“The Christian Science Monitor,” says the paper, “plans major changes in April 2009 that are expected to make it the first newspaper with a national audience to shift from a daily print format to an online publication that is updated continuously each day.

“The changes at the Monitor will include enhancing the content on CSMonitor.com, starting weekly print and daily e-mail editions, and discontinuing the current daily print format.”

In rough terms, the Christian Science Monitor has a circulation between 75,000 to 100,000 papers a day. This circulation is primarily distributed through the mailstream but times are changing.

The paper says that “producing a website that can be updated 24/7 and delivered instantaneously ‘better fulfills Mrs. Eddy’s original vision’ for the Monitor to be daily than does a five-day-a-week paper delivered by mail with frequent delays.”

Let’s go to the numbers.

Imagine that the CSM has a circulation of 87,500 papers a day and most of it’s delivered by mail. Imagine as well that in a year there are roughly 260 weekday deliveries. This means a potential distribution of as many as 22,750,000 papers annually.

The real number of papers moving through the mails is likely smaller but the point is this: By going from a daily print paper to a weekly, and by shifting to a news product which is largely web-based, there is less mail volume.

This is not good for the Postal Service, not good for jobs within the postal system and it may be implausible for most newspapers.

It’s difficult to see how newspapers can win in this situation. The Washington Post, as one example, just reported third quarter numbers. Revenue from the newspaper division, said the company, “totaled $196.2 million for the third quarter of 2008, a decrease of 7% from $210.2 million in the third quarter of 2007; division revenue decreased 9% to $599.6 million for the first nine months of 2008, from $657.2 million for the first nine months of 2007.” Such revenue, after various charges, produced an operating loss of $82.7 million in the third quarter.

Now look at the Post’s online operations:

“Revenue generated by the Company’s online publishing activities, primarily washingtonpost.com, increased 13% to $30.8 million for the third quarter of 2008, from $27.2 million for the third quarter of 2007; online revenues increased 8% to $87.2 million in the first nine months of 2008, from $80.5 million for the first nine months of 2007. Display online advertising revenue grew 32% and 20% for the third quarter and first nine months of 2008, respectively. Online classified advertising revenue on washingtonpost.com declined 8% in the third quarter of 2008, and was down 2% for the first nine months of 2008. A small portion of the Company’s online publishing revenues is included in the magazine publishing division.”

By any standard $87 million in nine months is a bunch of money — but it’s not enough to fund the Post’s news gathering operations at their current level of quality, volume and expertise.

You can see the dilemma here: Newspapers need print distribution for the foreseeable future because paper-based products produce vastly higher revenues than online sites. The Postal Service needs newspapers, magazines and newsletters to continue as print publications because otherwise it will lose billions of pieces per year in volume. Everyone needs a strong Postal Service because of the jobs it represents nationwide. At the same time, declining circulation and mounting losses make print-based products increasingly difficult to justify for financial reasons.

You can bet that newspaper executives will be watching the Christian Science Monitor — at least to see if its new distribution plan has a prayer. And folks with an interest in the mailstream will be watching too.

Technorati Tags: Mail & Jobs, newspaper, online, post office, postal, Postal Service, transition

Do MOST marketers want to get rid of direct mail? Is that what “MOST” marketers say? Where is the poll or survey to support such a claim? If that is what MOST marketers think, then why is it that marketers spent $61 billion advertising through the mails in 2007 — and $43 billion with newspapers?

Can it be true that “environmentalists” universally oppose the use of advertising mail? How can that be? According to their 2005 tax returns, the National Audubon Society spent $2,701,028 for fundraising postage and shipping; the National Resources Defense Council spent $1,147,114 on postage and shipping for fundraising — and raised $518,164 renting lists; and the National Wildlife Federation spent $1,516,178 on postage and shipping for fundraising, paid $185,736 to purchase list rental services and raised $916,034 from list royalties.

When asked about his group’s use of mail, Peter Bahouth, then executive director at Greenpeace, told ABC News long ago that “accusing environmental groups of paper pollution is a bit like saying that we need to get the ambulances off the street because they’re loud.”

