I emailed the CEO of the ANF on May 31 after being shown correspondence between him and a newsagent in which he referred to me. Click here to see the text of my email.
The ANF chairman responded to me last week. Click here to see this letter
Here is my response sent yesterday to the ANF Chairman, Stuart Kilborn, on this matter of equitable magazine supply for newsagents.
Stuart,
Thank you for your June 4 letter responding to my email to ANF CEO Alf Maccioni of May 31. I emailed Alf has he has been engaged in correspondence in which he comments about me and the Australian Newsagency Blog. While I am happy to respond to your letter, I am surprised that Alf did not respond to me as he is happy to talk about me behind my back.
Also, you write to me at Tower Systems. My agitation on behalf of newsagents and my own newsagency businesses on this issue is via the newsagency blog. The blog is a non commercial activity I spend my own time on publishing my opinions on matters I think will interest newsagents.
In your letter you say:
Whilst we habitually choose to focus on positive impacts for our channel the negative effect you are potentially causing the channel through misleading information requires us to respond. If what newsagents have told me is true, in this matter of the MPA trial the ANF has not been focussing on positive impacts as it has reportedly engaged in character assassination with no regard as to the facts.
I’ll not respond at this time to much of the first two pages of your letter as what you have written does not relate to the MPA trial whatsoever.
For the record, I first became involved in discussions on magazine supply rule changes in late 2013. These discussions, including consideration on the rules at the core of the MPA trial today, predated the involvement of the ANF. My position has not changed.
I have called for newsagents to withdraw support for the ANF on the matter of the MPA trial because I think the ANF is profoundly wrong. It is unfortunate that you label my disagreement as a lack of courage. You imply that it is courageous to support the ANF and not courageous to disagree with the ANF. So much for robust debate. So much for free will. Your statement is ignorant nonsense.
I have read the MPA submission to the ACCC. In your letter you go beyond this and appear to put the position of the small number of publishers in the MPA and the two major magazine distributors – ahead of the interests of your members.
You ignore that the ACCC conference attended by the ANF, newsagents, publishers and distributors was called for by newsXpress. The ANF could have called for this conference but it did not. Given what was discussed at the conference it was worthwhile for newsagents to have had the opportunity if only to speak directly to the ACCC about the unfairness of magazine supply to our channel compared to those with which we compete.
Left to ANF representation only the conference would not have occurred and newsagents would not have had the opportunity to, for the first time, speak directly to the ACCC about the matters covered. Shame on you and the ANF for not pursuing this opportunity for subsequently denigrating some of those newsagents who did participate.
At the ACCC conference, the CEO of the ANF said the organisation has consulted with newsagents. All I can find to support this claim is a brief mention in a note from the CEO in National Newsagent magazine and a brief mention in an ANF news email. As I have written previously, on this most vital of matters, the ANF ought to have hosted capital city and regional centre forums to canvass newsagent opinions. It ought to have conducted an industry wide survey on each of the rules to be tested as documented to the ACCC by the MPA.
The ANF did not do these things.
The claim by your CEO to the ACCC conference that the ANF consulted is not supported by the evidence available. If there is other evidence of newsagent consultation please share it.
You say Consultation is a word that is loosely thrown around, and often regarded as ticking a box then proceeding down your own path. Maybe that is what consultation means within the ANF. I disagree with your definition. Consultation is a process of actively engaging with those you say you represent to fully explore and understand their views prior to you forming your own views as to how to represent their interests. The ANF has not done this on this issue.
THE NEWSAGENCY BLOG
I do not use the blog to manufacture negative factors and am offended that you claim I do.
The Newsagency Blog publishes directly through my posts and through comments by readers items that are encouraging of newsagents and those who service and engage newsagents commercially. Sure it shines a light on negative issues. This is done with facts and in an effort to change behaviour.
My take is that if I write a post that is critical of the ANF you label it as negative for the channel. I disagree with such a position. The ANF has made its own failure of representation of newsagents. The failure is exacerbated because of poor communication and a refusal for open and public discussion on matters of importance.
