So the USPS is getting new trucks and they look like ducks and maybe that sucks… or maybe it wucks. Like “works,” if a duck said it. Just give me this one please.
Anyway.
I don’t know how mean I can be here – there has to be something said for objective journalistic integrity – but I have a feeling most people are going to have a rather sarcastic reaction to the new design. I’m not so sure I can blame them – it has a kind of stubby little nose with a shortened hood and a boxy frame and super tall windshield, which gives the wheels a disproportionately large look compared to the rest of the silhouette. It’s sort of like a Nissan Cube but less millennial cool, which A) is discontinued (so maybe not so cool), and B) is not the car that had those giant hiphop hamsters running around, but I’m still going to link to it anyway.
Elon Musk must be breathing a sigh of relief right now.
The contract was awarded to Oshkosh Defense (which I was thrilled to find out is NOT the adorable kid’s clothing company, even though I personally think that would be hilarious if there was a factory making overalls for tiny humans alongside tactical defense trucks) and officially announced on February 23rd, 2021 to the tune of $482 million. Seriously though, someone is going to mix those up for the rest of all time and eternity; I’d never not think about my own baby pictures if some contractor from Oshkosh Defense showed up.
The release mentions that, “The historic investment is part of a soon-to-be-released plan the Postal Service has developed to transform its financial performance and customer service over the next 10 years through significant investments in people, technology and infrastructure as it seeks to become the preferred delivery service provider for the American public.” It’s called the NGDV – Next Generation Delivery Vehicle, which I happen to adore, and will pronounce as Nugduv, and you can’t stop me anyway. The old one was called the Grumman, by the way.
Some credit this as a radical change, and keeping in mind that radical doesn’t necessarily denote positive or negative, it seems like the perfect word to use here. Then there are those who correctly identify “a mixed bag of responses,” sort of like when you get a bag of candy at Halloween that has at least one thing no one likes. Some call it strange, while others defend it as something every new big vehicle should look like (this is where – as one of many – I found it called a “duck” which oh man do I love, quack quack).
We can also hit up the ever fair public opinion of Twitter, because why wouldn’t we?
This is how I would draw a car. That is not a plus for this design
I really can’t get over that last one. But I mean, whoa. That’s quite the spectrum. There’s less disagreement on pizza toppings I think. But luckily I think we’re safe there – Domino’s makes people drive their personal cars.
Taking a step back and putting snide commentary away for a moment, there’s some areas that should be discussed. First – and what should probably be obvious – there was a laundry list of requirements and restrictions from the USPS, which made Nir Kahn – design director from custom carmaker Plasan – offer up his own tweets that give some insight on dimensions and design:
I was involved in an early proposal for the USPS truck so I know the requirements well. They pretty much dictated the proportions – this package sketch shows that to meet the ergonomic and size requirements, there wasn’t much freedom 1/2 #USPS pic.twitter.com/Fk35g98Z83
Kahn mentions that “there wasn’t much freedom,” but also that “it could have looked much better,” and this sort of underlines the entire discussion I think – there were goals in place, and possibly some more aesthetically pleasing ways to meet them, but the constraints won out and drove (hehe) the design more than style did.
Certainly, there are other concerns – the ability for USPS drivers to reach a mailbox while seated is paramount. Others have pointed out that this design – with its large windshield and shortened front – should help with safety around small children (all the better if they are wearing Oshkosh B’gosh, because that implies they are tiny and may not be at all concerned with the dangers of streets). The open field-of-vision will aid in making sure drivers can navigate places that might be frequented by any number of pedestrians, so that’s a plus.
Further, if you get struck by one of these, you’ll basically “just” get kneecapped versus taking it square to the torso. The duck article is the one making this call, and I think there’s some merit there (though it makes me question how the USPS fleet is going to do against the SUVs and big trucks out in the wild). It then goes on to point out that this design has more cargo space, fitting into the idea of “rightsizing,” where the form and function of the vehicle meet in a way that is downsized, but still punches above its weight.
