Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Opposes Plan To End Saturday Mail Delivery

Posted by kdawson on from the wee-bit-of-self-interest dept.

theodp writes "Online retailer giant Amazon.com has come out against a US Postal Service proposal to end Saturday service, part of efforts to address the USPS budget deficit. 'Amazon's customers have come to appreciate and expect Saturday delivery,' explained Amazon VP Paul Misener. 'If the five-day delivery proposal is not withdrawn,' he added, 'we ask that Congress ensure that Saturday delivery be maintained.' In the past, Amazon has argued that it should not have to help support public services in states in which it has no physical presence." The article adds, "Interestingly, online DVD service Netflix is backing the plan to end Saturday mail delivery, arguing that a 'well functioning' Postal Service is more important than 'maintaining current delivery frequency.'"

44 of 504 comments (clear)

  1. The difference between Amazon and Netflix by jmitchel!jmitchel.co · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The difference between Amazon and Netflix is that Netflix product fits comfortably in a mailbox.

    1. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And, for Netflix, it benefits them by slowing down the rate that they receive videos (though it means Monday's will be heavier than they were before).

      For Amazon, people want Saturday delivery without paying for it. For Netflix, people certainly want it, but if the USPS doesn't do it, then people will understand. So, Netflix can stop staffing the delivery portion of Saturday's if that goes through, while Amazon still has to do everything as normal and they lose the ability to cheaply send packages that can potentially arrive on Saturday.

    2. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Plus, netflix sells you a plan that is limited only by how often you can get mail. If you can't get mail on Saturday, that's one less DVD they have to send you. Amazon, on the other hand, gets paid for every package they send you.

      --

      -- Don't Tase me, bro!

    3. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by jaymz666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's 17% fewer movies sent and received by Netflix every week. I would expect them to also want more public holidays in a year as well

    4. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by localman57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's only 17% for customers who turn their DVDs around ASAP. My wife and I mostly subscribe for the online content, and often have a couple of DVDs sitting around for a few days before we get around to watching them. Obviously, high volume customers will get less value from their subscription. But I think it's a mistake to extrapolate a 17% overall savings from this.

      Also, this will tend to cause more of a surge on Mondays outgoing mail / Tuesday and Wednesday's incoming at Netflix. This will also tend to reduce the positive effect for Netflix. Most companies prefer to have a constant workload across all of their shifts and days, rather than dealing with surges. Like a power company, or a tax consultant, they have to size their capital investment to deal with surges, even though that is not fully utilized most of the time.

    5. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by DriveDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True enough. And while Netflix may be looking forward to a mostly-online service, for now their customers (me) will be more likely to keep paying them if we can get DVDs on Saturday. Perhaps they're also being agreeable with the USPS because they've been at odds in the past over envelop jamming and such. I really couldn't care less if I get a package from Amazon on Saturday or wait until Monday. The only case that makes sense to me is when I send a gift and I'm as late ordering it as I usually am. I think skipping another day besides Sunday is OK for the USPS, but I'd vote for Wednesday so as not to have two consecutive days missed.

    6. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Our customers are idiots and will never realize they are paying for less, even with the occasional journalist who pushes it in their face.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    7. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by couchslug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Amazon products fit comfortably in UPS, Fedex, and DHL trucks.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    8. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Summary read:
      Amazon has argued that it should not have to help support public services in states in which it has no physical presence

      What does that have to do with anything? Plus it's completely false. Amazon says it should not have to pay a tax to support New York's private government ~2500 miles away, but it still DOES support public services. It pays a toll for the roads (gas tax) and it pays a toll for the public mail (the postage tax) and it files income taxes with the U.S. and the California governments. I don't think a Slashdot summary should be stating politically-biased falsehoods like it did above.

      IMHO

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    9. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Personally, I think this idea of ending Saturday delivery is dumb. I had heard they were considering another idea, but I guess it's been dropped because I haven't heard of it since then; the idea was to end Wednesday delivery, and keep Saturday delivery. That way, you never have to go more than 1 day without deliveries. Plus, most people are at work on Wednesdays, and not on Saturdays, so it's easier to sign for stuff then. I wish they'd go back to this idea.

    10. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The last time I looked at one of those blue drop boxes near me it had disappeared. I think it's safe to say they're very willing to cut back on pick-ups.

    11. Re:The difference between Amazon and Netflix by BikeHelmet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      lawd that's a lot of movies in a month. Watching 3 a week is stretching it for me.

      :/

      "Watch" them, and head to Blockbuster on Monday evening.

      He's ripping them to HDD. At the end of the month, he has nearly enough movies to last a year.

