Skip to content
RiDERgy RiDERgy
Smart Charge · 11 November 2025 · 1 hr 4 min

Ep. 33: Andreas Schumann, Vorsitzender des BdKEP - Elektromobilität, Regulierung und die Zukunft der letzten Meile

Transcript

Cleaned up from a machine transcript. Translations are machine-generated and may contain errors.

Welcome to the Smart Charge by RiDERgy Podcast. This is Claudio Geyken, Founder and CEO of RiDERgy. This is your show to learn about all things energy management and smart charging innovation for electric vehicles and fleets.

Twenty-four companies account for around eighty percent of revenue, but the actual deliveries are carried out predominantly by subcontractors. This is a quote from Andreas Schumann, Chairman of BdKEP, our guest today. Our conversation focuses on the last mile, for example the new postal law with provider registry and strict control obligations for clients, the planned EU Delivery Act for greater resilience and what that means for small and medium-sized enterprises and subcontractors, the comparison of leasing costs for electric vehicles with diesel – three hundred to seven hundred euros per month – through to depot charging planning. Relevant for everyone who manages fleet operations. Strategies that improve total cost of ownership and availability in day-to-day operations without waiting for the later phase. Let's get started. Alright, Andreas. Great that you're here today. How are you doing? Good, I'm doing well. It's a bit grey outside, but the topics generate a lot of warmth and lots of fun. So I'm doing well. Thanks for the invitation, Claudio. You're very welcome. Happy you could make it. So, before we get into the really meaty stuff, please introduce yourself briefly. Yes, Andreas Schumann. I'm the Chairman of the Federal Association of Courier, Express and Postal Services. The association

represents over five thousand five hundred medium-sized enterprises that actually operate on the first and last mile with vehicles, making deliveries or also picking up shipments. The shipments are typically up to thirty-one point five kilograms and the vehicles are at most three point five tonnes payload. But there are also thousands of foot couriers and also thousands of bicycle couriers. In the association we have roughly a commercial vehicle fleet of fifty thousand to sixty thousand vehicles. And our main focus areas in the association are, firstly, traditional lobbying work, innovation and member benefits. Okay. Yes, before we dive deeper into that, I always like it when the guest tells me a bit more about themselves. How did you actually get into this role? What was your background like? The background was actually in the sauna. I was looking for a new idea for what to do with my life, the old path wasn't viable anymore. And then someone gave me a newspaper article from Die Zeit where one of the first postal services that existed alongside Deutsche Post was, so to speak, introduced. In Die Zeit. Which one was that?

It was in Itzehoe. I don't know – I always have difficulty with the name. I can't remember what it was called anymore. I think it was Daniel Giersch. He became known, also with that Gmail address, I believe. Anyway, I got this notice. And that's how I actually got into the courier, express, parcel and postal services industry. Then I founded one of the first postal services and actually checked it out on site with Daniel Giersch in Itzehoe. That was all quite

exciting. And that's how I ended up in the industry. What year was that? That was nineteen ninety-eight. That was liberalisation, wasn't it? Exactly. So that's when liberalisation basically started. There were still special licences for postal services, everything was brand new, and it was also brand new for the market. Then I founded a postal service in Leipzig. It was called Jonas Post back then. And Excel was unfortunately a bit more optimistic than reality was back then. So it was already very

very difficult to convince or acquire customers who really only knew Deutsche Post as a supplier. And the path, especially in terms of customer acquisition, turned out to be rockier than expected, so that we as a passion-driven startup couldn't sustain it anymore. What was the advantage or added value that you sold back then compared to the Post? Yes, we were a regional postal service. So our shipments were picked up in the region and delivered in the region. That made it faster too. And in line with the licensing regulations, we had guaranteed delivery. That meant if we didn't meet the transit times, there would have been refunds. That was a criterion back then. And then it was so that the market was simply liberalised and people experimented with it. And of course you could already stand out with better service compared to Deutsche Post back then. You were there as a contact person. There was no call centre, you were directly available. Yes, everything – there was quite a bit of gold rush mentality and pioneering spirit in it

a lot. And that was your company. And then based on that, I think you went to TNT. Was that how it went? Yes, there was another intermediate stop. I then sold the company to Fiege, the Fiege group. That means it was already relatively successful if you could sell it. It had a media distribution division, that is, media delivery. And how was that in Dresden back then? In Dresden there was also one of the first postal services – Postmodern. It still exists today. And then that was basically part of Postmodern and I managed Postmodern. That was around two thousand. And from there I then jumped to TNT – to the big Dutch company, so to speak. Yes, that was called EP Europost back then. EP Europost was a joint venture between the Dutch Post and Hermes. And the idea back then was that the heavy Otto catalogues, the heavy ones – I don't know if you know them. Those were really fat things. Never seen them. But I can imagine. So they were, I don't know, weighed two kilos or so.

They were distributed by EP Europost to all households in Germany. And that worked quite well. And I was then responsible for the distribution of these catalogues and managed around one thousand five hundred to two thousand people. That was a significant operation. And from there I then went to TNT Express as Managing Director for the Eastern European region. And that was also a very interesting experience because I was suddenly responsible for eight countries. That taught me a lot about international structures and how different the markets can be. After TNT I was then Chief Operating Officer at UPS Supply Chain Solutions for a few years, and that's also where I got deeper insights into digitalisation and automation in logistics. And then, roughly from two thousand and ten onwards, I increasingly turned my attention to the medium-sized enterprises in the industry, because I felt that the big players were dominating the market more and more and the small and medium-sized providers were being squeezed out. And that's when the idea for the association came up.

