[fasteddie]

As a mediocre armchair accountant, I'm interested in how to read their P&L since so much of the loss is depreciated clothing, which they presumably continue to rent out even after they mark down the value of the clothes.

Presumably a dress has a much higher LTV in future implied subscription income then its inherent accounting liquidation value.

[asdfasgasdgasdg]

I'm not one of their customers, but my understanding is that they're all about renting out high fashion and near-high fashion. These dresses have a short lifespan that has nothing to do with their physical integrity. I doubt they have much value to RTR more than two or three years after they are acquired.

[jsjohnst]

> I'm not one of their customers, but my understanding is that they're all about renting out high fashion and near-high fashion.

That used to be the case, but not really anymore. They do more rental of “work” or “simple night out” clothing than they do higher formality clothing.

[asdfasgasdgasdg]

Today I learned. Thanks for the info! You know they say the best way to get information is to be wrong on the internet. Someone will come fix you up pretty fast.

[gruez]

>They do more rental of “work” or “simple night out” clothing than they do higher formality clothing.

I can understand renting something for date night, but why would anyone would rent clothes just to go into the office? Is the HN/programmer bubble messing with my perception of what's normal?

[jsjohnst]

> but why would anyone would rent clothes just to go into the office?

I’m going to take a guess and assume you don’t wear the gender of clothing that they target?

> Is the HN/programmer bubble messing with my perception of what's normal?

Or maybe that’s the issue. Either way, many women who work in an office want a freshly changing attire that they can conveniently have with a monthly subscription.

Like I’d probably wear a button up shirt and slacks more often if I:

1) had fresh new looks sent regularly

2) that I never had to wash or dry clean

3) and usually don’t have to iron (although that wasn’t full proof with RTR’s delivery)

[buryat]

why not if you want to look good? $200 * 365 = $73k, peanuts for a right individual

[jsjohnst]

What are you basing those numbers on? The RTR subscription plans definitely don’t cost $200/day (closer to that for a month). Even if you were doing RTR classic rentals instead, it would be around half that price.

[spyspy]

Fashion is fast, but it's not _that_ fast. Most items would break down long before they go out of style.

[mikepurvis]

Yeah, particularly when it's real-world "off the rack" garments rather than couture items. Most fashionable items will still look good 5-10 years later.

[elliekelly]

I haven’t rented anything from them in several years but I know they used to sell the worn items at the end of the season or sometimes the end of the next season. They were really great deals, too. I would imagine they still sell the items at the end of their expected rental life though I’m not sure whether they sell directly to customers anymore. It wouldn’t surprise me if they had figured out a way to sell the older items in bulk.