Subject:
|
Re: Why Not...?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 22:08:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2205 times
|
| |
|
|
The easiest way to do it is to simply order an element, and receive
some arbitrary quantity (i.e. a "box" or "bag" full). That quantity
might vary from part to part but would be consistent on a per part basis.
That would be by far the most efficient way to fill orders.
They could price the shipments per unit weight or per package size
("big box is x, small bag is y) or even element specific pricing
(an order of 2x4's cost x, and order of crocodials cost y).
Allowing customers to order any specific quantity of parts would
drive the cost up significantly. However, If 1 unit of 2x4's is a big box,
then you might order 1 box or 10 and that would be a trivial order to fill.
KL
In lugnet.dear-lego, Wayne R. Hussey writes:
> In lugnet.dear-lego, Gene C. Weissinger writes:
> > Why not have a 'minimum piece order'? This would be where you could order
> > individual pieces but had to order a certain number (total $$ amount or
> > piece count). Maybe this has been touched upon in the past with all of the
> > LEGO Direct stuff...
> > I thought it would be a great idea... ;)
> > Just think of the catalog.
> >
> > EC
>
> Great suggestion. I would go farther and suggest not only a minimum piece
> count, but also an incremental piece count. Example: 2x4 bricks - can only be
> purchased in intervals of 40 pieces (40, 80, 160, 2,000 etc.). Other piece
> types could have different piece count lots. They (TLC) could then make up
> packets of the various pieces and the "picking" for an order would be easy.
>
> Maybe they could make piece lots in dollar blocks instead - 40 2x4 bricks (as
> used in the example above) could be a $1 (US) baggie. Other pieces could be $2
> or $3 (or whatever) to get a reasonable piece count/cost ratio.
>
> Wayne
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why Not...?
|
| (...) Crocodials, like in Peter Pan? ;-) (...) I would think that by the pound, with an understood margin of error, would be the most efficient, since they use scales to verify set contents right now. -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why Not...?
|
| (...) Great suggestion. I would go farther and suggest not only a minimum piece count, but also an incremental piece count. Example: 2x4 bricks - can only be purchased in intervals of 40 pieces (40, 80, 160, 2,000 etc.). Other piece types could have (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
