FBA Inbound API v2024-03-20 - Inbound Placement Fees & Box Rules - Excessive / Unbalanced fees for small amount of non-compliant SKUs?

[MetaMan2023]

So in testing it seems that the current rules for when Inbound Placement Fees are charged seems Unbalanced and more penalizing depending on the shipment types.

I am not 100% so would like some clarification. To clarify, I'm talking about when Amazon will allow you to send to 5+ centers with no fee vs. when you are forced to send to < 5 centers and pay an IPF.

This is our understanding from the documentation and testing -- to ship to 5+ centers and pay no IPF:

• Every SKU must have at least 5 or more boxes

• All boxes must be packed identically for a given SKU -- for example any box with SKU A must have the same number of units and if the boxes are mixed, they must be mixed identically as well

I have done some tests, for example I tried:

• Making 5 boxes, single SKU, evenly packed (5 boxes x 12 = 60 units) -- I received NO IPF and can send to 5 centers
• Making 6 boxes -- 5 are evenly packed and one is odd -- example: 5 x 12 and 1 box with 6 -- I AM charged IPF

My suggestions:

• When creating a plan, can Amazon flag non-compliant SKUs for each removal -- for example if I send 100 SKUs and 99 compliant, 1 non-compliant -- then Amazon should return a flag of non-compliant SKU(s) so we can modify our plan easily... maybe an array of "NON COMPLIANT SKUS" with a status like "MIXED BOX" or "UNEVEN QUANTITIES" etc. While there are written rules we can follow, it would help troubleshoot if there is confusion on rule interpretation.

• Consider options to make the rules more lax -- for example if I have a SKU that is evenly packed except for one box -- like: 20 boxes of 10 units and one box of 5 units (because I have 5 left over) -- I should still be allowed to send to 5 centers. Right now I either (A) have to pay an IPF on all 205 units or (B) leave 5 units sitting in my warehouse. This seems silly... I should not have to pay a huge penalty for a small handful of leftover units.

Also if your entire shipment is compliant except maybe one box, does Amazon really require a gazillion units to go to centers that charge fees? There should be some kind of box tolerance rules here. If a SKU has 10 units per box but one has 9 -- does that really cause upheaval in the Amazon network (as long as the center receiving 9 knows in advance they are going to receive 9)?

-John

[puppsupr]

Hi @MetaMan2023,
Can you please refer to this Seller Central Page which can give you more insights.

[MetaMan2023]

Hi @MetaMan2023, Can you please refer to this Seller Central Page which can give you more insights.

@puppsupr

Yes it seems the documentation has been updated with more clear examples (vs. the original versions last year). Thank you.

I do have a request that you please consider some kind of leeway on the "even box" rule. As a real world example and some loopholes in the system:

• Imagine we sell red widgets and they come 10 per box. We have 1,000 widgets but find one is damaged.

To send to 5 centers, we must now send 900 units, leaving 9 units sitting behind... all because of ONE unit. Put another way, 999 units are penalized due to ONE damaged unit. That's a minimum of a $200 penalty. Not only that, that fee would apply to EVERY SINGLE UNIT in the plan.

REQUEST OPTION A: Have a modification where, as long as you have at least X even boxes you could be allowed ONE odd box -- in our case we have 99 even boxes and one odd box.

REQUEST OPTION B: Allow boxes to be within a tolerance -- for example as long as all of your boxes are within X% of the other boxes in units... like 10 9 9 10 11 10 9 10 10 10 would be compliant. CASE USE FOR THIS: Packing large boxes of small odd shaped items, it is not easy to pack these type of boxes consistently as it depends on how the items fall into the box.

With such strict rules, there is a high incentive for a bad seller to "break the rules" and say they have a full box when they don't. In my scenario above, the penalty to NOT having that one unit could be thousands of dollars on a large shipment.

I am concerned Amazon will not be able to enforce those breaking the rules, which creates an unfair disadvantage for those of us who follow the rules.

Relaxing the rules to allow for at least a one odd box will avoid the temptation for a seller to break the rules and create a more even play field. It will also save Amazon time (and money) having to police bad sellers.