Showing posts with label competition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label competition. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Marketing Mail in a Competitive Market

Third Sector reported the results of a TNT Post announced the results of a survey that it conducted in Great Britain on the effectiveness of mail for gaining contributions by mail.   The results illustrate not only why mail is an effective marketing tool for non-profits but also how postal operators in competitive markets work to expand sales.

Findings of the TNT sponsored study
  • One-third of people who make donations to charity are prompted to do so by receiving direct mail from the organization.
  • 57% of those who respond to mail appeals respond by mail.
  • 87% of those who want more information get that information on-line.  Only 10% use the mail to get more information.
The results illustrate that even in an environment where potential donors use the web to seek information on a charity, mail plays a major role in getting donations.   In the article, both spokespersons for the Centre for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy and TNT Post about the importance of charitable organizations to use a multi-media strategy to solicit contributions.

What is unique about the survey is that it was conducted for TNT Post and and not the national post, Royal Mail, or for a trade association for direct marketers.  TNT is trying to differentiate itself from Royal Mail and a survey of the public is an inexpensive way to gain publicity for their service.

TNT Post's survey is particularly interesting once one looks at the websites of both the website of TNT Post's United Kingdom operations and Royal Mail.  Both firms provide nearly one-stop-shopping of all components of a direct mail campaign from design and printing, to delivery is done by Royal Mail, TNT Post or other delivery means, and analytics evaluating the effectiveness of the advertising campaign.

Based on what is happening in Great Britain, competition in the mail business in the United States could make it easier for advertisers that are hesitant to use mail or other forms of delivery of printed advertising to manage the process.  Clearly having multiple delivery companies marketing services could help expand the market.  The largest mailers will likely not need the services similar to those that TNT Post and Royal Mail are offering and continue to use the large printers to manage their needs

The United States market is not nearly as competitive as markets in Europe.   Restrictions exist as to what services the Postal Service can offer that would integrate delivery with all of the other activities associated with producing mail.   No company in the United States offers an alternative delivery network comparable to what TNT Post and other firms offer either.    Given that print fits well in a multimedia marketing strategy but is often shunned due to the production and delivery costs, it is worth posing two questions:
  • Would print be better off in a competitive postal market? 
  • How would the impact on economic growth if all aspects of printed advertising were sold in competitive markets?

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Enshrining a Twentieth Century Postal Service

The Postal Regulatory Commission in a decision announced last week illustrates how the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) freezes the Postal Service in the 20th Century.   The Commission ordered the Postal Service to terminate two non-postal services and issued guidelines for the sale of licensed CDs and DVDs.   [Press Release] [Decision]  This decision follows the requirements of the PAEA that the Postal Service not offer any non-postal service that were not offered prior to January 1, 2006.   While the PRC may have had little choice in its decision, the impact is likely to be much more significant that limited loss in revenue and net-income.  
 
The decision will stifle innovation.

The Commission determined that products that employed innovative uses of Postal Service human capital, physical capital, and intellectual assets violated the PAEA.  The decision will make the Postal Service think twice about making any change in its product offerings.  From this point forward, the Postal Service will consider first every reason why the PRC might reject a new innovative idea to generate increased revenue.   Even ideas that pass muster with marketing and operations staff will face the challenge of the Postal Service's lawyers who will use their knowledge of PRC precedent to further narrow what is actually offered in order to minimize the risk of objections from the Public Representative of firms in the private sector.
 
The Commission's decision prevents innovative ideas developed by APWU President Burrus, authors of papers on new postal business models, and witnesses at a recent House hearing from seeing the light of day.   The decision will reinforce the culture that discourages innovative ideas to generate revenue and innovation generally.
 
Representative Connolly showed his understanding that the Postal Service needs a culture of innovation in his questioning of former Deputy Postmaster General Coughlin at the last House hearing on the Postal Service.   A culture of innovation that will ensure the Postal Service's future is described in Richard Foster's book: Innovation: The Attacker's Advantage. He recommended that firms in the Postal Service's position must be close to ruthless in cannibalizing their current products and processes just when they are most lucrative and begin the search for new products and processes again, over and over.    As long as the Postal Service works within a regulatory framework that discourages innovation and prevents the development of products that did not exit prior to 2006, this cannot happen.
   
The decision illustrates how much US postal policy differs from policy in other countries. 

Outside the United States Postal operators operate within a public policy framework that understands that limiting the post to just what was done before policy reforms will not ensure the financial viability of the country's mail industry and universal service.    The business models and regulatory frameworks in all of these countries reflect this policy framework.

