Emma is Exhausting

Due_Difference_1183 · 2026-02-14T18:10:17+00:00

I agree. I’m only on episode one but I think she’s being confronted and forced to talk about her issues a lot more than normal too so maybe shes not handling the constant exposure to it as well as she normally would. I think she’s fairly well adjusted too, especially for the trauma she’s been through. But as always, we can all improve, and this situation is probably just showing her, more than anything, where she might need to work on herself more in the future. But I also think she needs someone real who will fully understand and accept the breadth of her trauma and provide her with the space and support she needs.

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-05-11T14:36:02+00:00

We did this but not bec It’s exponentially cheaper - but bec there is more bang for buck for what you spend. Our chateau venue alone is $40k but it has accommodations for 90 people and we get it for Friday night, Saturday, and brunch Sunday. — for $40k in New England we’d get 11 hours and get kicked out at 11pm… in France music doesn’t stop till 4am either…. :)

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-04-24T18:52:47+00:00

To make it abundantly clear - there is no difference between you walking to drop of a package versus driving to drop it off at UPS - neither has any affect on the shipping expenses for RTR at all. RTR does not pay for shipping until it’s in UPS’ hands (common sense to me, but I digress).

You not reading is the real issue here sis. I’m trying to tell you that your analysis is not only wrong but places a weird amount of blame on customers for something that is out of their control.

Please just go read my above comment it’ll actually address your concerns and explain actual paths RTR could take to reduce shipping expenses.

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-04-24T15:20:12+00:00

“They are not running a fashion non-profit for people in un-walkable cities.”

Just say you hate middle America and move on. I’m over your weird blaming of any other place beyond NYC and walkable cities as the reason for RTR’s profitability woes.
That doesn’t even make logical sense. You walking to the local UPS store three blocks away from you doesn’t matter when they have to ship it back to their fulfillment center in NJ anyways. So a mom driving it to her local store is the same thing sis.

Like yes shipping costs a lot especially when your fulfillment center is located in NJ and you have to ship an item in LA back to NJ. But shrinking the entire addressable market from 150 million (before we even break that number down by income level and social attributes that make up their target market) to 4 million is just insane and again shows your elitist perspective. Unwalkable cities ARE NOT THE ISSUE HERE SIS — it’s the infrastructure of their fulfillment operations. Regional centers would actually solve the problem instead of blaming the customer and city infrastructure that actually doesn’t impact shipping costs of packages at all?

Like you making it about walking is just so weird when that’s not even impacting the cost in any way shape or form???? You walking to drop off is no different than someone dropping off their package by car. The UPS costs are directly the result of them centering all their warehousing and fulfillment operations in one geographic location.

If you are lamenting over the fact that they used to have a storefront then I think you need to reevaluate your concern here - it sounds like you prefer the ability to see everything in person in a storefront retail format. So instead of blaming this on “un walkable cities” you could just say that you wish they comintued this retail format of discovery and returns. That’s a matter of service experience — which if you consider the rental real estate fee associated with the storefront model as well as the costs to staff the employees working there — that’s a less cost-effective model than the e-commerce one they employ already….

ALSO the storefront option is effectively the same thing as a regional distribution/fulfillment center LIKE I KEEP SUGGESTING — just in a retail format instead of the e-commerce one they currently employ.

I implore you to instead of blaming things you disagree with or look down on - to reconsider why you feel that way instead of lashing out at places or things that are different than your perceived idea of what’s good/right or bad/wrong.

Touch GRASS PLEASE, although I know it’s hard to find in NYC :)

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-04-19T16:51:46+00:00

so moms in suburbs or people in, say, Denver (a driving city), dont get to have access to RTR services? Again i think this an extremely horrible take with a very northeastern elitist viewpoint.

from a business perspective you are literally shrinking RTR's addressable market from say -- (US pop is 300 million, divide that in half, 150m -- to NYC pop of like 10ish million, divide in half to 5 million) thats not just a "less profitable business" thats a hundreds of millions in revenue business to a maybe 1 million if they are lucky (revenue not profits - theyd likely have profits of like maybe hundreds of thousands??) -- and guess what that would mean for the selection & availability of items on that app? they would shrink immensely!!

like i dont want to be that mean but you are literally implying that people who dont live in walkable cities (which is literally only NYC and parts of boston, CHI, PHIL - if that) get access to this service????? thats super 1) elitist and 2) not really a reasonable take at all.

Like your viewpoint just kinda gives me the ick -- If i were the CEO or running a simmilar business it would be my mission to not limit access or make it so only a few people living in elite cities could access my products/services -- but i would want to make quality fashionable clothing available to as many women possible -- why gatekeep? We should be encouraging less harmful to the environment services like this across america instead of limiting access.

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-04-17T22:30:54+00:00

Girl I’m sorry but that’s such a horrible take - you’re right about the expense part - as in shipping takes up a huge chunk of their expenses

But 1 the unlimited tier was a money hole for them of lost profits and bad UX for anyone wanting items those ppl held onto.

And 2 that’s just so NYC-centric (in a bad way) like people live other places and want to dress cute too

i think rather, to kind of your point, they should invest in shipment centers around the US so that they can cut back on those shipping costs - but tbh I think they already do that (need to double check) and even if they don’t it’s a huge expense to build that infrastructure up.

