prediction, as an aside: sometime soonish, there will be widespread adoption of something between renting an AirBNB, and owning furniture. Maybe it’s a service where you rent furniture. An AI-assisted interior decorator gives you a proposal, and the furniture is delivered and arranged. You pay a monthly fee.
I won an Ironhack hackathon based on this idea. Tricky to execute though as furniture is big, heavy and logistics become expensive. If you have 100 customers renting sofas for 6 months (because ifthey rent longer, why should they not buy one themselves?), you will end up moving a lot of furniture.
And how do you manage offering? Products from your own warehouse, or P2P, or both? Pure P2P would require no stocks, but also reduce the amount of products available on the portal which would make it less attracting.
For an early market research test we created a profile on the local craigslist and asked people selling their sofas if they were interested in renting it out instead.. Then we also created a profile offering to rent out a sofa. Limited interest but we did get some fun response..
You'd think the author would take "it's only worth half what I paid for it", where what he paid for it probably wasn't a princely sum in the first place as an indication there probably weren't too many people that wanted to pay vastly more in monthly fees for second hand furniture...
There's a good reason why they've chosen to focus on the long term "rent-to-own" hire purchase model rather than the short term AirBnB-type model though
If there were a personal possession I'd like transformed into a service, I think it might be clothing rather than furniture.
With furniture, once you have the appropriate pieces, you don't really need to do much with them. Also, it's easy enough to buy / sell furniture as needed, i.e. whenever you feel like moving.
As for clothing - with changing seasons, drycleaning, different dress codes, polishing shoes, etc, etc... wish there were something where I could order the next week or two's clothing for hire, and send it back dirty, and let someone else figure out when it needs replacing, polishing, etc.
I'd find something comfortable in a decent fit and buy half-a-dozen of them all at the same time, then attempt to wear them until they wore-out. But when I went back to the store they'd changed 'seasons' or 'styles' and the same items were no longer available. I'd defer searching for and purchasing new items until my wife would force me to do so due to holes in my pullovers etc. I'm not sure how Steve Jobs overcame this problem with his turtle-necks, unless he had them custom-made.
My solution to this was to start shopping in country-life ( farming / horse-riding etc ) and workwear shops. Not only do the items last longer but those ranges have much lower churn. Not as fashionable as high-street stores I suppose but functionally sufficient and less stressful for me overall.
In comparison furniture has zero cognitive burden for me once selected and installed. I've moved house once and it was just a case of hiring a removals company with a big van, they did all the work.
But when I went back to the store they'd changed 'seasons' or 'styles' and the same items were no longer available
Stick to classic designs from classic brands and you won't have that problem. The basic white dress shirt/blouse for example works for all occasions and if you find a fit that works for you from an established brand you'll never have to worry about fit again (until you change size).
I buy 2 pair of Levi's 501 on sale each year for ~$35, a single brand/style of underwear, single style/brand under shirt, single brand/style of athletic socks, 2 pair minimum of any style/design of non-athletic socks, etc. Button up shirts purchased as needed (trying to limit to 5-7) from same brand, and all matching jeans. I can blindly grab first item in each stack and have consistent results. haven't felt need to simplify any further. I try and stock up on the socks/undergarments during sales, and then replace in drawer once showing signs of excessive wear. so far so good.
Stores like Primark and H&M basically deal in "disposable fashion" - clothes that are up to the minute style-wise but made (and sold) incredibly cheaply, so you don't mind the fact that they disintegrate after a few weeks or months, and then just buy next month's style instead.
In my experience, the more expensive brands are no more reliable. Cotton t-shirt is a cotton t-shirt, there isn't much you can make to make it more durable. You could use a thicker fabric, but then it would not be the same t-shirt. The only option available that comes to my mind is using more resilient dyes.
using a higher thread count and better stitching has a significant effect on the durability of a t-shirt. But those aspects are only weakly correlated to price.
For business wear or a capsule style wardrobe, that could easily be a viable business in a large city. Select your style and collection schedule, and pay a monthly fee. Hangers have integrated buttons that update your account with what you've worn so far (using the same principle as Amazon Dash Buttons), and replacements get added into your next delivery. Add in a regular delivery of disposable underwear, and a range of occasional wear with same/next day delivery and you've got an ideal service for the busy professional.
I've thought about this a couple times and want it to work, but also think it's a non-starter. At least for women.
The problem isn't style. It's fit.
I can order a half dozen blouses online - from a brand that I buy frequently and that represents a third of my closet. And I'll be lucky if two thirds of them fit my individual combination of dimensions.
Of the ones that fit, only half will be flattering - the rest would look better on someone with narrower shoulders or a larger bust or whatever.
Shopping unfamiliar brands is even worse.
Whoever solves THAT problem scalably will make billions.
My wife loves Le Tote [1]. Over the past few years, we've talked a lot about the potential you've described and she's tried various services (ThreadUp, StitchFix); Le Tote is the first one i've noticed that really seems to bring her "joy."
> A prediction, as an aside: sometime soonish, there will be widespread adoption of something between renting an AirBNB, and owning furniture. Maybe it’s a service where you rent furniture.
Or, one could look into how others in the furniture rental business solved those questions in the market over the last 50 years, then analyze what it would take to disrupt:
The rent-to-own business was started by Johnathon Talley in Wichita, Kansas during the 1960s when he told customers of his store, Mr. T’s Rental, that they had rented a washer and dryer for a long enough duration that they had paid for it in full and now owned it. Thomas Devlin, a former employee of Mr. T’s rental, recognized the potential of renting name-brand products and partnered with W. Frank Barton and founded the Rent-A-Center brand in Wichita, Kansas in 1973.
RAC provides new and used brand-named furniture, appliances, computers and electronics from brands, such as Ashley Furniture, Sony, Toshiba, Whirlpool Corporation, Dell and HP. As part of their rent-to-own business model, Rent-A-Center generally makes its items available with no down payments or long term obligations. Customers can return an item at any time, for any reason, without penalty and also have the option to re-rent the same item and pick up the payments where they left off. Delivery, pick-up, service and repair are also included in the stated rental price. Customers can also upgrade items while they are renting—the payments will change accordingly.
It depends on which kind of person you are. If you are the type of person that likes to have parties at home, invites friends to dinner, etc. and you care about their comfiness, you will like to have a comfortable sofa, a nice coffee table, etc.
But it's true that you feel some kind of relief when you have fewer things. Specially if you travel frequently, you can go without worrying about leaving something important behind.
To offer a counterpoint, years ago the wife and I moved from NYC to California and purged quite a lot of stuff. We shipped everything we owned via UPS, to give you an idea of what we pared down to.
There was no sudden bursts of creativity or inspiration in our new life on the west coast. If anything, it was kind of annoying living out our daily lives without some items that didn't survive the move.
I have nothing wrong with minimalism, or owning fewer things. In fact, I'm all for it, but don't fool yourself that throwing out the fondue pot is going to help you finish that novel.
My guess is that the stimulation of such a new environment is more responsible.
> My guess is that the stimulation of such a new environment is more responsible.
This. Environment means so much to productivity. For example, the reason why I frequent my local hackerspace is that being there puts me into a getting-things-done attitude, whereas at home I usually end up chatting on IRC, watching Youtube or playing video games. And sometimes, all of the above at once. :)
The younger me will agree but now that I have more practical experience in life I see things differently. The stuff that you own are for convenience. If you install some furniture you don't need to think about them - they are there ready to accept the stuff you want to stash in. There is very little maintenance as well (dusting, etc.) which you could outsource if you want to free more time for yourself.
In terms of the comment that your things own you, I cannot see how this works. Of course if you need to be mobile, then you need to give up on these things or you need to be prepared to take a loss. Those things should have been factored from the very beginning. Buying a car has a huge upfront cost but perhaps lower transportation cost in the long run if you use it regularly. Solar panels vs nuclear vs fossil fuel , laptop vs desktop, own server vs cloud are manifestations of the same thinking. Everything has advantages and disadvantages and unfortunately, regardless of the framework of life you choose to live in some things will not work out the way you want them to but that is fine :)
To unclutter your mind you really need to go beyond that kind of thinking. Minimalism cannot be defined in such a simple terms as much as you cannot define minimalism when you are building your next product. Minimalism does not mean lack of features. It means lack of unnecessary features but to find out what falls under this category you need to try them out first to see what works.
There's a lot of changes happening when moving to a new place, so I'm not sure why the author assumes his burst of creativity is due to minimalism only. It might just be that it's exciting to be somewhere new and start fresh.
