MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
I sent a small, and I mean small package this afternoon. I thought for a bit of extra security I'd use a Jiffy bag. The woman at the Post Office then made a song and dance about it not fitting through a tiny hole cut in a piece of plastic. I pushed it through with no problems and she then had another go just to demonstrate to me how difficult it really was. All the time I was thinking that I've never seen a letter box that narrow, or have I? And what difference paying an extra 29p is going to make on the other side? Is it so the postie can buy a protien bar?
What gives?
apparently it is the gap the letter passes through in the sorting machine at the depo.
Why not just make the machine bigger?
Riot?
I sent a small, and I mean small package this afternoon
Clearly if it didn't go through the hole it wasn't. Do you think they should have no size restrictions so that you can send a huge box for the same price as an envelope (if it's light enough)?
apparently it is the gap the letter passes through in the sorting machine at the depo.Why not just make the machine bigger?
Good point, well made.
Do you think they should have no size restrictions so that you can send a huge box for the same price as an envelope (if it's light enough)?
I would expect the hole in the plastic would be representative of an average letterbox and not one third the size. No problem for paying for something if it's just, just don't like being ripped off or conned.
I would expect the hole in the plastic would be representative of an average letterbox
So you don't think that the cost to them of transporting items varies on size providing each individual item will go through a letterbox?
What are you talking about?
I thought every house in the country got sent one of those bits of plastic with the different sized holes in it when they started the new postal charges based on size as well as weight.
What did you do with yours ?
I've only been in the country for two weeks. I haven't got one. It's all new to me... 😕
I dislike the fact one has to walk to the Post Office with every single item [i]in case[/i] it's a little too thick or heavy for a normal stamp. If I buy a stamp for 50p and stick it on a postcard the Post Office will take it to it's destination with no issues. If I also want to send a cd in a jiffy bag to the same address at the same time I have to pay three times the price for the privilege. I understand that if I want to send a pair of wellies in a box I'll have to pay more, but I fail to see why anything under letterbox size commands a premium. If anything, charge a flat rate of £1 for all parcels, letters and cards under letterbox size (reducing queues at Post Office counters) and go up from there for items which are obviously oversize.
I thought every house in the country got sent one of those bits of plastic with the different sized holes in it when they started the new postal charges based on size as well as weight.What did you do with yours ?
Ha, first I've heard of it.
Ha, first I've heard of it.
Couldn't get it through your letter box?
A 50 foot steel pole will go through a letterbox. Eventually.
Its been that way for 5 years now, please make an effort to keep up. 😀
[url= http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/policy-research/post/background-briefings/pricing-in-proportion-pip ]Pricing in proportion[/url]
I fail to see why anything under letterbox size commands a premium.
Like the don, you don't get that being bigger costs them more well before it gets bigger than letterbox size (and that those who post lots of normal letters would be rather unimpressed with your pricing plan)? I also don't understand why you have to traipse to the PO - do you not own a ruler in your household? If it's that big an issue for you, and you have lost (or didn't get - can't recall having one myself) the bit of plastic it's hardly difficult to make a width gauge out of a bit of card.
Like the don, you don't get that being bigger costs them more well before it gets bigger than letterbox size
I do understand that, I was slightly amused at something that I was able to get through the little hole without problems, twice, nearly gave the lady on the counter a heart attack so that could show me that it was too big. When I left the country you went to the Post Office, gave them a package/letter, it got weighed and you paid a fair price for a fair service, if it was too big to fit through a letterbox it became a packet. Basically aracer I cand send a letter sized piece of lead for less money than a shoebox of feathers. A bit pissed don't you think?
Basically aracer I cand send a letter sized piece of lead for less money than a shoebox of feathers.
You [b]really[/b] don't get this do you?
It's all to do with some woman who is niw in charge of the PO trying to charge extra for everything to make the company look good before they float it, nothing ti do with her having a tight box just a tight purse.
If they can't get it through my flap at the front, they usually take it up my back passage. Or my neighbour signs for it.
I'm confused - but not as much as you are. How do you reconcile your understanding that being larger costs them more with:
I cand send a letter sized piece of lead for less money than a shoebox of feathers. A bit pissed don't you think?
Meanwhile you do understand that the hole demonstrates the maximum dimensions rather than being a go/no-go gauge - if you have to force it through then clearly it is larger than specified?
