>> #2 would necessitate an incredible amount of arbitrage (i.e., increase prices even further) because it would severely impact their ability to maximize parcels shipped.
> I'm fine with that. Like I said elsewhere, this is costing me £30 to send. I'd have happily spent £100 to get it done fuss-free.
It's not enough that you want to pay £100... there have to be enough customers willing to pay £100 to balance out the loss of customers who would pay £30 (as well as the decrease in unit volume that would result), and there probably aren't.
For the major couriers, there probably aren't. For a new courier service who approach the market from the top up rather than the bottom down, who knows?
At least here in the US, such services exist - there are high-touch courier services that deliver same-day with very high service levels. They're also very expensive and used by almost nobody other than bankers, lawyer and advertising firms that can expense the costs to big corporate clients (and even then, the firms will generally use a normal carrier unless the package is very timely or sensitive.)
Most people don't want to pay the $6 or so for UPS shipping... Paying $200 would restrict your customers to a very small part of the market shipping very high-value goods (jewelry, bearer bonds?)... I wonder if even armored car shipping is that expensive on a per-item basis.
There are a few in the UK but it's usually inner-city or highly personal: they don't make use of overnight vans so for me to pay for something to go to Scotland from London via one of these guys is going to cost me a whole lot more than $200.
I disagree. Trite comparison, but: "Most people don't want to pay the $999 for a Pentium PC… paying $1999 would restrict your customers to a very small part of the computer market." If you offer the quality I bet it's possible to make a really profitable business out of it. Think how many times these items are important: heck, I just wanted my TV so I could play Battlefield 3, but I'd have paid more than I did to get it sent to me. How much would people pay to not have a crummy experience with a courier if they used a courier a couple of times in a year?
Not suggesting I know the answers, but I think it's an interesting area for innovation.
I don't disagree that folks would pay more for a better experience, but I think they'd pay a few bucks - maybe up to double. Not 10X. Paying $200 for shipping would be like paying $10,000 for a PC to play BF3. Most people who can spend money like that have someone who takes care of their shipping and receiving, because their time is valuable.
Consider this: for $50, you could probably get someone who lives on your street to sit around all day waiting on your behalf for your package to arrive.
> I'm fine with that. Like I said elsewhere, this is costing me £30 to send. I'd have happily spent £100 to get it done fuss-free.
It's not enough that you want to pay £100... there have to be enough customers willing to pay £100 to balance out the loss of customers who would pay £30 (as well as the decrease in unit volume that would result), and there probably aren't.