We have sold eight copies of Bargain Shopper from Universal Magazines since it arrived eight weeks ago. They sent us 73. several years of sales data shows that we will sell a fraction of the 73. The oversupply is from a company which says it cares about the environment and cares about newsagents. As regulars here will know we gave the title a crack and promoted it in a high traffic area. All we could sell in eight weeks in 8 copies. And the title still has months to stay on the shelf. The behaviour of Universal around Bargain Shopper is another reason I do not want their product in my newsagency any more. No amount of requesting has altered their behaviour, so I am better off without all of their titles. Universal would know from the data they have that I and many other newsagents will lose money on Bargain Shopper yet they did not alter their supply model or financial terms. Based on my experience I would say that this title is bad for the environment and bad for newsagent cash-flow.
Why can’t they oversupply those types of magazines in supermarkets? The supermarket near me gets a better supply of weeklies than me, but I get the better supply of titles like the obove which don’t sell through. It doesn’t seem fair.
Does anyone know where I can get some info on the deregulation of a few years back?
I contacted Unversal directly to let them know about the oversupply from NDD then spoke to NDD and let them know that if this continued cash flow would dictate that I end our contract with NDD.
I have since been given a revised scale out of Universal Mags and an email stating that my future quantities will not be changed without my consent.
Enough pressure by enough newsagents and “maybe” the system can be changed a little bit, even though a major overhaul with all newsagents acting in concert is necessary.
Peter Stubbs
Interesting, it seems it depends on what day you contact them and also to whom you speak. I just completed a title review with NDD and cancelled some and increased others. The disappointing thing was that they refues to cancel some titles even though I had no sales of that mag for several months. I have gone back and requested that the decision be reviewed …but you know what? I should not have to!
Newsagents
I hope Peter’s new scale out stays the same, They may of had some improvements in their software since I closed my account.
The thing is one should not be forced to close a distributors account because of oversupply.
Brett he is the owner of his business and is being told he is not allowed to choose what he can stock, he wants magazines that sells at a reasonable supply.
The example of Mark’s case where he has paid for 73 Bargain shopper magazines and has sold 8 copies of this magazine so far. Why would a distributor and publisher do this kind of unethical oversupply?
How many other Magazine titles echo the above and then you may say how many other Newsagents are being treated this way.
Next year small business will need all the cash they can muster to be able the ride the economic storm that has not hit yet.
Newsagents will not be able to carry examples of Bargain shoppers oversupply or other examples happening with other magazines.
Its not fair and its not ethical.
Each case of NDD’s refusal to comply with clear data showing oversupply needs to be referred to the ACCC. You also need to request that NDD put their refusal in writing, keep all of your paperwork.
If NDD and the publishers wil not respect clear business decisions why the hell should we respect the relationship we have with our suppliers.
Our Associations need to get off their arses, stop focussing on commercial crap, and pay some attention to the core issues effecting newsagents.
No doubt i will receive another phone call from someone at VANA telling me that these issues are being addressed, my answer to that is simple, crap.
If these issues were being addressed then we would be hearing about it.
Vaughan you are right. Get the refusal from NDD in writing or at least note the name of the person to whom you spoke. The ACCC will find this most useful when considering unconsionable conduct if you can prove that continued supply causes you to lose money.
mark
I would like to see it go further – That is, if we request to not receive a particular title and the request is refused/ignored, we should not then have to pay for that title. Then, if the distributor wants the magazines back they should pay for them to be returned. No other industry is forced to pay for stock they didn’t want, and then pay to return the stock they didnt want anyway! We have to pay $17.50 per box per supplier to return magazines (sliding scale after the first box), and it hurts. If we return one box to each distributor each week its costs us $52.50. The holy grail would be for newsagents would be to only pay for stock they sell.