« Back to blog home page

Mike Critelli, Pitney Bowes Chairman, says you like to get unsolicited mail

This morning I read the New York Times Saturday Interview with Mike Critelli, Pitney Bowes Executive Chairman.  The title of the interview is In Defense of that Daily Visitor, Unsolicited Mail.  You can read the entire interview here.  As I read this Q&A article, it became clear that Mike is not expressing views consistent with 21st century realities.  Mike’s defense of unsolicited mail is essentially that alternative forms of marketing, such as email, also consume natural resources.  Where I come from, two wrongs don’t make a right.  Where the Catalog Choice community comes from, respecting customers’ mail preferences are paramount.

I was especially taken back by Mike’s answer to the following question:

Q. Do you think some Americans like to get unsolicited mail?

A. Absolutely. Americans have been buying from catalogs for over a century. The original unsolicited catalogs that people got, particularly in rural areas, were from Sears Roebuck, Montgomery Ward and J. C. Penney. They started the direct mail industry over a century ago.

Mike - in just one year over 1 million consumers have made over 14 million requests for unwanted catalogs to no longer be mailed to them here at Catalog Choice.  Mike has is own blog where you can let him know your opinion on this topic.  His blog is titled Open Mike.  Head on over to Mike’s blog to share your views on the topic of unsolicted mail.

This entry was posted on Saturday, October 25th, 2008 at 12:12 pm and is filed under Blogs, Reducing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

27 Responses to “Mike Critelli, Pitney Bowes Chairman, says you like to get unsolicited mail”

  1. What an ass.

    dave on October 25th, 2008 at 12:57 pm

  2. I agree with Dave.

    Hazel on October 25th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

  3. Heh. Rezzie Dannt had quite a discussion with him a few months ago at his blog. Well worth reading, but plan to set aside an hour.

    mikecritelli.com/2008/06/13/environmental-impacts-of-possible-responses-to-eliminating-direct-marketing-mail/

    Tracy Glomski on October 25th, 2008 at 4:53 pm

  4. In all fairness, I think Critelli has to say things like that because he’s representing the company which invented the first stamp-canceling machine and which still to this day is the world’s largest seller of postage meters, controlling 80 percent of the domestic postage meter market (according to Wikinvest). He’s been employed by Pitney Bowes in various high-level positions since 1979.

    Critelli is not a fool. He must realize that the direct mail industry is in trouble. Pitney Bowes has been actively diversifying since 2000, with some $2.5 billion in acquisitions. I hope they’ve done enough of that in time. Pitney Bowes employs some 33,000 people worldwide. Even if we strongly disagree with a company’s philosophy, layoffs are never cool.

    That said, it’s also not cool that the interview basically paints the green-minded public (and anyone who doesn’t favor unsolicited mail) as confused, half-crazy nincompoops. Critelli is using words like “zealous” and “resistant.” He’s entitled to his opinion, but my opinion is that it’s downright odd to keep touting the DMA’s service as the best of all solutions. Catalog Choice and DMA are basically competing in the marketplace, and Catalog Choice is trouncing DMA. The DMA has had 36 years to develop an effective and appealing service, and now it’s desperately playing catch-up to a grassroots movement (with far fewer resources) which attracted over a million members in its first 11 months. Catalog Choice is certainly looking like a superior business model as well as a superior service.

    It’s strange that he, as a businessman with a vital interest in this topic, doesn’t publicly acknowledge that. I wish he would. I’d be curious to read his opinion.

    Tracy Glomski on October 26th, 2008 at 11:00 am

  5. My mother thinks I’m a confused, half-crazy, zealous and resistant nincompoop because she thinks I WANT all this unsolicited mail that piles up and clutters my house! I don’t care what Critelli thinks of me, I’m siding with Catalog Choice, they’re helping to get my mother off my back! CATALOG CHOICE ROCKS!!

    Barbara B on October 26th, 2008 at 7:15 pm

  6. If I were to blog Mr Citrelli’s blog, I might actually tell him that I am glad my common sense towards “unsolicited mail” is a lot higher than my IQ but then, I believe my IQ is higher. Us Consumers know better. Don’t We?
    DMA has only did it to themselves with greed and ignorance towards the consumer by playing fox in the henhouse. Be aware, DMA has politicians and USPS backing them up as the “Ideal” solution. Tracy’s right they have had 36 years to improve. That’s why I will not endorse them.
    CC:org is great. No Doubt! You guys keep truckin’.

