12 ms·

Amazon to Begin Sunday Deliveries, With Post Office's Help

179 points by coloneltcb 13y ago

graemian 13y ago
There's a lot wrong with the US, but this kind of thinking is exactly what's right with it
alex4nder 13y ago
Oddly enough, I got my first Sunday delivery today from Amazon via USPS, and I don't live in either of the referenced cities.
- dsl 13y ago
  The USPS currently does Sunday delivery to catch up when it falls behind. This agreement allows Amazon to drop off at postal hubs on Sunday for same-day delivery.
  - alex4nder 13y ago
    In this case, I don't think that's it: this package wasn't due for delivery until the following Monday. I was pleasantly surprised when I got the text saying it had been delivered.
jxf 13y ago
From the article: > The Amazon contract will be a much-needed financial boost to the Postal Service, which continues to bleed red ink as more Americans eschew "snail mail" in favor of email, instant messaging and social networks. The agency, which said it expects to lose around $6 billion this year, has been closing locations and has proposed ceasing Saturday delivery of many items to cut costs. But the USPS is, operationally speaking, profitable; it makes about $400M in operating profit per year. So where does the $6B loss come from? It turns out that the overwhelming chunk of USPS expenses are due to a 2006 Congressional mandate that forces the agency to prepay for 75 years of benefits. In other words, Congress believes that a hypothetical 30-year-old USPS employee's benefit costs need to be fully covered at current levels for 75 years, when the employee would then be 105. Likewise, a retiring 60-year-old USPS employee's pension benefits need to be fully covered for 75 years out -- when the retiree would then be 135 years old. So, if USPS wants to hire, say, a new mail carrier whose benefits are worth (say) $20,000/year, they must immediately pay $1.5M into the fund (it's actually higher than that because there is a discount factor applied to account for interest and rising health care costs). Imagine if your startup or small business were held to the same requirements, and any reasonable person can see this is insanity. Here's a WaPo article covering the problem in more detail: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/02/08/mandate-pushed-postal-service-into-the-red-for-first-quarter/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/02/0...
- Wingman4l7 13y ago
  When I first heard about the absurd benefits-prepayment scheme, I could swear I read that even USPS employees were against it because they knew what repercussions it would have. I don't have a citation for that unfortunately.
  - lotsofpulp 13y ago
    The older ones may have been, because they would have reaped the benefits. But sooner or later, when the taxpayers would have started getting hit with astronomical bills for keeping USPS retirees alive, someone would have had to pay the price. See Detroit's pension retirees. The older retirees took advantage of the nice pension, and now the younger retirees are going to have to have their benefits cut because there is no one left for Detroit to tax.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- yummyfajitas 13y ago
  So where does the $6B loss come from? It turns out that the overwhelming chunk of USPS expenses are due to a 2006 Congressional mandate that forces the agency to prepay for 75 years of benefits. So do all private sector businesses. You can't promise employees $X in future benefits without putting $X into a pension fund. This requirement is uncommon in government, which is why many municipalities have unfunded pension obligations, but it's completely reasonable. The scary fact is that we only require the USPS to do this. You are also misrepresenting the 75 year time horizon. The USPS is required to make the following (wildly oversimplified) spreadsheet: year #living employees # earned costs/employee 2014 1000000 50000 2015 900000 51000 etc The pension fund needs to have SUM(column B x column C) dollars in it (again, wildly oversimplified - it's actually the Present Value of Future Benefits). The 75 year requirement means the spreadsheet must have 75 rows. This prevents the fund from cheating by cutting off the calculation early and failing to account for payments they promised to make. Changing 75 years to 100 years wouldn't change anything. The number "earned costs/employee" is the fraction of the pension costs that have already vested. I.e., if the employee has earned a pension of $100/month so far, but will have earned a pension of $5000/month at retirement, their earned costs are $100/month, not $5000/month. This is the same calculation that ERISA requires of all private sector companies. (Certain grandfathered companies in the private sector are also allowed to escape ERISA, and this will be a problem if any of them go out of business.)
ck2 13y ago
Working for the post office has to be probably the best job in the USA right now - your retirement is already funded before you are even hired, thanks to congress trying to put the post office out of business. They are not "bleeding red ink" they are just being gouged and forced to fund things even the largest corporations do not do.
