BoSacks Readers Speak Out: An Important Correction on "Print Ads with Money-Back Guarantee" & More
RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Major Publishers Bet on Print Ads with Money-Back Guarantee
Thanks for sharing this article with your massive distribution list! We all appreciate your ongoing support of magazine media. Just wanted to make one clarification. We don't set a minimum ad spend threshold but in order to be eligible for the Industry Sales Guarantee, an advertiser must reach a GRP threshold of 150 Adults 18+ GRPs. On average, the Sales Guarantee programs we've conducted at Meredith are based on a spend somewhere between $1-$2 million over 12 months for print campaign - nowhere near the $10 million ad buy you mention as the requirement (although we wouldn't say no to that!). Thanks again for your interest in this exciting new MPA initiative (and thanks for coming to the AMMC breakout session!). (Submitted by Britta Cleveland | Senior Vice President, Research Solutions)
RE: Hearst & Condé Joint Venture Seeks More Publishers // David Carey Outlines Plans Bo, As a former publisher, National Distributor and currently a circulation consultant I find it amusing that this merger is going to sell services to the publishers they have damaged over the years.
Going back as far as the 1980's the Hearst Group (then I.C.D.) announced at an ACIDA wholesaler meeting that they sold a supermarket cross merchandising program, possibly the first in the industry that generated over $10 million in advertising revenues through their newsstand program. Immediately after that magazine wholesalers, then 800, began asking magazine publishers for additional discounts to share in the advertising bounty newsstand distribution generated. However magazines like Doll Reader or Vegetarian Times had no such advertising revenues.
Then at another wholesaler meeting Time Distribution Services announced that checkout publishers believe that if a magazine could not afford to be at the checkout, it should stop cluttering newsstand.
When the MPA (now Association of Magazine Media) negotiated new postal rates a few years back, small publishers with low subscriber files were thrown under the bus on the sliding scale. The large publishers, the primary members of MPA at the time, created a sliding scale that penalized the small publisher, favoring the larger publisher with inflated rate bases due to low cost subscription rates.
When Magnet reports quarterly performance analysis the checkout publishers are the ones wit the double digit hits. Specialty and niche publishers are successfully working to build readers on the newsstand, and not subscriber bases.
As an independent circulation consultant I do find this move to help offset costs at the expense of the smaller publisher to be threatening to me, and to the industry because they have shown little or no interest in the growth of smaller publications. (Submitted by a circulation consultant)
RE: Hearst & Condé Joint Venture Seeks More Publishers // David Carey Outlines Plans Bob, I've worked in both the Prod and Circ Depts (albeit a long time ago). Based on my experience I think the combined Production concept could work fairly well. But for Circ it's a completely different story.
For circ to function well it must be in close contact and coordination with the advertising, editorial and now digital sides of the business. Plus, in a properly functioning publishing organizations it is critical for Circ to maintain good communication with Management. This is particularly critical in today's environment because, unfortunately, publishing management (across the industry) has increasingly become circ-phobic. If Circ is relegated to a "staff" function its performance is bound to wither. It will reduce the capability to attract good people (Do circ people want to work for PubWorx or is it nicer to have Hearst or Conde on their resume?). Finally, outsourcing the circ function will almost certainly reduce creativity and ultimately circ profitability. Moving the circ function to an outside company, I believe, will prove penny-wise and pound foolish for both Hearst and Conde. (Submitted by a circulation consultant)
Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Time Inc. & The Passing Out of Corporate Culture Cards Bo, Thanks for the shout-out. The research I presented at FIPP/Toronto reflected best practices in culture change from interviews with CEOs, CDOs and CCOs in 14 magazine media companies in 7 countries. I've presented it several times since to publishing executives worldwide at conferences and individual client seminars. It's really struck a chord and I'm now engaged in a number of culture change programs.
Culture change is not an option. It's essential for survival, for leveling the playing field vs. digital natives competing for eyeballs and revenues. I applaud the bold initiatives that Joe Ripp and his team have taken. They have released much energy and entropy formerly trapped in the organization by the obsolete wall of Church/State separation and the verticality of their historic 1271 home. They've also recruited and empowered a new generation of millennials who represent their audience and their future. They're being applauded for living the vision -- and their actions speak louder than words.
I admire the intent of "One Time Inc." Culture Cards and look forward to seeing how their words will hold up. I would also have liked Customers to be more specifically called out. Other of my culture change leaders have taken different approaches to reinforcing change. In particular, I admire the power and simplicity of Hearst's "Months to Moments" mantra, inasmuch as it brilliantly captures in one phrase the non-negotiability of change in every moment of a 24/7 business model. Another, Axel Springer has zeroed in on changing specific behaviors.
Overall, I'm happy to see the growing self-confidence of the industry, as demonstrated both at FIPP in Toronto and more recently at AMMC in New York. While there is clearly no silver bullet and an autonomous industry model is unlikely to reappear, the magazine media industry is recognizing its sustainable strengths and the potential of the integrated multiplatform model, properly executed and supported by a vibrant corporate culture. (Submitted by Peter A. Kreisky - Media Industry Strategist and Senior Advisor)
Re: After 20 Years, David Granger Is Stepping Down as Esquire's Editor in Chief Bo . . . . Our world is overflowing with "incredible" happenings. So rarely does anything I hear each morning cause me to suddenly stop then be smothered with thoughtful reflections.
The news of David Granger's departure from Esquire was one of those times.
I know the man only through the pages of Esquire. Yet, he has been a part of my life ever since he became its editor. His remarks on the "A note from the editor" page always seemed to be directed to me, personally, as a reader. Also, I placed so much trust in his judgement that I came to accept everything in the magazine as being something to which I should be exposed whether his purpose was to inform, to create interest or to entertain.
It wasn't a matter of whether I agreed or disagreed or whether it was funny or whether I got the point. Rather, it was the accuracy and the intensity of the attempt that was so engaging and revealing. Instead of feeling intimidated or outclassed, I came away from each issue feeling someone was looking out for me in terms of what I should know, of what I should be aware and the lighter touch all of us should have as we develop our own slant on life.
We often discuss the role of the editor. I believe that role has been defined by the firm and always anticipated connection I, the reader, have had with Esquire, the magazine, over such a long period of time. So, two congratulations are in order, first to David for such a superlative performance. I sincerely hope we haven't heard the last of him. In my mind, his superb ability to combine his own vision with the raw talent of others and his insistence on the pursuit of perfection could serve as a model for all editors.
And congratulations to Jay for being selected to take over the helm at Esquire. I'm looking forward to the mark he leaves on Esquire. I would like nothing better than for him to give me all the right reasons for continuing to admire the magazine that has become such an important component of my everyday life. (Submitted by a senior writer)
Re: Magazine Rivals Unite to Bring Sales Back to Newsagents This concept has never taken traction in the U.S. There have been co-op promotions between publishers and wholesalers aimed at retailers, but never at consumers, although wholesalers and their advocates have oft-times encouraged them. Frankly, in recent years, at least since the steep downturn in newsstand sales beginning in 2008, publishers have appeared to urge consumers to buy magazines on every venue except retail. (Submitted by a Publisher)