USPS Media Mail Regulations 1 1

[RockMyAmadeus]

Well, the only problem with that is there are plenty of comics without ads. Expired, new, old- no ads. The only thing that could be considered an advertisement would be the publisher imprint and possible next issue solicit. If this qualifies as advertisement, then that's fine but I have never seen a textbook without a publisher's logo and other incidental ads.

 

I asked specifically about comics WITHOUT ads and was told-as you can see in USPS response- that any comic, regardless of presence of paid advertisements is not media mail because they are serialized. However, again in cases of one-shots without ads- they aren't allowed either.

 

 

 

 

Exactly.

 

The regulations don't HELP you, only HURT you, especially when postal employees don't know their own regulations, and just make things up out of thin air.

 

How ridiculous is that?

 

 

The regulations, by the way, explicitly include books with incidental ads of other "books."

 

"containing no advertising matter other than incidental announcements of books."

 

So what would qualify? Sandman: Preludes & Nocturnes, for example. Or, Doctor Strange: Shamballa graphic novel.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

 

I asked specifically about comics WITHOUT ads and was told-as you can see in USPS response- that any comic, regardless of presence of paid advertisements is not media mail because they are serialized. However, again in cases of one-shots without ads- they aren't allowed either.

 

 

 

 

They are simply incorrect.

The DMM is the gospel.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

I just think there should be some consistent regulations.

 

There are:

 

Only these items may be mailed at the Media Mail prices:

a) Books, of at least eight printed pages, consisting wholly of reading matter and containing no advertising matter

Domestic Mail Manual

 

I omitted all the stuff that doesn't apply, which is a lot.

But this is the first first sentence (a) of a large list covering anything and everything that qualifies for media mail.

 

The regulations are absolute. What is inconsistent is enforcement.

You are dealing with human beings. We are easily swayed.

 

 

 

 

 

Correct. And the vast majority of comic books consist of at least eight pages, and contain no advertising matter.

 

Those pages that WERE ads in, say, X-Men #94, are no longer ads. Being no longer ads, they are now reference material, that is, reading material.

 

If the material that was formerly advertising is now expired, it is no longer advertising, and thus qualifies under these rules. It's really quite simple.

 

If you're going to use the USPS' arguments, it's perfectly suitable to use those arguments against them. Funny how the regulations aren't as absolute as some might claim...

 

 

The word in the DMM is "advertisement". It is further clarified with:

Advertising includes paid advertising ....

There is no clarification of "current, valid, recent, etc. (although we have had this argument before, eg: When is a 40 year old coke ad expired?) Regardless, one does not get to parse words, when their MM package arrives postage due at the Priority Mail rate.

.

 

It doesn't matter, because it's not necessary. Once the ad is expired, it's no longer an advertisement, paid or not.

 

Who said?

Note you are still calling these ads. Just with a qualifier of "expired". No qualifiers are used by the USPS, because they are not necessary. An old ad is still an ad.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Expired eh?

 

 

Yes. Expired as soon as its replacement came out, regardless of the continued existence of the product, as stated many, many times before.

 

Not difficult.

 

Your concept that ads are valid or invalid would require USPS personnel to spend countless man hours making often difficult and time consuming judgment calls. There is nothing simple, as you claim, about it.

 

It is far simpler to enforce the rule as written. An advertisement is an advertisement, regardless of publication date.

 

And your contention that it would "require USPS personnel to spend countless..." etc, isn't the case at all. All they need to do is update the DMM. That's it. And, if they refuse, as they have refused for years (it's obviously an issue that has been brought to their attention), then it's still very simple: you take the customer's word for it, and handle disagreements on a case by case basis. Will some people take advantage? Of course...but that's what they're doing now. There will always be some people who take advantage.

 

And, once more: the media mail regulation had in mind the initial distribution of periodicals from publishers (that is, Second Class mail), NOT the back issue exchange of those items after the fact.

