Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

environment.ec.europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 322 posts

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#21

Post by Stromgren »

xnx wrote: post #8

Is this a problem in the EU? I often think in terms of home remodels that a family might do at least once. Those can easily fill a dumpster with tons of garbage. That's much more waste than a family could ever generate directly or indirectly in clothing.

My dad worked at a logistics facility, the amount of perfume he took home was ridiculous - and you’d think that something like perfume would never go stale. It does from a brand perspective and they do everything they can to have it destroyed so it doesn’t end up being sold to prices that would hurt the perceptive value. Obviously he wasn’t allowed to take it either.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#22

Post by amelius »

graemep wrote: post #5
wolvoleo wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That can be penalised too. We really have to get away from the idea that curtailing intentional industrial waste production is futile. Perhaps in American style capitalism it is because the system is rigged and the biggest money bag always wins. But we don't want this here at all. We have to get forward as humanity and treat our planet with respect. Otherwise we won't have one worth living on. Making money isn't the…

I agree we should, but that does not mean that a particular regulation is the right way to do it. Its very hard to close loopholes and exploitation of exemptions.

We need judges that don't just look at the letter of the law. We can already use computers for that.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#23

Post by artisinal »

amazingamazing wrote: post #10

Why would this ever happen? Is it cheaper to destroy than sell at discount?

If the full price is €6, there isn’t much room for a discount. Destroying and freeing up store space for something that does sell can easily be profitable.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#24

Post by tancop »

some places already do this for food where anything thats after sell by date but still safe to eat has to be donated to a food bank.

i think it should be expanded to cover more categories than food and clothes when reuse and recycling infra grows to take the demand. its not just good for the environment it also prevents producers from restricting supply to keep their profits high.

the ultimate goal is make it illegal to destroy or intentionally damage anything usable before it reaches consumers. that would create a new ecosystem of discount stores and giveaway centers, and save everyone a ton of money.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#25

Post by graemep »

ChrisLTD wrote: post #7
graemep wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree we should, but that does not mean that a particular regulation is the right way to do it. Its very hard to close loopholes and exploitation of exemptions.

You have to start somewhere, no? We have laws against stealing and murder and folks don’t usually go around saying they should be removed from the books because some people still steal and commit murder.

Yes, but those laws are pretty effective. They do deter murderers and thieves, and take them out of society so they cannot repeat their offences.

Ill thought out regulations can make things worse - I am convinced this is the case for the UK's Online Safety Act, for example. That (and the proposed ban on social media for under 16s) is also promoted on "we must do something" grounds.

I am very much in favour of some proposed changes under the law - e.g. improving repairability and reusability of some product categories.

I have doubts that some discouragement of destruction of new products fixes the big underlying problem with clothing: the production of cheap junk not designed to last. Under these regulations (at least as summarised in the article), they offer it to charity, charity rejects it, then they are free to destroy it.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#26

Post by kryptiskt »

amazingamazing wrote: post #10

Why would this ever happen? Is it cheaper to destroy than sell at discount?

I think this largely is about brand protection. They worry that discounting the clothes means they will just cannibalize sales of that brand's full-price clothes.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#29

Post by hiAndrewQuinn »

Stromgren wrote: post #21
xnx wrote: post #8

Is this a problem in the EU? I often think in terms of home remodels that a family might do at least once. Those can easily fill a dumpster with tons of garbage. That's much more waste than a family could ever generate directly or indirectly in clothing.

My dad worked at a logistics facility, the amount of perfume he took home was ridiculous - and you’d think that something like perfume would never go stale. It does from a brand perspective and they do everything they can to have it destroyed so it doesn’t end up being sold to prices that would hurt the perceptive value. Obviously he wasn’t allowed to take it either.

This isn't really surprising in a low margin industry. If you are making a 2% margin on the average perfume bottle, and then you liquidate it at -3% because it's cheaper than destroying it, you can accidentally end up anchoring customer perceptions on a price with like a -1% margin which actually will destroy the business over time.

High margin industries get more complicated to model, of course.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#30

Post by phoronixrly »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #29
Stromgren wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad worked at a logistics facility, the amount of perfume he took home was ridiculous - and you’d think that something like perfume would never go stale. It does from a brand perspective and they do everything they can to have it destroyed so it doesn’t end up being sold to prices that would hurt the perceptive value. Obviously he wasn’t allowed to take it either.

This isn't really surprising in a low margin industry. If you are making a 2% margin on the average perfume bottle, and then you liquidate it at -3% because it's cheaper than destroying it, you can accidentally end up anchoring customer perceptions on a price with like a -1% margin which actually will destroy the business over time. High margin industries get more complicated to model, of course.

Perfume? Low-margin? Getting hits ranging between 50% and 85% depending on how luxury the brand is considered to be...
Post reply on HN