
Baggage claim: Trading your excess airline luggage-allowance - edward
http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2016/09/baggage-claim?fsrc=scn%2Ffb%2Fte%2Fbl%2Fed%2Fbaggageclaimtradingyourexcessairlineluggageallowance
======
desdiv
>Grabr largely skirts this conundrum by having the courier do the purchasing
and packing.

On the US customs declaration 6059B form[0], question 14 is:

 _I have commercial merchandise: (articles for sale, samples used for
soliciting orders, or goods that are not considered personal effects)_

Truthfully answering yes means you waste an extra 15 to 60 minutes dealing
with customs and paying import duties on whatever you're bring (personal
exceptions doesn't apply for commercial goods). That's assuming you're a US
resident. If you're a non-resident then you better plan on sleeping in the
airport that night.

Lie by answering no and 99.99% of the time you won't be caught. But 10 years
down the road if the government ever have an axe to grind against you, they
can just look up that confirmation email you got from Grabr and match it
against the 6059B form you filled out and they got you on the hook for making
false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001)[1].

[0] [http://www.immihelp.com/immigration/sample-us-customs-
declar...](http://www.immihelp.com/immigration/sample-us-customs-declaration-
form-6059b.pdf)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_false_statements](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_false_statements)

~~~
Cpoll
Use a throwaway email for Grabr, there's not much they can do short of a sting
operation.

~~~
joecot
If they know where to look they could issue a warrant for that info, and Grabr
have your credit card information.

~~~
aboonaboo
> If they know where to look they could issue a warrant for that info, and
> Grabr have your credit card information.

Bitcoin funneled to paypal cash?

------
THE_PUN_STOPS
> Airmule, a rival, sets standard fees for deliveries: $40 for packages up to
> 5lb (2.3kg), or $60 if the “mule” departs within 48 hours, plus a $5 fee if
> the mule has to travel to pick up the package.

Uhhh.... They actually named it Airmule? Is this satire?

~~~
anexprogrammer
What could possibly go wrong?

"did you pack your bags yourself? Are you carrying anything for anyone else?"

"Well I'm carrying an Airmule(tm) package. They packed it. They texted a photo
to prove it was totally legit."

"Um, really sir? Please come with us"

~~~
r00fus
"You've earned a free body-cavity search!"

Hope no Airmule users plan travel to the Philippines...

------
peterbonney
One big thing the article leaves out is the delivery logistics on the other
end of the trip.

Let's consider the $5 watch example. For such a low-value parcel, how much
time and effort will each party put into delivery/receipt? As a courier, for a
mere $5 there is _no way_ I'm going to go out of my way drop off the package
to anyone. So the recipient is going to need to retrieve it from me at the
airport. Are they willing to wait around for hours (or pay someone else) for
me to arrive, clear customs, etc.? Because I'm certainly not going to hang
around at the airport for hours for _them_ if I'm only getting $5 - so they'd
better be there on time. And that means they are going to have to pay for
transportation to/from the airport (usually pretty far from the city center)
on top of the cost of shipping.

All in all it seems like a pretty hard sell - mail/package couriers have
already sorted out these logistics and will deliver stuff straight to your
door, usually quite cheaply.

The only way I can see the economics working is avoiding import duties in
countries where they are prohibitive, which of course means shifting an
unacceptable risk to the courier.

~~~
disordinary
Actually, if they wait for me and throw in a lift to town and I might be
tempted. Airports can be seriously costly to get from/to.

------
disordinary
Completely not worth it, against airline and government policy and an easy way
to recruit drug mules. "Here, buy this thing from that suspiciously empty shop
and take it across international borders."

Also $5 to buy a watch is hardly worth the time, unless your literally buying
it at duty free.

------
pavel_lishin
> _For bringing a Citizen watch to Vu in Ho Chi Minh City, you can make $5.
> Franz in Munich is apparently unsatisfied with the quality of coffee there,
> and will pay you $15 to bring him a box of San Francisco’s Blue Bottle
> beans. Ahmed in Cairo has seemingly spotted a good deal for an Apple Macbook
> Pro in Dubai, and is willing to part with $100 to have someone bring one to
> him._

The trouble of even downloading the app and signing up for an account isn't
worth $5 to me.

~~~
maerF0x0
Me neither, but we're part of a disappearing slice of the world where we cant
be bothered. Much of the the labor force will do anything to make more than
minimum wage.

~~~
disordinary
Those people aren't flying internationally. If you spend hundreds on an
airline ticket then you wont care abbot $5

~~~
chrischen
Tell that to hostel-ers around the world.

~~~
disordinary
I spent several months backpacking around Europe, through Russia, and then
China, and a friend of mine is pretty much a professional backpacker well into
his 30's. It can be tough, and you take odd jobs when you can get them. But
realistically $5 is not going to buy you a nights sleep in a dorm, it might
buy you lunch, it will just buy you a coffee in some airports.

Not worth the risk for the money on offer. Knowingly being a drug mule, on the
other hand, pays better.

~~~
chrischen
You can get hostel beds for $15-$20 in Hong Kong, even if it doesn't get you
all the way, it's a significant chunk, so little bits from various places will
add up.

~~~
disordinary
You can get a hostel for $25 in most places, seasoned travelers are not going
to be taking unknown packages around. The people that do that sort of stuff
are the people going on their first trip overseas.