 

As for "countless man hours making judgment calls"...how do you think the crackdown on mm happened at all? Countless man hours devoted to opening up packages, and finding auto parts, clothing, food, etc. How do you think it came about that comic books do NOT qualify, according to the interpretation of some? Right...countless man hours devoted to checking. But it need not be difficult at all.

 

The DMM could easily be updated...easily...to say "anything newer than 6 months (or whatever) is exempt." Problem still solved. But, they don't, even though they know it's an issue (because it's been directly addressed by someone at some administrative level.)

 

Ever wonder why that is....?

 

No, I don't wonder at all.

Because the rule as stated is far easier to implement than one that says "new advertisements are verboten but old advertisements are ok".

 

I think you are misunderstanding what I am stating would take countless man hours, which would be the determination of new vs old advertisements. Which is clearly unnecessary as the rule is written as: any book with advertising does not qualify for media mail.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Expired eh?

 

 

Yes. Expired as soon as its replacement came out, regardless of the continued existence of the product, as stated many, many times before.

 

Not difficult.

 

Your concept that ads are valid or invalid would require USPS personnel to spend countless man hours making often difficult and time consuming judgment calls. There is nothing simple, as you claim, about it.

 

It is far simpler to enforce the rule as written. An advertisement is an advertisement, regardless of publication date.

 

And your contention that it would "require USPS personnel to spend countless..." etc, isn't the case at all. All they need to do is update the DMM. That's it. And, if they refuse, as they have refused for years (it's obviously an issue that has been brought to their attention), then it's still very simple: you take the customer's word for it, and handle disagreements on a case by case basis. Will some people take advantage? Of course...but that's what they're doing now. There will always be some people who take advantage.

 

And, once more: the media mail regulation had in mind the initial distribution of periodicals from publishers (that is, Second Class mail), NOT the back issue exchange of those items after the fact.

 

As for "countless man hours making judgment calls"...how do you think the crackdown on mm happened at all? Countless man hours devoted to opening up packages, and finding auto parts, clothing, food, etc. How do you think it came about that comic books do NOT qualify, according to the interpretation of some? Right...countless man hours devoted to checking. But it need not be difficult at all.

 

The DMM could easily be updated...easily...to say "anything newer than 6 months (or whatever) is exempt." Problem still solved. But, they don't, even though they know it's an issue (because it's been directly addressed by someone at some administrative level.)

 

Ever wonder why that is....?

 

 

No, I don't wonder at all.

Because the rule as stated is far easier to implement than one that says "new advertisements are verboten but old advertisements are ok".

 

It need not be difficult. Do you think all this hubbub over the last however many years has resulted in easier implementation? How many countless man hours have been devoted to dealing with this issue, regardless of the outcome?

 

The rule that isn't consistently applied, not because of corruption or graft, but because of a lack of clarity, isn't an effective rule.

 

The "note" on the USPS website (which is NOT binding in the least) is one example of that lack of clarity.

 

The issue that prompted this thread, which is that comics that contain NO advertising, and UNAMBIGUOUSLY follow the letter of the regulation, are being denied, is also an example of that lack of clarity.

 

One more time: all that needs to be done is to update the DMM to say "comic books/graphic novels/sequential art of any kind are not allowed to be shipped via Media Mail."

 

Simple.

 

But, it hasn't been done, even though someone at some administrative level is aware of the issue. Why...?

 

I think you are misunderstanding what I am stating would take countless man hours, which would be the determination of new vs old advertisements. Which is clearly unnecessary as the rule is written as: any book with advertising does not qualify for media mail.

 

 

No, I understood you correctly the first time, and, as I responded, you wouldn't need those countless man hours, because you don't need them now and/or, they've already been used to weed out clearly non-acceptable material.

 

Yes, if strictly enforced, it could become a problem, but it's not strictly enforced now, in practice, as evidenced by the tens of thousands, if not hundreds, if not millions, of comics being shipped every year via media mail, with very little rejection. And not only is it not strictly enforced, but whatever additional man hours are being spent to examine comics for "expired ads" is already allocated by those parcels being examined for other material that isn't allowed. After all...graphic novels are allowed, by the letter of the regulation, so are they being examined for ads...? I don't think so, but if they are, what's to stop them from doing the same with other types of sequential art, using the same allocated resources?

