Electronics leasing

Electronics leasing is an emerging business model in which consumer electronics such as phones or games consoles are leased to consumers for extended periods, rather than sold either by direct purchase or by finance. Unlike typical purchase methods, it is never expected that the consumer comes into ownership of the device, and can be considered a type of subscription. This model allows for lower monthly payments, but typically results in higher total costs due to the loss of the item's resale value.

In a typical electronics leasing arrangement:

1. The consumer applies for a leasing agreement, which may involve a credit check depending on the provider.
2. Monthly payments are made for the use of the device over a defined term, or on an ongoing basis.
3. The device remains the property of the leasing company throughout the agreement.
4. At the end of the term, the consumer may return the device, continue paying for continued use, or in some cases negotiate a purchase of the leased device.

Electronics leasing is distinct from rent-to-own arrangements, in which ownership of the product is the intended eventual outcome, and from traditional financing, where the consumer acquires ownership upon completion of payments.^[1]

Proponents of the model argue that it provides flexibility, reduces the upfront financial barrier to accessing high-end technology, and promotes device refurbishment and reuse as part of a circular economy.^[2] Critics contend that the model often results in significantly higher total costs compared to outright purchase or traditional financing, particularly when consumers remain subscribed over extended periods.

Deceptively high total costs to the consumer, compounded by a lack of device ownership (and therefore no resale value) is the primary concern with electronics leasing arrangements. In the case of NZXT's PC rental scheme, renting a low-spec PC could, over 5 years, accrue a total cost of around 5 times the value of the PC, without conferring any ownership of the PC to the customer. Gamers Nexus noted in its analysis of this scheme that the value proposition was so poor that it would be more economical for a customer to take out a high-interest payday loan to fund the purchase of a gaming PC, rather than obtain their PC via the NZXT Flex program.^[3]

The practice is closely linked in nature to Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) schemes, where the total cost of an item is obscured through seemingly low monthly payments. Consumer advocates have argued that when accompanied by 'aspirational' advertising, particularly through influencers, that pressures people to spend beyond their means, such practices can result in excessive spending and subsequent debt problems for customers.^[4][5] The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has raised concerns regarding debt accumulation from such schemes, finding in 2025 that the majority of BNPL users held subprime or deep subprime credit scores, and that 63% of borrowers had multiple simultaneous loans at some point during the year.^[6]

Other anti-consumer features of electronics leasing schemes can include: frequently changing terms, hidden fees, and contracts which are difficult or impossible to cancel. Some schemes have also been criticised for allegedly swapping advertised components for inferior alternatives, or for using influencer advertising that misrepresents the nature of the arrangement as ownership rather than rental.^[7]

Leasing arrangements are often marketed to, or disproportionately used by, financially vulnerable consumers who may not be able to afford upfront purchases or qualify for traditional credit. Many electronics leasing schemes do not report payment history to credit bureaus, meaning that consumers do not benefit from on-time payments in terms of building credit history.^[8] Consumer advocates have also expressed concern about "loan stacking", whereby consumers take on multiple simultaneous leases or BNPL arrangements.^[9]

Main article: PlayStation Lease with Flex

Main article: NZXT Flex

In December 2024, technology review channel Gamers Nexus published an investigation into NZXT's Flex gaming PC rental program, describing it as a "predatory, evil rental computer scam".^[3] The report alleged that the program used bait-and-switch tactics regarding hardware specifications, that rental PCs were marketed under the same names as more powerful purchase versions despite having inferior components, and that the terms of service were "aggressive" and difficult to understand.^[10]

Gamers Nexus calculated that renting a $3,000 gaming PC through NZXT Flex over five years would result in total payments of approximately $15,504 — equivalent to a 103% interest rate — without the customer ever acquiring ownership of the PC.^[3] Following the publication of the investigation, NZXT CEO Johnny Hou released a statement acknowledging that the company had "messed up", and announced that influencer-led advertising for the Flex program would be pulled and that product naming would be changed to distinguish Flex rental PCs from standard prebuilt offerings.^[11] In August 2025, a class-action lawsuit was filed against NZXT and its rental partner Fragile, Inc. under the civil RICO statute, alleging consumer fraud.^[12]

Progressive Leasing is a major provider of both rent-to-own and electronics leasing payment plans in the United States.^[13] In April 2020, the company agreed to pay $175 million to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it had misled consumers about pricing. According to the FTC, consumers were frequently told that Progressive's payment plans were "same as cash" or "no interest", leading them to believe they would not be charged more than an item's sticker price. In practice, the FTC alleged that consumers frequently paid approximately twice the sticker price if they made all scheduled payments under the plans.^[13]

The FTC stated that the full cost of Progressive's payment plan was hidden behind a non-descript dropdown arrow labelled "Additional Lease Details", and that Progressive received more than 15,000 consumer complaints in a single 15-month period regarding confusion over the terms.^[14] Under the terms of the settlement, Progressive was required to clearly disclose the total cost to own a product when marketing its plans and to obtain consumers' express, informed consent before charging or billing them.^[13]

Some companies, such as the UK-based Raylo, have maintained a generally better reputation than others within the electronics leasing industry.^[15] While still being criticized for their value, the company's more reasonable pricing, stable terms, and use of soft credit checks (which do not impact the customer's credit file) have been noted as distinguishing features.^[16][17]

• Buy Now, Pay Later