Trying to buy a contractor out
- Thread starter lesslulpo
- Start date
Code 82 Approved
Titanium Plus+ Level Member with benefits!
Here’s how we handle old codgers not agreeing to sell:
I strap them naked to a friend’n tree, then I load up a tennis ball launcher with boiled hot potatoes. I shoot boiled potatoes up his bung until he’s blue.
10 minutes tops, he’s agreeable to our terms.
I strap them naked to a friend’n tree, then I load up a tennis ball launcher with boiled hot potatoes. I shoot boiled potatoes up his bung until he’s blue.
10 minutes tops, he’s agreeable to our terms.
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
It's the contractor's obligation to be aware of conditions in the area and to set his operation up accordingly. If he can't be successful in those conditions then he shouldn't be in that line of work in that area. Simple.
And if local conditions don't allow much in the way of prosperity? Then all the contractor has done is made it possible for the company to profit while he takes on the headaches. Bet you're going to tell me that's too simplistic or some such.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
So Ground is selling quicksand areas to contractors and it’s the contractor’s fault? What a load of crap.
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
Ground isn't selling anything to contractors. They never have. If someone is buying a contract they are buying it from a contractor. FedEx never accepts payment for a service area. If an area doesn't provide enough revenue to turn a profit, don't sign a contract, it's not difficult.
FedEx might have never physically sold something, but initially at least they "sold" someone on the idea that it would be a good deal for them. A lot of water has gone under the bridge since then, including eliminating individual route contractors. I don't remember if Bacha was ever a multiple route owner, and maybe it's different for those who can spread the risk over multiple routes. But he certainly has a point that individual routes in rural areas are much less likely to be successful than metro area routes.
OrioN
double tap o da horn dooshbag
That's common sense, though
I'm operating a rural route with my neighboring route at a loss.
There's about 3 other routes at that status that's in a similar situation on my belt line, unless the negotiator has finally did his job to present the true operating costs to the table and they're secretly hoarding the profits for themselves.
2 routes out of the dozen on my line up are exploding in suburbia development, they recently upgraded to p1000s... I don't want to drive those things because of some narrow streets that you have to park at the corner, take out the hand truck, walk it off. (Unless they pay hourly)
It's a package deal for the investor group, so they had to take it or leave it.
I transferred from another terminal to handle my current route & you saw that there's misplots and missorts due to USPS assign the same zipcode over numerous towns
It's common sense but people here keep making it a personal failing instead. The best manager in the world can't make it work if the revenue isn't there.
OrioN
double tap o da horn dooshbag
That's the job of the negotiator, he has to present the operating costs and renegotiate the settlements... a NYC contractor had to do something similar to stay viable and make some profit on the side when things run smoothly (ie no truck breakdowns)... sold out recently
When the focus of the conversation surrounds the challenges and tribulations especially economic challenges of servicing depressed rural areas the first thing
you do is to accuse them of being poor managers. That's easy for you to say . You simply pull out of your terminal drive down the road a mile and there sits a building with 30 stops in it. Try driving 60 miles just to get to your first stop of the day or drive 40 miles every day just to do a pick up that never ships out more than 3 boxes a day.
It's been a long standing fact that X only wants the easy in town stuff. A number of years back when xpress was entering the Chinese market it would handle it's easy in town parcels and letters but dump it's ching weed rural stuff onto China Post. The Chinese government caught on to it and put an end to that practice right quick.
Over that the past few years the XG route price driver has been the entrance of the investor class C Corps. However they only wanted to no one's surprise the easy sure bet metro stuff. The have little interest out where the deer and the antelope play.
So IWBF you can criticize the rural contractors to your hearts content and no matter how skilled a manager you have yourself believing you are the potential collapse of XG's rural network is right now the greatest threat to you and don't for a minute believe that it can't happen.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Well then if an area sucks to where it’s unprofitable to everyone then who gets stuck with it? FXG will certainly make sure someone covers that territory. FedEx afterall owns you guys, bottom line.
Try it yourself if you think it's so easy . Quite a number tried it at my depressed rural terminal. Instead of taking on additional routes that were offered to us free of charge we 3 day 1's gave them to those starry eyed entrepreneur wanna be's who believed that all they then had to do was just sit back and count up the money.
Revenue per mile wasn't even a steady drip let alone a trickle . They payed on a per diem meaning the faster they drove the faster they got done. Trucks needless to say were simply pulverized. If there was a place they were afraid they would get stuck if they tried to go back into they would simply leave it at the first building they saw. Houses even if abandoned, barns, school bus shelters even if the place was two miles or more away from the place the box was meant to go.
Fire them you might say? How could they do that when they couldn't get anybody else to take over ?
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
It apparently isn't common sense. We have people here claiming it's impossible to turn a profit with the revenue generated, it's so bad they only did it for 20 years. Lol. If service falls enough and there are no takers Fedex will increase the compensation until someone takes it. If it's not enough revenue for you to make money, sell out. No one is forced to contract with Fedex.
What is at issue is having to take on additional routes that lack sufficient revenue to be profitable. That is why out here in the open country contractors are often found driving a daily route themselves because the route they drive is the one they live on. The other routes might make a hundred bucks on a good week and those weeks were quite few in number.
OrioN
double tap o da horn dooshbag
Yikes, if it was that bad, y stay on contract with Fx G?
It's similar to uber or Amazon flex, I guess it's not really taking the account of the wear and tear of your vehicle plus cost of fuel to drive 30 minutes to one house in some cases
The driver was to reduce administrative costs through a reduction in the total number of contractors as well as to erect a legal firewall from future worker misclassification lawsuits.
As a result some single route contractors decided to take the plunge and buy additional routes . For we 3 Day1's we were close enough to retirement not to have to take on a headache we didn't need.
If you lucky enough to grab hold of a couple dozen or so routes in a really good area then you might make out ok but if you're at a station where the most you can get is the minimum required which is usually 5 and they're all like yours too many trucks and too little bucks you're pretty much resigned to having to drive one yourself.
Maybe true, but Fedex has changed the rules so many times, and given ultimatums of take it or leave it so often that someone who had a contract several years ago has seen things change. In the past, core zone payments made my remote rural areas profitable enough to have a couple routes and even a supplemental.
Now the owner of those routes may have enough invested that it makes selling very difficult. With fedex unilaterally changing things throughout the years, you can't just ignorantly claim that the contractor needs to be aware of the conditions. Fedex changes the conditions.
With the requirement to own multiple routes, it could be hard to get adjacent routes that might make those rural routes less costly/more profitable. If the contractor is able to swap packages to another contractor and maybe save an hour for a single delivery, it doesn't make him a bad contractor. It might just mean that he is diligently trying to save himself money by saving his drivers time.
You are mixing profit with pay for your labor. 15 years ago you could run a rural route and make $50k income but that doesn't equal $50k profit. Profit is what is left over AFTER you pay the reasonable cost of labor, including your own.
And you ignore how fedex changes the rules- from being an individual contractor to being required to own multiple routes. That alone can screw someone after they spent tens of thousands. thinking they were ensuring some security. Fedex changes things and in reality, you have only a choice to accept the changes or leave. For someone with a truck worth less than they owe on, it isn't such a simple choice.
And if someone bought the right to service a contract, that might have been a huge investment so leaving isn't an option that is acceptable, and fedex knows they have that power. As long as fedex can make unilateral changes to their business model, you are one change away from being a failure tomorrow, even if you think are god's greatest contractor today. Any contractor chiding another for 'failure' has a chance to be there through no fault of his own tomorrow.
You just nailed it.
