advertisement
Forums

The Forum is sponsored by 
 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the Tips and Deals forum
RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: cbelt3
Date: September 30, 2010 10:53AM
CNN puts the stamp on their news
"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Christmas is not coming early this year for the U.S. Postal Service, after regulators denied a request Thursday that would have raised the price of a first-class stamp by 2 cents, to 46 cents"
- - -
Junk Mail companies celebrate !
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 30, 2010 10:55AM
I don't get the "Junk Mail" reference. Junk mail doesn't go first class, you know.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: C(-)ris
Date: September 30, 2010 10:57AM
Guess they are setting it up to stop delivery one day a week? If a company needs to raise prices to make money, they need to raise prices to make money. I hope this doesn't result in the government spending tax dollars to subsidize the USPS.



C(-)ris
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Throwback Thursday Signature:
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: billb
Date: September 30, 2010 11:08AM
Junk mail most certainly can and does go first class, it can also go bulk rate third class.
and then there's post cards and .....
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 30, 2010 11:29AM
Who on earth mails junk mail first class? You may be thinking of first-class presort, which is not the same price as the first class for individuals.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: (vikm)
Date: September 30, 2010 11:39AM
Yep, keep trying to raise prices and then wonder why more and more people are using them less and less.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Dakota
Date: September 30, 2010 12:07PM
I think if we give them a monopoly they'll be safe.



After you discover you're riding a dead horse, your best strategy is to dismount.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Lew Zealand
Date: September 30, 2010 12:08PM
"While USPS was able to demonstrate that the recession created the kind of "extraordinary or exceptional" circumstances that would merit the proposed 5.6% average increase on mail costs -- the requested increase was due to retiree benefits."

The USPS has to fund their pension on the first of the year and then make up the difference and hopefully break even by the end of the year.

It's called "Responsibility To Pensioners." Other businesses should try it once in a while. But it can lead to these type of rate increases as variations in income make breaking even a moving target.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: billb
Date: September 30, 2010 12:14PM
Quote
$tevie
Who on earth mails junk mail first class? You may be thinking of first-class presort, which is not the same price as the first class for individuals.

The planet you live on probably doesn't allow 44 cent stamp on envelopes with junk mail in them. The 44 cent stamp is a dead give away.
DNC , RNC sending propoganda and local car dealers intentionally trying to make junk mail look like every day letters.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 30, 2010 12:24PM
The planet I live on mails about a million pieces a year.

You sure that's a 44-cent stamp? You can buy stamps for pre-sorted mail and yes, the intention is to avoid looking like junk mail. If they are paying full freight to stamp their junk mail it is because they are none too bright.

Anyhow, cbelt did not say "a minority group of spend thrift direct mail users rejoice", now did he?



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: freeradical
Date: September 30, 2010 12:55PM
The post office is trying to fund future retiree benefits.

This is just crazy. These postal employees must have a really powerful union.

Anyhow, get ready for the USPS to start whining about the need to cut Saturday deliveries. Look for Netflix to change their business model to one without the USPS.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: JoeH
Date: September 30, 2010 01:04PM
Quote
freeradical
The post office is trying to fund future retiree benefits.

This is just crazy. These postal employees must have a really powerful union.

Anyhow, get ready for the USPS to start whining about the need to cut Saturday deliveries. Look for Netflix to change their business model to one without the USPS.

Umm, that is sort of the definition of a properly run pension fund, money is put into it to be invested so there will be funds for future retirees. Too many pension funds have gotten into trouble by trying the "pay as you go" approach.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: jdc
Date: September 30, 2010 01:11PM




----


Edited 999 time(s). Last edit at 12:08PM by jdc.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: the_poochies
Date: September 30, 2010 01:26PM
My local post office cut back hours. Now they are open M-F 10 am - 5 pm and Saturdays from 10 am- 2 pm. They also have less clerks working behind the counter.

Don't get me started on how they have fscked up mail delivery for my home and office over the past few years....cursing smiley
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Acer
Date: September 30, 2010 01:34PM
Operating Expenses: in 2009 $71.8 billion
U.S Gov't Contribution in 2009 $3.0 billion (and it's been fixed at that for at least the last 10 years)

3.0/71.8 billion is 4.1%

The net loss of the USPS in 2009 was 3.7 Billion, or 5%

I think it's doing pretty well considering every rate increase has to be vetted by the guys who only have a 4% stake.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: M A V I C
Date: September 30, 2010 02:19PM
The more they cut back on service, the less they will be used and thus the less revenue they'll make.

