Hubbry Logo
E-COME-COMMain
Open search
E-COM
Community hub
E-COM
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
E-COM
E-COM
E-COM
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

E-COM, short for Electronic Computer Originated Mail, was a hybrid mail process used from 1982 to 1985 by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to print electronically originated mail, and deliver it in envelopes to customers within two days of transmission.

Description

[edit]

The E-COM service allowed customers to transmit messages of up to two pages from their own computers, via telecommunication lines, to one or more of 25 serving post offices (SPOs) located in the following cities: Atlanta, Boston, Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Nashville, New Orleans, New York, Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Richmond, St. Louis, San Antonio, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, D.C. After an electronic message was received by an SPO, it was processed and sorted by ZIP Code, then printed on letter-size bond paper, folded and sealed, in an envelope printed with a blue E-COM logo. In order to be eligible for the service, customers were required to send a minimum of 200 messages per transmission.[1][2][3][4][5]

History

[edit]

USPS began looking into electronic mail in 1977.[6] E-COM was originally proposed on September 8, 1978, and service was expected to begin by December of that year. The proposal was caught up in a two-year regulatory dispute, and a modified version of the E-COM service as recommended by the Postal Rate Commission was approved on August 15, 1980, by the Postal Service Board of Governors.[7]

E-COM services began on January 4, 1982, and the original rates were 26 cents for the first page plus 2 cents for the second page for each transmission. In addition, there was an annual fee of $50 for the service. During its inaugural year of service, 3.2 million E-COM messages were sent, and more than 600 customers submitted applications for the service. Federal law prohibits the USPS from subsidizing a mail class by overcharging the users of other mail classes; however, E-COM was heavily subsidized from its introduction. During its first year of operation, the USPS lost $5.25 per letter. The House Government Operations Committee indicated that "The Postal Service deliberately manipulates the release of information about E-COM in order to make E-COM appear to be more successful than it really is."[6][8]

On June 18-21, 1982, the US Congress’ Joint Subcommittee on Economic Goals and Intergovernmental policy, held a hearing on the future of mail delivery in the United States, and whether the US Postal Service should be prevented from competing with the numerous commercial electronic mail providers, then in operation.[9]

Subsequent to this, there were difficulties in securing approval for a competitive and profitable rate for the service,[1] and beginning in June 1984 the Postal Service started trying to sell the E-COM service to a private firm. Having not received offers that were financially attractive enough to be accepted, Postmaster General Paul Carlin notified the board of governors at the June 3, 1985, meeting that the postal service would request through the Postal Rate Commission the authority to close down the operation as soon as possible. The E-COM service was officially discontinued on September 2, 1985.[10]

Another service, INTELPOST,[11] the Postal Service's international electronic mail venture beginning in 1980 which provided a high-speed facsimile copy service between continents and was also shut down in the mid 1980s.[8]

Legacy

[edit]

The abbreviation E-COM resulted in Electronics journal publishing a headline in June 1979 reading “Postal Service pushes ahead with E-mail”. This is the first known usage of the term E-mail.[12][13]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

E-COM

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
E-COM, an acronym for Electronic Computer Originated Mail, was a short-lived hybrid mail service operated by the (USPS) from January 1982 to September 1985, enabling large-volume business users to transmit electronic messages to designated postal facilities for automated printing, enveloping, and delivery as first-class mail. Designed to bridge traditional postal delivery with emerging electronic data transmission technologies, the program targeted corporate mailers such as financial institutions and oil companies, allowing them to send high-volume statements and notices via leased telephone lines to USPS computers in cities like New York, , and . Despite initial optimism from postal leadership about securing a foothold in the , E-COM processed fewer than 10 million messages annually at its peak, far below projections, due to high costs, limited geographic coverage, and rapid obsolescence against alternatives like machines and private electronic mail systems. The initiative, which cost taxpayers approximately $40 million in development and operations, faced legal challenges from competitors who argued it infringed on private markets, ultimately leading to its termination amid declining usage and regulatory scrutiny.