Which major environmental group does not mail? Which major environmental group only uses websites and email? Does the Times believe that electronic media are environmentally pure?

And what about saving trees?

“Deforestation in the United States, rampant in the 19th century has stopped,” says The New York Times. “Forested acreage of the country began rising in the 20th century, and is still rising. Why? Wood is no longer a primary fuel, while high-yield agriculture allowed millions of acres to be retired from farming and returned to trees.” (See: There Goes the Neighborhood, January 30, 2005)

If the Times is concerned about saving trees, then should it not give readers the option to receive the paper without advertising inserts? Wouldn’t that save a lot of trees? And isn’t it true that the Times itself uses direct mail to market subscriptions? If yes, is the Times going to stop its direct mail efforts?

Since when did it become appropriate for The New York Times to disparage a competitive media by using the pejorative and derogatory term “junk mail” instead of direct marketing or ad mail?

As the Times itself says in its 2007 annual report, “most of our revenues are from advertising. We face formidable competition for advertising revenue in our various markets from free and paid newspapers, magazines, Web sites, television and radio, other forms of media, direct marketing and the Yellow Pages. Competition from these media and services affects our ability to attract and retain advertisers and consumers and to maintain or increase our advertising rates.”

“Magazines and newspapers have been at war with advertising mailers for a long time — ever since the mailers began siphoning ad dollars away from publications,” says The Washington Post. “Indeed, newspaper editorialists invented the term ‘junk mail’ in the early 1950s, according to Richard Kielbowicz, an associate professor of communications as the University of Washington, Seattle, and an expert on postal rate issues.” (See: The Junk Mail Plague: You Can Run But You Can’t Hide, April 22, 1991)

The Times reports that the direct mail business was “vilified even before global warming became a hot topic.”

Exactly who vilified direct mail?

“A number of foreign postal administrations deliver unaddressed advertising mail, and U.S. postal officials toyed with the idea as long ago as the 1950s,” according to The Washington Post. “The agency was not independent of the White House at the time and the Eisenhower administration rejected the proposal after a year-long test. It had come under attack by the newspaper industry, which coined the phrase ‘junk mail.’” (See: Special Delivery for ‘Junk Mail,‘ August 18, 1995)

If the Times would like to present its readers with an informed discussion of direct mail and the environment, that’s fine. Hopefully it will mention the 8,300,000 jobs and the $1.2 trillion in products and services anchored by the mailstream. Hopefully it will want to explain what their loss would mean to our country. Hopefully it will discuss how many people want to close their local post offices because of environmental concerns.

Unfortunately, an informed discussion is not possible when advertising mail is first slammed with a prejudicial term invented by commercial competitors and then saddled with one-sided claims of environmental damage. The Times owes an apology to its readers.

Technorati Tags: advertising, conflict, coverage, history, media, newspapers, spending

For the past few years the mail, and by implication the Postal Service, has been under attack. Although strategic and targeted responses have kept state do-not-mail laws from being passed or moving forward, the Postal Service and the people who depend upon the Postal Service, are losing the battle to win the hearts and minds of American consumers.

Recently, the Postmaster General announced that he had created a new position — the Vice President of Sustainability. The Postal Service is developing and sharing with its work force fact sheets that discuss the Postal Service’s accomplishments in “being green,” the value of the mail, and ways consumers can “manage their mail.” Personally, I do not think this is enough.

I think the Postal Service needs a Vice President of Survival. Just in case I get a chance to interview for the job, here is what I would tell the Postal Service it needs to do.

The Postal Service cannot let the dialogue focus around issues of “consumer choice” or the “environment.” The more time we spend talking about the mail in these terms, the more we pay homage to the buzzwords of those who don’t care if the Postal Service and the jobs it anchors survive.

Even if the Postal Service tries to do damage control and stay out of the fray by saying, “We just deliver,” this argument or position is also a loser. It’s too passive.

Big Brown and Dominos deliver. The Postal Service needs to focus, and get out the word, about what makes the Postal Service special.

The Postal Service needs to be LOUD and PROUD about its mission. If I were the Vice President of Survival, I would be a mail missionary. I would make it my job to persuade postal stakeholders, including customers, consumers, the labor force and others to become mail missionaries.

