or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Publisher Hearst debuts on Apple's iPad with Esquire app
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Publisher Hearst debuts on Apple's iPad with Esquire app

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
Another big-name publisher has debuted on the iPad, with Hearst offering a digital version of its Esquire magazine at the newsstand price of $4.99 per issue with no subscription option.

The new Esquire iPad app (iTunes link) from Hearst Communications was released on Friday. Version 1.0 is 88.9MB, and at $4.99 it includes the latest issue of the magazine.

The digital edition also includes exclusive features, like a "moving cover" featuring actor Javier Bardem, an interactive explanation of how the new World Trade Center is being built, and videos accompanying some of the biggest stories from the issue. Users can also copy, save and share articles, quotes and photos.

The magazine represents the first real foray into the iPad digital publishing world for Hearst, one of the largest publishers in the world. The company previously experimented with a single "interactive edition" of Popular Mechanics (iTunes link), but that application has not been updated to reflect recent issues since it debuted July.

According to Peter Kafka of MediaMemo, for now Hearst plans to stick with a standard newsstand price of $4.99. The company has considered offering subscriptions, but one doesn't appear to be in the cards anytime soon.

For those who think the $4.99 asking price is too much, Kevin O'Malley, publisher of Esquire, said publications have to "reshape expectations" for pricing of digital content.

"Unlike many apps, Esquire doesnt provide a literal translation of the print copy," Kafka wrote. "So it cant count app sales as newsstand sales, but O'Malley seems fine with that. The upside for the reader is that Esquire doesnt need to include every ad from the print edition, and instead features just two ads from a single sponsor Lexus."



Recent reports have indicated that Apple is working on a standalone digital newsstand which would offer subscriptions to print publications. The rumored application is said to be similar in approach to iBooks, the downloadable storefront for e-books run by Apple and available for the iPad, iPhone and iPod touch.

A major issue for publications on the iPad has been a desire to obtain information about readers to share with advertisers. While such data is a necessity in the print world, Apple does not allow software on its App Store to collect such information.

Reports have suggested that Apple could allow to offer an opt-in function that would let subscribers agree to share their personal information with publications. Such a deal could be a part of subscription plans through the rumored newsstand application.
post #2 of 26
The best magazine by far on the iPad. Wired's doesn't come close. I'd love a subscription of course like everyone else but Esquire for iPad is the only magazine I would pay $4.99 a month for. It's not like other iPad magazines that are just PDF copy of the print version. For the price of a McDonalds meal it's worth it for me based on the great content they have in the app that I will never experience in a paper version.

Even better is that there are no annoying gazillion advertisements in between articles like the paper version. There are only two ads from Lexus and Audi and they're both interactive.
post #3 of 26
Esquire sounds like a fine magazine. I'm sure it will do very well. But the price. I would have expected online content to be cheaper than the printed version. It seems to me that there would be less overhead in distribution.
post #4 of 26
Verizon is behind all of this. Its knifes in Esquire's back as part of a plan to make Apple give them an iPhone.
post #5 of 26
Id love to subscribe to newspaper and periodical again but I am waiting for a proper system to be in place. I want one app, I want a subscription model, I dont care if it rotates and rewrites (games dont work this way), but I would like new issues to be pushed out when they are ready so I dont have to go hunting for each new subscription.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post

Even better is that there are no annoying gazillion advertisements in between articles like the paper version. There are only two ads from Lexus and Audi and they're both interactive.

That would explain the price point.

Are these iAds? I have yet to see an iAd and oddly will pay money right now just to use one of these ads.


Quote:
Originally Posted by whitentosh View Post

Esquire sounds like a fine magazine. I'm sure it will do very well. But the price. I would have expected online content to be cheaper than the printed version. It seems to me that there would be less overhead in distribution.

If the sales were equal and the content identical with advertisers contracts holding for both distribution methods I would expect the iPad version to yield them more profit.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #6 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitentosh View Post

Esquire sounds like a fine magazine. I'm sure it will do very well. But the price. I would have expected online content to be cheaper than the printed version. It seems to me that there would be less overhead in distribution.

From limited experience in publishing, by far the greatest expense is for content and composition of the content. The cost of paper and distribution is minor compared the above. Wurm5150 indicates it is not just a pdf version of the paper copy, which means the composition costs for the ipad version are separate from those of the paper version.

It will be interesting to see over time how prices adjust to expenses vs demand.
post #7 of 26
No subscription plan, no purchase.
post #8 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitentosh View Post

Esquire sounds like a fine magazine. I'm sure it will do very well. But the price. I would have expected online content to be cheaper than the printed version. It seems to me that there would be less overhead in distribution.

