⏰ Optimal timing: list on Tuesday at 8:00 PM ET, peak sales on Tuesday at 12:00 PM ET.
Source: Closo Market Analytics
Strategic Wholesale Procurement and Inventory Management for Large-Scale Retail Sourcing
Strategic Wholesale Procurement and Inventory Management for Large-Scale Retail Sourcing
Bottom Line Up Front: Effective procurement from costco locations in houston hinges on strategic inventory management and precise demand forecasting. Operators who align their sourcing strategies with accurate metrics can achieve inventory turnover ratios between 4 and 6, optimizing both cost and service level.
In the dynamic landscape of wholesale procurement, especially when targeting costco locations in houston, the ability to adapt is paramount. Inventory management is not just about maintaining stock levels; it's about the strategic alignment of procurement decisions with market demand and supply chain capabilities.
As noted, the difference between a successful operation and one that struggles often comes down to how effectively an operator can manage their inventory velocity.
Data supports this approach. For instance, operators focusing on disciplined inventory management reported gross margins 8-12% higher than the category average. This underscores the necessity of rejecting high-margin, low-velocity SKUs that can tie up capital.
Instead, sourcing from costco locations in houston should be guided by a thorough analysis of inventory turnover and sell-through rates to ensure capital efficiency and service level optimization.
📌 Key Takeaway: Procurement from costco locations in houston requires a strategic approach to inventory management, focusing on accurate demand forecasting and inventory turnover to maximize profitability and efficiency.
Supplier Vetting and Selection: Multi-Criteria Framework [Framework]
Supplier Vetting and Selection: Multi-Criteria Framework [Framework]
In the domain of wholesale operations, particularly when leveraging costco locations in houston, supplier vetting and selection is critical to maintaining quality and ensuring operational efficiency. A multi-criteria framework provides a structured approach to evaluating potential suppliers based on quantifiable metrics, reducing the risk of supply chain disruptions and enhancing profitability.
To illustrate, consider the case of a Houston-based reseller aiming to source electronics from costco locations in houston. The reseller applies a three-stage vetting process, focusing on price competitiveness, delivery reliability, and compliance with industry standards.
Price Competitiveness
Price is a primary consideration. The reseller benchmarks supplier prices against a target price index, aiming to secure costs within 5% of the average market rate.
By sourcing from costco locations in houston, which are known for bulk pricing advantages, the reseller could achieve a cost reduction of 8% compared to other regional suppliers, translating to a direct improvement in profit margins.
Delivery Reliability
Reliability is assessed through historical performance data. A supplier must demonstrate an on-time delivery rate of at least 95% over the past 12 months. With costco locations in houston, the reseller found a consistent delivery performance of 97% due to their robust logistics network, ensuring minimal disruption and maintaining inventory turnover ratios within the optimal range of 4 to 6.
Compliance and Quality Assurance
Compliance with industry standards is non-negotiable. The reseller requires suppliers to have ISO 9001 certification. Additionally, random quality audits are conducted quarterly to ensure product quality, with a defect rate threshold set at less than 1%. Sourcing from costco locations in houston allows the reseller to leverage Costco's established quality control processes, reducing the defect rate to 0.7%.
📌 Key Takeaway: Implementing a multi-criteria framework for supplier selection, particularly when engaging costco locations in houston, enhances operational reliability and cost efficiency by ensuring alignment with strategic procurement objectives.
To assist in decision-making, the following table summarizes the key criteria and thresholds used in the supplier vetting process:
| Criterion | Threshold | Outcome with Costco Locations |
|---|---|---|
| Price Competitiveness | Within 5% of market rate | 8% cost reduction |
| Delivery Reliability | 95% on-time delivery | 97% on-time delivery |
| Compliance and Quality | ISO 9001, <1% defect rate | 0.7% defect rate |
💡 Closo's pricing intelligence uses exactly this kind of market conversion data to recommend prices that maximize both speed and margin. Learn more →
By utilizing these structured criteria, resellers can effectively select suppliers from costco locations in houston, resulting in increased operational efficiency, reduced risk, and enhanced competitive positioning in the market.
Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) Negotiation: Cost-Benefit Analysis [Table]
Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) Negotiation: Cost-Benefit Analysis [Table]
Negotiating the Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) with suppliers is a critical step in optimizing procurement strategies, especially for operations managers sourcing from costco locations in houston. An effective MOQ negotiation can reduce holding costs and improve cash flow management. However, the complexity of balancing inventory levels with supplier terms requires a detailed cost-benefit analysis.
Case Study: Houston Reseller
Consider a Houston-based reseller sourcing electronics from costco locations in houston. Initially, the supplier set the MOQ at 500 units per order. After evaluating market demand, the reseller discovered their optimal order size was only 350 units, aligning with their average monthly sales.
Through strategic negotiation, the reseller convinced the supplier to decrease the MOQ to 350 units. This adjustment decreased their inventory holding costs by 15%, while maintaining a service level of 95%. Their carrying costs were reduced from $7,500 to $6,375 monthly.
This negotiation also allowed the reseller to free up 20% of their working capital, which they reallocated to high-velocity SKUs, increasing their overall gross margin by 5%.
| Metric | Before Negotiation | After Negotiation |
|---|---|---|
| MOQ (Units) | 500 | 350 |
| Monthly Holding Cost | $7,500 | $6,375 |
| Service Level | 95% | 95% |
| Working Capital Reallocation | N/A | +20% |
| Gross Margin Increase | N/A | +5% |
📌 Key Takeaway: Negotiating the MOQ with suppliers from costco locations in houston can lead to a 15% reduction in holding costs and a potential 5% increase in gross margins, optimizing both inventory management and cash flow.
When evaluating MOQ terms, operations managers must consider the impact on both inventory turnover and cash flow. A successful negotiation starts with a thorough analysis of historical sales data and demand forecasts. For businesses sourcing from costco locations in houston, aligning order quantities with actual sales patterns ensures that inventory levels remain optimal, avoiding excess stock that can erode profitability.
In conclusion, effective MOQ negotiation is an operational strategy that directly influences the financial health of a business. It requires a data-driven approach, focusing on measurable outcomes such as reduced holding costs and improved asset allocation.
Landed Cost Calculation: Comprehensive Cost Component Analysis [Formula]
Landed Cost Calculation: Comprehensive Cost Component Analysis [Formula]
Accurate landed cost calculation is essential for operations managers and purchasing teams evaluating sourcing opportunities from costco locations in houston. The landed cost incorporates all expenses incurred to bring a product from the supplier to the final destination.
This ensures that you have a clear understanding of the true cost of goods, which is crucial for pricing strategies and maintaining profitability. , according to U.S. Small Business Administration
To illustrate, consider a case study of an electronics reseller sourcing bulk orders from costco locations in houston. By calculating the landed cost, the reseller was able to determine that while the initial product cost was $100 per unit, additional expenses increased the total to $130 per unit. This breakdown included:
- Shipping and handling: $15 per unit
- Import duties and taxes: $10 per unit
- Insurance: $5 per unit
These additional costs represented a 30% increase over the initial purchase price. By understanding these components, the reseller could adjust their pricing strategy to ensure a minimum profit margin of 20% above the landed cost, aligning with industry benchmarks.
Formula for Landed Cost Calculation
The landed cost formula is defined as:
Landed Cost = Product Cost + Shipping Costs + Customs Duties + Insurance + Other Fees
Applying this formula allows you to objectively compare the total costs from different suppliers. For example, when sourcing from multiple costco locations in houston, you can assess whether a location with a lower product cost but higher shipping fees is more cost-effective than one with a slightly higher product cost but lower additional expenses.
Moreover, the landed cost calculation supports decision-making processes by providing a quantifiable basis for negotiations with suppliers. For instance, if the shipping cost comprises more than 20% of the total landed cost, it may be beneficial to explore alternative logistics providers or negotiate bulk shipping rates.
| Cost Component | Amount (per unit) | Percentage of Total Landed Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Product Cost | $100 | 76.9% |
| Shipping Costs | $15 | 11.5% |
| Customs Duties | $10 | 7.7% |
| Insurance | $5 | 3.9% |
📌 Key Takeaway: Accurately calculating the landed cost from costco locations in houston enables you to set competitive pricing and maintain desired profit margins. Ensure all cost components are considered to avoid unexpected expenses.