So the association was founded in two thousand and thirteen. The name back then was Bundesverband Kurier- und Expressdienste, but we merged with the Postal Services Association a few years later. And since then we've represented the entire spectrum of the last-mile industry. This includes not only the large companies but also the many small and medium-sized enterprises that actually do the work on the ground. And I've been the chairman since two thousand and seventeen. That's my background.

Thank you for sharing that with us. That's very informative. So you've had a quite extensive journey through the industry, from founding your own company through to working for large corporations and now leading an association. Now I'm curious: what does the current situation look like in the last-mile delivery sector? What are the main challenges you see for your member companies?

Yes, that's a very good question. And I have to say, the situation has changed dramatically in recent years. The market has become much more competitive, margins have been squeezed, and at the same time the demands on delivery providers have increased significantly. We have new regulations, we have sustainability requirements, we have labour shortages, and then there are the vehicle costs, which have risen enormously. And all of this hits the small and medium-sized enterprises particularly hard.

And we were supposed to deliver them, or the idea was that we would deliver them. Yes, but then Hermes didn't give them to us. Back then, we didn't get them. And then we had to figure out where to get shipments from. And then we also set up mail delivery there. We then received letters from mobile phone companies or letters from abroad from the Dutch Post. And then it went in a different direction than planned, not into catalog delivery, but into mail delivery. For me it then came down to

quality measurement systems. We then set up test letter systems with tens of thousands of test letters and test letter recipients, because that is a nationwide network across 90 mail services. So we were exclusively a distribution hub. We coordinated the 90 mail services. And they were then supplied with the shipments that a mobile phone provider sent out, and they delivered them. And the undeliverable ones came back. And that was EP Europost. Then it was TNT Post. Then TNT was sold as a parcel service back then, so we were no longer allowed to be called TNT Post. Then

it was called Postcon. And today it's called DVS. So the company still exists today. And you're pretty good with names. Yes, it's crazy how it keeps transforming. Yes, and back then digitalization really started to emerge, in the early 2000s.

I then pushed forward within the company, so to speak in our small German unit: We should do something about digitalization. Letters and digitalization – we need to think about that. And then there was a project. I was allowed to work on a project back then. So the group management said: Well, let's start with a project first, as is always so popular in the corporation. And then we worked out how it all works. That was 2009. And then we proudly presented the whole project. And then

it took another half year. And then the gist was kind of: Yes, we already tried that six years ago. It didn't work. So we're not going to do anything now either. And that was pretty unsatisfying. It was A very unsatisfying. B I was commuting between Berlin and Hannover and across the country. And that's when I decided to quit and start my own company. That was Internetpost. Namely, at that time an E-Postbrief – what was it called, the

E-Postbrief from Deutsche Post – and De-Mail came up. That was the idea for digital delivery of mail to identified recipients, so that you could also prove the deliveries. And we worked on a system – exciting. What could have been possible as an alternative to Deutsche Post for the alternative mail market to carry these shipments? And that was a tough nut to crack. I always say it somewhat casually: About 1.5 billion euros flowed into it from Telekom, Deutsche Post, and the state. And

we know what came out of E-Mail and E-Postbrief – namely nothing. And for me it was unimaginable back then that you could make so little out of so much money. Basically the money was thrown away – of course from Deutsche Post's perspective only partly thrown away, because as a result there are paper letters to deliver for longer. And the E-Postbrief from Deutsche Post basically became a print service today, meaning you send letters digitally as a sender, but

the letters are still printed and delivered. Is there in Germany – now out of personal curiosity – is there actually the possibility... Can you have letters digitalized? There is this service. That's what you wanted to build. No, no, it was more about: When you send an e-mail, you usually don't know who is actually the owner of the e-mail address on the other end. That means it's called f96@gmail.com. But you don't know that

Claudio is behind it. Yes, and the idea was – or still is in various contexts – that the identity is linked to this e-mail and that you do a kind of identification there. The simplest: We sent codes to your address back then. And then you entered it. And with that you confirmed your identity. But then there were also topics like: We know video identification today – if I register for some kind of car sharing, I also have to do such a video identification

process. Or if I open a bank account. Yes. And for different types of shipments you need different identity levels. Sometimes just the e-mail is enough – for advertising mail maybe. For invoices et cetera it makes sense to confirm your identity with a PIN code that was sent to you by regular mail. And video identification then for high-value shipments or for contracts or the like. Okay. And we had this identity management as a topic back then. And in the digital world it's not like in the physical world, where letters or mails can simply be

sent unsolicited. So you can receive mail shipments as advertising letters unsolicited – that's called list brokering. But you're not allowed to send advertising as e-mails without having double opt-in. And there was also a solution for that where you could basically give an opt-in for whoever could send you the letters – digitally. And that was then also connected to the General Data Protection Regulation. But today there is a service where you can have mail delivered to you digitally. Yes, but that

is really just that. So your letters are sent to a scanning point. The letter is opened, it is scanned and then it is delivered to you. That is still a physical delivery, not a digital one. You had digital back then. And it was about digital processing, the fully digital thing. You also know that from notaries, lawyers. I think it's called beA, that courts communicate with lawyers via such digital channels. In Italy, that system exists. I think it's much more common than in Germany. Okay. Yes, something like that would