You [b]really[/b] don't get this do you?
Explain to me why this new system is better than the old way of simply weighing and using eyesight and common sense without looking stupid.
It prices things more closely in proportion to how much it costs them to deliver. How hard is that to understand?
I reckon it makes a lot of stuff easier. I know if i've a letter to post it's one price if it's a wee bit bigger it's another. Means that for the majority of stuff I don't need to go into the post office to get stuff weighed. Which is good as I hate going into the Post Office, mainly because our post office is no longer a Post Office as such but a conversion of the former record department of WH Smiths. Horrible, horrible place.
How does the same weight but slightly bigger affect the price? We're talking small enough to go through the hole except when a song and dance is made.
I've just had a look at the [url= http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/policy-research/post/background-briefings/pricing-in-proportion-pip ]PP[/url] page and a letter that weighs between 0-100g will cost either 42p or 75p, simply dependant on size. And you think this is logical? What difference is size going to make? You've been suckered my loverlies...
This is because it believes the size and shape of most mail is a more important factor in the cost of mail sorting and delivery than weight.
From the same page.
What difference is size going to make?
None at all. Clearly it's just as cheap for them to deliver your shoebox of feathers as an envelope of lead 🙄
Are you having issues with the fact that people on here are disagreeing with you?
Are you having issues with the fact that people on here are disagreeing with you?
No, why?
You still haven't explained the effect of size on the cost. Maybe the lead/feather example was too subtle a reference for you.
Tell me why a letter of 99g of 240mmX165mmX5mm is cheaper to send than a 50g Large Letter of 240mmX165mmX6mm.
bigger volume = more money for R.Mail to transport the package
Even if it is for the same weight of package as you get less packages per van load with larger items so you have to pay more for all that extra space you've used up
Which incidentally is why you get silly sized packages from CRC, they're maximising the amount of packages they can get into a van by making them all a uniform size, therefore reducing their packaging costs and maximising their profits
Or something like that, anyway it's late and I can't believe that someone doesn't actually understand this basic principle of logistics
Or something like that, anyway it's late and I can't believe that someone doesn't actually understand this basic principle of logistics
Best tell the airlines as they tend to work on weight and while you're at it tell the major logistic companies, you know, DHL and TNT who charge by weight, and in general, not by volume.
Does RM have special vehicles that don't consume more fuel the more weight they carry?
You've been suckered. 😆
Tell me why a letter of 99g of 240mmX165mmX5mm is cheaper to send than a 50g Large Letter of 240mmX165mmX6mm.
Presumably one goes through an automated mail sorting machine, the other doesn't.
More to the point, do you think it unreasonable that a 350x240x20 90g "letter" should cost more than a 230x160x4 90g letter (which it is over 10 times the volume of)?
And what difference paying an extra 29p is going to make on the other side?
If it's only 29p, why not just pay it and STFU?
while you're at it tell the major logistic companies, you know, DHL and TNT who charge by weight
They will all ask you for dimensions of a package when booking a collection, and charge accordingly.
Best tell the airlines as they tend to work on weight
Which is perfectly reasonable because they have volume to spare, whilst extra weight costs them money.
while you're at it tell the major logistic companies, you know, DHL and TNT who charge by weight, and in general, not by volume
They too tend to be limited by weight rather than volume when they're loading delivery vehicles with parcels.
Does RM have special vehicles that don't consume more fuel the more weight they carry?
No, but it has plenty of points in the delivery process which are limited by volume rather than weight - hence if it gets more volume it has to send out 2 vans rather than 1. It's completely fallacious to compare RM with airlines or other delivery companies.
Couriers charge by volumetric weight (aka dimensional weight), not actual weight, the size of the package is more important than the weight when it comes to calculating costs
More to the point, do you think it unreasonable that a 350x240x20 90g "letter" should cost more than a 230x160x4 90g letter (which it is over 10 times the volume of)?
Presumably one goes through an automated mail sorting machine, the other doesn't.
not actual weight, the size of the package is more important than the weight when it comes to calculating costs
Why is my DHL price list calculated on weight, with no mention of volume?
just cough up what you owe you moaning tight miserable sod 😆
oh and for the pedantic, here's the DHL Global Dimensional/volumetric weight calculator, rather than the US one
http://www.dhl.com/en/tools/volumetric_weight_express.html
4ndy B, I trust you reads the footnote,
* Shipping charge is calculated by weight (actual or dimensional - whichever is greater).
didn't you?
