When shopping for electronics and big-ticket items such as cameras, TVs and other appliances, we are often faced with strong and seemingly sensible encouragement from the salesman to take out an extended warranty on the product. After all, you’re paying a lot for this advanced technological gadget - don’t you want to protect your investment?

According to Consumer Reports extended warranties are not only not necessary, they are probably money wasted. Most of the products they have tracked have not needed major repairs in the two years since they were purchased and often the cost of the extended warranty is more than paying for a repair, if one is ever needed.

Retailers advise you to take the warranties because they get a large percentage of the price of the warranty. In fact, they make more money on extended warranties than they do on the products they are selling the warranties on.

According to Consumer Reports:

For the consumer, extended warranties are notoriously bad deals because:

* Products seldom break within the extended-warranty window (typically around three years), our data show.

* When electronics and appliances do break, the repair often costs about the same as the cost of the warranty.

Read the rest of the article at Consumer Reports

CNN has an article looking at Consumer Reports’ latest survey on reliability in 2006 and 2007 cars. It makes interesting reading, with some winners you would expect and some surprising losers.

Toyota and Lexus do well but I was amazed that Volkswagen have so many models that owners reported as unreliable. As a result, I wonder just how reliable these surveys are. How were they conducted and what questions were asked? And to what extent has the usual problem with these surveys been overcome - that many owners hesitate to pour scorn on what was their own choice, after all?

These questions are answered in Consumer Reports’ FAQ on the matter. It does seem that they make a good job of their investigations and so we would be wise to take note of their findings when looking for a new car.

Have a read and be prepared for some surprises.

A survey conducted by CareerBuilder dot com found that 1 in 4 hiring managers say they have used the internet to screen candidates applying for jobs. 1 in 10 say they have used social networking sites in researching potential hires.

51% of the time, the applicant did not get the job based on an internet investigation and when social networking sites were accessed, it cost the applicant the job 63% of the time.

Divulging personal information on the net can be a risky business for your career. Everything from unprofessional screen names to bad-mouthing former employers were cited as reasons a candidate did not get hired. 31% of the time the company was able to determine that the candidate did not have the qualifications claimed on a resumé.

“While sharing information online can have a potentially negative impact on your job search or career plans, it can also be leveraged as a tool to differentiate yourself to employers,” said Rosemary Haefner, Vice President of Human Resources at CareerBuilder.com.

“Highlighting professional and personal accomplishments and showcasing your creativity can help a candidate make a positive lasting impression on employers and validate why he/she is the right person for the job,” she added.

Read the do’s and don’ts in the full article at Consumer Affairs