Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck

Amazon Will Now Let You Try On Clothes Before You Buy Them (theverge.com) 105

Posted by msmash from the going-forward dept.
For many people, buying clothing online is not worth the hassle of getting a pair of pants or a shirt that does not fit. Many retailers have sought to eliminate that risk by offering free returns on clothing, but now Amazon is going even further. From a report: Amazon is launching Prime Wardrobe, a new program that will let you try on clothes before you buy them. Once you select at least three Prime Wardrobe-eligible pieces from over a million clothing options, Amazon will ship your selections to you in a resealable return box with a prepaid shipping label. After you try on the clothes, you can put the ones you don't want back in the box and leave it at your front door -- Prime Wardrobe also comes with free scheduled pickups from UPS. If you decide to keep at least three items you will get a 10 percent discount off your purchase, and if you keep five or more pieces the discount rises to 20 percent.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Will Now Let You Try On Clothes Before You Buy Them More

Amazon Will Now Let You Try On Clothes Before You Buy Them

Comments Filter:

  • Do what I always do (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Fart in the pants and send them back.

  • Oh great (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ChoGGi ( 522069 ) <slashdot@ch[ ]i.org ['ogg' in gap]> on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @11:49AM (#54654779) Homepage

    used clothes from Amazon, just what I wanted.

    • Re: Oh great (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Just another jacked idea. My mom has been using a service just like this for years. She usually sends all but one item back so I guess such a service makes sense to her.

    • used clothes from Amazon, just what I wanted.

      How do you know the pair you tried on a Target or JCP wasn't tried on 5 minutes before you? What's the difference between that and this other than location?

      • There's a huge difference between clothes that have been tried in the fitting room for a couple minutes and clothes that have been "tried" for a night on the town and then returned. Most people aren't gonna be mucking around too much in the clothes in a retail shop, but who knows what you will do to them at home or elsewhere.

    • Re:Oh great (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Gilgaron ( 575091 ) on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @12:12PM (#54654911)
      You can hang out and watch the staff at the retail places fold or rehang the clothes from the dressing room and put them back on the rack if you like... they don't launder them first.
      • The difference there though would be that those clothes still never leave the store, whereas these may have been in any type of home environment before being returned. This says nothing of retail returns, however.

  • Too bad sizing isn't standarized. (Score:5, Informative)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @11:52AM (#54654799)

    The big problem is the lack of standardization in clothing sizes.
    Depending on the brand a Medium Sized shirt on me can fit nicely or it could be Tight and I will need to go to a large version, when then becomes baggy on me. Other brands have finer detail on the sizing, but the size number is only relevant to the brand.
    Then you have the problem with different body types. As a stockier build, many things that fit are either too long, or just tight around the arms and shoulder other than that they may fit.

    Except for having free return shipping. Amazon should ship over a Tailor to get your size.

    • The big problem is the lack of standardization in clothing sizes.

      Female voice: What's wrong?
      Man on monitor: I just bought one of these yesterday, and it doesn't fit my consumer, and the store doesn't have any of the other kind.
      Male voice: For more enjoyment and greater efficiency, consumption is being standardized. We are sorry...
      Man on monitor: This is -
      [cut off]

      I'm thinking that Bezos' s00p3r s3krit plan is to get us hooked on buying Amazon Clothes, and then gradually reduce the selection until we are all stuck wearing Mao suits.

    • If I read it correctly, the whole idea is that if you like a shirt, you order the range of applicable sizes and send back the ones that don't fit. Something that would be hard retail, but perhaps doable with their logistics, might be to have even casual clothes sold by measurement like dress clothes. Then you'd be more likely to get the proper fit in one try.

    • Jacket and long-sleeve shirt sizing especially seems crazy to me. You can't boil down a shirt to just "XL" or "L" - often the "L" jackets fit me perfectly, except I have long arms so the sleeves are too short... so I usually get to choose between baggy jacket or sleeves that are too short.

      I am sure hoping with the increase of technology in manufacturing that pretty much all shirts and pants can be ordered with a variety of sleeve lengths/chest size/neck size/waist/inseam.... just like dress shirts. At lea

      • Schoolboys may buy standard sizes off department store racks. It often doesnt cost all that much more to go to a real [wo]menswear store and have clothing properly adjusted.

        • At which point I've gotten into an extra layer of complexity for my clothes. Currently, I pick them up in the store, maybe try on a few, and pay for them and leave. I don't have to find a fitter and go through measurements and then pick them up next week. OK, OK, I'll get off your lawn.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by enjar ( 249223 )

      Amazon should ship over a Tailor to get your size.

      When I read the headline, I was hoping Amazon had found a way to use a app + cameraphone to make a reasonable 3d scan of a customer's body and then map that onto sizing. They wouldn't need to ship a tailor!

    • Amazon should ship over a Tailor to get your size.

      You jest, but you really should be able to take detailed measurements of yourself (not hard; but it helps to have a friend) and enter them into the web site, and then Amazon should be able to calculate how each piece of clothing will fit you and show you an image of a virtual dummy shaped like you with the clothes on it. This would not be easy, and would probably require both some serious research modeling how various fabrics fall on different shapes, and some method of acquiring very detailed data on the c

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by c ( 8461 )

        You jest, but you really should be able to take detailed measurements of yourself (not hard; but it helps to have a friend) and enter them into the web site, and then Amazon should be able to calculate how each piece of clothing will fit you...

        The assumption is that Amazon has accurate clothing sizes from its vendors. That's, if you'll pardon the expression, quite a stretch [lifehacker.com].

        Unless Amazon launches some sort of Amazon Basics for clothing, sizing is going to remain a bit of a crapshoot.

        • You jest, but you really should be able to take detailed measurements of yourself (not hard; but it helps to have a friend) and enter them into the web site, and then Amazon should be able to calculate how each piece of clothing will fit you...

          The assumption is that Amazon has accurate clothing sizes from its vendors.

          They're big enough to demand it. Or they could develop a solution to measure samples themselves.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by c ( 8461 )

            They're big enough to demand it. Or they could develop a solution to measure samples themselves.

            They can't even keep counterfeits out of their system. I don't see them having much luck enforcing size labelling.

            • They're big enough to demand it. Or they could develop a solution to measure samples themselves.

              They can't even keep counterfeits out of their system. I don't see them having much luck enforcing size labelling.

              Meh. Who cares about counterfeits? Not the customers; if they did they'd return the counterfeits in large enough volumes to make Amazon care.

  • Great (Score:5, Insightful)

    by A. B3ttik ( 1344591 ) on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @11:52AM (#54654801)
    This will be great for my wife. Not so great for my wallet.

    "But it's 20% off! I'm saving us money by buying more!"

  • Christ. My gf is going to go fucking *crazy* with this.

  • 21st Century Capitalism. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @11:59AM (#54654845)

    Prime Video. Prime Pantry. Prime Wardrobe.

    Sure as hell seems like every new feature on Amazon is making a Prime membership rather mandatory instead of merely a nice benefit to cut down on shipping costs.

    I shouldn't be surprised. Being forced to subscribe to every service you use to create a per-customer-cost-for-life revenue stream is the definition of capitalism in the 21st century.

    • Yes, the Prime stuff is lining up to compete with warehouse stores a la Costco or Sam's Club.

      • We thought that CostCo - later Sams - was a "good thing" from about 2000 to about 2008, by 2009 we realized that we were spending $30, no $40, no it's $50 per year now for the "privilege" of shopping at this store-o-giant boxes maybe 5 or 6 times a year, getting stuff we don't necessarily want, at prices that aren't necessarily any better than the convenient grocery store down the street.

        I like Amazon, too much in fact, but if they start making Prime the only way to shop there, I'll be buying a lot less fro

    • Prime Video. Prime Pantry. Prime Wardrobe.

      Next Amazon offering: Prime Numbers

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • To all the dudes (and dudettes) out there with wives and girlfriends (boyfriends, or girlfriends too, I don't judge) spending their money on clothes, this is much better! I don't know about you but there have been many occasions when my credit card billing period ended before the 15 shirts/pants whatever that she ordered were returned and refunded. I end up having to pay off the balance regardless of the fact that $400 bucks was refunded by the time the statement actually arrived. On rare occasion that e

    • You need to get a wife/girlfriend who has her own money and buys her own clothes.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DogDude ( 805747 )
      I don't know about you but there have been many occasions when my credit card billing period ended before the 15 shirts/pants whatever that she ordered were returned and refunded.

