Been getting a lot of these emails lately as we load up for Q4. This one isn’t bad, some of them are pushed a month+.
We have new listing we shipped in over a month ago and has been pushed to Oct for receipt. We were told by SAS that Amazon is not prioritizing new listings due to volume.
Just a heads up. I’m sure we aren’t the only ones getting these emails. This is new for us though. Hadn’t seen it before and until about 3 weeks ago.
Good to know…if creating new ASINs, at least keep some back for FBM.
Is this for freight or SPD?
Both actually…
We’ve been getting those relatively often in the last few weeks as well. Unfortunately, we’ve seen big increases in lead times for LTL shipments, currently averaging a few weeks from the pickup date, which is significantly affecting my ability to keep inventory levels lean for our heaviest products.
I am not getting the emails, but have another anecdote. My shipment was received 41 days ago on August 3rd. It was replenishment for a long standing ASIN, case of 120 that will be transferred to multiple FC’s, (it’s always that way).
The shipment events page shows it received, the transfer link on that page does not present any data. The inventory event report only shows the receipt. Products are not available for sale. Inventory page shows reserved status.
1st support case claimed they are being transferred - they ignored what I told them about no record of transfer events.
2nd support case claimed they are sidelined for verification of weight and dims. First listed October 2006, many thousands sold through FBA. I find this excuse hard to believe. I requested escalation and the FBA support rep said that is not an available option.
If I send another case I will end up overstocked once the first one is released - or found.
How can they ethically charge us low/high inventory fees when they can’t fully receive our inventory in a timely manner?
Last week I got an email recommending creation of an Outlet Deal on a Christmas sku that they lost last fall after receipt and finally found in May. Insulting.
They don’t on the low side if it’s in their possession.
I can one up you this year. We’ve now had 2 shipments double received and closed which has totally ■■■■■■ up our ability to finish our Q4 inbound due to limits…
Nobody will do anything about it either, including SAS. Looking forward to that 6 figure reimbursement for lost inventory that has zero cost attached to it. 
You win (against me anyway). But they probably will do something eventually when the mistake is discovered, long after Q4, and they’ll then claw back any reimbursement. Might take a few years.
The units they lost last Christmas still counted against my limit. I was maxed out, could have used that allotment for other sku’s if they had admitted it was lost. Inventory that is not available for sale should not count toward the limit.
SAS will fix it. They just can’t override the investigation date. I was half kidding.
SAS manager already spoke to the associate who received it,their boss, and determined the root cause.
But, much like sellers, even Amazon associates have their hands tied with lots of simple ■■■■ at Amazon / FBA.
SAS should be able to fix it for what they cost you!
For sure. FBA support used to be great, the agent I called yesterday tried all her “tools” (database queries I’m sure) and did not have access to any other resources. They ought to be able to contact the FC in question and request an update or investigation. Instead I have to wait until they figure out the box that’s sitting there somewhere needs processing. Maybe next May …
The only reason why my current SAS manager is able to get into the FC’s is because he used to lead a 100 member team at an Amazon FC…
He still has access to things he shouldn’t still… LOL
Going to miss him when he gets rotated out of our account. TBH, he’s not the brightest bulb but he’s been the best so far at getting ■■■■ done for us… He also doesn’t mind bashing Amazon when appropriate. Our 2nd manager was a goody two shoes. So fake…
When this guy escalates things, he escalates it on 3 different paths / groups, instead of the usual 1…
Well this is interesting. The double receipt I mentioned upthread has been corrected as of this AM.
In the meantime, the over receipt debacle has happened twice more since I wrote about this.
96 units shipped - 192 received
96 units shipped - 474 received
This is new for us. Since 2018, this has never happened to us, on either of my accounts and suddenly 3X in a matter of 3 weeks.
I’m sure it will be auto-corrected (as the big one was before SAS could even escalate it), but it begs the question - what’s up with this?
Crappy time of the year for this to happen with loading up for Q4 and these overages taking up space.
We have the space we need as these latest double receipts were minimal but we have other big shipments inbound with more to create before the end of the month for stuff that’s in production. Praying that none of the big ones get over-received between now and then…
Update: most of the shipments for which I’m getting the “Delivery Disruption” emails are going to BNA6. That FC is proving absolutely disastrous for us - no shipments received in the last 3 weeks, and up to 1.5 month delays:
I’ve instructed my warehouse to avoid that FC during shipment creation at all costs. We’ll either ship UPS (even if the product is heavy) or select another region (if no optimized shipments split).
BNA6 is an IXD (“Inbound Cross Dock”) facility, similar in function to RDU4, LAX9, RYY2, PBI3, LBE1, LGB8, etc.
Basically, an IXD performs the functions which were formerly segregated between SCs (“Sorting Centers”) & DCs (“Distribution Centers”).
Amazon, for the last 6 business quarters, has been engaged in a re-jiggering of its logistics infrastructure, resulting in the creation of CXDs (“International IXD”), nIXDs (“National IXD”), & rIXDs (“Regional IXD”).
I’m of the opinion that the creation of this new system - which I call the ‘IXD-tweaking Initiative’ - is one of the primary driving impetuses behind the introduction of the Placement Fee & Low-Inventory Fee Initiatives; be that as it may or may not be, there seems to be little doubt that things aren’t going as smoothly as might be hoped.
A problem that, if the available evidence of various discussion venues is to be believed, seems to particularly plague BNA6; it might be noteworthy that the opening of that facility was delayed by 2 years from the originally-announced date…
