Let's be honest, separating parcel costs by the 500 gram threshold is far too much. Even the 250 grams threshold (which existed many years ago) was too much, albeit tolerable compared to today's situation.
Charging per 500 grams is how you get ridiculous situations like being charged twice as much for going from 500 to 502 grams. Double the hurt if it's an international parcel.
It's how you get ridiculous situations like it being cheaper to send two large letters for $2 each ($4 total) but if you superglue those two letters together and send it as one, it ends up $7.60.
It's how you get ridiculous situations like it costing the same to post a 20 grams item the size of a golf ball, and a 499 grams item the size of a watermelon, simply because the golf ball is more than than 2cm.
What are the pro-arguments for the current high thresholds? Apart from profits, of course.
Everyone's productivity could be improved greatly if the thresholds were reduced to something manageable like per 100 grams. Sellers don't have to meticulously calculate the postage prices for their items for fear of underquoting (and being overcharged twice the amount by going over the threshold a few grams). Even if a seller underquotes, so what? It's only a few grams over, and the cost is only a few dollars. From eBay's point of view, it would also be a good thing because there would be fewer instances of buyers complaining about high postage due to underquoting. A seller would much prefer to shoulder the underquoting of a few dollars but not if it's something big like $10 (their incorrect quote) and $20 (actual cost).
Everyone's productivity could also be improved greatly if Australia Post didn't change their services and prices every few months. Speaking of prices, aren't some of the international shipping prices weird looking? It costs $23.72 to post a standard parcel to the USA. It costs $20.46 for an economy parcel to the UK. Why $20.46? $20, I can accept. $20.40, ditto. But $20.46? Is the $0.06 so important to Australia Post's bottom line? I would "happily" pay $20.50 if it allows me to memorise the figure. I used to be able to memorise all the parcel prices by heart, whether local or international. But now it's a near impossibility due to the erratic nature of the prices and it's going to change again every 6 months or so anyway.
There is of course merit to changing the sake of efficiency and productivity and whatnot but there is also merit in just staying the same. There are Post Offices in other countries who don't change their prices, for YEARS, let alone every 6 months.
Speaking of efficiency, and effectiveness, and productivity (a CEO's favourite meaningless buzzwords), I don't actually see it. Quite the contrary, I see LESS efficiency and LESS productivity. Such as the intentional withholding and delayment of the delivery of letters in order to justify the "economy" and "standard" pricing options. Not to mention the attempt to remove international large letters as a shipping option before being overturned by consumer backlash. I don't care how you define efficiency, and effectiveness, and productivity and [insert managerial business-speak word here] but to me the end result of those goals should be lower prices and more choices. The reality seems to be higher prices (or similar prices for an inferior product/service) and fewew choice (attempt to remove international large letters). Of course, I realise the actual point of "efficiency" is "profits for the few" but my thesis is based on pretending that this public/private (an entire different debate worth its own thread) hybrid company cares about consumers.