 

It's not as cumbersome as you're trying to portray it.

 

You simply take the customer at their word, and deal with issues on a case-by-case basis, like they're already doing. Do you think there's going to be a flood of people all of a sudden shipping comics via media mail? No. Allow the customer to self-police which they are already doing. Look at all the people who refuse to ship them via Media Mail just on this board, because of the "rule."

 

Regardless, there's still no need for media mail to be examined for "countless hours" to weed out "active ads." It's not necessary at all.

 

The reality is, they don't do much of that as it stands. I think, in the hundreds upon hundreds, if not into the thousands, of packages I've received in the last 20 years, that I've never had a single one shipped media mail which was rejected and upcharged. Maybe one. Lots and lots of packages STAMPED, but none actually opened and rejected/upcharged.

 

I don't ship media mail for the most part...maybe 1-2 packages a year...because I find it to be a slow, inconvenient, and risky service. But that doesn't mean it can't be used, because, again: expired ads are not ads.

 

I just think there should be some consistent regulations.

 

There are:

 

Only these items may be mailed at the Media Mail prices:

a) Books, of at least eight printed pages, consisting wholly of reading matter and containing no advertising matter

Domestic Mail Manual

 

I omitted all the stuff that doesn't apply, which is a lot.

But this is the first first sentence (a) of a large list covering anything and everything that qualifies for media mail.

 

The regulations are absolute. What is inconsistent is enforcement.

You are dealing with human beings. We are easily swayed.

 

 

 

 

 

Correct. And the vast majority of comic books consist of at least eight pages, and contain no advertising matter.

 

Those pages that WERE ads in, say, X-Men #94, are no longer ads. Being no longer ads, they are now reference material, that is, reading material.

 

If the material that was formerly advertising is now expired, it is no longer advertising, and thus qualifies under these rules. It's really quite simple.

 

If you're going to use the USPS' arguments, it's perfectly suitable to use those arguments against them. Funny how the regulations aren't as absolute as some might claim...

 

 

The word in the DMM is "advertisement". It is further clarified with:

Advertising includes paid advertising ....

There is no clarification of "current, valid, recent, etc. (although we have had this argument before, eg: When is a 40 year old coke ad expired?) Regardless, one does not get to parse words, when their MM package arrives postage due at the Priority Mail rate.

.

 

 

It doesn't matter, because it's not necessary. Once the ad is expired, it's no longer an advertisement, paid or not.

 

Who said?

 

Common sense, and ad companies. Is a former model always a model because she was at one time? Is a retired football player still a football player? Is an expired carton of (raw) milk still milk, because it was once, or is it now clabber? Is a person always a child, just because they were one at one time?

 

Note you are still calling these ads. Just with a qualifier of "expired". No qualifiers are used by the USPS, because they are not necessary. An old ad is still an ad.

 

Not at all. I use the qualifier of "expired" to illustrate what it was, not what it is. If a postal employee says "this is an ad!" I can say "no, it's not. It WAS an ad, but it's now reference material", which it most certainly is.

 

Using a qualifier helps to explain what something WAS, not what it IS.

 

It's a perfectly reasonable argument, using sound logic that the government itself likes to use all the time.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

I asked specifically about comics WITHOUT ads and was told-as you can see in USPS response- that any comic, regardless of presence of paid advertisements is not media mail because they are serialized. However, again in cases of one-shots without ads- they aren't allowed either.

 

 

 

 

They are simply incorrect.

The DMM is the gospel.

 

Right. The DMM is the governing manual of the USPS. If it's not in there, it means nothing.

[jcjames]

 

Define "advertisement".

 

 

Is this a book or is it an advertisement?

 

Or how about this one - is it a book or is it an advertisement?

