Today at 10am, newsagents will get to read more about changes in the newspaper distribution model. At 10am, News Limited announces the changes being delivered through the T2020 project. Click here to see the FAQs document from News.
While the changes most immediately affect retail and distribution newsagents in three regions in Queensland, newsagents in other states, except for South Australia, will eventually be affected.
What will be announced today by News Limited are the goals and processes of the restructure of newspaper distribution. Newsagents will read about the target distribution territory size and the process involved in expressing interest in and ultimately bidding for the right to handle newspaper distribution in a territory.
The new newspaper distribution remuneration model – fee for service – along with the new model based around scale (and operational efficiency) represents the most significant change in newspaper distribution in living memory. While we can argue about the time this has taken and complain about the misinformation along the way, we need to focus on the announcement itself for this will be what really matters to newsagents.
News Limited will lay out a process through which distribution newsagents can engage in a contract which provides certainty for a fixed period of time. At the heart of the contract is the desire for newsagents to have a business model which enables them to be profitable. With so many newsagents operating unprofitable distribution businesses, a newsagent profit focused goal from a newspaper publisher is welcome.
The newsagents who will be the first affected by the changes, those in the three areas in Queensland, have been briefed in a series of face to face meetings with News Limited executives. This in itself is a sign of good faith by the company – having senior management face to face in newsagencies talking with newsagents directly affected. The approach News is taking in these trial regions is one of active consultation with a view to tweaking the process based on feedback.
The approach News is taking reflects learnings from what the company delivered in South Australia a few years ago.
Newspaper distribution restructure activity beyond the three Queensland regions will not to be looked at until 2013. While this will frustrate some, it’s a good move as it enables thorough analysis of the Queensland trials.
I have been briefed on the changes as have the industry associations. The process makes sense to me. The goals are good for newsagents and necessary for News. Yes, some newsagents will be unhappy at losing their distribution businesses. This has been in prospect for several years now. Those with a view to the future have had an opportunity to sell up.
There will be some who paid too much to purchase their distribution businesses. I wish there was an easy answer here. There is not other than to wonder what advise was provided at the time of purchase and what due diligence was undertaken.
Today is the beginning of a new era. I urge newsagents to engage with the process and to consider carefully the business decisions they will need to make.
The most important role newsagent associations can play in all this is to be an association, working with newsagents on business plans, budgeting and the tender process. I say this because I worry than some may prefer to play a commercial role while neglecting their real role.
From a personal perspective, through my newsagency software company I’ve been involved with many territory consolidations from small to the largest in Australia. As an indication of what I see for the future, I have signed off a significant investment by my company in software enhancements to get to the next level of newspaper distribution management facilities newsagents will need in 2013 and beyond. These changes will be delivered to newsagents at no cost.
The Australian has the story on page 28 today.
Just downloaded the documentations for the new T2020 Model.
10，000 papers per day, Great!
For those who enjoy irony, I would love to read about all this in the Aus but it hasn’t been delivered up here for the last 2 days. I hope News Ltd get their delivery system sorted out while we make changes to ours…..
To deliver 10,000 papers a day around here would entail a huge numer of kilometers. It’s a bit sad that the Weekly Times will not get to be distributed to it’s core readers in the country. Guess it’s vale Weekly Times.
We were seriously prepared to double our deliveries to 1500 a day – but not interested in 10,000 a day. Forget it. Good luck with it News…
think everyone is jumping the gun here, metro and country will be treated differently, there is no way they can consolidate country areas into 10 000 paper hubs. i suggest dont even think about it until the dist areas are released next year, stressing wont fix anything
Whilst I do not object to Industry change as long as it protects the business asset and provides certainty in business, I do object however to the fact that News Ltd are still not defining a commencement date and that they apparently do not recognise the fact that Mum and Dad businesses have their funds tied up in their busines and could in fact loose the asset value of the distribution part of their business due to Industry forces that they themselves have instigated.
