In article .com, "warbler" wrote:

Wow. I obviously touched a nerve when I complained about my $3.00 part
and the annoyance from the high shipping cost. Many of you are fair in
suggesting that Delta's part's and order fullfillment process is a
costly exercise for them. But what bugs me is that:

There is no match between the cost of the item and the cost assigned to
shipping

No reason why there should be. To illustrate with extreme examples, a $10K
diamond could be shipped coast-to-coast in a padded mailer or small box for
less than a dollar via first-class mail -- but a dollar's worth of scrap steel
might cost twenty bucks to ship from one side of town to the other. Shipping
cost is a function of weight, bulk, and difficulty in packaging, none of which
have any particular relationship to the value of the item being shipped.

There is no match between the weight of the item and the cost assigned
to shipping

I doubt that's actually the case. Do you seriously mean that the costs to ship
a 1/2-ounce gasket and a ten-pound motor are similar?

There is not match whether the part required is really poor Delta
quality (which in this case is true)

?? What does the quality of the parts have to do with the cost of shipping? I
confess I'm at a loss to understand why you think there should be any
relationship here.

There is no match between the method of shipping based on the nature of
the part

It's probably less expensive for Delta to have a contract with a single
shipper, and ship everything that way.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.