 

How about a book about the history of advertisements with examples?

 

Or a textbook ?

 

How about a newspaper from 1730 with 286 year-old advertisements?

 

 

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Expired eh?

 

 

Yes. Expired as soon as its replacement came out, regardless of the continued existence of the product, as stated many, many times before.

 

Not difficult.

 

Your concept that ads are valid or invalid would require USPS personnel to spend countless man hours making often difficult and time consuming judgment calls. There is nothing simple, as you claim, about it.

 

It is far simpler to enforce the rule as written. An advertisement is an advertisement, regardless of publication date.

 

And your contention that it would "require USPS personnel to spend countless..." etc, isn't the case at all. All they need to do is update the DMM. That's it. And, if they refuse, as they have refused for years (it's obviously an issue that has been brought to their attention), then it's still very simple: you take the customer's word for it, and handle disagreements on a case by case basis. Will some people take advantage? Of course...but that's what they're doing now. There will always be some people who take advantage.

 

And, once more: the media mail regulation had in mind the initial distribution of periodicals from publishers (that is, Second Class mail), NOT the back issue exchange of those items after the fact.

 

As for "countless man hours making judgment calls"...how do you think the crackdown on mm happened at all? Countless man hours devoted to opening up packages, and finding auto parts, clothing, food, etc. How do you think it came about that comic books do NOT qualify, according to the interpretation of some? Right...countless man hours devoted to checking. But it need not be difficult at all.

 

The DMM could easily be updated...easily...to say "anything newer than 6 months (or whatever) is exempt." Problem still solved. But, they don't, even though they know it's an issue (because it's been directly addressed by someone at some administrative level.)

 

Ever wonder why that is....?

 

 

No, I don't wonder at all.

Because the rule as stated is far easier to implement than one that says "new advertisements are verboten but old advertisements are ok".

 

It need not be difficult. Do you think all this hubbub over the last however many years has resulted in easier implementation? How many countless man hours have been devoted to dealing with this issue, regardless of the outcome?

 

The rule that isn't consistently applied, not because of corruption or graft, but because of a lack of clarity, isn't an effective rule.

 

The rule is crystal clear. It is not consistently applied due to the bureaucratic nature of the USPS.

 

You keep implying that since the DMM has not been updated to address your specific argument, that your position is correct. Do you want them to update it for newspapers, magazines, newsletters, and any other similar products with ads. Why? It is simple now. Anything with ads does not qualify.

 

Yet, you think by clarifying the DMM position on advertisements to "anything newer than 6 months (or whatever) is exempt." would be less cumbersome to implement? The amount of turmoil that that would cause is specifically why they don't care how old the ad is.

 

 

It doesn't matter, because it's not necessary. Once the ad is expired, it's no longer an advertisement, paid or not.

 

Who said?

 

Common sense, and ad companies.

 

Common Sense says an advertisement is an advertisement regardless of the age.

Ad companies will tell you that the best ads are timeless.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

And, once more: the media mail regulation had in mind the initial distribution of periodicals from publishers (that is, Second Class mail), NOT the back issue exchange of those items after the fact.

 

Media mail had nothing to do with periodicals, as reduced rates for periodicals had been around for decades before Media Mail was introduced. Media Mail was originally "book rate" and later expanded to other media: audio, video, etc.

 

The back issue exchange of periodicals after the fact, has always been subject to standard (non-reduced rate) mail rates.

[shadroch]

In the 70s, I'd get book rate boxes from Hugh O'Kenon. He'd sent a packing slip in a separate envelope because putting one in the box made the whole thing ineligible for book rate,according to him.

[jools&jim]

 

The DMM is the gospel.

Would it surprise anyone to learn that I worked for the USPS as a clerk after I got out of college in the late '80s, and never once heard of the DMM?

 

Some "gospel"...

 

 

 

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

The rule is crystal clear.

 

Yes, perfectly clear. No advertisements.

 

And X-Men #94 contains no advertisements, only reading material.

