The Economics of Right to Repair
In Aurora, Colorado, a bike shop owner says he has turned away hundreds of e-bike repairs. The problem is not always the bike itself—it is the battery system, software, certification, and liability risk behind it. His shop will not work on an e-bike without UL 2849 certification, which covers the bike’s electrical drivetrain, battery, and charger as an integrated system.
That leaves customers in a frustrating position: they may have spent $1,000 or more on a bike, but cannot find a local shop willing—or insured—to fix it. The manufacturer may be difficult to reach, independent technicians may lack the diagnostic tools or parts, and the customer is left with a product that is technically repairable but practically stranded.
This is the economic problem behind right to repair.
Most people assume brands lose when customers can repair products themselves or use independent providers. They may lose replacement sales, service revenue, control over the repair experience, and access to customer data.
We see the opportunity differently: right to repair can help brands make more money across the entire product lifecycle—if they build the infrastructure to support it.
The Shift from Replacement to Lifecycle Revenue
| Old model | New opportunity |
|---|---|
| Sell the product, then replace it | Earn across repair, parts, service, upgrades, and resale |
| Support is a cost center | Support generates revenue and product intelligence |
| The OEM controls the service network | Dealers and independent providers extend reach |
| Failures remain isolated | Repair data improves products and forecasting |
The opportunity includes:
- Replacement parts and accessories
- Maintenance plans and extended warranties
- Diagnostic tools and technician certification
- Dealer training and independent repair partnerships
- Refurbishment, upgrades, and resale
Apple is already moving in this direction. Its Self Service Repair program gives customers and independent repair providers access to genuine parts, tools, repair manuals, and diagnostics.
That does not mean Apple has abandoned its service business. It means repair can become a more organized extension of the ecosystem.
The Data Problem
There is one catch: when an independent repairer or the customer fixes the product, the OEM may never know what happened.
The brand may not see:
- What failed
- Which part was replaced
- What symptoms appeared
- Whether the repair worked
- Whether the same failure is affecting hundreds of other customers
That is a serious loss. Repair data is not just service history. It is product intelligence.
The solution is not to stop independent repair. It is to connect the repair ecosystem.
Brands can:
- Provide independent repairers with structured diagnostic tools
- Link repairs to product serial numbers
- Connect parts ordering to the service workflow
- Offer incentives for complete repair records
- Use consent-based data-sharing agreements
- Connect repair platforms to OEM systems through APIs
The goal is simple: independent repair should not mean invisible repair.
From Repair Event to Business Intelligence
John Deere shows what happens when repair data and diagnostic tools remain locked inside the manufacturer’s authorized network.
The FTC alleged that Deere’s fully functional repair software was available only to authorized dealers, forcing farmers to rely on a limited repair network for critical equipment. When a tractor failed during planting or harvest, the issue was not simply inconvenience—it could mean costly delays, lost yield, and higher repair bills.
In 2026, Deere agreed to make key repair capabilities available to farmers and independent repair providers, including fault-code resets, component reprogramming, technical manuals, and troubleshooting guidance.
The lesson for OEMs is clear: restricting repair may protect a service channel in the short term, but it can also create customer frustration, regulatory scrutiny, and a weaker understanding of how products perform in the field.
The payoff is not simply fewer repair complaints. It is better parts planning, lower warranty costs, faster service, stronger independent repair networks, and products that improve with every real-world failure.
When repair data flows back to the OEM, a broken tractor is no longer just a service expense. It becomes information that can improve the entire product business.
What Brands Should Do Now
Right to repair should not be treated as a threat to the business. It should be treated as a chance to build a better lifecycle business.
Brands should:
- Make product, parts, diagnostic, and warranty information usable across repair channels.
- Build structured data capture into every repair interaction.
- Give independent providers tools that improve repair accuracy.
- Use AI to identify products, interpret symptoms, recommend parts, and guide repairs.
- Feed repair outcomes back into engineering, warranty, and product design.
The brands that prepare early can earn more from parts, services, refurbishment, and customer loyalty—while learning more about how their products actually perform in the real world.
Right to repair may redistribute control across the hardware industry. It does not have to reduce the value of the manufacturer.
Handled well, it can turn a broken product into three things: a repaired customer relationship, a new revenue opportunity, and better information for the next product.
A version of this post also appears on our Substack.