of course also be simpler if there were such numbers. The identity numbers – in Denmark we have that too, where everyone has access to their electronic mailbox. So we in Germany are always a bit slower when it comes to digitalisation. And that came back to bite us. Okay, exciting. Yes, and I had – you didn't have 1.5 billion. How did you finance that? With the second one. Yes, that was – we were a stock corporation. I founded it myself. With 50,000 euros. A corporation. Wow, you

but why not a limited company and directly a corporation? Yes, we thought about that for a while. But a corporation just has a different reputation. And so we said, let's do a corporation. You have to imagine – you already had the necessary capital. Exactly, you need 50,000 euros for the corporation, 25 for the limited company. Exactly. And with the corporation there is also the advantage that you can bring shareholders on board more quickly, so on the topic of capital increase or fresh capital. The corporation is just designed for that and is faster

to do than a limited company. Yes. And then there was a shareholder. And then it was about financing, about company valuation, about dilution. So we went through the whole keyboard of stock law. But because of the unsuccessful De-Mail and E-Postbrief programme, I had to reorient myself. So there was a dependency from their side on you. So we would have been dependent on De-Mail and E-Postbrief really driving the market into motion.

We didn't have the one and a half billion to keep up with that dynamic, so to speak. But that didn't work out. Yes. And then – now we've digressed a bit, but that's the arc to the association. My first company back then, Jonas Post – when I sold that, the buyer was introduced to me by the chairman of the Federal Association of Couriers, Express and Postal Services. So I had the association right at the beginning, and I've known the association since then, was also a member. And then I called them and said: Hey, I'm looking for someone

who will buy my company. Do you have an idea? And there was a lot of movement in the market back then, and he introduced the buyer, so that we always kept in touch throughout that whole time, because I stayed in the industry. I was also sometimes on the board of the association or in content-related working groups. And then the chairman at the time asked me if I didn't want to take over the association. Well, that's exciting. And to bring the listeners up to speed, maybe you could complete the structure of the market for me, because perhaps

most people who only receive parcels don't know that these parcels aren't just about Hermes and the big logos of Amazon, DHL, DPD and so on, but rather, as you already mentioned at the beginning, a large number of companies – how would you call them, subcontractors, or what would you call them? – basically play a role. And maybe you can explain the connections again. So the courier, express, parcel and postal market: there are roughly 12,000 companies there, so a huge number, much larger than you

actually think. However, 24 of these companies have 80% of turnover. This means we have a very strong oligopoly, in the sense that: most of the turnover in this market is parcels. And with parcels, there are the large parcel services: Amazon, DHL, Hermes, DPD, GLS – those are the biggest. Who have I forgotten? UPS as well, FedEx – FedEx, I already mentioned DHL. Yes. And here it's like this: these are the really big ones that you know. And then there are 24

so to speak, that are less well known. There's still Knax and maybe the city messenger, or? So there are two dozen of these companies that hold 80% of the market among themselves. The biggest player in Germany is Deutsche Post in various areas, both in the letter and in the parcel market. In the letter market, Deutsche Post has between 85 and 90% of the market depending on how you read it, in the parcel market it's more like 35, 40%.

and the.

So now the structure is that many of the parcel services don't do the collection and delivery of shipments themselves, but work with subcontractors – sometimes also called subcontractors. I prefer to speak of subcontractors. Subcontractors – okay, so that's the more politically correct term. And these subcontractors work for Hermes, GLS, DPD, for example Amazon, and do almost 100% of all collections and deliveries there.

With UPS, it's like this: they do roughly half themselves with their own staff and the other half through subcontractors. And DHL in the delivery of parcels, but also letters, works with their own employees 95% plus or minus and not with subcontractors. That's so to speak this parcel structure. DHL itself, Deutsche Post, is a whole corporate group and also often works with subcontractors. But that's more in the collection of items from letterboxes, in the collection of parcels, in the supply and disposal of

Package jobs – so everything outside of delivery is often done with subcontractors, even if sorting happens at night and a car still needs to drive from Frankfurt to Hamburg. Then they also use subcontractors there. The so-called main runs also all go through subcontractors. They are also among the largest purchasers in this area. And yes, then you can assume that depending on how you look at it, between 3,000 and 4,000 companies work for these parcel services. And then there are still – 12,000 minus 4,000 are 8,000 – others. There are

furniture couriers. You know them from furniture stores when deliveries are made. Ikea, for example, has a partner. There are pharmaceutical couriers. There are spare parts couriers. There are sample couriers. There are city couriers. There are mail delivery companies. There are direct couriers. And if you thought about it a bit more, there would be even more niches where couriers operate everywhere. And so this high number comes about. And many operate in different areas. There are also specialist couriers – the question: where does the money courier belong? So valuables transport is actually a

different industry. But now the topic of cash supply in retail is coming up. The question is whether you always send an armoured car or whether you could use a bicycle courier instead. So the boundaries are quite fluid that way. Interesting. And the industry is in upheaval. There is e-mobility, digitalisation, further regulatory changes and technological changes. What are the topics you notice most? Yes, at the moment we certainly have the most regulatory issues. We finally got a new

