The thing that surprised me the most about it is that FedEx didn't just pay them the 400k for lost shipment. They had all the proof that it was lost, all that Fedex had was a signature of someone who doesn't even work at their fulfilment centre. Even after their "higher ups" got involved all that FedEx could do was "huh, sucks to be you I guess?" Does freight shipment not have insurance? What's going on here?
This reminds me of the recent story where an Uber courier stole two MacBooks, there was no signature, CCTV showing no delivery, and Apple was just like "our carrier has completed the requested investigation, and no further action will be taken by Apple."
> all that Fedex had was a signature of someone who doesn't even work at their fulfilment centre. [...] What's going on here?
Basically a lot of global logistics runs on trust.
If a driver is delivering a pallet to the FooCorp warehouse, he doesn't get given a copy of the FooCorp org chart, or get an example signature to compare against the signature they're given, or get given a map or a secret password or anything like that.
He just pulls up to the building that says FooCorp on it, says "got a delivery for FooCorp", they let him in and he accepts any name and signature from whoever is near the door.
>>If a driver is delivering a pallet to the FooCorp warehouse, he doesn't get given a copy of the FooCorp org chart, or get an example signature to compare against the signature they're given, or get given a map or a secret password or anything like that.
Obviously. But if there is 400 grand on the line, you'd think someone would actually check(when the claim is made). The receiver would say "you have a signature from person X. Person X doesn't actually work here". Fedex then says "ok, prove it" - and then the receiver does, in whatever way is legally acceptable.
Edit: in fact, let me add a bit more - if the shipment was delivered to the right address just signed by someone who didn't actually work there then sure, I think FedEx would be in the clear. But they delivered the parcel to the wrong place - the fact that it was signed for by someone is almost irrelevant, it's the same as having no signature at all.
The article you're commenting on mentions that FedEx didn't deliver the pallets of handhelds to the warehouse, but instead left them at an unrelated construction site next door. This is clearly FedEx's fault, they didn't even deliver to the correct address.
Every time I bought an electric unicycle, it got stolen at South San Francisco branch. It is totally reproducible, happened 3 times. One time I found some higher up at FedEx on LinkedIn and sent them an InMail. The regional manager really pushed this issue to highest priority for the branch. Branch managers got CC'ed in, drivers, people working at the warehouse; it was an all hands on deck situation. They reassured me that they have cameras everywhere and it couldn't be stolen.
It was stolen. They don't know who did it. FedEx is terrible.
FWIW, I've had really good interactions with FedEx for the most part.
Including for Apple hardware, where I had a FedEx driver pull into the end of my long driveway, wait 5 seconds and then leave. They marked the signature-required MacBook Air as "undeliverable, nobody home", while I was in fact home and waiting for the delivery. Called the local FedEx hub and they sent the driver back to me.
Would playdate be able to sue FedEx or take them to small claims court or do you sign something when you use FedEx that says you can't sue them for XYZ?
'you cannot sue us for not doing the only thing you are paying us for (delivering your goods)' sounds like an inconscionable clause. Surely any worthwhile legal system would make such clauses illegal. Otherwise many scams (fake invoicing, for example) would be essentially legal as long the perp buried a clause in a contract.
Shipment insurance is normally an optional add-on. IMO, if the shipper doesn’t get it, it is on them.
It is nicer for the shipper to decide the value and pay the corresponding price for that. Because you need to know the replacement value of that lost item. This is dependent on all kinds of factors.
Is there any scenario where someone would knowingly decide not to take insurance on a 400k shipment? What would be the reason for doing so?
In this case the shipper is the company behind the Playdate, so it seems weird to me they wouldn't insure their own stock. But maybe there's a good reason why this isn't done?
I wanted to buy a playdate when they first came out, but unfortunately they weren't shipping to my country.
Now they do, so I just placed an order 15 mins ago and my partner just received a call from the bank to verify that it wasn't a fraudulent transaction.
She just asked me - what is this "play date" you just sent $300 to? Oh dear. :D
Then she asks why you spend $300 for a Gameboy when you already have a PS5 and Switch, and at this point you just get the guest room ready for yourself tonight.
