Originally Posted by
flapshalfspeed
Pretty funny hearing a FDX pilot decry the death of Mom & Pop businesses wrought by all those evil Amazon boxes.
Mom & Pop businesses only existed and thrived in the US in the post-war era because they've been structurally/informationally protected from competition by geography, logistics, and price transparency.
Those barriers to competition have been broken by the internet and by the development of highly-efficient/fast parcel delivery networks (key players being UPS & FDX).
FDX & UPS represent the rapid shipping backbone enabling sellers from all over the planet (including Amazon) to compete with those darling Mom & Pop/Bricks & Mortar businesses on a cynical, cut-throat, price-only basis...your employer helped to destroy all of those little no-competition zones within which Mom & Pop businesses thrived for decades/centuries before.
Don't get me wrong--I'm one of those guys who still loves buying my shoes/clothes in person at a shop. I hate waiting for something to arrive even if it takes 2 days via Amazon Prime. I have my shoe guy, my car guy, my pest control guy, my local barber, etc.--I love the Mom & Pop shops in my hometown...just saying Amazon isn't any more or less responsible for the death of Mom & Pop retail than FedEx or UPS or the company who made the computer any of us are using to shop for xmas gifts this weekend.
Don't take my comment out of context. I never said FedEx/UPS were caused the death of Mom & Pop retail (you suggested that, and I disagree with that viewpoint).
Ecommerce is a relatively recent business model. Yes, shipping companies like FedEx and UPS make that possible. I don't think you can blame shipping companies for tearing down barriers of competition because I believe what is really going on here is these internet companies paying a lot less taxes and overhead.
FedEx and UPS have repeatedly said that business-to-consumer cargo is heavily discounted and creates a lot of operational issues and costs per package. Whereas, business-to-business freight which typically includes a large shipment to one business or business park, instead of hundreds of individually packaged boxes that need to go to different households.
In my opinion, what I think Amazon is trying to do is lower shipping costs by contracting a shipper to move "bulk freight" of packages between city pairs which can fill up an entire airplane, instead of shipping all of those packages individually on FedEx/UPS or other carriers (they use a lot more carriers than just FedEx/UPS).
But if that is not the case, and Amazon thinks they can start their own overnight delivery business, bring it. I must question the business model for a couple of reasons. First, it was Bezos in his own words that said very soon Amazon with have fulfillment centers located near 90% of the population and those centers will carry every SKU. So if that's true, why do they need to ship long distance via air carriers? Second, what is the business model? Fly an airplane full from a fulfillment center to a destination, then bring it back empty? Third, without carrying non-Ecommerce cargo, bulk freight, hazardous materials ecetera which pay the bills, I don't see how Amazon is going to make it work using packages which have high costs and yield little profit.*
But that's the rub (see the asterisk). Amazon doesn't like profit, in fact it avoids it by reinvesting the money back into the business, which is why they pay very little in taxes. Low taxes, no brick and mortar buildings to maintain, only adds to the aggressive growth strategy of Amazon.
So again I go back to my original point. As a society, are we willing to watch a company bring down multiple sectors of the economy while paying little in taxes because its legal?
I think even Trump said last week that if Amazon had to pay taxes like everyone else, they'd be out of business.
I'm all for innovation and competition, but we must ensure a level playing field for all those involved.