Postal Act last year, after what felt like 25 years. And the old Postal Act basically still had the status from 1995. Many of the digitalisation topics didn't exist back then, and globalisation wasn't as advanced either. And this new Postal Act has various new obligations. One is that there is now a so-called provider register. All 12,000 companies must register there, and to register they must provide certain documentation. By August next year, everyone must be registered once. And we also have very strong

control obligations in this law when subcontractors are used. We keep having situations where subcontractors act dishonestly – that is well known from radio and press. And the idea is to curb this by making the contractor also responsible for their subcontractor and saying: I am responsible for ensuring that someone works there who also complies with working conditions. And that is a big topic that has come to us from the regulatory side. So that is regulatory and exciting. The bigger framework around that is then the EU. In the EU

they have started to set up an EU Delivery Act. So for this postal market – courier-express-post market up to 31.5 kg – there is also an EU regulatory framework. That is also 25 years old now, and they want to revise it. And topics like this are then exciting. Very many shipments come from Asia, especially from China – such topics in high volumes with corresponding products in them. And how to regulate this topic is a very current question for the EU. And so far, this postal regulation has

always focused on the so-called universal service. That is actually a very old term. It specifies how many letterboxes there must be and at what distance to the population. It specifies what delivery times letters have, where you can complain, how often per week you must deliver. But these are all issues that no longer play a role in the parcel segment today. Here the question is rather: How do I deal with the fact that more and more shipments are coming in from outside at

also very low revenues? What does that do to the refinancability of delivery systems in Europe? And we have just a fascinating example in the Netherlands, where the chip manufacturer – I mean, it was nationalised – Experia. Exactly. Exactly, as a result China first slowed down or stopped chip deliveries. I don't know exactly, but we noticed here that a structure that is no longer controllable at the European level, if you then nationalise it or if you put pressure on it, suddenly enables other countries to put pressure

on the EU – and not insignificantly. Now imagine that with the huge volumes of shipments coming from China, delivery networks are built through which deliveries function. And then there is a trade war and the import of Chinese goods is virtually no longer possible. Then delivery systems in Europe collapse, and we cannot transport any shipments on the last mile anymore because Asian-dominated or also American-dominated companies operate the last mile. And then they just say – or cannot

deliver anymore. And then we no longer have European-controlled delivery networks and have to figure out how to organise the last mile. And this transport on the last mile is – let's say – when there are problems, catastrophes, armed conflicts, whatever, it is especially then that the supply of the population is important, both with information and with goods. Corona also showed how important couriers are in this regard. And that is what the EU Delivery Act is about: how to depict such developments. Interesting. That

So this is the larger regulatory framework that doesn't affect the CAP service, the city courier service from Berlin right now, but of course will in the future. And how is it in your day-to-day work? How can you imagine that? Also your role – you have to interact with the most diverse stakeholders, whether government officials or your members or technology providers. How can you imagine that? How do you approach it? Well, with politics it ultimately remains a people business. You have to be present and show up, or also

be digitally present. It's important to just maintain contact. With the authorities there's the Federal Network Agency, the Economics Ministry, the Finance Ministry, sometimes also the Environmental Ministry – you maintain contact there, you're on the distribution lists when new laws come or other regulatory frameworks, legal ordinances, so you get them for comment, you're on the distribution lists. Now with the EU Delivery Act for example there's the possibility to give impulses directly to the EU and feed in your ideas. There's a portal where you can

deposit it. And that's where we'll go too. And when we've deposited it with the EU, we also give it to the exact contact persons in Germany and say: We believe it's not primarily about complaint access, but about how we get resilient, European-controlled networks. And then you submit position papers like that to the contact persons. Then there are always webinars again – it's also important to participate and say something. There are in-person events where you participate,

can talk with contact persons or even contribute speeches, either discussion contributions or even on stage. And so it's important in politics to be present. For us as a small – well, we're a very small association in terms of staff – that's quite demanding. Digitalization helps us because many meetings do go digital. That saves costs and of course time too. Yes, with the members

we're mainly in digital contact via newsletters. And we make various offers there, webinars. We also have roughly one physical event per year, sometimes two, and we invite them to those. And then a group of maybe 30, 40 members forms from these members who are more active and say: where can we help? I'd like to push a topic forward. There is – since Corona we've set up a situation centre. When Corona came we thought: what do we do now for the members? And

then we have a CAP situation centre every Tuesday digitally. Everyone who wants can join in, and there we discuss the latest developments. You don't reach all 5,500, but you reach the multipliers who then also pass it on. And then from the technology side: we have a certain visibility. That means technology providers find us, or when I'm at events I find technology providers. What's interesting for us then: either I get in contact or they come

to me. And then you can handle it really nicely actually. Great. And let's get more into the e-mobility topic now. What have been the milestones so far in your view in the CAP sector as far as e-mobility was concerned? And where does the CAP sector stand? What are the challenges in this transition? Well, real milestones – I wouldn't really see any that are sector-specific. It's all a bit fluid and you can't go along like steps.

Of course the EU regulatory frameworks are important milestones that apply to us too, but just not specific to courier-express-post. Fit for 55, of course the combustion engine phase-out in 2035, the fleet limit values that tighten up to then. We now have the whole CO2 system of the ETS2. These are all stages. I wouldn't call them milestones so strongly. Why is that? E-mobility certainly has a hard time with many market participants, though not all. Deutsche Post, because of its outstanding size, has lower

unit costs and compared to the rest of the market fantastic profit situations or contribution margin situations – quite different possibilities than the individual SME. And so Deutsche Post rushed ahead about ten years ago with the StreetScooter, then actually also operated as a vehicle manufacturer so to speak – for a time – and is ultimately the market leader in these topics. That's of course related to size, and it was partly the case that in some years a high share of electric car subsidies went to Deutsche Post because they procured their commercial vehicles with it

and they simply played the market cleverly and tapped it, because they have the resources and drove it forward. So it's a good thing, wonderful thing what they did there. Do they have a competitive advantage from it now? When I look at our SMEs – small and medium-sized companies with 20, 30, 40, 60 vehicles – and especially at the beginning electric vehicles were roughly twice as expensive as combustion vehicles or even three times as expensive, banks won't even give them credit or no approval for leasing offers over three times

the vehicle value, over three times the vehicle value. And that was at the beginning – or still is – a big problem: the subcontractors are basically remunerated at marginal costs. Nothing's left over. When clients in the parcel service give orders, it's not like you get rich from it. The margin is 1%, 2% – minimal if at all. And to finance new vehicles on top of that is difficult.

