Posted on 05/18/2009 7:31:42 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
His plan (when you read the actual article) has some logic behind it, but it is based upon a false premise.
Basicly, he wants to be a premium news magazine. He plans on making money on subscriptions as well as advertising.
Instead of selling 3 million mag at $3 (9 mill a month), he’ll sell 1.5 million at $5 (7.5 mill a month). Since his printing costs will be halfed, he’ll probably net more profit out of the 7.5 mill than the 9 mill.)
He probably figures he can maintain his advertising rates by saying his new readers have more upscale and have more disposable income (because they are willing to spend more on a premium news magazine.)
What he forgets about is competition. What is going to differentiate Newsweek from its competition to the point that customers are willing to shell out more money for it?
This reminds me of the Cable ad where they guy (with the inferior product) says “we’ll target people with more disposable income and let them dispose of their income to us.”
I bet that all the free copies they sent to doctors and dentists, are the half they are cutting .
“Spinal Tap meets Newsweek. In the movie when asked about why the band has been losing fans and playing in smaller and smaller arenas, the manager replies that they are appealing to a more selective audience.”
Quote of the tread. Sums up what they are doing.
I remember back in ‘94 when I used to subscribe to Time. In one issue they stated they would no longer just be reporting the news but would be ‘interpreting’ the news as well. I cancelled my subscription that night.
That was about the time I cancelled my subscription to “Money” as well. They had an article ‘interpreting’ what HillaryCare would mean to me. Not one mention about reduced services or increased taxes, just page after page of talk about how great it would be for the government to pay for free health care for everyone.
These news magazines, the rest of the media, and their reporters have been captured by big government. All they do is recycle government press releases. Not a smidgen of honest reporting and investigation. Even their ‘investigations’ of Republicans are written by the DNC.
He wants to become the ‘Esquire’ of news mags. Good luck.
Yes, but he expects us to think of them as 'intellectuals' and us as those darn stupid 'rednecks'. I guess he just proved who is smarter. At least, most of us know cutting your subscribers in half and increasing prices is not good business practice unless you are planning on going out of business.
“Newsweak loses a huge piece of its subscription base every time a barber shop or orthodontist cancels.”
I suspect that most copies of Newsweek and Time are sent to dead senior citizens whose families haven’t bothered to cancel the subscription.
When they cease to go after certain markets (like middle America) they no longer have to pretend to support the religious tradition in America or to give a Rat’s a$$ about what a conservative might’ve said. When you go niche market, you can play up to the liberal mindset and raise the cover price like it was the New Yorker or Atlantic Monthly.
Newsweak. Now more than ever.
“It’s hugely counterintuitive...”
Whenever someone uses this term what follows is magical-thinking, wishful-thinking, a lie, an outlandish lie, or a damned lie.
Maybe a swimsuit issue?...
Love Newsbusters.
Great story. Just shows that the idiots are running the asylum.
Just a point of clarification for ya Peej.
Or...JOhn Bobbet
Like The New Yorker? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
Guys, it's newsprint, not diamonds. Less isn't more.
<<< My larger point is that we are rapidly seeing an even smaller number of options available for news. >>>
####
This is very disturbing. Yesterday, a man told me that he had been terrified that Bush was planning to take away his Social Security check. This was an otherwise intelligent professional person who obviously believed what he read in the Baltimore SUN and heard on NPR.
I don’t spend too much time around people who place their highest priority on ‘social justice’ so I was not prepared for his comment, which came out of the blue. I hope my face did not register my shock and surprise when he said this.
We have to find a way to reach these people with some actual facts.
Actual facts are anathema to the left.
That was the Saturday Evening Post, and that was circa the very late 1960s, very early 1970s. Say sometime 1968-1971.
And yes, the purpose was to change their demographics, so as to appeal to advertisers with a "higher class" sort of readership.
It didn't work. The Saturday Evening Post then shortly thereafter expired. There's still a Saturday Evening Post, I guess, but it has no connection with this former magazine, being mostly a "nostalgia" magazine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.