THE ANF CHAIRMAN
In my email to your CEO I make the point that you, Stuart, called a newsagent with the sole purpose of speaking about me. This is a newsagent to whom you had never spoken before. To suggest otherwise as you do on page four of your letter is unfortunate spin that seeks to divert attention from your actions. I don’t care whether you are paid for your time. Your letter goes on to canvass issues not pertinent to this discussion. You did call at least one newsagent to agitate against me and that’s okay. My point on this in my email to your CEO is that you should have the guts to speak to me. That you went behind my back as a whiney school kid is like communication reportedly by other ANF staffers about me and this issue of magazine supply.
If you have an issue with me, confront me. I have written to the ANF about comments made by Ann Nugent in Queensland about me which upset several Queensland newsagents. I wrote to Ann and she did not respond. I wrote to Alf and he did not respond. If Ann did not make the comments she should say so and I can go back to the newsagents and ask whey they would make the allegation up. If Ann did make the comments then she need to answer for her behaviour. Remaining silent damaged the ANF.
Your letter then turns to the ACCC conference., noting that I say every newsagent who spoke at the conference disagreed with your CEO. To support your claim you include a note from the ACCC minutes. The quote you have included offers no support of the ANF’s position. Indeed, the minutes note the terms on which Ms Dixon agreed to participate in the trial, terms not reflected in the documentation submitted by the MPA to the ACCC.
PUBLIC DEBATE
The concerns in discussion between us relate to the poor performance of the ANF on this issue of magazine supply to newsagents and, most recently, the poor representation of newsagents on the issue of the MPA pilot of proposed new magazine supply rules.
The ANF says the trial is a good thing. I disagree. This is what I propose the ANF debates publicly with me. The worst outcome from such a public debate would be those attending agreeing that the ANF has not acted in the interests of members. The best outcome from an ANF perspective would be that those attending do agree with the position taken by the ANF. Either way newsagents benefit from a transparent exploration of how their interests have been represented and, more broadly, what is best for their representation on the issue of magazine oversupply.
I suggested a debate because it seems to me that the ANF has not debated the proposed rules for had it done this it would not have endorsed them. Remember, the documented rules are different to what the ANF claims the rules to be. For example, in the documented rules there is no provision for newsagents to control range and volume, no provision for early returns … yet the ANF says these benefits are part of the trial. As I noted at the conference, If this is the case why not document that.
A public debate would demonstrate to newsagents that the ANF is transparent and that it is consulting on this matter.
In your letter you say you have welcomed on many new members during this recent phase. Please advise your membership numbers prior to this phase and now. This is an invitation for you to be transparent.
CONCLUSION
If the ANF had professionally and thoroughly represented newsagents on this matter it would have:
- Ensured early returns were allowed in the proposed magazine supply rule changes.
- Ensured newsagents had control over range and volume in the proposed supply rule changes.
- Held public forums to harvest opinions from all newsagents.
- Engaged actively with all magazine publishers and not just the three members of the MPA on this issue.
- Stopped criticising personally anyone who criticised the performance of the ANF on this matter.
- Ensured that the trial is a real world trial testing processes and rules that can be applied channel wide rather the current trial involving a level of non real world support for some participants.
- Been more thorough in advising newsagents about the trial in its various channels of communication.
- Been more robust in demanding magazine distributors use the sales data provided by newsagents to set supply levels.
- Used the proposal of the trial as an opportunity to agitate on the proposed continuation of anti-competitive against newsagents by magazine distributors compared to their treatment of our competitors.
The ANF says the trial is necessary to provide an understanding of magazine performance and newsagent engagement with the category. I say that such an understanding can be gained today by a thorough analysis of the data.
I believe in the newsagency channel and work hard in many ways outside your gaze and knowledge in support of newsagents, for the future of the channel. The MPA trial is trialing the wrong parameters in a wrong way. For newsagents to have a bright future they need fair and equitable supply of magazines – on terms that enable them to be commercially competitive with other retailers of magazines. Anything short of this is not a solution. The issue at hand here is not the trial so much as it is the proposed new supply rules being tested by the trial, rules the ANF has not challenged.