The procrastination and uncertanty continues and we are the pawns in their restructure.
Trying to think positively.!!!
And this is where we need STRONG associations. This is there time to SHOW results and gain back membership.
I would definately rejoin if I could see some ‘runs on the board’ in the favour of small Mum/Dad newsagencies. Rather than huff and puff statements put out there and then nothing done.
Have Fairfax said anything about the News Ltd changes as if they do not jump on board with it well
I can see this not working very well in strong Fairfax delivery areas.
Fairfax has said publicly that it will look at what News propose and that it is likely to follow the News model.
The state associations have had two years to provide members with clear communication on this. They have failed.
This is a national issue and should be handled nationally. The ANF focus should be on helping newsagents to make the move – not to fight it. This will happen, as it should. The focus must be on helping newsagents who want to to embrace the opportunity.
storage for say 600 bundles of sunday papers, at least 5 delivery vehicles capable of 2000 sunday papers each, how many drivers, throwers…… so say $500,000 setup costs
I can really see existing businesses finding funding to get into this…. NOT
It seems we (Newsagents) have finally and formally been abandoned by the Newspaper Publishers.
Well there goes my house!
Advised when we purchased to only take a newsagency with a run as banks like the security of a territory. Hmmm..
Lets see the Coles/Woolies duopoly get right into this fantastically profitable Business Opportunity.
In SA we have a depot system (up to
10-12 agents all in the one depot so that
the drop of papers is already only going
to one spot for the 10,000 papers.
The differentiate is that there are 10-12 agents all with a considerable investment
in each shed.
Many years ago when the depot system started here we suggested to the agents
in our depot that we all band together and
that would have reduced our labour costs
and we could have had one office e.g. to
do the accounting etc.
The resounding answer was “no” back then but I still think it is a workable solution now.
I don’t have any distribution rounds any more but our agent now has about 11 rounds and he has employed most of the
newsagents whose rounds he has purchased. It is working quite well so why
wouldn’t it work if 10-12 newsagents combined their businesses and set up a
company with them as directors and pooled their resources (drivers, computers etc) and the rationalisation could afford them a better lifestyle (like 2 days each off per week).
I am sure it could work in the metro areas but it wouldn’t be feasible for regional Aust.
Any other suggestions???
I read all the documents carefully and it seems that News Ltd know very little about customer service and what it means to deliver papers to Sydney suburbs. (or for that matter to any other capital city)
Imagine trying to manage a warehouse with 10,000 deliveries a day for Sydney metro or some inner suburbs?
Think about how many drivers you’ll need…say 400-500 papers delivery per driver per day you’ll need 20 drivers??
Clearly you can use less drivers but will never finish delivering papers before 6:30am.
Also I don’t think News really understand what it takes to deliver papers in dense areas where only small vehicles can get access to or areas where drivers need to get out of the car to place the paper in the right place…
Just a big cop out by News Ltd, nothing else. FFX will follow. I figure 19 out of 20 territories officially gone. The publishers can’t do it effectively with their infrastructure and resources (which is not hard) and want to pass it (and admin) to us.
I agree with June and this will certainly be the way to secure your share of a territory. There need not be as many losers as it seems. It is complicated by Fairfax rolling it out (I believe) a bit later (to avoid collusion). Like the carbon tax, I’m not stressing.
I am a bit lost why people are wanting to hold onto there runs? All I read is that there a lose maker mine is only border line at the best.
I just no longer feel the Two sit well together any longer and if you are looking after the Delivery the Shop suffers ect
The only problem I see in all this is Fairfax and News not both doing it at the same time that might be an issue I feel.
And the payment that will be paid upon handover of the territory and customer data.
As if the carrot is not worth the bit what is to sop a mass exit from runs?
Just my thought after looking at all the info I have came across.
I think you’re correct Brett. My run is contracted out to a delivery specialist and I still “own” the run but it’s marginally profitable at best for me. Pretty sure they’ll be the ones to have a good shot at taking over the enlarged territory which I don’t think is a bad thing.
