it to empower their customer but we know that is not what happens.

We can regulate emissions and farmers can be penalized for violating them, so that can’t be on John Deere.

To say that they can use the same scan tools is a false solution because John Deere could simply choose to stop selling it to them.

And while in your experience repair issues are “non existent to most customers”, we cannot let that be a reason that we don’t pursue right to repair. It’s like saying “most of the slaves are treated well” (which I admit is an exaggerated comparison, but it shares enough similarities that I’m sticking with it)

[bluGill]

> We can regulate emissions and farmers can be penalized for violating them, so that can’t be on John Deere.

The letter of the current emissions laws and court case law is it is on John Deere. So start by talking to your federal representative about this.

Are you willing to pay for someone to go around and do random exhaust sampling of tractors? Most farmers aren't doing anything, but there is no way to know which farmer is the 1% that is without testing. If it is still "factory" then it meets emissions (VW style scandals aside, but then catch one you get them all), how are you going to enforce it if anyone can make violating changes?

> To say that they can use the same scan tools is a false solution because John Deere could simply choose to stop selling it to them.

Probably not. The protocol is the ISO11786, and we will keep using it because there are other customers of engines who demand it. The engine in our tractor is also sold for use in boats (boats are not large enough a market to pay the development cost of a modern engine, but the profit margin makes them worth selling to), it is also used in generators, and a number of other applications, and those customers demand standards so they can fix things when it is in their unit.

Also, one of our big selling points is everyone knows you can get parts for old John deere tractors (but not our competitors), and so the trade in value is higher.

Though technically you are correct, we can stop selling scan tools, the reality is there is too much value to do that.

> while in your experience repair issues are “non existent to most customers”, we cannot let that be a reason that we don’t pursue right to repair.

Sure, but be very careful about the what the law says. Most right to repair laws are not helpful to someone who uses a tractor as intended, but are useful to those abusing it in ways you may not want them to. violating emissions better be clearly on the farmer. What about the person who buys a used tractor - we use the same engine on a 200 and 300 horsepower tractor (I'm not sure without looking the exact range, but that is close enough for discussion), it wouldn't be hard to modify the smaller tractor to have more power, but that will impact how long the tractor lasts and thus the value to the next owner. There is no way to know if someone made that change and then undid it.