Overview

Definition and Purpose

E-COM, or Electronic Computer Originated Mail, was a hybrid electronic-physical mail service developed and operated by the (USPS) from 1982 to 1985. It enabled large-scale business users, such as corporations and financial institutions, to transmit digital messages via dedicated telecommunications lines to designated USPS facilities in major cities including New York, , , and Upon receipt, the USPS printed these messages on standard paper, enveloped them, applied first-class postage, and integrated them into the regular postal delivery network for physical distribution to recipients. The system required a minimum volume of 200 pieces per mailing and supported only text-based content, excluding graphics or attachments, with transmission occurring during off-peak hours to leverage lower telecommunications costs. The primary purpose of E-COM was to position the USPS as a participant in the burgeoning field of electronic messaging, thereby safeguarding its statutory monopoly on first-class letter mail against encroachment by private-sector alternatives like services and early electronic mail providers. By facilitating the conversion of computer-generated data into tangible mail, the service aimed to streamline high-volume correspondence for enterprises—such as billing statements from oil companies or brokerage confirmations from firms—reducing manual and printing expenses while ensuring nationwide delivery reliability. USPS leadership, including William Bolger, viewed E-COM as a defensive to evolve with technological shifts, projecting it could capture a share of the projected $1 billion annual electronic mail market by the mid-1980s and generate revenue through handling fees of approximately 26 cents per piece, comparable to first-class rates. Proponents argued it extended obligations into digital realms, promoting equitable access to efficient communication for businesses reliant on postal infrastructure. Critics, including telecommunications firms and the private mail industry, contended that E-COM subsidized unfair by leveraging USPS's government-backed , potentially stifling in fully electronic alternatives. Despite regulatory approval from the Postal Rate Commission in following extensive hearings, the system's purpose was ultimately constrained by its hybrid nature, which presupposed the persistence of physical in an era when end-to-end digital transmission was gaining traction. E-COM's design reflected a causal understanding that electronic origination could optimize upstream processes but required postal delivery to fulfill legal and perceptual requirements for "mail," aligning with the Private Express Statutes that reserved certain communications to USPS.

Key Features and Requirements

E-COM, or Electronic Computer Originated Mail, was designed to facilitate the transmission of standardized electronic messages from business mailers' computers to recipients via physical postal delivery, bridging early electronic communication with traditional mail infrastructure. Messages were limited to a maximum of two pages, transmitted over telecommunication lines to one of 25 designated serving post offices across the , where they were automatically printed on letter-size , folded, enveloped with a distinctive E-COM , and entered into the mailstream sorted by . The system emphasized reliability in delivery, committing to a two-day service standard from transmission to receipt, which was consistently achieved during its operation from January 1982 to September 1985. Core operational features included to handle high-volume business communications, such as billing statements or notices from utilities and financial institutions, with electronic origination enabling faster preparation compared to manual typing or printing at the sender's end. Unlike fully digital systems emerging contemporaneously, E-COM required hybrid processing: senders formatted messages in a compatible electronic structure for USPS receipt, but final output remained tangible paper mail to ensure accessibility for recipients without electronic terminals. The service targeted large-scale mailers, including 1,046 certified participants by 1984, among them 528 communication carriers, reflecting its focus on institutional rather than individual use. Participation requirements mandated a minimum transmission of 200 messages per batch to qualify for service, alongside an annual of $50 per mailer, ensuring economic viability for USPS infrastructure investments. Technical specifications demanded compatibility with USPS telecommunication interfaces, with mailers responsible for generating messages in a printable format adhering to postal standards, though no proprietary protocols beyond sorting were imposed. began at 26 cents for the first page and 5 cents for the second in 1982, with proposed increases to 31 cents and 9 cents in 1983, underscoring the service's cost-recovery model tied to physical handling and delivery. These elements positioned E-COM as a regulated, volume-driven extension of postal monopoly services into electronic messaging, subject to oversight by bodies like the Postal Rate Commission.

