by
Karl
Schumacher
Vice
President, Global Business Strategy and Acquisition
Pitney
Bowes Document Messaging Technologies
Mailers
considering an Internet billing option should try
to leverage their existing investment in 'legacy'-based
statement generating applications. Why? So they can
continue to serve their traditional paper-based customers
while they meet the emerging preference for electronic
billing cost-effectively. Otherwise, mailers risk
investing a huge sum in a new or duplicate capability
that may be underutilized for some time.
Mailers
can also minimize any upfront capital costs by utilizing
a service bureau format, which enables mailers to
offer an electronic billing option quickly and at
a fraction of the ongoing unit cost of processing
traditional, paper-based mail.
As
for choice, the biller direct and consolidation model
should be viewed as complementary capabilities, not
exclusionary options. One or the other or both can
be utilized. The real danger comes from delay. Debating
delivery models merely gives more nimble competitors
time to take action and gain an edge.
Additionally,
high volume mailers that distribute statements only
-- such as trade confirmations from brokerage firms
or statements confirming investments in 40l(k) plans
or mutual funds can still utilize electronic delivery
but without a payment capability. The benefit? They
respond to the growing consumer preference for faster
delivery and easier handling.
And,
of course, convenience must be king. Every aspect
of the digital service from enrolling on-line, to
distinguishing between the receipt of statements only
to the capability to both receive bills and make payments,
to actually authorizing payment should be easy for
consumers to implement.
Analyst
Reports