Assessing the Welfare Effects of Entry into Letter Delivery

  • Ian Dobbs
  • Paul Richards
  • Norman Ireland
Part of the Topics in Regulatory Economics and Policy Series book series (TREP, volume 8)

Abstract

The United Kingdom Post Office is a statutory corporation organized into three main businesses—letters, parcels, and counters. The counters business was established as a wholly owned subsidiary, Post Office Counters Ltd., in October 1987. The letters and parcels businesses are not separate legal entities, but they have their own internal accounts and are organizationally distinct. The Post Office derives its powers mainly from Section 7 of the Post Office Act 1969; it has the power to provide the various services specified there which include postal services, banking services, and services for Government. Section 59 of the British Telecommunication Act 1981 (BT Act 1981) requires the Post Office in exercising its powers to have regard to (1) efficiency and economy; (2) the social, industrial and commercial needs of the United Kingdom with respect to the matters subserved by its powers; (3) the desirability of improving and developing its operating systems; and (4) developments in the field of communications and banking. Additionally, The Secretary of State at the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) has the power (HMSO 1969) to direct the Post Office to do work of any kind for government departments and local authorities.

Keywords

Consumer Surplus Uniform Price Postal Service Service Standard Price Structure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albon, R. 1985. “Competition or Monopoly in Australia’s Postal Service?” Center for Independent Studies.Google Scholar
  2. Albon, R. 1986. “A Cost-Related Pricing Structure for Inland Letters - the Cost and the Benefits.”Google Scholar
  3. Albon, R. 1987. “Privatize the Post.” Center for Policy Studies.Google Scholar
  4. Albon, R. 1989. “Some Observations on the Efficiency of British Postal Pricing, Applied Economics.”Google Scholar
  5. Association of Metropolitan Authorities. 1990. “Bus Deregulation: The Metropolitan Experience.”Google Scholar
  6. Bishop, M., and J. Kay. 1988. “Does Privatization Work?” Center for Business Strategy, LB S.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, K. 1987. “Private Buses Run into Timetable Problems.” Financial Times (February 16 ).Google Scholar
  8. Brown, S.J. and D.S. Sibley. 1986. “The Theory of Public Utility Pricing.” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  9. Clarke, P. 1988. “Opening Up the Post Office.” Aims of Industry.Google Scholar
  10. Cuthbertson, R., Richards, P. (1991 forthcoming) “An Econometric Study of the Demand for United Kingdom Inland Letters.” Review of Economics and Statistics.Google Scholar
  11. Estrin, S., and D. de Meza. 1988. “Should the Post Office’s Statutory Monopoly be Lifted?” London School of Economics.Google Scholar
  12. Faulhaber, R. 1975. “Cross-Subsidization: Pricing in Public Enterprises.” American Economic Review.Google Scholar
  13. HMSO. 1969. `The Post Office Act.“Google Scholar
  14. HMSO. 1978a. “The Nationalized Industries.” Cmnd 7232.Google Scholar
  15. HMSO. 1978b. “The Post Office.” Cmnd 7292.Google Scholar
  16. HMSO. 1981. “British Telecommunications Act.”Google Scholar
  17. HMSO. 1984. “Buses.” Cmnd 9300.Google Scholar
  18. Mail Users Association. 1989. “Deliver us from the Post Office”. London.Google Scholar
  19. Mason, D. 1988. “Enlightenment.” Adam Smith Institute.Google Scholar
  20. Mason, D. 1989. “Privatizing the Posts.” Adam Smith Institute.Google Scholar
  21. Molyneux, R., and D. Thompson, 1987. `Nationalized Industry Performance: Still Third Rate?“ Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
  22. Monopolies and Mergers Commission. 1984. `The Post Office Letter Post Service.“ HMSO Cmnd 9332.Google Scholar
  23. Neary, P. 1975. “An Econometric Study of Irish Postal Services.” The Economic and Social Research Institute Paper No. 80, Dublin.Google Scholar
  24. Oftel. June 1990. “Report of Director General of Telecommunications.”Google Scholar
  25. Post Office. 1979. `The Letter Monopoly, A Review.“Google Scholar
  26. Post Office. 1986. “Report of the Steering Group on the Long Run Marginal Costs of the Inland Letter Service.”Google Scholar
  27. Post Office Users National Council. 1989–90. “Annual Report.”Google Scholar
  28. Pryke, R. 1981. `The Nationalized Industries.“ Oxford.Google Scholar
  29. Scott, F.A. 1986. “Assessing USA Postal Ratemaking: An Application of Ramsey Prices.” Journal of Industrial Economics, 34. 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Senior, I. 1983. “Liberating the Letter.” Institute of Economic Affairs.Google Scholar
  31. Tabor, R. 1987. “Can Competitors Pass ‘Go’ with a Natural Monopoly?” Public Finance and Accountancy.(May)Google Scholar
  32. Tabor, R. 1987. “Who Benefits from ‘One Price for Everywhere’.” Public Finance and Accountancy.(June)Google Scholar
  33. Union of Communication Workers. 1990. `The Last Post?“ London.Google Scholar
  34. Bös, Dieter, and Lorenz Nett. 1989. “Privatization, Price Regulation and Market Entry. An Asymmetric Multistage Duopoly model.” Discussion paper 303, Rheinische FriedrichWilhelms-Universität Bonn.Google Scholar
  35. Cuthbertson, R., and P. Richards. (Forthcoming.) “An Econometric Study of the Demand for UK Inland Letters.” Review of Economics and Statistics. Google Scholar
  36. Salop, Steven C. 1979. “Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods.” Bell Journal 10: 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ian Dobbs
  • Paul Richards
  • Norman Ireland

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations