• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Who is becoming your top Republican Presidential Candidate?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

mrj said:
Does anyone know if, or which, of these companies is working for the US Postal Service? I'm pretty sure UPS is, but have heard that Fed Ex forced govt. to also 'share the wealth' of the work load with their company, too. That could be a sort of 'captive supply' of work which the company wouldn't have to make an effort to get. Wonder how it is all working out, for the businesses, post office, and taxpayers!

mrj

Hi MRJ!
What a great question! I could explain to you about UPS Surepost and FedEx Smartpost programs that are contracted with the USPS from my experience with these carriers, but the article below does a superb job in giving you all the details you need to understand what is happening with these programs and how it affects the USPS. The focus of these programs is to use the USPS to deliver the "last leg" to communities outside of major cities; in return, they don't tied up their assets if they don't have the volume to ship to such destinations.

There is a hug opportunity for the USPS to make more revenue, but I think it might required some action from the taxpayers to request for transparency of their current contracts, not only with UPS, FedEx, but also with Amazon. It is like the road as a mode of transportation, the trucking companies use our highways and not being charge enough to help the taxpayer maintain the roads.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-mail-does-the-trick-for-fedex-ups-1407182247

Hope you'll enjoy the article!
Sweetbasil
 
For FedEx and UPS, a Cheaper Route: the Post Office
Agency Stretches to Handle Business From Express Couriers; Is the Price Right?
ENLARGE
STEPHEN KRONINGER
By LAURA STEVENS
Updated Aug. 4, 2014 6:58 p.m. ET
98 COMMENTS


FedEx Corp. and United Parcel Service Inc. increasingly are moving their own packages through the U.S. Postal Service, putting pressure on the quasigovernmental agency and raising questions about whether the USPS is charging enough for the service.

FedEx and United Parcel Service increasingly are moving their own packages through the U.S. Postal Service, putting pressure on the quasigovernmental agency and raising questions about whether the USPS is charging enough for the service. Laura Stevens joins MoneyBeat. Photo: Getty Images.
For FedEx alone, the post office delivers an average of 2.2 million packages a day, or about 30% of the express-mail company's total U.S. ground segment.

UPS won't specify how much of its shipments go through the post office, but a regulatory filing indicates those types of lightweight shipments accounted for 40%—or about 37 million packages—of its total increase in ground shipments in 2012.

The post office is lapping up the extra package-delivery business from its private-sector rivals because it badly needs growth. In the past decade, it has lost more than 30% of its most profitable product—first-class mail—to the Internet.

ENLARGE
"We've been focusing a lot of efforts on package growth, because that's the biggest opportunity for us," said Postmaster General Patrick R. Donahoe.
Advertisement

But the flood of these packages has begun to tax the system, and it has raised questions about whether the USPS is charging enough for its service. Even as UPS makes use of the USPS, a UPS executive on the company's earnings conference call last month questioned whether the Postal Service is unfairly cross-subsidizing certain products to offer lower prices.

The volume of so-called Parcel Select packages—a USPS service aimed at businesses including FedEx, UPS, and Amazon.com Inc.— surged nearly 500% to about 1.29 billion packages in 2013 from about 223 million in 2009. The USPS projects that service it will grow 12% next year. Parcel Select accounts for 35% of the USPS's annual package-delivery business.

Both UPS and FedEx rely on the postal office for the back-end of their cheaper two- to seven-day delivery options, Smartpost for FedEx and Surepost for UPS. Amazon also uses the USPS and enlisted it for Sunday deliveries. The post office's Parcel Select service, launched in its current format in 2008, allows the companies to transport the packages the long distance themselves, then sort by ZIP Code and deliver to the local post office. The letter carrier takes it for the most expensive last leg of the delivery.

Some critics question whether the Postal Service is charging the delivery services enough. Revenue per Parcel Select package averaged about $1.71 in the second quarter, according to a quarterly filing. FedEx averages $1.78 in revenue per package on its Smartpost business. UPS doesn't disclose its Surepost revenue.