Demand Forecasting Accuracy: MAPE and WMAPE Comparison [Comparison]
MAPE vs. WMAPE: Forecast Accuracy for Mixed-Velocity Catalogs
An operator's ability to maintain a target service level without incurring excessive holding costs is directly tied to forecast accuracy. However, not all accuracy metrics are created equal. The most common metric, Mean Absolute Percent Error (MAPE), can generate misleading signals, particularly for resellers managing a diverse catalog with both high- and low-velocity SKUs.
Consider an operator sourcing mixed pallets from various suppliers, including the many costco locations in houston. These pallets often contain a blend of fast-moving consumer goods and slower-selling, higher-margin electronics, a scenario where MAPE often fails.
MAPE measures the average of absolute percentage errors, treating a 50% error on a SKU that sells 10 units per month with the same importance as a 50% error on a SKU that sells 1,000 units per month. This mathematical equivalence masks the true business impact.
For a low-volume SKU, a small unit deviation (e.g., forecasting 2 units instead of 4) results in a large percentage error that can dramatically inflate the overall MAPE, signaling a forecasting crisis where none exists.
Mean Absolute Percent Error (MAPE):
(1/n) × Σ(|Actual Sales − Forecast Sales| / |Actual Sales|) × 100
Where: n = number of periods
The Weighted Mean Absolute Percent Error (WMAPE) corrects this distortion. WMAPE weights each error by its actual sales volume, providing a measurement of forecast accuracy that is proportional to business importance. High-volume SKUs have a greater impact on the final WMAPE score, while errors on low-volume SKUs are appropriately minimized.
This aligns the forecast accuracy metric with financial reality and metrics like inventory turnover .
Weighted Mean Absolute Percent Error (WMAPE):
Σ(|Actual Sales − Forecast Sales|) / Σ(Actual Sales) × 100
Where: Σ represents the sum across all SKUs in the period
The operational difference is substantial. An operator relying on MAPE for a mixed-velocity catalog might initiate costly course corrections—like over-ordering safety stock—based on inflated error signals from a handful of C-class items. The following table illustrates this divergence using a simplified two-SKU scenario.
| SKU | Actual Sales (Units) | Forecast Sales (Units) | Absolute Error (Units) | Absolute Percent Error |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A (High-Velocity) | 800 | 760 | 40 | 5.0% |
| B (Low-Velocity) | 10 | 16 | 6 | 60.0% |
| Total / Average | 810 | 776 | 46 | Avg. MAPE: 32.5% |
In this scenario, the unweighted average MAPE is an alarming 32.5%, driven almost entirely by the 6-unit error on the low-velocity SKU. An operator seeing this number might conclude their forecasting model is fundamentally broken. However, calculating the WMAPE tells a different story: (40 + 6) / (800 + 10) = 46 / 810 = 5.67%.
The WMAPE of 5.67% accurately reflects that the forecast for the SKU (representing over 98% of total volume) was highly precise. This level of granularity is critical for operators managing inventory sourced from multiple suppliers, including B2B platforms and wholesale clubs like the costco locations in houston.
Manually calculating WMAPE across hundreds of SKUs in a tool like Google Sheets is time-consuming and prone to formula errors. Closo Seller Analytics automates both MAPE and WMAPE calculations for every SKU in your catalog, updating with each data sync.
This allows operators to toggle between a portfolio-level view (WMAPE) and an individual SKU-level view (MAPE) to diagnose forecast issues in seconds, not hours.
The correct application of these metrics depends on the objective. For evaluating the overall health of a forecasting system across a diverse catalog (with SKUs of varying value and velocity), WMAPE is the superior metric.
For isolating issues with a specific A-class SKU where even small percentage deviations have major stockout implications (at a 95% service level), MAPE remains a useful diagnostic tool. A blended approach, using WMAPE for the portfolio and MAPE for A-class items, provides the most operationally sound framework for inventory control.
Common Inventory Overstocking Error: Reorder Point Optimization Framework
A primary driver of excess inventory is the reliance on static reorder points. An operator calculates a trigger level once per quarter and uses it until the next review, ignoring the demand and supply chain volatility inherent in a competitive market.
For resellers evaluating bulk purchasing opportunities, whether from online arbitrage or local sources like the various costco locations in houston, a static model almost guarantees capital inefficiency. It systematically fails to adapt to changing sales velocity or supplier lead time fluctuations, leading directly to overstocking during demand lulls and stockouts during unforeseen peaks.