- yummyfajitas 13y ago
  ERISA forbids unfunded (PAYGO) pensions in the private sector. A private sector employer must put the PVFB of your pension into the fund as you earn it.
  - ck2 13y ago
    "as you earn it" is the key phrase here, the post office has to fund pension plans before you are even hired, it's a future pool of staggering size. Pensions at the post office are probably the most secure retirement fund in the US right now, well other than what congress awards itself.
    - yummyfajitas 13y ago
      No, they are not required to prefund before current workers are hired. The pension costs of future workers are simply required to be included in future projections of USPS costs. It used to be that the USPS could go to congress and say "we want to do X over the next 10 years, it will cost $Y". The $Y value was allowed to exclude the cost of retirement benefits for workers hired during those 10 years. Now it must be included. This is simply good accounting practice.
    - lotsofpulp 13y ago
      You are incorrect. Please read the text of the law, especially section 8909a here: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407/text https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407/text The government is requiring USPS to set aside money for benefits which it has already promised, which is a no-brainer. Did you know that health benefits for employees in the private sector are not promised, and they have been yanked away?
jotm 13y ago
Amazon is really trying to be the end all for online purchases - I bet in 10-20 years, when you need anything, you just Amazon it (you know, like Google it) :-)
- AlexanderDhoore 13y ago
  Except for food (and some clothes) I already "Amazon" anything I need. Once your credit card is in there, it's too damn easy to buy stuff.
  - JoshGlazebrook 13y ago
    Psh. I needed those twelve bags of sour fizzy soda bottle gummie candies.
  - stevenwei 13y ago
    Amazon does grocery delivery in Seattle and parts of Los Angeles via AmazonFresh, and it is pretty awesome.
JoshGlazebrook 13y ago
> "Delivery on a Sunday would be very compelling for consumers. There are certainly people who decide not to make an order on a Friday because it won't get there until Monday," I am definitely one of those people. It seems like I always end up remembering to order something late Thursday night or Friday. When using my Prime membership's 2 day shipping on a friday, the package does not arrive until Tuesday. Is this ever going to change? What exactly is the reason these shipping companies seem to go into a kind of hibernation over the weekend? Surely there are people out there who would be willing to work weekends (if the pay was right)? How much more would it cost them?
- megablast 13y ago
  > What exactly is the reason these shipping companies seem to go into a kind of hibernation over the weekend? Surely there are people out there who would be willing to work weekends (if the pay was right)? How much more would it cost them? This disturbs me, just like forcing shops to open on the weekend. People need a break, and should have a break, just because you can't wait an extra day? Sure, they have a choice to work, just as shop workers have a choice to work, they can always get a job somewhere else.
  - GauntletWizard 13y ago
    People need a break. People should get a break. They should also hire extra weekend help. Spreading the load out by hiring part-time but weekend-bonused workers would benefit society as a whole. It's not just going to be overtime, it's going to be more interesting and flexible work hours - And society will benefit.
    - kubiiii 13y ago
      Spreading the load when generalized also spreads the shops income, and will make paying sunday bonuses unsustainable for companies. Sunday work appears great only if a portion of competitors open, it doesnt create income out of nowhere but draws it from closed competitors.
aashaykumar92 13y ago
It is amazing how obvious it is that customer satisfaction is at the core of every new initiative Amazon launches.
- madeofpalk 13y ago
  Is it really? A lot of companies do this. Apple pays _a lot_ of attention to what it's customers says and guides a lot of decesions by it.
  - ceejayoz 13y ago
    So you're refuting the "Amazon cares about customers" point by saying other companies do too? Huh?
    - madeofpalk 13y ago
      No, I'm just questioning if it really is 'amazing' if a large portion of successful companies do the same thing.
    - icebraining 13y ago
      I think madeofpalk is refuting the "amazing" part. It's not amazing if it's common.
      - ceejayoz 13y ago
        I don't think Amazon-level customer service is all that common. Yes, some other companies like Apple do the same thing, but it's generally surprising to get that sort of support.
  - CamperBob2 13y ago
    So we can expect most of the design decisions in iOS 7 to be reverted in iOS 8, then? Because that's what most Apple users seem to want.
    - 13y ago
el_shayan 13y ago