    Yvonne Camesi on October 27th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

  7. Isn’t there a First Amendment issue associated with the fact that under the present system, people are effectively being forced to listen to speech (junk mail) they don’t want to? The USPS’s de facto monopoly on the delivery of junk mail (First class mail monopoly + cost advantage of piggybacking + monopoly on mailbox access) and the fact that they are “required” (in quotes since they want to do it anyway) to deliver anything given to them means there is no way to turn off such unwanted mail (short of the mailers deciding that it’s in their self-interest to voluntarily honor the customer’s wishes).

    Andre on October 28th, 2008 at 7:58 pm

  8. I am glad you posted the entire interview. Your comment that I said that all of us like to get unsolicited mail was understandable because of the way Bill Holstein was required to excerpt my answers to get them down to an appropriate number of words. Keep in mind that the interview in the paper is, by its own admission, an edited version of what I said. If you look at other parts of the interview, you will note two points:

    • I acknowledge that there is a legitimate issue with consumer annoyance of a portion of the unsolicited mail consumers receive, and I urge them to go to the DMA web site and register their preferences. I recognize that Catalog Choice is positioned as a competitor to the DMA, but my reason for mentioning the DMA registry is that I know it to be reliable, to be focused on authenticating the true preference of consumers, and to make sure consumers make informed choices. The main point I was trying to make is that those who want to stop receiving certain categories of unsolicited mail have ways to do so today.
    • While I believe that much of the unsolicited mail is not unwelcome, some is, and in an answer to a question about what we know relative to consumer preference, I point out that the U.S. Postal Service 2007 Household Diary Study, consistent with other research, points out that consumers are quite refined in what they like and do not like to receive. Offensive, fraudulent, insensitive, misaddressed, and irrelevant mail from any source is unwelcome, and, by the way, some of the worst offenders in these categories are low-quality pieces from political candidates and non-profits who would be exempt from any proposed “Do Not Mail” legislation. With respect to the rest of the mail, consumers do not object to receiving mail from current vendors, or from trusted marketers with whom they might not currently do business, including local businesses. For example, we know from research that while few recipients of ValPak or Advo mailings containing 20 coupons from various local businesses might not use any of the coupons, they like to get them. On the other hand, a catalog from a company with which they have never done business and which does not appear relevant to them is wasteful and they would prefer not to receive it.

    Mike Critelli on October 29th, 2008 at 7:52 am

  9. The U.S. Postal Service 2007 Household Diary Study also found that 19 percent of households do not usually read their advertising mail. That percentage is rising over time. It’s up from only nine percent in 1987.

    The study also contains the rather wry comment: “With $284 billion spent in the United States on advertising, it is not surprising that few households wish they received more.”

    Thanks for stopping by to clarify, though. It takes courage to post where your views have not been favorably received. I’m sorry the NYT piece was edited in a way that didn’t fully convey your thoughts. I look forward to exploring these ideas further with you at your blog.

    Tracy Glomski on October 29th, 2008 at 3:09 pm

  10. Mike:

    Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. I know that all of our members respect the fact that you understand their desire to no longer receive unwanted mail.

    We are not attempting to compete with the DMA. We are a non-profit that is working in the interest of all parties involved. We strive to provide an innovative service to consumers and companies that will reduce waste. As a result of our initiative and innovation we are pleased that the DMA has significantly enhanced their service. Also, many more companies are now offering mail preference options on their websites.

    While you mention Do Not Mail, you should be aware that we represent a market-based approach to address the problems of unsolicited mail. An effective market-based solution that connects companies and consumers may be able to effectively solve the problem. Time will tell. At least we are trying.

    We look forward to working in collaboration with Pitney Bowes.

    Chuck on October 29th, 2008 at 5:04 pm

  11. Thanks for your response. I seem to be a bit confused by the connection between DMA and CC.org as competitors: DMA sells our mail info to countless merchants, and makes $$$ -without the consumers consent and consumers pay whether it’s time or money to get removed for me I say about 400 hours in phone calls and, hundreds of letters to unwanted mailings.(my past blogs doc this) Point in hand: “A negative response should not be regarded as a positve response” to keep on sending unwanted mailings even DMA’s merchants are guilty of ignoring my requests. CC.org on the other hand is not selling our mail info and they arbitrarily work with merchants to get consumers off catalogs for free. It has worked for me. Are DMA/CC.org Competitors? Please explain? There is yet to be a legal penalty for persistent unsolicited mailings even for “low quality” pieces. DMA is not the only mail/info suppliers or piggybackers around and there needs to be some legislation protecting our precious selves…our identity as consumers. Because of those other mail suppliers around, Who do we trust?
    CC.org is non profit and not out to marketeer.
    I am glad and respect the responses above and also additional clarification of the unsolicited mail issue but I really am blindsided.