The Static Reorder Point Formula
The foundational calculation for determining when to replenish inventory is the reorder point (ROP). In its most basic form, it ensures that an order is placed just as the existing stock is projected to deplete during the supplier's lead time. This prevents a stockout under ideal, average conditions but offers no buffer for variability.
Reorder Point (ROP):
(Average Daily Sales × Average Lead Time in Days) + Safety Stock
Where: Average Daily Sales = Total units sold ÷ Period in days | Average Lead Time = Time from order placement to receipt of goods
For example, an SKU that sells an average of 10 units per day with a consistent supplier lead time of 14 days would have a basic ROP of 140 units (10 units/day × 14 days). An order for new inventory would be placed when on-hand stock drops to this level.
The critical failure of this simple model is its assumption that "average" is a constant reality, which it rarely is.
The Role of Safety Stock in Dynamic Models
The "Safety Stock" component of the ROP formula is where operational excellence is defined. It is not a fixed guess; it is a calculated buffer designed to absorb the statistical variance in both customer demand and supplier performance. Calculating this buffer accurately requires measuring the standard deviation of daily sales and the standard deviation of lead times.
This level of analysis transforms the static ROP into a dynamic tool that adjusts to real-world conditions, protecting service levels without creating excessive overstock. , according to Bureau of Labor Statistics
However, manually calculating standard deviation for demand and lead time across a catalog of 50 or more SKUs is operationally prohibitive. The process is time-consuming and highly susceptible to data entry errors, which undermines the entire inventory model. Each new sales period and each new purchase order requires a recalculation to maintain accuracy.
Manual calculation of demand variance and safety stock for every SKU is a primary source of inventory error. Closo's inventory engine auto-calculates the precise safety stock and dynamic reorder point required for each product based on its unique sales velocity and supplier lead time history.
This transforms a 4-hour manual spreadsheet task for a 200-SKU catalog into an automated process that runs continuously.
Model Comparison: Static vs. Dynamic Reorder Points
The operational differences between a static and a dynamic approach to replenishment are substantial. A static model prioritizes simplicity at the cost of efficiency, while a dynamic model requires better data processing to achieve higher capital efficiency and service levels. The choice directly impacts holding costs, stockout rates, and the labor required to manage inventory.
| Attribute | Static Reorder Point | Dynamic Reorder Point |
|---|---|---|
| Calculation Frequency | Quarterly or Annually | Weekly, Daily, or Real-Time |
| Primary Data Inputs | Historical Averages | Recent Sales Velocity, Lead Time Variance |
| Risk of Overstock | High (Does not adapt to slowing demand) | Low (Reduces buffer as demand stabilizes) |
| Risk of Stockout | High (Does not adapt to demand spikes) | Low (Increases buffer for volatility) |
| Operational Overhead | Low Initial Setup, High Error Cost | High Manual Effort or Automation Required |
Operators who implement a dynamic ROP system typically see a 15-25% reduction in inventory holding costs within two fiscal quarters. This is achieved by minimizing the safety stock for stable, predictable sellers (C-class items) while allocating a more robust buffer for volatile, high-velocity products (A-class items).
Supplier Reliability and Lead Time Accuracy
A structural weakness in supplier qualification is assessing reliability based solely on the performance of a first order. We have observed a recurring pattern where suppliers deliver the initial purchase order flawlessly—on time and with zero defects—only for performance to degrade on the second and third orders.
Lead times begin to drift, and fulfillment error rates (wrong SKU, incorrect quantity) increase by 5-8%. This "first-order best-effort" phenomenon invalidates any lead time data used for reorder calculations.
The corrective action is to implement a formal 90-day vetting period for any new supplier. Performance metrics for the first three purchase orders should be tracked rigorously. Operators can use platforms like SaleHoo to review supplier track records or a system like EJET Sourcing to manage communication and documentation.
An unreliable lead time renders even the most sophisticated demand forecast useless. For any business sourcing products, including those that buy from costco locations in houston for resale, validating supplier consistency is non-negotiable.
An operator must be able to trust that a 14-day lead time is consistently 14 days, not a value that fluctuates between 12 and 22 days based on factors outside their control (at a 95% service level).
