While the animal farm partwork has been slower than expected, sales of the first issue of the helicopter partwork has been good. However, I suspect sales will face quickly because of the price point and highly specialists nature.
Cake Decorating is the best in recent history. I do wish these things were more predictable so we could manage space and time more effectively.
Pitty Network is already out of stock.
We’ve sold out, have quiet a few customers asking for them and can’t get any more. And the partwork model fails again.
Given the way partworks are handled, this is a failure by the UK publisher.
At least you got some Jarryd. I was allocated the 4 part helicopters test last year and it sold well with customers wanting to put it away. First I knew of it starting for real again was through this blog.No allocation no nothing.
i have boxes of them, have sold maybe 4 i think, same with the animal farm. They could have sent half my stock to agents that need them and i would still have too many. Hang in there guys they will all be going back before the end of the month, bar 2 or 3 i will keep on display, so should get your back orders then.
animal farm is slow for us, and i was very suprised by that.
the helicopters sold out. out of stock
You would think they could have released this after the Fighter Aircraft Partworks had finished, as some of the people buying that would like to collect this one, but not have the expense of both at the same time.
That is the comment my husband made.
Similar results here peter. Animal farm was slower than we though it would be.
I wish they would scatter the release of partworks. Space is always at a premium and when two partworks turn up at the same time its very difficult to allocate a large display to both.
Cake Decorating has been that successful for me the first 15 issues placed no.2 in my NDC $ sales ranking for 2012.
This was even dispite the fact that I received no allocation initially for part 3 because NDC believed I hadn’t sold any of the first 2 parts. Even thought I sold out at 220 units for part 1.
Dale Smith’s attitude when I tried to get stock for part 3 was a disgrace. First he wouldn’t return a call, so I elevated it the ANF. In an email he replied to the ANF there was no stock an he can’t make it appear out of thin air. I continued to rattle cages until finally I receive a call from a call centre manager, who ensured I had stock with in 3 hours, unfortunately 3 days late.
The issues over Xmas, although I was still selling 30+ per issue, I was short 20 copies 2 weeks in a row.
Part 22 failed to turn up in SA, due to sales demand they kept the stock in the eastern states. I did get 4 copies, but have 30 unhappy customers who are now uncertain if they will get part 22.
How to stuff up partworks. NDC should write a manual. They are a disgrace and should not be allowed to distribute them.
The above is only one of many examples…
as the say the fish always stinks from the head.
The trick here is not to oversell the supply reliability. You have to presume worst case scenario. We always go hard and do well with the first issue. Although we put customer orders into the putaway system for future issues we also tell the customer that we have no control over the ongoing supply and it can be hit and miss. We don’t have the economic time to waste chasing things. If they arrive well and good, if they don’t tough luck. Not our problem.
Stores get too many- some stores can’t get enough is it just me or is the obvious thing to do is ask each store through an email what they would like their requirements to be. I mean who knows what sells best in our stores ask us we know-we may not get it right all the time but hell its not like they do either
P,
This would be the obvious answer. Have a system where publisher generated allocations for the first issue are known well in advance – give stores the opportunity to alter these allocations. This way those stores that don’t want to engage with the initial allocations process still get product and the stores that want to go hard have the opportunity to do so.
There is no good reason, with subsequent issues, that priority allocations should not be given to customer putaways. This data is easily available to distributors. Allocate stock to customer putaways first then divide the remaining product as normal.
Jarryd, only one problem with your idea , well it is a good idea and distributors do not operate with good ideas in mind .
Distributors take note ,Jarryds idea would work and so simple .
P, Jarryd Shauns – You know what I agree, BUT From my time in distribution & sales prior to purchasing my newsagency, we tried the method you suggested with different retailers including newsagents. It simply doesn’t bloody work! Newsagents & others whinge about supply issues, quite rightly but when given the opportunity to respond and set their own supply, give a lousy overall response or set totally unrealistic levels. Im talking 100 responses at best from numerous offers I was part of during my previous life. 4000 emails to confirm a proposed supply and only 100 responses is a disgrace.. My advise to newsagents is read he weekly newsletters at the very minimum the big suppliers/distributors send through. All the info and offers are in them. Pick and choose on the rest of the rubbish received..
