> On the other end, I’m also surprised by the “one-year” thing: most of my clothes are more than five-year-old and they are fine. Because these are the minorit

> On the other end, I’m also surprised by the “one-year” thing: most of my clothes are more than five-year-old and they are fine. Because these are the minority of clothes despite being used by the majority of people in the example I gave, changing the timeframe doesn't really change the average. Changing the example to use a 5 year timeframe, for instance, only changes the average to 4.92. > not 20% of the population Right, and it also ought to be less than 80% that buys clothes no more often than once per year or per 5 years. Both extremes are exaggerated to not have to insert more tiers than needed into the example.