The more the raise prices, the less they will be used and thus the less revenue they'll make.

Back when stamps were cheaper, the cost of a stamp wasn't a consideration in my choice to mail something or not. Now it is, and I avoid it where I can.




Help MacInTouch: Buy from Amazon? use this link [amazon.com]
Mac News & Info: [macintouch.com] [macnn.com] [tuaw.com]
Mac Benchmarks: [barefeats.com]
Used Mac Stuff [FS/T]: LowEndMac Swap List
Mac Software Updates: [macupdate.com]
Fonts: [dafont.com] [fontspace.com]
Online Computer Store With Mac Support: [macsales.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: sekker
Date: September 30, 2010 02:31PM
I'm a big fan of eliminating Sat delivery. This was always a luxury to me.

Don't confuse the pension plan issue with the first. All businesses in a shrinking market are hard to run well. No consumers like to hear they are going to get less (product, service, etc) for the same money they paid last year.

As for whether the USPS has a strong union - that's a topic for the other side!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2010 02:33PM by sekker.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: RAMd®d
Date: September 30, 2010 03:26PM
Junk Mail companies celebrate !

"Junk Mail" companies lose on this. The higher the price of First Class mail, the more people go to mailing houses for the discount. Companies that mail "junk mail" themselves aren't affected.


Junk mail most certainly can and does go first class

That's pretty much a subjective interpretation. What is "junk mail"? To most of the free world, it's not mail that the sender cares enough to put a 44c stamp on, or even send pre-sorted First Class. So depending on how you define your terms, you could be right.


The post office is trying to fund future retiree benefits.
This is just crazy.


Tell that to Enron employees, those retired and those abandoned.


These postal employees must have a really powerful union.

Actually, I'm betting that unions had nothing to do with it, but that it was a condition set by the Gov'mint as part of the Postal Reorganization Act. All other federal agencies don't pre-fund since they can rely, literally, on government subsidies, should they have problems. Since the Postal Service doesn't get Gov't money in the first place, there are no subsidies to count on. Hence, the pre-funding.




Too many pension funds have gotten into trouble by trying the "pay as you go" approach.

Exactly.


Yep, keep trying to raise prices and then wonder why more and more people are using them less and less.

They should lower cost and increase service, continuing to lose money. They could just make it up in volume. A business plan like that can't miss.


I'm a big fan of eliminating Sat delivery. This was always a luxury to me.

I'm on the fence on that one. I don't know that any common carrier has *free* saturday delivery, in that regular rates are charged, not a premium for Saturday. They could drop Saturdays and charge extra for them like others do.

But it seems to me I've read that many smaller business don't want that because they do business on Saturday, and that would compound the problem of Monday holidays. I have a PO box, and don't visit it every day, and only on the occasional Saturday.




When a good man is hurt,
all who would be called good
must suffer with him.

Everybody matters or nobody matters.

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

There is no safety for honest men except
by believing all possible evil of evil men.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

-An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

You make me pull, I'll put you down.

Mister, that's a ten-gallon hat on a twenty-gallon head.

I *love* SIGs. It's Glocks I hate.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Acer
Date: September 30, 2010 03:33PM
A little out of date by one price increase, but still relevant:



[correctedwisdom.com]

But that's about as apologetic as I'll get for the USPS. My cousin has worked for them for 30 years, and he says it sucks more every year. But it's not because of ineffectiveness or waste, it's because the manager types keep crapping all over everything in an effort to cut costs any cost, mostly on the backs, literally, of the lowest guys on the chain: the carriers. It's the kind of stuff failing corporations spiral down into.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Zoidberg
Date: September 30, 2010 04:18PM
I was going to say, just raise it to 50¢ or even 60¢ and leave it the hell alone for a while. I've got a drawer full of "Forever Stamps" anyway.

On the same token, however, as I take a look at what I actually mail these days, it's down about 80 to 90 percent. Just about every bill I pay is paid online; just about every invoice I send to clients is sent via email. All my personal mail is sent via email.

I do have a P.O. Box, though. It's a plus/minus. Sucks that it doesn't accept FedEx, UPS, etc. Maybe The UPS Store should just buy them out and convert all the post offices to UPS Stores.