Remember, the ANF played a central role in the deregulation of magazine supply. Its representatives at that time failed newsagents miserably on this matter. They failed to seek and achieve for newsagents a change to the terms of supply to reflect a deregulated environment. Their failure in 1999 means that today our channel has magazine supply rules from the era of protection and regulation while our competitive benefit from supply rules designed for a competitive post-regulation marketplace. This is what must be fixed. I see no evidence in your correspondence and the ANF submission to the ACCC that the ANF gets this.
Stuart, you have to ask yourself, are you the right person to lead the ANF, are you the best the channel has available? Asking this question does not make me a bad person nor does it mean I am not courageous.
I am happy to meet to discuss this issue at any time face to face.
—————————————————————————-
Footnote: The MPA ought to have thoroughly analysed all data available on magazine supply, sales and returns prior to even considering this trial. They should have also discussed possible solutions with all stakeholders including other publishers outside their small group, all distributors, all newsagents and others involved directly in the magazine management within newsagencies.
This trial is ill-conceived because it was not properly researched prior to designing the proposed supply rules to be trialled.
As soon as it as invited to be involved last year, the ANF should have written extensively on the trial in its various communication platforms and actively sought newsagent feedback from far and wide. That it did not do this has left the ANF ill-informed and supporting a trial that does not address the fundamental challenges faced by newsagents, the uncompetitive terms of supply of magazines to our channel.
Newsagents sell close to 50% of all magazines in Australia. There are ways we can grow this. There are ways magazines can be profitable for us. A trial of the ways and processes that could be employed to achieve these outcomes is appropriate.
It seems to me that few involved in the MPA trial are actually interested in putting the interests of newsagents ahead of their own interests.
Mark(and this is NOT a dig) you may have answered this in the past but if all is no good at the ANF why not join up again to fix what is wrong We can all bleet on about what is wrong but is anything getting fixed.What can we all do collectivelly to become better at what we all do.This is becoming tiresome (with respect)
Paul this is a good question and I am glad you have asked it. I would happily do that if there was certainty participative with a group of thoughtful, engaged and dedicated colleagues to reform the organisation to redirect its focus to serve newsagents on the matters of most importance.
A single person on a board cannot achieve this. What is needed is root and branch change, driven by active and respected newsagents. I would be happy to be part of this as long as there are enough engaged with this common goal of serving newsagents first in mind.
Back in 2003 I joined the ANF board with the goal of encouraging better service of newsagents. A single vote, even two can struggle to achieve this. It is even worse when you consider poll votes, when one board member can vote based on the number of members they represent. This resulted in blocks acting to thwart genuine reform.
Thanks for the frank response but if we all thought that no good(or we could do nothing) would come from joining any organisation where does that leave us.A large fire is started by a single small match (fire)
again this is with respect and i am not suggesting that you alone can fix our collective problems
Paul the challenge if you read the letter from the ANF Chairman and correspondence from their CEO, the ANF does not think they have a problem. I’d note, they are entitled to form such a view. I happened to disagree and, I suspect, many newsagents would disagree.
Through the course of this MPA matter I have been asked by several newsagents to start an alternative organisation. I have resisted that for similar reasons to what I have said here.
If representatives of the ANF said we’re in trouble, we’ve made some mistakes, can we find a way to getter to serve newsagents the areas of concern to them – I’d listen with interest.
Mark, you continually put your head on the chopping block and you should not feel that is your duty but you really are the only person that I would re-join the ANF for.
I don’t think there is another person in Oz who understands our issues so competently.
No one has done, or is doing, more for our industry than you and while you have your share of naysayers I just want to say that I admire your intellect, your tenacity, and your ability to keep going when you are attacked from every angle by people with nowhere near your capacity for work nor your prodigious output of good common sense.
I want to know when you sleep because sometimes you put something on this blog in the wee small hours.
If there was a newsagency medal I would award it to you.
Paul
In my 20+ years of being a Newsagent including sitting on our state board for 14 years and previously being an ANF member ,I have tried and tried to bring about change for the betterment of the industry. Some Newsagents who sit on boards should hang their heads in shame.
I learnt early on that some board members don’t have the gumption to support change and some board members don’t understand their roll and are happy just to be seat warmers.