@timc 😉 I did and I am. I'm surprised at all the changes that have happened in the last few years.
I haven't started on the "Pay and Display" at supermarket carparks yet!!! Grrr!!! 👿
I haven't started on the "Pay and Display" at supermarket carparks yet!!! Grrr!!!
Now that is worth getting your knickers knotted for.
Yes I do know that whichever is greater is what is charged, I do send a lot of items from work via couriers
Are you sure you haven't been over charged? I mean if there's no mention of volumetric weight on your price list are you sure your being charged correctly? A lot of couriers guesstimate the volumetric weight you know.
I'd spend more time checking your invoices & volumetric weights and not worrying about 29p on a stamp
@Don Simon... shouldn't be polluting the earth driving the shops then 😉
Of course if you're going to start invoking alternative couriers, you always have the option to vote with your feet - if you think the PO is overcharging for you little jiffy bag you could always see how cheaply somebody else could deliver it for you...
shouldn't be polluting the earth driving the shops then
I would have it delivered, but reading this thread it'll cost a fortune to have it couriered to me. 😯
Are you sure you haven't been over charged? I mean if there's no mention of volumetric weight on your price list are you sure your being charged correctly? A lot of couriers guesstimate the volumetric weight you know.
I'm quite happy in the knowledge that I am currently receiving a very good price but it could go lower.
I'd spend more time checking your invoices & volumetric weights and not worrying about 29p on a stamp
😆
Thanks for the lesson.
Whether the postie has to come to my house to deliver a postcard or a jiffybag is irrelevant. They are coming in the same vehicle, why is it a different cost to them ?
Jeez, some people are dense!
Weight is what costs you more in fuel. Volume is what costs you more in the number of delivery vehicles. That's fairly easy to understand. The caveat on courier order forms is to cover minimum costs, surely. Again, that's just common sense.
I have no idea what the supply chain in the PO is like, but if they're charging more for larger volume items then that would suggest a limit in the number of vehicles they have (which someone has already said), or a constraint in their sorting equipment (which someone else said). A postman can fit fewer packets in his bag than letters now, can't he (I understand there are female postpeople too)?
It's not simply about how they handle it when you take it to the PO, or how they deliver it to your house now, is it?
Jeez, some people are dense!
They are, aren't they.
or a constraint in their sorting equipment (which someone else said).
Of course, as you've already read, this was agreed to in the third post as being a logical reason.
All this piffle about volume, however, isn't logical.
Take two letters, a letter and, by definition, a large letter.
I'll keep the dimensions nice and simple so as not to confuse, and I'll use the maximum letter size and I'll only change one defining measurement.
letter= 240X165X5 will give me the max volume according to the post office, let's say the letter has a max weight of 100g and we have 100 letters for our postie to carry.
We are now asking our postie to carry 10kg for the princely sum of 46 of your English pounds.
With a large letter of the same dimensions except 20mm wide, therfore falling into the category of large letter, becoming a large volume object and being 4X wider than the std letter, for the same width we can carry fewer letter, 3x fewer, yet we're charging only 75p for said letter. Assuming the letter is the same weight and 100 letter fill the posties bag, they now have to make 4x the number of trips for less than double the charge.
Now let's introduce the idea of the large letter weighing only 50g. Half the weight, 4X the number of trips for 28% more money.
Clearly you'd have to be dense.
I would expect the hole in the plastic would be representative of an average letterbox and not one third the size.
Has clearly not had a paper round in the last 20 years.
How does the same weight but slightly bigger affect the price?
Posties have tardis-like mail bags, it is true.
Anyhow, the instruction is that the package has to go through the hole [b]easily[/b]. Or is it [b]without resistance[/b]? Wouldn't want your package (I mean, really small package) to cause a jam? Create delays? Raise prices? Your recipient would then receive a red note, have to travel to the sorting office, pay the 29p difference and then an extra £1 to collect it...
You can understand how the post office counter have have to err on the side of caution, don't you?
Clearly you'd have to be dense.
Clearly. Previously you were arguing they were overcharging on the dimensions, now you're arguing they're charging too little?
Of course your analysis doesn't consider that only some parts of the delivery cost are size rather than weight affected, nor that the size related cost isn't necessarily directly proportional. What exactly makes you think you know more about the PO cost model than they do themselves?
Anyhow, the instruction is that the package has to go through the hole easily. Or is it without resistance?
Which is logical, because as I pointed out above, the limit is on the dimensions of the package rather than whether it fits through the gauge (which is just a guide). Clearly if you have to squidge it to fit it through it's actually over-dimension. You'd have to be pretty dense not to realise that.
mornin' aracer, how are you today sweetheart? Logic is the argument not too much or too little.
Of course your analysis doesn't consider that only some parts of the delivery cost are size rather than weight affected, nor that the size related cost isn't necessarily directly proportional.[b] What exactly makes you think you know more about the PO cost model than they do themselves?[/b]
Where have I said that? (Not that it is impossible to be so). The Post Office is full of human beings and human beings make mistakes/take advantage and lie. What makes you think that the Post office doesn't make mistakes? Do you simply accept everything a corporation says without thinking? You are a salesman's dream and I love you for that.
😆You'd have to be pretty dense not to realise that.
Logic is the argument not too much or too little.
Logic would suggest they've probably got the proportion about right. Unfortunately you came into this thread with emotion, not logic.
Actually I don't think it has anything to do with what Postie can or can't carry, or how big a letter box is. I think its what the automatic sorting machines can handle is the limiting factor. larger packets have to be sorted manually - hence more cost. Its not as simple as how many you can fit in a bag/lorry.
As to the fitting through the hole in the guage, it has to be able to fall through the hole, not be forced through at all. This is so it does't muck up the sorters.
As someone said, I think they do have slightly more idea on costings etc than the man in the street.
[url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/whats-this-with-the-post-office#post-2845152 ]That seems quite plausible stgeorge[/url], the weight vs volume, however, doesn't.
Awesome troll DS. Postage, who'd have thought? 😆
What STGeorge says!
Actually I don't think it has anything to do with what Postie can or can't carry, or how big a letter box is. I think its what the automatic sorting machines can handle is the limiting factor. larger packets have to be sorted manually - hence more cost. Its not as simple as how many you can fit in a bag/lorry
Well, it's all of the above factors and more, put in to a cost calculation engine for the delivery pipeline. RM made huge investments in machines [url= http://www.nec.com/global/solutions/postal/content/catalogue/NEC-NS10.pdf ]like these[/url] and sorting kit to go in APCs [url= http://www.curtins.com/projects/industrial/leeds-mail-centre.html ]like these[/url]. Mail that could be processed through those was the most cost effective. Larger mail has more manual steps in the pipeline and a higher cost to process and deliver.
"Weight vs Volume" doesn't have to be binary, but it's too complex a pricing model to do both; for RM and its customers - so they picked volume as that was a bigger determinant on processing cost than weight (as did most of their competitors).
Purely speculation, but I wonder if the charging method has changed because the type of mail has changed?
Once of a time, the vast majority of letters Royal Mail delivered were just that, letters. They were priced so that they could deliver a piece of paper from one place to another relatively cheaply.
With the rise of Internet shopping, there's a sudden explosion in the amount of small packets being delivered as 'letters,' costing considerably more to deliver as they take up ten times the space of a regular letter in the van (and, it seems, require more manual handling), yet earning no more revenue.
With differentiating between a letter and a "large letter," they're basically saying "look, we'll still deliver your jiffy bags for you for next to no money, but we're going to charge you a bit extra if you're going to take the piss."
Never has a thread about postal charges been a more entertaining read!
With the rise of Internet shopping, there's a sudden explosion in the amount of small packets being delivered as 'letters,' costing considerably more to deliver as they take up ten times the space of a regular letter in the van (and, it seems, require more manual handling), yet earning no more revenue.
Amazon etc. just have a yearly deal with the PO - they give them £x millions to delivery all their parcels regardless. Someone from Amazon doesn't sit in the PO office queue with 10,000 CDs to put stamps on.
And if you've noticed Amazon now send multiple smaller parcels rather than putting all your, say, CDs in one big box after a bit of feedback from posties - you can stick 5 individual CDs though a letterbox but can't do the same for one big box. Plus 4 out of 5 might get through rather than losing the whole lot.
As people have said, it's more complicated than postie X can carry 25kg of post, therefore thats x hundred letters blah blah.
Glad I got involved in this.
🙄
Thanks for your contribution veedubba.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
Who are you?