Going digital is a big help. My legacy collection of books, CDs, DVDs or records still takes annoyingly much space and it's a pain in the butt when you move. Books are heavy!
I wish there was an easy way to instantly get a digital version of a book you own. Publishers always claim that you don't really own a book or record, it's just a license. I've already bought a license to read a novel or listen to an album, why can't I just transfer the license to a digital format without paying full price again?
And it's even more painful when you acknowledge that a lot of books are still unread, it's like a wall of shame of good intentions. Thankfully you can easily hide digital books in a subfolder.
I keep working on digital minimalism. What's the cleanest, simplest organizational schema/stack I can use to make sure all of my digital material is findable and secure? It's a rabbit hole for sure.
So the premise of this post seems to be that owning things that may one day need to be moved introduces a cognitive load extreme enough that daily creativity is reduced, but reducing easy access to purchases to the point where buying things is a 'scavenger hunt' is 'actually great'.
I can kind of understand where these types of articles are coming from but I wish people would stop framing them as some sort of generational paradigm shift in living. It's simply a response to a changed set of incentives.
Cheap consumables + high property values + cheap travel + low job security = consumerist minimalism makes sense
This isn't about "cognitive freedom" it's about low interest rates (causing high house prices), low tariff trade (meaning dirt cheap manufactured consumables) and the corporate culture of treating labor as disposable (frankly: due to union destruction) meaning you have to be able to move often.
Assuming all of those things reversed and:
* High tariff trade means that you can't just buy a new Bangladeshi-sewn wardrobe for $200.
* Suddenly you can buy a huge house relatively cheaply because of a drop in house prices.
* The "job for life" becomes a thing again.
Then again, consumerist minimalism would make much less sense.
30 comments
[ 1.7 ms ] story [ 96.1 ms ] threadI won an Ironhack hackathon based on this idea. Tricky to execute though as furniture is big, heavy and logistics become expensive. If you have 100 customers renting sofas for 6 months (because ifthey rent longer, why should they not buy one themselves?), you will end up moving a lot of furniture.
And how do you manage offering? Products from your own warehouse, or P2P, or both? Pure P2P would require no stocks, but also reduce the amount of products available on the portal which would make it less attracting.
For an early market research test we created a profile on the local craigslist and asked people selling their sofas if they were interested in renting it out instead.. Then we also created a profile offering to rent out a sofa. Limited interest but we did get some fun response..
With furniture, once you have the appropriate pieces, you don't really need to do much with them. Also, it's easy enough to buy / sell furniture as needed, i.e. whenever you feel like moving.
As for clothing - with changing seasons, drycleaning, different dress codes, polishing shoes, etc, etc... wish there were something where I could order the next week or two's clothing for hire, and send it back dirty, and let someone else figure out when it needs replacing, polishing, etc.
I'd find something comfortable in a decent fit and buy half-a-dozen of them all at the same time, then attempt to wear them until they wore-out. But when I went back to the store they'd changed 'seasons' or 'styles' and the same items were no longer available. I'd defer searching for and purchasing new items until my wife would force me to do so due to holes in my pullovers etc. I'm not sure how Steve Jobs overcame this problem with his turtle-necks, unless he had them custom-made.
My solution to this was to start shopping in country-life ( farming / horse-riding etc ) and workwear shops. Not only do the items last longer but those ranges have much lower churn. Not as fashionable as high-street stores I suppose but functionally sufficient and less stressful for me overall.
In comparison furniture has zero cognitive burden for me once selected and installed. I've moved house once and it was just a case of hiring a removals company with a big van, they did all the work.
Stick to classic designs from classic brands and you won't have that problem. The basic white dress shirt/blouse for example works for all occasions and if you find a fit that works for you from an established brand you'll never have to worry about fit again (until you change size).
I buy 2 pair of Levi's 501 on sale each year for ~$35, a single brand/style of underwear, single style/brand under shirt, single brand/style of athletic socks, 2 pair minimum of any style/design of non-athletic socks, etc. Button up shirts purchased as needed (trying to limit to 5-7) from same brand, and all matching jeans. I can blindly grab first item in each stack and have consistent results. haven't felt need to simplify any further. I try and stock up on the socks/undergarments during sales, and then replace in drawer once showing signs of excessive wear. so far so good.
http://www.cultofmac.com/122575/why-steve-jobs-wore-turtlene...
