Baggage claim: Trading your excess airline luggage-allowance
economist.com
economist.com
On the US customs declaration 6059B form[0], question 14 is:
I have commercial merchandise: (articles for sale, samples used for soliciting orders, or goods that are not considered personal effects)
Truthfully answering yes means you waste an extra 15 to 60 minutes dealing with customs and paying import duties on whatever you're bring (personal exceptions doesn't apply for commercial goods). That's assuming you're a US resident. If you're a non-resident then you better plan on sleeping in the airport that night.
Lie by answering no and 99.99% of the time you won't be caught. But 10 years down the road if the government ever have an axe to grind against you, they can just look up that confirmation email you got from Grabr and match it against the 6059B form you filled out and they got you on the hook for making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001)[1].
[0] http://www.immihelp.com/immigration/sample-us-customs-declar...
Bitcoin funneled to paypal cash?
Uhhh.... They actually named it Airmule? Is this satire?
"did you pack your bags yourself? Are you carrying anything for anyone else?"
"Well I'm carrying an Airmule(tm) package. They packed it. They texted a photo to prove it was totally legit."
"Um, really sir? Please come with us"
Hope no Airmule users plan travel to the Philippines...
Let's consider the $5 watch example. For such a low-value parcel, how much time and effort will each party put into delivery/receipt? As a courier, for a mere $5 there is no way I'm going to go out of my way drop off the package to anyone. So the recipient is going to need to retrieve it from me at the airport. Are they willing to wait around for hours (or pay someone else) for me to arrive, clear customs, etc.? Because I'm certainly not going to hang around at the airport for hours for them if I'm only getting $5 - so they'd better be there on time. And that means they are going to have to pay for transportation to/from the airport (usually pretty far from the city center) on top of the cost of shipping.
All in all it seems like a pretty hard sell - mail/package couriers have already sorted out these logistics and will deliver stuff straight to your door, usually quite cheaply.
The only way I can see the economics working is avoiding import duties in countries where they are prohibitive, which of course means shifting an unacceptable risk to the courier.
Also $5 to buy a watch is hardly worth the time, unless your literally buying it at duty free.
The trouble of even downloading the app and signing up for an account isn't worth $5 to me.
But the subset of the labor force that takes international flights?
Not worth the risk for the money on offer. Knowingly being a drug mule, on the other hand, pays better.
Just be careful you don't wind up in a Turkish prison. Then, what you need to do to escape is to kill the chief guard and walk out the front door wearing his uniform: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_Express_(film)
No thanks. Not the life for me.
Be careful about what you answer. "No" is a bad answer and "yes" is OK only if 1) the content of the bag is OK and 2) you really packed it.
It's a shame because I believe that loosening restrictions of airline tickets, specifically allowing for transferability would be a huge opportunity. If tickers were transferrable, the seemingly arbitrary shifts in pricing would fall considerably. The same restrictions could apply such as visa restrictions and perhaps even a limit to transferability such as 24 hours before the flight. It would be a huge win for the consumer but sadly I doubt this will happen any time soon.
Security aside, this can't catch on. If it started to, the airlines would have to put a stop to it or reduce baggage allowances to the point where it would be unprofitable. Like many services, they're counting on the fact that the average will be much less than the maximum. An airliner where every passenger checked their maximum would probably be overweight, and at the least would greatly cut into their profitable cargo capacity.
This is in some way already happening (in reverse) with some budget airlines or travel classes, where the default is hand baggage only, and then you top up for each checked baggage.
Edit: I had a typo --> "I doubt the can _prevent_ me..."
Now, wait, let me finish! I don't mean in the confused sense of "lol everything should be free!"
What I mean is, checked luggage is inconvenient for the passenger (less access, have to wait), while using the least scarce part of the cabin -- they can't sell tickets to fly in the cargo hold, while they want to allocate whatever passenger-usable space they can for paying passengers.
So, if anything, they should charge for carry-on luggage while making (some level of) checked luggage free.
The system we have now -- the opposite -- creates perverse incentives all around: passengers are encouraged to avoid using the perfectly usable cargo hold, and instead, cram increasingly absurd amounts into their carry-on allotment, testing the unwillingness of airline employees to say, "sorry, you're over your limit, you'll have to check that". And then people have more pieces to deal with, choking up the loading and deplaning procedures, and bringing more of their (potentially dangerous) items through a security checkpoint...
Every time I fly, I notice a sea of people toting enormous bags, as if to say "tell me can't take this on. Just try."
Instead, everyone gets some of that premium, human-usable space for free. But if people are going to get some lump of space for free, why not make it the cargo hold, which is less constrained (doesn't have to be human usable) and thus cheaper? They're effectively letting people with more expensive requirements (must be able to access my stuff during flight) be subsidized by people with less expensive requirements ("I can wait until after the flight to access my stuff").
[1] which is probably true enough to a first approximation; you could redesign the interior to have more cargo space and less passenger space
Frontier and Spirit airlines have adopted closer to the policy you describe. Checked luggage is $5-10 cheaper than carry-on. Their customer service posture is hostile, however. They charge for printing of boarding passes at the airport and getting a ticket altered to accommodate a lap infant (free in the US) takes over one hour on the phone.
I'm not saying I like any one of these airlines more than the other carriers. Southwest's moneyball strategy means they charge exorbitant amounts for tickets purchased within one week of the flight, even if it risks a vacancy. I prefer the consistency of the commodity carriers even though the Southwest experience is better for economy travelers.
EDIT: there are also costs in baggage handling though I don't know how the economics of that works out.
And in some countries like Singapore and Indonesia, even a small amount of drugs will get you executed. Too much risk for so little return. Who knows what they are packing in their package, and it really seems like drugs and other illegal items would be relish at the opportunity to use this service.
What I would like to see is airlines encouraging me to check in a few days/weeks earlier and state how many bags I am planning to check in (international travel as domestic airlines dont allow free check in bags except southwest ). If none or less then I should be compensated in some sort of air miles. Then the airline can sell the extra space to a private shipping company. No need to turn travelers into Uber for taco bells for a nostalgic digital nomad living in Reykjavik.
I would never do this for someone I didn't trust personally.
> Grabr largely skirts this conundrum by having the courier do the purchasing and packing. With Airmule, the goods come pre-packaged by the person sending them.