Here’s proof of how stuffed magazine distribution is in Australia. We received this issue of Geare magazine on April 20. It’s due for return in June. This issue, #39, is dated September/October 2006. The current issue is #42.
Geare is a technology magazine punters judge the magazine and those who stock it by how up to date they are. By reissuing old stock like this the distributor is making my newsagency and plenty of others look out of touch. It’s also a bad look for Geare as the reissued stock conflicts with current stock of the same title. Worst of all is that this is a grab for my cash as I’ll pay for the title and not get my money back for another two months.
The distributor, Gotch, will have their reasons for the reissue. I can’t think of any that make sense. I am certain they will say that reissues sell. Most reissues don’t sell. With shrinkage in the magazine category at, on average, 5%, what Gotch sees as sales will not always be sales.
I want a trading term with all magazine distributors whereby they agree to get my permission before they reissue a title and that such a request is very clear that it is a reissue of a title. I’d also want a trading term which enables me to ban accepting reissues in certain categories – such as technology.
Thanks to Ben Kay manager of my newsagency for alerting me to this.
Beware. Network has a new trick up their sleeve. 3 new copies of “Australian Roadrider (Motorcycles & Travel) (Vol 9 #2 (No.41)) magazine” arrived this morning. When placing them on the shelves I noticed 4 of exactly the same magazine (same issue Vol 9 #2 (No.41) sitting there unsold. These existing ones arrived on the 4th of April 2007.
Checking my stock on the system showed that on the 4th of April I received 7 initial copies & have since sold 3 (not a bad performance for what I’d call a marginal title). But to received 3 more copies unannounced & unrequested shows Network Services again treating Newsagents with disdain & disregard by using double supply to top up their own bank accounts at my expense.
Interestingly though both sets have the same return date of 07-07. Needless to say the 4 earlier copies are being returned immediately. The bad thing is Network now has my funds for another few months while I wait for credits.
I thought in many cases this over supply may not be picked up by agents where inexperienced staff are placing magazines, hence more & more $’s sitting there until the 07-07 return date.
Greg France
Chelsea News & Tatt’s
Greg,
Are you saying that Network are actually using your sales data to allocate more copies? Or, are they guessing and therfore abusing the distribution system, and putting more pressure on cash flow for all newsagents.
The redistribution of magazine titles also creates a nightmare when returning copies unsold. By having to choose which copies belong to which delivery dates for the same issue, makes the returns process evn more long winded.
Beechworth Newsagency
Interesting with this magazine we received 17 on then initial distribution and early returned 5 leaving a net of 12 sufficient to cover past highest net sales of 9 I would have thought but today we get 6 more.Yet their credit department doesn’t wanna know about how Network, but not only Network, make it difficult for us to pay our accounts when they are the ones strangling our cash flow. Even your bank manager will let you go over after 25 years of history.
Graeme this is a perfect opportunity for newsagents to ‘strike’. We ought to all return this reissue and short pay our account. It is the only way to make a point. Mark
With this and similar problems, you contact the distributor but the problem isn’t solved. Or you don’t contact the distributor for fear it might jeopardise other, better selling titles they distribute. When the problem titles arrived you felt angry, now you feel frustrated as well.
Gross over-supply affects the publisher’s ROI too. Far better for them to have titles realistically distributed.
If a publisher was contacted along the lines of, I own/manage such-and-such newsagency and I want to let you know your distributor has delivered X number of copies of your title today which I cannot possibly sell. This has probably also happened to many other newsagents. I am concerned that having a large percentage of your print run pulped is an unnecessary waste of your investment. I am also concerned that your distributor may not be doing the right thing by you. The response might be positive.
This does not take more of the newsagent’s time because such contact is in lieu of contacting the distributor.
Calmly approaching publishers from this angle may not always appear to immediately solve the newsagents’ problem, but it will encourage publishers to have an “interesting discussion” with their distributor which could well result in realistic scale out of their titles in the very near future. That’s what newsagents want, isn’t it?
C Stephens
CEO, 40+yrs biz experience