    Yvonne Camesi on October 29th, 2008 at 5:22 pm

  12. Sorry, Yvonne, I think I was the one who originally mentioned the concept of competition. That was just my perception, and it’s possible I misspoke. I most definitely didn’t mean that the DMA and Catalog Choice are competing for a profit. What I meant is that there are now several choices for consumers to express their opt-out preferences (including Catalog Choice, the DMA, and at least four other services which come very quickly to my mind). Catalog Choice has emerged as the leader in my eyes. Like you, I was an early adopter and have become a strong proponent because I’ve had excellent results with Catalog Choice. I can’t say quite the same for the DMA.

    I apologize if I clouded the issue with a ham-handed comment. For whatever it’s worth, though, the DMA is technically a nonprofit, too (albeit a very different type of nonprofit than Catalog Choice, since the primary mission of the DMA is to advance its trade).

    Tracy Glomski on October 29th, 2008 at 6:07 pm

  13. Tracy, no you are not to blame. No need to apologize. The DMA muddy waters have been there for a long time. A past blog mentioned where I had picked up a pamphlet from the post office regarding DMA plus catalogs printing their former address for years really contributed to my lack of confidence in them. Also my failed attempts via mail to get off listings. I read Mr Citrelli’s last response that he recognizes CC.org as a a competitor to DMA and maybe his winding rhetoric baffled me. No need to apologize. I am glad to read what he had to say.
    A blog on CC.org’s “Frustrated” site is interesting that a potential mail supplier may be EBAY?
    So far, CC.org has done more in leaps in bounds for catalog mailings. And it does take time. Even miscellaneous mailings are dwindling.

    Yvonne Camesi on October 30th, 2008 at 5:12 pm

  14. I hear ya, Yvonne. But I wish I’d used a word like “organization” instead of “business,” because my meaning was not at all clear.

    It sounds like Chuck regards the DMA’s service as complimentary to Catalog Choice’s, rather than in direct competition. That is a healthy perspective. I will try to begin seeing it that way myself.

    My heart leapt up when he mentioned the possibility of collaboration with Pitney Bowes. I didn’t know such a thing was under consideration. I didn’t have the most positive reaction to the NYT piece, but after reading a number of entries at Mike’s blog, I’ve changed my mind. I think a collaboration is exactly what needs to happen. There needs to be a better way to eliminate mailings to the folks who truly don’t want them. It doesn’t matter if we’re only one in five households, or whatever statistics we can finally agree upon. Continuing to send advertising where it’s ignored and sometimes actively opposed is a waste of resources. I think everyone’s on the same page with that concept. It’s just a matter of how exactly to go about it. I trust that the experts are now tending to it.

    It’s become even more important to me that Catalog Choice succeed, because I have decided that I will not register with the DMA’s service a fourth time when the current enrollment expires. I hope the DMA continues to improve. But at this point, the only thing that would actually help me feel good about them is a written apology for the significant inconvenience they’ve caused me over the past year.

    Here are the three big sore spots:

    • The 26 DMA members who sent unsolicited, prospecting catalogs to my house during the 2007 holiday season. How do I know they’re members when the DMA doesn’t make that info public? Well, in a nonsecure area of the DMA’s website, it’s possible for anyone to examine the mailing list data cards. The DMA member logos are clearly displayed (quite often along with a “preferred provider” graphic). So I looked them up one at a time and found widespread noncompliance with my global opt-out. I don’t know if the DMA failed to process my request properly or if all those companies were simply ignoring the DMA’s suppression protocol. Neither is good.

    • The security breach in January 2008. That reportedly left exposed the names , addresses, e-mail addresses, and passwords of some 30,000 consumers (most likely including me) who were enrolled in the DMA’s mail preference system.

    • The fact that the only PS Form 1500 I’ve ever filed was against a DMA member. I tried opting out of their mailings once by phone and three times by e-mail over a six-month period this year. The only response I received was a chirpy reassurance that they’d be happy to honor my request, but wouldn’t I rather opt down instead of opting out? In my final e-mail, I pointed out that they were in violation of several clauses of the DMA’s code of ethics, and that I would file a complaint if my preference was not honored within the next ten weeks. They sent me three more catalogs, including one after the cutoff time. This suggests to me that DMA members have no great concern that the DMA ethics will actually be enforced. I ended up just getting a prohibitory order instead. That’s working. Apparently, the prospect of being found in contempt of federal court is enough to wake some people up.

