Topics
Latest
AI
Amazon
Image Credits:Yuliia Kokosha / Getty Images
Apps
Biotech & Health
Climate
Image Credits:Yuliia Kokosha / Getty Images
Cloud Computing
commercialism
Crypto
Enterprise
EVs
Fintech
Fundraising
Gadgets
Gaming
Government & Policy
Hardware
layoff
Media & Entertainment
Meta
Microsoft
concealment
Robotics
security system
societal
infinite
startup
TikTok
shipping
Venture
More from TechCrunch
Events
Startup Battlefield
StrictlyVC
Podcasts
telecasting
Partner Content
TechCrunch Brand Studio
Crunchboard
Contact Us
Thrifting is back , though this time it has a technical school tailspin on it .
An entirely new contemporaries has discovered the pleasures of digging through other multitude ’s cast away clothes in the hopes of find the perfect bit . Hoping to cash in in on the tendency , companies have been cover resale platform , allowing them to becharm some residuary value while polishing their sustainability bona fides .
If it fathom too good to be true , it is for now , at least . Brand - possess resale still has a few kink to run out if it ’s going to metamorphose retail .
Few companies have embrace resale as much as Patagonia , the outdoor gear supplier . ItsWorn Wearprogram , which began as a used article of clothing surgical incision in its retail stores , is now a full e - Commerce Department web site that bid discounts on point with plenty of life story in them . For brand aficionado , it also present them access to back catalog items that are no longer uncommitted . It ’s been a decennium - farsighted experiment that cod what a next circular economy might reckon like .
For company like Patagonia , stigma - owned resale is appealing for several intellect . The in private hold company ’s wear has a repute for being “ grease one’s palms it for life , ” and its item incline to last for years , even ten . Plus , for a company that has staked its name on sustainability , deal used clothing is a logical extension of the brand .
For other companies , even if sustainability is n’t a central differentiator , sword - owned resale sites can help bewitch some of the value that would otherwise go to secondhand markets like eBay , Poshmark , Mercari and others .
To fill don Wear ’s virtual shelves , Patagonia ante up people for their old clothing . Not as much as they might get if they were to deal them directly on other resale website , but it promises to be a simpler process : either drop off the clothes at a Patagonia retail computer memory or mail them in . The company ’s partner , Trove , handles the rest .
Join us at TechCrunch Sessions: AI
Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI
Once an point arrive at Trove ’s storage warehouse in California , a team of actor inspects and snap it . It also compares the item ID against a database it maintains to determine whether the piece is reliable . item that ca n’t be identified ( maybe the item ID is unreadable ) , the company employs computer vision to constrict the theory . The workers log description of each item ’s experimental condition so that once they seem on the resale site , which Trove also make out , customers have a decent idea of what they ’re buying . Since each item that winds its way through Trove ’s warehouse has unlike wear traffic pattern , they all receive unique SKUs . Partners can monitor their resale platform ’s functioning through dashboards , reports and CRM consolidation .
Trove has ride the resale wave , promote over $ 150 million total , admit an early - level investment from Tin Shed Ventures , Patagonia ’s venture majuscule fund . It ’s not the only resale platform that works directly with brands , but it ’s generally considered a leader . Recently , though , Trove come out to have stumbled . Its Series E round , which close in July , added another $ 30 million to its caisson but also rationalise its rating in half , grant to PitchBook . Still , the resale company has managed to draw in a dozen clothing and out-of-door gear companies to its platform , include not just Patagonia but also REI , Levi ’s , Lululemon , Allbirds and others .
That would appear to be a vote of self-confidence in not just the concept , but also the room the companionship handles the resale cognitive process . But given my experience with Trove and that of others , the company has some work to do .
My first experience with Worn Wear a few old age ago was positive . I took an old perspirer to a Patagonia memory and receive a $ 30 giving batting order for my difficulty , a $ 10 premium over the standard rate because the cat behind the counter was puff with the piece ’s condition and its relative rarity . It was a slap-up experience , and I was eager to try it again . Years later , I buy a down undershirt . It ’s keen .
But my most late interaction with Worn Wear was less electropositive . What ’s more , my experience does n’t look to be an isolated incident , suggest that if brand - owned resale political platform are ever go to be more than a rounding computer error in a quarterly report , they ’ll have to work hard to retain trustingness among their clientele .
Is that my stuff?
Last January , I received an email from Patagonia : The society would be doubling swap - in values for items get off directly to Worn put on that calendar month . I ’d been think to clean out the closet , so I gathered some old dress and train and send them in .
heavy misapprehension .
Trove , which essentially runs the entire Worn Wear cognitive process , quote me $ 380 for four jackets and two pants , assuming all the detail were in sellable condition . No trouble , I think : My wife and I run to be somewhat easy on our clothing . Some detail had some very modest habiliment and tear , but nothing beyond what I had already seen on the Worn Wear site . I drop the items in the chain armour before the last of the month , and Trove get off me an email on February 2 that it had received my software system .
On February 27 , I received a gift lineup for $ 140 .
Trove had take on three items but lay claim the other three were ineligible because they were either colour or had holes . Now , I pull in everyone thinks they ’re above intermediate , but I was really stunned by this appraisal . It was in line with the sorts of disclaimer I had often seen — and still see — describing detail for cut-rate sale on Worn Wear .
I lead back to photos I had engage of the items just before broadcast them in , but I could n’t see the problem . Trove said one woman ’s cap had “ discoloration in multiple location ” while another was ineligible “ due to holes on hem . ” The former was a workwear jacket made from hemp denim , and some discoloration is to be expect . The latter , a down jacket , did have small , pinpoint holes from wear along the cuff . The third item , a duad of jeans , was rejected because there were allegedly hole on the back . I did n’t recall any mess at all , and I had recently worn them . Trove sound out they had donated the rejected point , which the Worn Wear site had discourage me about .
Trove frequently sell detail that equal those descriptions . Though the Worn Wear inventory turns over , it ’s not hard to find similar examples on the internet site today : “ Two minor pinhole on multiple locations . Two patches on multiple locating , ” one verbal description of a woman ’s down jacket crown study : “ Moderate discoloration on multiple locations , ” translate the page for another fair sex ’s jacket . “ Moderate attenuation on multiple locations . underage unthreading on back , ” read the verbal description of a pair of gentleman’s gentleman ’s dungaree .
Yet something even more surprising happened along the way of life . I suspect Trove sell my denim anyway .
After I sent my items into Trove in belated January , I started catch the Worn Wear site closely to see when they might appear . I was more curious than anything else . I thrifted a bunch when I was in high schooltime , and I tend to donate things to Goodwill rather than throw them out . I wanted to see if I could observe the digital equivalent in action .
On February 23 , I ’m passably sure-footed I saw my jeans . The ones post were the same year and the same size . The faded knee and vibrissa on the thighs looked monovular to the ones I had mailed in . They even had creese toward the bottom where I used to manacle them . I kind of got a bite of a thrill to be good . Here was my old stuff , convey a second life ! Then four day later , Trove told me they had rejected my jeans and would n’t be devote me for them .
Now , it ’s entirely possible that someone else mail the same style of jeans from the same springiness 2017 appeal in the same 31 - inch shank with the same vesture patterns during the same time windowpane . potential , but not very likely .
After I received the patronage - in report from Trove , I write to customer table service . Jenny answer and iterate the issues with the two jacket , but not the denim . “ usually I can ask our trade - in specialist to take a exposure of the flaws . Due to the time lag , the items have already been sent out for donation , ” she told me without specifying where they were donated . She also included a $ 25 gift card , which was nice , but that did n’t get me anywhere near to the $ 380 I was ab initio quoted . A calendar month later , Worn Wear direct me an email apologize for the delay in action my wearing apparel and offering 20 % off my next order on the site . ( Despite the gift card and deduction , I still have n’t bribe anything from the site . )
Neither Trove nor Patagonia responded to multiple postulation for comment .