The Postal Service has a Constitutional mission to connect the country together. It is the only free access, universal communication channel. The Postal Service is sender-supported. There are no subscription or access fees.

The Postal Service runs on volume. On print and paper.

Any attack on mail volumes, print or paper, whether in the form of a law or a consumer movement that would curtail mail volume, would destroy the Postal Service and its ability to deliver on its mission.

Here are the messages that the Postal Service should be promoting. Let me make it clear. These are not lobbying messages. They are messages about the critical, country-connecting mission of the Postal Service.

1. Free Speech. Mailers have a right to send a message to all consumers as long as they pay the postage. There is no “right” to opt-out or choose what mail you want or do not want to receive. The right to send is part of the economic underpinning of the right to have access for free.

2. Economic Equity and Affordable Service. The Postal Service delivers mail and packages to a lot of people who depend upon mail delivery. Frequently these people receive very little mail but the mail they get is important to them. The housebound person who shops by mail, the senior who gets prescription drugs by mail, and the many households who get benefit checks, or payments by mail that are essential for their rent, food and expenses, are postal dependents.

The ability of the USPS to reach all households affordably and regularly is paid for by postage payers who want to reach all consumers and businesses. Much of the volume that underwrites the Postal Service’s network is advertising mail.

Any law, or consumer movement, that would give consumers a choice or incentive to opt out of the mail, or “redline” their mailbox, is elitist. There are a lot of “haves” in this country who get mail advertising from many sources. Most of these “haves” are wired, have cable, computers, Blackberrys, and Palm Pilots.

The “haves” do not need the Postal Service lifeline to get goods, services, and communications. Giving the well-connected upper crust some right to declare their mailbox a “gated community” will discriminate against the rates and services available to those who do not have so many communication choices.

3. Unrestricted Mail Promotes A Free Market System and More Jobs. The Postal Service has helped numerous small businesses get in business and stay in business.

The Postal Service helps businesses of all sizes with new products, services, and a way to reach consumers with “a better mouse trap.” For the past 25 years I have worked with an organization of small business advertisers. I have heard their testimonials about how coupons, shared mail packages, and classified ads in free papers help them get in business and stay in business. The mail remains the most democratic and accessible way a small business service provider, retailer, home-based business, or handyperson can target and reach a small-to-large audience.

I remember the story of a recently-divorced woman who lost everything and only knew how to clean houses. She sent a coupon in the mail to some well-heeled communities offering her services. What would have happened to her if these “we’ve-got-enough-mail-thank-you” households had declared their mailbox off-limits to mail paid for by senders?

America’s economic growth has historically been fueled by consumer spending. Anything that hurts or limits the rights of businesses to reach existing and potential customers hurts the American economy as a whole. It will hurt America’s small businesses, self-employed, and home service businesses the most. These are the businesses that are most dependent upon affordable and locally targeted mail.

Advertising is the fuel that helps businesses get in business and stay in business. You cannot just “build it” and hope they come. As a consumer, there are lots of great products and ideas I would never have discovered but for the coupons, catalogs, and mail offers that come to my door.

4. Mail Is Good. Mail shopping is fun and environmentally friendly. Lots of people like to shop. With the high cost of gas, traffic congestion, and the press of time, window shopping and mall-walking is not always possible. I would urge the Postal Service to promote and partner with the mailing industry about the pleasures of clipping coupons, cruising through catalogs, and finding values in circulars and shoppers.

The Postal Service should NOT be shaping its message by consumer opinion polls. If the Postal Service believes it has a mission, and believes it is doing the right thing, start telling people why. Create and share your message and story based on your own convictions.

What do I think makes the Postal Service special?

The Postal Service has REACH. The Postal Service’s ability to serve all, affordably and regularly, depends upon its ability to reach all.

The Postal Service, and the industry, needs to stop playing defense.

The Postal Service is driving America’s greenest, most democratic and affordable, SUV. That stands for SERVICE that is UNIVERSAL and VOLUME supported.

The Postal Service has a national network, touching and connecting all, that’s powered by print products and paper.

