2 ms·
> For other types of goods, the shipper typically decides whether to offer a signature option, which costs the shipper around $7.15 extra per delivery. Well, a
by mschuster91 2y ago
> For other types of goods, the shipper typically decides whether to offer a signature option, which costs the shipper around $7.15 extra per delivery.
Well, as counterintuitive as this is... this is typical beancountering in action. AT&T says it ships "tens of thousands" of packages a day, so let's assume 50k packages. That's about 357.000 $ a day they would have to pay extra to FedEx... assuming 500$ unit cost, AT&T can have 714 phones a day stolen and still be net zero.
But that calculation only holds up because pure financial beancountering ignores associated costs: customers aren't happy when they have to wait for another package (that might get stolen as well) and each stolen phone supplies criminals with about 300$ if it gets shipped to China for being parted out - criminal activity by organized gangs is a cost that society bears in the end.
- drcongo 2y agoIn the UK I've never had an iPhone (or anything from Apple) delivered without signature and the courier taking a photo of it in-hand. I wonder if that levy doesn't happen here.
- OptionOfT 2y agoIn the USA they figured that the cost (and time, which is cost) of asking for a signature overall is more than the cost of replacing the occasional missing package (whatever causes it to go missing).
- JumpCrisscross 2y agoWho eats the cost of a stolen package?
- mschuster91 2y agoAT&T most likely, but as said, as long as the value of stolen iPhones a day doesn't exceed the cost of requiring receipt signature, they're still in profit zone.