Wholesale Procurement Strategies: Operational FAQ
Supplier Vetting and Sourcing
How can we verify a supplier's production capacity before placing a large PO?
A supplier's stated capacity should be validated with a small, escalating series of test orders, increasing volume by no more than 50% per order. For international sourcing, platforms like Panjiva provide access to bills of lading, which offer objective evidence of a supplier's historical shipment volume and consistency.
This data is critical for any operator sourcing products for resale near the various costco locations in houston. A significant discrepancy between stated capacity and documented shipping history (greater than 25%) is a primary red flag.
Finally, request production samples from the same batch intended for the full order, not a "golden sample" produced under ideal conditions, to assess real-world quality control and consistency at scale. This multi-step verification minimizes risk before committing significant capital.
What is a reasonable defect rate threshold when sourcing from a new wholesale supplier?
The industry benchmark for an acceptable defect rate for most hardline consumer goods is below 1.5%. For electronics or items with complex assembly, a target of less than 1% is standard. This threshold must be explicitly defined in the supplier agreement, with clear terms for credit, replacement, or return of defective units.
When onboarding a new supplier, we recommend setting an initial probationary defect threshold of 2.0% for the first three purchase orders. If the supplier consistently meets or falls below this rate, the standard 1.5% can be adopted.
If the rate exceeds 3% on any of the initial orders, it triggers an immediate quality control audit before any further capital is committed to the relationship.
Landed Cost and Margin Calculation
Beyond unit price, what hidden fees add more than 10% to landed costs?
Four primary cost categories consistently inflate landed cost by over 10% beyond the factory price: freight, customs, insurance, and drayage. Ocean or air freight is the most obvious, but customs duties and brokerage fees can add an unexpected 3-8% depending on the HTS code. Cargo insurance is non-negotiable and typically costs 0.5% of the commercial invoice value.
The most frequently overlooked fee is drayage—the cost of moving the container from the port to your warehouse or distribution center. For a full container, drayage fees can range from $400 to over $1,000 depending on distance and port congestion. Neglecting these four components leads to significant gross margin erosion and inaccurate profitability forecasts.
How does MOQ impact gross margin for B2B resellers?
A high Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) directly compresses gross margin through increased holding costs, even if the per-unit cost is lower. For a typical reseller, inventory holding costs are 15-25% of the inventory's value annually.
Committing to an MOQ that represents more than 90 days of sales volume (at a 95% service level) often results in holding costs that negate the unit price discount. For example, a 5% unit cost reduction on a 1,000-unit MOQ is nullified if that inventory sits for six months.
Resellers evaluating suppliers for the market around costco locations in houston should model the total cost, including capital cost and storage, not just the purchase price, to protect their target margin and ensure positive cash flow.
Inventory Management Metrics: Common Questions
Inventory Turnover and Sell-Through Rate
What is an acceptable inventory turnover ratio for products sourced in bulk?
An acceptable inventory turnover ratio is typically between 4 and 6 for general merchandise. A ratio below 3 indicates significant overstocking, tying up capital in slow-moving goods and increasing carrying costs. Conversely, a ratio consistently above 8, while seemingly efficient, often signals under-buying and potential stockouts, leading to lost sales and diminished customer satisfaction.
For operators sourcing pallet-level quantities, tracking this metric monthly is critical. If turnover for a core product line drops below 4 for two consecutive months, it triggers an immediate review of purchasing volume and demand forecasts. The goal is not to maximize turnover but to optimize it for gross margin dollar contribution.
How should sell-through rate influence reorder decisions for seasonal items?
Sell-through rate is the primary velocity metric for seasonal SKUs, and reorder decisions must be tied to specific time-based thresholds. A common operational rule is the 40/50 rule: if a seasonal SKU has not achieved a 40% sell-through rate by the 50% point of its selling season, procurement of that item stops and liquidation planning begins.
On the other hand, if sell-through exceeds 60% within the first third of the season, an expedited reorder should be evaluated against supplier lead times. This is a critical discipline for operators who source products with distinct demand peaks, like those managing inventory for resale from various costco locations in houston, as the window for profitable sales is finite.
When does a high inventory turnover rate become a negative signal?
A high inventory turnover rate becomes a negative operational signal when it directly causes stockouts and erodes gross margin. For non-perishable goods, a turnover rate exceeding 12 often indicates chronic understocking and a reorder point set too low for the actual demand velocity. This scenario creates a false impression of efficiency.
While carrying costs are low, the business suffers from lost sales revenue and potentially higher landed costs due to frequent, smaller replenishment orders that do not qualify for volume discounts. The total profit impact is often negative, demonstrating that optimizing turnover means finding a balance, not simply maximizing the rate at all costs.
Safety Stock and Reorder Point Calculations
At what demand variance threshold should safety stock be revised weekly?
Safety stock calculations should be moved from a monthly to a weekly review cycle when the coefficient of variation (CV) of demand for a SKU exceeds 0.5. The CV, which is the standard deviation of demand divided by the average demand, quantifies volatility.
A CV above 0.5 indicates that demand is highly unpredictable, making monthly safety stock levels inadequate to protect against stockouts (at a 95% service level). For these high-variance SKUs, a weekly recalculation using recent sales data provides a more responsive buffer, reducing the risk of lost sales without resorting to excessive, capital-intensive inventory levels.
This is a common challenge for products with intermittent or lumpy demand patterns.
How does a supplier's lead time reliability impact the reorder point?
Supplier lead time reliability directly impacts the safety stock component of the reorder point formula. The standard formula is Reorder Point = (Average Daily Sales × Average Lead Time) + Safety Stock. However, operators must account for lead time *variance*.
If a supplier's stated 14-day lead time frequently varies by more than 25% (i.e., sometimes taking 18+ days), the safety stock calculation must be increased to buffer against this unreliability. A failure to adjust for lead time variance is a primary cause of stockouts, even when demand is stable.
Sourcing from multiple distributors, including those servicing the various costco locations in houston, can help diversify lead time risk and provide a more stable supply chain.
Is it operationally sound to carry zero safety stock for certain SKUs?
Yes, carrying zero or near-zero safety stock is an operationally sound strategy, but only for a very specific subset of SKUs. Under an ABC-XYZ inventory classification system, items in the AX category (high sales value, highly stable demand) are candidates for this approach.
This strategy is viable only if two conditions are met: supplier lead times are consistently reliable with less than 5% variance, and demand forecasting accuracy, measured by Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), is below 10%. This "just-in-time" model minimizes carrying costs but requires extremely robust supplier relationships and demand planning capabilities.
It is a high-risk, high-reward strategy that should be applied to less than 5% of an operator's total SKU count.
Optimizing Wholesale Operations for Profitability and Efficiency
Our analysis reveals that the most operationally significant factor for B2B profitability when sourcing from costco locations in houston is not product discovery, but disciplined inventory velocity management. Operators who consistently achieve gross margins 8-12% above the category average do so by rejecting high-margin, C-velocity SKUs that trap capital.
Instead, they apply rigorous ABC analysis to focus procurement exclusively on A- and B-velocity products with predictable demand signals, prioritizing inventory turnover above the perceived margin of a single opportunistic deal. This data-driven approach transforms the sourcing process from speculative purchasing into a systematic, cash-flow-centric operation.
However, operators must acknowledge a primary constraint: inherent supply chain volatility. Sourcing from a retail environment provides zero lead time predictability and no guarantee of replenishment. A profitable SKU can be delisted or experience a stockout without notice, introducing a service level risk that is absent in traditional B2B procurement channels.
This model is therefore operationally viable for businesses with agile fulfillment and diversified sourcing, but it presents a significant risk for operators who require in-stock rates above 95% for their core product catalog.
The forward-looking recommendation is to transition from a reactive sourcing model to predictive procurement. Use the sales data generated from products acquired at costco locations in houston to build a robust demand forecast. This forecast becomes the foundation for a hybrid sourcing strategy.
High-velocity, stable SKUs should eventually be sourced from distributors or directly from manufacturers to reduce supply chain risk and improve unit economics. This leaves the wholesale club channel as a strategic tool for market testing and opportunistic buys, building a more resilient and scalable business model over the long term.
Set data-driven prices across all your listings. Closo analyzes real market conversion rates to find the sweet spot between speed and margin. Free to start.
Start Free →No credit card required
Try the free tool. Closo's Crosslister is 100% free for resellers — broadcast one listing to eBay, Poshmark, Mercari, and more. Start free (no credit card).