(BTW, it's spelled < y'all >.)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: hal
Date: September 30, 2010 04:35PM
A remarkable bargain at twice the price

didn't everyone buy a lifetime of stamps when the first 'forevers' became available? Whatsa matta you??!!

If someone asked me to take this here envelope to new jersey for 46¢, I'd tell them to take a hike. Glad that SOMEONE will do it though....
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: September 30, 2010 04:59PM
For any of you who think that 'privatizing' the USPS could possibly provide reliable service at lower costs than we have now, and continue to provide service to every postal address (not region, not community, but address), i have but one question:

Have you lost your mind?

Also: the USPS does not have a guaranteed monopoly on anything. Any company that wants to provide delivery service of letters, packages, or other items can do so in direct competition with the Postal Service. Last i checked, there are plenty of companies that do just this.



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: freeradical
Date: September 30, 2010 05:26PM
The USPS has a monopoly on first class mail.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 30, 2010 06:24PM
Our mail carrier is just horrible, and our local post office has deteriorated in quality the last couple of years. That said, my complaints are all in regards to packages. Letter mail is still a pretty good bargain if you think about it.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Dakota
Date: September 30, 2010 06:48PM
Quote
Zoidberg
I was going to say, just raise it to 50¢ or even 60¢ and leave it the hell alone for a while.

This is like giving your teenager his monthly allowance all on day 1. Guess how much he has left by the end of the week.

I have another question. I wish we could settle this claim that UPS or FedEx does not go to all addresses that USPS goes. I have seen their trucks in the most remote parts of this country.



After you discover you're riding a dead horse, your best strategy is to dismount.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Acer
Date: September 30, 2010 07:22PM
Quote

I wish we could settle this claim that UPS or FedEx does not go to all addresses that USPS goes. I have seen their trucks in the most remote parts of this country.

Oh, they'll go anywhere...for at least $10.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: DaviDC.
Date: September 30, 2010 08:09PM
I've got one of the best letter carrier in the US & I've actually become friends with her.

The USPS could get rid of about half of its middle management personnel & might be able to turn a profit. There's probably not many other organizations as top heavy with managers as the Post Office.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: John B.
Date: September 30, 2010 09:46PM
I think all of the lawmakers need to get together and rewrite any laws that say that mail notifications need to be sent by "certified mail" or "registered mail" in favor of any delivery service that can provide serialized proof of receipt/proof of delivery. Then the USPS can do whatever they want.

In the meantime, they have a legally codified monopoly on certain delivery services and thus need to be held to a higher availability standard.

P.S. My local Post Office is threatening to take out their automatic postal center due to lack of use. Never mind that they've already cut counter staff down to virtually nothing.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: RAMd®d
Date: October 01, 2010 07:38AM
This is like giving your teenager his monthly allowance all on day 1. Guess how much he has left by the end of the week.

BS.

The USPS is legally not permitted to operate at a profit. That's to say they can only make operating expenses. They don't get to bank profit like Apple. Too bad.


I wish we could settle this claim that UPS or FedEx does not go to all addresses that USPS goes.

Settled.

They will not go to all addresses that the USPS does, and they cannot go to all the addresses daily. You will not see a FedEx or UPS truck delivering packages to every address every day.

What you will see is the USPS delivering those packages that UPS and FedEx pay them to deliver. I get them from a number of vendors.


In the meantime, they have a legally codified monopoly on certain delivery services

First Class mail, and delivery of any material to your mail box.




When a good man is hurt,
all who would be called good
must suffer with him.

Everybody matters or nobody matters.

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

There is no safety for honest men except
by believing all possible evil of evil men.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

-An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

You make me pull, I'll put you down.

Mister, that's a ten-gallon hat on a twenty-gallon head.

I *love* SIGs. It's Glocks I hate.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: bazookaman
Date: October 01, 2010 07:59AM
Quote
DaviDC.
There's probably not many other organizations as top heavy with managers as the Post Office.

The airlines.




__________________________________
There’s a guy wearing overalls with no shirt.
Which I think we all know is the International uniform for the last guy you’ll ever see.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Dakota
Date: October 01, 2010 08:55AM
Quote
RAMd®d
This is like giving your teenager his monthly allowance all on day 1. Guess how much he has left by the end of the week.

BS.

The USPS is legally not permitted to operate at a profit. That's to say they can only make operating expenses. They don't get to bank profit like Apple. Too bad.

"Profit" is a relative term. They can always spend the money. Why do you think they want to raise postage?



