Amazon Lockers: When Urban Dwellers Find Home Delivery Really Inconvenient

Written by Frank Hayes and Evan Schuman
July 11th, 2012

Amazon has been expanding its network of Amazon Lockers—relatively secure holding areas for Amazon packages in the middle of stores—in the U.S. since last year. They were initially limited to New York, Seattle and Washington, D.C., and inside chains including Rite-Aid and 7-Eleven. The concept has been picking up considerable traction in the U.K., though. And one key reason is that package delivery is more problematic there.

An interesting report from Kantar Retail detailed some of the problems: “In the U.K., home delivery is basically the very antithesis of convenience, as it routinely ends up with a frustrating wait in for errant delivery personnel or an equally galling queue on a Saturday morning at the local Royal Mail sorting office. While the former might have the silver lining of a day spent watching The Jeremy Kyle Show or Cash in the Attic, the latter is devoid of any consolation whatsoever. With increasing numbers of workplaces becoming rather reluctant for their post rooms to basically serve as last-mile fulfillment centers for Amazon and other distance sellers, the onus is falling on Amazon et. al. to come up with an alternative.”

The home-delivery problem for E-Commerce is hardly only a British issue; it is an apartment and city issue. But the fact is that a huge percentage of the E-Commerce decision-makers in this country do not live in apartments or urban areas. A relatively small percentage may work there; however, packages delivered to these E-Commerce execs’ homes typically find themselves to a front door. These execs may work in the city, but they don’t—in general—live there.

So it’s easy to see why the locker idea has appeal, especially in high-density urban areas where owning a car is optional and many young apartment dwellers are good E-Commerce candidates. The customers have a safe, relatively convenient place to pick up their Amazon purchases; the brick-and-mortar stores get a little more foot traffic.

Although Amazon might once have worried that lockers in the U.S. would represent “nexus”—a physical presence that would expose the E-tail giant to sales-tax liability—that’s less of a concern since Amazon began cutting deals right and left with state tax authorities and lobbying for online sales taxes.

But there’s still a deep irony here: Customers have to go into a brick-and-mortar store to pick up their Amazon purchases. Remember, these are customers who went online to avoid buying in-store. It’s exactly not the direction you’d expect Amazon to want its customers to go.

Still, if this Amazon version of site-to-store doesn’t seem to make strategic sense, that’s just pure-play E-tail theory colliding with reality. Amazon started as a pure middleman, taking orders that someone else shipped to customers. Then it began keeping some inventory of its own on hand, adding distribution centers spread across the country (and the world) to cut shipping times and costs, and finally switching sides on sales taxes.

And if embedding its delivery system inside other chains’ stores is its paradoxical way to keep some customers happy—even if, as with Rite-Aid, it’s a direct competitor—don’t expect Amazon to think too hard about that problem. The E-tailer can always make sense of it later.


One Comment | Read Amazon Lockers: When Urban Dwellers Find Home Delivery Really Inconvenient

  1. Miles Thomas Says:

    This is not just an Amazon thing in the UK: “Click and Collect” (from a local branch) is big for all retailers that have physical presence, and even parcel companies are getting in on the act: for example, Collect+ has leveraged the convenience store bill payment systems of PayPoint and the delivery courier Yodel to provide parcel pickup and dispatch points (and ecommerce return points) in lots of local convenience stores, and these locations are, well, convenient (local and open long hours).

    So far, Collect+ is typically used by smaller sellers and ebay traders (professional and personal).


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.