Savings which are then cancelled out by new wages for designers, servers. Same price is fine, especially with less ads. You pay for the content, not the method of delivery.
post #9 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post




That would explain the price point.

Are these iAds? I have yet to see an iAd and oddly will pay money right now just to use one of these ads.

No. But they're decent ads. Not static and not boring.

Well if you really want to see an iAd download the AP and NY Times app and go the Tech section. Guaranteed you'll see one.
post #10 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitentosh View Post

Esquire sounds like a fine magazine. I'm sure it will do very well. But the price. I would have expected online content to be cheaper than the printed version. It seems to me that there would be less overhead in distribution.

The way they did their iPad mag I can tell Hearst spent serious money developing it and producing the content. So I think there's a counter argument with this app. Yes there's no overhead cost with printing and distribution but they did spend money reimagining, developing and producing the digital version. Like I've said they definitely did not just digitally convert the paper version. You can really tell they put a lot of work to it. Plus it has barely any ads on it.

But I'm still hoping for discounted subscriptions. I mean who wouldn't right?

Oh and I heard this magazine is HTML5 based.
post #11 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post

You can really tell they put a lot of work to it. Plus it has barely any ads on it.

In the print version of these types of magazines, I find the ads to be some of the best parts of the publication. Full page ads from top brand companies are usually very beautiful and creative. Of course, I'm in advertising, so when I watch TV, as soon as the feature show comes back on I click to find another advertisement since that is where the real genius is, not in the sitcom.

"Opulence, I has it!"

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #12 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

In the print version of these types of magazines, I find the ads to be some of the best parts of the publication. Full page ads from top brand companies are usually very beautiful and creative. Of course, I'm in advertising, so when I watch TV, as soon as the feature show comes back on I click to find another advertisement since that is where the real genius is, not in the sitcom.

"Opulence, I has it!"

I'm in multimedia design so just like you I'm a sucker for good design. The problem with digital ads is that it shouldn't be static. I like well designed paper magazine ads but when you put those same static ads to something digital it's just not the same. I hate most online ads because they don't do anything and that's why I like iAds.
post #13 of 26
A 1 year subscription to Esquire is available on Zinio for $8. Granted this is closer to a print sub than a souped up app, but still. I would want a lot of pizzazz in that app for the equivalent of $60/year.
post #14 of 26
You can subscribe to the "real", paper, snail-mail version for $8 a year. Whats's the deal with charging $5 for one digital copy?
post #15 of 26
I dont get it.

So you buy an app for 4.99 and get one single issue? So you have to re-buy the entire app every month? What did I miss?
post #16 of 26
This is still all messed up. I subscribe to The New Yorker and while that includes credentials to view their ipad-formatted web edition it doesn't include the iPad app version for offline reading.

They're all confused, inexcusably, like they didn't know this product (iPad) was coming years ago. Hopefully they'll catch up soon.
post #17 of 26
Is it possible they could launch a new stand alone newspaper/magazine store with 4.2?? I just think this would be perfect timing for Apple allowing for an even better holiday season and then hopefully doing well 2011 Q1 with iPad 2 and whatever else.

Of course we would all hope for subscriptions with this store but even putting all newspapers and magazines in one place would be much more convenient and I think it would drive sales in the area I was originally most excited for with an iPad.
post #18 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by walshbj View Post

This is still all messed up. I subscribe to The New Yorker and while that includes credentials to view their ipad-formatted web edition it doesn't include the iPad app version for offline reading.

They're all confused, inexcusably, like they didn't know this product (iPad) was coming years ago. Hopefully they'll catch up soon.

It actually isn't the publishers fault here. The hang up is Apple. From what I have read the publishers want to charge for subscriptions on the iPad but they are very uneasy with paying Apple part of those monies from subscription sales and also they are uneasy about loading that content on Apple servers which gives Apple free reign on user data. If I was a publisher I would be wary too.

But at $4.99 an issue for the digital copy? Nope not in my budget.
post #19 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcahill009 View Post

Is it possible they could launch a new stand alone newspaper/magazine store with 4.2?? I just think this would be perfect timing for Apple allowing for an even better holiday season and then hopefully doing well 2011 Q1 with iPad 2 and whatever else.

iBooks is an App Store download so Id expect any periodical app to be the same. It might require 4.2 as the minimum install, but Im sure it wouldnt be included. Also, Id expect an event that demoed this and had plenty of partners on board so Id say the earliest would be January.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #20 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebjesus View Post

It actually isn't the publishers fault here. The hang up is Apple. From what I have read the publishers want to charge for subscriptions on the iPad but they are very uneasy with paying Apple part of those monies from subscription sales and also they are uneasy about loading that content on Apple servers which gives Apple free reign on user data. If I was a publisher I would be wary too.

