Reply to thread

Message

I shall allow the other forum members judge whether or not you have answered the question, what would you have done in Croziers place.

You have made false statements such that he sacked 33,000 people, he did not, they all resigned. I should know, I was one of them.

The main core of sub PO business is dealing with people who do not have bank accounts. They are reducing in numbers, even the Regulator accepted that fact. The closures had to happen or the only alternative was for the tax payer to subsidise them which was something the Government would not permit. Times change and the need for small Post Offices is reducing.

The level of mail is now over 84m letters a day which is a record. The PO does not reduce the number of pillar boxes when volumes are rising.

The real threat has yet to come and that is when full deregulation will happen in 2007. The PO will then without any doubt lose enormous amounts of money. The most conservative estimate is £3m per day. This is because the new competitors will be allowed by law to use the PO's sorting system and only pay 11 pence per letter. That will loose the PO at least 2 p per letter.

I have the advantage over you in that I held a fairly senior post in the business for 22 years, so unlike you, I know what I am talking about.

I am using facts, you used conjecture and it showed.

Regards

Mick

<blockquote data-quote="mick parry" data-source="post: 604812" data-attributes="member: 1103">I shall allow the other forum members judge whether or not you have answered the question, what would you have done in Croziers place.You have made false statements such that he sacked 33,000 people, he did not, they all resigned.&nbsp; I should know, I was one of them.The main core of sub PO business is dealing with people who do not have bank accounts. They are reducing in numbers, even the Regulator accepted that fact. The closures had to happen or the only alternative was for the tax payer to subsidise them which was something the Government would not permit. Times change and the need for small Post Offices is reducing.The level of mail is now over 84m letters a day which is a record.&nbsp; The PO does not reduce the number of pillar boxes when volumes are rising.The real threat has yet to come and that is when full deregulation will happen in 2007.&nbsp; The PO will then without any doubt lose enormous amounts of money.&nbsp; The most conservative estimate is £3m per day. This is because the new competitors will be allowed by law to use the PO's sorting system and only pay 11 pence per letter.&nbsp; That will loose the PO at least 2 p per letter.I have the advantage over you in that I held a fairly senior post in the business for 22 years, so unlike you, I know what I am talking about.I am using facts, you used conjecture and it showed.RegardsMick</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mick parry, post: 604812, member: 1103"] I shall allow the other forum members judge whether or not you have answered the question, what would you have done in Croziers place. You have made false statements such that he sacked 33,000 people, he did not, they all resigned. I should know, I was one of them. The main core of sub PO business is dealing with people who do not have bank accounts. They are reducing in numbers, even the Regulator accepted that fact. The closures had to happen or the only alternative was for the tax payer to subsidise them which was something the Government would not permit. Times change and the need for small Post Offices is reducing. The level of mail is now over 84m letters a day which is a record. The PO does not reduce the number of pillar boxes when volumes are rising. The real threat has yet to come and that is when full deregulation will happen in 2007. The PO will then without any doubt lose enormous amounts of money. The most conservative estimate is £3m per day. This is because the new competitors will be allowed by law to use the PO's sorting system and only pay 11 pence per letter. That will loose the PO at least 2 p per letter. I have the advantage over you in that I held a fairly senior post in the business for 22 years, so unlike you, I know what I am talking about. I am using facts, you used conjecture and it showed. Regards Mick [/QUOTE]

Verification