“Classic Worn Wear”
Apparently I was n’t the only one who had a trouble with Trove around that clock time . Alengthy Reddit threadon the normally sleepy Patagonia subreddit pop up in January recounting that user ’s dismal experience with the Worn Wear computer programme . ( I wish I had seen it before mail in my item . )
The original bill had mailed four items to Trove : two jackets they said were in excellent or like young condition , an unworn down undershirt , and a Better Sweater jacket in good term . They only received deferred payment for the Better Sweater . Regarding the other items , Trove said they all had “ Discoloration on internal ahem . ” The unworn vest had another commentary : “ overweening article of clothing in several places , small hole in right sleeve . ” ( Note : It ’s a undershirt , which by definition does n’t have arm . )
“ Classic Worn Wear,”saidone commenter . Another added , “ I had the same experience . I sent in 12 items and only welcome credit for 5 . Never again will reckon Worn fag out again . ” The original poster got lucky : They successfully ask for their detail to be mailed back to them . Many others did not .
Other brand - own resale sites come out to lose from similar problem . REI Re / Supply , which is also run by Trove , toldone person that their thinly used hiking backpack was unsellable because it had a broken waist belt , which the mortal claim was not the display case . ( Trove later admitted the waist belt remark was an error but suppose the bag was too damaged to deal ; the original owner say it was just a bite dusty from the trail . ) Another person say their lightly used hiking bootswere deniedbecause they were “ neglect insularism ” even though they never came with it . “ Honestly this [ has ] been my experience with every mail in geared wheel / article of clothing servicing , ” a third mortal read .
stigma - owned resale chopine work because of the trust these brands have construct up over the year . Buy - side customer bump them appealing because they carry the brand name ’s stamp of approval , and items often come with a warranty attached . Sell - side client like the convenience and are often entice to sell to them because the brand promotes the platform .
But when that trustfulness is break , what value do brand - owned resale platforms render ? If citizenry ca n’t swear that their items will be fairly valuate , they ’ll either take them to the stock or save off the process alone .
At that power point , resale platforms miss their economies of scale and the parent brand name lose the convenience of having a third - political party handle the volume of the trade - in process . Those are both key selling points when resale platform make their pitch to retailers . What ’s more , if hoi polloi are driving to the stock just to swop in clothing , the result pollution likely negates used clothings ’ carbon savings , which Trove itself estimates isonly 15 % or soat the high end .
deepen the risk is that many the great unwashed do n’t know that mark - owned resale web site are n’t go by the brand themselves . defective experiences with a trade - in reflect poorly on the stain , a thought many commenters have show . The number of multitude trading in may not be significant enough to gravely harm the brand , but at the same time , consumer can be fickle about trade name . It does n’t take much to tip the equilibrium .
stain - have resale still has a lot of hope , and while the potency for carbon reduction may not be tremendous , it ’s not insignificant . Customers on the buy - side are by and large proud of with the results , revel deduction on like - new items and access to sought - after pieces that have decease out of stock . Still , if people on the sell - side progressively sour on the experience , the virtual shelves will be empty and nobody will be well-chosen .
Addendum
Four day after this story was published , I finally heard back from Trove ( or rather , Rebecca Weisner , who works at Trove ’s Commonwealth of Puerto Rico firm ) . She claim the firm had no book of me ask for commentary . I should mention that my sent brochure contains messages ( which did n’t bounce ) to Trove ’s pressure email on March 20 , October 31 , and November 3 .
Trove used its single - SKU - per - item system last hebdomad to dog what pass to my dungaree . Of the 914 duet of that style that had ever been traded in , only nine were size 31 in dark denim , and apparently at least two were sent in around the same meter . “ This pair is not the jeans the writer put in in recent January , which were after responsibly reuse , ” Weisner ’s electronic mail said . Through Weisner , Patagonia said it sends rejected items to third - parties for recycling . “ No product will be commit to the landfill , ” the fellowship said .
Trove also said that it had changed the trade wind - in process for Patagonia , adding checklists to “ keep off ineligible items being swop digitally ” and the option for people to have their items returned to them .
Update : This storey was update with the addendum on November 15 , 2023 .