But at $4.99 an issue for the digital copy? Nope not in my budget.

I can see that - and I'd be wary too. But what part of any of this is a surprise? That's what I'm saying - they knew it was coming and it doesn't do the publishers any good to look like they're clueless. They've sent a message to early adopters that they're gouging, and that doesn't help anyone.

As for paying Apple - well - they pay to distribute physical media. Now they need to pay Apple. I haven't thought much about the subscribers demographics and who gets access - I don't know anything about how that stuff works. It's interesting though.

The right move would have been to throw print subscribers a bone. In that light at least the New Yorker lets print subscribers access the content online and with an iPad specific version. But not everyone does. Contempt for your loyal customers is never a good thing.
post #21 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebjesus View Post

It actually isn't the publishers fault here. The hang up is Apple. From what I have read the publishers want to charge for subscriptions on the iPad but they are very uneasy with paying Apple part of those monies from subscription sales and also they are uneasy about loading that content on Apple servers which gives Apple free reign on user data. If I was a publisher I would be wary too.

But at $4.99 an issue for the digital copy? Nope not in my budget.

No. The blame for the hold up falls on both Apple and the publishers. Apple already owns users data. iTunes accounts. Its those accounts that the publishers wanted so badly to serve ads. The publishers want access to users information which Apple is reluctant to give away.
post #22 of 26
Besides the high price, you can't just share the issue with someone unless you want to share the iPad.

I think that those of us with subscriptions to the print version should get the iPad version it for half price, at least...
post #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post

No. The blame for the hold up falls on both Apple and the publishers. Apple already owns users data. iTunes accounts. Its those accounts that the publishers wanted so badly to serve ads. The publishers want access to users information which Apple is reluctant to give away.

This is exactly one of the reasons I love Apple. I have been on a list of lapsed subscribers for a major mag and the constant harassment by them to sign back up was almost illegal.
Put it this way, I haven't subscribed to any mag (despite the higher cost) since and that was 17 years ago.
I'm very happy Apple have kept my details from these people.

Save your friends from Skynet - whoops, Google.  Recommend they use StartPage for search..

...and no, I am not paid to say this..

Reply

Save your friends from Skynet - whoops, Google.  Recommend they use StartPage for search..

...and no, I am not paid to say this..

Reply
post #24 of 26
Are any of these magazines going to fix the backup issue they all cause?

An hour to backup Wired... I've read other people have it even worse.

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply
post #25 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by raybo View Post

Besides the high price, you can't just share the issue with someone unless you want to share the iPad.

I think that those of us with subscriptions to the print version should get the iPad version it for half price, at least...

Expectations of lower pricing on electronic media are nothing new. Nothing about changing the way media content is served determines what the exact end price will be. Publishers do have to run the numbers. They are going to incur a lot of extra costs transitioning to something that reads on the ipad and other comparable devices. In the longer term, the potential exists to add in small amounts of video content, links to what is worn in a fashion a spread, etc. You drop some of the distribution costs associated with printed media, but pick up a lot of other potential costs, so it's hard to say what the price really should be. Designing to a price point often means having to cut a lot of content, and anecdotal opinions on what percentage it should be are really silly. I'd be interested in seeing any genuine market research into what people are willing to pay for digitized versions of magazines they previously read.
post #26 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedo View Post

A 1 year subscription to Esquire is available on Zinio for $8. Granted this is closer to a print sub than a souped up app, but still. I would want a lot of pizzazz in that app for the equivalent of $60/year.

Agreed completely. I will not buy any of these magazine apps. Zinio works fine for me. I bought a new Popular Science subscription once Bonnier stopped being jerks and offered it on Zinio again. $10 for the Zinio subscription sure beats the old $60/year app Popular Science+ purchases, although they've finally reduced that to an only slightly less irksome $36/year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raybo View Post

Besides the high price, you can't just share the issue with someone unless you want to share the iPad.

With Zinio, there is a small way to do that, at least. You're allowed four devices to read on, be they iDevices, Macs or PCs. Just give your friends your account info to sign on with and assuming you stay under the limit, you and up to three friends can share.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Publisher Hearst debuts on Apple's iPad with Esquire app