Circulation of Bauer Media’s Dolly dropped 42% year on year in the latest audited circulation report – as reported by mUmBRELLA. other Bauer titles dropped: Cleo 25%, AWW 4.2%, Cosmopolitan 9.2%, PC & Tech 19%, Top gear 19.8%. Pacific titles dropped too but not at the same level as Bauer: Girlfriend 22%, Total Girl 29%, Men’s Health 19%, Women’s Health 12%, Marie Claire 9%, Better Homes and Gardens 6%.
Frankie, which usually achieves growth, dropped 3.5%.
Only a small number of titles reported growth this quarter.
Magazine publishers could grow sales by changing how they engage with newsagents. I am certain that newsagents could help publishers in return for a more commercial relationship. We could more actively promote magazines and engage in campaigns that increase multi-purchase as well as attracting shoppers back for their next purchase.
Newsagents have an opportunity to engage with the category differently to supermarkets, and P&C outlets where the focus is only on the SKU. For a better margin we can nurture and support magazines. It all depends if Australian magazine publishers want this.
According to the Daily Telegraph today, the latest Magazine circulation figures are worse than last year for all the weeklies eg. Woman’s Day (-12.9%) plus Dolly (-30.8%). The biggest winners are Prevention (+26.3%) and Inside Out(+9.6%). Page 32 in the Daily Telegraph (Sydney) if you want to know more
I think a lot of newsagents have become disengaged from magazines, it’s a dept that causes to much grief, and already consumes way to many resources for the return we get. It’s easy to bag the distributors, but in their shoes I’d run it the same way, it’s designed that way. Publishers really need to look at their model, they have the most to lose, unless they are switched into digital already, and it’s hard to make money in that space at the moment. If publishers, and newsagents want a future with magazines, there needs to be a whole new model that’s reflects modern society, I don’t know what that is but the current model is stuck in the 1970’s and can only end up a dead end one way street. With NDC pulling out maybe this is a good time for change, but then again G&G will have them all over a barrel.
I agree with Rick. For so many years there has been so many individuals, groups, associations and publishers all complaining that the system is broken, yet fundamentally nothing has changed, Sure there has been tweaks, but the model is still the same, and that model is not viable for all but a select few of the stakeholders in our industry.
Many of us are sick and tired of putting effort into trying to change a broken model as every effort falls on deaf and disinterested ears. The only option is to move on and focus on the rest of our business.
Until there is absolute engagement by publishers and distributor(s) in the long term viability of magazines in our channel then the future is bleak and many publishers will move from endangered to extinct. Gotch now has the ability to make a real difference to the future of our industry, it just remains to be seen if they have the inclination.
Yep, also in agreement with Rick.
I’m totally over magazines and the distributors to the point where I have cut my magazine space to less than half of what I had 6 years ago to replace with other better earning and less labour consuming product which is going great guns for me. My ideal now would be to work toward carrying less than 100 titles as I quite frankly don’t give a rats about any of the titles that don’t pay their way. That would leave me with about ten of the weeklies with the rest being niche mags that do do well for me. The other 700 odd titles that the distributors keep forcing on me would no longer have a place. The extra space will go over to the other line that is making me real money.
See my post from today on this topic.
Paul, your view is the only rational action we can take. You, in essence, are saying to the publishers: if you want my business, you are going to have to compete with all the other producers who also want my business. That’s what the market is supposed to do.
It’s ironical that in this tough time for magazines, newsagents are being empowered for the first time ever. And it’s the first time the supply chain has been brought face-to-face with consumer demand instead of publisher demand.
It doesn’t really matter in the long run what is decided in regard to the MPA’s Code-of-Conduct, they will have to compete to survive. Newsagents are going to display the goods that will bring them the most profit, so publishers what can you offer.
As a small, independent publisher I want to jump for joy hearing Mark Fletcher talk about leaning in to change. At bella rae magazine we’re interested in doing exactly that but we’re a small team and it is slow going and a whole lot of hard work.
Please help us understand how best to engage with Newsagents because its pretty overwhelming to understand the distributor/newsagent dynamic and where we factor in.
We would love to see better understanding and promotion of our product but we’re told there is “no point” in POS promotion or that its a “waste of time” trying to communicate with our 400+ newsagents but we NEED you guys. How can we help each other with business?