  2. Jack up the price? by recoiledsnake · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why not just have a increased rate for Saturday delivery like Fedex and UPS? I don't see a reason for something to run on a loss. If Amazon's customers appreciate or expect it, either they or Amazon can pay extra for it.

    --
    This space for rent.
    1. Re:Jack up the price? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You must be some kind of pinko, to suggest a market-based solution instead of a (lightly) veiled corporate subsidy.

      In all seriousness, though, while there is a compelling public interest argument to be made in favor of the post office doing some un-economic things(and about the best chain of precedent you'll find for any US federal function, outside of war), like providing postal service to podunk towns that would have nothing otherwise; there seems to be no reason why they need to subsidize merely convenient services that have plenty of viable substitutes. If Saturday delivery costs more, offer it at a premium(or not at all, if you don't think you can make money at the new price point). People can either suck it up and wait till monday, or suck it up and pay Fedex/UPS.

    2. Re:Jack up the price? by TheKidWho · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You must be some kind of pinko, to suggest a market-based solution instead of a (lightly) veiled corporate subsidy.

      Why do people like you always have to come in and try to polarize an issue along political lines?

    3. Re:Jack up the price? by icebraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I thought the viability of a public system like the USPS was a political matter.

      --
      Dilbert RSS feed
    4. Re:Jack up the price? by hoboroadie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't buy that "Junk-Mail-Subsidizing-First-Class" crap. If that was true, First-Class would be cheap or free, and the recyclable-paper-waste would cost more to deliver than First-Class does now.

      --
      They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
  3. USPS isn't a State Function by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the past, Amazon has argued that it should not have to help support public services in states in which it has no physical presence.

    I'm having trouble seeing exactly why this is relevant, other than innuendo. State taxes don't pay for mail delivery, that's a federal function. Amazon's stance is consistent. (Whether it's morally right or wrong is a separate issue, mind you.)

    1. Re:USPS isn't a State Function by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

      State and local gasoline taxes are more than enough to upkeep roads in most cases. They also usually fund things that have nothing to do with roads. That's how it should be.

      States always want more money. Once Amazon is taxed, that means all the small internet businesses have to be taxed as well. There are so many small municipalities, especially in CA, demanding their special rate of sale's tax, that it would be hard for a small merchant to file it all.

      Of course, I'm for the apt tax replacing all this bullshit anyway, no loopholes.
      http://www.apttax.com/

    2. Re:USPS isn't a State Function by sco08y · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In the past, Amazon has argued that it should not have to help support public services in states in which it has no physical presence.

      I'm having trouble seeing exactly why this is relevant, other than innuendo.

      Another reason it's irrelevant: corporations don't pay taxes, they just pass them on to consumers and investors.

    3. Re:USPS isn't a State Function by Enry · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll add for you that Amazon is paying the USPS for delivery. In that respect, they are paying to support services. Why should Amazon pay for police or firefighters in states where they don't have a business presence?

    4. Re:USPS isn't a State Function by ae1294 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why not just lump all of the taxation into one revenue stream, eliminate the substantial costs of collecting and administering multiple streams.

      Because then people might start to realize just how much of their money goes to prop-up 'big government (tm).

    5. Re:USPS isn't a State Function by godefroi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      H

      I know America isn't ready to face a the simple truth:
      The government need to generate more revenue. There really sin't any service left we can cut without dramatically undermining the countries future.

      This mean higher taxes. Taxing transaction might be a good start.

      You say that as an absolute, but I disagree. I think America isn't ready to face THIS truth:

      The people need to be responsible for themselves, and shouldn't expect others to take care of them. This means that there won't be government-funded health care, won't be government-funded welfare, won't be a "farm bill", won't be government bailouts, won't be government-funded home loans, won't be government-funded fixes when people insist on building their houses below sea level in hurricane zones.

      I'd say there are PLENTY of programs to cut. The problem is, there are too many looters and not enough producers left.

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    6. Re:USPS isn't a State Function by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The people need to be responsible for themselves, and shouldn't expect others to take care of them.

      And it's being responsible to pay taxes. Everyone's still taking care of "themselves," but the risk is distributed such that no one person bears a proportion larger than they could handle. That holds true whether it's fixing a sinkhole on the road in front of their house, or treating cancer, and should be patently obvious. It's the whole point of living in communities and societies; otherwise we'd just head off into the woods and fend for ourselves.

      --
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
  4. It helps Netflix to end Saturday delivery by h2oliu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If there are fewer delivery days in a month, then you get fewer movies per month if you turn them around every other day. This would help Netflix's bottom line to cut delivery down to 5 days a week.

