Mr. Magazine

Well, as many as the publisher wishes to have. Woman’s Day opted for three cover prices, at least that’s all what I found so far. From the wholesaler’s “losing” cover price of $1.99, to the “minimum money making” cover price of $2.49 and last but not least the regular $2.79 cover price. As you can see the discounted cover prices are highlighted big times, while the regular cover price does not call attention to itself. When I wrote few weeks ago that I was really impressed by the magazine’s redesign, I did not expect to pay $7.27 for one issue of Woman’s Day.

In today’s Media Life’s Magazines section, reporter Diego Vasquez interviews The Reaper, the person behind the blog MagazineDeathPool.com. The Reaper offers the views of yet another prophet of doom and gloom with regards to the magazine industry. I thought you may enjoy reading his comments regarding the demise of the magazine industry. It is the best use of facts to write fiction. Read for yourself.

When magazines publish special issues or spin offs they have one of two options: sell it on the newsstands only and thus do whatever you want to do to identify the name of the publication and its spin off, or mail that issue as part of the magazine subscription to your subscribers. However if you decide to do both, you better watch the size of the original name of the magazine. Your friends at the post office have more rules and regulations on the size of the name of the spin off in comparison to the name of the magazine. You must adhere to these specifications in order for that extra issue to qualify for periodical mailing. Take the example of In Style Makeover magazine, one of four spin offs of In Style magazine. The magazine plays big the name Makeover on the newsstand edition, while the original name In Style is the dominant part of the name on the subscribers edition. The rest of the magazine is the same. At least it is good to know that the wholesalers are not the only folks trying to tell publishers what to do with their magazines in order to obtain their service.

I guess September is the month for doubles even for those magazines who are on their final breath. Vibe and its soon-to-die sister Vibe Vixen opted for split covers on both magazines. Vibe made history with its first non-music cover and Vibe Vixen made history by becoming history itself. The split covers of Barack Obama offered the gutsy cover, Obama on his own and the not-so-gutsy Obama who needs “40 more who will change the world.” The Barack only cover wins my vote hands down. As for the recently shuttered Vibe Vixen, well pick your choice of either cover. I have no opinion on either. But, what the heck, it is their last issue, so it must be a collector’s item. Buy both for safe keeping… one day the two copies and five dollars will buy a good cup of coffee.

Nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to magazine cover testing. Everything is fair game. The latest cover test that I’ve discovered is People magazine. The magazine is testing the placement of the rail to the left or to the right of the main cover story. To me the rail to the right is the logical way our eye moves from left to right as we read things, but again, the rail on the left gives the buyer instant read of the stories even before they say the name of the magazine or the main cover story. Confused? Well, join the club. I have given up on trying to understand cover testing long time ago. The variables are too many and editors are better off spending that extra money on something else. I asked an editor one time for the reason she always tests her magazine covers on the newsstand? Her answer was very simple, “because everybody does it.”

News from the Big Apple that Teen Vogue magazine is raising its rate base to 950,000 from the current level of 900,000. Teen Vogue was launched in 2003 with a rate base of 450,000. This new rate, effective Feb. 2008, represents an increase of 111% since the magazine was started. Today’s news comes on the heel of rumors that Condé Nast was ready to shut down Teen Vogue. The rate increase, announced by Vice President and Publisher Gina Sanders, is the best response I’ve seen yet to a rumor of magazine closure. It is amazing how many proofs the prophets of doom and gloom need to accept the fact that teens read and read a lot if the content is relevant to their needs, wants and desires. Shoving something down their throat that is not relevant to them and wondering why they don’t read it is a completely different story.

What if you were to buy a magazine on the newsstand and the price you pay for that magazine is considered by the publisher to be the price for a subscription? Nothing more, nothing less…not even the cost of a postage stamp. The cover price you’ve just paid for the magazine is all the money you are going to spend on that magazine for the rest of the year. There will be no need for you to return to the newsstand to buy another issue of the magazine. Your $3.99 or $5.99 has earned you a year’s subscription. Is this a smart marketing gimmick or another slap in the face of selling magazines on the newsstands? The three featured magazines above are just doing that. Buy them once on the stands and they love you so much that they will continue to send the magazines to you for a whole year. This is yet another example of the blind race toward counting customers rather than finding customers that count. I have said it before and I will say it again, the only solution for the ills of the magazine industry is to start moving toward becoming a circulation-driven industry and not an advertising-only- driven industry. In the business of customers who count, giving away free subscriptions just because someone buys one issue, is the wrong direction. Look at the above examples and judge for yourself. It seems to me that we are not “biting” the hand that feeds us, but actually “cutting” it off.

It was ten years ago when Princess Di and Mother Teresa both died within 48 hours from each other. There was enough time for all the major newsweeklies and weeklies to put either one of the subjects on their covers. With no exception, all the major magazines went with the mass, Princess Di rather than the class, Mother Teresa. The big picture was for the Princess and the side-bar picture was for Mother Teresa. Now, a decade later, the renovated and reinvented Time magazine reversed that picture. Mother Teresa, in a very powerful and moving account of her journey of faith, received the big cover picture treatment from Time magazine and Princess Di received the side-bar treatment. One more feather in the crown of the new Time magazine.