 |
 |
 |
|
 |
Page 4/5 |
 |
Shipping Fees
It can be a tricky balancing act... You want your eTail site to compete and win sales, but the cost of shipping may drive customers away. Shipping and handling fees are one of the biggest issues that etailers face. Charge too much and customers will abandon their shopping carts. Don’t charge enough to cover your costs and your venture may fail.
Consider these shipping/handling tips:
- Avoid overcharging for shipping and handling. Shipping and handling fees are the number one reason that online shoppers abandon their cart. Aim to break even.
- Consider product weight as a basis for your fees. The postal carriers and other shipping companies base fees mostly on weight, so most customers expect this to be the norm.
- Offer multiple shipping options. You never know how motivated your customer may be to receive items faster and what the trade-off financially will be to them. Consider offering ground transportation, next-day shipping and a two-to-three-day service, as well as additional international charges where appropriate.
- Use reduced shipping fees for specials and promotions. Reductions in shipping fees are among the most successful promotions available to online retailers. Many etailers will charge shipping and handling for smaller purchases, and offer free shipping on orders over a certain dollar amount. This can provide an incentive for customers to buy more to take advantage of the offer. Always test shipping fee promotions based on your most common customers.
Click the "Learn and Interact" image to the right to explore a global shopping and shipping scenario. Where can you find the best deal?
 |
Page 4/5 |
 |
|
 |
These materials were developed as part of the Southern Rural Development Center’s Nationall e-Commerce Extension Initiative. They are based upon work supported by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under Award No. 2005-45064-03212
Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the Southern Rural Development Center. |
|