This comment fells too reddit esque for me, as if it's crafted to solicit upvotes or "facebook up, hit your lawyer and delete the gym" style comments.
- Why is your partner getting the call from the bank when you placed the order?
- If it's a shared account, why would you not forewarn your partner about this transaction? If I'm about to buy pay for something big from our joint account, I sure as hell let my partner know about it ahead of time.
- If none of the above applies, then a simple "it's a portable gaming console that I've been yearning after for ages that I finally ordered earlier today", and 9/10 times that should settle the matter.
Interesting choice to go with a PI who's focused on recovery rather than criminal convinctions. Given the lack of sophistication in this operation, I suspect recovery would have happened either way, and the thieves might have faced some actual consequences. As is, they didn't lose anything other than the stolen items and will likely continue to capitalize on similar opportunities in the future.
Playdate likely took the initial interactions with the police as a sign of how that would play out. It was already slower and a lot more work, including flying to Las Vegas in-person, to involve law enforcement.
Maybe those construction workers will steal again. But also maybe they realized how easily they were found out, how hard it actually is to offload stolen goods, and decide it’s not worth the hassle to steal again.
Not sure if it helps anyone else, but for me it made the story a lot easier to grasp.
I wrote most of it by hand, using an LLM just for a rough outline which I then manually rewrote line by line, streamlined, removed hallucinations, double-checked all quotes, reordered and added images and links.
Honestly original article is way more interesting and nuanced. I'm afraid LLM version is too short and while technically correct definitely feels like dry list of random facts from transcription.
> original article is way more interesting and nuanced
Oh I don't disagree in the slightest, after all it's basically an interview full of personal experiences and anecdotes.
But HN already has a problem with people commenting without reading the article, even if that article is relatively short. With an hour-long podcast episode or a transcript stuffed with filler words and partial sentences it's even worse.
> I'm afraid LLM version is too short and while technically correct definitely feels like dry list of random facts from transcription
Well, the LLM summary was a lot more thrilling and entertaining than my version. Sadly, it was also wrong and full of hallucinations.
That was amazing. I wasn't up for spending an hour listening to the podcast, but a few minute reading the article you created were well worth it. Thank you!
Huh, so a half-baked crime of opportunity, as opposed to a sophisticated operation.
Still unclear on how the delivery managed to get put (or taken) to the wrong side of the road at a construction site. Fedex mistake? Trickery by thief? Misdirection by thief that took them from loading-dock?
Almost certainly just a fedex mistake taking them to the wrong lot. Happens all the time. And, Hanlon's razor - never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.
Its pretty easy to imagine construction workers just signing for everything that arrives, and only afterwards figuring out that the address is wrong.
I suppose the key insight is that mandatory device registration really saved them. Everyone loves the concept of an entirely open device that doesn’t require this, but if Panic didn’t have registration, it would’ve been impossible to locate the devices, and end up being a $400k write off.
UPS pays their drivers very well. FedEx… does not.
I’ve had them “deliver” a bunch of PCs to a dumpster. Or drop off a laptop to a garbage can in a Manhattan office. How do I know? The courier took a picture to document the delivery.
FedEx employees in our region are consistently grumpy, unhelpful, and extremely abusive with packages.
We got video of one FedEx guy kicking retail Apple Computer boxes off the back of his big rig (destroyed 2x iMacs).
Our UPS drivers are consistently cheerful, helpful and considerate with the packages they carry.
The contrast grows dramatically if you ever suffer some misfortune that requires a phone call into corporate. FedEx is reliably crabby, unhelpful and actively belligerent.
These two companies are a perfect illustration of what happens when you make it obvious to your staff how you feel about them.
I supposed this begs the obvious question I'll ask: why? It seems like this is an easy way to make sure any and all Fedex employess are looking to jump ship to UPS or any other competitor.
Readit News
These days you have to beg them to take their proprietary prototype hardware back https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgeEHdAmJDg
Apple and Uber know driver who the order was given to and the police are involved but they also haven’t been able to do anything? Just seems odd.
