6 ms·

Clever, but seems ethically questionable. Why do the shippers care about breaking a TV? Presumably there are repercussions, such as an insurance plan. So why d

Clever, but seems ethically questionable. Why do the shippers care about breaking a TV? Presumably there are repercussions, such as an insurance plan. So why don't those repercussions just apply to bicycles? If they're fined for enough bikes being broken, they should probably learn that they need be more careful than they thought, right? EDIT: Toning down my choice of words.

satysin 10y ago
I don't think shippers are just about breaking a TV. I believe it comes down to the, perhaps, subconsciousness of "TV = fragile" whereas a box with a bike, something we expect to be pretty solid, doesn't seem like it would be damaged quite so easily.
- orblivion 10y ago
  Yeah, I get that. But it turns out that they're wrong. Are you suggesting that shippers try not to break things purely out of courtesy? Maybe, but I think incentives aren't aligned such that that can go a long way. With no other feedback, they want to get their job done quickly so that they can move on to the next, and get paid for moving more things. If they're doing this purely out of courtesy, then yes, I could understand that being wrong about the fragility of bicycles could lead to such a disparity of broken things, since they pay no consequences for being wrong. However if there is a simple insurance policy, which I can only imagine any business would have with a shipping company, they are paying consequences for it, and they would have reason to learn, and try to treat bicycles a little more like televisions. Apparently this isn't happening, but I don't understand why. EDIT: I would add that the only explanation I have is that bicycles are less expensive than televisions. This implies that putting a television on the box leads the shipping company to believe that they have to put more time (aka money) into care for the box than they actually have to. This is what lead to my comment about fraud.
  - douche 10y ago
    Shippers huck stuff around with little regard for the contents, particularly if they aren't blazoned all over with fragile/biohazard stickers. Fedex and UPS tend to be just about one-half step above the folks handling baggage at the airport, and how many times have you seen those people wing around suit-cases like they were throwing the hammer in the Olympics, and seeing just how far back they can toss from and still hit the conveyor belt? If I had a nickel for every time I've had an Amazon purchase refunded or replaced because the delivery person smashed it to hell, or jammed it into a mailbox that was clearly too small, or left it out in the rain unwrapped, or even tossed it in the snowbank during a storm that dumped a foot and a half of snow and disappeared it until spring... I could probably buy a candy bar.
    - civilian 10y ago
      A solid example, with biting British commentary to boot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbNq2xdvU_g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbNq2xdvU_g
      - Symbiote 10y ago
        I'm reasonably sure that's a New Zealand accent. (I'm British, so I know it's not British.)
        slyall 10y ago
        The news stories identify the commentator as Australian
    - orblivion 10y ago
      So you're saying that Amazon doesn't honor your insurance policy? I guess if that's generally true for shipping companies, and there's not much competition, that explains it. (in which case, tricking them into being more careful seems more ethically appropriate).
      - civilian 10y ago
        He said that they do honor it: > ... If I had a nickel for every time I've had an Amazon purchase refunded or replaced because ...
  - rrdharan 10y ago
    Bikes cost as much or more than televisions these days almost across the board. Obviously the cheapest bikes cost less than the most expensive televisions, but a decent 50" flat panel is around 600$ USD now and an entry level road bike is maybe 750-800$?
    - JWLong 10y ago
