US Postal Service announces no increase in magazine mailing rates
This seems a day for postal news. U.S. Postmaster General John E. Potter has sent a letter to customers officially announcing there will be no rate hike for "market dominant products." Magazine publishers had been expecting a 2 to 3 percent increase in May and some had even speculated about 10 percent.
"We want to end all speculation," said Potter who, on Wednesday, told a conference in New York that the USPS had an "extreme prejudice" against a 2010 rate hike.
According to a story in Audience Development, first-class mail, standard mail, periodicals and single-piece parcel post will not have a price increase—"there will be no exigent price increase for these products," said Potter in the letter.
Would that Canada Post -- which is imposing a 3% increase as of January, citing "increased costs to serve" -- took the same view as the USPS. The cost of mailing the average magazine in Canada has gone up 38% in six years.
Labels: Canada Post, mailing rates, USPS
posted by D. B. Scott at
12:34 pm
6 Comments:
The USPS lost close to $3 billion (US) in 2008, expects to lose much more this year (according to their CEO) and has talked of laying off up to 150,000 employees. So if you're looking for a business model for Canada Post to emulate, this probably isn't the best example to use.....
It's not so much that I'm looking to the USPS as a business model as looking to Canada Post for some reasonable reflection of real costs. Magazines are generally treated as whiners and nuisances when, in fact, we are a good and loyal customer. And 38% in increases in 6 years is not an inflationary increase, but a revenue grab.
So here's a test open to anyone. Take two envelopes of exactly the same size and weight - one with a magazine inside, and one with content that could be anything else, but whatever the case, ISN'T a magazine. Take them both to a post office. The envelope holding the magazine will cost at least two thirds less to mail than the other one because of breaks that continue to be given to the magazine industry as a good and loyal customer. That's something that Magazines Canada never tells anyone: that the magazine industry continues to get greatly favoured treatment - just not quite as favoured as was once the case.
I don't think it is true that Magazines Canada never tells anyone that magazines get a subsidized postal rate. In fact, the preferential rate is very well known and has been around for more than 100 years. It's a matter of longstanding public policy to provide affordable circulation to a small population spread across a very big country.
What I'm surprised at is that Anonymous is apparently critical of, rather than defending, such a policy.
An interesting presumption, because nothing in the two previous posts supports or suggests that. Rather, the point is that most in the magazine industry - and you, it must be said, are among them - behave as though the business is continually discriminated against over and above other sectors - when the reality is that it continues to enjoy preferred treatment. Check your own previous posts - how many times have you ever acknowledged that this ongoing subsidy exists ?
Of course you have the advantage of commenting anonymously; I have no idea if you are in the magazine business or not, while my posts are signed and I take responsibility for them.
As for presumption, one wonders why you would comment on and criticize the subsidized postal rate unless you felt it was somehow unfair or unreasonable. It's not presumption, it is an inference from what you said.
My original post that led to this exchange simply commented on the fact that the USPS decided, for whatever reasons, that a rate increase is unjustified this year while Canada Post decided to once again raise rates considerably beyond the rate of inflation.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home