Just thinking out loud, but is mail a natural monopoly? The U.S. Postal Service has seen a precipitous drop in volume lately.
So they raise their prices, making other alternatives more attractive, which further depresses volume. It sort of looks like a death spiral.
Of course, "mail" can mean messages, so email is a functional substitute, as was facsimile.
And mail and packages can be delivered by any number of competitors (FedEx, UPS and others). To the extent that FedEx, UPS, the Internet and other alternatives aer widely available, perhaps "mail delivery" is not a natural monopoly.
Still, without large subsidies, the network is not profitable. It could not provide universal delivery without subsidies and it certainly does not ever make money. So it is one of the other models one has to look at when thinking about the future of the communications network business.
1 comment:
I need to vent. We followed the USPS rules about leaving clear access to our mailbox. Granted, a construction trailer was parked in front of our house for 2 weeks, but it was 20 feet from the mailbox. A recent conversation with a USPS employeed said 10 feet is enough. Yet, our mail carrier, at her own monopolistic judgement, and WITHOUT TELLING US, put a hold on our mail last week. After not receiving it last week and yesterday, we go to the USPS, wait in line for 45 minutes, only to have them tell us they don't have the mail in the building. But they will remove the hold. (What hold!?! We didn't put our mail on hold! Nobody told us they were doing this to us!!) So, still, we are at the mercy of a random employee who randomly decided to NOT DELIVER our mail, which certainly includes some first class items that are supposed to be delivered in 3 days minimum. All i can say is WTF, break up the monopoly already. This organization would immediately die if competition were allowed.
Post a Comment