Non-American here. Why at the start of the article does it say "...with an unlikely partner"? (to be honest I immediately though of Owls! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBfxOatX0tU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBfxOatX0tU) So any idea why Amazon-Post partnership was considered as "unlikely"?
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  Perhaps because USPS is a pseudo-goverment organization, and the US government (and its many appendages) usually doesn't strike this sort of cooperative deal with private companies.
  - adestefan 13y ago
    Except the USPS does. Just look at what they do for Netflix.
- sneak 13y ago
  Few people see the USPS as a serious shipping competitor to FedEx and UPS and others. They're for letter mail.
  - hayksaakian 13y ago
    ... Except for anyone doing business involved in shipping. When I was reselling used books, USPS was the best ROI for shipping (packages and media).
    - icelancer 13y ago
      With Priority Mail now offering $50 in free insurance to the flat rate packages, it's now the obvious choice for my online retail business. Even before then it was the clear winner. Flat rate standardized (free) packaging is such an awesome perk. USPS loses way too many of my parcels, but it's just not worth going to UPS/FedEx and paying 2x the rate plus way more hassle for a slightly reduced lost package rate.
vinhboy 13y ago
This is great news. The USPS is hands down the best shipping provider. Priority Mail, especially the Flat Rate boxes, are often the cheapest and fastest way to ship packages.
- ghaff 13y ago
  Not for me it isn't. In fact, one of the things I like about Amazon Prime is that--at least in my case--it means that UPS delivers a higher percentage of my packages. The issue is that, while UPS drops off the package at my door (as they have to), USPS tends to leave it hanging off my mailbox out by the road because they don't want to spend the time coming down my driveway. And I've had more than one such package stolen.
  - freehunter 13y ago
    Also from my experience with apartments, UPS will leave the package at the front desk while USPS leaves the package at the post office (forcing me to go to the post office to pick it up).
    - BillyMaize 13y ago
      This. USPS for me has also been terrible about updating their tracking information, so I don't find out until late at night when expecting a package to find I need to make this trip. It is like they wait until the end of the day to update every package status.
      - wcfields 13y ago
        I think I can echo having a list package from my mailbox vs front door and it has everything to do with FedEx/Ontrac/UPS leaving the box at my front door. One of my favorites is the recommended carrier of Monoprice, Norcon, that emails you a photo of the delivered package once delivered. Ontrac is a west coast delivery service, and from what I can tell they keep prices low by using mid-90s beater white minivans with a company logo magnet and issuing their employees a polo T uniform.
Ettolrahc 13y ago
I got very excited. Then I realised you meant "Postal Service" and not "Post Office".
xlevus 13y ago
Meanwhile, in the UK, Amazon appear to have opted to not use existing services like the Post Office (who are capable enough to deliver packages) and gone with their own "Amazon Logistics" (who don't seem to be able to deliver a package).
rgbrenner 13y ago
Representatives of Amazon and the Postal Service said the Seattle-based company was taking advantage of a little-known offering available to any shipper. So it sounds like they're just using Express mail.. not really anything special. USPS will deliver express mail on Sunday for an extra fee ($12.50). I'm in Denver, you can drop off an express mail package @ the post office in stapleton until 10pm on Saturday, and it will be delivered on Sunday by 3pm. That facility used to be open 24hrs a day/7 days a week.. so it wouldn't surprise me if the cities amazon picked have facilities open for 24hrs, and they are able to drop off packages at 2-3am sunday, and still have them delivered on sunday (within the city, or near it).
nandemo 13y ago
TIL that Amazon doesn't deliver on Sundays in the US. In Japan (well, at least in cities) pretty much everything works on Sundays.
bound008 13y ago
I experienced this for the first time yesterday. It was surprising, especially with today being a postal holiday.
wdr1 13y ago
Well, this explains the Amazon package on my porch this morning. I didn't expect it until later today.
abuehrle 13y ago
Companies like Instacart, Doordash, Postmates, Amazon, and Google are (in different ways) building a new, siloed delivery infrastructure. At the same time, the USPS and their local delivery infrastructure are in trouble. Is it conceivable that the USPS could leverage their infrastructure to build a national same day delivery network? It's obviously a stretch, but they already have the scale and resources. As a country, we aren't as interested in having letters delivered to our houses anymore, but we sure are interested in groceries and appliances.

