Get ready for 1 star postage stars if you post as "letters"

[wehavethatau]

Not to mention the buyer will have to pay for the service....

http://www.bunburymail.com.au/story/2263610/australia-post-boss-floats-user-pays-mail-delivery/?cs=1...

[chameleon54]

Around two years ago we had to pay a $10.00 ( I Think from memory ) surcharge on all parcels to the USA. This was an extra levy over and above the post cost which went to the US. postal service. This has now been abolished but might be worth Aust. Post looking at, as we seem to be getting flooded with international mail that local AP users have to pay for. It has got so out of proportion that it is causing major distortions in local postal prices. ( and local internet sales )

[digital*ghost]

---

@chameleon54 wrote:

Around two years ago we had to pay a $10.00 ( I Think from memory ) surcharge on all parcels to the USA. This was an extra levy over and above the post cost which went to the US. postal service. 

---

That was actually a levy imposed and kept by Australia Post. They blamed the US for it, but none of the money went to the US.

It was all tied into the bomb scare on a flight (I've forgotten which one, but there was a tip-off about a homemade bomb being carried on a plane in a mail package), so the US decided not to accept any international parcels over 1 pound unless they had been subject to specific security measures....which they left to the originating country's postal service to do.

Thus, the $9.00 levy from AP was supposedly to cover the costs of implementing these security measures. I thought it was interesting, as in the beginning, Japan simply refused to send any mail to the US, but a few other countries imposed a levy like Australia did, the only difference was that the other countries abolished the levy in a matter or weeks, we had it for over a year. 

[chameleon54]

Very interesting ( as always ) Digi. I have never heard this account before. At the time my local AP claimed it was going to the US postal service, so obviously they where not aware of this either.

[digital*ghost]

I think that awas a fairly common understanding of the charge, and one which Australia Post (shall we say) 'enjoyed'. 

[phorum_junkie*]

That postage is paid in the country of origin but Aus Post gets nothing and they still have to deliver it

And what about when the sender's delivery cost is more than APs? Should AP, and ultimately the buyer, have to pay the extra over and above the AP cost?

With so many different countries in the world it would be almost impossible to administer at a cost that would not result in the cost of postage rising considerably.

[misterforgetfulsbooks]

just seems weird that with the removal of PO's deliveries as contracted out delivery centres, franchised PO's etc... Where are their costs coming from???    Seems a lot of BS and fudged figures by the Govt to privatise and cut services that are a national right for all Australians.

What has always bothered me though is more deliveries should spell more money ie: the more we sell, the more we buy their products and they still, use the same infrastructure to deliver those products.

So my thinking is parcels should be cheaper so that more are sent and a critical mass is built up making services equitable and profitable rather than just the odd delivery to the back of beyond, there would be multiple deliveries out that way making the trip worth it financially.

[digital*ghost]

---

@phorum_junkie* wrote:

That postage is paid in the country of origin but Aus Post gets nothing and they still have to deliver it

---

They don't get anything for individual letters or parcels, but they do get money none the less, via terminal dues.

http://www.upu.int/en/activities/terminal-dues-and-transit-charges/about-terminal-dues-and-transit-c...

"

Since 1969, the designated operator that sends a letter-post item to another country remunerates the destination Post for processing and delivering that item. This system of remuneration is known as terminal dues.

Terminal dues are an important source of revenue for UPU member countries. The system continues to evolve from one Universal Postal Congress to another. At the 2004 Bucharest Congress, member countries adopted a system aimed at covering their actual mail processing costs. Moreover, a link was established between the remuneration received and the quality of service provided."

[phorum_junkie*]

LOL DG, that was a quote from another post I forgot to put in italics, the rest of my post was giving my opinion on why it would be impractical and expensive to have it any other way than it is now.

[digital*ghost]

Oh...ok apologies for the misinterpretation. 😄 (Going for a hattrick - what else can I mis~ ? )