It is time for the Postal Service to start being LOUD and PROUD.

Technorati Tags: marketing survival, Postal Service

According to the paper each individual will receive 560 pieces of ad mail each year; 10.8 pieces per week; and it notes that 42 percent of all pulpwood is made into paper,

Let’s see, mail is generally delivered six days a week and there are 52 weeks a year so that means there are 312 delivery days annually. Less federal holidays, maybe 300 delivery days a year. So, if 560 pieces of mail are delivered each year and there are 300 delivery days that means each day results in less than two pieces of ad mail per person.

This hardly sounds like a crisis.

As to the 10.8 pieces of ad mail per week, just how remarkable is it given that there are six delivery days in a typical week? Still less than two per day.

Then we see that 42 percent of all pulpwood is made into paper. Notice that pulpwood is made into “paper” and not just mail. So, for example, according to the EPA in 2006 there were 44,840,000 tons of paper and paperboard products produced — of which 12,360,000 tons were used to make newspapers and 5,890,000 tons were used to create advertising mail. (See: 2006 MSW Characterization Data Tables, EPA, table 4)

Here are some interesting facts the Winston-Salem Journal left out:

Newspapers compete with the mailstream for advertising dollars. As the Washington Post has explained, “magazines and newspapers have been at war with advertising mailers for a long time — ever since the mailers began siphoning ad dollars away from publications. Indeed, newspaper editorialists invented the term ‘junk mail’ in the early 1950s, according to Richard Kielbowicz, an associate professor of communications at the University of Washington, Seattle, and an expert on postal rate issues.” (See: The Junk Mail Plague: You Can Run But You Can’t Hide,” April 22, 1991.)

If the Journal wants to tell the whole story, it should plainly inform readers that it competes with mailers. It should say that the term “junk mail” is a slur developed by the newspaper community to disparage a commercial rival. It should note that newspapers, like advertising mail, are made from paper but that a significant percentage of both products are made from recycled materials.

The Journal should explain to readers that advertisers can market their goods and services through a variety of media. Advertisers, being lucid and logical, will not use media that does not produce results.

The use of ad mail has proven to be effective and efficient for many advertisers. If that were not the case, surely advertisers would take their dollars elsewhere.

And ad mail has value: The mailstream anchors 8,300,000 jobs nationwide and the production of goods and services worth $1.2 trillion annually. Is the economy so strong that we can do away with so many jobs inside our borders?

The Journal can do better than this. It needs to update its style manual to purge the term “junk mail” from its pages — or it needs to explain to readers how the term came about each and every time it is used.

Technorati Tags: advertising, mail, newspapers

“The recent increase in the cost of a first-class postage stamp from 41 cents to 42 cents was hardly surprising, compared to the increased in the cost of gasoline, food and just about everything else,” said the paper.

“It could have easily been avoided, however. All the U.S. Postal Service needs to do to drastically cut expenses and the necessity for several future postal-rate increases is one simple thing: Eliminate Saturday delivery.”

And why should Saturday deliveries be curtailed?

“Just think of the amount of fuel that would not be burned if mail were not delivered on Saturdays,” said the paper.

“Most people,” continued the Observer-Reporter, “communicate with friends and family by e-mail now. Many receive and pay bills online. Most of what arrives in the mailbox these days is just junk mail, anyway.”

The thought that the Postal Service could cut costs by ending Saturday deliveries is no different than suggesting that hospital expenses could be reduced if only the emergency room was shut down on weekends.

The Postal Service has a high percentage of fixed costs — all those people, vehicles and local post offices. If local post offices are closed on Saturdays it means there is less volume to support the system but many of the fixed costs remain in place — you still need a given number of people, vehicles and facilities to reach almost 150 million physical addresses.

The Observer-Reporter says “most of what arrives in the mailbox these days is just junk mail, anyway.” In other words, advertising mail.

How is paper-based advertising sent through the mailstream any different than paper-based advertising delivered by the Observer-Reporter? Would the Observer-Reporter agree that it could cut its costs and save paper if only it would not carry advertising inserts one day a week? Think of all the fuel used by delivery trucks that could be saved if the Observer-Reporter published less often. Would not such economies please owners and shareholders?

