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

231–240 of 322 posts

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

#231

Post by Dylan16807 »

flowerbreeze wrote: post #140
palata wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm... say you estimate that you will sell 1000 items of "normal size", you stock 1000 items, and hope that you sell all of them. You end up selling 900, you have a remaining 10%. No say you estimate that you will sell 10 items of "less common size", you stock 10 items, and hope that you sell all of them. You end up selling 9, you have a remaining 10%. How does that make a difference?

It's more like if you find one mushroom in the forest, it doesn't make sense to bring it home, get the knife, clean it, get the pan, oil the pan, fry the mushroom, eat it, clean the knife, clean the pan, put things away. It's not worth the effort for just one mushroom. If there are many, a lot of these actions only need to be taken once.

But that's about the cost of making them. That doesn't change between the destroy and not-destroy scenarios.

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

#232

Post by Schiendelman »

altairprime wrote: post #165
kelvinjps10 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't they have to make discounts or sell it therefore lowering the price.

Nike certainly could choose to sell at a discount rather than grind unsold shoes into rubber. They have a wealth-signal brand to maintain, however, so they will resist doing so if at all possible.

Nike is famously one of the less wealth signalling shoe brands. Until recently I don't think they had a product for sale for more than ~$220 at all.

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

#233

Post by Dylan16807 »

cm2012 wrote: post #78
josephcsible wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you figure?

Normally you can overproduce clothing and make three of every size or something, knowing that it only costs a couple bucks to make another shirt, for instance. And you can throw out if you make too many. If it's illegal to throw it out, maybe that raises the price from $2 to $4 because now you have to pay for storage for a long time. So you'll buy less inventory at the start, which usually means cutting less common s…

> because now you have to pay for storage for a long time

Or you sell the extras off at a discount and it's fine.

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

#234

Post by TitaRusell »

mnewme wrote: post #184
radu_floricica wrote: post #129

> To prevent misuse, businesses relying on these exemptions must provide proof (e.g. documents or test results) and publish annual reports on what they have discarded. I wonder if anybody is keeping track of everything a mid size business needs to take care of. Each particular report probably sounds like a reasonable request, but by now they're probably well into hundreds, and they're all outside the actual scope of…

This whole story that Europe suffers from overregulation is just in parts true, and mainly lazy thinking. In fact there was a study by an American law school that came to the conclusion that the US has more bureaucracy than many European countries… Recommended read: https://www.andybudd.com/archives/2026/04/the-lazy-myth-that...

Mandatory testosterone testing!

At the end of the day people want to impose their morality on on others. Whether it is crazy Christians or leftist eco warriors- don't let them take away your freedom. Keep on buying shit from China.

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

#235

Post by Dylan16807 »

dash2 wrote: post #210
nairboon wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or (c) lower the price to the market clearing price point and your clothes will be gone.

You're assuming there is such a price! Charity shops throw out the majority of clothes they are given: some things just will never sell.[1] [1] https://theclothingbank.org.uk/what-happens-to-the-clothes-y...

Those are used clothes. New clothes, especially from a brand that would use a shredder to have a little more exclusivity? I expect almost all to sell just fine.

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

#236

Post by Dylan16807 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #172
rzwitserloot wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and it costs society more to process the destroyed waste, and it costs society more to then deal with the fallout of shelters not having enough clothes. Or not. Who knows. The point is, this 'economically it is more efficient' is not a proven case because the externalities need to be taken into account, and so far the person I've been responding to seems to not understand this part, or is ignoring it.

I'm not sure everyone in the conversation is understanding each other. Saying the waste is pointless implies to me that it has no value, that companies could eliminate it with small costs and no other tradeoffs and they just don't want to bother. That's not accurate; a system with no oversupply is necessarily a system with fewer choices and more shortages. The tradeoff may be worth it in some contexts, but if you don…

"it would be a small cost" and "there are tradeoffs" can both be true at the same time!

If the benefit they get from waste is like 10% of the value they're destroying, then in a broad sense it is pointless.

And nobody is arguing against oversupply. Oversupply itself is fine.

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

#237

Post by pqtyw »

toast0 wrote: post #105
josephcsible wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But clothes aren't perishable, so why would you only be able to sell 500, rather than it just taking twice as long to sell all 1000?

Fashionable clothes are perishable. "Nobody" wants to buy clothes from last season or last year. Storing the clothes until they come back in fashion is expensive... and some materials really won't be useful after sitting for 10 years anyway. (Elastic bands really are perishable)

[dead]

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

#238

Post by [deleted] »

palata wrote: post #220
flowerbreeze wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more like if you find one mushroom in the forest, it doesn't make sense to bring it home, get the knife, clean it, get the pan, oil the pan, fry the mushroom, eat it, clean the knife, clean the pan, put things away. It's not worth the effort for just one mushroom. If there are many, a lot of these actions only need to be taken once.

Right. So what you're saying is that instead you should be allowed to go in the forest to get another 99 mushrooms, give them the same treatment, and then throw them away? And suddenly it's worth it for one mushroom if you threw away 99 other mushrooms in the process?

[deleted]

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

#239

Post by wisty »

palata wrote: post #220
flowerbreeze wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more like if you find one mushroom in the forest, it doesn't make sense to bring it home, get the knife, clean it, get the pan, oil the pan, fry the mushroom, eat it, clean the knife, clean the pan, put things away. It's not worth the effort for just one mushroom. If there are many, a lot of these actions only need to be taken once.

Right. So what you're saying is that instead you should be allowed to go in the forest to get another 99 mushrooms, give them the same treatment, and then throw them away? And suddenly it's worth it for one mushroom if you threw away 99 other mushrooms in the process?

> Right. So what you're saying

If you start a sentence with "so what you are saying", and then say something obviously silly ...

The argument would be that it's a large burden to have to write a report if you forage 10 mushrooms and toss one away.

Low volumes, higher fixed costs.

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

#240

Post by Dylan16807 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #128
IneffablePigeon wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The result of laws like this is not that the store will never buy too much, it’s that when they do buy too much they will give it away to somewhere it can be used instead of destroying it. It will not cost them much if any more to simply give things to food banks or charity shops.

It's not so easy to give things away at scale. If someone deposited 500 kilograms of assorted meat products outside your front door right now, with a note attached saying they need to be consumed or frozen in the next 24 hours or they'll go bad, how much work would it take for you to deal with that? Clothing is of course a bit easier to deal with (it'll still grow mildew if you don't protect it from moisture!), but t…

Is that scenario supposed to be relevant?

This isn't some random guy. Their entire job is dealing with the logistics of big piles of clothes, and they have months in advance to plan.

Post reply on HN