Slog
News & ArtsThursday, March 25, 2010
Media / Books The Dreaming Was Nice While It Lasted
Posted by Paul Constant on Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:28 PM
According to Engadget, you won't save that much money by reading magazines or newspapers on the iPad: The Wall Street Journal will cost $17.99 for a monthly iPad subscription (which is 11 dollars less than a paper subscription,) and, while Esquire looks like it'll be cheaper, many other magazines are going to be the same price as the newsstand edition.
Sources told the WSJ that the April issue of Hearst's Esquire magazine (no stranger to new media) will arrive in downloadable format without advertisements for $2.99, $2 less than the newsstand price, and will include five music videos (each containing the phrase "somewhere in Mississippi," oddly enough) to take advantage of the device's multimedia capabilities. On the other hand, a full iPad issue of Men's Health with match the glossy's $4.99 price.
First of all: Why would a magazine sell an ad-less edition? Part of the reason I read magazines is for the ads. I love that they're ridiculous and pure fantasy and often more current than the content in the magazine I'm reading. If you stick an ad in an e-book, I'll lose my shit. But a magazine? Ads are part of what make magazines into magazines. As long as they don't interrupt the content or force me to linger until a video finishes playing, I want them around. I say, stick the ads back in Esquire and lower the selling price by another dollar or buck fifty.
Second of all: While I'm not a believer in micropayments, I do think that if you lower your price to a certain level, more people will buy your magazine. $4.99 is obviously not that level.
2
@1 ... I see you've never read Vanity Fair, or many fashion or bridal magazines.
That said, the iPad consumer should be a highly premium ad market, as they might buy things that geeks with their netbooks won't.
That said, the iPad consumer should be a highly premium ad market, as they might buy things that geeks with their netbooks won't.
3
Having no ads in your magazine makes you not answerable to advertisers for your content. That makes for good journalism, right? What am I missing?
4
What, people who can afford to piss away $800 on an iPad are too cheap to spend $5 on something to read? Cry me a river.
5
Wonder what they'll do for magazine subscription rates? Should iPad users expect the 75% newsstand price that many magazines offer?
I suppose it depends what you read, but printed magazines, to me, are more important than printed daily papers or even printed books.
I suppose it depends what you read, but printed magazines, to me, are more important than printed daily papers or even printed books.
6
2 points.
1) Glossy ad-driven magazines, whose content is always an afterthought, will be terrible on the iPad. The iPad is great for content-driven material. Most magazines today are not content-driven, but ad driven. Of course I won't pay for that, because, as Constant notes, we browse magazines in large part for the ads. Does anyone even read the content?
2) People will pay for content-rich media on the iPad; books, movies, music. And even content-rich newspapers and content-rich magazines.
1) Glossy ad-driven magazines, whose content is always an afterthought, will be terrible on the iPad. The iPad is great for content-driven material. Most magazines today are not content-driven, but ad driven. Of course I won't pay for that, because, as Constant notes, we browse magazines in large part for the ads. Does anyone even read the content?
2) People will pay for content-rich media on the iPad; books, movies, music. And even content-rich newspapers and content-rich magazines.
7
The ads are what tell you the demographics and socio-economic strata the magazine is aiming at, which is valuable information both now and especially historically. When you look at old magazines, the ads are usually the most compelling part. Maxim has very different ads from Cigar Connoisseur or The New York Review of Books.
8
For instance, I defy anyone with eyes to look at this Ebony from 1970 without spending the rest of your day goggling at the fantastic ads.
@6, there are loads of content-driven magazines. The New Yorker is content-driven. The National Geographic is content-driven. So are The Atlantic, The New Republic, TNYRB, Harper's, and hundreds of others. It's not all Woman's Day or Big Truck Monthly.
@6, there are loads of content-driven magazines. The New Yorker is content-driven. The National Geographic is content-driven. So are The Atlantic, The New Republic, TNYRB, Harper's, and hundreds of others. It's not all Woman's Day or Big Truck Monthly.
9
@1 - I agree with you. Ads suck. I know ads are a necessary evil and therefore, I tolerate them. I have no idea why anyone would buy magazine specifically for the ads.
@2 - I totally agree with you. I do not read those type of magazines.
@2 - I totally agree with you. I do not read those type of magazines.
10
@6, the market for various types of content is proven. The market for mixed content is not. No one knows if anyone wants magazines with video embedded in it, for instance. I know that I personally would expect my e-reader version of ANY magazine to be exactly the same as the paper version in every way possible. I can find my own videos and music, thanks. A link, sure; embedded? No. A magazine is not the same thing as a blog.
12
@10 Fnarf…I'm aware that there are content-driven magazines, which is why I stated @6 that people will pay for content-driven magazines (see the last sentence).
As for new content? I don't close myself to the possibility that new mediums will emerge. I can't a priori say that I wouldn't like something that I may, upon seeing the right implementation, in fact love.
I do know that I hope people will push the envelope of the delivery of content. It can't be possible that we've reached the end of ways to convey information, entertainment and ideas.
As for new content? I don't close myself to the possibility that new mediums will emerge. I can't a priori say that I wouldn't like something that I may, upon seeing the right implementation, in fact love.
I do know that I hope people will push the envelope of the delivery of content. It can't be possible that we've reached the end of ways to convey information, entertainment and ideas.
13
Remember that, even if you sell an ad-free version of a magazine, by virtue of the Apple store interface, you effectively can target ads via email that go to that iPad.
Thus, as a marketer, I don't mind selling an ad-free version of my magazine if I can resell my list of qualified consumers, with content choice information, to a reseller.
You'd be surprised how that works.
Thus, as a marketer, I don't mind selling an ad-free version of my magazine if I can resell my list of qualified consumers, with content choice information, to a reseller.
You'd be surprised how that works.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (13) RSS