Subject:
|
Re: Why Not...?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 23:45:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4547 times
|
| |
|
|
Kevin Loch wrote:
> 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).
Crocodials, like in Peter Pan? ;-)
> 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.
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 Communications Corp
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Why Not...?
|
| 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 (...) (27 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
|
|
|
|
