Australia to Finland

[jayconnor (Jay)]

Hi,

My wife is from Finland and we currently live in Australia. We are wanting to send a decent sized box of clothes and other items to her family back home " Finland ".

Has anyone done this before and know any of the cheapest options? as this seems to be quite expensive.



Thanks.

[Rainmaker (Matt)]

Jay, unfortunately there aren't any cheap options.
UPS Express Saver is perhaps your best bet depending on size and weight of the box.

as an example, a 20Kg box 80x40x40cm will be about $340

[jayconnor (Jay)]

Originally Posted by Rainmaker

Jay, unfortunately there aren't any cheap options.
UPS Express Saver is perhaps your best bet depending on size and weight of the box.

Kiitos, I will look into that.

[gary]

If you are in no hurry, shipping 20kg by sea mail by Australia Post costs $218 but will take 2 to 3 months.

For sea shipping goods they weigh much more than that, or bulkier items, like furniture, you would want to employ the services of a freight forwarder and get a quote on some fraction of the space of a container.

[jayconnor (Jay)]

Originally Posted by gary

If you are in no hurry, shipping 20kg by sea mail by Australia Post costs $218 but will take 2 to 3 months.

For sea shipping goods they weigh much more than that, or bulkier items, like furniture, you would want to employ the services of a freight forwarder and get a quote on some fraction of the space of a container.

Thanks Gary, Yeah looks like Auspost is the go. We are in no hurry for the parcel to arrive. Such a shame its so expensive.

[leee (Thomas)]

Shipping, is certainly a factor to be considered - from any place - to anyplace.
So- how is it that, many items I have ordered - coming out of China - include free shipping?
The cost of the item, is always less - than what the shipping charge should be. (If for example, I were to ship the same item back to China.) The shipping would be considerably more than the items originally cost - Including shipping.
There is something we are not knowing concerning shipping 'arraignments' with China and other countries.

[jahnpahwa (JP)]

Originally Posted by leee

Shipping, is certainly a factor to be considered - from any place - to anyplace.
So- how is it that, many items I have ordered - coming out of China - include free shipping?
The cost of the item, is always less - than what the shipping charge should be. (If for example, I were to ship the same item back to China.) The shipping would be considerably more than the items originally cost - Including shipping.
There is something we are not knowing concerning shipping 'arraignments' with China and other countries.

I sort of thought you were having a go at a haiku there for the first couple of lines.

And I think you're barking up a non-existent tree with regard to "shipping 'arrangements' with China and other countries".

[gary]

Originally Posted by leee

Shipping, is certainly a factor to be considered - from any place - to anyplace.
So- how is it that, many items I have ordered - coming out of China - include free shipping?
The cost of the item, is always less - than what the shipping charge should be. (If for example, I were to ship the same item back to China.) The shipping would be considerably more than the items originally cost - Including shipping.
There is something we are not knowing concerning shipping 'arraignments' with China and other countries.

Hi Thomas,

In a nutshell, they are being dumped.

If the pricing seems impossible, that is because it is impossible.

I've seen packages shipped from China delivered by Australia Post
that are franked with ¥0.00

Now if one went to an Australia Post office and tried to convince them
to ship an item from Australia to China for $0.00, how far up the ladder
would one have to go to get authority? The local postmaster would
not have authority nor even the head of Australia Post.
It would have to be ordained at a government level.

So why does China do this? Whenever you buy a plastic hose fitting,
a cable, a remote control or a UV filter, it is China's way of saying to
other countries, "Don't ever think of making anything like this ever again".

More importantly, it isn't the specific items but the means of manufacture
they are protecting, be it plastic injection molding, automated assembly,
glass shaping machinery, and so on.

So what they are really saying is, "Forget about bothering building up any
means of production of your own".

Those trivial items that only cost a few dollars each with "free delivery"
have a hidden price tag.

[leee (Thomas)]

You are saying --- In order to preserve making a Small Lens Cap (for example) they will Pick up the shipping ---
From the plant in China, to the airline, to Australia, to the truck, to the Distribution Center, to the Truck, to the Post office, to your Home ??
Australian Post Office is not picking up the Tab, so China must be paying Australian post Office ? --- Just to keep an Australian entrepreneur from producing ?
If I were CEO of this Lens Cap item. I would say "this is costing me way too much money. Let them produce it - at 30 times the cost. Then let them also pay for the shipping etc. " Won't happen. It will cost China one penny to produce this Cap, it will cost Australia, US and Europe 30x time that amount. Then they will still have to ship it. Won't happen.
BUT. if Australia, US, and Europe will cut our (China) shipping rates by a factor of 10. We will continue making these Lens Caps and deliver them for free. Let the citizens of Australia, US and Europe[e -- subsidize us. (China) True, they are dumping them here - but that is because we are helping to pick up the tab.
That's what I am thinking.

[PCH (Paul)]

As far as I’m aware, the Chinese government subsidises the cost of post for businesses sending stuff oversees as a way of incentivising business success.

[gary]

Originally Posted by leee

Australian Post Office is not picking up the Tab, so China must be paying Australian post Office ?

Hi Thomas,

Post between nations is governed by a set of agreements made by the members of the Universal Postal Union (UPU).

When you mail an item overseas, it is carried part of the way by your
nation's postal system and the other part of the way by the postal system
of the destination country.

Back in the days of sailing ships, you might get a letter from England.
Chances are you wrote a reply and the costs of delivering this exchange
evened out.

Fast forward to now and the flow of mail from one country to another
can be lopsided. So the UPU has what are called "terminal dues".
The weight of the mail to and from two countries is tallied up and one
country might owe the other money.

However, despite it being one of the largest economies in the world,
China has benefited from having "developing nation" status under the UPU.
As a bonus of having this status, China is given a more favorable rate
on its terminal dues.

So that means Australia post users here subsidise the cost of delivery
of each of those parcels coming from China. So in practice, Australian
businesses pay significantly higher rates to export by post
products made here in order to subsidise all those little parcels people
buy from China.

So in doing that, Australia scores an "own goal'. If it sounds like it sucks,
it is because it does.

The United States, for example, was paying China in the order of
$300 million a year in terminal dues despite the fact the bulk of the
parcel delivery is one way.

Rather than think in terms of a lens cap, think in terms of the means
of production. As a manufacturer, you actually tend to think in terms of the
first differential beyond that, that is the innovations and improvements
to the means and methods of production over time.

Only by being embedded within the manufacturing loop can you make
the observations and collect the data that then allows you to build better
equipment and processes. Over time, that know-how becomes almost
indistinguishable from magic to those who don't manufacture themselves.

That is China's end goal. To make sure that they will be at the leading
edge of that magic.

[leee (Thomas)]

Thanks. An economist I am not. But I think I do understand more now.