A lot of newspapers and magazines go through the mailstream. In fiscal 2007, according to the Postal Service, 8.8 billion newspapers and magazines were delivered by mail.

Many communication companies that publish newspapers also have subsidiaries to market through the mailstream. Indeed, many newspapers offer “Total Market Coverage” plans that include postal deliveries. Surely it would not be good for TMC programs if the local post office was shut down on Saturdays.

Some TMC programs are huge. The Newspaper Association of America says that 3,520,000 million piece per week are delivered in Los Angeles, 2,385,371 in Chicago and 570,000 in Miami.

If advertising through the mailstream is not effective or productive, does it not make sense that advertisers would go elsewhere? Should not the marketplace decide such issues? In fact, according to Robert Coen, senior vice president, director of forecasting with Universal McCann, the huge advertising agency, advertisers in the world, advertisers now spend more marketing through the mailstream than through newspapers.

In the December 2007 issue of his “Insider’s Report,” Coen said that advertisers spent $60.998 billion with mail marketing in 2007 versus $42.94 billion with newspapers.

Although the Observer-Reporter is surely concerned by 42 cent stamps it somehow fails to mention the rates paid by newspapers — 13.6 to 16.8 cents per piece, according to the Newspaper Association of America.

The fact is that the U.S. marketplace is vast and all forms of advertising should be welcomed and encouraged because they stimulate sales and create jobs. That’s good for the economy, good for local communities and good for readers in Washington, PA.

Technorati Tags: close, Coen, mail, newspapers, post offices, Saturdays, TMC, Total Market Coverage

To be polite, they are awful.

“The percentage of loans in the foreclosure process was 2.47 percent at the end of the first quarter, an increase of 43 basis points from the fourth quarter of 2007 and 119 basis points from one year ago,” says the MBA.

What do foreclosure numbers have to do with the mailstream?

The mailstream is a major source of jobs and economic activity in the U.S. — some 8,300,000 jobs inside our borders are anchored by the postal system. Goods and services worth $1.2 trillion annually are related to the existence of a reliable and competitive mail system.

But the mailstream does not exist in a vacuum. People who face vastly higher mortgage costs order less from catalogs and online. People who are losing their homes are not likely to be big buyers, online or off.

The truth is that our economy is a two-way street. Mail volume will be impacted by general economic trends — and general economic trends can be significantly hurt when mail volume declines.

Those who complain about advertising in the mailstream — but not the same advertisements, by the same advertisers, on the same paper which are distributed in other media — need to understand that large numbers of jobs will be lost if the mailstream contracts artificially because of inaccurate information, false claims and fake comparisons.

No kidding, this was an envelope sent by PowerOfEnvelopes.org and saturated with seeds. All you do is place the envelope in the ground, add water and Nature will take care of the rest.

We sometimes forget the envelopes provide important values in the communication process. Mail is a tactile medium that you can touch and hold. It offers the benefits of utility, economy, authenticity, and universality. Words on paper are real, and so are signatures and sentiments. Envelopes, in particular, convey privacy and security. They are socially inviolate.

In fact, research from the Envelope Manufacturers Association Foundation shows that:

___84% of consumers says envelopes leave a memorable impression.

___Three out of four people prefer bills when sent inside an envelope.

___Americans are three times more likely to pay attention to direct mail sent to their homes than to unsolicited email, Internet banners or pop-up ads, telephone calls, text messages and at-home visits combined.

As to that envelope I received, I have a great place in the garden which could use a few more flowers.

Technorati Tags: envelopes, flowers, mail, privacy, tactile

The use of ethanol has grown in large part because of federal subsidies and good PR, but the results to date have not been impressive. Corn diverted to energy production is corn not available for cattle, a major reason for rising food costs.

Now comes a study from the Postal Service which will dash the hopes of many who saw corn as a major alternative to overseas oil.

The Postal Service has purchased more than 30,000 vehicles that run on E85, a mixture of 85 percent gasoline and 15 percent ethanol.

The results?

