The Domino Effect - Low-Value Drone Delivery

The Domino Effect - Low-Value Drone Delivery

The logistics and delivery behemoth DHL has this week become the latest in a long line of multinationals to bow out of the drone delivery race. Our social feeds have been inundated for a decade with news of progress and industry firsts so you could be forgiven in wondering what has gone wrong? Well, like much in today's modern world, what's presented to us often does not reflect reality. Let's explore this further.

We have clear unresolved challenges in our industry, namely regulation maturity, achieving societal acceptance, and evolutionary technology developments. However, with our industry well versed and actively contributing to all the above you may be asking yourself, ‘am I missing something?’. Some may say that despite the hundreds of millions of dollars spent to date, some of that should have committed to building a business case. The elephant in the room is one of commercial viability. The economics of a drone delivery program where it is low-value goods being packed into boxes simply do not add up. Having heard the stories of delivery drivers receiving mere cents per parcel with the majority of these unsung heroes earning minimum wage, it doesn’t take a lot to work out this will likely be the most cost-effective method for some time.

With the overwhelming majority of purchasing decisions based on the price, it is unlikely we will see a willingness to spend thirty dollars for delivery vs five only to have a ten-dollar pack of batteries delivered via drone. Sure, you might get the occasional individual who favours the environmental benefits of drone vs van, but not at a scale that it becomes a sustainable business model. This quite promptly brings us back to the real value drones bring to the delivery supply chain. Namely, in things on which you cannot put a price; think organs, blood, and other life-saving necessities. In addition to this the delivery of high-value items across industry in which any delay can result in significant financial ramifications; think an emergency repair on a railway track requiring a specialised tool not located on-site. There are of course many more, commercially sustainable examples.

There is another possibility, perhaps one for those of us predisposed to cynicism. With some of the best minds in the industry working with these organisations it is hard to imagine they were not aware of what would be the likely outcome. If this was the case then perhaps the marketing material gleaned over the years has proved value enough in raising brand awareness. After all, we all remember that Amazon Prime advert with Clarkson, don’t we?

Kenny Beggs

Business Owner at Media Environments Ltd

3 年

That’s it in a nutshell. An indulgent PR stunt. Offered no advantages (that I could see) over hand delivered parcels.

回复
Chris Crockford

Developing new businesses in highly regulated sectors

3 年

A great article which covers many points i concur with. Three other points to consider IMHO are: 1) federated airspace, the opportunity cost of flying point to point in class G is not the same as class D, especially with different ANSP''s operating different class D airspaces. 2) Architecture, the operational costs for delivery to the home will have massively different risk profiles for a georgian terrace than to suburbia to inner city high-rise. 3) The advent of electric vans provides a simple, cost effective means for last mile to fulfil net-zero with few regulatory hurdles.

Consolidation time is still to come, leaving others to burn money and buy what remains once the demand side of the market has matured makes more sense to behemoths.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Callum C.的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了