What could possibly go wrong? Walmart edition.

[Captain Jack Harkness]

I just love how it's okay to call Wal-Mart shoppers stupid dumbfucks.  Sure there are some, but please don't generalize.

Yes, I know that nobody used those exact words.

[chitoryu12]

I just love how it's okay to call Wal-Mart shoppers stupid dumbfucks.  Sure there are some, but please don't generalize.

Yes, I know that nobody used those exact words.

As a matter of fact, The Illusive Man was really the ONLY person to actually say that. The rest of us expressed a very real concern that they would be having random Wal-Mart shoppers perform deliveries rather than hiring drivers regularly.

Please don't generalize.

[Art Vandelay]

So apparently you need to sign up for this like an actual job and go through the usual process of a background check and other dealies to actually get to delivering. They're not just going to throw boxes at people who leave and ask them to drop them off.

So then what they're actually doing is hiring delivery drivers that work when they want or is convenient. That's actually a lot more sane than what it sounded like.

Almost every thread around here seems to be this sort of story. We get an extremely sensationalist, outrageous and plain wrong OP and people actually take it seriously until finally one bright spark has the brilliant idea to actually glance at the facts for a second.

Really people, can we please put in at least some research before hitting the "post thread" button? Or at the very least, stop taking The Illusive Man's threads on face value.

[chitoryu12]

That said, there are still going to be issues with this model:

* Customers give their address to Wal-Mart when they sign up and are assigned locations on their way home from the store. So depending on who signs up and how many, there could be gaps in coverage; the point behind this is to lower prices for items shipped online by removing companies like FedEx from the equation, but we don't know if customers will have to deal with higher prices if outside of the independent coverage area or if they'll only lower the price for items as a smaller general decrease that affects the entire potential coverage zone.

* There's still a chance of package theft by unprofessional drivers. I can picture it being a very short time before methods of theft are passed along various channels (including the internet), much like shoplifting guides.

* People don't really trust random strangers knocking on their doors as much as a FedEx or UPS deliveryman, which could cause concerns among customers.

* As the article in the OP mentions regarding Zipments (a similar concept), some cities require licensing for the drivers (which either get factored into the costs of online items if Wal-Mart pays for them or lowers the amount of drivers due to making all new hires pay for their licenses) and Wal-Mart would need to either pay for insurance for the packages or require the drivers to pay additional insurance costs to carry higher priced deliveries.

[Sleepy]

Wal-Mart would offer a discount on the customers' shopping bill, effectively covering the cost of their gas in return for the delivery of packages, he added.

The article doesn't mention how much the discount is, but this sentence makes it sound like the bill is only slashed enough to cover gas. That would be completely stupid, since the deliverer would only break even, essentially wasting his time.

[Captain Jack Harkness]

That said, there are still going to be issues with this model:

* Customers give their address to Wal-Mart when they sign up and are assigned locations on their way home from the store. So depending on who signs up and how many, there could be gaps in coverage; the point behind this is to lower prices for items shipped online by removing companies like FedEx from the equation, but we don't know if customers will have to deal with higher prices if outside of the independent coverage area or if they'll only lower the price for items as a smaller general decrease that affects the entire potential coverage zone.

* There's still a chance of package theft by unprofessional drivers. I can picture it being a very short time before methods of theft are passed along various channels (including the internet), much like shoplifting guides.

* People don't really trust random strangers knocking on their doors as much as a FedEx or UPS deliveryman, which could cause concerns among customers.

* As the article in the OP mentions regarding Zipments (a similar concept), some cities require licensing for the drivers (which either get factored into the costs of online items if Wal-Mart pays for them or lowers the amount of drivers due to making all new hires pay for their licenses) and Wal-Mart would need to either pay for insurance for the packages or require the drivers to pay additional insurance costs to carry higher priced deliveries.

Good points.  I suppose it's just Wal-Mart being greedy and thinking it has a smart solution to "lower costs."

*sigh*

I guess this makes a lot of sense, seeing as how there's no more full-time workers.  That's for another topic, though.  Speaking of that, it really pisses me off that Obamacare's the scapegoat for that one.  Greedy bastards need to go fuck themselves.