Amazon/UPS Deal
OK, so, Amazon, yeah? As discussed previously, Amazon apparently have some sweetheart (but non-exclusive) deal with UPS. I verified this with the franchise owner of “my” UPS Store, who seems to know what he’s talking about. What kind of deal?
Well, I’m an Amazon Prime member. I went in for a “free trial”. I gave them a credit card number, but they promised they would contact me for permission before converting me to a paid member. They didn’t. Flat out, they didn’t. They lied about it. They went ahead and charged my credit card for a year in advance. It’s something like $80 per year.
Sneaky. But, best deal out there. It gives you free two-day shipping on practically everything Amazon carry, and the option to upgrade to overnight shipping for US$3.99 per item. $3.99! Let’s do some research:
I ordered a three-pound item today through Amazon, in the afternoon. It will be here tomorrow, by “Next Day Air Saver”, which differs from “Next Day Air” by giving the driver an extra five hours to get you the package, for which I paid the aforementioned $3.99. They shipped it from their location in Sparks, Nevada.
I played with UPS’s online tool. I said I was located in 89431, was shipping to a commercial address in 91107, that I had a daily UPS pickup, and that I would give my package to the driver. I was using my own packaging, and I low-balled the dimensions as 10″×6″×4″. It’s almost certainly bigger than that, in reality. And the retail cost, for mere mortal companies? Want to guess? Here take a moment.
… When in the course of human events it are you ready? …
$43.57. $43.57! For one package, one time! Surely Amazon Prime subscribers aren’t paying $80 per year and just not using it, right? How is this remotely profitable for Amazon? If I were a shareholder, I’d be throwing a fit until I got some numbers. Are they getting an 80% discount from UPS? I can’t see how that would be possible, and nothing else would seem to make the numbers line up.
Someone at UPS or Amazon, please post anonymously and give the answer. How much are Amazon paying for this?
Email subscription
February 26th, 2008 at 7:15 am
“Amazon apparently have…”
“How much are Amazon…”
Stop it! STOP IT! It’s freaking me out.
February 26th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Isn’t that the rule, though? It’s a company composed of people:
“The people who work at Amazon apparently have…” ⇒ “Amazon apparently have…”
This is one of those cases where I think the British are actually completely right and Americans completely wrong. It freaks you out? How would you do these?
“The Strokes has/have a new album”
“Hootie and the Blowfish has/have a new album”
“The Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra has/have a new album”
“Pearl Jam has/have a new album”
If you would handle these differently, what is the justification?
February 26th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
I don’t know how Dave would “handle” them, but I would say
“The Strokes have a new album”
“Hootie and the Blowfish have a new album”
“The Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra has a new album”
“Pearl Jam has a new album”
The justification is that, in my world, Pearl Jam and LA Phil are each one thing, a set, and the other names refer to the elements of their respective sets. So I’d say, “The group, The Strokes, HAS a new album,” since group is one, a singular collective noun.
February 26th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Right. That’s what I figured he would say, too. You’re basing it on whether the nouns themselves are plural, not whether they are collective nouns. And while that’s normal, in the same way that saying “I know where he’s at” is normal, I think it’s an error.
February 27th, 2008 at 4:12 am
February 27th, 2008 at 6:04 am
Don’t you mean “I think it are an error”?