To those that don’t belive this can be done in a metripolitan area, there are certainly businesses already in existance with newspaper distribution that can handle this new method and volume of delivery easily. Change has arrived at the station and even though some have heard it coming some still want to deny it now that it’s right in front of them.
Brett,
Under the new structure, If you lose / give up /don’t get your delivery run, you will only get 12.5 % on your shop sales. I don’t know where you are, but could you afford to suddenly only get 12.5 % on your shop sales ??
If the runs are unprofitable, isn’t that mainly NEWS ltd etc ‘s fault? So they made a run unprofitable, they take it off you and you lose half your commission on shop sales. I’m puzzled on their logic ???
Anyhow I am off home to have a scotch or 2 !!!!
MAX
I hear you and no I will not be happy to loose my other 12.5% BUT that will not be the end of my Business. I even feel that it will be like taking a shackle of that has been holding me back somewhat.
To blame News for an unprofitable run is very easy BUT could they not also say that our inability to grow the run is our fault?
In all my years in this business I have never seen News wanting to communicate with us like this so I would like to think that we could make this a win for both parties and continuation of print for the foreseeable future.
I hope that the association get this right for newsagents.
Its not so much the money side that is a worry for me (12.5 com) but the traffic that print drives into my store. Both papers and magazines.
Its bleat time.
As a retailer I am sick to death of hearing this utterly odious proposition that suppliers and principals can justify low margins because the brand or the product “generates traffic”. Well whoopi do. What are we supposed to do with the “traffic” when we get it.
Over the past few years so many of our formerly strong margin products have been eroded in the name of traffic. There is very little left amongst our major product ranges that has more than 25% margin.
And our life as a retailer has become an endless search for lines that have enough margins which enable us to profit from our traffic.
12.5% is not enough margin for selling newspapers, especially as a specialist. This makes us no different from any other subagent for whom papers are very much a sideline.
The publishers may well say they are changing nothing but the reality is that many of us are shifting out of a 25% model to a 12.5% model.
We need an average of at least 25% across all lines to justify the investment in people , property and resources which enable us to provide a customer service level that keeps customers coming back into the store.
We have to be careful that in being freed of the schackles of distribution that we are not becoming slaves to suppliers that use the popularity of their products to screw us on the margin front.
You should also consider the awful spectre that your new distribution agent can appoint unlimited sub agents along side you with whom you can share the “traffic” !
By the way I am positive about News Australia’s transperency this time, but the consequences of the announcement are grim.
Well the news is out – Ross Greenwood covered it on the 2GB money show tonight.
He ‘interviewed’ the CEO of ANF..
Ricky well said .
Ricky they can say what they like. Our job is to focus on our businesses. Personally, 12.5% for newspapers or 25% … there’s not much difference based on OTC sales.
Rick you are correct on country areas from what our News rep told us Tuesday most will not be affected? To give you an idea of area they have had to incorporate Woollongong to Kiama to meet the 10,000 target. That is a huge area to cover for someone to take on.
we only have a population of 12-`13 thousand in total
I like the line about compensation – since news only has to give 6 months notice of termination and they will honor that you get bugger all.
Like I stated before good luck to those agents that lose goodwill and runs they will need it.
We are not affected just as Mark is not effected as we sold our runs a while ago but that does not mean I do not understand that newsagents have loans for equipment etc based on projected income from runs that will soon be called in as the runs are not there any more again with no compensation but the loans will still need to be paid back.
We made the choice to move out deliveries and reduced our debt accordingly, did not update equipment or cars and simply wrote off the old ones once it was finished it was not forced onto us.
I’m only a spectator but i know a lot that are not.
So when some bloke you have nothing to do with is charging around your streets missing papers left right & centre, we’ll have to tell our locals to piss off & call news ltd if their paper wasn’t delivered? Yeah, that’ll work.
Actually the only surprise to me is the surprise. We’ve been sodomised for years, this is the beginning of the final thrusts.
The loss of 12.5% profit, while not a big problem for some, is definatly a huge blow to many newsagents, especially those with large retail sales.
While we handed back our run a few years ago and were willing to wear the lost profit, some newsagents won’t have that luxury.
For us, based on our current retail newspaper sales (News and Fairfax only), 12.5% would represent approx $25K per year.
Paul, we don’t have to tell them to piss off but just politely that we don’t deliver the paper anymore and that if they have any complaints they need the news ltd contact line. It’s been taken out of our hands.
Of course if they would like to come in and pick it up every morning we’re more than happy to look after them….
Jarryd, That is certainly substantial !
Interesting to see how many newsagents will opt to stop selling 12.5% commission newspapers if association has a survey.
Are Magazines next? Does Distributor for Newspapers also gets to tender for Mags. Easier for Network/Gotch. Our commission would drop to 12.5% for Mags.
Can News Ltd guarantee a Coles/Woolies entity won’t bid over the top for the Bne/Syd/Melb areas. Then also Tender Network/Gotch to also give them Mags. Newsagents supply is squeezed slowly dry.
Why do we need a 5 yr retail contract to sell newspapers at 12.5%?. So we can work Sundays.Work Public Holidays.
What good is the contract?
Why not just become a normal sub agent with no contract and not work Sundays/Public Holidays if you don’t wont to?
I don’t see why you would stop selling them completely as money coming in (any money coming in !) and foot traffic are both still important.
What it will mean though is that that prime space they now command at the front of the store won’t happen anymore. I’ll either have them at the back or to one side and will convert where they are now to shelving for high turn good gp products.
No sorry I don’t mean not selling newspapers I just mean a normal Subagent gets 10% – 12.5% for selling papers and they dont have to sign a 5 year contract, they just have a ongoing contract. I thought a contract was to suit both parties. What extra do we get for signing a 5 yr contract or is it all to News advantage
On the plus side however, if you get 12% (as I do) for your papers, News no longer can demand prime real estate in your store. Papers have been moved away in this shop and that prime real estate has been handed over to giftlines and seasons. My run was handed back years ago now and my bank is still happy. Exploit the opportunity would be my advice.
Our papers are at the back if they want them in the front must pay more
Paul,
Your point about retail agreement/normal subagent status is very vaild. Aside from the $20 comission for getting people to subscribe (not sure why any retailer would want people moving to home delivery), what else will newsagents with retail agreements get?
Maybe Freedom of choice?
I think they also get the ability to take payments for the subscription customers via what I believe will be the touch system and get some sort of a commission from it.
BTW, I haven’t gone completely mad and am not typing reponses in answer to myself. There are now two different people posting above under “Paul”.
The other Paul is correct though in that there doesn’t seem to be that much incentive to sign a retail only agreement above a sub agents agreement. Both types will be supplied by the distribution agent for that territory so it’s going to be in his best interest to ensure you are still supplied whether you sign the retail agreement or not.
yes Paul, in Adelaide the Touch Networks home delivery account payment system works a treat. I know VANA said they would have something for newsagents in this area but I doubt they could beat the Touch offer for ease of use and back end cash management. Also, it’s proven
Why take 12.5%? Purchase through iSUBSCRiBE for 30-40% off. No contract!
In my region, a few agents have handed back their runs, after unsuccessfully offering them for sale to the open market.
A small newsagent showed interest in part of the territory, but one publisher rather than offering that part of the territory to the smaller agent approached a service station to take on the run.
With the frustration of inadequate supplies, and advice from the newspaper supplier that taking on the newspaper territory may encourage magazine suppliers to supply him direct as well, the service station took on the territory.
Utilising an empty mechanic workshop, the service station has the space to take on extra territories and has taken on another. Best of all, he does so without having signed any contract.
