Recycling Cannot Save Clothing Designed Only to Be Thrown Away

Bank & Vogue handles some of the largest volumes of pre-loved textiles globally. Based on that vantage point, what shifts in the composition or quality of incoming materials are you seeing — and what do those shifts say about the state of overproduction?
Steven Bethell: From our vantage point, the shift has been unmistakable: we’re seeing a dramatic increase in polyester and other synthetic blends, alongside a decline in natural fibres and an overall drop in material quality.

Much of what’s now entering the secondhand ecosystem was never designed to last. These lower-grade textiles don’t age well, can’t be repaired easily, and won’t be passed down across generations the way garments made from 100% wool, cotton, or leather historically were. 

At the same time, we are not seeing the demand for natural fibres we once did. Cotton prices are shockingly low, and many cotton growers are operating underwater. This disconnect- massive volumes of low-quality synthetics flooding the market while natural fibre producers struggle- is a clear indicator of systemic overproduction and a race to the bottom on cost rather than durability, quality, or long-term value.

Your remanufacturing facility in Gujarat is a rare industrial-scale operation for turning used garments into new product. What barriers still stand in the way of scaling this kind of recycling, both in terms of technology and market appetite?
Steven Bethell: We don’t see barriers for brands that genuinely value authenticity—in materials and product integrity. For partners who understand that, remanufacturing isn’t a compromise; it’s a creative and commercial advantage. We consider ourselves fortunate to work with brands like Coach and Converse that see recycled textiles not as a limitation, but as a point of differentiation.

The bigger challenge is less about technology and more about market structure and appetite. Today’s fashion economy is increasingly polarised: at one end, luxury; at the other, ultra-fast, disposable fashion. The middle—where durability, fair pricing, and long-term value traditionally lived—is being hollowed out. That squeeze makes it harder for remanufactured products, which require care, time, and intention, to scale at the pace fast fashion demands.

That said, there is real reason for optimism. We’re seeing a growing cohort of brands pushing back against disposability and reinvesting in quality and longevity. Our work with Seasalt, for example, shows that when brands commit to thoughtful design and material reuse from the outset, remanufacturing can scale both creatively and commercially. The demand is there - but it’s coming from brands willing to lead, not follow.

Many fashion brands say they want circularity, but the vast majority of garments are still impossible to recycle at scale. What is one technological leap or policy intervention you believe would materially unlock textile-to-textile recycling?
Steven Bethell: If there’s one intervention that will materially unlock textile-to-textile recycling, it’s policy. The EU’s ban on the destruction of unsold goods is a critical first step because it forces brands to confront the reality of returns and excess inventory rather than quietly disposing of it. 

The next—and harder—question is who pays. Collection, sorting, grading, and remanufacturing are real industrial activities with real costs. Until there is a policy framework that funds this work, scale will remain limited. Circularity fails when it’s treated as a marketing expense instead of infrastructure.

One of the most immediate and effective policy fixes in the UK would be closing the de minimis loophole. As long as ultra-cheap imports can enter markets duty-free, brands investing in durability, recycling, and compliance are competing on an uneven playing field. 

You often warn that without structural changes, the volume of waste will keep outpacing even the strongest recycling systems. What is the uncomfortable truth the industry still refuses to confront about the limits of recycling?
Steven Bethell: The hard truth is that recycling can’t fix products that are made to be disposable. When clothing is produced as cheaply as possible, it has no resale value—and when resale dies, the entire circular system breaks down.

Another reality the industry avoids is that charities are the backbone of textile circularity. They collect, sort, grade, and resell clothing at scale. The flood of ultra-cheap imports is overwhelming that system.

By leaving the de minimis loophole open, we’re not just creating more waste—we’re directly harming charities and the vulnerable people they support, including those facing homelessness.

Bank & Vogue has evolved from a basement start-up to a global player advising brands like Vivienne Westwood, Converse and Coach. Looking back, what operational or philosophical shift most enabled that transition?
Steven Bethell: I want to issue the wording of the question, we are not advising those brands. We’re lucky to sit across the table from a partner who wants to work together to find a solution. We learn just as much from the partner as they do from us. A tone of humility that is missing in this world. To thy own self be true - love of authenticity. 

I’d like to reframe the idea that we “advise” those brands. We don’t see ourselves as consultants delivering answers from the outside. We’re fortunate to sit across the table from partners- like Vivienne Westwood, Converse, and Coach -who genuinely want to work together to find solutions. Those relationships are collaborative,, and we learn just as much from them as they do from us.

Therefore, the most important shift that enabled our growth was a commitment to humility and authenticity. From the beginning, we’ve stayed true to who we are. In an industry that often rewards certainty and scale over truth, choosing humility, collaboration, transparency, and integrity has been our most powerful differentiator.

You’re in a unique position: operating wholesale, retail, design, remanufacturing and recycling under one umbrella. What have these overlapping capabilities revealed about the weakest links in today’s fashion supply chain?
Steven Bethell: Working across every part of the system has shown us a basic truth: the value of clothing is completely out of sync with the skill and labour behind it. Consumers have been conditioned to expect extremely low prices, even for work that requires real craftsmanship.

The most dangerous weakness is economic. In many cases, it’s cheaper to make something new than to collect, sort, and resell what already exists. That reality rewards overproduction and makes circularity hard to sustain.

At the same time, highly skilled roles—like pattern-makers and technicians—are not being paid for their expertise. When both materials and human skill are undervalued, the entire system breaks down.

As pressure mounts around sustainability claims, extended producer responsibility and overproduction, where do you see Bank & Vogue positioning itself in the next decade — as a recycler, a service provider to brands, or a system-level disruptor?
Steven Bethell: We’ve always focused on finding value where others don’t. We were doing this work long before it was labelled “sustainable” or “circular,” and that same curiosity continues to guide us. Going forward, we see ourselves partnering with brands that genuinely understand the problem and want to do the work, not just talk about it.

We don’t see our role as fitting neatly into a single category. We’re recyclers, manufacturers, and collaborators—and sometimes challengers of the system itself. We’re proud to have the first post-consumer material registered on the HIGG Index, and we see real momentum in expanding remanufacturing beyond garments into components and materials.

Over the next decade, our position will be defined less by a title and more by impact: building practical, scalable solutions that create real value from waste and push the industry toward a more honest and functional system.