After you discover you're riding a dead horse, your best strategy is to dismount.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: RAMd®d
Date: October 01, 2010 12:26PM
"Profit" is a relative term.


The fact is the federal government has defined "profit" relevancy for the USPS, and it is not allowed to operate at a "profit". It is allowed to earn money for operational costs. Again, it is not allowed to bank "profit" for a rainy day. It can only make money to cover projected expenses.

Most businesses, public and private, do not define monies needed for operational costs as "profit". That doesn't mean that the money can't be spend, misspent, or squandered. It means that it's not really profit.




When a good man is hurt,
all who would be called good
must suffer with him.

Everybody matters or nobody matters.

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

There is no safety for honest men except
by believing all possible evil of evil men.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

-An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

You make me pull, I'll put you down.

Mister, that's a ten-gallon hat on a twenty-gallon head.

I *love* SIGs. It's Glocks I hate.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: M A V I C
Date: October 01, 2010 01:16PM
Quote
RAMd®d
"Profit" is a relative term.


The fact is the federal government has defined "profit" relevancy for the USPS, and it is not allowed to operate at a "profit". It is allowed to earn money for operational costs. Again, it is not allowed to bank "profit" for a rainy day. It can only make money to cover projected expenses.

Most businesses, public and private, do not define monies needed for operational costs as "profit". That doesn't mean that the money can't be spend, misspent, or squandered. It means that it's not really profit.

A business can occur operational costs that negate profit, with which they can later release when they need the cash. It's done all the time.




Help MacInTouch: Buy from Amazon? use this link [amazon.com]
Mac News & Info: [macintouch.com] [macnn.com] [tuaw.com]
Mac Benchmarks: [barefeats.com]
Used Mac Stuff [FS/T]: LowEndMac Swap List
Mac Software Updates: [macupdate.com]
Fonts: [dafont.com] [fontspace.com]
Online Computer Store With Mac Support: [macsales.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: RAMd®d
Date: October 01, 2010 02:18PM
A business can occur operational costs that negate profit, with which they can later release when they need the cash. It's done all the time.



That's what a lot of companies do- operate at a profit and bank it for the expected and unexpected, all the while earning interest which generates more profit. Apple has a ton of cash they can access should the desire , operational cost, or law suit occur. What doesn't occur leaves them with a lot of profit.

The Postal Service doesn't get use that business model.




When a good man is hurt,
all who would be called good
must suffer with him.

Everybody matters or nobody matters.

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

There is no safety for honest men except
by believing all possible evil of evil men.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

-An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

You make me pull, I'll put you down.

Mister, that's a ten-gallon hat on a twenty-gallon head.

I *love* SIGs. It's Glocks I hate.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: Dakota
Date: October 01, 2010 03:20PM
What keeps the Post Office from going out and hire people, expand hours etc. and spend all their "profits"?



After you discover you're riding a dead horse, your best strategy is to dismount.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: M A V I C
Date: October 01, 2010 05:38PM
Quote
RAMd®d
A business can occur operational costs that negate profit, with which they can later release when they need the cash. It's done all the time.



That's what a lot of companies do- operate at a profit and bank it for the expected and unexpected, all the while earning interest which generates more profit. Apple has a ton of cash they can access should the desire , operational cost, or law suit occur. What doesn't occur leaves them with a lot of profit.

The Postal Service doesn't get use that business model.

Note I never said that they "bank" the profit. I said they "can occur operational costs that negate profit, which they can later release when they need the cash."




Help MacInTouch: Buy from Amazon? use this link [amazon.com]
Mac News & Info: [macintouch.com] [macnn.com] [tuaw.com]
Mac Benchmarks: [barefeats.com]
Used Mac Stuff [FS/T]: LowEndMac Swap List
Mac Software Updates: [macupdate.com]
Fonts: [dafont.com] [fontspace.com]
Online Computer Store With Mac Support: [macsales.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: RETURN TO SENDER ! USPS denied Rate Increase request
Posted by: AllGold
Date: October 03, 2010 03:05PM
The way I see it, there's nothing the postal service did or did not do to get into this situation. It's just the reality of our electronic age. Check printing companies have probably seen a similar drop in volume.

Looking forward, I don't know what could be done to get the USPS out of the red. I would think (but I really don't know) that with the massive drop in postal volume, there could be ways of cost cutting to keep things somewhat level. Although I'm sure there are elements of infrastructure which can't be cut in the same proportion as the drop in volume.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 93
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020