You’d think a magazine distributor owned by a publisher could get the scale out of that publisher’s titles right. Sadly, Bauer media’s own network Services has failed on that score. They have increased our supply of the Take 5 Crime & Puzzle Special from 12 copies to 16 to 18 despite the evidence showing that ten copies is appropriate based on our sales history.
While Bauer fronts the ACCC and says the company wants a strong newsagents channel and wants to be part of developing a fairer model, here they are doing the opposite. I know if I complain to Network they will say the increase is an error. I am tired of hearing that excuse.
I think I have been sent the extra stock because Bauer wanted it somewhere, anywhere – regardless of what would be considered fair based on the sales data.
Bauer complains through the MPA that I am wrong on the issue of the magazine trial. If only they put as much energy into fixing their magazine supply model as they do into complaining about newsagent concerns.
This increase in supply of Take 5 Crime & Puzzle Special is appalling, unwarranted, unethical in my view.
And this is a large part of the reason I’m about to lose another 180 magazine pockets and draw down to about 500 pockets with an eye to future to probably cut this even further to 350 or even less if other more productive parts of my business continue to give me the returns that magazines don’t. If it’s not a title I want to keep and have a history of selling, it will no longer have any time or space on my shelving for any reason (certainly not delayed billing) .
Paul how do you manage that? We continually receive more and more titles with no room to display. Our only option is to early return.
There are so many examples of this oversupply scenario that Mark finds easily, to reveal the state of affairs in magazine supplies.
In anyone’s language this should be sending a message to Newsagent Industry bodies.
That there is more to it than just ensuring you have a seat at the table or that you have contact arrangements with certain groups. All that of course should be essential and basic building blocks, done in the formative stages, of any representative group.
But it is not the be all and end all.
If, as is shown, both by past performances and self confessed, there continues to be a lack of any degree of success towards reducing costs borne by Newsagents in relation to a broken magazine supply model, then what is the point of having the entity as it currently exists.
I don’t believe its throwing stones to ask such a question.
I don’t necessarily agree with Mark’s position that a debate allowing Newsagents to decide is the answer.
I think both should extend a hand to each other and work for the common good.
Clearly both seem to have the same outcome desire but individually they cannot achieve the goal.
Put Marks undisputed understanding of operational matters and strategic thinking together with the ANF’s contacts/seats at the table and Newsagent reach and there has to be a better chance of a positive outcome for Newsagents.
Of course there are plenty of examples of other great stories like “…..And the dish ran away with the spoon… its called fairy tales.
I’m happy to receive evidence of this type of oversupply from others by the way.
17 return 12 so they sent 18 this time round
Just looking at shauns post and I noticed the capture code for leave a reply…….
It is ……..
fcKt
I hope that’s not an omen for magazines 🙂
Best result 10/15 worst result 0/13 over past 15 months. Received 18 this month.
Since I don’t know the size of the print run I’m unsure if the sales efficiency rate should be 25%, 35% 45% or 55%.
No wonder I’m feeling like a mushroom.