Historical Development

Origins and Proposal

In the mid-1970s, the (USPS) faced growing concerns over the potential erosion of first-class mail volume due to emerging electronic communication technologies, with projections estimating that electronic fund transfers alone could divert up to 23% of such mail by 1985. Between 1969 and 1976, USPS commissioned 21 internal studies on electronic mail systems to explore adaptation strategies, reflecting an institutional recognition of the need to integrate with traditional postal services amid rapid technological shifts. The E-COM proposal originated within USPS in 1978, formally submitted to the Postal Rate Commission on September 8 as a new subclass of first-class mail designated "Electronic Computer Originated Mail." Spearheaded by the USPS Board of Governors and William Bolger, who described it as the "obvious next step" for the agency, the system envisioned businesses transmitting messages electronically via telecommunication lines to a central 1108 mainframe in Middletown, , for processing and distribution to 25 designated serving post offices nationwide. These messages—limited initially to two-page formats and requiring a minimum of 200 per transmission—would then be printed, enveloped with a distinctive blue E-COM logo, and delivered as hard-copy first-class mail, guaranteeing two-day service across the . The primary goals of the proposal were to establish USPS's foothold in the burgeoning electronic messaging sector and mitigate revenue losses from digital alternatives to physical , particularly for high-volume applications like billing and . Pricing was set at 26 cents for the first page and 5 cents for the second, plus a $50 annual participation fee, positioning E-COM as a subsidized hybrid service to compete with private-sector offerings while leveraging USPS's existing delivery infrastructure. This initiative marked an early, government-led attempt to bridge electronic transmission with tangible postal delivery, though it immediately encountered regulatory scrutiny over potential market distortions.

Regulatory Approval and Planning

The (USPS) formally proposed E-COM on September 8, 1978, when its Board of Governors filed a request with the Postal Rate Commission (PRC) to classify electronic computer-originated as a new subclass of first-class mail, enabling transmission via networks to postal facilities for printing, enveloping, and physical delivery. This initiative aimed to integrate USPS into emerging electronic messaging markets while leveraging its existing physical delivery infrastructure, with initial planning focused on contracting carriers to relay messages to designated serving post offices (SPOs). The PRC's review process, which lasted approximately 15 months, encountered significant opposition from entities, including electronic providers like Graphnet and industry groups such as ADAPSO, who argued that USPS entry into electronic services constituted unfair competition and violated antitrust principles by potentially foreclosing market opportunities. The U.S. Department of Justice raised concerns that the program might deter private innovation through perceived government favoritism, prompting scrutiny under antitrust laws. Additionally, the (FCC) influenced the proceedings through its policies on public message services, effectively requiring USPS to collaborate with carriers like for transmission, as E-COM evolved from services like Mailgram. The PRC ultimately approved E-COM with restrictive conditions, including prohibitions on bundling with other services and rate structures designed to ensure cost recovery, though these delayed full implementation. Planning for E-COM encompassed technical and operational preparations, including the selection of 25 SPOs in major metropolitan areas—such as New York, , and —for high-speed printing and sorting facilities equipped to handle up to thousands of messages daily. USPS contracted with carriers including ITT, RCA, and to establish a national telecommunications network for message relay, with transmission protocols standardized to convert digital inputs into printable formats compliant with postal handling standards. These efforts involved feasibility assessments and phased rollout planning, culminating in experimental operations by early 1982 after judicial affirmation of USPS management authority in a 1981 appellate decision overturning certain PRC-imposed limitations. Despite approvals, ongoing rate adjustments—such as a 1983 proposal for a 31-cent per-message rate—required further PRC oversight to address initial underutilization and cost overruns.