Stores like Primark and H&M basically deal in "disposable fashion" - clothes that are up to the minute style-wise but made (and sold) incredibly cheaply, so you don't mind the fact that they disintegrate after a few weeks or months, and then just buy next month's style instead.
The problem isn't style. It's fit.
I can order a half dozen blouses online - from a brand that I buy frequently and that represents a third of my closet. And I'll be lucky if two thirds of them fit my individual combination of dimensions.
Of the ones that fit, only half will be flattering - the rest would look better on someone with narrower shoulders or a larger bust or whatever.
Shopping unfamiliar brands is even worse.
Whoever solves THAT problem scalably will make billions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_the_Runway https://www.renttherunway.com/
[1] https://letote.com
Or, one could look into how others in the furniture rental business solved those questions in the market over the last 50 years, then analyze what it would take to disrupt:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-A-Center
The rent-to-own business was started by Johnathon Talley in Wichita, Kansas during the 1960s when he told customers of his store, Mr. T’s Rental, that they had rented a washer and dryer for a long enough duration that they had paid for it in full and now owned it. Thomas Devlin, a former employee of Mr. T’s rental, recognized the potential of renting name-brand products and partnered with W. Frank Barton and founded the Rent-A-Center brand in Wichita, Kansas in 1973.
RAC provides new and used brand-named furniture, appliances, computers and electronics from brands, such as Ashley Furniture, Sony, Toshiba, Whirlpool Corporation, Dell and HP. As part of their rent-to-own business model, Rent-A-Center generally makes its items available with no down payments or long term obligations. Customers can return an item at any time, for any reason, without penalty and also have the option to re-rent the same item and pick up the payments where they left off. Delivery, pick-up, service and repair are also included in the stated rental price. Customers can also upgrade items while they are renting—the payments will change accordingly.
[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVxM0gryue4
But it's true that you feel some kind of relief when you have fewer things. Specially if you travel frequently, you can go without worrying about leaving something important behind.
There was no sudden bursts of creativity or inspiration in our new life on the west coast. If anything, it was kind of annoying living out our daily lives without some items that didn't survive the move.
I have nothing wrong with minimalism, or owning fewer things. In fact, I'm all for it, but don't fool yourself that throwing out the fondue pot is going to help you finish that novel.
My guess is that the stimulation of such a new environment is more responsible.
This. Environment means so much to productivity. For example, the reason why I frequent my local hackerspace is that being there puts me into a getting-things-done attitude, whereas at home I usually end up chatting on IRC, watching Youtube or playing video games. And sometimes, all of the above at once. :)
In terms of the comment that your things own you, I cannot see how this works. Of course if you need to be mobile, then you need to give up on these things or you need to be prepared to take a loss. Those things should have been factored from the very beginning. Buying a car has a huge upfront cost but perhaps lower transportation cost in the long run if you use it regularly. Solar panels vs nuclear vs fossil fuel , laptop vs desktop, own server vs cloud are manifestations of the same thinking. Everything has advantages and disadvantages and unfortunately, regardless of the framework of life you choose to live in some things will not work out the way you want them to but that is fine :)
To unclutter your mind you really need to go beyond that kind of thinking. Minimalism cannot be defined in such a simple terms as much as you cannot define minimalism when you are building your next product. Minimalism does not mean lack of features. It means lack of unnecessary features but to find out what falls under this category you need to try them out first to see what works.
I wish there was an easy way to instantly get a digital version of a book you own. Publishers always claim that you don't really own a book or record, it's just a license. I've already bought a license to read a novel or listen to an album, why can't I just transfer the license to a digital format without paying full price again?
And it's even more painful when you acknowledge that a lot of books are still unread, it's like a wall of shame of good intentions. Thankfully you can easily hide digital books in a subfolder.
Cheap consumables + high property values + cheap travel + low job security = consumerist minimalism makes sense
This isn't about "cognitive freedom" it's about low interest rates (causing high house prices), low tariff trade (meaning dirt cheap manufactured consumables) and the corporate culture of treating labor as disposable (frankly: due to union destruction) meaning you have to be able to move often.
Assuming all of those things reversed and:
* High tariff trade means that you can't just buy a new Bangladeshi-sewn wardrobe for $200.
* Suddenly you can buy a huge house relatively cheaply because of a drop in house prices.
* The "job for life" becomes a thing again.
Then again, consumerist minimalism would make much less sense.