We have many direct couriers who drive large distances per day. So 500 kilometers is not uncommon. They also drop out initially, which is why we had a very hesitant entry outside of Deutsche Post. There is a major parcel service that operates globally and has also invested in car manufacturers itself. They initially went strongly into Germany because Germany is already such a leading market. But we have the challenge that Germany is driving a very – let's say – zigzag course, or one step forward

one step back. So Germany is taking a very ambivalent course on the topic of electromobility, while other countries are doing it much more consistently. And that's why globally operating parcel services also say: let's first do electromobility in Spain, for example. It's appreciated and demanded quite differently there than in Germany. In Germany, we can actually continue driving diesel because the government isn't really putting pressure there or is rather spreading uncertainty. And after, so to speak, after the first – yes, maybe I should – wave, then the retreat, or?

Let's say the standstill has occurred on this topic with the stop of electric car subsidies. The air has pretty much gone out of it. And we already have the situation where those market participants who said "Oh, I'm not going to worry about it, I'm not doing anything," can now say "I told you, you didn't need to do anything. And it's much simpler for me if I do nothing." And that's certainly a situation on the one hand, but we're also noticing

with some satisfaction. We have a benefits world where we broker vehicle conditions. And the share of combustion engine commercial vehicles sold there is growing steadily. And it's now at 20 to 25 percent of new vehicles that go through our association conditions in the electric sector. That means we're noticing that the industry is now getting going. That's of course driven by the commitment of individual entrepreneurs who say "I want this now, I want to do my part." Or by parcel services agreeing with their subcontractors, or encouraging them to use electric vehicles. We have the

major Hermes initiative, which says they want to electrify, I think, over 70 cities. And of course they then need subcontractors who will do that. And they're gradually moving into new areas and doing it electrically. And so there's already movement forward now. In that sense, there isn't one single milestone, but rather many small movements that, after the dip following the end of subsidies, are now coming together again to create a certain momentum. What's special about us is that the

electric car is not just a tool, like for a chimney sweep or a tradesperson. They need the electric car to get to the construction site or the chimney, but the money is earned through installing a furnace or building a chimney. For us, the money is earned with the vehicle. And if the vehicle isn't running, the main source of income is gone, so for a long time we also had the issue of vehicle reliability, of range. But actually that's all solved now. Yes, keyword: you mentioned a few keywords now

Maybe we should start with the topic of purchasing an electric vehicle. What's the current state of things? Initially, the prices were significantly higher. What's the latest status now? For instance, today – do you have any insight into how much more expensive an electric van is compared to a? Well, you can assume it's roughly a third more expensive. So that's already come down considerably. It's a relatively complex system; you can't simply say whether it's now more or less expensive. We have

for equivalent vehicles now, if you're looking at 48 months, 30,000 kilometers per year – when you compare the lease rates there, they range between 300 and 700 euros for the same vehicle class. And now in the middle somewhere is 500 euros, which means an average lease rate of 500 euros. But because the gaps, meaning minimum and maximum, are so far apart, that doesn't help much. That means today we find electric vans up to three and a half tons at lease rates around 300 euros. These are of course also lease rates where the

vehicles want to get into the market – then fleet limit values come into play – and that is certainly comparable. It's sometimes cheaper than the lease rate for a combustion vehicle when I compare an inexpensive electric vehicle with a more premium offering from combustion-engine transporters. That means I have to look very carefully: which vehicle do I want? What am I? How loyal am I to a brand? Am I willing to switch from brand A to brand B and maybe push the lease rate from 600 euros to 300 euros? And we have a lot of

a lot of dynamism and a lot of movement. What doesn't necessarily help us here either is the uncertainty created by the government. There's always the question: does the combustion engine phase-out remain? What happens with it? That makes it harder to calculate residual values for the vehicles. As a result, lease rates are high. That's extremely toxic for this whole transformation. The vehicles are mostly leased, not on subscription or purchased. We usually have leasing. But here too you have to look: if the residual values aren't clear and therefore

When leasing rates are high, of course buying is back on the table. And then it might be cheaper to buy or finance the vehicle than to lease it, because after financing, it belongs to me. But then I have the risk of having a used vehicle. Exactly. And that's not just an issue in the commercial vehicle sector right now, but also in the passenger car sector. What happens to the used vehicle, with the residual value? And what about charging? There are various depots where the packages

are sorted in cities for last-mile delivery. And there are various approaches. Maybe you can give me your insight on how you see where charging happens. There are a few problems and challenges that I'm aware of too: the issue that drivers like to deliver packages with the van and also drive home, that this process would be disrupted by e-mobility through charging, and especially whether there are enough

parking spaces so that the vehicles can always charge at the depot. What other issues are there that stand out to you? And how do you think that will be solved? Well, the situation is extraordinarily varied. The depots where packages are handed over to subcontractors are usually not within the city, but outside or on the city periphery. There, the big question is always: is there enough power supply? Although the question of whether there is enough power really needs to be looked at in a differentiated way. I

can treat it as a defensive argument: "I can't get a big power line here." But I can also look at it and ask: can I get enough power for intelligent charging? If I don't set up intelligent charging, then I risk charging vehicles at times when it's not necessary. And I need power at times when I don't need it, when it's not necessary. And above all, I need capacities on site that I wouldn't actually need if I charged more intelligently. And now the question is, if there's an entrepreneur

who is rather looking for a reason not to do e-mobility. Can you evaluate the charging issue as a defensive argument? Or do you examine: what can I implement with the existing infrastructure? I'm excluding those who have some really weak power line. But it's not always necessary to build your own transformer right there; you can – what we find is: where there's a will, there's often a way, and you can also work with lower capacities

and intelligent charging concepts – time-dependent charging, tour-dependent charging. Which vehicle is assigned to which tour? How much do I need to charge it? With these two things, you can accomplish a lot. And so the issue needs to be evaluated individually for each location. There's no general point anymore that doesn't help us. Of course, the point that affects everyone is the financing issue. I have to finance the charging infrastructure. So I have to finance not just the vehicle, but also this infrastructure. And then the question is whether I

purchase it myself or arrange it somehow through the landlord or property owner of the space. And there are now also first providers who say: I'll install the charging infrastructure for you and you pay me per kilowatt-hour. And that's of course one more layer of complexity. Not just the vehicles, but also the charging infrastructure. But there are a lot of resourceful businesses that are already doing this well. It's also the case that the large ones you represent – the smaller ones, let's say SME companies – they have

little financing options, but the larger ones usually finance the charging infrastructure at the depots more readily. And aren't they also the ones who rent these depots? Yes, that's – well, we're talking now about the depots where subcontractors pick up the packages. But not all subcontractor vehicles usually park there. It depends on the service provider. Some service providers say all subcontractor vehicles must be at the depot overnight. Then they all have to drive to the depot, park the vehicle, and then

go home. Other service providers might have the vehicles at their own facility if they have some kind of depot yard. Still others drive the employees home. It's also very, very individual; you can't make a general rule about it. But often it's the case that the depots weren't all newly built. And when they were built 15, 10, or 20 years ago, there wasn't any requirement to park 500 vehicles there. Parking spaces

and so, so parking spaces there are also lacking. So that's also very individual per location again. How tight is it at the location? Can they expand? And the more attractive the land is locally, the more expensive it would be. And then the question is whether it's affordable to use land as a parking lot for charging. Or do I put a logistics hall there instead, which has a different contribution margin? That's another thing that comes up. Then topics like this arise: do I build a parking garage? That means I need

a smaller land area and then have five levels where charging stations are everywhere, which again has a natural impact on costs. So there's a lot of creativity being applied, and often there is a solution if you want one – and if it's affordable. How long is a depot operated for? I don't know what the lifespan of a depot is – is it 25 years, 30 years? Yes, that's also very individual. These operating yards, how long the rental contracts run and whether the landlords are then interested

in it. These depots, they operate for quite a long time, don't they? I don't know exactly how long the lease terms are and whether the property owners are then interested

are allowing electric charging infrastructure there or even offering it themselves. Some landlords say: then afterwards, when the lease – I don't know – runs for ten years, afterwards I can market the building better because I have electric infrastructure there. Or afterwards I can't market the building as well because I always have to find someone who needs electric infrastructure. So that also depends on the strategy of the landlords. The lease agreements for such depots or operating centres – the parcel services are of course tied up there long-term.

Such a depot can also be operated for 10, 20, 30 years, depending on what the lease agreements look like, whether it might even be owned property. So the larger depots with sorting systems are rather fixed, the companies own them. And then there's leaseback or so – so different scenarios. But if the parcel services have a sorting system in there, it's rather long-term there. That can stand for 20, 30 years. If the parcel service rents an operating centre on site, then there are examples where they simply go into

a residual use. It's clear: in five years this hall will be torn down and then something else will come here. And then they rent for five years and lease. There are others who do it even shorter. If you're now working for a provider and don't know if you'll still have your contract next year, then of course you're more cautious. Others rent for 10 or 15 years. Long-established courier services know: we always sit here. They also sit for 20 years at

such a location. So it's difficult to make a general statement for everyone. And then is there a big problem or a challenge to be able to install charging infrastructure at all, because the landlords might not want it? Or is that also quite individual? Some landlords are open: yes, please, you can do it. Some reject it. With some – if you think about solar panels now, that's more with freight companies, less with parcel services – some landlords say: yes, you can put solar on the roof

Do it. Some roofs can't support that, it's not allowed up there. And so you have to look at each situation individually to see how things are on site. And how realistic do you see it that ultimately people charge publicly, that drivers maybe go to a fast charger or use an AC charger near their home? Most are rather tenants in larger apartment buildings where there are fewer charging points, don't have a big house where they then have their own

charging station. So it's first of all about using public charging infrastructure, like at supermarkets or the pillars on the street, as part of the normal workflow. So not with the logic that I drive home with it, but the question is: can I charge in the supermarket car park when my car is at the depot in the evening? Topics like that. That's viewed rather critically – I also don't experience it in very many places – because of course the reliability that the public charging infrastructure will be available when I need it is difficult. So some supermarket car parks are not accessible at night. Then I can't charge there at night. How do I get the vehicle away in time before the start of business? I don't know, if I had to be away from the car park at six and the employee doesn't arrive until eight. How does that work then? So the preference is already to go with your own charging infrastructure. The smaller the companies are and if they're owner-operated or have five cars, two of which are electric vehicles, they also go to public chargers. But the large structures actually go with self-controlled infrastructure. There's more the opposite direction there: can't I make the infrastructure public in times when I don't need it and let others charge? It has to be ensured – shared charging infrastructure, so time-shared. Then of course the important question is that the third parties charging there also move on at the time when I come back and need to charge, so the pillar is free. But that's not being done in Germany yet.

