Author: Archive

Why size-based pricing critics miss the point

Posted by | Jun 4, 2004 | |

Those industry stalwarts opposing size-based pricing are displaying a traditional knee-jerk reaction to any sort of change. They have somewhat missed the point.

Some form of size-based pricing is almost universal throughout Europe. At the moment, you could put together a European mailing campaign posted from the UK, with one pack sized 240mm x 165mm x 5mm, weighing up to 100g for the recipients on the Continent, and then another pack any size you fancy, but weighing under 60g for the Brits.

Read More

Japan Post to set up mail transport unit in FY 2005

Posted by | Jun 4, 2004 | |

Japan Post plans to set up a mail transport subsidiary and will decide when to do so a year from now, President Masaharu Ikuta said Thursday.

The comment by the chief of the postal public corporation is interpreted as a hint that the subsidiary will likely be set up as early as fiscal 2005.Japan Post now outsources long-distance transport of postal matter. It introduced bidding for some routes last fiscal year, but contracts on other routes have been handed out without bidding to affiliates and subsidiaries that hire former Posts Ministry officials.

Read More

UK Hays to demerge mail division

Posted by | Jun 4, 2004 | |

Hays, the services group transforming itself into a specialist recruitment business, has promised expansion of its mail operations after deciding to demerge the division, known as DX.

Colin Matthews, the chief executive who is leaving at the end of this month to take up the reins at water group Severn Trent, said Hays had decided against a sale of DX.

Read More

E-substitution for mail: models and results; myths and realities

Posted by | Jun 3, 2004 | |

Presentation at Rutgers 04 Cork by Luis Jimenez, Pitney Bowes. Progress report on study on e-substition
Ian Senior comments on presentation:
Jiminez’s paper is outstanding in its breadth and depth of approach to
>forecasting a future for mail.
>
>The main points remain:
>
>1) Each new communication medium that arrives has an impact that both
>increases the total amount of communication and, frequently, reduces for a
>while the volume and value of existing media but does not completely
>eliminate existing media. Thus cinema was supposed to kill off theatre; TV
>was supposed to kill off cinema; videos were supposed to reduce the amount
>of TV watched; transfer of files via the internet is currently predicted to
>kill off CDs etc. So far none of the threatened media has been killed off
>though their shares of the total communications market have changed. If
>the total market is growing, which it is, that helps them to survive.
>
>2) The Internet is already having a big impact on letters as a medium for
>one-to-one information. I write far more individual e-mails per day than I
>ever wrote individual letters per month. However, the impact of the
>Internet on direct mail advertising so far has not prevented the latter’s
>growth, in the UK at least.
>
>3) However, different technologies can kill off earlier technologies
>completely (e.g the fax killed off telex; e-mail is in the process of
>killing off faxes; audio cassettes and CDs have killed off vinyl; CD’s
>have killed off cassettes. The point in all these cases, including mail,
>comes down to the cost and convenience of the transmission per piece and,
>in the case of mail, the sales generated by the transmission. Spam is an
>example, akin to broadcasting radio and televition, in which the cost of
>sending literally millions of spam messages is no more than sending one.
>Hence, the tiniest response rate producing sales justifies spamming. This
>will change dramatically if ISPs were all to introduce charges for each
>e-mail sent.
>
>In conclusion Jiminez’s paper is an outstanding contribution but does not
>alter my view that the volume of mail pieces in the developed world will
>float slowly downwards over the next 5 years. Mail’s content will
>increasingly be direct marketing while one-to-one information bearing mail
>will largely migrate to the Internet. The advent of competition in
>providing mail services should reduce the cost to senders which in turn
>will encourage growth of volume.

P:LibraryRutgers 2004Jimenez Electronic Substitution for Mail.pdf

Read More

Selling crucial to networks

Posted by | Jun 3, 2004 | |

Pallet networks are missing out on huge volumes by failing to give their members enough sales support, according to consultant John Day of AD Partnership. Day (pictured below), formerly general manager of Fortec who was joint-buyer of Auld Bros last autumn, says: “There is a lot of volume currently going through the parcel systems that they (pallet networks) could gain. With the Working Time Directive soon to kill off groupage, customers will turn to the pallet networks, therefore sales strategy is becoming crucial; but the networks leave it up to the licensees.”

Read More

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

P&P Poll

Loading

Have you noticed a decrease of non-EU inbound parcel volumes since the implementation of the new €3 charge?

Thank you for voting
You have already voted on this poll!
Please select an option!


View ResultsHide Results

Post & Parcel Magazine


Post & Parcel Magazine is our print publication, released 3 times a year. Packed with original content and thought-provoking features, Post & Parcel Magazine is a must-read for those who want the inside track on the industry.

Subscribe to the Magazine

 

Pin It on Pinterest