Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
That’s probably too much. Even though it’s roughly what I’m paying now. While the subscription commitment would encourage me to make sure I was running to get value for it, the risk of not owning my shoes and the service being timely with replacements wouldn’t offset the stability I have now of just owning my shoes.
In short, I can’t see who this would be better for.
They have a sustainability angle, which I guess is what would drive most to subscribe. The company would probably argue they need a subscription model to ensure people return the shoes regularly so they can recycle them, but it would be good if they could find a way to do this without removing the consumer’s right to ownership.
They cost $30 (US) per month lol
That’s probably too much. Even though it’s roughly what I’m paying now. While the subscription commitment would encourage me to make sure I was running to get value for it, the risk of not owning my shoes and the service being timely with replacements wouldn’t offset the stability I have now of just owning my shoes.
In short, I can’t see who this would be better for.
They have a sustainability angle, which I guess is what would drive most to subscribe. The company would probably argue they need a subscription model to ensure people return the shoes regularly so they can recycle them, but it would be good if they could find a way to do this without removing the consumer’s right to ownership.