We are a little fish fiercely swimming up stream. We are exceptional in that we have been in publication since 2009 but this year has been our first with commercial distribution.
Far from a teen gossip mag, we actively engage with young women in practical ways and communicate that every young woman has Value+Beauty+Purpose – we are bella rae mag but we are so much more than a magazine and we want to hear how newsagents feel we can do things better!
I am also part of a tiny group of Australian Independent Magazine Publishers who are trying to support each other as we look to bring our magazines into the future and I know my publishing friends will be so interested in engaging on this topic too.
Yes, yes, yes! How can we make this an active 2 way street. When I speak with our readers they want to know where they can go to purchase our magazine & 9/10 will drive them to their local newsagents.
People really still do love magazines, how can we get them into their hands. No point burying our head in the sand and hope it will will magically happen. Us niche magazines can’t compete with the big publishers to buy up space, but surely their has to be away we can work together.
I would rather sell niche magazines than fill my shelves with magazine titles that have have been around for ever and I hardly get a sale from anymore.
We need fresh magazines, new titles, on our shelves, something that magazine lovers want, and magazines that make us stand out from the convenience of supermarkets.
Well, you’ve got two niche mags talking to you here and we’re friends with more. For 7 years my mag has been published without commercial distribution but last issue we secured it because we need it to survive and yet how do we get relationship with you guys and communicate who we are, what we are about and help you sell? Newsagents we distribute to don’t even know they have our magazine let alone what it is about to sell it. We cannot afford to travel around the country telling you about our independent title, phone calls its hard to talk to the right person or chance on the right time to hit a lul between customers, we’re told you don’t do promotions and aren’t interested in written material about our publication – how do we work with you?
Jewel we make 50% and more off gifts, 65% and more off cards. We spend our time where we make money. 25% off magazines is the starting point of the challenge. The other factor is time.
Th reason written material is challenging is because in any given week, the average Australian newsagent received more than 250 supplier communications of one sort or another. Time poor again.
I have written at length abut the challenges and the opportunities for publishers. Here are a couple of these posts:
http://www.newsagencyblog.com.au/2015/01/15/if-magazine-publishers-and-distributors-do-not-offer-viable-terms-what-then-for-newsagents/
http://www.newsagencyblog.com.au/2015/10/30/i-urge-magazine-publishers-to-make-newsagencies-magazine-specialists-once-more-ditch-supermarkets/
There is an issue in being heard if you are a publisher. I processed over $7000 in new magazines yesterday alone. It is hard for newsagents to hear a lone magazine publisher voice in the myriad of titles being processed through our systems.
Like any business the company who owns the product needs to work out the best way of getting it sold. This is the same for publishers, it is up to the publisher to work out how to get the message across about its publications. Newsagents do not have the time or honestly the inclination to spend precious time researching new magazine titles (unless a customer requests it).
Would you put time towards sourcing a title that may sell for $8 4 times a year and potentially sell 4-5 netting you $40 gross profit a year? I am not being rude but publishers have to understand the time constraints on newsagents and how we have to carefully manage all of our resources for the greatest return.
On a side note – please do not refer to newsagents as “you” as in a blanket coverage of all of us as we all run very different operations. The industry is going through a period of upheaval and my recommendation would be that a group of niche publishers target the best practice newsagents, offer a higher commission level in return for the support their product would receive in these growing businesses. The first suppliers to actively target and enhance their relationship with the successful newsagents who are changing will see success in the next decade as the number of newsagents declines leaving only successful retailers.
Chris, you seem very frustrated. I understand. We too are very frustrated.
There is no disrespect intended through the use of the collective “you” for “newsagents, as unique as you are you are from the same industry. Likewise, we “publishes” and “niche magazines” are each very unique also.
I understand there is a difficulty with the voice of the independent publisher being heard and so I am a publisher looking for solutions.
Honestly, it seems that although there is much complaint about distribution companies and an expression of desire for niche magazines there is little desire or ability to provide solutions to facilitate the sales of those same magazines.
I think independent publishers are working a lot harder than you realise at promoting their own product. We would not still be in publication if we weren’t doing something about it – this industry is brutal and we put everything on the line because we believe in what we do.
