[1] http://fortune.com/2015/03/11/united-nations-subsidy-chinese... [2] http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cp396.pdf
Just so there's context, the actual cost is much, much higher than $1200. That's just the payment for the ocean journey. The other costs are factory to port (varies), insurance+docs (few hundred), destination port charges ($1k or so), customs bond, and then the actual duty for the imported items. Lastly, of course, getting the container from the dock to where you are to unload it.
The costs above and beyond just the "ocean shipping" part for the most recent one was $1914. $830 of it was the customs duty, which will vary wildly depending on the HTS code of what's being imported, and how much you brought in.
I guess they thought it was too much work too.
I've found that Malaysia Post is the worst, they often take 60 days until a package is delivered.
After lots of "failed" delivery notes when there was always someone present, I asked the workers in the post office why they don't deliver packages anymore (thinking it might be related to country of origin and specific agreements between different postal services regarding fees).
They were adamant that delivery was attempted and it must be coincidence. In the end I suspect, in our case, it's more a case of silent protest from the postmen who are payed poorly, so they don't bother carrying the packages.
"Find the amount charged to domestic senders to go from the incoming drop-off point to the destination. Got it? Okay, if the foreign post drops it there, they get charged that amount."
Then, everyone gets charged the same, and you can't overcharge foreigners without also screwing your own people. Plus, foreigners get cheaper postage as they drop it closer to the final destination.
That's the idea of the treaty anyway, an idea that pre-dates internet and computers of course, which do make it at least theoretically possible for my local post office to figure this out.
When terminal delivery charges came in, countries were divided into classes based on economic criteria, basically gross national income per capita. Surface area of the country is also figured in.[2] Because there hasn't been a recalc of this in a few years, China gets a very good rate. This may change in 2016.
[1] http://www.upu.int/uploads/tx_sbdownloader/reportStrategyCon... [2] http://www.upu.int/uploads/tx_sbdownloader/resolutionClassif...
Modern container ships travel at about 25 knots (unless they're doing fuel-saving slow cruise at 12 knots). http://www.sea-distances.org/ tells me that a 25-knot ship going from Hong Kong to Marseilles via the Suez Canal takes 13 days 7 hours to get there.
In practice, of course, there's loading and unloading on both ends (figure 2 days) and you're not traveling through the Suez at 25 knots; the traffic there goes at 8 knots according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Canal#Navigation. That said, the Suez transit takes 11-16 hours according to that link, so maybe add half a day to the estimate.
The upshot is that a 16-18 day travel time is not unreasonable there. I was a bit surprised it's that short, but being able to maintain 25 knots around the clock eats up distance faster than one expects.
Of course if you go from Shanghai instead of Hong Kong, you need to add a day and a half or so. And if you go to Brest instead of Marseilles, add two more days.
But the huge mistake you're making is that a container vessel will make additional stops and it does not connect every possible port to every other possible port. If you have uncommon combinations, the container will usually be moved from one vessel to another. This adds additional time (days).
Hong Kong -> Fos Sur Mer is like 31+ days.
One time they knocked zero times.