19 ms·
Something doesn't add up here. The article says: > For each mile saved, per driver, per year, UPS saves $30 million. Then at the end it says: > As for UPS,
by jules 13y ago
Something doesn't add up here. The article says:
> For each mile saved, per driver, per year, UPS saves $30 million.
Then at the end it says:
> As for UPS, Santilli notes that a driver in Gettysburg, Pa. is now driving nearly 25 miles less per day, from an original route of more than 150 miles down to 126 miles—with the same number of stops.
So they are saving $30 million * 25 * 365 = $274 billion per year. However, UPS' revenue is only $53 billion. What gives? Is this driver in Gettysburg saving a very atypical number of miles, and the average number of miles saved with this system per driver per day is way less? It's a bit disappointing that they left the actual savings out of the article.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- StavrosK 13y ago> For each mile saved, per driver, per year, UPS saves $30 million. Err, there's no way a single mile per year costs them $30 million. Looks like the $30m figure is the total savings, unless they're using gold, single-use robots that burn gold to push the gold trucks.
- jules 13y agoThey did say per driver. It's still a high number of course, but I don't see how you can read that differently? UPS has around 400,000 employees, so if 200,000 of those are drivers that number becomes $150 per mile saved. Still way too high, but not single use golden robots high.
- maxerickson 13y agoI think the goal has to be to read what it doesn't say. The most sensible interpretation I can come up with is saving 1 route mile for each driver for a year (that is, chopping 365 miles off the work of one driver). That puts the per mile savings right around $0.40.
- jules 13y agoAlright, so it should have said: > For each mile saved, per driver, per day, UPS saves $30 million per year. That would put the total savings at $750 million per year, assuming that Gettysburg driver is typical.