    --
    Ok, I give up, why you?
  5. I need saturday mail pickup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Monday through Friday, I leave for work before our local Post Office opens and leave from work after it closes.

    1. Re:I need saturday mail pickup by stewbacca · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because all the overpaid postal workers won't get a two day weekend, duh.

    2. Re:I need saturday mail pickup by apparently · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you can't shove your letters in the slot after hours?

      Yeah, that works really well for sending international mail or larger domestic packages.

  6. Neflix != Amazon, and postal service == bad by enigma32 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Netflix benefits from less frequent mail delivery. (Lower costs for them)
    Amazon loses big from less frequent delivery (I frequently choose them because I can have a package here before I'd have time to go get the item in Manhattan myself).

    As for the postal service, I frequently find myself waiting in 20 minute lines, at any time of day, to pickup a package that they were incapable of delivering correctly to my residence. I'd love to see someone that has a clue about business run the postal service rather than it being run with the competence level of the DMV.

    Keep the Saturday delivery or go the way of the dodo, guys. (add Sunday delivery and be super-cool)

    1. Re:Neflix != Amazon, and postal service == bad by darjen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the national post office was eliminated, we would have more private competition and a pretty decent chance of getting Sunday delivery. The newspaper comes on Sundays, why not the mail? They would also be more efficient while doing it. The level of service at the post office compared to UPS and Fedex is shockingly bad. Whenever I go into a UPS store there is little to no line.

    2. Re:Neflix != Amazon, and postal service == bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Modern economy apparently doesn't give a damn about food production.

    3. Re:Neflix != Amazon, and postal service == bad by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Holy shit, did you even think when you typed your post?

      Screw rural residents:

      Why should people living in the backwoods of Kentucky be entitled to force me to pay for their mail service? It's their choice to live there. If they really wanted better or less expensive service they should move to a city.

      OMGS! EVERYONE EQUAL!

      Government should benefit everyone equally, not one class of people over another.

      Also, show me one farm of sufficient size to efficiently produce food for a substantial number of people. Fuck cities. They'd die overnight if food wasn't shipped into them like it's going out of style.

    4. Re:Neflix != Amazon, and postal service == bad by Darby · · Score: 0, Insightful

      I'm not talking about people living in small towns necessarily, but people who choose to live in exurban areas. If they want to live there, then fine, but there's a cost to having everything you'd get easily in a concentrated living area (even a small town) and they should pay it rather than bitching that there's no high speed internet or mail delivery.

      Eliminating all of the subsidies to rural areas (very much including small towns) would be the best possible thing that could happen in America. These are the people constantly whining about taxes (which they don't pay), and welfare leeches (which they are) and demonstrate a complete misunderstanding of the most basic economic facts.
      If, for once,these leeches would actually pay their own way rather than leeching off of the productive, parts of the country then they might at long last start dealing with reality.
      If only these welfare leeches would grow up and act like responsible adults, then the Republican party would be gone in a day and we'd have a chance (however slim) at developing a responsible fiscal system and have actual honest debate about social policy.
      As long as we keep paying to maintain these delusional scum in their delusions, we'll keep seeing more of the same insanity and rabid hatred of America that defines them. From pushing religion into government to making up wars based on lies, this all comes down to allowing ignorant, bratty children to believe far out lies about who's paying their bills.

    5. Re:Neflix != Amazon, and postal service == bad by Grishnakh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wrong. Removing the monopoly would mean that private companies could deliver urban mail cheaper than the USPS, and 90% of mail would move to these private carriers. The USPS, still required to deliver to rural areas (which the private companies ignore, or charge much more for) would then not have enough money to continue operating, so the rural areas wouldn't get any mail service at all in the end.

      Of course, there is a valid argument that rural areas should be required to pay more for mail service, instead of being subsidized by urban service as it is now. But allowing private companies to compete with the USPS, and not requiring them to deliver mail to rural areas while still requiring the USPS to do so, would result in the destruction of the USPS.

    6. Re:Neflix != Amazon, and postal service == bad by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think my post is quite accurate thanks. As a business owner, I'm not going to provide service to a certain geographic region if it's not profitable. I believe it to be fact that other for-profit entities feel the same way (I don't include non-profits whose sole goal is to provide service to under-served areas). I'm sure you're aware of the Tennessee Valley Authority, which grew out of the need to provide electricity service to a majority of Tennessee residents due to the unprofitability of doing so.

      If the USPS can't provide service to both urban and rural areas while staying in the black, how do you expect private business to do the same thing (if mandated) while maintaining the same level of service? I'm sure there is cruft to cut in the USPS, but not enough to justify a health profit margin for a for-profit org.

