Ben Ames has spent 20 years as a journalist since starting out as a daily newspaper reporter in Pennsylvania in 1995. From 1999 forward, he has focused on business and technology reporting for a number of trade journals, beginning when he joined Design News and Modern Materials Handling magazines. Ames is author of the trail guide "Hiking Massachusetts" and is a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism.
Warehouses across the U.S. are filled to the rafters, and another wave of imports is coming soon as retailers stock up for the holiday peak season. That puts most companies in a pinch as they look for ways to deal with the extra inventory.
Conventional wisdom says that retailers can simply move their goods from expensive coastal distribution centers to cheaper rural locations or ship them directly to brick-and-mortar stores, “forward positioning” the inventory closer to consumers. But nothing comes for free in logistics; in practice, every option comes with its own costs and challenges.
For example, warehouse space is hard to find anywhere right now, thanks to soaring demand during the pandemic rebound. And even if you can find space, good luck paying for the truck to get your goods there; freight costs are higher than ever, thanks to rising fuel costs and tight capacity.
The conflict is real. A survey released in June by the shipping and mailing services provider Pitney Bowes showed that big retailers are now offering widespread discounts to shoppers as a way to draw down their inventory. “This summer will present both new challenges and new opportunities for brands,” Vijay Ramachandran, VP market strategy, global e-commerce at Pitney Bowes, said in a release announcing the survey’s findings. “Overstocks and markdowns will impact profitability but also create new openings to sell, as a large portion of consumers seek out deals—further aided by the return of [Amazon’s] Prime Day and other mid-year promotions. At the same time, our survey found a growing number of consumers cutting back on retail spending altogether as they react to record inflation and gas prices, and rising interest rates.”
Caught in a vise between rising stocks and slowing consumption, companies have to be more precise than ever in balancing the costs and benefits of carrying inventory, says Steve Denton, CEO of Ware2Go, a third-party fulfillment services provider that is owned by UPS Inc.
Waiting out the storm is not an attractive option, either. “The cost of storage is higher than [it was] a couple years ago because of the lack of warehouse space,” Denton says. “That means the margin evaporates if you carry [inventory] too long.”
FINDING NEW MARKETS
As for how companies can clear out some of that overstock, Denton urges them to explore new sales channels beyond the classic options of direct to store (DTS) and direct to consumer (DTC). For many merchants, an easy option is to liquidate their goods by selling them on a secondary market—such as Overstock.com or T.J.Maxx—or to sell them to the giant online retailer Amazon.
However, Denton points out that even those options carry some costs, such as the extra labeling compliance costs required of “Amazon 1P”—or first-party—partners (meaning companies that sell their products directly to Amazon, which then sells them to consumers). Choosing the “Amazon 3P”—or third-party—option could cost even more, since only the digital sale itself occurs on the Amazon marketplace in that model, leaving merchants to take care of order fulfillment and shipping themselves.
As companies fight their way through the thicket of rising inventory management costs, many are turning to a middle ground between the in-store and online models, using their stores as small DCs. That’s where software analytics has become an important tool for balancing the strengths and weaknesses of the purely warehouse and retail sites, says Amy Tennent, senior director for product management at Manhattan Associates, a supply chain software developer.
As Tennent explains, the “simple” decision to forward-deploy goods to a retail store actually represents a potential minefield. In theory, stockpiling goods at stores should shrink a retailer’s shipping costs by enabling practices like “buy online/pick up in store” (BOPIS) or minimizing shipping distances for items sent to consumers, she says. In pursuit of that goal, some companies create “mini fulfillment hubs” within some of their retail sites, then task their store employees with picking and packing orders for home delivery.
However, that strategy may have drawbacks because managers at each location must decide how much store labor to devote to e-commerce fulfillment work, as opposed to serving customers in the showroom, says Tennent. Make the wrong choice, and parcel shipments could be backlogged for days, or impatient customers could walk out of the store. “You need to identify specific labor assigned to the job, otherwise your store team will have to [fulfill online orders] while also serving customers,” Tennent says. “If they get only two or three orders a shift, then store associates can do it just fine. But if it’s 50, 100, or 150 [orders], then they need the right tools in place: pick-path optimization, batch picking, prioritizing orders, sorting and staging the products after picking, and a packing station.”
Generally speaking, the retailers most likely to benefit from forward-deployment strategies are those that are able to assign committed resources to the task, Tennent says. Ideally, that would mean deploying a dedicated labor force for every shift, using cloud-based software like supply chain management and warehouse management systems to balance all the variables.
JUMPING IN WITH BOTH FEET
When it comes to inventory-balancing technology, retailers have other tools at their disposal as well. Another type of software for the job is an order management system (OMS), a critical tool for coping with overstocks in any location, says Carson Krieg, industry solutions + strategy, last mile, at project44, a provider of freight data and supply chain visibility solutions.