As Mark suggested read the letter from the ANF Chairman . It give a insight as to the mindset of the ANF and where they think their duty of care is to its members .
As for non members bleating on as you put it . Might I point out that non members are dragged along with the ANFs poor decision making, Gotch and Network don’t make a set of rules for ANF members and another set of rules for non members
On the issue of the MPA trial the ANF didn’t widely consult with its own members in fact in the letter from the Chairman he stated there was no need for the ANF to consult its members as it was not their trial !!! What rot the ANF endorsed this trial in fact consulted with the MPA on the structure of the trial where is their duty of care to its members.
Paul how do you propose to “fix” the ANF many Newsagents have tried in the past with little or no success .
What is tiresome is people who think the ANF will fix everything .
Last time I checked Australia was a free country so If Newsagents want better outcomes for their businesses do they have to be a member of the ANF ? rubbish
Good luck working with the ANF when and if you achieve anything please come on here and tell us
Paul posting on here and having a go at Mark Fletcher is fine he can handle it .
But if you want to do that how about posting with your full name ? no need to be shy
Mark – I didn’t take Paul’s email as having a crack.
June, thanks for your comments. There are plenty who work tirelessly for the channel.
Newsagents play an important role in Australian cities and towns. However, we have to justify our existence and this can only be done by us being successful. To be successful we need control. This is the issue at the heart of my concerns regarding magazines. We do not have control. We are not allowed to be as successful as we could be. This is what those supporting the MPA trial fail to see I fear.
Mark Richardson
what the f$#@ are you on about
and shy i doubt that
I am a part of the trial with MPA. I have had absolutely no contact with the ANF concerning the trial, just with selected representatives from MPA. I feel that I would prefer to be part of the trial then let other newsagents take my place who do not have A)the guts to stand up to distributors, suppliers, MPA and tell them the way it is, B) have good communication skills and C) know how to run a good business. It is only early days in the trial but it has proved to be positive so far as we have been able to show clear signs of blatant oversupply to high level management of top publishers. Plus we have conducted a magazine relay which has changed the look of our shop. I think it looks much fresher and we have allocated previous magazine space to products which are potential cross sellers for the magazines located closest. As Mark has said before, we should do this regularly and the results in my shop are proof that it not only changes the make-up of your shop but it also opens your eyes to how your shop looks and makes you think outside the square you are normally in.
I have always had total control of my shop and this trial will be no different.
Chris part of my concern is that the resources invested in the trial sites are not what they will be able to invest post-trial and thereby possibly deliver results real world newsagents will not be able to achieve.
Another concern is that this trial involved less than 5% of publishers, the MPA members.
On blatant oversupply, the data has been available for years and it is offensive distributors do not use this and do not have contracts with publishers that enable it to be used.
Well done on the relay – it continues to be the single most valuable step newsagents can take to drive immediate magazine sales growth.
Chris could I ask what were your return rates before the trial started ?
Hi Shauns, our return rate was just under 50%, 30% early and 20% normal, why?
Mark, my impression so far, and it is only early, is that the any newsagency could implement this trial. Any trial only targets a minor segment of an audience. It is only early in the trial but I am positive about it because the lines of communication between our store and the other stakeholders have been clear and honest.
Why ? Because I want to make sure they have selected the right newsagents , the ones that are suffering from over supply .
Shaun, I think we are all suffering from over-supply so it won’t matter which newsagents have been chosen.
For 39 years I have had a 53% returns ratio despite my constant intervention to improve my supplies.
If early returns were disallowed I would probably be so cash strapped that I would
have to walk away.
Now I might be tardy or stupid or both (but I’m not) but the fact is that it is unsustainable.
copies go from 3 to 6 with no supporting sales data. They go from 150 to 200 with no supporting sales data.
It is hard to imagine any other industry which is pushed to the limits as we are.
I can see the day coming (hopefully in my lifetime) when the circle will turn and so many small publishers will hit the wall that we will all be complaining about undersupply – yes I really believe that but that will create another whole set of problems.
Diversity is the only way to survive – we have to imagine a future with only the top 80 titles of mags and probably no papers so we need to be well on the way to implementing other sorts of sales and we are held back on price only by ourselves.
I sell chess boards and beautiful mah-jong sets and they cost nearly $300 each.
I only need to sell one to return me a week’s commission on papers.
This is our future. Searching our demographic and seeing what is lacking.
Our centre is considered the fashion centre of Adelaide so clothes, jewellery, and shoe shops are at its epicentre.
That leaves quite a bit of room for other sorts of things to be checked out.
Plush has been one of our winners. We deal with Korimco.
We have a smiggle and a Kikki K in our centre so upmarket stationery is the next thing for
me to attack.
Random House have a gorgeous range of
journals and diaries called Paper Blanks and we have done really well with them.
I would love other newsagents to let us know here what has worked for them.
By helping each other we are helping ourselves.
Some product won’t work in all demographics but some will.
Ancol are moving (somewhat slowly) towards some upmarket stationery but mostly I have to look elsewhere for it.
I’m happy to share the names of companies with whom I deal for giftlines.
In reading the MPA proposal to the ACCC the purpose of the trial is to end up with an industry “CODE OF CONDUCT” which will bind newsagents to a set of rules.
I am not against a trial BUT, the trial rules as requested by the MPA to the ACCC, do not improve a newsagents position and can make it much worse. The trial therefore in its current form is a waste of everyone’s time and money. If the ANF did have any input(which is doubtful), they should have canvassed IDEAS from newsagents as to what needed to be in the trial to improve magazines generally.
In fact the ANF should have a permanent list of these ideas gathered from years past, but they obviously don’t, which shows the lack of involvement of the ANF in talking to newsagents for many years.
If for the purpose of the trial only early returns are ceased, that would be fine, but that is not stated and should be if that is the case.
The trial rules were drawn up by the MPA and even they did not consult newsagencies. To the MPA we are invisible, to the ANF we are their meal ticket.
June, being the first newsXpress store in metropolitan Adelaide(with many more to follow), I would love to share what has worked for us, but I am bound by “secrecy” until you join.
Will stop by and meet you one day when I’m out that way.
I must admit to not having given this issue the attention it obviously deserves. Having now read the documentation I am finding it hard to get answers for the following:
1. Has the trail actually commenced?
2. Do we know which newsagents are part of the trial?
3. Is there, or will there be a forum for these newsagents to share their trail experience with other newsagents?
4. Are submissions on the draft determination still being taken?
5. What is the process at the end of the trail process?
6. Will the learning from the trial actually be fed back into the ACCC process before a final determination is made?
Can anyone answer these questions for me please?
A quick note of sincere thanks to Mark Fletcher for is efforts on this matter to date. Had it not been for Mark’s efforts I would be none the wiser. The ANF has in my view failed newsagents on this matter. If there was consultation by the ANF I certainly wasn’t aware of it. While I am a current member of the ANF, I am seriously questioning why!
Chris during the trial period are you allowed to early return magazines without restrictions ?
Mark:
1. The trial has commenced.
2. I know of at least half of them.
3. No, not established.
4. Yes.
5. A report on the results.
6. No as that is not part of the submission to the ACCC by the MPA.
On the ANF, their CEO says the ANF has been transparent with newsagents about this. I can find no evidence to support this claim.
June, I understand why you want newsagents to share information and insights. Given the growing gap between successful businesses and others this is less likely as newsagents are competing not only with other retailers but with each other. This is the value of a proactive group.
Take newsXpress, for example, it has over 125 preferred suppliers with around two thirds of these not being traditional newsagent suppliers. I’d not want newsXpress members too be public about these as to do so would reveal intellectual property that makes their individual businesses more valuable.
This is a core focus for us today – to make our own newsagency businesses more valuable.
Hi Mark,
Yes I can early return but I need to email MPA my returns form to show the proof I am being oversupplied.
I will check whether I have a confidentiality agreement for the trial and if I do not I will update you as it progresses. It is better that you hear from a newsagent doing it than from whispers.
On a side note June: I am at the moment selling a tonne of shopkins, they are walking out the door! I get toys through All Brands Toys, Modern Brands, Jasnor and Waymore. I follow the trends that are happening at schools etc and sell what is hot. It works really well, Peppa Pig was great but slowing now, Frozen was good, Match Attax was amazing(we sold thousands!) and as Mark has shown we are also now stocking Minions as it takes off. I have already started researching/ordering Star Wars gear as that will be massive later this year.
