Click on the image for supply and return detail to see for yourself the supply and return data for Puzzler Simply Code Crackers and tell me if you think I am wrong to complain about oversupply of this title by Network Services in one of my newsagencies.
Issue 1/5/13: Supply 5, returned 1. 5/6/13: 6/1. 3/7/13: 6/5. 1/8/13: 7/5. 29/8/13: 9/9. 26/9: 10.
The magazine allocations experts at Network have been increasing my supply without justification.
Talk any supplier to newsagents and they will tell newsagents don’t respond to emails and rarely engage with opportunities. They will tell you newsagents are time poor. One reason newsagents are time poor is because they have to deal with a magazine distribution model that burdens them in out of data business practices and because they have to spend time chasing errors that bleed them of cash in addition to time – like this creeping oversupply of Puzzler Simply Code Crackers.
Newsagents strike out at all magazines because of the oversupply of some.
When the pick over the caracas of this world, an anthropologist will discover that the magazine opportunity in our channel was killed off by very few behaving selfishly while those who should have been concerned sat on the sidelines, on their hands.
has to be the number 1 issue for newsagents today, it is just a real pain in the arse to be constantly on guard for blatant oversupply and having to early return so much. Where is the ANF on this one, maybe HUBBED can be modified to handle magazine distribution and then the ANF might take some interest.
Mark;
It has become an issue in our business again, especially the past 12 months.
Gordon and Gotch haven’t changed much in the 10 years i have had this business (always oversupply); Network have added to the pain recently; their supply is appalling!
My growing concern is with the delayed billing titles; just because it is delayed billing does not give them the right to increase supply by 100% or more in some cases!!
What ever happened to the “game changer” of “replenishment”? Has Network realised that it isn’t profitable for them?
……pardon my cynicism; but there are suppliers in our industry that really give me the !@#$!
About 3mths ago I did a review with Gotch, where we went through every title and I was told to set my allocation of each magazine. I was assured that this would be entered into the system and this is what I would receive. I have just gone through last months supply of magazines and over 50 titles where increased on what I was told would be my allocation, some by 1 copy others by more.
A complete waste of my time.
DM such range reviews stay in place for 13 weeks or thereabouts before their algorithms kick in.
Mark
My first day back off leave and it’s nice to see nothing has changed. Supply, or more to the point over supply, is still the major daily issue to contend with.
As in previous posts I welcome contact from agents who feel they are being oversupplied with any of our titles. In the rare event this does occur, we will rectify this problem. The earlier posts of the 26th of September and 7th of October raise the issue of oversupply and English titles. The earlier post shows a photo of Lovatts titles and Beachcomber. Although Beachcomber are distributed through G&G locally, the name ‘Beachcomber’ has connotations with Australiana. They are in fact totally U.K owned and operated as ‘Bromley House’, and are simply re-badged for our market. A similar story for the publisher you complain of today- ‘Australian’ Puzzler. Again, a company owned and controlled from London although distributed by our distributor, Network Services.
Re your question of what we at Lovatts feel when we see 8 new titles ranged in direct opposition to ours… The standard answer could be “Oh well, that’s business”. However Lovatts have been strong supporters of the Australian Newsagency channel for 30 years. As Shaun S said in the earlier post, Lovatts actually carry out store visits in our support of Australian newsagents. We have attended and sponsored State and National awards for many years. However, it’s easy to attend when you’re based in Gosford NSW; not so easy when you’re based in London U.K.
So how do we feel when on our store visits and we see ‘Australian’ Puzzler placed in prime position? “Not very happy” is the P.C response (as this is a family blog), however, you may insert many well know colourful Australian phrases for this answer. You as agents have control – if you’re not happy, do as you and Shauns did and send them back.
You already have enough Puzzle /Crossword titles to satisfy your need. Again, I repeat if any agent feels we can improve our supply, please don’t hesitate to contact me at
terryt@lovattsmedia.com
Terry, Network Services distributes Puzzler and your product. You can help resolve this more so than newsagents.
Just did my arrivals for tomorrow, so much rubbish on the way. Is it just me or have the Mag Distributors stepped up their channel stuffing endeavours since the switch to two delivery days.
you are dead right so much junk and not enough of popular mags. larger than normal monthly acc’s they are difinitley shoving junk down our throats. not happy.
Early return aggressively so the publisher hurts, they hold the key
rick,
The solution is not that simple. Oversupply can be just as costly for publishers, if not more so, than it is for us.
Distributors are the gatekeepers and it is their business model, not the publishers, that draws that majority of financial benefit from oversupply.
This is why Lovatts needs to deal with Network as it is their own distributor doing this to them.
publishers are the only ones that can bring the distributors to heel, if early returns hurt enough they might be inclined to do something about it. If I was a distributor I would be doing what ndc and gotch do now, they make money out of oversupply. The publishers need to introduce a penalty system in their contracts with the distributors that will discourage gross oversupply, not like the current system the actually makes it financially rewarding to oversupply as much as they can.
I’ve stopped whinging about oversupply, now I simply return VERY aggressively but I am tops only so am fortunate there. Just out of interest, my return credits for both ndc and gotch are 50% of the amount supplied each month, i.e. ndc supply $24k of mags, my credits come in at around $12k, gotch is about $20k supply and $10k returns.
yep 50% here as well
rick,
Publishers are often as beholden to take-it-or-leave-it distributor contracts as we are. This is why I would advocate the possibility of a joint approach to the issue by both newsagents and publishers. Both groups have likely accepted unfair contracts and a unified approach makes sense where our interests largely align.
Rick my returns ratio has been running at
55% for 38 years and no amount of work
or effort on my behalf will change that.
The distributors say we can change our supplies and I have done so countless times but it always reverts to how much they need to get from us to support their
own cashflows and that is why you can’t
really change anything for good.
The distributors will tell you they work on a 30% returns ratio but that is cr….p.
How this is still happening is quite beyond me and I blame the ANF squarely for not
acknowledging and insisting on their members having reasonable trading terms
plus a say in their own destiny.
They are destroying their own industry and us along with it with their unapproachable “you will obey or we will
cut you off” attitude.
I believe the ANF (and all the state associations) have sadly let down their members when the associations’ mission
was to preserve the pecuniary interests of their members. IT DID NOT HAPPEN.
and it is not likely to happen until we get competent people at the helm aka, the accountant, the lobbyist and the lawyer etc
as I have mentioned many times before.
Dear ANF, please call me and tell me why you have allowed this to persist for the best part of 50 years? Tell me why your fees are worth it? I bet you don’t.
The ANF have been toothless tigers for over 30 years that I know off. I DOUBT they care as long as the money is in the bank account. The ACCC have not done us any favours either.
I really don’t see any light at the end of the tunnel when it comes to a Newsagent associations call then NANA, VANA or whatever you want.
We have to believe we can fix this despite the worsening situation with Network. Fixing it will be up to newsagents though. On this specific example though Lovatts could act through their contract with Network – by switching to IPS.
Mark,
They could switch to IPS but by how many stores would this reduce their distribution reach?
There is still the potential for may of the exact same problems to rear their head with IPS and, given the contract, the potential for a host of new problems as well.
We must move past trusting that suppliers will act ethically. IPS is owned by Fairfax – a company with an incredibly bad track record in their dealings with newsagents. If the contracts don’t protect us, if they are unfair, then we need to push for them to change – no excuses.
have to find a way to hurt their hip pocket, that’s all they understand, maybe we need to hit acp titles to bring some pain to network? like return all womens weekly one month, don’t sell any at all, or pick on womans day for a couple of weeks, rolling stoppages like in the good old days back in the union 🙂 of course getting every one on board for any sort of confrontation is about zero. maybe we just need to live with it,
rick,
It may be that we don’t have to hurt their hip pocket. I’m not sure about how profitable magazine distribution is but I’d hazard a guess that it’s not bringing in rivers a gold. It may be the case that we need to put to the distributors an adjustment to their business model that doesn’t see them become unprofitable, but helps both newsagents and publishers.
Whatever we do it must be at an industry level to make any real, large scale difference. It may involve political lobbying, the ACCC or even legal action. If we want to achieve anything there must be clear contingency plans that demonstrate the fight isn’t fleeting and that we’re prepared to do whatever it takes for as long as it takes.
If only we could set up some kind of body to represent the industry as a whole, to coordinate such an approach, to lobby the govt, to mount some kind of challenge thru the accc, or other legal avenues. Any ideas? 🙂
How about something like Australian Newsagents Federation – nah, can’t use that one, it’s already claimed by a group that specialises in a number of areas e.g. rhetoric, sitting on hands, fiddling while Rome burns (and newsagents go broke), long lunches, sweetheart deals with suppliers whist supposedly maintaining independence, ignoring the ravaging ways of magazine distributors, etc, etc, etc!
How about United Newsagents of Australia – I believe the name would be available since the last attempt to launch anything like this using that name died of apathy!