OPINIONS FROM OTHERS.
Page 28
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor invites corresPondence on all subjects connxted with the use of commercial motors. Letters should be on one side of the paper only and typewritten by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for views
expressed is accepted,
A Freight Agency Offer.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2,290] Sir,—I was very interested to read of a new. freight agency offer, particulars of which you published in the issue of The Commercial Motor for November 11th.
Is not the transport business an extraordinary one, inasmuch as each year brings its new crop of prophets who spring up like mushrooms only to flit away again (usually in the moonlight) as rapidly as they appeared I
In almost every case, the most lucrative results are predicted, to be obtained by blindly. following their doctrines, the text of all such doctrines being " Return Loads."
Hauliers who are seriously interested in their business do not admit of the return load, as, the moment this unfortunate term is admitted, all loads, whether inwards or outwards become return loads to be paid for on a basis the new prophet weuld recommend the haulier to accept.
Traders want efficient transport and far the transport to be efficient it must be on such a basis as will pay the man running it. A trader who seriously seeks to take advantage of such an offer as is now put forward must sooner or later pay for the experience.—Yours faithfully, NORTHERN MOTOR UTILITIES LTD.
• M. W. DRING, Managing Director.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2,291] Sir,—I am inclined to view your statements and remarks regarding this agency scheme with doubt. Admittedly the matter is open to serious discussion ; the following,. however, are my views, which, more or less, conflict with the opinions expressed editorially. You say : "The return load of one haulier is the outward load of another : . . ." Take the "outward load " haulier—supposing he received £30 for the contract ; would it not pay him better to receive .225 per contract and secure a load each way, increasing his revenue by £201 ' In the interests of the transport industry, I would suggest that • you place the. matter open to debate through the medium of your columns, which I shall watch with considerable interest.—Yours faithfully, Birmingham. R. CHARLES.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2,292] Sir,—I was much interested in the circular letter of the Amalgamated. Transport Agency published by you in The Commercial Motor of November 11th, and your comments thereon ; also the letters appearing in your issue of November 25th, and should be glad if you will permit me to make a few observations.
I can assure Mr. C. E. Trea.dwell, of Chelmsford, that he is not voicing the general opinion of carriers in suggesting that freight agencies should not be supported by hauliers. On the contrary, I affirm that not only does the average long-distance haulier realize the absolute necessity of agencies, but fully appreciates their services. Of course, there are agencies and agencies, and the fatal mistake has been, and still is, in hauliers supporting agencies of ill-repute. I submit that we have had ample evidence of that. The function of a freight agency is to satisfy the requirements of both traders and hauliers, and to a great extent this is being done. Traders generally, and those in a large way in particular, simply cannot B"
afford the time to deal %ifith scores of individual hauliers each day, educating ea...11 one into their particular requirements ; moreover, they would find that one day they would have lorries to spare, and another day none, whereas goods must be transported daily, hence they deal with an agency who,: generally speaking, is able to meet all their requirements, however erratic: Incidentally, in this way, rates are stabilized ; the same rate is paid to the contractor returning home as to the contractor commencing a journey, whereas, if hauliers dealt direct with customers, the London contractors would not be aware of the rates obtained by provincial hauliers, and vice versa. Moreover, I submit to Mr. Treadwell that if he despatched, say, 30 lorries to 30 various destinations in the knowledge that a reliable agency existed at each destination to provide a satisfactory, load for the return journeys, that would be better than he, or his drivers, spending time and money endeavouring to find loads for the return journey from the 30 different roints. Indeed, the latter would prove impossible in many cases, because he would find that traffic was already passing through agencies. Recognized regular long-distance hauliers certainly arrange with a reliable agent to fix up return journeys. My experience does not agree with Mr. Treadwell's in respect of the owner-driver cutting rates. I experience the greater difficulty with the owners of large fleets, and can quote " chapter and verse."
Mr. E. Dunn apparently realizes the necessity for agents, but what surprises me is that he should send
his subscription to a concern without making in quiries, particularly in view of his past experieme and, presumably, he was quite. prepared to accept traffic from London at rates 40 per cent. below the recognized rates obtained by London contractors, and withal, pay his agent. 121per cent. commission. • I submit that he Would not thank London people to act similarly in Bromley1
If I may be allowed to express an opinion, I consider the circular in question displays some ignorance of the haulage industry in assuming that the idea of obtaining loads on the return journey is original, whereas the position is, of course, that agencies are already "three a penny" up and down the country, and that at least one good reliable agency exists in every place of importance. What is required is additional traffic, not further agencies, especially agencies which propose still further reductions in rates. My company could supply Mr. Dunn with all the traffic he required from London on those terms, but, of course, we would not entertain the idea fer a moment.
I should be surprised if the circular appeals to hauliers, for the reasons following :—
(I) I cannot se .e how the proposdd idea can succeed where others working on precisely similar lines have failed notoriously, despite ample capital.
(2) I cannot imagine hauliers being satisfied with having their rates reduced in the hope that they may find it cheaper to live.
(3) That there appears to be some confusion between " Costs " and " Charges," but no doubt about the desire to reduce the rates at present charged by the "large corporations." (4) That hauliers do not run on the assumption that they will return light, otherwise they would do little business, simply because they could not compete with the rail rates. (5) That, obviously, the circular does not show a realization of the fact that the rate which it proposes should be 40 per cent. below the usual is the present rate for the outward load, and that ultimately business would come to a standstill on those lines.
(6) That the question of insuring loads appears to be overlooked.—Yours faithfully, WALTER GAMMONS, • Managing Director, Walter Gammons, Ltd. London.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2,2931 Sir,--11 read your comments upon the formation of a new freight agency and thought I would like to let you and other hauliers who like myself read your paper know that I work with one of the freight agencies in London (a concern run by two men as a limited liability company), and with a freight agency in the provinces run by the corporation °Law town, I think, and I have always been very well served. I can get good work from them, perhaps because they know me and I have never let them down.
If the new freight agency is as good as either of these, then the haulier who is always on the lookout for jobs, but hates looking for them, will have something to be grateful for.
But I do agree with you that there is only one scale of rates to be upheld. We have to cut our rates to the minimum as it is, in order to get the work, so there is no margin for return loads at a rate lower
still.—Yours faithfully, S. D. GORDON