Analysts estimate Amazon pays about $2 to mail a package via the Postal Service versus $7 or $8 for UPS or FedEx ground. Late last year Amazon cut out the middleman—FedEx—and started taking most of its packages to the Postal Service, analysts say. FedEx Smartpost volume dropped 8% in the quarter ended in May, FedEx reported.

Neither the Postal Service nor these big customers will reveal contract terms. "There should be more transparency" to make sure the agency is properly compensated, says Mark Jamison, a retired Postmaster from North Carolina, a frequent critic.

Mr. Donahoe says the criticism is unwarranted. "We make money on it. We wouldn't do it if we didn't make money on it," Mr. Donahoe said.

Postal carriers are already delivering to every mailbox, so transporting the presorted packages doesn't add significantly to costs, he said.

Rates have increased 27% from an average of $1.35 in revenue per package in 2012, according to postal filings.

First-class mail still accounts for nearly half of the USPS's revenue, while standard mail, such as advertising and circulars, account for about 25%. Packages—including those from FedEx and UPS—account for about 20% of the post office's revenue but are the fastest-growing, averaging 7% annual revenue growth the past four years.

The Postal Service is aiming to more than double its package-delivery business within a few years, Mr. Donahoe said.

The post office, established in 1775 to enable secure communications during the Revolutionary War, was designed for letters, not packages, and it is aging. About 140,000 of its 200,000 mail vehicles are more than 20 years old. The service also isn't nearly as automated as FedEx and UPS.

At FedEx and UPS, packages typically are automatically scanned on belts that deposit them directly to designated delivery vans. At local post offices, by contrast, mail carriers often sort packages manually and carry them to their trucks. Shelves to stack packages have been squeezed into tiny delivery trucks. The number of career postal employees has declined nearly 30% over the past seven years, and some mail carriers tend their routes twice a day, once with letters and once with packages.

To accommodate the growth, Mr. Donahoe plans to invest $10 billion over the next four years for improvements, including buying new vehicles, retrofitting old ones and upgrading package-sorting equipment.

It is unclear how the post office will finance growth, as it is chronically short on funds. Because the Postal Service has enough cash on hand for only about two weeks of operations, Mr. Donahoe is counting on Congress to pass a proposed bill that would give the Postal Service more financial flexibility, with options like cutting Saturday letter delivery. The Postal Service reached its $15 billion credit limit with the Treasury Department in 2012.

Under law, the USPS must pay its own way. It generated $67.3 billion in revenue in 2013, $7.5 billion of which came from selling stamps. It doesn't receive an annual taxpayer subsidy, but is reimbursed by Congress for some services such as delivering mail to the blind and overseas voters.

The USPS has generated about $1 billion in operating profit so far this year, but that is before its approximate $5.5 billion required annual contribution for retiree benefits.

There is little margin for error. If it misjudges its capacity or financial strength, it could end up with too many packages to deliver, compromising mail service. "Without significant structural changes, we will…continue on a path that will lead to insolvency and a government bailout," the postal service warned this summer.

Write to Laura Stevens at [email protected].
 
sweetbasil said:
Mike said:
Why FedEx Has UPS Beat

May 24, 2013 3:10 PM ET | About: FedEx Corporation (FDX), UPS
One of the greatest and most well known rivalries in America is United Parcel Service (NYSE:UPS) versus FedEx (NYSE:FDX). These two corporations are competing fiercely for customers in the transportation services industry.

Performance and Operations

The last reported annual revenue of UPS was an impressive $54.42 billion. FedEx, on the other hand, "only" notched $43.86 billion. At first glance, one is likely to think that UPS is the more dominant of the two companies. But with further examination, something quite phenomenal can be seen. Despite the fact that UPS made $10 billion dollars more in revenue than FedEx, the latter company still manages to bring in a greater profit. The net income reported by FedEx was $1.80 billion compared with $874 million for UPS. This, without a doubt, shows that FedEx is providing greater value to shareholders. Hence FedEx's earnings per share of 5.71 compared with the humbling 0.90 for UPS.