I guess the point of this story, if you are a distribution agent you need to be wary, you are not just competing with other agents to take on these bigger territories. Service stations, freight companies, delivery contractors etc will all be able to compete. The publishers couldn’t care less if it’s a newsagent or a flower delivery company. Whoever offers the best business plan, facilities and price will win the tender.
Good luck.
Amanda, my understanding is that News will work with existing newsagents first.
I think you mean they will humour us first. Don’t they say retail and distribution no longer sit side by side? Where do they get that from? I don’t believe in the “economy of scale” rhetoric used to justify this. What happened to News Ltd “economy of scale”? Just as Coca Cola have sub-contracted out deliveries and their contracters have realised they are not profiting, so may the new paper distributors.
If News was really interested in newsagents having a hand in the new distribution model then wouldn’t they be out assessing who’s interested and facilitating meetings. This would be genuine transparency and I truely hope this did occur in Queensland and will occur elsewhere. It should be an opportunity for all newsagents to either opt out or participate. I just feel alot will be left out and that 12.5% in store has the capacity to really hurt many stores bottom lines. Even for those who wish to operate on 12.5% OTC it’s rather ironic that they will happily be funding the 45% discount of the home delivery consumer, that in turn pays the new distributor who is taking all their previous profit.
T2020
Very Arnold Schwarzenegger?
So those with retail agreements will be able to accept payments and a receive fee for converting people to a subscription.
I wonder if they will receive any greater control over supply? Naturally, a significant issue for many retail only newsagents is certainty of adequate supply. It seems to be a common problem for subagents; not receiving enough stock or promotional product. It would be nice to see this addressed, through access to Connect, to manage guaranteed supply and allow store-level alterations. With a large section of the industry soon to become retail-only, the potential for large scale subagent undersupply needs to be addressed in the new model.
We have got 15 subagents. They all ,everyone of them, is delivered to according to the standing order in the system. The standing order has been discussed and agreed with them.
We individually review their returns each and every Monday.
We provide a second delivery at anytime during the day if they request it.
We have very few sell outs.
If sale trends are up or down we review our order in Connect to compensate.
We are changing orders in Connect at least 3 times per week.
Promotional items are supplied at the same % of sales as we are, despite the pathetically low margins and mess of handling returns.
We do this because we are committed to customer service, and we see subagents as OUR customers. We’d be highly offended if a sub agent could use Connect to second guess our own procedures.
In the new world this will be our competitive edge and it will be why we are looked upon favourably when we tender for the territories of the less diligent newsagencies around us.
Letting subagents into Connect will cause chaos!
Ricky, You will find that you will not be in control of your News Ltd subagents anymore. All you will be doing is dropping their pre-wrapped News ltd bundles. News Ltd will be controlling what your subagents get, you will just be acting as a courier. This is what is happening in my territory and i like it because the subagents have to do all of their own returns and ordering and I get 12.5% for dropping their papers off. So I think for agents who lose their distribution but keep retail they should be able to access Connect to control their retail supply.
I dont remember reading about it but as News Ltd want to take all customer information from us and run it in-house I can only assume that this means all subagents as well.
I hope that News ltd dont travel this road slowly, I hope that as soon as the trial in QLD is finished they roll it out everywhere as soon as they can.
Ricky,
Thats fantastic you are run such a professional, dilligent operation. Unfortunatly for many, many subagents this is not the case.
Our supplying agent continually undersupplies us, rarely adjusts our allocations, never provides a second delivery and can’t even manage to deliver publications to the front of our store.
Simply because there is a tender process does not ensure that those who take on territories will operate as effectively as you.
When a garden plant dies you dig it out and replace it. The new plant is small,looks out of place, and will need to be nurtured to produce fruit.
I wise gardiner digs out the doomed plant early and makes room for the new.
My shed already has a spade, next I’m off to the nursery, now what shall I grow.
It looks to me like a lot of work stress and you end up with nothing to sell
I am a little dumfounded by the lack of leadership in this industry.
There is NO strength coming from ANF, VANA, NANA or any other association. Besides your comments Mark, i have heard NO comment from any other marketing group or even a so-called industry partner in GNS (whom will be heavily impacted by these changes).
As for external leadership, it seems Newsagents are a forgotten industry in the world of politics.
We all understand the current home delivery system is not working, but lets not forget this is the system created by the publishers. They wrote the contracts, and we were FORCED to sign them. When i signed my contracts I stated several issues i did not agree with and wanted the contract changed to reflect those issues. The response was that the contracts ARE NOT NEGOTIABLE, and to SIGN or have NO CONTRACT. That is not a negotiated contract, it is an abuse of power.
Some many years later the industry has been forced to continue under constraining and restrictive contracts to the point many distributors have run at a loss for years and some handed back their territories all-together.
Basically, newsagents have had to continue their run at a loss so newspaper companies could offer consumers a discounted product which was not reflective of the true cost of it’s production.
Now, consumers are moving to digital and these Publishers want us to support their product by once again signing 5year contracts with no sign of financial success. Whilst our overheads continue to rise, they want us to take a reduced commission, and support their product like never before.
But what I am failing to see any industry leader say is WHY?
Why should we?
Instead of somebody standing up and saying STOP! No we are not doing that we are going to do it THIS WAY, we simply get leaders saying well 12.5% commission is what is on offer, take it or leave it. Stop whinging.
If it costs $3 to produce the newspaper, put a $3 RRP on it. Not a $1 RRP on it. I can quote EVERY single CEO of both Fairfax and News claiming consumer purchasing habbits are not changed significantly in reaction to a price rise. So why not increase the price to what it actually costs? If publisher’s want to continue to supply that product to the market at a discounted rate, than these are the terms the newsagent industry will support.
Yes the distribution model needs to change, but it should be mutually beneficial to those willing to take on the huge new territories, and for those agents still willing to sell newspapers at a retail level.
For god’s sake, it is time someone stood up and said to newspaper companies ENOUGH is ENOUGH. Deregulation has NOT WORKED. We are going to do it our way, or find someone else to sell your newspapers.
This could mean that there is only ONE publisher left in the market. So be it.
Kyle,
I agree on the issue of product pricing and have written considerably here about it. I really feel for NSW newsagents. The Daily Telegraph price today compared to 12 years ago – on the back of considerable labour and retail real estate price changes.
I have spoken at length to News people driving the change. I think what they are doing is necessary and being done in a respectful way to handle this.
In terms of the broader deregulation discussion, the Howard government drove this.
I got out of distribution years ago as it was not working for my size and I could not acquire more runs nearby. This is what we need to do – to make decisions for ourselves which best suit our needs.
While we’re thinking about newspapers here, there are big issues around lotteries, magazines, stationery, cards … I could go on. They all require planning to get through.
The days of the channel being managed nationally for all newsagents are long gone.
The time has come to replace old assumptions, old habits. Take what is being offered , & collectively go forward & build a better business & future. We can build a diverse distribution company in the time available & survive, & prosper into the future. Open up your mind & think what can be done to change & prosper retail wise, follow marks suggestions, diversify.
we must draw a line with the old & look only to the future.
further to Kyle who said
“This could mean that there is only ONE publisher left in the market.”
Quote from The Australian 11 Aug 2012 :
MEDIA: On the day the board of Fairfax Media met to discuss a potential $1 billion-plus writedown of key assets, a leading broker downgraded the company’s stock and predicted the closure of the print editions of its two main metropolitan mastheads in three years.
Goldman Sachs yesterday downgraded the stock to “neutral/cautious” and said Fairfax was facing the potential closure of the print editions of The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age in 2015.
Nice post Kyle. Seems to be a common theme the commission, if they do not reinstate the commission, I will have to make some tough decisions regarding News Limited Newspapers . Newsagents do not deserve this treatment or the burdens that accompany a decision such as this. In my view whoever agreed to the reduction in commission without putting it to a vote of members should not be in a job right now.
