Thursday, June 13, 2013 8:09:27 AM
"Crayola will have worked out a deal with FedEx to ship those on an a space available basis with no time limit on transportation time. The rates for that level of service are much lower."
I don't believe that for a minute.....there is no such level of service. Packages are not people and cargo areas don't have assigned seating.
Think about what you are suggesting:
All the packages are coming from different places....there is no efficiency as might be gained from a single shipping point.
The packages will be of varying sizes.....there is no way to create an efficient multiple package load.
Fedex can't be expected to maintain a location, a waiting room, for storing packages awaiting your imaginary "space available".
The process that you are suggesting would require special handling for each of the packages in the program, which is diametrically opposed to the condition that Fedex covets. They make more money when packages are the same size and are shipped from the same location. There is NO incentive for them to discount their service in these circumstances.
That said, there is probably a discount on these shipments based on an existing Crayola/Fedex relationship.....the likelihood that this new program will incentivize Fedex to provide an additional discount seems unlikely to me.
So knock 25% off the shipping cost numbers in my post:
That same half million dollar expenditure by Crayola then gets about 650,000lbs of markers to the NF plant (note that that treats the weight of the packaging material as actual markers, which it obviously is not). Assuming 4,000lbs/hr of production and 75% uptime, that would keep one processor occupied for 9 days instead of 7.
And it doesn't change my question much:
Is that something to get excited about? How many millions is it reasonable to expect Crayola to spend?
By the way, you estimated the weight of an empty marker might be around 10grams based on a partly used one weighing 16grams, so there would be around 50 markers per pound. Based on that math, and assuming that 20% of the 33lb package might be packing material, Crayola's half million in shipping cost would cover the return of 26,000,000 markers.
Is that a reasonable expectation? If so, how many 9 day batches of 26,000,000 markers each that cost Crayola $500,0000 in cash money would you expect to be processed annually?
ps. Can the markers just be dumped into the pre-melt without additional handling and inspection? Can they be processed with other feedstock or will they have to be stored and processed in special marker-only production runs? Will they require a permit modification like the one we are waiting for for HTF? How about a stack test?
I don't believe that for a minute.....there is no such level of service. Packages are not people and cargo areas don't have assigned seating.
Think about what you are suggesting:
All the packages are coming from different places....there is no efficiency as might be gained from a single shipping point.
The packages will be of varying sizes.....there is no way to create an efficient multiple package load.
Fedex can't be expected to maintain a location, a waiting room, for storing packages awaiting your imaginary "space available".
The process that you are suggesting would require special handling for each of the packages in the program, which is diametrically opposed to the condition that Fedex covets. They make more money when packages are the same size and are shipped from the same location. There is NO incentive for them to discount their service in these circumstances.
That said, there is probably a discount on these shipments based on an existing Crayola/Fedex relationship.....the likelihood that this new program will incentivize Fedex to provide an additional discount seems unlikely to me.
So knock 25% off the shipping cost numbers in my post:
That same half million dollar expenditure by Crayola then gets about 650,000lbs of markers to the NF plant (note that that treats the weight of the packaging material as actual markers, which it obviously is not). Assuming 4,000lbs/hr of production and 75% uptime, that would keep one processor occupied for 9 days instead of 7.
And it doesn't change my question much:
Is that something to get excited about? How many millions is it reasonable to expect Crayola to spend?
By the way, you estimated the weight of an empty marker might be around 10grams based on a partly used one weighing 16grams, so there would be around 50 markers per pound. Based on that math, and assuming that 20% of the 33lb package might be packing material, Crayola's half million in shipping cost would cover the return of 26,000,000 markers.
Is that a reasonable expectation? If so, how many 9 day batches of 26,000,000 markers each that cost Crayola $500,0000 in cash money would you expect to be processed annually?
ps. Can the markers just be dumped into the pre-melt without additional handling and inspection? Can they be processed with other feedstock or will they have to be stored and processed in special marker-only production runs? Will they require a permit modification like the one we are waiting for for HTF? How about a stack test?
Now you've gone and done it!