      In all seriousness, it sounds like you should be spending some money on mental health treatment, instead of more clothes.
      • Interesting. When a guy above commented, "The big problem is the lack of standardization in clothing sizes." he got a +5 Informative but when someone comments on a shopping behavior that is a natural corollary to poor clothing size standardization they get trolled. The whole basis of Amazon's offer is to facilitate trying clothes on before making the financial commitment. Have you ever bought your own clothes or do you assume everyone just buys a triple pack of t-shirts in plastic every few years and not

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by DogDude ( 805747 )
          I buy my own clothes. The idea of buying 15 pieces of attire at any one time, to me, at least, indicates some kind of mental illness.
          • Given the aforementioned lack of standardization in clothing size means you have to order extras. A few t-shirts, a few button-up shirts, a few shorts and a couple pants for the new summer season. Keep the two or three that actually fit and are pleasing and return the rest. This is common practice when purchasing clothing online which is why you see a $100 Billion dollar company catering to that shopping model.

            Can identify which mental illness is suggested by this behavior and why Amazon is coddling t

  • Vanity Sizing - now in men's clothes (Score:3)

    by jbridges ( 70118 ) on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @12:09PM (#54654899)

    Used to be Vanity Sizing only messed up the woman's clothing market. But now it's infected men's clothing as well.
    Phrases like "relaxed fit" are only the first clue. There are now all kinds of tricks to telling what the actual size will be. If you see any kind of adjustments or elastic you can be sure they will be super oversized to make men feel better about their growing girth.

    All this makes it brutally hard to buy clothes that fit based on measurements!

    The sad part is, I don't think we can turn back. Consumers love the idea of wearing a smaller size than their real measurement, so like the marching morons with their speedometers that lie, we keep buying the vanity sizing.

    • Usually relaxed fit has to do with the pant leg length and the room in the crotch/ass.

    • It hurts the retailers if people keep returning clothes, so retailers have an incentive to pressure manufacturers to have accurate sizing.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      All this makes it brutally hard to buy clothes that fit based on measurements!

      I make clothes from scratch, starting with pattern drafting. Buying clothes based on measurements will always be a crap-shoot. There are countless curves and angles that can not be communicated effectively. Most "size charts" are laughably simplistic. They might tell you if a garment will be too small to stretch over your body, but if you actually care about how your clothes fit, you have to try things on.

      • It'd be a whole lot easier if everyone just wore stretchy spandex outfits like in 70s sci-fi movies.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by KGIII ( 973947 )

          I live in America. That's a horrible idea.

          • Ok, here's a better idea: people with up to a certain BMI (25?) are allowed to wear stretchy spandex outfits. People over that threshold are only allowed to wear baggy sweatclothes. This way, both groups have clothes that only really need to come in a handful of sizes and pretty much fit everyone, and don't need any kind of special cuts.

        • It'd be a whole lot sillier if everyone just wore fashions from Fritz Lang's Metropolis.

    • See Carlin's bit about "loose fitting jeans." It's been going on for decades.

      http://lybio.net/george-carlin... [lybio.net]

    • Re:Vanity Sizing - now in men's clothes (Score:4, Interesting)

      by swillden ( 191260 ) <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @05:06PM (#54656945) Journal

      All this makes it brutally hard to buy clothes that fit based on measurements!

      Soon enough we'll get rid of rack sizing entirely and you'll just provide your detailed body measurements (like a tailor would take, but measured with your smartphone) and the clothing will be custom made to fit. I give it 10 years at the outside.

      • It's already started. My girlfriend used likeaglove smart pants so she could find jeans that fit her well. She's got a badonkadonk and lymphadema so it's been hard to find pants she likes, the smart pants found her a good match that she's happy with.

  • Cool. I'm buying underwear.

  • Seriously... online business is decimating brick and mortar stores but there is absolutely no way I would ever buy something like a sofa without trying it out first.
  • I guess the only missing part is combining this with the "auto renew" function they already have for toothbrushes and the like. "Send me five shirts I might like every three months" doesn't seem too much of a stretch here. I know my wife has ordered many pairs of shoes from Zappos (bought by Amazon in 2009) and they make returns very easy, so she will get multiple sizes to see which fit the best and return all the others.