___E85 decreased overall fuel efficiency by 29%.

___E85 must be priced at least 30% less than gasoline for ethanol to be a cost-effective.

___ The Postal Service found that only 1,100 retail sites sell ethanol, primarily in the Midwest, thus there is a need to increase the infrastructure if ethanol is to be used nationwide.

___The Postal Service found that the use of ethanol increased gasoline consumption by 1.5 million gallons.

This is a case where the Postal Service has been far ahead of the public. It tried an experiment with much potential, but unfortunately ethanol appears to be less valuable than many anticipated.

Such a short sentence. Can it be true?

Let’s see, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, advertising mail (also known as “Standard A” mail) totals 5.89 million tons before recycling. However, 2.28 million tons are recycled, a recovery rate of 38.7%. (See: 2006 MSW Characterization Data Tables, EPA, table 4).

So, if we subtract 2.28 million tons from 5.89 million tons we get 3.61 million tons of advertising mail.

Does this mean that 3.6 million tons of material was made from trees? Nope. Not hardly. Much of what goes through the mailstream comes from recycled materials.

Not only that, but not all advertising mail consists of “catalogs.” According to the U.S. Postal Service, Standard A mail includes printed matter, flyers, circulars and advertising; newsletters, bulletins and catalogs; and small packages.

But let’s say there are 19 billion catalogs. How much ad mail is sent out each year?

According to the 2007 annual report of the U.S. Postal Service and there we can see that 103.5 billion pieces of ad mail went through the mailstream.

Nineteen billion items sure seems like a small part of 103.5 billion items, which means that it’s not possible for 19 billion catalogs to use 3.6 million tons of paper unless flyers, circulars, newspapers and such suddenly weigh nothing.

Now, about those trees:

If we have 3.6 million tons of ad mail, and if each ton weighs 2,000 pounds, that would mean we have 7,200,000,000 pounds of material. If it takes 53 million trees to make 7.2 billion pounds of paper then an average “tree” weighs just 135.84 pounds!

Does this make sense to anyone?

According to AARP’s 2005 IRS Form 990, the association spent $108.3 million on “printing and shipping.”

AARP says that its “more than 36 million members receive ‘AARP The Magazine,’ which is published every other month (bimonthly)” and that “all members also receive 11 issues of ‘AARP Bulletin,’ a monthly publication (July and August are combined).”

That’s six magazines per year x 36,000,000 or 216,000,000 million magazines annually plus 11 bulletins per year x 36,000,000 or 396,000,000 bulletins — a total of 612,000,000 paper-based items sent through the mailstream per year.

Surely if AARP is worried about teeny micro trees it could shut off its own distribution torrent and rebate $100 million or so to its members. Otherwise it ought to explain why using the mail is okay for AARP — but not okay for others. It should also explain what will happen to stamp prices if advertisers leave the mailstream.

Most importantly, if mail volume is reduced AARP should explain what will happen to the jobs inside our borders that are anchored by the mailstream. As The Washington Post has explained:

“The Postal Service has about 738,000 employees, relies on revenue from operations rather than taxpayer funding and is one of few federal bureaucracies with which most Americans have regular contact. It is at the center of a $900 billion mailing industry, which employs 9 million people in such businesses as direct mail, paper manufacturers and printers.”

Technorati Tags: AARP, catalogs, mail, trees

Seen another way, when the cost of gas goes up 15 cents per gallon then USPS expenses increase by $18,150,000.

In the context of an entity that had revenues of nearly $75 billion in fiscal 2007, it might seem that $18 million or so is not a big deal. But the problem is that gas prices have not just risen by 15 centers per gallon.

According to the Energy Information Administration, gas today is priced at $3.663 per gallon. Two years ago the price was $2.966 per gallon. That’s a difference of $.697 per gallon. If you need to buy 121 million gallons your additional cost is almost $85 million.

The problem is that as bad as gas price increases have been in the past few years, they could get a lot worse. Think of $4 a gallon this summer — and $5, $6 or $7 in the next year or two. Now we’re talking about huge amounts of money for a delivery system which is dependent on gas, especially when you consider that the Postal Service says it had a $5.1 billion net loss in fiscal 2007.

Technorati Tags: costs, economics, mail, pricing