Thrifting was made for times like these.
A prolonged period of high living costs and consumer pushback against the excesses of fast fashion has led to soaring interest in buying secondhand clothes and pre-owned homewares.
Big business is tapping into the trend, drawing mixed reactions from thrifters accustomed to spending their money at charitable op shops.
For-profit expansion
Late last year, the private equity-backed Savers, a firm listed in the US, opened a store on Oxford Street, one of Sydney’s primary shopping precincts. Months earlier, it had unveiled a sprawling superstore in the city’s west.
In the next few months, it plans to open stores in Sydney’s inner west on the bustling Parramatta Road, and in the city’s outskirts in Marsden Park.
The Sydney expansion builds on the outlet’s long-term presence in Melbourne and Adelaide.
Savers, the biggest for-profit thrift retailer in North America, has found financial favour in Australia, with quarterly sales jumping to US$30.7m in the March quarter, up almost 12% from a year earlier.
Overall, the company generated US$1.54bn in sales in 2024 through its network of more than 350 stores, mainly located in the US and Canada.
Caitie Pridmore, a longtime op shopping enthusiast, says she is more inclined to shop at charity-run op shops than Savers, but any arguments against for-profit thrift stores should be nuanced.
“It comes down to … the intention as the consumer, and then the intention as the retailer of the op shop,” she says.
“With Savers, it’s an interesting one. I feel less compelled to shop there.”
Pridmore says while there is a charitable element to the way Savers operates, she prefers to spend her money in op shops where she knows her contributions are going to have “more of an impact on the community”.
For-profit thrift retailers tend to do well in markets where customers are conscious about their spending, but not under so much financial pressure that they stop buying altogether.
This is representative of conditions in Australia, where households are grappling with cost-of-living pressures, but most people have a job, with unemployment at a low level of 4.1%.
Michael Fisher, the managing director at Savers Australia, said in a statement that secondhand shopping served as a meaningful and sustainable way for consumers to stretch their dollars in the current economic climate.
“We are competitively positioned in the retail sector with a hyperlocal model, an average price per item of less than $10, and a fresh assortment that provides exceptional value to consumers,” Fisher said.
For-profit model
The Savers model relies on donations of clothes and small household items to its charitable partners, including Red Nose, Wounds Australia and Diabetes Victoria, which are either collected by the not-for-profits or through donation centres attached to the stores.
Savers then pays the charities for those goods.
The Wounds Australia chief executive, Jeff Antcliff, said the organisation had been “thrilled with the exposure” the partnership had brought and that the relationship provided revenue to support the organisation’s work in advocating for those living with chronic wounds.
Savers’ charitable partners, including Wounds Australia, said the rates paid by Savers were confidential.
In the US, Savers has faced questions over the transparency of its relationships with nonprofit partners, and the rates it pays.
after newsletter promotion
The office of the Washington attorney general said in 2017 that Savers’ parent company was paying one of its charitable partners as little as four pennies for every pound of clothing. Other goods, like housewares, earned the charities 2 US cents per pound.
Savers did not respond to questions about the per-kilo rate it pays in Australia.
Fisher said the company had paid its Australian not-for-profit partners about $20m for secondhand goods over the last five years.
“Last year alone, we found a reuse for over 9.1 million kilograms of secondhand items,” Fisher said in a statement.
One of Savers’ partners, Diabetes Victoria, disclosed in financial accounts that about 4.8m kgs of clothes and other products went to Savers in 2024, and that the charity had earned $2.98m from its collections business.
While this would imply a rate of about 62c per kilo, the calculation could be complicated by donations of different types of goods attracting different rates.
The Diabetes Victoria chief executive, Glen Noonan, said the Savers partnership had “played a vital role in advancing our efforts to raise funds for much needed diabetes programs, advocacy and world-leading diabetes research”.
The thrifting sector has changed significantly from the days of being almost exclusively run by charities.
Another for-profit model, consignment stores, allows people to sell unwanted clothes for lower-than-retail prices if they don’t want to give them away for free.
Bec Brewin, a keen op-shopper who creates thrifting content for social media, says e-commerce platforms like Depop facilitate a more sustainable economy, even though “you’re not donating to a charity, you’re donating to somebody’s wallet”.
“As long as you’re aware of the fact that you’re shopping at a for-profit thrift shop or op shop, it’s fine. You’re still making a more sustainable choice,” she says.
Vicky Weatherlake, who runs an online thrifting community I Love To Op Shop which includes a Facebook group with more than 122,000 members, says she supports the Savers business model.
“I’m not wasting time criticising Savers for not being not-for-profit when we have [fast fashion platforms] doing huge environmental damage,” she says, referring to mass market retailers selling ultra cheap clothing.
“Is [Savers] competitive with op shops? Yes, certainly – but from my personal point of view, it’s more environmentally friendly.”
“We’ve got far bigger fish to fry than pulling Savers up on being a for-profit business, when it actually gets through so much goods that people are just not wanting any more,” she says.