Another issue is that there is a vast number of newsagents who like the way it works right now where they can early return whatever they like when ever they like as this lowers their risk and they do not have to make any serious business decisions in this category. As much as people push for change, there will be a large number of newsagents who will resist as is their right as a business owner. In my opinion the one way forward is for a new or established distributor to open up a channel that requires a higher level of compliance and performance requirements on all sides that facilitates growth. Unfortunately I do not have the capital to facilitate this project at the moment!
Jewel – the only frustration I have is that my business is thought of in the same breathe as the poor newsagent operator down the road! Yet if I was a crap cafe I would not be put in the same bracket as the cool cafe down the road yet they sell the same products just as we have similar products. This is a marketing/branding issue for our industry which needs to be addressed as well!
I am not sure how you can reach us all Jewel – maybe some form of web platform where new independent publishers could spruike their titles to pro-active newsagents on a fortnightly basis so we can log on every now and then and check if there are any new titles or updated publications that would suit the demographics of our shop.
Chris, when you start talking about “compliance”, it sounds like it is you who doesn’t want to make the “serious business decisions”. If we really want to make your own decisions, let us do so by doing what other retailers do: buy the stock you want at a reasonable margin and live or die by your decisions. I would put my money on you keeping your average unsold magazines under 10% in which case you would be a hell of a lot better off than you are now. If this were to happen, the magazines found in your shop would be a response to the consumer, not to compliance with the big publishers and supplier who pursue their own agenda much to the detriment of newsagents, independent publishers and the consumer. However, we do not have the option of making your own decisions so you should be arguing against compliance in the hope that one day you will be in a position make the serious magazine decisions.
I can’t see why you worry about the “crap cafe” down the road; if it was a good as yours, yours would ordinary, as it is, yours is extraordinary. What a fantastic advantage you have in your area.
In regard to comments on distribution, I do not think you realize the strong bond that exists between the dominate publishers and the supplier. Consider this statement made to the ACCC.
“The MPA represents the 3 largest Australian publishers. The MPA members
represent approximately 63% of magazine sales revenue and 7% of number of titles.”
They go on to reveal they have a return rate of 33%.
So, by deduction, the other 37% of revenue comes from the other 93% of the other publishers. The MPA publishers also claim 59% of other publishers magazines are returned.
So here’s the point: why do the MPA publishers allow the suppliers to tie non-MPA products to MPA products. You would think it would be to their advantage to have as few opposition magazines as possible. So there must be other arrangements that make it more profitable to allow opposition products to ride on their shirt tails. It is these arrangements that a new entry supplier would need to deal with.
Henry, thanks for your comments but you seem to miss my point but that’s ok as we are all entitled to our opinions.
I did mention compliance on all sides, not just Newsagents so you could determine from that point that distributors and publishers have to be compliant to newsagent terms.
How you have got from my comment that I do not want to make serious business decisions is beyond me, maybe I should have a few Sat afternoon drinks like most people do so I can grasp your meaning.
Chris, I responded to you because what you say is interesting. On a blog, we test the limits of the written word as compared to face to face conversation where our words would be modified from moment to moment by the others spoken and unspoken reactions. Had we been having a drink and a chat together, we would have come away disagreeing but having enjoyed the conversation.
Absolutely, the only issue is that I am not sure how you interpreted my comments to mean I do not want to make serious business decisions. I am all for everyone expressing their opinion as I freely do but please make sure when commenting on another persons view you do not assume anything that has not been written.
Maybe we can have a drink and chat about it at a conference in the future.
As long as newsagents are seen and treated as agents, any compliance discussion will be one-sided and will fail.
Chris, we’re both having an identity crisis here; you at the thought that anyone would assume you are not a strong independent person and I because people might think I would attack a person rather than the argument. If you read my first sentence,
‘Chris, when you start talking about “compliance”, it sounds like it is you who doesn’t want to make the “serious business decisions”.’,you will realise rather than assume you are not a decision maker it infers you are, but that when you argue for compliance, you sounds like you are arguing for a system that is rule bound and; therefore, inconsistent with your own beliefs as an independent person. We don’t differ over the kind of person are – anyone reading your comments would have no doubt. Our disagreement is over whether the notion of compliance is consistent we the notion of independence.
However, having said that, I’m obliged to tell you that I have taken the matter to the arbitrator I fear most: my wife. She has ruled in your favour because I used the phrase,”it is you”. When I pleaded that I intended camaraderie, she said it was inappropriate since we don’t know each other well. So I’m sorry for that.