I don't think you actually looked at the requirements for a "flat" or you wouldn't use it as an example. It's not an arbitrary package of a given weight. It has to be FLAT. It has very specific size requirements, must have a minimum of 1/4 inch thickness and maximum 3/4 inch, and that thickness has to be uniform across dimensions: it cannot vary by more than 1/4 inch. And even then it has strict rigidity requirements: It cannot deflect more than 2 inches over a set distance from the edge of a counter. If any of these conditions are not met then you pay the standard "commercial plus" package rate, whether you ship 10 package a month or 10,000. I have inquired both directly with USPS and with a shipping logistics consultant: there is no amount that gets you a better price than the general prices I'm quoting unless you have your own logistics network that delivers directly to regional USPS distribution hubs for "last mile" delivery, and then you're not really using just the USPS are you? You're building out your own shipping network as well.
And even then you're wrong: Paying any amount for shipping of items, even if the items cost the same amount as the Chinese version it's still more expensive. It doesn't matter if the shipping cost is $10 or $3.50 or $1: It's still more expensive.
I've shipped hundreds of thousands of flats, I'm quite familiar with the requirements. Looking at the product you linked it seems small enough that it could be stuffed into a flat envelope and shipped.
>And even then you're wrong: Paying any amount for shipping of items, even if the items cost the same amount as the Chinese version it's still more expensive. It doesn't matter if the shipping cost is $10 or $3.50 or $1: It's still more expensive.
Care to elaborate? If your cost was the same as the Chinese and your shipping cost the same as well then your overall cost would be the same. What are you trying to say here?
So you know the requirements and persist in presenting it as a package shipping option? When any item thicker than 0.75" wouldn't apply and thus invalidates this as an option for the vast majority of package shippers?
And you ignore that point that even at the high volume flats rate, it's still more expensive. Maybe your needs are an edge case, I don't know. But you asked for examples where shipping within the US is more expensive, and you have those examples in spades. Once given, you want to move the goal posts, and can't even move them to where you're actually right. You're being deliberately obtuse and intellectually dishonest. I'm done trying to have a conversation.
I presented as an option for the specific item you presented as an example. I never claimed it's an option for the majority of shippers. It's an option for many of the cheap, light items people present as examples.
Nope, still wrong. It doesn't meet the length and width requirements, and if you shoved it in an envelop the size needed, it wouldn't meet the thickness variability requirements or the deflection requirements. And even if it did, once again, it would still be more expensive. So, you didn't claim it as an option for the majority of shippers: which implies that you concede the main point you raised, that there are plenty of cases where shipping within the US is more expensive.
Regardless, you're not trying to honestly assess the examples given. But I guess I was incorrect when I said I was done with the conversation-- I couldn't help pointing out for other readers how you persist in being wrong.
>So, you didn't claim it as an option for the majority of shippers: which implies that you concede the main point you raised, that there are plenty of cases where shipping within the US is more expensive.
No, it doesn't imply that. For other configurations there are different programs that reduce the cost; elsewhere in this thread I pointed out that using parcel select lightweight would reduce the claimed shipping cost by a factor of 3.
My claim is that the specific examples people give tend to be wrong. I'm sure there's some exotic configurations where China ends up paying less. It's just that virtually none of the articles about the topic point to correct examples.
And even then you're wrong: Paying any amount for shipping of items, even if the items cost the same amount as the Chinese version it's still more expensive. It doesn't matter if the shipping cost is $10 or $3.50 or $1: It's still more expensive.