An email today from the ANF to members was solely about Hubbed, the agency business in which the ANF has a 5% share. The email underscores a conflict for the ANF as the national association representing newsagents. The email, essentially a promotional letter from Hubbed, indicates that Hubbed is relying on ANF staff:
We are taking on additional staff as we speak and also leaning heavily on our friends at the ANF to provide support in the roll out process so that we can effectively manage document receipt, installation, training and marketing.
There are other suppliers who provide the ANF with real dollars funding for conferences and award sponsorships who could want to lean on the ANF for staff support. Why is the ANF providing this to Hubbed and is such a tight relationship healthy for newsagent members and the channel more widely?
Just by asking these questions some will say, as they have done recently, that I am talking Hubbed down. I am not. rather I am seeking transparency for newsagents.
The ANF love affair with Hubbed must be challenged since the ANF is not doing this on behalf of members. While there have been some answers to some of the questions I have raised, I am yet to see any evidence of reasonable due diligence on the Hubbed business model for newsagents.
As I have noted previously, I’d like to see a public debate to test the business model and the newsagent contractual arrangements at the core of the model. If Hubbed is as good as the ANF Hubbed partnership says it is then it would emerge from the debate in a stronger position.
As for the rest of the email – which was thin on specific detail, I am surprised they are rolling out Hubbed given the challenges some tell me of getting a consistent contract.
Is describing a commercial relationship as a ‘Love Affair’ impartial? Your points regarding transparency have grounds, however, the latest post is crossing professional boundaries and comes across as being petty.
John I called it that based on the fulsome endorsement of Hubbed by the ANF through various forums.
My post is what it is. At least people know what I think and can comment on it in a public forum without moderation.
FFS John,
The ANF have entered into a commercial relationship with an entity without thorough due diligence. They have sought promote this service to members without the proper safeguards.
This is absolutely unacceptable behavior from an industry association and especially so when taking into account the recent history of the Bill Express fiasco. They ANF has learned nothing from what transpired only a few years ago and appear to have wandered blindly down the same path again.
From their actions one can only conclude that those making decisions at the ANF are either negligent, corrupt, ignorant or stupid.
Very well summarised & said Jarryd !
+1
You do have to wonder what the heck they are doing making recommendations when it appears that they haven’t even read the contract that was apparently being offered to people in the first the place and that has since reportedly been altered ?
What’s with the “FFS” Jarryd. It’s John’s opinion…show some respect if you want others to show some to you.
I maybe a bit slow but what is FFS
Think about it Shaun
ahh gees i just had to google it .
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=FFS
Ted,
I will show no respect to an opinion that is unfounded in evidence. I use the acronym FFS to highlight just how ridiculous I believe John’s comment is.
For fucks sake Shauns you must be blonde like me! I get lost with all the abbreviations on this blog but I’m learning.
Grow up Jarryd.
Ted,
You are attempting to divert attention from the issue by challenging the tone, rather than content, of what I write. You are free to do so but in choosing that approach you are detracting from the real debate and adding nothing of substance to the conversation.
Boys – stop talking dirty NOW!!!!!!
June, at least the boys hid it with abbreviation. Jenny has fired things up with her no nonsense approach……I’m wondering if Jenny has a “Nigella” type accent……GGGGGRRRRR!!!!!!!
Lol!
Ha ha Allan, I wish! but no I don’t nor do I possess her other good points, but I can cook like her if that’s any concession.
June you would be shocked if you were in my living room tonight watching his NRL team get beaten – I’ll abbreviate this time – YFI and WADH.
Jenny I feel his pain 🙁
And now I will have a queue out front Sunday to collect there Jackpots Lottery Tickets off me.
On that note I can only try to get some back Go the Knight!
Jarryd, thanks so much for your sage like opinion, it really is invaluable. Furthermore, to know that you must have talked to the ANF and Hubbed about your concerns and received unsatisfactory answers provides solid ground for your debate. Well done!
Think about how ridiculous it would be if you’d talked to neither the ANF or Hubbed and that your ‘evidence’ was just posts in this blog.
I take my comment back. Mark acted with complete impartiality and wasn’t biased at all. It truly looks like their union is modelled on a Mills and Boon Love Affair.
John, I have no conflict of interest when it comes to Hubbed. My posts are based on a review of the Hubbed contract as provided by the company to a newsagent and based on my assessment of the Hubbed model as it has been promoted to newsagents.
Further, people know who I am and can read my opinions published here with that not knowledge. Unfortunately, manny commenters don’t disclose their background.
Why has the ANF got shares in the business? They say it is to keep Hubbed looking after newsagent interests. Don’t they understand how shares work? They have no influence at all unless there is a contract in place not disclosed to us. Now the ANF is providing newsagent funded staff to Hubbed? At what cost?
