3 ms·
> Delivering a package in rural areas where houses are a quarter mile apart is a lot more expensive than when a carrier can load up a handcart and deliver 10 ad
by nybble41 6y ago
> Delivering a package in rural areas where houses are a quarter mile apart is a lot more expensive than when a carrier can load up a handcart and deliver 10 addresses.
And yet Amazon does their own deliveries in my parents' rural area where the houses are indeed about a quarter mile apart and several miles from the nearest town. Perhaps the business model isn't quite so one-sided as you thought? USPS has issues with managing their pricing, true, but UPS and FedEx are under no obligation to deliver packages below cost.
- supergeek133 6y agoIt may be because there are enough consistent deliveries in the area to employ someone dedicated to delivery there.
- nybble41 6y agoYes, naturally. That doesn't change the fact that Amazon does handle their own deliveries in rural areas, not just cities. FedEx and UPS operate under the same constraints.
- ahelwer 6y agoThe parent offered rural areas as an example of where it might not be profitable to deliver. Not a be-all-end-all analysis carving up profitable and non-profitable areas.
- ogre_codes 6y agoWas meant as a simple example. I live in a rural area and get Amazon delivery too (though much of the volume I get is USPS). It could easily be self-selecting, Amazon puts out their own deliveries essentially the same way as Uber. They set rates for drivers and if they can't get drivers at the rates they set, they send the packages off to USPS. The result is more-or-less the same. Much as Uber drivers don't service unprofitable areas, Amazon's contractors don't either.
- thomastjeffery 6y agoNo, but it does change how profitable it is to make those deliveries. Delivering to urban areas is generally more cost effective because there is an opportunity bonus. People in rural areas can simulate that opportunity bonus by getting more packages more regularly.