HINTS FOR HAULIERS.
Page 27
Page 28
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
An Occasional Chat on Subjects and Problems of Interest to those Who are Engaged
• or About to be Engaged, in Running Commercial Vehicles for a Living.
W\WITH REFERENCE to the figures of cost which I gave in the article in the issue of " the-week before last, the calculation, I may remind readers, was based upon a -weekly mileage of 200. If the haulier is able to obtain contracts which will keep him going for more than this, his expense per mile, and therefore the profitable charge which he may make, will diminish accordingly.; For example, if he can keep up an average mileage of 300 per week for a reasonably lengthy period, then he is in a position to quote much more favourable terms than those which I named last week. His total working cost for the lorry, according to the tables which appeared in the issue of this journal for January 11th, is 19.40d. per mile, for a four-ton lorry Covering 300 miles per week. This figure covers the running costs and the standing charges incurred in connection with the lorry itself. His establishment and office expenses will be substantially the same as when the lorry only runs NO miles per week, so that we may now divide £4 .2s. 6d. per week (the figure arrived al last week) by 300, instead of 200, in order to arrive at the actual -expense per mile run. This figure -is therefore, now, 3.30d. per mile instead of 4.95d., making the actual cost of running the lorry and business together 22.70d. per mile. We may make the same. percentage allowance for contingencies and possible occasional expenditure for the temporary hire of a lorry to complete contracts: on occasions when thehaulier's own machine is laid up from some cause or other. This, at 15 per cent., amounts to 15.41d. . The total ,expenditure is thus 26.11d. Now, if the man is driving his lorry for 300 miles a. week, he will naturally expect a better return than £5. On the other hand, I do not think he is justified in increasing the profit strictly pro rata for the mileage. Each individual reader may have hisown ideas on this matter and CAA make corresponding alterations in these calculations. In the present case, I am going to assume a profit of £6 per week, which, for 300 miles, is 4.Sd. per mile and the charge must therefore be at least 30.91d., say 28. 7d. per mile.
Low Mileages Impracticable for the Haulier.
The effect of running, comparatively, only a few miles per week, is more strongly emphasized than ever, when we come to'take into account the effect of establishment charges and a regular maximum profit. So important does this point become that it is, strictly speaking, impossible for a haulier to compete unless his mileage is at least 200 per week. Take, for example, the case in which a man only covers -100 miles per week. The corresponding figures work out as in Table II herewith, and it is apparent that, in order to obtain a profit of so little as £4 per week, hei must charge practically 58, -per mile for the use of his four-ton lorry. It is not to be eispected that hewill obtain many eontracts at this rate and the immediate result will, therefore, be that his mileage will become less and less, and he will eventually find it impossible to go on any longer.
It is extremely important to point out here that this is all on the assumption that the charge for the hire of the lorry is necessarily based on the mileage. I do not think it should be so, and will return to that aspect of the question later on, when I shall be able to uSe some of the above figures in support of argumeets to the contrary.
Is a Sliding Scale of Charges Possible ?
It would almost appear that the proper thing to do would be for the haulier to adopt a sliding scale and charge his customers according to the amount of business he himself can acquire. In slack times, for exe ample, suppose he found he was only averaging 100 miles per week on contracts and that for the greater part of' the .week his vehicle was lying up in the garage, be would, if a. sliding scale were permissible, charge 5s. ; if he were doing 200 miles per week his charge would be 38. 2d. per mile, -but, if 'his contracts were enough to enable him to cover 300 and over, he would be able to make profit and only charge 2s. 7d. per mile. The absurdity of this is apparent. at once, when it is remembered that at busy times one can charge high prices, and in slack time, prices have to be cut to get budinees at all. •
It is clear,, therefore, that a sliding scale is quite out of the The principle underlying this impracticable -method of charging, however, is immensely important at this stage of. our argument. A haulier can, by consideration of it, realize-how inextricably bound up are the expenses of running a, vehicle, the Mileage which it covers per week, 'and profitable 'charges which may be made -in connection with it. E " • .. • :
Before proceeding further, must remind readers of this page, for the 95th time—or is it the '96th.? I am not; Sine—. that, since the working costs of the lorry are calculated per actual mile run; the charges for the hire of that machine, which are based upon the working costs, must also be according to the actual miles covered, whether the vehicle it-self he empty or loaded. . The cost of running is, to all intents and purposes, the same in either case, or, at any rate, the average cost of running, which is given in the tables which accompany these articles is calculated for periods of months, and sometimes years, _and does not discriminate between empty and loaded vehicles. It may also be worth while to point out, too, that dthough a man who is running a lorry 300 miles a week is able to make a profit at the) low price of 2s. 7d. per mile, instead of 5s. per mile where the mileage is only 100 per week, he it, nevertheless, working on a much lower margin per mile, and if, as may possibly happen from time to time, he finds it necessary. to sacrifice a little profit in order to secure a useful contract, he must remember that his actual profit is 4.8d. per mile, while that of the man who is running 100 miles per week is 9.6(1. A cut of 4d. in one case would almost sweep .sway the profit, while, in the Other one, it would still leave a substantial margin per mile.
Giant Tyres and Running Costs.
I have read the letter under the above title which appears on the "Opinions from Others" page of the isaue of The Commercial Motor her March 1st. The writer will appreciate that any figures which may be given for the mileage which may be run by Giant pneumatic tyres before they are done must necessarily be 'mare or less hypothetical. for the simple reason that there are not enough of them on the road which have been in commercial use long
enough to enable figures to be calculated coneerning them. I am, naturally, extremely interested in the subject., and, if the writer of that letter has any useful figures which he would like to show me, I would be only too pleased to go into the matter with him. He -will have to understand, however, that I do not necessarily pledge myself to vouch for them on this page, which, as I have pointed out before, is not open for the publication of manufaCturers' figures of running costs.
There is one thing that I should rather like to see in connection with Giant pneumatic tyres, and that is a statement showing the life of every one of a series of them as issued from the factory and put to .commercial use. I shall, naturally, refuse to consider a few isolated examples which, by good hick or good management, or a combination of both, have averaged high mileage figures. The same remarks apply, in general, to the remainder of his letter in which he refers to saving of fuel, lubricants, 'depreciation, and maintenance. As for the passibility of misleading readers, they are far less likely to be misled by such statistics as appear on this page than by occasional reports of a few selected satisfied users. TEE SKOTC11.