179 points by coloneltcb 13y ago

There's a lot wrong with the US, but this kind of thinking is exactly what's right with it

Oddly enough, I got my first Sunday delivery today from Amazon via USPS, and I don't live in either of the referenced cities.

dsl 13y ago
The USPS currently does Sunday delivery to catch up when it falls behind. This agreement allows Amazon to drop off at postal hubs on Sunday for same-day delivery.
- alex4nder 13y ago
  In this case, I don't think that's it: this package wasn't due for delivery until the following Monday. I was pleasantly surprised when I got the text saying it had been delivered.

jxf 13y ago

From the article: > The Amazon contract will be a much-needed financial boost to the Postal Service, which continues to bleed red ink as more Americans eschew "snail mail" in favor of email, instant messaging and social networks. The agency, which said it expects to lose around $6 billion this year, has been closing locations and has proposed ceasing Saturday delivery of many items to cut costs. But the USPS is, operationally speaking, profitable; it makes about $400M in operating profit per year. So where does the $6B loss come from? It turns out that the overwhelming chunk of USPS expenses are due to a 2006 Congressional mandate that forces the agency to prepay for 75 years of benefits. In other words, Congress believes that a hypothetical 30-year-old USPS employee's benefit costs need to be fully covered at current levels for 75 years, when the employee would then be 105. Likewise, a retiring 60-year-old USPS employee's pension benefits need to be fully covered for 75 years out -- when the retiree would then be 135 years old. So, if USPS wants to hire, say, a new mail carrier whose benefits are worth (say) $20,000/year, they must immediately pay $1.5M into the fund (it's actually higher than that because there is a discount factor applied to account for interest and rising health care costs). Imagine if your startup or small business were held to the same requirements, and any reasonable person can see this is insanity. Here's a WaPo article covering the problem in more detail: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/02/08/mandate-pushed-postal-service-into-the-red-for-first-quarter/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/02/0...

Wingman4l7 13y ago
When I first heard about the absurd benefits-prepayment scheme, I could swear I read that even USPS employees were against it because they knew what repercussions it would have. I don't have a citation for that unfortunately.
- lotsofpulp 13y ago
  The older ones may have been, because they would have reaped the benefits. But sooner or later, when the taxpayers would have started getting hit with astronomical bills for keeping USPS retirees alive, someone would have had to pay the price. See Detroit's pension retirees. The older retirees took advantage of the nice pension, and now the younger retirees are going to have to have their benefits cut because there is no one left for Detroit to tax.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
yummyfajitas 13y ago
So where does the $6B loss come from? It turns out that the overwhelming chunk of USPS expenses are due to a 2006 Congressional mandate that forces the agency to prepay for 75 years of benefits. So do all private sector businesses. You can't promise employees $X in future benefits without putting $X into a pension fund. This requirement is uncommon in government, which is why many municipalities have unfunded pension obligations, but it's completely reasonable. The scary fact is that we only require the USPS to do this. You are also misrepresenting the 75 year time horizon. The USPS is required to make the following (wildly oversimplified) spreadsheet: year #living employees # earned costs/employee 2014 1000000 50000 2015 900000 51000 etc The pension fund needs to have SUM(column B x column C) dollars in it (again, wildly oversimplified - it's actually the Present Value of Future Benefits). The 75 year requirement means the spreadsheet must have 75 rows. This prevents the fund from cheating by cutting off the calculation early and failing to account for payments they promised to make. Changing 75 years to 100 years wouldn't change anything. The number "earned costs/employee" is the fraction of the pension costs that have already vested. I.e., if the employee has earned a pension of $100/month so far, but will have earned a pension of $5000/month at retirement, their earned costs are $100/month, not $5000/month. This is the same calculation that ERISA requires of all private sector companies. (Certain grandfathered companies in the private sector are also allowed to escape ERISA, and this will be a problem if any of them go out of business.)

ck2 13y ago

Working for the post office has to be probably the best job in the USA right now - your retirement is already funded before you are even hired, thanks to congress trying to put the post office out of business. They are not "bleeding red ink" they are just being gouged and forced to fund things even the largest corporations do not do.

yummyfajitas 13y ago
ERISA forbids unfunded (PAYGO) pensions in the private sector. A private sector employer must put the PVFB of your pension into the fund as you earn it.
- ck2 13y ago
  "as you earn it" is the key phrase here, the post office has to fund pension plans before you are even hired, it's a future pool of staggering size. Pensions at the post office are probably the most secure retirement fund in the US right now, well other than what congress awards itself.
  - yummyfajitas 13y ago
    No, they are not required to prefund before current workers are hired. The pension costs of future workers are simply required to be included in future projections of USPS costs. It used to be that the USPS could go to congress and say "we want to do X over the next 10 years, it will cost $Y". The $Y value was allowed to exclude the cost of retirement benefits for workers hired during those 10 years. Now it must be included. This is simply good accounting practice.
  - lotsofpulp 13y ago
    You are incorrect. Please read the text of the law, especially section 8909a here: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407/text https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407/text The government is requiring USPS to set aside money for benefits which it has already promised, which is a no-brainer. Did you know that health benefits for employees in the private sector are not promised, and they have been yanked away?

jotm 13y ago

Amazon is really trying to be the end all for online purchases - I bet in 10-20 years, when you need anything, you just Amazon it (you know, like Google it) :-)

AlexanderDhoore 13y ago
Except for food (and some clothes) I already "Amazon" anything I need. Once your credit card is in there, it's too damn easy to buy stuff.
- JoshGlazebrook 13y ago
  Psh. I needed those twelve bags of sour fizzy soda bottle gummie candies.
- stevenwei 13y ago
  Amazon does grocery delivery in Seattle and parts of Los Angeles via AmazonFresh, and it is pretty awesome.

JoshGlazebrook 13y ago

> "Delivery on a Sunday would be very compelling for consumers. There are certainly people who decide not to make an order on a Friday because it won't get there until Monday," I am definitely one of those people. It seems like I always end up remembering to order something late Thursday night or Friday. When using my Prime membership's 2 day shipping on a friday, the package does not arrive until Tuesday. Is this ever going to change? What exactly is the reason these shipping companies seem to go into a kind of hibernation over the weekend? Surely there are people out there who would be willing to work weekends (if the pay was right)? How much more would it cost them?

megablast 13y ago
> What exactly is the reason these shipping companies seem to go into a kind of hibernation over the weekend? Surely there are people out there who would be willing to work weekends (if the pay was right)? How much more would it cost them? This disturbs me, just like forcing shops to open on the weekend. People need a break, and should have a break, just because you can't wait an extra day? Sure, they have a choice to work, just as shop workers have a choice to work, they can always get a job somewhere else.
- GauntletWizard 13y ago
  People need a break. People should get a break. They should also hire extra weekend help. Spreading the load out by hiring part-time but weekend-bonused workers would benefit society as a whole. It's not just going to be overtime, it's going to be more interesting and flexible work hours - And society will benefit.
  - kubiiii 13y ago
    Spreading the load when generalized also spreads the shops income, and will make paying sunday bonuses unsustainable for companies. Sunday work appears great only if a portion of competitors open, it doesnt create income out of nowhere but draws it from closed competitors.

aashaykumar92 13y ago

It is amazing how obvious it is that customer satisfaction is at the core of every new initiative Amazon launches.

madeofpalk 13y ago
Is it really? A lot of companies do this. Apple pays _a lot_ of attention to what it's customers says and guides a lot of decesions by it.
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  So you're refuting the "Amazon cares about customers" point by saying other companies do too? Huh?
  - madeofpalk 13y ago
    No, I'm just questioning if it really is 'amazing' if a large portion of successful companies do the same thing.
  - icebraining 13y ago
    I think madeofpalk is refuting the "amazing" part. It's not amazing if it's common.
    - ceejayoz 13y ago
      I don't think Amazon-level customer service is all that common. Yes, some other companies like Apple do the same thing, but it's generally surprising to get that sort of support.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  So we can expect most of the design decisions in iOS 7 to be reverted in iOS 8, then? Because that's what most Apple users seem to want.
  - 13y ago

el_shayan 13y ago

Non-American here. Why at the start of the article does it say "...with an unlikely partner"? (to be honest I immediately though of Owls! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBfxOatX0tU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBfxOatX0tU) So any idea why Amazon-Post partnership was considered as "unlikely"?

sliverstorm 13y ago
Perhaps because USPS is a pseudo-goverment organization, and the US government (and its many appendages) usually doesn't strike this sort of cooperative deal with private companies.
- adestefan 13y ago
  Except the USPS does. Just look at what they do for Netflix.
sneak 13y ago
Few people see the USPS as a serious shipping competitor to FedEx and UPS and others. They're for letter mail.
- hayksaakian 13y ago
  ... Except for anyone doing business involved in shipping. When I was reselling used books, USPS was the best ROI for shipping (packages and media).
  - icelancer 13y ago
    With Priority Mail now offering $50 in free insurance to the flat rate packages, it's now the obvious choice for my online retail business. Even before then it was the clear winner. Flat rate standardized (free) packaging is such an awesome perk. USPS loses way too many of my parcels, but it's just not worth going to UPS/FedEx and paying 2x the rate plus way more hassle for a slightly reduced lost package rate.

vinhboy 13y ago

This is great news. The USPS is hands down the best shipping provider. Priority Mail, especially the Flat Rate boxes, are often the cheapest and fastest way to ship packages.

ghaff 13y ago
Not for me it isn't. In fact, one of the things I like about Amazon Prime is that--at least in my case--it means that UPS delivers a higher percentage of my packages. The issue is that, while UPS drops off the package at my door (as they have to), USPS tends to leave it hanging off my mailbox out by the road because they don't want to spend the time coming down my driveway. And I've had more than one such package stolen.
- freehunter 13y ago
  Also from my experience with apartments, UPS will leave the package at the front desk while USPS leaves the package at the post office (forcing me to go to the post office to pick it up).
  - BillyMaize 13y ago
    This. USPS for me has also been terrible about updating their tracking information, so I don't find out until late at night when expecting a package to find I need to make this trip. It is like they wait until the end of the day to update every package status.
    - wcfields 13y ago
      I think I can echo having a list package from my mailbox vs front door and it has everything to do with FedEx/Ontrac/UPS leaving the box at my front door. One of my favorites is the recommended carrier of Monoprice, Norcon, that emails you a photo of the delivered package once delivered. Ontrac is a west coast delivery service, and from what I can tell they keep prices low by using mid-90s beater white minivans with a company logo magnet and issuing their employees a polo T uniform.

Ettolrahc 13y ago

I got very excited. Then I realised you meant "Postal Service" and not "Post Office".

xlevus 13y ago

Meanwhile, in the UK, Amazon appear to have opted to not use existing services like the Post Office (who are capable enough to deliver packages) and gone with their own "Amazon Logistics" (who don't seem to be able to deliver a package).

rgbrenner 13y ago

Representatives of Amazon and the Postal Service said the Seattle-based company was taking advantage of a little-known offering available to any shipper. So it sounds like they're just using Express mail.. not really anything special. USPS will deliver express mail on Sunday for an extra fee ($12.50). I'm in Denver, you can drop off an express mail package @ the post office in stapleton until 10pm on Saturday, and it will be delivered on Sunday by 3pm. That facility used to be open 24hrs a day/7 days a week.. so it wouldn't surprise me if the cities amazon picked have facilities open for 24hrs, and they are able to drop off packages at 2-3am sunday, and still have them delivered on sunday (within the city, or near it).

nandemo 13y ago

TIL that Amazon doesn't deliver on Sundays in the US. In Japan (well, at least in cities) pretty much everything works on Sundays.

bound008 13y ago

I experienced this for the first time yesterday. It was surprising, especially with today being a postal holiday.

wdr1 13y ago

Well, this explains the Amazon package on my porch this morning. I didn't expect it until later today.

abuehrle 13y ago

Companies like Instacart, Doordash, Postmates, Amazon, and Google are (in different ways) building a new, siloed delivery infrastructure. At the same time, the USPS and their local delivery infrastructure are in trouble. Is it conceivable that the USPS could leverage their infrastructure to build a national same day delivery network? It's obviously a stretch, but they already have the scale and resources. As a country, we aren't as interested in having letters delivered to our houses anymore, but we sure are interested in groceries and appliances.