 

Problem solved.

 

It is not consistently applied due to the bureaucratic nature of the USPS.

 

Or, lack of clarity with regards to what is, and is not, an advertisement.

 

You keep implying that since the DMM has not been updated to address your specific argument, that your position is correct.

 

Not at all. You're inferring that, but that's not what I'm implying, no. I'm stating that they're aware of the issue at some administrative level, yet they don't do anything about it. However, that doesn't therefore mean my position is correct. My position is correct because it's a sound argument, regardless of any other considerations. I'm not going to rest the weight of my argument on something as philosophically weak as an implication.

 

You may not be familiar with me, but I'm the guy who isn't shy about being forthright, and doesn't beat around the bush much. Nice to meet you!

 

My argument about updating the DMM is only in regards to resolving the issue, one way or the other. Whether they update it or not doesn't have any bearing on my argument that expired ads are no longer ads, just like former models are no longer models.

 

Do you want them to update it for newspapers, magazines, newsletters, and any other similar products with ads. Why? It is simple now. Anything with ads does not qualify.

 

It is not simple now, which I have already said, repeatedly, as evidenced by the decade-plus long debate over the issue. If it was simple, there wouldn't still be a debate.

 

Yet, you think by clarifying the DMM position on advertisements to "anything newer than 6 months (or whatever) is exempt." would be less cumbersome to implement? The amount of turmoil that that would cause is specifically why they don't care how old the ad is.

 

So you say. My suggestion is just that: one possible way to go. That's not the only form updating the DMM could take. I've already explained why that argument isn't an issue. It's all right up there. In short: it's what they're already doing now, in practice, and if it becomes an issue, they can handle it on a case-by-case basis. Nothing, in practice, would, or need, change.

 

It doesn't matter, because it's not necessary. Once the ad is expired, it's no longer an advertisement, paid or not.

 

Who said?

 

Common sense, and ad companies.

 

Common Sense says an advertisement is an advertisement regardless of the age.

 

 

Yes, and common sense says a model is a model regardless of her age, milk is milk regardless of its age, a person is a child regardless of their age, and football players are football players, regardless of their job status...?

 

Clearly, that's not true.

 

Ad companies will tell you that the best ads are timeless.

 

 

Yes, timeless...until it's time for the next ad campaign.

 

Ad Agency: "Hi, this is Jim from Acme Ad Agency. It's time for a new ad campaign!"

 

Customer: "But I thought you said our last campaign was "timeless!""

 

AA: "It is, that's why we need another one!"

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

And, once more: the media mail regulation had in mind the initial distribution of periodicals from publishers (that is, Second Class mail), NOT the back issue exchange of those items after the fact.

 

Media mail had nothing to do with periodicals, as reduced rates for periodicals had been around for decades before Media Mail was introduced.

 

Yes, precisely, that's precisely where the regulation derives: the requirements regarding advertising that partly defined what a periodical was.

 

But I didn't say Media mail had to do with periodicals. Read it again; it's quoted right there: "the media mail regulation had in mind the initial distribution of periodicals from publishers."

 

I didn't say media mail itself had to do with periodicals, only the specific regulation regarding advertising. That regulation was designed to PREVENT those using Second Class services (including comic book publishers) from taking advantage of the lower "book rate" service to distribute their periodicals.

 

Media Mail was originally "book rate" and later expanded to other media: audio, video, etc.

 

"Book rate" was created in the 1930's, and applied to...you guessed it...books, because other forms of media...film, CDs, microfiche, printed music...were either in their infancy, didn't exist yet, or weren't a concern.

 

Yes, Second Class mail for newspapers and magazines...periodicals, in other words...is much, much older than "book rate", but its existence is precisely WHY "book rate" was established: so that there could be a cheaper, slower method to get educational materials...that is, books...to people without having to pay the higher costs, and bear the regulatory burdens, associated with Second Class mail, much less those of Standard Mail.