Postal operators outside the United States are using the commercial freedom granted by the postal policy framework in their country to expand far beyond the limited set of services that the Postal Service can offer.   Outside of the United States, postal operators generate no more than 70% of their revenue from letter mail and for many posts, less than half.    The Postal Service generated 84 % of its revenue from letter mail services and it is not higher because letter mail revenue shrank faster than the decline in parcel shipping in 2009.

Restrictions in commercial freedom are only some of the differences between the Postal Service's business with the business models of foreign posts.   Foreign posts operate under fairly limited regulatory restrictions, standard private sector business law, employment law, and increasingly tax law.   In no country do these differences prevent the national post from continuing to offer universal service.  In many cases, the differences allow the national post to offer universal retail access, and especially retail access in rural areas at levels far greater than what exists in the United States.

The decision illustrates the limitation of governmental models for the Postal Service.


Nearly all of the governmental models proposed by the Postal Service and other authors of papers on business models included changes in the Postal Service's charter to allow it to compete more openly with the private sector in a way that would allow it to offer the services terminated. They all argued that the Postal Service needed the additional competitive ability in order to replace revenue from declining mail volumes. The change in law required would require Congress to allow the Postal Service, operating as a government entity, to go into direct competition with the private sector.  The Commission's decision, and in particular Pitney Bowes's active participation shows that private sector firms have a real interest in keeping the Postal Service from gaining an expanded competitive mandate.   The nature of the debate over a public health care option illustrates that passage of a charter that allows the Postal Service more room to compete with the private sector is highly improbable as long as the Postal Service remains a part of the Federal Government.

The decision has adverse inflationary and economic growth impacts.

The Commission's decision restricts entry by the Postal Service into markets that it could serve profitably.  In its decision, it cited both concerns of private sector competitors and the public representative that argued for terminating products that the Postal Service offered.

The theoretical impact of restricting entry in postal markets have been studied and published in numerous papers over the past 20 years.   The impact on economic growth is less clear but given that most mailers require a positive economic return on their mailing expenses, regulations that restrict entry and raise prices should raise the probability that a mailing would not meet the return hurdle that would allow for a mailer to print and mail.

The Commission's decision requiring the Postal Service to terminate two products is reminiscent of decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission under trucking regulation. In particular, objection by competitors could derail proposes to expand the geographic area served by a trucking company.  Entry restrictions in transportation and other markets have been shown by economists as having both inflationary and economic growth slowing impacts.   Numerous economic studies were sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation, and a number of books were published on the topic including:
The Decision Hurts Postal Labor.

 The Postal Service's workforce faces tremendous strain due to the need to cut costs as volume and revenue declines.   Any regulatory decision that limits the Postal Service's ability to fully utilize its human, physical or intellectual assets will require that reductions in the workforce come more swiftly and cut more deeply than might otherwise be necessary.   Restrictions on entry also reduces the sources of potential cash to cover transfer and retraining costs, retirement incentives and severance pay that accompany a downsizing process.

The Decision Illustrates the Political Challenge of Changing the Postal Service's Business Model.

Changing the Postal Service's business model and regulatory framework will affect nearly all stakeholders.   Those stakeholders who could lose a favored position by a change in the business model and regulatory framework will oppose those changes.    Those that would benefit from change are less likely to actively pursue change as the benefits of change are less clear to them than the risks are to those who currently enjoy a favored position.

Trucking deregulation illustrates a successful change in regulatory model that forced changes in business models in dozens of firms over the objections of business, labor and regulatory stakeholders. In particular, during the early days of regulatory reform the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) focused on protecting its regulatory responsibilities and the due process rights of those that would be hurt by entry and pricing freedoms that the Ford administration promoted. A combination of pressure from the Ford Administration and appointments of new commissioners and ICC chairman resulted in an ICC that actively supported the deregulation of trucking and the elimination of much of the ICC's regulatory responsibilities.

A review of politics of policy reform for the trucking is instructive in trying to understand the politics of policy reform for the Postal Service and in particular the risks and opportunities available for governmental officials that believe a new business model and regulatory framework is needed.  In that regard, I recommend the following books:

Friday, January 8, 2010

Cutting Management at UPS

In announcing its expected strong earnings in the fourth quarter of 2009, UPS also announced significant cuts in its management structure.  