  • >For many people, buying clothing online is not worth the hassle of getting a pair of pants or a shirt that does not fit.

    For me it's ok. If I walk into a clothing store, E.G. Nordstom, there's maybe a 20% chance I'll find something that fits and is shaped reasonably and doesn't cost a stupid amount of money. However having found some fitting clothes at M&S and fitting clothes at Nordstom, I certainly can look up the clothes online, filter by size, brand and price and have a close to 100% chance of fi

  • If the minimum order is 3 pieces of clothing, and assuming that the average consumer only buys 1, that means Amazon needs to hold 2 piece of unsold inventory for every 1 piece they sell. That's a substantial amount of inventory that needs to be held to justify each sale. The only way I can see this working is if they price their items higher to account for the costs of the clothing that is returned without being purchased. How does this model make business sense?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by SmSlDoo ( 414128 )

      Keep in mind, that if you order 3-4 items, at most you can save 10% and that is assuming you keep everything.
      So people wanting to get 20% off will always order at least 5 items, and will be more inclined to keep at least 5.

    • Do you have any concept of the profit margins in fashion?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hackel ( 10452 )

      Amazon already holds countless pieces of unsold inventory, for free, for its 3rd warehouse sellers. They don't seem to care. Whatever they're doing has been working for them for quite a long time now.

      • The unsold inventory being held for 3rd party vendors will eventually be sold and transformed into cash for their bottom line. The expectation is that the inventory is as closely matched to demand as possible to minimize unsold items.

        With this model, on the other hand, consumers are buying into it with the expectation of trying and returning items they don't like it. A substantial percentage of the inventory will be locked in try-ons and returns at any point in time. Even if the returned item is sold to ano

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DogDude ( 805747 )
        Whatever they're doing has been working for them for quite a long time now.

        As long as there are always more suckers to buy their stock, the ponzi scheme will continue.

    • The only way I can see this working is if they price their items higher to account for the costs of the clothing that is returned without being purchased. How does this model make business sense?

      That is what happens in shops - they stock many different sizes and have to wait for the right-sized customer to come in and buy.

      But this way, Amazon swaps the overheads of retail outlets for the overheads of transportation costs, which I would guess are a lot lower.

    • Some European fashion retailers have been doing this for a good while, and still manage to turn a profit. In fact free returns and only paying for the items you keep is starting to become the norm here.

      I am sure that this practice of taking a lot of returns, and having to receive and repackage them, eats into the profits of retailers a bit, but they make it up in volume: hassle and cost of returns has been one of the biggest problems that consumers had when mail ordering apparel. Assume those costs and

  • The items are marked up at +20% and if you buy more than 5, the penalty is removed.

    Any "discount" you ever get is only the removal of a markup.

  • Amazon continues in its mission to complete destroy the environment. All of their deliveries are bad enough, but free shipping back and forth just to TRY ON clothes? Come on... Until they have a viable drone or other delivery programme that is carbon-neutral, no responsible person can participate in such a horrible, polluting enterprise.

    • Re:Killing the environment (Score:4, Interesting)

      by LunaticTippy ( 872397 ) on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @04:13PM (#54656605)
      I used to feel this way too, but it might be misguided. Imagine a hundred people all driving to the mall to try on clothes - that is 100 cars making 200 round trips, plus all the electricity wasted at the mall on HVAC, lighting, as well as all the items that don't get bought and the army of trucks to supply the mall with products.

      Those 100 people could all be served by a single UPS truck making one big trip. The whole thing might be greener than the old way, even with all the wasted boxes and returns and whatnot. It is certainly cheaper, which keeps a hard lid on resource use.
      • It's hard to know what an appropriate system would be. I really hate the idea of everyone getting everything they buy delivered from online retailers. I also look at department stores and question the logic. Many retailers have a store full of stuff, but much of it isn't of any interest to many people. I don't have a better idea, but it's not hard to see the the inefficiency in online individual delivery of every consumer good a person could possibly want, or on the other hand the department stores filled w
  • Most of their clothing and accessories are already eligible for Free Returns, without needing Prime.

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close