- cross-posted to:
- unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
- cross-posted to:
- unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
The theory is simple: instead of buying a household item or a piece of clothing or some equipment you might use once or twice, you take it out and return it.
The theory is simple: instead of buying a household item or a piece of clothing or some equipment you might use once or twice, you take it out and return it.
You’re literally saying you are happy paying half the price and not owning anything.
You could have at least bought the tools new and sold them after for a net maybe 5% loss…
Time and effort to sell is also cost
Yeah if I see a “used once” tool on Craigslist, I’m not paying 95% of retail for it
You do not understand that capitalism and markets are not the best solution for everyone, do you?
He said the exact opposite.
Seems like renting with extra risk and steps
Sometimes it’s better than the alternative. If I only need a thing once and I likely won’t ever need it again (e.g. a chainsaw when I cut down trees in my backyard a few years ago), I’m willing to make the trade-off. If I bought it instead, I’d still sell for half price and need to spend the time selling it. It’s a wash either way, so I’ll do the easier thing.
I’ll buy other things that I’ll use occasionally. For example, I own an angle grinder, which I’ve used a handful of times. If it was cheaper to rent, I would. But home improvement stores are in the business of selling tools, so they want to increase rent enough that people will lean toward buying instead of renting.