Technical Implementation

System Architecture

The E-COM system architecture integrated electronic data transmission with traditional postal printing and delivery processes, enabling high-volume business mailers to submit messages electronically for physical output. It featured a centralized mainframe for initial processing connected to 25 serving post offices (SPOs) via a leased , with mailers interfacing through public data networks or direct lines. The system supported both (accounting for approximately 60% of inputs) and magnetic tape submissions (40%), requiring minimum batches of 200 messages per transmission to a single SPO. Mailers connected to the system using standard protocols, including character-oriented standards such as ANSI X3.28 Bisynchronous and bit-oriented protocols like ANSI X3.66 ADCCP or HDLC, with support for CCITT X.25 packet-switching networks. Interfaces adhered to OSI Layer 1 specifications via EIA RS-232-C or for (DTE) to (DCE). Messages, limited to two pages, were transmitted from customer computers to a central 1108 mainframe located in Middletown, , which handled routing based on destination ZIP codes before forwarding via the network to the nearest SPO among the 25 sites, including , , , , New York, and . At each SPO, equipped with specialized computers and printing hardware implemented by RCA under contract, incoming data underwent sorting, printing on letter-size bond paper, folding, enveloping with a distinctive E-COM , and sealing for insertion into the first-class mailstream. The SPOs linked back to a Management Operations Center (MOC) through leased digital circuits for oversight and coordination, ensuring two-day delivery nationwide within the . This hybrid design prioritized reliability and maintainability, as emphasized in RCA's to meet USPS criteria, though it remained constrained by 1980s telecommunications without advanced or real-time end-to-end digital delivery.

Message Processing and Delivery

The E-COM system enabled business mailers to transmit electronic messages via telecommunication lines directly to one of 25 designated serving post offices (SPOs) across the , such as those in , , , and New York. These transmissions required a minimum of 200 messages per batch and supported formats including single-address messages, common-text messages for multiple recipients with identical content, and text-insertion messages for personalized variable data. Senders utilized compatible terminals like TTY devices or 2780/3780 models, often routing through certified carriers due to regulatory restrictions barring USPS from directly managing transmission networks. Messages were limited to two pages, with up to 41 lines on the first page and 56 on the second, excluding custom fonts, letterheads, or attachments to standardize processing. Upon receipt at an SPO, messages were handled by Sperry Rand Univac 1108 computer systems, which performed initial validation and ZIP code-based sorting to route them to the appropriate local delivery facility. In some configurations, preliminary processing occurred at a central UNIVAC 1108 mainframe in , before distribution via leased lines to the SPOs, ensuring efficient regional handling. The system integrated electronic data reception with traditional postal operations, transforming digital inputs into physical mail without full end-to-end computer-to-computer exchange. Printed output occurred at the receiving SPO using high-volume printers connected to the systems, producing messages on standard letter-size . Postal staff then folded the sheets, inserted them into pre-printed envelopes bearing the blue E-COM , and sealed them for entry into the first-class mailstream. This hybrid approach—combining electronic transmission, automated sorting, on-site , and manual enveloping—facilitated guaranteed delivery within two days to any address in the 48 contiguous states, a standard consistently achieved during the service's operation from to 1985. Volumes peaked at 23 million messages in 1984, demonstrating scalability within the SPO network despite limited adoption.

