Earlier this week here I asked distribution newsagents three questions:
- Do you charge sub agents to deliver newspapers to them?
- Do you charge sub agents to pickup returns from them?
- Do you pay sub agents at least the publisher mandated commission?
Now, I have a supplementary question, a judgement question:
If a newsagent is found to have paid sub agents less than publisher mandated commission and they charged sub agents to deliver newspapers to them and/or have charged sub agents for returns pickup, should they have their distribution business taken from them?
I would say yes unless the subagent had signed a contract that had the charges and commission level clearly stated in the terms. We get our subagents to sign a contract so that both sides know their position.
Good luck getting News or f/Fax to take away a distribution contract as who will replace the distributor.
That is unethical practice and it would make me question what other parts of their business are being treated the same way.
Take it off them.
Can if the sales are under say 20 papers a day make a subagent pick up their own papers and have them drop back returns as it is no viable?
No
First/ Issued 2 breach notices (3 and you’re out).
Second/ Refund all Payments made by Subagent for delivery & collection of Newspapers/Magazines regardless of the period.
Three/ Close supervision and pdf copy of subagents weekly accounts sent to publisher’s concerned.
Four/ Commissions need to be repaid as well , unless previously agreed.
Using the above NO, the Distributor would still retain the run, but under supervision.
This person is probably cheating in other areas.
Short answer: No.
John’s ultimate end game scenario is accurate in that close supervision is the chosen tool of a Publisher in a case that had similar levels of fraud/deception/theft albeit different in the execution.
So despite what might be a popular choice or desired action, the Publisher calls the shots here (unless the victim takes matters into their own hands) and this was the call.
I guess each reported event would be investigated by the Publisher and decisions made on a case by case basis after consideration of the facts.
The offender must have a hide like Trump!
Speaking of whom, did you hear the one about the Secret Service Agent who when hearing of an imminent assassination attempt against Trump yelled out to Poteus “Donald duck”.
Jeez, I’m still laughing after hearing that one. Oh my aching gut.
what if a chemist who has got lottery agency inside hier chemist shop want me to supply papers when 50 yards across from them is a coles whom i supply now do i have any say in who i supply and who i dont?
cheers
Sharyn,
Looking at it from a different angle, what would you like to do, supply the chemist or not?
Hi Dennis
i would think that the less people supplied the better not too many other business that you are forced to supply other that erodes your own income
my take anyway