      The bikes that the average truck-loader comes in contact with cost $120.
      - legodt 10y ago
        Doubtful. The largest mail order bike companies are rather upscale. Look at Canyon, Planet X, Rose, Bikes direct, and others for a sampling of the most popular mail deliver bike companies. These aren't fly-by-night sketchy retailers either, Canyon bikes are ridden by many pro teams despite not having a storefront presence.
        JWLong 10y ago
        Absolutely, but I was speaking to the experience of the loaders. Edit: Sorry, I should have made that clearer in my previous comment.
        mikeash 10y ago
        You mean the fully assembled ones they ride or see others riding, right? It took me a bit to figure out you meant that and not the ones in the boxes they handle. That might be the confusion.
        jononor 10y ago
        Majority of bikes we sold at our shop cost around 200-300 USD for us to purchase (retail price would be around 2x that). This was in expensive Norway, and there were plenty of generic sports stores that sold bikes at down to 1/2 of what we did. So for to-retailer price in US, that 120 USD does not seem too crazy. Don't forget that "good bikes" are actually very rare, especially if counted in volume (not price).
  - recursive 10y ago
    My bike is worth probably 10x my TV. I'm not saying it's representative, but it's certainly not unusual for bikes to cost as much as or more than TVs.
GirlsCanCode 10y ago
I think people actively dislike bicyclists.
civilian 10y ago
Organizations are bad at communication. How do you disseminate that the information that "look guys, bicycles are fragile too" to ten of thousands of logistics workers? This is an awesome hack, and it's a great way to fix behavior without having to collide with bureaucracy. It's not ethically fraudulent because the shipper shouldn't be breaking anything. And I'm sure they do pay fees for what they break, and the shipping company is trying to do what it can fix that, but putting a picture of a TV on the box is still more effective than whatever the shipping company is trying. I'm scared to think what else you would view as ethical fraud, if pictures-on-boxes qualifies. I tell baristas that I want "room for cream" in my Americano. But I never put cream in it--- I just want less volume so that when I walk I won't spill hot coffee on my hand. #EthicalFraud
- orblivion 10y ago
  Well I didn't say it was a huge deal necessarily. Just not totally clean. Perhaps fraud was a bad choice of words and I changed it. And I agree it's a very interesting hack. I don't necessarily agree that a shipper shouldn't be breaking anything. I think that they should meet whatever the agreement was. If the agreement is "we'll try super hard not to break stuff" and they're clearly not holding up their side of the bargain when it comes to bikes, then sure, changing the picture is fair game. If the agreement is "we'll pay for anything that breaks", then they should determine how careful they want to be, since they're footing the bill for it. Making that determination for them by changing the picture, I think is not totally honest, unless they also have a history of not paying up.
  - c22 10y ago
    I think it's ethically questionable to carelessly break things people are waiting for just because the thing is perceived to have low monetary value. The shipping company may have to eat the dollar cost of the item, but the cost to the sender and receiver in time and hassle is non-negligible.
    - 21 10y ago
      I don't think it's about the monetary value. Your typical bike is more expensive than your typical TV (but your average shipping guy might think all bikes cost like the super-market ones) I think it's just the perception that bikes are "rough" and that they can take a beating. Which is true, but only when fully assembled and driven on road/terrain, not when you bang at it from the side.
TuringNYC 10y ago
Your concern can be addressed by printing a photo of a TV with a bicycle show on TV. Then, the recipient will also not be confused.

