1. Chris – thanks! Anytime I can work in an LOLCat reference, it’s a good post.

2. Michael – thanks for reading. This is the great part of the blog world: it moves beyond static (interview / reader) to dynamic (conversation).

To the substance: three points.

1. 2% of the waste stream actually seems quite high: just from mail? What fraction of that is unsolicited mail? I agree that recycling rates could and should be higher. What investments is Pitney Bowes making to that end?

2. We seem in agreement that consumers don’t like poor quality or poorly targeted direct mail. My contention is that marketers can and should do more to improve targeting – and that part of that would likely be to reduce unsolicited mail. Put another way: unsolicited mail that’s discarded without creating a sale is a net loss, not only to the advertiser and the consumer, but to society: it’s a negative externality. The waste load that it creates isn’t fully internalized, since there’s no way to charge the advertiser for the cost of waste disposal or recycling. (Indeed, consumers generally cover these costs through property taxes or local sales taxes, meaning that consumers subsidize advertisers.) In classical economic terms, this would suggest that society has an interest in reducing direct mail – perhaps we should tax it, to internalize these costs?

3. You contend that “the public does not appear to consider the majority of the unsolicited mail it receives” as poorly targeted or not worthwhile. Could you provide some backing for this claim?

Thanks again for reading. I suspect we disagree on some of the underlying issues here, but I’m grateful for the chance for a discussion.

You mischaracterized my environmental comment. Everything we do, including eating industrially-produced food like Big Macs, or driving to a train station, consumes environmental resources and has some negative environmental impact. Mail does not contribute to the reduction of the tree population, since trees are harvested and replanted like corn or wheat. Mail is generally recyclable, although not all of what could be recycled is being recycled. Even at today’s relatively low recycling rates, mail contributes about 2% of the municipal waste stream. The bigger question is whether what would replace mail would be better for the environment. That is unknown at this time.

Many healthcare providers benefit from radius marketing. They target the neighborhoods near their offices and capitalize on the fact that neighbors talk. Healthcare professionals make good use of their advertising dollars by marketing to new neighbors, too.