What Mark says regarding post 53, other issues to consider is very true and need to be addressed yesterday,
Mark
Thanks for feeling sorry for us NSW agents. I asked in a previous post how News can charge $1 for the DT in NSW and charge $1.20 for the HS in Melbourne. Same publisher same news stories essentially the same paper. The reason they charge an extra 20 cents, NOBODY at News will answer this question. News in their own documentation say our commission is tired in with the cover price why not fix this annomally and show Newsagents in NSW some respect and stop devalueing their own product as we are the ones copping it in the pocket.
Gregg,
VIC newsagents also received higher delivery fees than NSW and receive compensation when papers are late. Something for NANA to look at maybe?
So in 2013 there will come a time when many newsagents are off contract simultaneously, joining the ranks of the 12.5%. I would certainly strike on Daily Telegraph sales at 50 papers equalling the grand profit of $4.
The problem is a strike needs to be coordinated and or reported in the news. Would anyone else strike? Would NANA or ANF organise it? I don’t think so.
It’s a good job NANA and ANF don’t have the word Union in their titles.
Oh and if my rep came to check on me I could easily say that we sold out, if you know what I mean.
make that $6.25, I shouldn’t post so late!
Martin makes a great point. Thousands of agents will be effectively off contract.
The publishers have effectively torn up the current contracts and want new terms to suit the changing environment.
In THEORY this SHOULD enable a group of agents to negotiate the terms of a contract they deem fair and willing to sign.
In THEORY a group could be an alliance of agents with common ideals, or members of a marketing group with a central purchasing strategy. A community of agents not held back by the red tape of an association.
In THEORY a representative from News or Fairfax would agree to meet and negotiate a mutually beneficial agreement for the sale of the product.
In THEORY, the bigger party would not be permitted to abuse it’s market power and force unfair trading terms such as a paltry 12.5% commission. Things such as commission MUST in THEORY be negotiated. NOT forced.
It is a big test for News and Fairfax to PROVE newspapers are de-regulated. it is a big test to prove their is no collusion.
It’s a big test for governing bodies to ensure Fair trading practices are adhered to.
But most of all it’s a big OPPORTUNITY for agents themselves to band together as groups big and small and change the landscape of publisher/newsagent relationships.
Shayne, could you elaborate on the compensation for late newspapers in VIC?
Unheard of in NSW!
Amanda, central to the News move is a free market approach to the contracts. Such a model does not fit with what you have proposed.
Given that newsagents have known for close to three years that News and fairfax would move, the time for an approach such as what you outline has long passed.
In our area we have a lot of small agents in villages and small townships that have recently been centralised from a group of newsagents into one huge run. The company who delivers the papers is not a newsagent but a freight company with no understanding about newpapers or what it entails to deliver. We are constantly getting calls from these small agents wondering where papers are and if we got enough supply as they cannot contact the delivery driver and the company is closed until 9am each day. It is one thing to tender for delivery and another to offer the kind of customer service subagents expect from deliveries. customers will not care about the shift in deliveries, it will be another case of bad customer perceptions of newsagents not bad service from the publishers. We have not delivered papers for about 5yrs and we still get customers coming in about missed deliveries. It is all about customer perception and news now this and wants to pass the blame.
Amanda, not 100% sure (I’m in NSW) but I believe VIC agents get paid $30 per 100 papers compensation if the papers are more than 1 hour late. As you said, unheard of in NSW.
you would be better off making sure that truck is late every day that way there would be money to be made
What concerns me is this magical 10,000 delivery figure is not the real delivery figure for the new territory holder going forward…Why? If we safely assume FFAX will follow suit and align its new territories with News, doesn’t that mean that the new territory holder will have to also deliver FFAX papers too? If so, they’re looking at possibly 15-20,000 papers daily? Is this scenario true or am i missing something?