 

"Book rate" was established as an alternative to the Second Class service (and, indeed, Standard Mail, as well.)

 

https://www.uspsoig.gov/blog/brief-history-preferred-postage-rates

 

(A very interesting blog article; make sure to read the comments, too!)

 

Second Class (periodicals) has an entire section of the DMM dedicated to it:

 

http://pe.usps.com/Archive/HTML/DMMArchive20070514/707.htm

 

The back issue exchange of periodicals after the fact, has always been subject to standard (non-reduced rate) mail rates.

 

According to what specific policy in the DMM...? They meet the qualifications AND the intent of media mail.

[somewhereintexas]

I sure miss Bound Printed Matter. Not that much more than Media Mail, and comics were clearly allowed.

[fastballspecial]

Really 1st class adjustments have made Media really only applying to larger lots of books that you can't get in a flat rate which would be around 12 books.

After that you have to ship in a priority box and that's where the Media option starts coming into play.

 

For shipping 1 or even 2 books 1st class should be your only option although you can still ship it Priority. At up 16 ounces 1st class you can pack one comic very well and make it bullet proof basically. If condition is not an issue then you can ship 3 or 4 with minimal packing as well.

 

But it still happens I just bought a $50 book and the seller shipped it Media with very little protection. And yes it got damaged.

 

 

[01TheDude]

what annoys me sometimes is when they send an ebay purchase first class but only use 4-5 ounces of packaging (total including the book) when for the same price up to 8 ounces at $2.60. WHy not add some more cardboard to the package? I am also seeing tons of people sending it using cut up priority mail cardboard sandwiches. I have a problem with using the PM materials (short of them being simply recycled) especially when they don't even bother to use the entire 8 ounces allotted.

 

I've been lucky so far in terms of nothing being bent or damaged but it seems so lazy of the seller.

[toro]

I sure miss Bound Printed Matter. Not that much more than Media Mail, and comics were clearly allowed.

 

FedEx has bound and printed matter option.

 

http://www.fedex.com/us/smartpostguide/bpm/bpm_rates_zones.html

[docdimento]

I buy a ton of comics and don't want to keep them all. I keep the stuff I really like and sell the rest as 40 comic lots. I'm not trying to make a ton of money, I'm trying to get rid of bulk and get as much as I can for it. Shipping 40 books media mail is about $6, priority can be as much as $25 which is more than what a 40 comic junk lot usually goes for. Without media mail, I'd probably just be leaving stacks of comics on the free table at work

Edited October 12, 2016 by DocDiMento

[Fan Boy]

Found something interesting from online while I was browsing for info about media mail. I copied as quoted and pasted here:

From one of the many threads on this topic...


----start---
The two areas that relate to our discussion here are the following sub-sections E610 Basic Standards (in the E600 Standard Mail section) and E713 Media Mail (in the E700 Package Services section).

E610 2.2 Printed Matter
Printed matter weighing less than 16 ounces may be sent as Standard Mail. For this standard, printed matter means paper on which words, letters, characters, figures, or images (or any combination of them), not having the character of a bill or statement of account or of actual and personal correspondence, are reproduced by any process other than handwriting or typewriting.

Ok, no mention of advertising here... just bills, statements of account and correspondence. So comic books are printed matter.

E713 1.1 Qualified Items
a. Books, including books issued to supplement other books of at least eight printed pages, consisting wholly of reading matter or scholarly bibliography, or reading matter with incidental blank spaces for notations and containing no advertising matter other than incidental announcements of books. Advertising includes paid advertising and the publishers' own advertising in display, classified, or editorial style.

c. Printed music, whether in bound or sheet form.
[b,d-i items deleted as they are irrelevant to the discussion]

Ok, this would exclude comics that contain paid advertisments that exist as pages. I'm not sure about the obsolete aspect for advertisments published in the 1950s, but for arguments sake we will call all paid advertising (be it current or obsolete) as advertising. So comics do not qualify as Media Mail.

