Cost–Benefit Analysis for European Fashion Brands
For years, destroying surplus stock has been the fast-track solution to free up warehouse space. But in a context of climate crisis, stricter regulations, and increasingly demanding consumers, this practice is not only questionable — it’s also expensive.
In this article, we analyse the hidden costs and missed opportunities of stock destruction versus international resale through circular models like Tekstila’s.
Option 1: Destroying Stock
At first glance, it might seem like the easiest solution. But let’s look at the real costs:
Direct costs:
- Logistics and handling for destruction
- Storage prior to destruction
- Industrial destruction costs (shredding, incineration, transportation to specialized centres)
- Fees associated with non-recyclable waste
Legal and reputational costs:
- Potential legal sanctions in countries where destruction is already banned (e.g. France, and upcoming EU regulations)
- Difficulties during sustainability audits and ESG compliance checks
- Reputational risk in case of leaked information about destroying unsold new clothing
- Missed CSR opportunities and inability to communicate positive brand actions
Option 2: International Sale via a Circular Model
Distributing surplus in other markets, safely and under full control, changes the equation entirely.
Economic benefits:
- Direct income from stock sales, even at reduced prices
- Lower logistics costs: Tekstila handles the entire process, from pickup to final destination
- Elimination of destruction and long-term storage expenses
- Availability of documented traceability for financial and sustainability reports
Strategic Benefits:
- Improved environmental footprint (lower CO₂ emissions, less waste)
- Strengthened ESG and CSR policy
- Proactive compliance with European regulations
- Generation of measurable positive impact for internal and external communication
Comparative Example (indicative model)
| Concept | Stock Destruction | International Redistribution |
|---|---|---|
| Average cost per ton | €600–1,000 | –€150–200 (profit) |
| Average processing time | 4–6 weeks | 2–3 weeks |
| Direct income | €0 | ✔ Net income per garment |
| ESG report | ✖ Difficult to justify | ✔ Traceability and added value |
| EU regulatory compliance | ✖ Risk of sanctions | ✔ Full compliance |
| Consumer perception | ✖ Negative | ✔ Positive and aligned with sustainability |
The Smart Choice is Circular
Destroying stock may feel like “business as usual,” but today it’s an outdated, costly, and risky practice.
International redistribution not only reduces environmental impact — it also optimizes resources, generates liquidity, and strengthens your brand.
At Tekstila, we’ve spent over two decades helping brands turn surplus management into a profitable sustainability strategy.
Is your brand still destroying stock?
Maybe it’s time to update the equation.