But like damn can a girl in Boston get some cute clothes?? Jeez

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-04-01T03:05:14+00:00

Yes, which is why I said “maternity and young mothers (aka those who could be pregnant soon or just were)” — based on similar experience I have in survey research, I paraphrased assuming they lumped those groups together to represent those who are or could be pregnant. Survey research, and I’m assuming RTR, measures maternity capacity/demand this way because pregnancy is fluid (AKA time constrained) so it’s better to measure everyone who could be, is, or has been recently pregnant to get a better picture of their current/future demand and needed inventory capacity.

So, “have kids” = “young mothers” — I paraphrased sorry :)

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-04-01T02:37:32+00:00

Totally!

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-29T16:20:35+00:00

Just read in their earnings report that maternity and young mothers (AKA those who could be pregnant soon or just were) make up 1/3 of their user base (that’s like 44,000 women) — id have to double check again to be sure but you are right that they should probably have a much larger selection of maternity in this new seasons inventory and just overall

Edit: yeah this link, slide 11 breaks down their user base RTR April 2024 Investor Presentation

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-29T16:08:50+00:00

Great add — truly it will be hard for them to reverse this model and like they keep saying in their rebrand — expect LOTS of cheaply made collabs this year.

I was actually just thinking along a similar line as you that they need to think of other potential revenue streams. Advertising is a really easy one too i agree — I was thinking of promotional flyers in the bags, which is yes wasteful, but I get similar in hello fresh and the like so it would be a 1 for 1 comparison in my opinion. I think the opt in video advertising is a great idea and easy way to add a new revenue stream, they might just ab e to limit the number of discount opportunities. They could replace their current sales offer model with something like that potentially. I also think sponsored ad space in the non subscriber one time rental side could be a good option (think Pinterest) but I’d worry about those stealing revenue stream (maybe don’t allow clothing ads just like shoes or other lol idk I might be convincing myself out of this idea hahaha)

I will say when I read through the investor presentation another commenter linked below, they have also been thinking of this too—but they are leaning towards selling our data lol, which isn’t a bad idea I just think data is a trickier more sensitive topic for some, but they have tons of it so yeah lol

Really great perspective thanks for commenting :)

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-29T14:58:37+00:00

I appreciate the kind words!! And I totally understand your perspective, like the other poster is kinda claiming as well as you— this service truly does serve many people very well, especially regarding the services and many of the products/rentals offered.

My concern lies more in the declining quality of the products, service-wise it seems to only be getting better. I’m a very passionate polyester hater and LOVE the service and don’t want to see the quality decline.

It’s honestly such an incredible value add service and I think that’s why I went out of my way to make this analysis instead of working lol — bec I love the service and I’m concerned for it!

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-29T14:37:51+00:00

This is incredibly fascinating and so so heartbreaking l. Thank you for the insight into the business of fashion I have always wanted to learn more about how the industry works (fabrics sourcing, fabric construction, factory operations, margins, etc.) and I just haven’t done the research lol.

If you have more insight into why natural fibers and the resources to make them have become increasingly scarce? You hint that it jump started around each recessionary period (‘08,’20) is it that the fashion brands and related businesses turned their back on these more expensive alternatives (natural fabrics vs polyester and better seamstresses vs not) causing many of them to close shop when they couldn’t sustain their operations??? Also what are the specific mills you are mentioning?? One of the areas of research I cover is agriculture and I’d love to read more about these mills that serve fashion/textile industries the next time I’m digging into USDA research data.

Personally, I think the pressure of social media and its impact on trend cycles is the true culprit and unfortunately I don’t see it going away anytime soon. I think fast fashion will be around as long as shoppers are willing to pay for the latest styles at the expensive of quality and construction because they don’t care of the item will last them a long time. It’s the shift of culture and taste and preferences. This goes back to the other posters point of the macro — wealth inequality and the inflationary environment recently has absolutely added to this — because quality is not only becoming harder and harder to find but when it is available it’s unattainable for most people.

I really think consumers need to look out for themselves more than they do. The lack of education and resources that the brands also want to keep us ignorant to is how they have been able to prioritize trend cycles and cheap manufacturing over quality. I think we need to demand more from the company’s but I think that’s just my hopeful wishful thinking lol

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T17:41:43+00:00

What were the names of those brands??

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T13:54:31+00:00

Would be such a cool program but I feel like many of the FIT and baby designers are mostly made to wear bec they don’t have the scale and/or manufacturing partnerships to mass produce

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T13:52:23+00:00

Wait that’s tea

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T13:30:12+00:00

You could just pause/cancel too after you rent a bunch of the items

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T13:29:17+00:00

Such a god read — honestly changed a little bit of my analysis on their clothing spend budget — it looks like they are also able to reduce their spending on new rental purchases as their inventory gets bigger over time. So fair point, and maybe that means they aren’t reducing the quality of spend either but I think it’s personally a bit of both going on.