If the distributors sent out an email saying this is your proposed allocation, if happy do nothing if you want to change log on to web and alter. Then the progressive ones would not be penalised and thd dist would not need to do more work.
Jeff,
That’s the beauty of a system where responses are optional. Only those that want to put in the effort have to do so. Everyone else still gets their normal allocations.
Yes, there is always going to be a notable percentage that doesn’t respond. The key is to work a system that removes some of the “barriers” that contribute to a low response rate.
1. Don’t send out TOO many emails. If regularly receives emails from you that they don’t want then they’re probably going to skip reading important ones out of habit.
2. Make the subject consistent to allow sorting rules to pick out important emails and flag/move them.
3. DO NOT USE an image as the entire email. It’s more likely to get filtered out as spam or marked as a potential threat. It also makes it impossible to search. In fact, its probably best to not use images at all. If you need pictures – use attachments.
4. Make responding easy. Use a simple reply email or link that takes the recipient directly to the page they need. Try not to make people go to your website and force them to login. For many, it’s that few extra steps that make them avoid the task.
5. Include ONLY information relevant to the retailer. Don’t try and sell the product like you would to a consumer.
6. Make basic reference information already available in the email – include the retailer’s previous sales history of issue 1 of the most similar 3 partworks. This saves them having to research the data in their own system.
7. Attach a task and/or calendar item to the email. This way, those who use these functions in their email client can easily be reminded of when a response is due.
Limits can easily be placed on the number requested. If someone wants to make a change outside these, give them the email address who to contact to discuss a change outside such parameters.
If such a system is in place then no newsagent has a case to be make if they want to complain – the blame falls completely on them.
So instead of arriving magazines off an EDI lodged 12 hours before physical arrival (actually the goods are already picked & packed on on the way), we could run a notional arrival process 24 hours from a proforma EDI. They could then pick, pack & ship according to what we accepted. Yeah, that’d work for us.
Great post Jarryd, you make alot of sense
What it comes down to is: give me control. Do this and I will increase magazine sales.
Jarryd/P/Bill, the super new partworks allocation system you’re designing needs to account for:
1. If a newsagent asks for extra and doesn’t sell them, that doesn’t cost the newsagent anything except cashflow and pocket space. It costs the publisher hard money. It costs other newsagents potential lost sales. There’s not much incentive for newsagents to keep their requests realistic on the high side.
2. Partworks are tightly supplied and every copy is allocated. If you want a system where a newsagent can add 5 copies to an allocation that’s already drafted, there have to be matching newsagent/s who want 5 copies less. I’m going to shortcut you here and say that any system where you’re tinkering with an already-made allocation is unworkable.
3. You heard from jeff how many newsagents would actually use any kind of allocation altering system. Don’t go too nuts designing something to suit the 2% of newsagents who would use it…
4. The title of this blog post is “who can predict partworks sales?” and it’s pretty gutsy for anyone to say “Me! I can predict partworks sales!” because the whole theme of the post is how unpredictable they are.
P (and Mark), you know lots of stuff about your newsagency that the distributors don’t, and they know some stuff about national sales patterns that you don’t, so it’s not actually a sure thing that you could do allocations better. But there’s a no-cost way to see… each week/month write down how many you think you’ll sell– before you get your allocation, no cheating! If you can consistently beat the distributor allocations for a few months, then bang on their doors and say “give me control, I can do better, here’s proof.”
Red, It’s my money so I should be able to control my level of indebtedness.
Thanks to a generous relationship on occasion with distributors I have had the opportunity to set my allocations for some one-shots. My prediction of what I could sell has proved to be more accurate than theirs for my business.
I want the same capacity across all titles not just partworks. I am certain I will increase magazine sales as a result.
Red,
When it comes to who knows what about newsagencies and national sales patterns, distributors know a lot more about newsagencies through daily sales data than they would have us believe so to use that as a reason is not on.
Although this topic is about predicting sales of partworks (and supplying accordingly) rather than magazines the principle is the same so why can’t the 2% (your figure although I think it would be significantly higher) be allowed to set their allocations and then scale the rest out to the uninterested. What basis is used for this tightly controlled allocation anyway – distributors are either unwilling or unable to use accurate daily sales on the magazine side so why would we be expected to believe that they can or will do it for partworks?
Red,
I’ll use your numbering to respond.
1. The incentive for newsagents to not excessivly over order is that partworks are expensive to return. Infact, for most first issue partworks the profit made on one box is around the same, or less then, the cost to return it.
2. The whole point of the system would be to address allocations before having the product ordered and shipped into the country. It can be organised well in advance. The “tinkering” is done before numbers are finalised.
3. The number of newsagents using the system is often a reflection of the system itself. Make it easy. Design it with the intention of removing barriers that stop people from using it. Even integrate it into POS systems if necessary.
4. I agree with Mark. History would indicate that for many pro-active agents their ability to predict sales is better than the distributors.
The distributors may know more about sales patterns, however, this does not mean they apply that knowledge. In fact, it is easy to make the case that it is often not in their interests to get allocations correct.
Jarryd is right re my point #2, the time to address partworks allocations is well in advance. So what’s all this talk of using daily sales data? How does that apply to partworks? If you mean sales-based replenishment then that’s a valid discussion for another thread. But maybe you mean something else?
Actually re both #1 and #4 I’m now imagining a system where newsagents set/adjust allocations, within limits, as long as they don’t cause stockouts or silly amounts of returns, and as long as they continue to make better predictions than the distributors. Sounds a bit like a casino game though, which I don’t mean to do, this is serious business.
Red,
I was actually advocating for 2 systems.
One for allocations of ISSUE 1 only – where everything could be organised well in advance.
And another to address the ongoing issue of not being able to guarantee stock for those customers who actually have the product putaway through their newsagent.
The second is where distributors can use data through XchangeIT to have a 2 step allocations system. The first step would allocate stock to newsagents for their customer putaways. Then the remaining stock would be divided and allocated as per normal.
In regards to #1 and #4 I’m only referring to ISSUE 1 (and possible ISSUE 2 depending on the actual partwork). There can easily be limits set based on a number of variables. Those newsagents that want to make changes outside this would, and should, have to make their case to someone as to why. If they continually ask for changes outside the set parameters then that person can naturally refuse to approve such requests in the future.
They allocate the first six weeks based on a trial here and UK sales. This is where they can get into trouble. They then allocate in blocks to fit in with freight to Australia – again shop sales can be out of whack with predictions.
The problem is that the needs of the retailer, the distributor and the publisher are not the same.
From where I sit, after part 22, when you have consistently sold the 2 copies allocated and backorder one more copy (for the last ten issues), you would think a standing order could be changed to THREE copies per issue.
But no.
There is something horrible wrong with the distribution system.
But we bat on, for the customer, one phone call a week to a very apologetc human being, who also apparantly CANNOT change the computer system.
Who gves a flit though, for the customer, or even for the retailer…..just as long as I pay my bill by the 20th….
PS : re Xchange-it sales return data : only works one way, when they want to give give us MORE, doesn’t work for overstocking AT ALL…. funny that…
Cranky – my point exactly.
As Jarryd points out, pre-allocation only works for the initial partworks and obviously needs to be improved but, once in to the series and despite Red’s objection to using it, sales data is the only fair way to go!
Sold out of Helicopter. Issue Two sales are selling well.
Have stacks of Farm partwork left-over, which initially surprised me as we do similar numbers to Bill (post 8). However, I was shocked to see it at the checkout in Target yesterday, and a customer said they saw it in Woolworths too, so that probably explains the low sales volume for that title. I did a mass-return yesterday as a result. Not supporting this title.
Same helicopter selling well ,issue one sold out early . Farm animals no good at all only sold a few , i really thought that one would have been a hit
My Animal Farm selling well here. Naturally Gordon Gotch have decided to send me less than what I need for putaways for part 3. Here we go again.