"Effective in April, UPS will reduce its U.S. Regions from five to three and its U.S. Districts from 46 to 20. As part of the realignment, UPS will expand its outreach to customers by strengthening local sales and marketing efforts.  The restructuring will eliminate approximately 1,800 management and administrative positions across the country. Normal attrition will minimize some job displacements, and approximately 1,100 employees will be offered a voluntary separation package. In addition, other impacted employees will receive severance benefits and access to support programs based on length of service."  [Emphasis Added]  (UPS Press Release)

The cuts are severe and the highlights above illustrate that the cuts will are deep and most likely will have significant one time costs for UPS.   The following bullets recast the information contained in the press release to illustrate how significant UPS's actions are


  • UPS is cutting its regional management by 40%.
  • UPS is cutting its district management by 57%.  For example, the reductions in the number of districts will put the corridor from Philadelphia to Washington DC into a single district.
  • The number of employees laid off will depend upon attrition and the number of employees taking voluntary separation packages.
  • The cost of this action for UPS will likely be between $100 and 300 million depending upon the number of people who leave under normal attrition and the cost of transfers for managers that are retained.  UPS expects that the charge will be offset by cost savings initiatives in its domestic ground delivery business.

Dow Jones  quoted UPS spokesman Norman Black explanation of the cuts as follows: "We're talking about adopting a leaner management structure for the domestic business," [The latest cuts have] "nothing to do with the economic recession." 


Saturday, December 12, 2009

Purolator USA, Canadian in the US Parcel Market

When DHL exited from its United States domestic business, most commentators suggested that shippers would face only the duopoly of UPS and FedEx. The Postal Service was considered a marginal player that could not meet the service quality needs of business to business customers. More importantly, it rarely was price competitive on shipments over 5 pounds.

In a previous post, I noted that Amazon in its drive to shorten the time from order to delivery is expanding the number of competitors that compete in the parcel delivery market as it uses same-day couriers to delivery parcels that UPS or FedEx would have delivered previously. Amazon can expand the list of potential vendors to include same day and regional parcel carriers because its warehouses are close to the customers that it wants to serve but can only be served by carriers that can operate with more flexibility than the two national carriers.

New competition in the United States does not just come from these regional carriers. Purolator USA, a Canada Post subsidiary, is slowly expanding its domestic United States business as a complement to its cross-border business. By expanding its domestic United States business, it can serve more of the North America needs of its customers, making it easier for it to get a larger share of the business of customers with significant cross-border parcel and express traffic.

The growth of Purolator USA can be seen by looking at its web site and some of the older items that Purolator has not updated. Purolator, operating as a subsidiary of the Canadian courier has been in the United States since 1997, and under the Purolator USA name since 2004. For most of its existence, its focas has been on cross border traffic into Canada where it is the largest parcel and express carrier.

In its brochure describing its cross-b0rder service, Purolator describes four (4) United States based consolidation terminals in Seattle, New York, Buffalo and Chicago. It's website now lists the ten (10) gateways listed below. Clicking on any of the gateways will show the service times that Purolator USA promises to customers served by that gateway. The maps are comparable to service times of UPS and FedEx but somewhat narrower than what is offered by some regional carriers.

(Readers using Internet Explore may have some difficulties with some of these downloads as you have to tell IE that you want to download the file and then try a second time. They all work fine in Firefox. If you have a fix send a comment.)

Buffalo, NY
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
Itasca, IL
Los Angeles, CA
Melville, NY
Newburgh, NY
Philadelphia, PA
Raleigh-Durham, NC
Seattle, WA
Taylor, MI

The growth in gateways, and the service area of each gateway suggests that Purolator USA is growing its cross boarder business and using that growth to organically grow regional and inter-regional traffic within the United States. This is similar to the strategy that Roadway Package Express used to grow the ground network from scratch that is now FedEx Ground. This contrasts with the failed strategy of DHL to buy US market share by buying Airborne, a company that at best was marginally profitable as an independent firm. Purolator USA's strategy in the United States domestic market has a reasonable chance of success if it can offer domestic US service as good as the cross-border service it offers its customers as well as the service offered by UPS and FedEx.

Given the success of numerous regional carriers, Purolator USA may now be enticed to speed the process by buying profitable regional operators. The DHL experience will likely ensure that any mergers are pursued cautiously and will likely focus on regional operators in areas that it does not now have gateways.

Purolator USA's domestic service unlikely provides more than a fraction of 1% of the total US domestic parcel and express market. However, even niche competitors can have an impact on the pricing strategies of UPS and FedEx as they negotiate with US customers that currently use Purolator for Canadian destined shipments.