Great idea, but what happens when every major purchase includes a EULA that requires binding arbitration, like so many contracts already do?
Also, requiring this kind of EULA would be bad publicity for companies since it would emphasize to potential buyers that the seller is afraid of being sued for defective products. Companies that don't require such an agreement would be at a competitive advantage since they'd project an image of higher quality and more respect for the customer.
At the moment it's pretty difficult to conceive of signing an EULA for those new shoes or a washing machine.
I would see such a EULA as a negative warranty, the manufacturer betting against itself. I would walk.
I am launching judge.me in a few days, offering $299 email arbitration service that is legally binding in 146 countries.
Ad hoc arbitration (i.e. not using institutional rules) often specify the arbitrator(s).