“From smaller fire engines to nimbler garbage trucks, making vehicles better scaled to urban tasks can make a huge difference, not only for keeping other cars moving on narrow streets, but also to ensure that humans on those same streets can access the bike lanes, sidewalks, and curb cuts they need to get around.”
I didn’t try too hard to find stats on crashes in mail trucks, but seems like something that should be addressed.
Maybe the biggest point here is that we sort of have to get new trucks – they are outliving their 24 year expectancy and catching on fire. On FIRE. I mean a mail truck might be the worst place for a fire. I’m not even sure I can’t think up a better answer… Ok maybe toilets would be worse.
The new vehicles can be either petrol or electric powered, have 360 cameras, airbags, and automatic braking. Oh, and air conditioning, which the old vehicles did not have. So yes, literally the worst place to have a fire. But due to the taller vehicles, someone can stand in them now! So escape is even easier! Hooray!
A series of delays pushed back the introduction of new vehicles from their 2018 projected date, with poor initial prototypes and the pandemic being major setbacks. Aggressive bidding led to extended deadlines, which had been narrowed down to a small list of candidates that included Workhorse (who unfortunately suffered a large stock plunge following the announcement). It’s been in the works for at least six years.
In the end, I don’t think we can discount all the advantages here – more efficient vehicles that are safer and provide drivers with modern amenities. That’s a LOT of good. I think once the initial goofy shock is over, the design will be accepted. Everyone thought Nintendo’s Wii was a hilarious name (still pretty much is regardless of being in the public book of acceptable nomenclature), and Cybertruck sales are brisk, so I think we can set a lot of this aside. The Edsel these are not.
So hey, new USPS vehicles in 2023, like an exceedingly late birthday present. All I want to see is a bunch of baby ducks following one of them around oh please let that happen. The USPS kind of has an identity crisis in the modern era, so maybe a funny little cute silly boxmobile is just the right way to get some attention.
Missy Caulk
April 8, 2008 at 6:09 am
Teresa, I have to keep my emotions out of it too. I have potential clients telling me after I show them the market value, “Well we’ll just sell short?”
Is the the big catch all?
Last time, both had excellent jobs and were transferred out of state, good investments. This freaks me out that so many are reading the papers and think that is a way to go and don’t care about credit.
I told them to go back and renegotiate with their employers, for more benefits or to make them whole.
Kevin Sharkey - IBR Broker
April 8, 2008 at 7:30 am
Teresa,
Great post as usual. There are many opportunities out there to choose from, especially for an agent like yourself. I agree with your whole idea of being more selective in who you choose to work with. Ultimately, you will generate more revenue because of being more selective.
There are other agents who do not have as many options as you, and are more likely to “chase leads”. Others get emotionally involved and will reduce their fees to help out. As a broker, I am conflicted by some of this activity. On one hand, there will probably not be a closing for my bleeding heart agent. On the other hand, an agent will get more experience, an opportunity to work with marketing a home in a down market and maybe someday have enough experience so they can become more selective in who they work with.
I think this may just be part of the whole growth cycle of an agent. The better the agent becomes, the sooner they can take control of their business. Clearly, you are at that point. Thanks again for the great words.
P.S. I still have the other red mitten. It wants to join its mate.
Bill Lublin
April 8, 2008 at 8:07 am
Teresa: Great post- and what courage to address an issue that so many agents keep in the closet- Its always better to take a listing that will sell then just to take a listing- and if its needed, its better to be the second agent when the listing doesn;t sell. As far as fees go, if you can;t negotiate for the fee to feed your family, how well can you negotiate on behalf of the seller when it comes time to actually negotiate the sale of the property? You have the skills and knowledge that the consumer needs, and you are well worth the cost of that service 🙂
Kristal Kraft
April 8, 2008 at 8:18 am
Wise advice T. The last time we had a bad market I get very good at asking people (with a straight face), “How much money can you afford to bring to closing?”
Eventually they got the message after hearing it from agent after agent. Seller’s realized we weren’t miracle workers and to sell their home it would take money out of their pocket.
Once agents realize this is the way to make it happen for the seller, the market will turn around. Or at least they will be able to sell their home and move on to the next destination.
