Newspaper publishers often seek to mitigate the impact of a price rise. Smart ones do this through promotions wh9ch add value to the product. Less smart publishers offer steep discounts off the increased price. Even less smart publishers offer steep discounts through one channel (home delivery) while expecting equally loyal customers through the other channel (retail) to cop it sweet.
This is what was behind the awful sticker stuck on the front of the Sydney Morning Herald this morning. The marketing department was seeking to mitigate the impact of their cover price increase. The offer disrespects their retail partners. It also disrespects existing home delivery customers. Oh, and it disrespects home delivery newsagents who stand to make less because of the Fairfax largesse.
70% off! What is that? It’s scared marketing that’s what it is. It’s, we know this paper is not worth what we are charging so we are prepared to cut the guts out of the price but only if you use the distribution channel which gives us more control, is more expensing and which is funded as a loss leader by small business people who can ill afford to have margin further cut.
I love the Sydney Morning Herald as a newspaper, it is worth the cover price increase. The game played out today, stuck on the masthead, cheapens the product and shows that some within Fairfax don’t share my faith in their newspaper.
My view is that Fairfax ought to have ridden through any downside of the price increase and come out in a week or two with a premium offer based on coupon redemption. Something of value which gets people buying at retail over seven or fourteen days. The Australian is doing this right now and my information says it is working. News Ltd is smart when it comes to these things.
Fairfax marketing is notoriously incompetent
still, despite all the trouble with later delivery and a 5kg Saturday paper, I like them better than News, which is run by crooks