    Anyhow, that’s why I get a little keyed up whenever I read the advice to: “Try the DMA! It works!” Uh no, it didn’t. If it had worked, I’d be talking them up to all my friends instead of hanging out here at Catalog Choice. Catalog Choice is the service that’s giving me the best results.

    Tracy Glomski on October 31st, 2008 at 8:45 am

  15. Tracy:

    Excellent comment. Regarding the collaboration concept - Catalog Choice recognizes that under the current regulatory setting we need companies, including mailers and their suppliers, to collaborate with us to make this system work. I will let you all know how our discussions with Pitney Bowes go. On the surface, since they make money when people mail, it seems like a strange partner. But I have always taken the approach of engaging with all parties. You never know where you find an ally.

    Chuck on October 31st, 2008 at 10:56 am

  16. Understood on all points Tracy and Chuck.

    Yvonne Camesi on October 31st, 2008 at 8:10 pm

  17. It’s not so much that I hate unsoliciated catalogs, it’s that I hate the number of them that I get. It’s an industry gone mad! One or two I can handle, but I get dozens a week, even with some substantial efforts to cut off the flow over the past few years. My poor mail carrier! He often has to dump them inside my screen door because there are too many for my oversized mailbox. Then I have to spend the time to haul them to the recycling center. It’s wasteful, not just of paper and ink, but of our precious time and energy. If I get behind on the mail one or two days, I have a huge mess to deal with. It’s ridiculous. Maybe I enjoyed the first few, but at this point, it’s just exhausting and a major source of clutter in our homes.

    Donna on November 3rd, 2008 at 6:38 am

  18. Donna, you hit the nail on the head. At this point I have declined from over 140 catalogs. This industry has indeed spun out of control, creating a waste of resources, advertising dollars, and my time. It shouldn’t have to be this hard to stop the flood.

    Dawn on November 5th, 2008 at 7:17 pm

  19. What on Earth just sent the first prospecting catalog that I’ve received for the holiday season. It is addressed to me but has no customer number (which makes sense, since I haven’t shopped with them before).

    What on Earth is a DMA member. Here is their mailing list data card:
    lists.the-dma.org/market?page=research/datacard&id=73078

    What on Earth has violated my DMA opt-out, and I’ve reported them at the DMAchoice.org website. It was noticeably more of a hassle at the DMA site than it would’ve been here. I had to type in the company name and address (I got an error message when I tried to do the full ZIP+4) as well as my info, including my e-mail address. I really prefer the more streamlined and user-friendly system here at Catalog Choice.

    Tracy Glomski on November 6th, 2008 at 10:03 am

  20. Tracy,
    I just received a Solutions catalog (had not receved one since Dec07), They belong to CC.org too. I could speculate on the “who done it” but it’s a waste time to do so. It’s better and easier to just use this site, which I did to update my cust svc # to get off their mailings again.
    When does your membership with DMA expire? Maybe, they changed their rules again and membership is annually. Good luck! Evidently from previous postings of others, some merchants took a list and went with it.

    Yvonne Camesi on November 7th, 2008 at 12:17 pm

  21. While I still get quite a few catalogs that I had tried to cancel via Catalog Choice, the number is diminishing weekly. One of the good things about this site is the publication of the web site info for these catalogs; it makes it easier to directly contact those catalogs that refuse to accept our declinations via CC
    Thanks for all your good work

    Joan Makurat on November 7th, 2008 at 1:44 pm

  22. Yvonne, I’m sure you’re right, thanks for the good luck wishes, and the answer is January 2011. I believe my prior enrollment should’ve still been effective through 2008, but I registered again this past January, since I was curious about DMA’s “new and improved” system.

    I guess I should just be grateful that I can report a noncompliant company via DMAchoice’s contact page. Maybe there’s a quicker and easier way to do so from an account. If someone could tell me about that, I’d be grateful. I personally wouldn’t know, since I’ve lost access to my DMA account. I first noticed that back in February, about a month after I created my account. Every time I try to log on, I’m informed that my e-mail address is not on record.

    Here’s the interesting part. Even though my account has mysteriously disappeared, my opt-out request was in fact processed properly. I’m certain my DMA opt-out was active by April, thanks to a kindly merchant who looked it up for me. So any DMA members who are prospecting are most definitely obliged to suppress mailings to my house.