satysin 10y ago

I don't think shippers are just about breaking a TV. I believe it comes down to the, perhaps, subconsciousness of "TV = fragile" whereas a box with a bike, something we expect to be pretty solid, doesn't seem like it would be damaged quite so easily.

orblivion 10y ago
Yeah, I get that. But it turns out that they're wrong. Are you suggesting that shippers try not to break things purely out of courtesy? Maybe, but I think incentives aren't aligned such that that can go a long way. With no other feedback, they want to get their job done quickly so that they can move on to the next, and get paid for moving more things. If they're doing this purely out of courtesy, then yes, I could understand that being wrong about the fragility of bicycles could lead to such a disparity of broken things, since they pay no consequences for being wrong. However if there is a simple insurance policy, which I can only imagine any business would have with a shipping company, they are paying consequences for it, and they would have reason to learn, and try to treat bicycles a little more like televisions. Apparently this isn't happening, but I don't understand why. EDIT: I would add that the only explanation I have is that bicycles are less expensive than televisions. This implies that putting a television on the box leads the shipping company to believe that they have to put more time (aka money) into care for the box than they actually have to. This is what lead to my comment about fraud.
- douche 10y ago
  Shippers huck stuff around with little regard for the contents, particularly if they aren't blazoned all over with fragile/biohazard stickers. Fedex and UPS tend to be just about one-half step above the folks handling baggage at the airport, and how many times have you seen those people wing around suit-cases like they were throwing the hammer in the Olympics, and seeing just how far back they can toss from and still hit the conveyor belt? If I had a nickel for every time I've had an Amazon purchase refunded or replaced because the delivery person smashed it to hell, or jammed it into a mailbox that was clearly too small, or left it out in the rain unwrapped, or even tossed it in the snowbank during a storm that dumped a foot and a half of snow and disappeared it until spring... I could probably buy a candy bar.
  - civilian 10y ago
    A solid example, with biting British commentary to boot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbNq2xdvU_g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbNq2xdvU_g
    - Symbiote 10y ago
      I'm reasonably sure that's a New Zealand accent. (I'm British, so I know it's not British.)
      - slyall 10y ago
        The news stories identify the commentator as Australian
  - orblivion 10y ago
    So you're saying that Amazon doesn't honor your insurance policy? I guess if that's generally true for shipping companies, and there's not much competition, that explains it. (in which case, tricking them into being more careful seems more ethically appropriate).
    - civilian 10y ago
      He said that they do honor it: > ... If I had a nickel for every time I've had an Amazon purchase refunded or replaced because ...
- rrdharan 10y ago
  Bikes cost as much or more than televisions these days almost across the board. Obviously the cheapest bikes cost less than the most expensive televisions, but a decent 50" flat panel is around 600$ USD now and an entry level road bike is maybe 750-800$?
  - JWLong 10y ago
    The bikes that the average truck-loader comes in contact with cost $120.
    - legodt 10y ago
      Doubtful. The largest mail order bike companies are rather upscale. Look at Canyon, Planet X, Rose, Bikes direct, and others for a sampling of the most popular mail deliver bike companies. These aren't fly-by-night sketchy retailers either, Canyon bikes are ridden by many pro teams despite not having a storefront presence.
      - JWLong 10y ago
        Absolutely, but I was speaking to the experience of the loaders. Edit: Sorry, I should have made that clearer in my previous comment.
        mikeash 10y ago
        You mean the fully assembled ones they ride or see others riding, right? It took me a bit to figure out you meant that and not the ones in the boxes they handle. That might be the confusion.
      - jononor 10y ago
        Majority of bikes we sold at our shop cost around 200-300 USD for us to purchase (retail price would be around 2x that). This was in expensive Norway, and there were plenty of generic sports stores that sold bikes at down to 1/2 of what we did. So for to-retailer price in US, that 120 USD does not seem too crazy. Don't forget that "good bikes" are actually very rare, especially if counted in volume (not price).
- recursive 10y ago
  My bike is worth probably 10x my TV. I'm not saying it's representative, but it's certainly not unusual for bikes to cost as much as or more than TVs.

GirlsCanCode 10y ago

I think people actively dislike bicyclists.

civilian 10y ago

Organizations are bad at communication. How do you disseminate that the information that "look guys, bicycles are fragile too" to ten of thousands of logistics workers? This is an awesome hack, and it's a great way to fix behavior without having to collide with bureaucracy. It's not ethically fraudulent because the shipper shouldn't be breaking anything. And I'm sure they do pay fees for what they break, and the shipping company is trying to do what it can fix that, but putting a picture of a TV on the box is still more effective than whatever the shipping company is trying. I'm scared to think what else you would view as ethical fraud, if pictures-on-boxes qualifies. I tell baristas that I want "room for cream" in my Americano. But I never put cream in it--- I just want less volume so that when I walk I won't spill hot coffee on my hand. #EthicalFraud

orblivion 10y ago
Well I didn't say it was a huge deal necessarily. Just not totally clean. Perhaps fraud was a bad choice of words and I changed it. And I agree it's a very interesting hack. I don't necessarily agree that a shipper shouldn't be breaking anything. I think that they should meet whatever the agreement was. If the agreement is "we'll try super hard not to break stuff" and they're clearly not holding up their side of the bargain when it comes to bikes, then sure, changing the picture is fair game. If the agreement is "we'll pay for anything that breaks", then they should determine how careful they want to be, since they're footing the bill for it. Making that determination for them by changing the picture, I think is not totally honest, unless they also have a history of not paying up.
- c22 10y ago
  I think it's ethically questionable to carelessly break things people are waiting for just because the thing is perceived to have low monetary value. The shipping company may have to eat the dollar cost of the item, but the cost to the sender and receiver in time and hassle is non-negligible.
  - 21 10y ago
    I don't think it's about the monetary value. Your typical bike is more expensive than your typical TV (but your average shipping guy might think all bikes cost like the super-market ones) I think it's just the perception that bikes are "rough" and that they can take a beating. Which is true, but only when fully assembled and driven on road/terrain, not when you bang at it from the side.

TuringNYC 10y ago

Your concern can be addressed by printing a photo of a TV with a bicycle show on TV. Then, the recipient will also not be confused.