Operation and Adoption

Launch and Initial Rollout

The United States Postal Service (USPS) launched E-COM, or Electronic Computer Originated Mail, on January 4, 1982, following approval from the Postal Rate Commission as a subclass of first-class mail. The service enabled large business mailers to transmit electronic messages via existing telecommunications networks—such as those operated by Western Union, ITT, and RCA—to USPS electronic message distribution facilities in 10 major cities, including New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. At these facilities, messages were printed on high-speed laser printers, automatically inserted into envelopes, postmarked, and delivered via standard first-class mail service the following day. Pricing began at 26 cents per message for volumes under 100,000 monthly, with discounts for higher volumes, positioning it as a premium option over the standard 20-cent first-class stamp to cover electronic handling costs. Initial rollout was restricted to certified large-volume business customers, with only 16 companies approved in the first months, reflecting regulatory conditions imposed by the Postal Rate Commission to limit scope and ensure postal monopoly compliance. Western Union accounted for approximately 70 percent of early message volume, underscoring reliance on a few dominant participants amid limited network interoperability and certification hurdles. USPS processing centers handled messages up to 1,000 characters, formatted for standard 8.5-by-11-inch paper, with no provision for attachments or end-to-end electronic delivery, as mandated to preserve physical mail integrity. In its first year, E-COM processed 3.2 million messages, with over 600 customer applications submitted, though actual usage remained modest due to onboarding delays and competition from private electronic messaging services. Expansion efforts included marketing to corporations for and statements, but adoption was hampered by the service's hybrid nature—requiring physical delivery—and higher per-unit costs compared to pure electronic alternatives emerging at the time. By mid-1982, certified participants grew slowly, with USPS reporting incremental volume increases tied to pilot integrations with major networks, yet overall rollout fell short of projections for rapid business uptake.

Usage Statistics and Customer Engagement

In its inaugural year of operation in 1982, E-COM processed 3.2 million messages, primarily from over 600 business customers focused on high-volume applications such as billing statements and corporate correspondence. By fiscal year 1983, message volume rose to 15.3 million, reflecting modest growth among select large-scale users like financial institutions and oil companies that leveraged the system for cost-effective printed delivery of electronic-originated documents. However, this expansion masked underlying limitations in broader adoption, as approximately half to three-quarters of the second year's volume originated from just two major customers, indicating heavy reliance on a narrow base rather than diversified engagement. Customer participation centered on enterprise-level mailers seeking to integrate electronic data processing with traditional postal delivery, but overall engagement proved insufficient to sustain the service. Monthly averages, such as around 172,000 messages in July , underscored sporadic rather than consistent utilization, with many potential users opting for emerging private-sector electronic messaging alternatives that avoided physical and delivery costs. The system's design, which required messages to be transmitted to USPS facilities for and enveloping before physical mailing, limited appeal to non-bulk senders and failed to foster repeat or expanded usage beyond initial trials by corporations like Merrill Lynch and Shell Oil. By 1985, cumulative low volumes and stagnant customer acquisition led to termination, as the service generated revenues far below projections—originally anticipating billions of messages annually but achieving only tens of millions over its lifespan. This outcome highlighted challenges in engaging customers amid rapid technological shifts toward fully digital transmission, rendering E-COM's hybrid model obsolete despite regulatory approvals and investments exceeding $40 million.

Controversies and Criticisms

The Postal Service's (USPS) E-COM program encountered significant regulatory hurdles from the Postal Rate Commission (PRC), which reviewed the proposal filed on September 8, 1978, for 15 months before approving a modified version in December 1979. The PRC imposed strict conditions, including prohibiting USPS from building its own and requiring reliance on private carriers for message transmission, while classifying E-COM as an experimental service limited to a trial period ending October 1, 1983, with mandates for self-sufficiency without cross-subsidies from first-class mail revenues. Initial rates were set at 26 cents for the first page and 5 cents for additional pages, higher than the proposed 15 cents, due to these restrictions, which increased operational costs by approximately 60 percent. The (FCC) asserted jurisdiction over E-COM through its 1979 Graphnet ruling, designating USPS as a in resale and extending oversight to the physical delivery component to mitigate anti-competitive risks. This decision stemmed from concerns that USPS's statutory monopoly on letter mail, combined with tax-exempt status, could unfairly disadvantage private electronic messaging providers, prompting telecom firms like and Graphnet to challenge the program as a potential extension of postal dominance into electronic communications. Legal ambiguity persisted regarding the scope of FCC authority over hybrid electronic-physical services, leading to delays and structural redesigns that barred USPS from integrating end-to-end electronic networks. Antitrust scrutiny from the Department of Justice further complicated approval, with officials arguing that E-COM risked anticompetitive practices by leveraging USPS's infrastructure and revenue streams, potentially misleading customers about long-term viability. These concerns were partially addressed when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld E-COM's legality on April 21, 1982, allowing launch on January 4, 1982. However, ongoing debates over prohibited subsidies—critics, including the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission, contended that below-market pricing violated the Postal Reorganization Act by implicitly drawing on monopoly profits—intensified opposition from private sector entities and mailer groups like the Coalition of Private United Messengers, who feared rate hikes for traditional mail. Subsequent PRC reviews exacerbated challenges; in 1984, the commission demanded accelerated cost recovery by 1985, proposing rate increases to 52 cents for the first page and 15 cents for additional pages (later adjusted to 49 cents and 14 cents), which the USPS Board of Governors rejected, contributing to termination on September 3, 1985. These regulatory impositions, rooted in statutory limits on USPS's commercial expansion, underscored broader tensions between postal mandates and private market competition, with incumbents leveraging FCC and judicial processes to constrain the program's scope.