Many questions here and no answers.
On principle industry associations shouldn’t have pecuniary interests in businesses that are being promoted to their members. It’s an implied conflict of interest well on it’s way to becoming a reality.
Industry associations need to re examine their charter. Their primary purpose is to take care of their members’ interests in the holistic context of an industry. Their focal point needs to be the great challenges of our time.
In our case it’s the apparent decline of printed news and entertainment and the arising consequences on our businesses. In the short time that I have been in the industry (4 years) the issues have been the same, yet I have seen very little initiative or leadership from the associations on the issue.
The paradox we have now is that the rise of the ANF was supposed to save us from the ineptitude of VANA. With this latest news VANA seems to have suddenly come to it’s senses, and its the ANF who is behaving ineptly.
That said, is the wedge that now exists between VANA and the ANF a good thing?
John,
The evidence comes in the form of the announcements from both the ANF and Hubbed as well as the contract(s) on offer.
As Mark has indicated he has no bias in this issue. That you try to insinuate that he does, while providing no bases for such an accusation. speaks volumes.
Unless the ANF lives in a bubble they are well aware of the concerns being raised – they are the exact same concerns that have been raised in the past. Concerns that have been consistently ignored
If the ANF has conducted thorough duedillegance on both the product and the contract then they should release those reports. If they have constructed their shareholding in such a way that it prevents it from interfering with their duty to members then show us what has been put in place.
THe actions of the ANF would indicate that none of these processes have been properky undertaken, if they were undertaken at all.
Dave, the ANF has a long and not very
illustrious history of making decisions that are not in the interests of Newsagents.
I have often advocated that the directors of the ANF should be sourced from outside our industry and they should include a lobbyist, an accountant, a lawyer
to ensure that we have the right mix of people looking after the pecuniary interests of their members – which is their
charter.
It is in the interest of us all to have unity but the people at our helm do not have the necessary qualifications to ensure it,
so newsagents (me included) no longer wish to be members of the ANF.
When you see NANA and VANA coming out against Hubbed it just qualifies the disunity (mostly within associations) that
ensures that our industry is very poorly
represented.
The state associations have always maintained their vested interest in not really embracing national unity and nothing has changed.
Poor representation has meant poor relationships and poor decision making and it is a shame that nobody has been able to harness this problem and find a solution.
Mark Fletcher was the “obvious Prime Minister” but his “cabinet” stabbed him in
the back when he was an executive director of the ANF.
I speak from knowledge because my husband was also an executive director at the time.
Meanwhile, I use this blog to help me in my
decision-making for my business and I don’t rely on anything or anyone else.
PS. Mark F will not like me saying this but it needs to be said so that history doesn’t repeat itself e.g. BE & Hubbed.
Our industry has had a very difficult few years and we are still “rudderless” (or “abbotless” as the case may be)
June: the state based structure somehow made sense in those historical times when each state had its own separate publishers. But now that the key publishers are nationwide, and each of these has a newly empowered national office, the association structure is ripe for review.
I hear what you say about ANF and its perniciousness. I am amazed by how many newsagents pay the fees but openly lambaste the associations for their general uselessness.
Is the time right to gather in all of the disaffected and likeminded, and direct these fees to a new organisation which could focus on industry wide issues, rather than narcissistic commercial interests.
Dave, June’s husband and I created an alternative newsagent association model in 2005 and newsagents didn’t want to join. The pitch was simple: $99 a year for a virtual association, one that focused 100% on lobbying on behalf of newsagents. Non commercial activity.
Between 2004 and 2008 I’d say associations lost around a third of all their members as a result of in-fighting, poor commercial choices and poor representation of newsagents through the Bill Express mess.
Like any business group, the value delivered by the association is a function of member control of the association.
Mark
That direction is spot on. The times have changed since 2005 and I can’t help wondering if that approach were revisited would it have a different outcome. What we get now for $1500 a year is just a big waste.
Here’s a link to the constitution I published here: http://www.newsagencyblog.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/microsoft-word-una-constitution.pdf
I agree Dave.
The industry has become incredibly apathetic towards associations. A clear plan and detailed agenda for a new national association assisted by professionals (as detailed by June) may certainly get a different response from the industry today.
Mark,
In 2005, did you get any worthwhile feedback on the reasons Newsagents did not wish to join?
Was there any suggestion that UNA would not be recognised by newspaper publishers?
I still have a desire to be a participating member of an association that has the capacity and wit to understand what it’s members want and that will lobby in good faith in an open and transparent manner to all members.
And yes, one that has an Advisory Group that reports to Association officials for determinations.
Dennis
Dennis it came down to lack of interest. To be fair, we did not actively promote or launch the new body as we were concerned it could split the channel. Our goal was to use the opportunity of a new drop to get the then ANF Board working more effectively for newsagents.