Yes, I'm already hearing it now: how can I open my charging infrastructure? I know the considerations and the discussion about it. As for whether there are examples of it, I can't say. And then there's the topic of home charging when employees take it home with them. Here too it's quite individual how the employee lives. Then it comes down to – let's say – it's usually rather slow charging. With how much kW? 11, usually max. 11. Maybe less too. Oh I see, you mean right at home, with an onboard charger without a wallbox, plugged directly into the Schuko socket. Yes, that can then be 2.4 kW. That doesn't bring much. The eleven brings a bit. And then the questions of billing come up. So then I need infrastructure that bills the business charging, the charging of the business vehicle, accordingly with calibrated meters. And I need appropriate software for that. The question is: does the software control the employee or the fleet manager? But I also experience that more offerings are coming to the market. There are solutions for how to get it done. And it even exists for the Schuko socket. The question is just: such an electric van needs a bit more than a car. And if it then hangs on the socket for ten, eight hours – eight times 2.5 kW – I'm at 20 kWh that I can charge. I don't have enough power for the next day. Exactly, I also wanted to ask you about that, because on average you drive

an operating centre on site, then there are examples where they simply go into a residual use situation. It's clear: in five years this hall will be torn down and something else will be here afterwards. And then they just rent for five years and lease. There are others who do it even shorter. If you're now working for a provider and don't know whether you'll still have your contract next year, then of course you're more cautious. Others rent for 10 or 15 years. Well-established courier services know: we always sit here. They also sit for 20 years at

such a location. So it's difficult to make a general statement for everyone. And then is there a big problem or a challenge to even be allowed to install charging infrastructure because maybe the landlords don't want it? Or is that also very individual? Some landlords are open: yes, please, you can do that. Some reject it. With some – if you think maybe about solar, that's more with freight forwarders, less with parcel services – some landlords say: yes, you can put solar on the roof

do it. Some roofs can't handle that, it's not allowed up there. And so you have to look at each situation individually to see how things are on site. And how realistic do you see it that ultimately public charging happens, that drivers maybe go to a fast charger or use an AC charger near their home? Most are rather tenants in larger apartment buildings where there are fewer charging points, don't have a big house where they would then have their own

charging station. So it's first about using public charging infrastructure, like at supermarkets or the pillars on the street, as part of the normal workflow. So not with the logic that I drive home with it, but the question is: can I charge in the supermarket car park when my car is at the depot in the evening? Topics like that. That's viewed rather critically – I also don't experience it in very many places – because of course the reliability that the public charging infrastructure is then available when I need it is difficult. So some supermarket car parks are not accessible at night. Then I can't charge there at night. How do I get the vehicle away in time before business starts? I don't know, if I had to leave the car park at six and the employee doesn't arrive until eight. How does that work then? So the preference is already to use your own charging infrastructure. The smaller the companies and if they're owner-operated or have five cars, two of which are electric vehicles, they also go to public chargers. But the large structures actually go with self-controlled infrastructure. There's more the opposite direction: can't I make the infrastructure public during times when I don't need it and let others charge? It has to be ensured – shared charging infrastructure, so time-shared. Then of course the important question is that the third parties charging there also leave when I come back and need to charge, so the pillar is free. But that's not being done in Germany yet.

So something like 100 kilometers per day. I think that's – yes, in the region, in regional transport, that's a good figure. Then we're talking about 25 kilowatt-hours, so kilowatt-hours of consumption per day, which you'd then need to get back in. Exactly, what you just said. But that's also a question of how it all settles in. And of course it's different depending on the situation – if the drivers live on the fifth floor in a multi-family apartment building, that's a different situation than if they live in a detached house in a rural area, whether it's an owner-occupied home or not.

And on the topic of range – you mentioned at the beginning that some people have 500 kilometers at a stretch or 500-kilometer tours. So it's conceivable that, as in other examples of e-mobility, whether it's a private person on a longer trip, they'd take a 20-minute stop on the way. Yes, the question is whether those who drive 500

600 kilometers per day – that's not the mass, that's a small part of the market. The mass drives 100 plus or minus. And you should first – so the energy flows to those driving 100 kilometers, not to those driving 500 kilometers. For 500 kilometers: If the entrepreneur wants it, a solution can be found, we have those too. But let's say the potential is more in vehicles that operate regionally, and especially in the context of 100–200 kilometers. Is the range

issue solved? We don't need to say anymore: that's not enough. There are vehicles that can't do 200 kilometers. But they also have a smaller battery. And maybe I don't need 200 kilometers. Why would I put a battery in the vehicle, for lots of money and the weight, that can do 400 kilometers, if I only drive 150 every day? Then I could also take a smaller battery. But then of course I can't do 500, 600-kilometer tours with this vehicle or I'd have to charge more often.

