Skip to comments.
ROSIE'S CLOSET OUTING HURTS: Mag Bottoms Out
NY POST ^
| 5/22/02
| KEITH J. KELLY
Posted on 05/22/2002 4:24:48 AM PDT by Liz
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:06:31 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Rosie O'Donnell's eponymous mag hit the circulation skids with its May issue.
May 22, 2002 -- ROSIE O'Donnell's magazine, Rosie, has been plagued by newsstand erosion since early this year, but the numbers fell off the table in May - the issue in which the controversial talk show host came out and confirmed that she was gay.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-70 next last
To: bvw
who = "how"
21
posted on
05/22/2002 5:00:57 AM PDT
by
bvw
To: Liz
I can't stand this woman...Grossie McDonald's. She says that guns are bad, but her bodyguards have them (usual hypocrisy). Oh yeah...it's OK to be gay and raise children in said household, but guns are bad!
To: Dante3
Don't know. Never read the mag. And from what I hear about K-Mart's woes, Rosie's gunstance was the least of them. But why buy ad space in a mag that nobody's reading?
23
posted on
05/22/2002 5:03:03 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
To: Liz
Maybe it's just a crappy magazine.
To: bvw
I am going on what BobJ tells me. He does an analysis on the unigue hits/day. According to him our readership has always been about five + times our registration.
25
posted on
05/22/2002 5:09:49 AM PDT
by
BADJOE
To: bvw
"Readership around a half million" .... that's terrific, but who do you figure that?
Easy. He just uses tried and true statistical methods to approximate the number of readers vs. number of page views.
In short, he made it up :D
To: Liz
Sources say that newsstand sales for the Gruner + Jahr-owned title bottomed out in the 200,000-to-235,000 range for the May issue I think they are lying about this circulation report. I believe it's 'way lower than this. Why? Rosie's past history of deceit and hypocrisy.
To: BADJOE
By the similar handles (the "B" in combo with the "J") I get you and BobJ confused ... I just remembered that one of you was monitoring this kind of thing. Thanks for setting me straight.
28
posted on
05/22/2002 5:28:29 AM PDT
by
bvw
To: Liz
This is a message to Hollywood! We DON'T care about your lifestyle so QUIT shoving it down our throats.
29
posted on
05/22/2002 5:29:38 AM PDT
by
smiley
To: Liz
My wife seems to be getting the mag for free - she never asked for it and she never paid anything to get it. The label indicates that her 'subscribtion' expires sometimes in '03. I noticed it a few days ago while cleaning my parrot cage. It was used to what you could call parrot 'toilet paper'.
To: Liz
LOL. Just like Ellen Degenerate. Coming out to boost ratings/circulation always has the opposite affect.
Personally, I would love to know how fast ratings for the last episode of survivor dropped off right after the winner was announced and then that fat hippo started flabbing her gaping maw.
To: A Vast RightWing Conspirator
I noticed it a few days ago while cleaning my parrot cage. It was used to what you could call parrot 'toilet paper'.LOL!! Haa Haa, Good one!
To: Liz
I think it has less to do with her "coming out" and more to do with the fact that, when she is out, she resembles Meatloaf more and more each day.
To: William Terrell
They are not lying about their numbers, however I will say that circulation figures are more complicated than just "copies sold". Judging by these figures I can say that the actual paid circulation is lower than the number posted.
Considering expenses, advertising rates and newsstand sales, dropping to 150,000 is a killer. A wise executive should pronouce this book dead if these figures remain for the next several months.
Then, there is the little matter of the title it replaced, McCalls. G + J ran up a debt on that title which for practical purposes applies to this mag. All this book is, is McCalls with Rosie's name attached. So, to conclude, this book is saying bye-bye.
34
posted on
05/22/2002 5:36:51 AM PDT
by
lavrenti
To: lavrenti
Is McCall's still published, or is "Rosie" the newer name of it?
35
posted on
05/22/2002 5:47:50 AM PDT
by
bvw
To: bvw
The average readership of a national magazine is 750,000, so 200K is not even close to break even. Average costs of a major launch run in the 5-7 million range and break even is 3-5 years. Plus, magazines make their money on the second and third year customers, so losing a large percentage of your subscription base actually costs twice the net loss.
Of course, newsstand sales are probably the largest part of Rosie's market, so the immediate decline reflects a direct relationship with her outing. Another one bites the rug--oops, I mean dust.
To: antidisestablishment
Thanks for the info. Non-major-metro Daily papers run about 30K, no? What about niche magazines?
37
posted on
05/22/2002 5:57:51 AM PDT
by
bvw
To: Rodney King
LOL. Just like Ellen Degenerate. Coming out to boost ratings/circulation always has the opposite affect. Could that be because they constantly overestimate the number of homos in the general population?
38
posted on
05/22/2002 6:10:05 AM PDT
by
mc5cents
To: Liz
Rosie is someone who thinks she has a good heart. But I am deeply offended by her pushing homosexual adoption on us - especially by the idea that the desires of homosexuals take precedence over the need of each child to have a mother and father. When Rosie's 'girlfriend' gets pregnant with some guy's sperm, what are they going to say to that child? - Well, we just didn't think you deserved to have a father? And what is the sperm donor going to say? Well, I thought I'd help bring you into this world, but didn't feel you needed a father, and felt just dandy in turning you over to two strangers to be raised? It seems to me, it is the two humans (one male and one female) who bring a child into the world who should raise and love that (their) child. I'm tired of being told we're intolerant when we object to children being treated like chattel.
To: yendu bwam
Hey now, yendu, you know you're not supposed to be thinking those thoughts. In fact, you're not really supposed to be
thinking. You're just supposed to be feeling warm and affirming and accepting!
Dan
40
posted on
05/22/2002 6:41:45 AM PDT
by
BibChr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-70 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson