Targeting Versus Saturation: Derived Demand for Direct Mail

  • Michael D. Bradley
  • Jeff ColvinEmail author
  • Mary K. Perkins
Part of the Topics in Regulatory Economics and Policy book series (TREP, volume 50)


Over the most recent decade, Postal Operators (POs) have suffered financially from the dramatic reductions in single piece communication mail, which have put Universal Service Obligation (USO) funding in jeopardy. To some extent, however, and especially in the US, weakness in the demand for single piece mail has been partially compensated for by continued strength in bulk mail, though the margin on bulk mail is lower. Electronic substitution has been weaker for presentment mail than for remittance mail. Further, direct mail has held on to its share of the overall advertising market.


Equilibrium Price Postal Operator Profit Function Single Piece Potential Buyer 
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.


  1. Anderson, C. (2006). The long tail. New York: Hyperion.Google Scholar
  2. Athey, S., & Ellison, G. (2008). Position auctions with consumer search. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, 126(3):1213–1270.Google Scholar
  3. Athey, S., & Gans, J. S. (2009). The impact of targeting technology on advertising markets and media competition. American Economic Review, 100(2):608–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagwell, K. (2007). The economic analysis of advertising. In M. Armstrong & R. Poster (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial Organisation, Vol III. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  5. Bergemann, D., & Bonatti, A. (2011). Targeting in advertising markets: Implications for offline and online media. Rand Journal of Economics, 42(3):47–443.Google Scholar
  6. Chen, Y., & He, C. (2006). Paid placement: Advertising and search on the Internet. NET Institute Working Paper No. 06–02.Google Scholar
  7. Crew, M., & Kleindorfer, P. (2012). Non-linear pricing, volume discounts and the USO under entry. In M. A. Crew & P. R. Kleindorfer (Eds.), Multi-model competition and the future of mail. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  8. De Donder, P., Cremer, H., Dudley, P., & Rodriguez, F. (2011). Welfare and pricing of mail in a communications market. Review of Network Economics, 10(3):1–24.Google Scholar
  9. Dieke, A., Bender, C., Campbell, J., Cohen, R., Müller, C., Niederprüm, A., de Streel, A., Thiele, S., & Zanke, C. (2013). Main developments in the postal sector (2010–2013), WIK.Google Scholar
  10. Iyer, G., Soberman, D., & villas-Boas, M. (2005). The targeting of advertising. Marketing Science 24(3):461–476.Google Scholar
  11. United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General. (2013a). The untold story of the ZIP Code. RARC-WP-13-006.Google Scholar
  12. United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General. (2013b). Strengthening advertising mail by building a digital information market. RARC-WP-14-002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael D. Bradley
    • 1
  • Jeff Colvin
    • 2
    Email author
  • Mary K. Perkins
    • 3
  1. 1.George Washington UniversityWashington, DCUSA
  2. 2.USPS Office of Inspector GeneralArlingtonUSA
  3. 3.Howard UniversityWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations