Author: Mark Fletcher

In 2004 ACP Magazines made the first move to cut newsagents out of long term supply arrangements with key petrol outlets. Just under 1,000 newsagents lost revenue as a result. Some other publishers subsequently followed ACP. Now, almost three years on, we see magazines getting moved in major petrol outlets and while top selling titles may still be doing okay, the magazine category overall has suffered. While no one will agree it would be good to access sales data to understand the impact beyond individual publishers. The previous newsagent supply arrangement was better for the category – maybe publishers will realise this when they discover how far from the traffic in some outlets their product is being moved.

Magazine publishers and distributors show their care about the environment by sending magazines which failed to sell the first time out to newsagents again and again. These old issues are used as fodder to fill double and triple packs, to add value to a title. The trouble is that punters committed to the title probably bought the old and very old issues when they first came out. Punters know the packs are a con – this why they are often ripped open in store to uncover issues not already purchased.

I don’t mind a an occasional double pack to reignite interest in a title. However, too often the double and triple pack strategy is used cynically by publishers to keep dead stock circulating. It’s cheap marketing.

While some will say why should I worry since if they don’t sell I can return them. True. But the freight costs for returns are high – I’m paying two and three times to freight a dead issue of a magazine back to the distributor.

Double and triple packs ought to, in my view, have a premium attached to them which respects the additional real-estate they need in a newsagency. If newsagents operate on a fee for service basis we would see far fewer double and triple packs.

Good to see Pacific Magazines announce that they will launch Women’s Health in Australia by the end of this year. The health category is strong at present and launches of new titles such as Women’s Health will help drive further growth.

Good to see Burke’s Backyard back and getting star treatment now that the show is coming back to TV. While sales have been okay while it’s been off air, ther magazine will benefit from on air support. We’ve been given extra stock this month because of the sales kick expected with the product giveaway accompanying the title.

Garden and related titles are strong despite the drought and stronger interest in Burke’s Backyard ought to help the overall category.

Limelight, Life Etc, Collectors and Gardening Australia from the ABC are strong magazine titles in their respective niches and therein lies a dilemma for the retailer. We’re driven to display each title in its appropriate category yet I suspect they would equally work in an ABC themed display stand. Such a display might see multiple titles purchased if, as I suspect, the titles are purchased sometimes for their ABC connection than the pure subject matter.

Take Collectors for example – it should be located at the back of the shop in the collectibles / antiques area. However, the TV show on which it is based is interesting to a broader audience that such an isolated category – yet I cannot justify display space for the limited quantity of this one title.

We might have a crack next week at an ABC themed display grouping the some of their titles together and therefore help the newer titles like Collectors find an audience.

The news that Emap is contemplating selling Australian titles needs to be considered in the context of the turmoil for the company in the UK. Add to this the moves surrounding some of Time Inc’s Australian titles and newsagents seem set for some changes in the magazine space – but rather than reacting to these moves, business minded newsagents ought to exert more control for themselves.

Australian Horticulture is struggling. We sell, if we’re lucky, one copy a month. It’s not paying its way. The Rural Press website says the titles has 4,507 ABC audited paid circulation January to June 2004. I received three copies this month so it cannot be in that many newsagencies once you account for subscriptions.

This is the type of publication I’m talking about when I pitch here that newsagents need more equitable terms. I can’t keep losing money of Australian Horticulture. I don’t need the title to give my newsagency credibility as a magazine specialist. I’d gladly carry the title if I was being paid for real-estate and time but without such compensation, the title is not worth it.

Australian Horticulture has a lifeline in the form of newsagents providing the retail presence at no cost. As one who is paying for this subsidy I feel it is right to question the worth of the title.

In retail, the saying stack em high and watch em fly is often pitched as a good strategy. There is evidence that this works with magazines. An issue can sell very well until you have one or two left and they will sit until the recall date. I have seen this happen where an issue has sold all but one or tow copies on the day of issue.

There are plenty of magazines titles for which we receive just one copy. Romantic Homes and Victorian Homes – the two in the middle of the photo – are single copy titles for my shop. It’s a problem because the pocket costs me the same whether it holds one copy or eight copies. Customer behaviour is such that these single copy titles are not likely to sell.

The distributor scale out algorithms are such that I am likely to be supplied for months, possibly years, before the title is cut.

So what’s the solution? My view is that if I am due to get a single copy then don’t send me any. However, I accept that such an approach denies the title the opportunity of building a customer base. Maybe I have to be flexible. The answer might be a scaled commission. If I am to receive one or two of a title, my commission ought to be, say, double. This gets my attention and demonstrates that the publisher is keen to work with me as I find customers for their title.

It could be that sending more titles is a solution. A smart distributor would cut in some areas so the title can be better supported elsewhere. While they say they do this, I am doubtful. A trial project built around a few titles could be established to test various approaches and find one which equitably serves publishers newsagents and distributors.

The current approach of all newsagents receiving titles in single quantity is disrespectful and financially expensive for newsagents.

This Excel magazine is a dog, it should not have access to the newsagent retail network. Sales data, not supply and return data but sales data will support my claim that this title ought to be killed off.

The only people making money off this title are NDD, the distributor, and the publisher. For the publisher it’s a low cost venture – same old content regurgitated and a black and white print run. For NDD it’s a fee for service. Newsagents are being abused, again.

I’ve early returned the copies I received today as I have more appropriate product to display in its place.

The free pedometer with this week’s New Idea is working well as the above sales decay graph for my store shows – it’s comparing this week with the average of the last three weeks. We’ve been a construction zone since March so sales are down. It’s good to see the kick this week.

We look at sales decay data for all the major weeklies every few days to measure the success or otherwise of our magazine co-location efforts. It also helps, as is the case here, with tracking the impact of publisher driven promotions.

As far as magazine giveaways go, this pedometer is excellent – useful and timely.

I’m thinking of getting out of adult magazines. Not because of an issue with selling what some might call pornography – each to his/her own I say. No, my concern is that adult magazines like Penthouse, Playboy and Hustler are no longer paying their way.

Take Penthouse for example, sales of Penthouse in my newsagency are poor – the sell through rate is 30% at best for the last year. Given the cover price, at this rate I’m not making money. If I get out of Penthouse then the others probably go as well. I’d keep Picture and People but not the others.

My view is that I need to get out of titles when they are no longer viable rather than waiting for a publisher to decide this.

The AWW branded crossword book launched last week (see this blog post) seems to sell well. In my store, in six days, we have already achieved a sell through of 30%. I’d say this is because of co-location.