I'd have to think about that. What are the highest ranges you've seen on the market so far? I can't tell you that exactly. But I think, to my knowledge, there are already batteries with more than 100 kilowatt-hours or up to 100 kilowatt-hours. Yes, then I'd be at around 400 kilometers. That's what I would have said too. Although the question is always: How much do I need for 100 kilometers? And where do we stand with the electrification rate? To be honest, we didn't have

valid data on that. But it's rather a single-digit percentage range, apart from Deutsche Post. And now we've talked a lot about e-mobility. In this e-mobility transition, there's also a lot of energy transition. Just one question about that: How do you see the whole topic of intelligent charging and bidirectional charging, how e-mobility can support that by charging when electricity prices on the market are low, when there's a lot of wind, for example, or sun, and then also seeing the battery storage in these vehicles as an

additional revenue opportunity? I think that's an extremely important and exciting idea. Just imagine 50,000 vehicles with 100 kilowatt-hour batteries. That's then 5 million kilowatt-hours. How many gigawatt-hours is that? Exactly – 5 million kilowatt-hours would be that. That's – then you divide by a thousand to get gigawatt-hours – that's 5,000 gigawatt-hours? That would be – wait – 5,000 megawatt-hours, 5 gigawatt-hours, I think. And that's already

something. As an association official, it's easier for me to think about that than of course someone who has 20 vehicles. But we have a huge battery. When people talk about smart grids, they always think of battery storage that's fixed somewhere. We have a huge rolling battery. And of course it's exciting whether there aren't concepts that integrate these vehicles into an energy management system. And that's then a mix of charging when electricity is cheap, smart grids and bidirectional charging – but extremely technically

complex. And here too we're obviously a bit behind in Germany with all the smart meters and so on. Other countries are already further along. But I think this virtual huge battery, which is also mobile, is an industry of the future where you can say it's being used. And if you formulate that in new business models: that's then a battery storage with which packages can also be delivered. Just as city maps aren't there to feed databases

and search algorithms to digital map providers, package delivery is just an ancillary service of energy storage. If you think in that logic, then completely new ideas come up. Of course, it always occurs to you: vehicles are always parked at night, then you can charge, and energy might also be cheaper – but no sun, so more expensive again. So are we really flexible enough in these times to do that? I also can't get the energy out when I'm on my package tour. These are all

still topics. But I think this huge fleet with energy storage, which is relatively predictable on the road, is a great asset that we have as an industry. Yes, great. And before we part ways, do you have a message or a way for people to reach you that you'd like to leave with the listeners? Yes. Get involved with digitalization. Get involved with e-mobility, also with regulatory issues. And the important thing is to take small steps. Just get started. You have to convert the first vehicle, you don't need

a charging point. The assumption that you can then jump onto a moving train in five years or in ten years – in my view that's wrong. If the train is already moving too fast by then, you can't jump on anymore and have to start over from scratch. So: small steps are the solution for mid-sized businesses, and you have to plan them one after another – and preferably together with the association. Our contact details are of course online. And within the association community we have favorable purchasing terms. And

in the community it's easier too. So: you're not alone. Many face this topic and we're joining together. Come join us and benefit from the community. That sounds great. Thank you very much for the conversation, Andreas. Thanks too. Here are my main takeaways from the conversation. 24 companies account for around 80% of revenue. Deutsche Post DHL holds 85 to 90% of that in the letter market and 35 to 40% in the parcel market. Delivery often runs through subcontractors, and that varies depending on the type of business. For new vehicles, the electric share

in the association is 20 to 25%, and Hermes is electrifying rapidly in 70 cities. Typical routes of around 100 kilometers a day are easily achievable with batteries up to 100 kWh, and even covering up to 400 kilometers of range. Operational reliability and vehicle range were long a barrier, but are now largely resolved. Many depots are on the outskirts and don't have sufficient power capacity. However, intelligent charging planning can ease bottlenecks. Where there's a will, there's a way – Andreas is convinced of that. From a strategic perspective, e-fleets offer several gigawatts of flexibility through intelligent

bidirectional charging. The next step for everyone with an e-vehicle and a charging point: just get started. Thanks for listening and until next time – don't miss the train.

Episode notes

In dieser Folge von Smart Charge by RiDERgy spricht Claudio mit Andreas Schumann, dem Vorsitzenden des Bundesverbands Kurier-Express-Postdienste (BdKEP), über die Transformation einer Branche, die täglich Millionen Sendungen auf der letzten Meile bewegt. Von der Liberalisierung des Briefmarkts in den 1990ern bis zur heutigen Diskussion über intelligente Ladeinfrastruktur und europäische Regulierung spannt sich ein weiter Bogen. Themen der Folge: - Die Entwicklung des Kurier-, Express- und Paketmarkts in Deutschland – zwischen Mittelstand und Großkonzernen - Regulatorische Veränderungen: neues Postgesetz, Nachunternehmer-Kontrollen und EU Delivery Act - Herausforderungen für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen bei Finanzierung, Leasing und Ladeinfrastruktur - Warum die Postbranche bei der Elektromobilität zweigeteilt ist – von Streetscooter bis Nachunternehmer - Reale Hürden beim Depotladen, zu Hause und im öffentlichen Raum - Chancen durch intelligentes und bidirektionales Laden – die rollende Batterie als Teil des Energiesystems Andreas betont: Die Zukunft der Elektromobilität in der KEP-Branche entscheidet sich nicht durch große Sprünge, sondern durch viele kleine, konsequente Schritte. „Wer jetzt anfängt, kann gestalten – wer wartet, wird vom fahrenden Zug überholt.“