I’ve had trade ins go missing and after a short investigation Apple has always credited me.
Basically a lot of global logistics runs on trust.
If a driver is delivering a pallet to the FooCorp warehouse, he doesn't get given a copy of the FooCorp org chart, or get an example signature to compare against the signature they're given, or get given a map or a secret password or anything like that.
He just pulls up to the building that says FooCorp on it, says "got a delivery for FooCorp", they let him in and he accepts any name and signature from whoever is near the door.
Obviously. But if there is 400 grand on the line, you'd think someone would actually check(when the claim is made). The receiver would say "you have a signature from person X. Person X doesn't actually work here". Fedex then says "ok, prove it" - and then the receiver does, in whatever way is legally acceptable.
Edit: in fact, let me add a bit more - if the shipment was delivered to the right address just signed by someone who didn't actually work there then sure, I think FedEx would be in the clear. But they delivered the parcel to the wrong place - the fact that it was signed for by someone is almost irrelevant, it's the same as having no signature at all.
It's kind of overwhelming when you stop and really think about it.
It was stolen. They don't know who did it. FedEx is terrible.
Deleted Comment
It is nicer for the shipper to decide the value and pay the corresponding price for that. Because you need to know the replacement value of that lost item. This is dependent on all kinds of factors.
In this case the shipper is the company behind the Playdate, so it seems weird to me they wouldn't insure their own stock. But maybe there's a good reason why this isn't done?
Now they do, so I just placed an order 15 mins ago and my partner just received a call from the bank to verify that it wasn't a fraudulent transaction.
She just asked me - what is this "play date" you just sent $300 to? Oh dear. :D
- Why is your partner getting the call from the bank when you placed the order? - If it's a shared account, why would you not forewarn your partner about this transaction? If I'm about to buy pay for something big from our joint account, I sure as hell let my partner know about it ahead of time. - If none of the above applies, then a simple "it's a portable gaming console that I've been yearning after for ages that I finally ordered earlier today", and 9/10 times that should settle the matter.
Maybe those construction workers will steal again. But also maybe they realized how easily they were found out, how hard it actually is to offload stolen goods, and decide it’s not worth the hassle to steal again.
Not sure if it helps anyone else, but for me it made the story a lot easier to grasp.
I wrote most of it by hand, using an LLM just for a rough outline which I then manually rewrote line by line, streamlined, removed hallucinations, double-checked all quotes, reordered and added images and links.
Oh I don't disagree in the slightest, after all it's basically an interview full of personal experiences and anecdotes.
But HN already has a problem with people commenting without reading the article, even if that article is relatively short. With an hour-long podcast episode or a transcript stuffed with filler words and partial sentences it's even worse.
> I'm afraid LLM version is too short and while technically correct definitely feels like dry list of random facts from transcription
Well, the LLM summary was a lot more thrilling and entertaining than my version. Sadly, it was also wrong and full of hallucinations.
Still unclear on how the delivery managed to get put (or taken) to the wrong side of the road at a construction site. Fedex mistake? Trickery by thief? Misdirection by thief that took them from loading-dock?
Its pretty easy to imagine construction workers just signing for everything that arrives, and only afterwards figuring out that the address is wrong.
> Thanks so much for listening, and please don’t steal our Playdates. Because we will find you.
> Thanks so much for alledgedly listening
> please don’t alledgedly steal our Playdates.
> please don’t steal our alledged Playdates.
> Because we will alledgedly find you.
I’ve had them “deliver” a bunch of PCs to a dumpster. Or drop off a laptop to a garbage can in a Manhattan office. How do I know? The courier took a picture to document the delivery.
We got video of one FedEx guy kicking retail Apple Computer boxes off the back of his big rig (destroyed 2x iMacs).
Our UPS drivers are consistently cheerful, helpful and considerate with the packages they carry.
The contrast grows dramatically if you ever suffer some misfortune that requires a phone call into corporate. FedEx is reliably crabby, unhelpful and actively belligerent.
These two companies are a perfect illustration of what happens when you make it obvious to your staff how you feel about them.
Deleted Comment