E713 1.2 Loose Enclosures
In addition to the enclosures and additions listed in E610, any printed matter that is mailable as Standard Mail may be included loose with any qualifying material mailed at the Media Mail rates.

Look, a loophole! You can print out a sheet of music and include it in a package containing no more than 16 ounces of comic books and the package can be shipped as Media Mail. The sheet of music is qualified material and comics meet the definition for Standard Mail. So long as you are only sending 1 pound or less of comics, with the sheet of music, it can all go Media Mail!

Now, there is still that question regarding obsolete advertising still being advertising vs. historical text (the argument being "how can you advertise something that no longer exists?"). Has it become historical text and hence part of the reading material? If so, older comics may qualify under E713 1.1 a as Media Mail. I plan to take this post into my local Main Office to get a definition on "advertising vs. historical text".

----end----

----start----

Ok folks, I just got off the phone with the head of Media Mail at Rates and Classifications in Chicago, IL.

Here is his take on the situation... as E713 1.1 a says "advertising" and makes no provision for obsolete advertisments vs. current advertisments, he says that any postal branch is operating within the regulations to refuse comic books that contain any advertising.

Now he wasn't aware of the RIBBS precedent set for reprinted historical catalogs being allowed under Media Mail (PS-064 in the RIBBS system). But he understands the logical argument (by extension) that if a product is no longer being produced, or the vendor is no longer in existence, that no one can benefit from the advertisment and so it has become historical in nature and has become part of the reading text. The problem he sees is in verifying that all of the products are unavailable and that the vendors are out of business (and trying to determine such a thing could get messy and take more time than it is worth).

Now I explained to him that some people were getting comic books rejected, and others were not, based on their local POs interpretation of the Media Mail rules. He said the only way for us to get a National rule would be through a "hearing" on this issue. And it would work this way... someone who gets comic books rejected at their local office would need to appeal that ruling locally and get it worked up the ladder to Rates and Classifications in Chicago. This appeal is where we can present our our "case" as to why vintage comics should be allowed to qualify for Media Mail. Once it gets to him then he would investigate the matter, taking our position as part of that investigation, and then make a National ruling.

So we would need a damn good set of reasons to allow comic books otherwise we risk losing Media Mail privliges for all dealers that are currently allowed to send comics under that rate by their local POs. He said sometimes it is better to leave it alone.

----end----


My local PO told me that they classify any advertising more than 3 years old as obsolete, so any magazine (comic books, TV guides, etc.) are eligible for Media Mail if they are that old or older.

 

Ending the copied quote here.  Yeah, I see this thread here is almost a year old. 

[GM8]

On 10/9/2016 at 6:53 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

 

...

 

Yes, if strictly enforced, it could become a problem, but it's not strictly enforced now, in practice, as evidenced by the tens of thousands, if not hundreds, if not millions, of comics being shipped every year via media mail, with very little rejection. And not only is it not strictly enforced, but whatever additional man hours are being spent to examine comics for "expired ads" is already allocated by those parcels being examined for other material that isn't allowed. After all...graphic novels are allowed, by the letter of the regulation, so are they being examined for ads...? I don't think so, but if they are, what's to stop them from doing the same with other types of sequential art, using the same allocated resources?

 

It's not as cumbersome as you're trying to portray it.

 

You simply take the customer at their word, and deal with issues on a case-by-case basis, like they're already doing. Do you think there's going to be a flood of people all of a sudden shipping comics via media mail? No. Allow the customer to self-police which they are already doing. Look at all the people who refuse to ship them via Media Mail just on this board, because of the "rule."

 

Regardless, there's still no need for media mail to be examined for "countless hours" to weed out "active ads." It's not necessary at all.

 

The reality is, they don't do much of that as it stands. I think, in the hundreds upon hundreds, if not into the thousands, of packages I've received in the last 20 years, that I've never had a single one shipped media mail which was rejected and upcharged. Maybe one. Lots and lots of packages STAMPED, but none actually opened and rejected/upcharged.

 

This.