June we joined newsXpress last year its been fantastic both for ourselves and our business .
Our turnover is up on last year but more importantly our GP looking much better
Chris be careful with Star Wars as the majors locked in product last year and groups did so early this year.
If the ANF wanted to resolve the scourge of magazine over supply you would think they would talk to magazine publishers. That is what you would expect isn’t it?
Mark and Chris thanks for your responses.
Mark, given your answer to my question 6, what is the purpose of the trial? If the trial is not going to do anything to shape the final determination why have a trial? They may as well have come out with a final determination.
Chris, I would be very interested to hear about your experiences during the so called trial. Thanks
Mark, the MPA says the purpose of the trial is to address oversupply to newsagents.
I say this cannot be the purpose as the trial does not involve all magazine publishers and the construct of the trial has not included reasonable consultation with all newsagents.
At the hear of oversupply is the treatment of newsagents compared to the other channels with which we compete. The only way to provide newsagents with fair and just magazine supply is for us to have a level of control equal to those with which we compete. This opportunity has not been put on the table by the MPA nor is it part of any submission to the ACCC on this trial by the ANF. This has been part of the submissions made by newsXpress and by me individually.
Competition in the supply and sale of magazines will not be enhanced by this trial. Now will the trial, in the form of the rules put to the ACCC, adequately address the issue of oversupply – or undersupply for that matter.
I believe there is a long term goal of the MPA that is being overlooked by newsagents that is central to my submissions to the ACCC.
As stated on the MPA Application, point 2(a) “The longer term aim of the Pilot is to assist in the promulgation and implementation of a Distribution Code of Conduct(Code).”
Again under Public benefits, point 4(a), “The pilot will also be a “proof of concept” that will assist in getting necessary stakeholder support for an industry wide Code of Conduct”……. it then goes on describing how great and profitable it will be for newsagents and how it will assist the consumer. Point 4 then ends saying “Therefore the public benefits of any Code of Conduct apply equally to the pilot.”
The Code of conduct is mentioned other times but in Public detriments, point 6(a) “In this regard we note that any Code of Conduct will not be implemented without itself being first authorised by the ACCC.
The MPA has a goal of forcing a Code of Conduct on newsagents, drawn up by the MPA with their own rules.
The trial will succeed, and we need to convince the ACCC that the current trial rules, drawn up by the MPA are for the benefit of the MPA and not newsagents.
We need the rules of the trial changed NOW, or the current rules, under the guise of a successful trial may be implemented as an industry Code of Conduct.
A Code of Conduct must be drawn up by ALL affected parties which include newsagencies.
The purpose of the trial is to prove to the ACCC that early returns will not be needed.
The MPA wants a new code of conduct approved which will disallow early returns
As Chris has stated as a trial participant he can early return BUT he has to prove he has been oversupplied ,it would be interesting to know how time consuming this will be
What happens when a new copy of a magazine arrives yet the old copy cannot be returned for another 2 weeks currently we can early return the old copy.
What happens if we get say 10 copies of a magazine previous sales were 8 so that’s ok, but as you know we don’t usually sell the sale amount each month so the next month we sell 2 copies ,our previous sales will show we are not being oversupplied , so will we be forced to hold those 8 copies for 6 weeks ?
I do not believe the distribution companies have or will not want the resources to handle newsagents justifying early returns by their new guidelines. Historical sales data on previous issue and same issue 12 months previous should satisfy that requirement but getting Network & Gordon & Gotch staff to go thru every newsagent request for each magazine (for us 10 -30 titles each delivery at least) isn’t realistic. I believe the model we will end up with will be similar to now on all things except NO EARLY RETURNS
Adrian you are correct. Especially considering I am told that Bauer is in the process of divesting itself of Network Services and Bauer is outsourcing most staff not involved with publishing
Nelson I have not heard that about Network Services and Bauer.
I would suggest Mark that you ask your sources within Bauer and Network. I am told that by September it will be a ghost town.