Economic Subsidies and Efficiency Issues

The USPS's E-COM service faced significant criticism for potential cross-subsidization, where revenues from its legal monopoly on first-class mail would fund below-cost to undercut private electronic messaging competitors, in violation of the of 1970, which prohibits such transfers between mail classes. Competitors including and Graphnet argued that the USPS's tax-exempt status and access to monopoly profits enabled , distorting the hybrid mail market and stifling private innovation. The Postal Rate Commission (PRC), tasked with oversight, mandated that E-COM operate on a self-supporting basis without cross-subsidies from traditional mail revenues, but skeptics contended this safeguard was inadequate given the USPS's integrated financial structure. Despite these restrictions, E-COM proved economically inefficient, incurring substantial losses that strained USPS resources. In its first year of operation in 1982, the service charged 26 cents per single-page letter but recorded losses of $5.25 per letter due to high fixed costs and underutilized . By fiscal year 1983, volumes reached only 15.3 million messages against projections of 50 million, with per-letter losses reduced to $1.25 amid continued low adoption. Efficiency was further hampered by operational limitations, including minimum order quantities of 200 messages, delivery to only 25 initial cities, and frequent delays exceeding two days despite electronic transmission, alongside subpar print quality that deterred customers. In response to mounting deficits, the PRC approved rate hikes in 1984, doubling the base price to 52 cents per page—rendering E-COM 32 cents more expensive than standard first-class mail and accelerating its decline. These adjustments underscored the service's failure to achieve , as actual weekly volumes hovered at 15,000 letters—mere 3% of the anticipated 400,000—highlighting flawed demand forecasts and an uncompetitive model reliant on bulk business users who preferred private alternatives. The program's termination in 1985 stemmed directly from these fiscal shortfalls, with no private buyers emerging for the $40 million in facilities and , affirming critics' views of inherent inefficiencies in government-led forays into electronic communications.