  7. Re:Amazon wants their cake and eat it too... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How do you get the idea that Amazon does not pay postage (support the service that the post office provides them)?

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  8. Re:Amazon wants their cake and eat it too... by garyok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, because it's free to put things in the post.

    Oh, wait... The Postal Service don't do it from the grace in their fairy slave hearts, they expect to get paid to deliver the goods, even on a Saturday?! Unless they pay the staff extra on a Saturday, then I can't see what USPS's problem is.

    Dunno about the US, but in the UK about 40% (so I hear) of people are single and don't have anyone waiting in all week for a big parcel to arrive. Saturday's about the only day I can get a parcel delivered to my house. Any other day, and I have to wait a couple of days before collecting it from the depot a couple of miles away.

    --
    One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors - Plato
  9. End mail delivery on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday by Zarf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many USicans only have Saturdays free to run errands. Ending services on Saturday is a burden to them. Ending delivery on any other day of the week would be preferable.

    --
    [signature]
  10. Re:Skip Wednesday instead by RotsiserMho · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That stuff only comes on Wednesday because the backlog of mail from over the weekend has finally subsided by Wednesday. If they got rid of Wednesday delivery, you'd just get the same crap on Thursday.

  11. Who even understands the Post Office any more? by HerculesMO · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The argument is common, and one that even Obama has poked fun at -- the Post Office loses money.

    Let's take a step back in history folks -- and realize that the Post Office was not *designed* to make money. It was designed to facilitate the communication between long distances in a organized, logical way. It's a great reason why we have become the powerhouse that we have, because we knew we could rely on legal documents being delivered, because contracts could be signed and sent back, and the legal code behind them was always upheld.

    Fast forward to today -- the need for the post office still exists in a large fashion. I am not arguing against or for Saturday delivery, but it's just a point of annoyance for me, so I am addressing it. What other service in the world can allow you to ship a letter from one remote corner of the country to another for mere cents? The ability for citizens to mail letters and rely on their ability to reach the destination is still hugely important, and one that *should* be subsidized by our tax dollars. Until the time we go fully electronic, the post office will have a need. That time is not now. You are still "served" in person, you still have to sign contracts by hand, and a multitude of other things that have not yet caught up to the pace of technology.

    So when you think about what the post office has allowed the US to accomplish over the years of its service, take a moment to think that without it, our country would not be nearly as far along as it is, and we have a lot to thank for that. And to boot -- we still need it for the same reasons today.

    --
    The price is always right if someone else is paying.
  12. I already only don't get mail 2-3 days a week. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's not just my faltering social life, it's everyone in my apartment complex at the same time. I have also lost packages (but never from amazon), and had several incidents of Netflix DVDs that never arrived or arrived open.

    Yes I have complained. No, I have not seen any improvement. This has been going on since last year.

    Seriously, change the law so Fedex and UPS can stick envelopes in your mailbox. I'm beyond giving a crap about unintended consequences, I just want to get my damn mail on time.

  13. Re:They don't need to. by DCheesi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, they can throttle you. But people get annoyed when they do that, and some even wind up canceling the service.

    Getting the USPS to drop Saturday delivery would be a way for them to reduce DVD volume without getting blamed for it.

  14. Re:Why not a weekday? by SocialEngineer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem with this is the fact that it would greatly affect businesses who rely on mail services. No mail on Thursday means no bills going out, no checks coming in, etc. Also, that means people who get newspapers delivered via mail route (yes, they do that - I'm systems manager at a small locally focused paper that is doing quite well) will have to skip a day. Of course, if we lose Saturday, we lose a day, too. As far as receiving packages go, I always have mine shipped to work, anyway, so I don't have to worry about being there to sign for it.

    --
    "Better to be vulgar than non-existent" -Bev Henson
  15. Bullshit argument by copponex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did you miss the first day of economics? There's always downward pressure on prices. Any increased costs may be passed on to the consumer, but not always. The business that finds ways to absorb the tax increase without passing it on is the one that will probably sell more product.

    But since a quarter of large corporations - $50m in sales or $250m in assets - don't pay any income taxes at all due to loopholes and offshore sheltering schemes, you're right: if they ever started to pay taxes, prices might go up.

    And if corporations had to pay taxes for the infrastructure that enables them to be in business, I don't think that would be unfair. And if a business can't afford the burden of the infrastructure, guess what: they shouldn't be in business unless they serve to lower costs of vital services for the rest of the economy. And even then, since they exist entirely at the grace of tax payers, they should have no right to any amount of privacy.