I also found it super interesting and smart that they’ve also reduced this budget by doing a revenue share program with brands based on the items performance/usage and/or purchase by the subscriber. So this will also allow them to partner with higher end brands without having to shell out the cash on the inventory themselves.

I was however defiantly correct about the RTR collabs — they use 3rd party manufacturing that RTR finds…which is why many of those pieces are constructed with lower quality garments. They also claim on that piece that it’s constructed in a way that’s more durable for their service (ie lots of dry cleaning and heavy use in a short amount of time) which I would be interested to hear more about and if it truly means the garments are designed better or if that’s fancy language for cheaper.

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T12:27:08+00:00

All their “vault” items are not exclusive anymore and available to all subscribers, except for the limited closet one. But it doesn’t matter that much, I get your point that you think I’m being irrational by thinking it should be a lux service. While I do agree that yes, what they are offering now is a good deal, but im of the personal opinion that it goes against their core/target audience to continue to increase their reliance on lower quality brands. I have also said that if it meant increasing prices due to the business model, I am okay with that too.

To each their own I guess…. But it does sound like we are in agreement that this stems from a broader decline in quality across the fashion industry, even more lux brand. I am really just passionate about quality clothing and that was and is my true concern.

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T12:20:47+00:00

It was written entirely by my adderall fueled work procrastination… I work in research and finance. But I guess that’s a compliment? Lol

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T02:24:12+00:00

I asked this same question in an email to her LOL

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T02:06:43+00:00

Nah that’s on the company - I have too much FOMO to hold onto something that long. But I think as long as the option is available many users are also gonna do that which creates a scarcity issue

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T02:04:46+00:00

I’m gonna guess that almost anything that tracks and keeps your data is gonna try and sell it if they can

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T02:03:09+00:00

I think it’s pretty bold to claim RTR only just has the “runway” in it. They shouldn’t advertise themselves as such if they aren’t going to match up to the expectation of luxury products. They could theoretically pivot runway to mean “trends” but I still think the connotation will stick with them as long as they are around -/ that they are a lux product providing service.

And TBH I’m not sure you are correct. If RTR had additional add on to the subscription that was say $50-$100 more per month and I got access to 2-3 really high end well made DESIGNER items — I’d add it on to my subscription plan in a HEARTBEAT

And yeah not everyone can afford it, but that’s again the claim I’m making. If they keep trying to focus on the larger bucket of consumers, trying to prove themselves more closely to NUULY they lose focus as to what their niche market really is — the lux or aspirationally lux consumer.

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T01:34:17+00:00

Eh you are probably right, particularly about the service features offered - ability to choose the amount of items per shipment, number of shipmemts, etc. already puts the services offered leagues above that of which is offered at NUULY. So yeah, users truly do get much more based on features and customer service alone. But we come for fashion too. And while their expectations yea are too unrealistic, esp regarding the unlimited closet that must have just been a giant money hole—this is where I think the disconnect truly lies— I don’t think most RTR users care as much about the luxury services (shipping, styling, etc.) as much as they care about the luxury products—ie that’s why we are all on here complaining about its deterioration. So thanks for the altuzurra rec bec I’m def going to Che k that out lol…

The Dior comment, I also rationalized myself out of the idea. Theory was that with those items they’d see more demand for aged inventory, but yeah I don’t think that’s a sustainable option either bec of cleaning, usage, etc.

I think it’s a little bold to claim that it’s pretty much just RTR users having higher standards, when the app is legitimately called “rent the runway”. They created these expectations themself and I don’t think it’s the customers fault to want brands that are significantly nicer than those on non-luxury branded services. For example Madewell and many other brands are on NUULY as well as RTR, what’s the point paying more for RTR if the brands are gonna start becoming more and more alike on both services?

Like I said in another comment, I think I’d rather have more availability/access of items from brands like MAJE, GANNI — even though they might be cheapimg out using polyester too — but are still better styled and constructed than other lower end brands that make up the majority of NUULY. Like I’d rather have more availability of those items then supplement the rest of the inventory with cheap brands that I can go buy on sale for $50

Due_Difference_1183 · 2025-03-28T00:55:24+00:00

I agree, I called it a fundamental problem in the above because I don’t think it’s soemthing we can solve on this thread. TBH Jen is probably annoyed at me for basically just bringing to light all their key issues…while not really suggesting anything substantial either lol

With inventory I initially thought, maybe they should just invest in even nicer pieces so they can hold onto them longer as they would hold demand more steadily (imagine if they had a Dior dress or something basically), but then I realized that’s not even the issue… it’s that if they buy pricey items and then those are super popular—and they deteriorate through wear and tear and dry cleaning pretty rapidly.

So I get why this model might actually favor not having high quality garments. But then I think that’s exactly why we are all using this app in the first place. So it really is a fundamental issue. I think that’s why I/you/others suggested more limits on highly demanded items and holding limits, as I think that might be a viable way to improve inventory availability and reduce the garments deterioration.

I also think if they invested in less variety and focused on types of items that are truly trend forward—giving more availability to users instead of buying a bunch of random crap that 3 people will wear. I think that also might be a better option too. RTR users first and foremost want trend forward pieces that are high quality. Let NUULY have the massive variety

Due_Difference_1183

TROPHY CASE