Opposition from Private Sector

Private sector opposition to the E-COM system primarily emanated from established and electronic messaging firms, which viewed the Postal Service's (USPS) entry into electronic mail as an anticompetitive incursion subsidized by taxpayer funds and bolstered by the USPS's statutory monopoly on physical delivery. Companies such as Graphnet Systems (a subsidiary), ITT World Communications, Telenet Communications, and Dialcom argued that E-COM blurred the lines between postal monopoly services and private-sector electronic transmission networks, potentially undercutting market-driven innovation in digital communications. These firms contended that USPS's below-cost pricing—estimated at rates as low as $0.26 per message for high-volume users—constituted predatory practices that could drive private competitors out of business, especially since E-COM leveraged USPS infrastructure without equivalent capital risks borne by private entities. Key actions by private opponents included formal complaints and legal challenges filed as early as 1979. Graphnet initiated a petition before the (FCC) in Docket No. 79-6, seeking a declaratory ruling that E-COM violated regulations by allowing USPS to transmit electronic messages without obtaining necessary carrier licenses or competing on equal terms. This effort, supported by other carriers like Telenet, highlighted concerns that E-COM's hybrid model—receiving digital inputs via private telecom lines but delivering printed hard copies—effectively subsidized USPS expansion into non-postal domains, contravening the Private Express Statutes that reserved first-class mail to the government while permitting private electronic alternatives. The telecom industry was nearly unanimous in its resistance, forming coalitions to lobby and regulatory bodies, asserting that USPS's involvement distorted market incentives and ignored the rapid evolution of fully electronic systems unburdened by and physical delivery costs. The (FTC) amplified private-sector critiques in October 1983, warning that E-COM's "unrealistic" pricing failed to cover full costs and risked inducing "private, competitive firms to exit the market," thereby harming long-term in messaging services. Industry executives, such as Graphnet Stanley Weinstein, publicly denounced E-COM as both "unlawful" and "unworkable" due to technical limitations like lack of customization and two-day delivery , which paled against private networks' capabilities. Despite these challenges, E-COM launched on January 4, 1982, but opposition contributed to its tepid adoption, with only 1,500 customers and fewer than 2 million messages processed in the first year, far below projections of 100 million. This resistance underscored broader tensions between government postal incumbency and nascent private digital markets, with opponents emphasizing that USPS's $40 million investment in E-COM hardware and software represented inefficient public expenditure rather than genuine service enhancement. Private firms' advocacy influenced regulatory scrutiny, including joint opposition from the Departments of and , which echoed antitrust concerns over USPS's potential to monopolize hybrid mail-electronic hybrids. Ultimately, the sustained private-sector pushback, combined with operational underperformance, factored into E-COM's suspension in July 1985 after accumulating losses exceeding $26 million annually by 1983.

Termination and Legacy

Shutdown Reasons and Privatization Efforts

The E-COM service, launched in 1982, was terminated in early 1985 primarily due to chronically low adoption rates, escalating financial losses, and technical shortcomings that undermined its competitiveness. Initial projections anticipated volumes of up to 400,000 messages per week, but actual usage peaked at around 15,000 per week, with only 15 million letters processed in 1983 against an expected 50 million. The system charged customers 26 cents per letter but incurred costs of $5.25 per letter in its first year, dropping to $1.25 by 1983 amid ongoing subsidies that failed to achieve viability. Delivery delays, often exceeding several days, and substandard print quality further deterred users, as private alternatives offered faster and higher-fidelity electronic messaging without postal intermediation. Regulatory and competitive pressures exacerbated these operational failures. Private telecommunications firms, including major carriers, vigorously opposed E-COM's expansion through and legal challenges, arguing it encroached on their markets and distorted via USPS's government-backed infrastructure. The U.S. Department of Justice raised antitrust concerns, warning that the program's subsidies could mislead customers into assuming long-term affordability, potentially stifling private innovation in electronic mail. These factors, combined with broader from —evidenced in House Government Operations Committee reports criticizing USPS's handling of E-COM data—contributed to a environment hostile to its continuation. Privatization efforts emerged as a last-ditch measure to salvage the program, with USPS leadership announcing in late a search for a private buyer to offload what was internally termed an "albatross" draining resources. Despite overtures to potential corporate acquirers, no viable bids materialized, reflecting the service's unattractiveness amid its demonstrated unprofitability and obsolescence relative to emerging private-sector technologies like direct digital transmission. The absence of a buyer led to full shutdown by March 1985, with USPS absorbing the accumulated losses and redirecting focus away from electronic mail ventures. This outcome underscored the challenges of entry into rapidly evolving private markets, where incumbent telecom opposition and market dynamics favored unsubsidized competitors.