The good news is, sometimes what they perceive to lose on the selling end them may gain on the buying end. It may not be as bad as it looks.
Of course if the homeowner doesn’t have to sell right now, they shouldn’t. This too shall pass. Really!
Teresa Boardman
April 8, 2008 at 8:30 am
KK – I often question sellers on how badly they “have to sell” and advise against it if they are upside down or close to it.
Bill – I learned that line in real estate school and never use it. I just know that to stay in business I need to make a profit and that my time and experience is worth money and sold to people who will pay for it.
Kevin – loved the mitten! Will call, my right hand is getting cold.
Missy – hate the idea of a short sale for people who just want another house. i am seeing agents in my market encouraging it. I won’t.
Greg Cremia
April 8, 2008 at 9:20 am
Over the past 2 years I have turned down more listings than I accepted. There is a wall right next to my desk that I can bang my head against if I ever feel the need to.
Andy Kaufman
April 8, 2008 at 11:29 am
Learning how to say “no” is a valuable skill and one that I’m still perfecting.
I also spent a good portion of last year caught in non-dollar productive activities that drained me mentally, physically and financially, but I feel that it’s almost a rite of passage that one needs to go through to in order to learn the lesson first hand.
The challenge lies in that it’s a lot easier to say no when you’re drowning in business and are forced to pick and choose rather than when you’re sitting around the office most of the day and working with that ‘on the fence’ buyer or seller that will happily devour your time & energy if you allow it, just for ‘experience’
I’ve learned a few lessons from those clients. Most notably how to identify and either incubate or steer clear.
Vicki Moore
April 8, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Thanks for reaffirming the position I took recently. A close friend told me of a neighbor who wanted to list their house for far above its value. They gave me all of the details, including that the seller didn’t care if it took over a year to get her price. It became quite a conversation. I told them that I was in the business of selling houses, not listing them, how much it would cost me to retain a high-end listing for over a year and that the likelihood is that by then both the seller and I would be sick of each other and I wouldn’t make the sale anyway. They had arguments for every position that I took and I’m sure that the seller would have too. However, it’s my business. I’m the one taking the risk. I have to choose where to put my time, money and efforts.
Teresa Boardman
April 8, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Andy – I have said no when business is bad and it is hard to do but I remind myself that the time that I would have been working on something that is not going to generate revenue could be spent making money. I am not in the business to show houses or to list them, if I want to make money I need to sell them. I am willing to work hard and market the hell out of each and every listing but I am not willing to work with sellers who will not cooperate for any reason.
Vicki – the more you say no, the easier it gets.
ines
April 8, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I’ve never had a problem saying “no” – now Rick…..that’s a different problem (I know that’s mean). Rick and I sat down today to discuss which listings we are not renewing – it’s important to know where you are spinning your wheels and where you are getting results. It’s also important to identify which customers you work well for and who really appreciates your expertise.
Mike Farmer
April 8, 2008 at 3:13 pm
I have about four in the wings now I’ve convinced to wait to sell. They are all making improvements to their homes waiting until the market is more favorable.
Teresa Boardman
April 8, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Ines – I don’t renew them all. 🙂
Mike – I hope yu gave them some chocolate so they will remember you and list with you. 🙂
Matthew Rathbun
April 8, 2008 at 8:10 pm
T,
This is one of the most important mindsets that an agent can have in this market. You’ve done a great job of using your experience to help other agents. That’s one of your most endearing qualities. I really appreciate your openness and willingness to share.
The concept of having a business plan and only taking on those clients who fit into that plan is a great risk mitigation tool. It all starts with being determined to say “no” if you the client isn’t realistic and you aren’t a good fit.
Teresa Boardman
April 9, 2008 at 6:20 am
Mathew – you bring up another point. The “good fit” thing is why I sometimes say no to buyers. A personality quirk of mine but I have to feel comfortable with the people I work with. I spend a lot of time with my buyers and do a lot of hand holding as many are moving from other states or are first time buyers. If I don’t trust them or feel like they don’t trust me, I just can’t do a good job so I end up interviewing buyers after they get done interviewing me.