Typically, the best results come when a retailer has both OMS software and a limited number of stock-keeping units (SKUs), he says. That combination allows companies to choose the most efficient option. Three common choices are: 1) to deploy inventory to multiple microfulfillment centers (MFCs) that are dedicated to shipping orders; 2) to rent short-term shared warehouse space through a marketplace like Flexe,Flowspace, or Stord; or 3) to use their own brick-and-mortar locations in the local market and implement a ship-from-store strategy.
But of course, not every company is able to take full advantage of those options; many lack the necessary software or have an extensive product catalog. “If the retailer has a [large] number of SKUs, it may not benefit [it] to implement an MFC strategy due to the storage costs in local markets. It will depend on the maturity of [the retailers’] pick, pack, and ship processes and their cost to stock additional forward inventory,” Krieg says.
When it comes to clearing out their overstocked warehouses and reining in their storage costs, companies today have more choices than ever before. Among other options, they can ease the pressure by turning to liquidation websites, Amazon partnerships, shared warehouse space, and hybrid retail/DC facilities.
Choosing among those options may not be easy, but with the right logistics partners and finely tuned software, warehouse leaders can realistically assess the costs and benefits of every choice. No option offers a silver bullet, but experts say that strategies abound for managing the nation’s inventory glut.
Worldwide air cargo rates rose to a 2024 high in November of $2.76 per kilo, despite a slight (-2%) drop in flown tonnages compared with October, according to analysis by WorldACD Market data.
The healthy rate comes as demand and pricing both remain significantly above their already elevated levels last November, the Dutch firm said.
The new figures reflect worldwide air cargo markets that remain relatively strong, including shipments originating in the Asia Pacific, but where good advance planning by air cargo stakeholders looks set to avert a major peak season capacity crunch and very steep rate rises in the final weeks of the year, WorldACD said.
Despite that effective planning, average worldwide rates in November rose by 6% month on month (MoM), based on a full-market average of spot rates and contract rates, taking them to their highest level since January 2023 and 11% higher, year on year (YoY). The biggest MoM increases came from Europe (+10%) and Central & South America (+9%) origins, based on the more than 450,000 weekly transactions covered by WorldACD’s data.
But overall global tonnages in November were down -2%, MoM, with the biggest percentage decline coming from Middle East & South Asia (-11%) origins, which have been highly elevated for most of this year. But the -4%, MoM, decrease from Europe origins was responsible for a similar drop in tonnage terms – reflecting reduced passenger belly capacity since the start of aviation’s winter season from 27 October, including cuts in passenger services by European carriers to and from China.
Each of those points could have a stark impact on business operations, the firm said. First, supply chain restrictions will continue to drive up costs, following examples like European tariffs on Chinese autos and the U.S. plan to prevent Chinese software and hardware from entering cars in America.
Second, reputational risk will peak due to increased corporate transparency and due diligence laws, such as Germany’s Supply Chain Due Diligence Act that addresses hotpoint issues like modern slavery, forced labor, human trafficking, and environmental damage. In an age when polarized public opinion is combined with ever-present social media, doing business with a supplier whom a lot of your customers view negatively will be hard to navigate.
And third, advances in data, technology, and supplier risk assessments will enable executives to measure the impact of disruptions more effectively. Those calculations can help organizations determine whether their risk mitigation strategies represent value for money when compared to the potential revenues losses in the event of a supply chain disruption.
“Looking past the holidays, retailers will need to prepare for the typical challenges posed by seasonal slowdown in consumer demand. This year, however, there will be much less of a lull, as U.S. companies are accelerating some purchases that could potentially be impacted by a new wave of tariffs on U.S. imports,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management Solutions at Moody’s, said in a release. “Tariffs, sanctions and other supply chain restrictions will likely be top of the 2025 agenda for procurement executives.”
As holiday shoppers blitz through the final weeks of the winter peak shopping season, a survey from the postal and shipping solutions provider Stamps.com shows that 40% of U.S. consumers are unaware of holiday shipping deadlines, leaving them at risk of running into last-minute scrambles, higher shipping costs, and packages arriving late.
The survey also found a generational difference in holiday shipping deadline awareness, with 53% of Baby Boomers unaware of these cut-off dates, compared to just 32% of Millennials. Millennials are also more likely to prioritize guaranteed delivery, with 68% citing it as a key factor when choosing a shipping option this holiday season.
Of those surveyed, 66% have experienced holiday shipping delays, with Gen Z reporting the highest rate of delays at 73%, compared to 49% of Baby Boomers. That statistical spread highlights a conclusion that younger generations are less tolerant of delays and prioritize fast and efficient shipping, researchers said. The data came from a study of 1,000 U.S. consumers conducted in October 2024 to understand their shopping habits and preferences.