------
pmontra
"Did you pack your bags yourself?"

Be careful about what you answer. "No" is a bad answer and "yes" is OK only if
1) the content of the bag is OK and 2) you really packed it.

------
bko
I can't see this as a long term viable market. Airlines obviously won't like
this and it's only a matter of time until they lobby politicians to make this
illegal because "terrorism"

It's a shame because I believe that loosening restrictions of airline tickets,
specifically allowing for transferability would be a huge opportunity. If
tickers were transferrable, the seemingly arbitrary shifts in pricing would
fall considerably. The same restrictions could apply such as visa restrictions
and perhaps even a limit to transferability such as 24 hours before the
flight. It would be a huge win for the consumer but sadly I doubt this will
happen any time soon.

~~~
SilasX
Similarly, it's ridiculous how they charge for checked luggage.

Now, wait, let me finish! I don't mean in the confused sense of "lol
everything should be free!"

What I mean is, checked luggage is _inconvenient_ for the passenger (less
access, have to wait), while using the _least scarce_ part of the cabin --
they can't sell tickets to fly in the cargo hold, while they want to allocate
whatever passenger-usable space they can for paying passengers.

So, if anything, they should charge for carry-on luggage while making (some
level of) checked luggage free.

The system we have now -- the opposite -- creates perverse incentives all
around: passengers are encouraged to _avoid_ using the perfectly usable cargo
hold, and instead, cram increasingly absurd amounts into their carry-on
allotment, testing the unwillingness of airline employees to say, "sorry,
you're over your limit, you'll have to check that". And then people have more
pieces to deal with, choking up the loading and deplaning procedures, and
bringing more of their (potentially dangerous) items through a security
checkpoint...

Every time I fly, I notice a sea of people toting enormous bags, as if to say
"tell me can't take this on. Just try."

~~~
jschwartzi
This assumes they don't make any money from selling space in the cargo hold
for air mail couriers.

~~~
SilasX
Right, but if we assume passenger space trades off one-to-one for cargo hold
space [1], then the airline could reallocate the overhead bins to cargo (e.g.
raise the floor). Then they could sell out even more cargo space as mail. So,
in equilibrium, passengers should have to "compensate" (pay a premium) for the
airline's lost opportunity to rent out the space.

Instead, everyone gets some of that premium, human-usable space for free. But
if people are going to get some lump of space for free, why not make it the
cargo hold, which is less constrained (doesn't have to be human usable) and
thus cheaper? They're effectively letting people with more expensive
requirements (must be able to access my stuff during flight) be subsidized by
people with less expensive requirements ("I can wait until after the flight to
access my stuff").

[1] which is probably true enough to a first approximation; you could redesign
the interior to have more cargo space and less passenger space

~~~
detaro
Is floor height (and thus window positioning, ...) something an airline can
order customized? (genuine question, I always thought of that stuff as fixed,
but I could very well be wrong)

------
pfarnsworth
No thanks. The laws are so brutal in some countries, there's no way I would
ever risk it. In Japan, Sudafed is illegal, which is something I would not
have known if not for my friend who ran into this issue years ago.

And in some countries like Singapore and Indonesia, even a small amount of
drugs will get you executed. Too much risk for so little return. Who knows
what they are packing in their package, and it really seems like drugs and
other illegal items would be relish at the opportunity to use this service.

------
carpathiani
Shipping with a contract carrier provides lots of benefits. The method
described here only increases risk for all parties.

------
CodeSheikh
Given the current political climate and default skepticism and fear that comes
with air traveling, I would not take $50 to take someone else's goods. Heck I
double check if one of my friends of family member try to send an item with me
(that has happened like 1 out of 1000 times I have traveled). This app has
funding from Russia and it might be a success there. Sure they just wanted a
media footprint catapulted by US media outlets.

What I would like to see is airlines encouraging me to check in a few
days/weeks earlier and state how many bags I am planning to check in
(international travel as domestic airlines dont allow free check in bags
except southwest ). If none or less then I should be compensated in some sort
of air miles. Then the airline can sell the extra space to a private shipping
company. No need to turn travelers into Uber for taco bells for a nostalgic
digital nomad living in Reykjavik.

------
tmaly
cool idea, but I just imagine someone getting in trouble for transporting
something that is not allowed.

------
jacalata
Interesting - I was expecting this to be about trading your luggage allowance
with other passengers on the same plane, which is a much tinier audience but
might avoid some of the risks.

------
bronco21016
This is exactly something I could see low paid employees at a US regional
airline doing to make some extra money.

------
post_break
I've watched enough Australia border security episodes to know I would never
use this service.

------
jbmorgado
This seems like a very big risk. You are actually putting your name on a
baggage that is passing trough a high security/high traffic control situation.

I would never do this for someone I didn't trust personally.

~~~
maerF0x0
You didnt read the details. You're also tasked with provisioning and packing
the thing . Eg: goto walmart and buy me M&Ms, fly them to london to deliver to
me.

~~~
adamio
not with Airmule, with them the packages are pre-packed

~~~
maerF0x0
Gotcha, because it was first mentioned I was thinking the article was about
grabr. But I see now its about the whole idea in general. Yes, taking an
unknown prepackaged ("ticking"?) container onto the plane for a stranger seems
to either be 1) stupid or 2) vastly undercompensated.