Long-Term Impact and Lessons Learned

The discontinuation of E-COM on September 3, 1985, following low adoption volumes of 3.2 million messages in its inaugural year and 15.3 million in 1983, exerted minimal influence on the broader of electronic . Private telecommunications providers, unencumbered by postal regulations, accelerated fully digital transmission protocols, rendering hybrid print-electronic models obsolete as internet-based proliferated from the late onward. The service's operational constraints, including a mandated two-day delivery window only marginally faster than standard first-class , failed to capture sustained interest despite initial applications from over 600 customers. E-COM's legacy within the USPS centered on reinforcing institutional boundaries, with regulators classifying electronic messaging as rather than postal matter, thereby curtailing future expansions into digital realms. This precedent contributed to the short-lived nature of subsequent initiatives, such as the 1990s Post Electronic Courier Service, which similarly dissolved amid analogous regulatory and market hurdles. The program's estimated $40 million expenditure, incurred primarily through infrastructure and experimental operations, provided no recoverable financial or infrastructural assets, exemplifying sunk costs in mismatched public ventures. Principal lessons derived from E-COM's termination highlight the potency of lobbying and regulatory interventions in derailing state-sponsored technological adaptations. Telecommunications incumbents, including and Graphnet, secured Postal Rate Commission and FCC rulings that prohibited USPS network development and cross-subsidies from traditional revenues, culminating in rate hikes from 26 cents to 52 cents per page by that eroded competitiveness. These constraints exposed systemic frictions for monopoly-oriented entities entering dynamic markets, where bureaucratic and compliance cycles hinder agility against profit-motivated innovators. More broadly, E-COM underscored causal dynamics wherein interest group pressures and jurisdictional turf battles—rather than inherent technological inferiority—often dictate outcomes in hybrid public-private domains. The failure affirmed the inefficiencies of mandating experimental status without long-term viability assurances, prompting USPS recalibration toward core obligations amid declining first-class volumes. Empirical evidence from the program's trajectory suggests that unsubsidized forays into competitive communications risk amplifying fiscal burdens without commensurate service advancements.

References

  1. https://about.usps.com/who/profile/history/delivering-mail.htm
  2. https://www.technologyreview.com/2002/07/29/40870/how-the-postman-almost-owned-e-mail/
  3. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/1829/981
  4. https://buttondown.com/blog/the-e-com-story
  5. https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-usps-email/
  6. https://www.nalc.org/news/the-postal-record/2023/may-2023/document/E-COM.pdf
  7. https://about.usps.com/who/profile/history/pdf/ecom.pdf
  8. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-95shrg34911/pdf/CHRG-95shrg34911.pdf
  9. https://fedtechmagazine.com/article/2013/09/postal-services-30-year-relationship-email
  10. https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/TN/nbstechnicalnote1104.pdf
  11. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/654/108/260309/
  12. https://its.ntia.gov/publications/download/81-73_ocr.pdf
  13. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/764328/
  14. https://www.nytimes.com/1982/03/19/business/electronic-mail-s-slow-start.html
  15. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/03/29/Let-your-computer-do-the-mailing-says-Post-OfficeNEWLNIntroduces-Electronic-Computer-Originated-Mail/2429386226000/
  16. https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/premature-death-electronic-mail-united-states-postal-services-e-com-program-1978-1985
  17. https://www.princeton.edu/~ota//disk3/1982/8214/821404.PDF
  18. https://ghostsofdc.org/2012/06/26/postal-service-email-ecom/
  19. https://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/10/business/electronic-mail-controversy.html
  20. https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa047.pdf
  21. https://www.nytimes.com/1981/12/31/business/electronic-mail-faces-a-delay.html
  22. https://www.nytimes.com/1981/12/28/business/post-office-s-move-into-electronic-mail.html
  23. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1983/12/04/critics-want-to-stamp-out-e-com-mail/7aed5007-2923-4151-9dbe-d5d5697a1029/
  24. https://vipparcel.com/blog/usps_history_and_images
  25. https://nalc.org/news/the-postal-record/2023/may-2023/document/E-COM.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.