In the past 10 years, UPS has seen net income jumping around somewhat unpredictably. It has fallen and risen numerous times, and currently seems to be spiraling downward. FedEx, on the other hand, took only one tumble around 2008-2009, and has otherwise experienced consistent and impressive growth, which seems to be a pattern that is currently active for the company.

Hi Mike,
Thanks for sharing. I am not surprise to see the numbers you have shared about these companies' revenues. I had the opportunity to participate in the small parcel contract negotiations for my former employer. From my experience, even leadership was concerned about FedEx ability to really execute, but the FedEx manager is a true sales person along with its leadership. FedEx promised the moon, the stars, and threw in Jupiter as a bonus. UPS is not easy to negotiate with; they are very strong on their pricing; I got a sensed that they strongly believe in the quality of their services, and see no "need" to push for cutting their prices. I rarely had any issues with UPS executing our volume, but a lot with FedEx. I don't believe FedEx will be able to keep up with the increased in volume; they actually failed terribly in 2013 during our peak season, and UPS stepped in and helped us. The retail industry is struggling and they are after the $, just as my former employer and I don't see that FedEx will be able to continue to undercut its competitor.
As soon as I read your post, my first question came to mind "if no productivity is associated with being unionized, then why why UPS is more productive than its competitor who is non-unionized?"

By looking at the profits, you should be able to see who is the more productive. Do you really think your small associations with UPS and your previous employer tells you anything about the productivity of UPS OR Fed-Ex? :lol: Or unionization?
 
Ups only became unionized in the last decade well after they were prominantly established #1. There is no causal relationship with ups being #1 and unionization because that position long preceded unionization. Management that built ups and indeed had a causal relationship with ups' success resisted the union thugs, and the union strike around ten years ago nearly crippled ups. Did wages or benefits improve with unionization? Hell no, ups was among the best compensation packages in the industry. Why did the criminal teamsters want to unionize ups? The teamsters had mismanaged the retirement funds and was scheduled to run out of money. The teamsters wanted to seize the retirement fund that was administrated by ups management. Ups workers voted to go teamster and their retirement funds have never been as secure. Ups workers that were unionized are either dupes or victims.

So, if you managed a company and watched the teamsters drive the ups to its
knees, what would be a responsible response? Kroger corp based in Cincinnati, but really in Hutchinson Kansas with the Dillion's family had long operated a trucking company with some of the best compensated workers in the industry. Upon seeing the thuggish crippling sustained by ups, Kroger disbanded and shut down their trucking company and opted to use independent trucks to move grocery inventory. Independent trucks are non unionized despite teamsters long efforts to enslave them, and Kroger found a way to get beyond the criminals called the teamsters union.
 
I know several UPS drivers who were union 25+ years ago....so I don't think unionization is a recent thing with UPS. FWIW.
 
Thanks for sharing that info, Sweetbasil. It is interesting, to say the least. I wonder if there is a bit of govt subsidizing those transporters involved, if indirectly. And that thought is based on a very small, very localized incident. A person wanted to ship a rather heavy, bulky item, namely a saddle. In checking various methods, postal service was lower cost. Shipping is from a population dense large urban area to a very remote, very low population density area.

In my area, I believe population is more than one mile per citizen for the county, tho I didn't check that recently.

For instance, the town of Midland has a post office and there are several rural routes of 50 or more miles running at least two or three times a week. I believe there are at least two, maybe three different people running those routes (individual contracts, I think). I know the Fed Ex and UPS show up for some deliveries to homes, and sometimes to the post office, it appears. I can see the value of the 'partnership for such extreme rural areas, but an not sure of the validity in congested population areas.

I do feel guilty for the effort and time you spent putting it together for me, but realize guilt is a wasteful emotion, so will try to focus on something more worthwhile, such as what can I do with the info to improve the situation??

mrj
 
Brad S said:
Ups only became unionized in the last decade well after they were prominantly established #1. There is no causal relationship with ups being #1 and unionization because that position long preceded unionization. Management that built ups and indeed had a causal relationship with ups' success resisted the union thugs, and the union strike around ten years ago nearly crippled ups. Did wages or benefits improve with unionization? Hell no, ups was among the best compensation packages in the industry. Why did the criminal teamsters want to unionize ups? The teamsters had mismanaged the retirement funds and was scheduled to run out of money. The teamsters wanted to seize the retirement fund that was administrated by ups management. Ups workers voted to go teamster and their retirement funds have never been as secure. Ups workers that were unionized are either dupes or victims.

So, if you managed a company and watched the teamsters drive the ups to its
knees, what would be a responsible response? Kroger corp based in Cincinnati, but really in Hutchinson Kansas with the Dillion's family had long operated a trucking company with some of the best compensated workers in the industry. Upon seeing the thuggish crippling sustained by ups, Kroger disbanded and shut down their trucking company and opted to use independent trucks to move grocery inventory. Independent trucks are non unionized despite teamsters long efforts to enslave them, and Kroger found a way to get beyond the criminals called the teamsters union.

Hi Brad S,
Thanks for sharing this additional input. I have enjoyed learning from you! In my humble opinion, I see UPS as being a better executor, not better than FedEx overall. As you all continue to share more feedback on the unions, I am understanding why UPS pushes hard to increase efficiency in their operations... to make up for the labor cost. I read somewhere that we have about 14 million plus unionized workers in the U.S. It might be save to assume that most of the workers are unionized in the public sector; however, why do you think workers in the private sector are still being unionized? What keeps them from not going on strike to try to abolish the union?
 
mrj said:
Thanks for sharing that info, Sweetbasil. It is interesting, to say the least. I wonder if there is a bit of govt subsidizing those transporters involved, if indirectly. And that thought is based on a very small, very localized incident. A person wanted to ship a rather heavy, bulky item, namely a saddle. In checking various methods, postal service was lower cost. Shipping is from a population dense large urban area to a very remote, very low population density area.

In my area, I believe population is more than one mile per citizen for the county, tho I didn't check that recently.

For instance, the town of Midland has a post office and there are several rural routes of 50 or more miles running at least two or three times a week. I believe there are at least two, maybe three different people running those routes (individual contracts, I think). I know the Fed Ex and UPS show up for some deliveries to homes, and sometimes to the post office, it appears. I can see the value of the 'partnership for such extreme rural areas, but an not sure of the validity in congested population areas.

I do feel guilty for the effort and time you spent putting it together for me, but realize guilt is a wasteful emotion, so will try to focus on something more worthwhile, such as what can I do with the info to improve the situation??

mrj

Hello MRJ,
I am glad that you found this article useful. The postal office would be your best bet to ship large (anything over 150 lbs and 138 inches in length and girth) packages, otherwise, they will be consider oversize and you will incur overcharges on top of your shipping. No worries, it didn't take me much time to find this article to share with you. I don't know what you can really do as an individual to help the situation.

Thanks for sharing!
Sweetbasil
 
Big Muddy rancher said:
Getting back to the election I see Trump signed a pledge not to run as an Independent,


Hi BMR,
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: Today, Trump scored some high points on my book... I really didn't liked it that he didn't answered when he was asked during the Primary Republican Debate on August 6th, whether he thought he would run as an independent.

Thanks for sharing!
Sweetbasil
 
It wouldn't surprise me if Bernie Sanders runs as an Independent if Hillary gets the DNC nomination. For sure it could happen if his money doesn't dry up. He knows he only has this one shot at Pres.

If this were to happen and Bush gets the GOP bid, then I hope Trump DOES run as an Independent.
 
Mike said:
It wouldn't surprise me if Bernie Sanders runs as an Independent if Hillary gets the DNC nomination. For sure it could happen if his money doesn't dry up. He knows he only has this one shot at Pres.

If this were to happen and Bush gets the GOP bid, then I hope Trump DOES run as an Independent.
Good point, but I don't think Bush is going to get crap at this point.
 

Latest posts

Top