Further to my post last month about Google magazine, the same publisher, Citrus Media, is behind a range of other titles offering equally questionable value. They publish Ultimate Guides for the Mac, iPod, iPhone and Apps as I understand it.
The model appears to be similar to the Google magazine – buy in content on the cheap (really cheap), freshen this up to look original and ship it out to newsagents with a sales forecast which unlocks cash for the publisher before newsagents have sold stock. yes, some publishers have an agreement with their magazine distributor which sees them paid a percentage of forecast sales immediately the title is distributed. Newsagent cash funds this.
Newsagents get the titles with a long shelf life and many do not early return, funding Citrus Media, paying them for the privilege of carrying what is in my opinion b-grade content which appears to have been created solely for the purpose of manipulating the newsagency magazine distribution model which can unlock cash flow for clever publishers.
I am told that you can assess the professional commitment of the publisher to original content by checking out the editorial team for each of their magazines. It’s the one editor for all titles.
I wish I had copies of the Ultimate Guide iPod magazines from recent years as I suspect that I would find that the latest edition recycles content from previous years with only limited new editorial content behind a fresh cover. Is it an Ultimate Guide if the content is from years ago?
The magazine distribuution model is open for anyone to access. Magazine distributors are the gatekeepers, our representatives controlling access to our channel and our cash.
On the basis of what is happening with the Ultimate Guides one has to wonder whether they are doing their job on behalf of newsagents.