As they cope with that tight shipping window, a huge 83% of surveyed consumers are willing to pay extra for faster shipping to avoid the prospect of a late-arriving gift. This trend is especially strong among Gen Z, with 56% willing to pay up, compared to just 27% of Baby Boomers.
“As the holiday season approaches, it’s crucial for consumers to be prepared and aware of shipping deadlines to ensure their gifts arrive on time,” Nick Spitzman, General Manager of Stamps.com, said in a release. ”Our survey highlights the significant portion of consumers who are unaware of these deadlines, particularly older generations. It’s essential for retailers and shipping carriers to provide clear and timely information about shipping deadlines to help consumers avoid last-minute stress and disappointment.”
For best results, Stamps.com advises consumers to begin holiday shopping early and familiarize themselves with shipping deadlines across carriers. That is especially true with Thanksgiving falling later this year, meaning the holiday season is shorter and planning ahead is even more essential.
According to Stamps.com, key shipping deadlines include:
December 13, 2024: Last day for FedEx Ground Economy
December 18, 2024: Last day for USPS Ground Advantage and First-Class Mail
December 19, 2024: Last day for UPS 3 Day Select and USPS Priority Mail
December 20, 2024: Last day for UPS 2nd Day Air
December 21, 2024: Last day for USPS Priority Mail Express
Measured over the entire year of 2024, retailers estimate that 16.9% of their annual sales will be returned. But that total figure includes a spike of returns during the holidays; a separate NRF study found that for the 2024 winter holidays, retailers expect their return rate to be 17% higher, on average, than their annual return rate.
Despite the cost of handling that massive reverse logistics task, retailers grin and bear it because product returns are so tightly integrated with brand loyalty, offering companies an additional touchpoint to provide a positive interaction with their customers, NRF Vice President of Industry and Consumer Insights Katherine Cullen said in a release. According to NRF’s research, 76% of consumers consider free returns a key factor in deciding where to shop, and 67% say a negative return experience would discourage them from shopping with a retailer again. And 84% of consumers report being more likely to shop with a retailer that offers no box/no label returns and immediate refunds.
So in response to consumer demand, retailers continue to enhance the return experience for customers. More than two-thirds of retailers surveyed (68%) say they are prioritizing upgrading their returns capabilities within the next six months. In addition, improving the returns experience and reducing the return rate are viewed as two of the most important elements for businesses in achieving their 2025 goals.
However, retailers also must balance meeting consumer demand for seamless returns against rising costs. Fraudulent and abusive returns practices create both logistical and financial challenges for retailers. A majority (93%) of retailers said retail fraud and other exploitive behavior is a significant issue for their business. In terms of abuse, bracketing – purchasing multiple items with the intent to return some – has seen growth among younger consumers, with 51% of Gen Z consumers indicating they engage in this practice.
“Return policies are no longer just a post-purchase consideration – they’re shaping how younger generations shop from the start,” David Sobie, co-founder and CEO of Happy Returns, said in a release. “With behaviors like bracketing and rising return rates putting strain on traditional systems, retailers need to rethink reverse logistics. Solutions like no box/no label returns with item verification enable immediate refunds, meeting customer expectations for convenience while increasing accuracy, reducing fraud and helping to protect profitability in a competitive market.”
The research came from two complementary surveys conducted this fall, allowing NRF and Happy Returns to compare perspectives from both sides. They included one that gathered responses from 2,007 consumers who had returned at least one online purchase within the past year, and another from 249 e-commerce and finance professionals from large U.S. retailers.
The “series A” round was led by Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), with participation from Y Combinator and strategic industry investors, including RyderVentures. It follows an earlier, previously undisclosed, pre-seed round raised 1.5 years ago, that was backed by Array Ventures and other angel investors.
“Our mission is to redefine the economics of the freight industry by harnessing the power of agentic AI,ˮ Pablo Palafox, HappyRobotʼs co-founder and CEO, said in a release. “This funding will enable us to accelerate product development, expand and support our customer base, and ultimately transform how logistics businesses operate.ˮ
According to the firm, its conversational AI platform uses agentic AI—a term for systems that can autonomously make decisions and take actions to achieve specific goals—to simplify logistics operations. HappyRobot says its tech can automate tasks like inbound and outbound calls, carrier negotiations, and data capture, thus enabling brokers to enhance efficiency and capacity, improve margins, and free up human agents to focus on higher-value activities.
“Today, the logistics industry underpinning our global economy is stretched,” Anish Acharya, general partner at a16z, said. “As a key part of the ecosystem, even small to midsize freight brokers can make and receive hundreds, if not thousands, of calls per day – and hiring for this job is increasingly difficult. By providing customers with autonomous decision making, HappyRobotʼs agentic AI platform helps these brokers operate more reliably and efficiently.ˮ