I can buy/own a new widget for X dollars.
I can rent/give back a used widget for ≈X dollars.
Seems like a pretty clear consumer choice to me.
It doesn't seem to me that you'd be able to offer rental LEGO cheaply enough to make it worthwhile. The inevitable logistical expenses involved in transporting/tracking/maintaining your product (rental brick) would drive up your customers' costs (or cause you to lose money). If the cost for renting vs. buying is negligible, there'd be no point in renting.Apparently, though
, there are places out there that rent toys. Possibly even one that specializes in LEGO (Brickrental). I can see some parents being into the notion of a Netflix style circulating toy rental operation.
Victor Epand wrote:...it is not necessary to invest money in a variety of toys that your child will out grow or may become bored with in a short period of time. This makes renting toys a good alternative for many parents. This idea of renting toys is good for parents who feel like they are wasting money on buying toys that they don't need to keep. They may also feel that they don't want to clutter their house with things they don't need.
The hassle of keeping kids' rooms clean and finding ways to get rid of old, unused toys is a headache that some folks might actually pay to avoid, but renting is still a financial investment. One could argue that renting toys is still a waste of money without the benfit (or hassle, depending on your perspective) of ownership.
To make a profitable business of it you'd probably have to have a pretty big operation and I just don't know that there is demand enough to keep it afloat.