    Right now, I aim for double coverage on all unsolicited catalogs. I’ve got the DMA blanket opt-out, but I’ve also entered every single title here at Catalog Choice. It’s not impossible that the DMA’s service is helping, and for that reason, I do suggest that people try DMA if they want to stop their unwanted mail in a hurry. I really have no way of measuring which service has been more useful for preventing prospecting catalogs. For merchants with whom I’ve previously done business, however, Catalog Choice is the service that’s giving me the results I want. My DMA opt-out doesn’t address those. I’d love to go back to my DMA account and switch from global to granular opt-outs, but um, yeah, I can’t do that if my account no longer exists. I sure hope that was an honest glitch and no one deleted me intentionally. Hmmmm.

    “Reliable” is not exactly the first word that comes to my mind when I think of the DMA.

    Tracy Glomski on November 7th, 2008 at 8:49 pm

  23. This morning’s mail provided a Haband AutoVantage membership offer, a check for $10. I worked real hard at getting off Haband’s catalogs/mailings last year and with CC.org as they are participating merchants. Now I feel they are getting “sneaky” with these type mailings. It’s been over a year that I have even ordered from them ever since they sent me a pair of shoes that had one shoe a full size larger than the other.
    Since it wasn’t a catalog, I’ll deal with it on my own. Funny, between Blair, Solutions and Haband, they all have a mailing address of Jessup PA with the same zip code to get off their lists Different street and box #s. Just speculating….
    Tracy, googled abit and happened to type in “mailing lists” and I still feel DMA is not the only provider of mail info. Even one of the above mentioned catalog’s Privacy Policy states that once you have ordered from them, you consent to their compilation of your info for their use, i.e. exchanging with other companies.
    In my entire career with a biggie empire they would fire my butt for giving out even a $ amount to an unauthorized source. We were required to sign Privacy agreements.

    Yvonne Camesi on November 8th, 2008 at 8:44 am

  24. Right. There’s no question that the lists are widely available from a variety of sources.

    Your post makes me wonder, however, if I’ve misunderstood a key point. I was under the impression that if a merchant is a member of DMA, then the merchant is supposed to honor the opt-outs in the DMA suppression files *regardless* of where the list was acquired. But maybe the DMA’s mail preference service applies only to DMA lists traded between their members. Is that what you mean?

    Well, that does slightly alter my perspective, if that’s the case. I imagine there are quite a few merchants shopping around for lists outside the DMA, and if they’re not in fact obliged to run the DMA suppression protocol on those other lists, then I actually see little point in using the DMA’s service.

    I’ll go research that and try to find some clarification. But not today. Today, I’m going to put my feet up after work with a cuddly parrot and a warm sweater and cup of hot cocoa and just enjoy the change of seasons. No unwanted catalogs arrived in my mailbox this morning. Or yesterday morning, for that matter. I’m breathing a sigh of relief about that.

    Tracy Glomski on November 8th, 2008 at 11:12 am

  25. Tracy, I’m with you on chillin’ the rest of the weekend. Let’s chat on Weds. Mon/Tues are booked.

    Yvonne Camesi on November 8th, 2008 at 4:06 pm

  26. I ended up with not one, but two cuddly parrots in my lap! That was a pleasant surprise, since the sun conure king is usually even grouchier than I am.

    This sucks, but after looking around this morning, I discovered that I was flat-out wrong in my long-standing assumption that DMA members are expected to use suppression files on all lists. The Commitment to Consumer Choice guide simply says: “CCC requires our members to…use the DMAchoice suppression files on a monthly basis.” It does not specify that DMA members must apply those suppression files to each and every list, regardless of source. In fact, the FAQ page seems to suggest that the rules are for in-house suppression only, and that merchants are simply asked to use their “independent judgment” when doing business with non-DMA members:
    dmaccc.org/Faq.aspx

    I still think I was right to file a report, however. The What on Earth catalog does not appear to meet the DMA guideline which asks members to inform consumers of opportunity to modify or eliminate future mailings. I so far haven’t received a response to that report, and I am not really expecting one.

    While I was browsing here and there, I did find confirmation of the October layoffs at DMA. About 20 people were cut from an estimated staff of 120, and the vice president and counsel for corporate and social responsibility was among them. The comment thread which follows this article is very interesting.
    directmag.com/news/10_08_dma_layoffs

    Tracy Glomski on November 9th, 2008 at 9:30 am

  27. Tracy:

    You are right that this all is a mess. Even the DMA, who came out against us because they claimed that they have this all under control, can not get their members to use their service. You should have filed the complaint.

    For the sake of the environment and good old customer service, we are not going to give up the effort to fix this the good old entrepreneurial way - by building the best system possible. It will work, with continued support from you and others.
    Thanks, Chuck

    Chuck on November 9th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
 

(required)

(required) Will not be published