Sunday, October 2, 2011

On the fate of USPS...

Changes can be hard to swallow sometimes, in the face of technological and cultural shifts. It's particular so, for long-standing services and habits. Examples abound, and we need to look no further than LP albums, to cassette tapes and walkman, to CD, then mp3 players, and now tunes in the cloud (hello, iTune) that renders all predecessors obsolete.

Not everyone listens to music, but most everyone gets mails. Even with overwhelmingly junk mails, there is certain comfort in seeing something as regular as daily mail delivery in the mailbox. Alas, at least something stays constant in life...but not for long. Judging from the way that USPS is hemorrhaging, I'm not sure how long it can stay afloat.

Sometimes I find it rather bizarre, looking at the way that public/private services are in US. Much like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the USPS provides a very public civic service. In the case of Fannie and Freddie, they pretty much underwrite the secondary mortgage market with a quasi-government backing, even though they are "private entity" in name. I've always found that disingenuous, if only so that Americans (particularly the GOP cohorts) want no government in life or business enterprise. Yet, those markets and everyone who has a mortgage or a hand in the financial markets all have a hand in seeing to it that Uncle Sam's hidden role (as the guy backing Fannie and Freddie) stays hidden but is kept alive.

The same is true with USPS which is turned into a private entity, yet its finance and operations are largely hamstrung by public policy. Without change in regulations, they can't raise prices, they can't cut service, they can't even cut much staff, not to mention those generous pension. That's a terrible way to run a business.

I can't fathom a country without a postal service. Even though there are alternatives (eg. FedEx, UPS), postal service would and should remain public entity. On the other hand, regardless of whether it's public or not, one can't simply run it as if resources and funding are unlimited; to do otherwise is unconscionable.

I don't USPS that much these days. For my incoming mails, almost all the bills that I receive, I've ordered electronic bills and statements; so, there goes 80% of my mails in thin air. There are a few other billers who still can't do e-bills (eg. property taxes from county), but it's just a matter of time before they do. I still have only one journal (namely, Fortune magazine) that I still like it in print form. Everything else I get from the web and online subscription. The rest is all junk mail that goes to recycle bin. As to my outgoing mails, I pay all bills online. (How many billers can't receive online bill-pay these days anyways?!) So, I hardly need to send any mails at all. Those first-class stamps are gathering dust on my desk.

If my case is any indication of the impact to the USPS mail volume, it'll indeed be a very worrisome sign. And if USPS is to rely solely on the revenue on mail volume, then sooner or later it's going to go bankrupt. There's simply no other way.

Truth be told, USPS has had some innovations in recent years, including partnering with vendors like eBay to make it easier for merchants to ship packages, and stamps.com. They are not sufficient to ramp up revenue fast enough to compensate for the rapid decline of the physical mail volume.

I buy stuffs quite often on the web, and those packages are probably the times when USPS comes in most handily. I hope USPS will live on, but I don't think its current course is sustainable, with Congress behind its back (for whipping, not for much financial backing).

No comments: