or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Soft sales prompt Conde Nast to slow addition of magazines to Apple's iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Soft sales prompt Conde Nast to slow addition of magazines to Apple's iPad - Page 2

post #41 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

That's what I agree with. I don't need an app that's a magazine. I want an app that holds magazines.

I agree. Magazines should be delivered through the iBookstore.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #42 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by TalkingNewMedia View Post

An app for every magazine is not what they want. It doesn't fit into their lives. It's inconvenient to read and use.
Good luck finding research to back up this claim. Besides, how is an individual app more inconvenient than an individual print magazine?

I don't know of any research to back that up, but my own experience is that there's some truth to it. I didn't mind using Zinio which has access to a large number of magazines. Granted, it needs to be improved, but it's a start.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonro View Post

Dear Conde,

I paid $10 for a print subscription to Wired and you threw in a free tee shirt. Wouldn't you be better off charging me the same rate for an electronic subscription. Heck, I'll be a little generous, since you have to pay Apple 30%. Make it $12 per year. For $48 a year, I'm not even remotely interested.

By the way, your digital copies weigh in at about 350 MB each. A year's subscription would use up over 4 GB of my iPad's memory. You really should give that some thought.

Fondly,

A Longtime Subscriber

I agree 100% on all of this. I rarely spend over $10 on a year of a print magazine - why would I spend 5 times as much on an electronic version?

And why should the publisher charge more simply because they pay Apple 30%. They have huge costs for the print version - paper, ink, printing costs, shipping costs, and the free giveaways you mentioned. I can't see how their margins would be any lower with Apple than with the conventional route.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #43 of 55
While the multimedia enhancements to iPad mags like WIRED are fun, I wouldn't even mind if these ipad magazines were just plain old PDF versions of their print editions. It's the prices that blow. Give us no frills WIRED for $1 an issue and I'll subscribe. Saves trees, less clutter, same content, minimal work for the publishers.
post #44 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by apple-ecosystems View Post

I am not sure that the avid newspaper readers would be of the same perspective as you claim. The avid newspaper reader, even those online, is a voracious reader, one who is prone to explore and discover. The essence of discovery and exploration depends not so much on the headline or the lead paragraph, but in the perusal of the details of the content. The publisher will not provide you with the latter option, using the model that you prefer.

A more modest subscription rate would be much preferred by such avid readers and also by the the publishers. It would be also more affordable and more convenient for both parties - the reader and the publisher, and also Apple. For the publisher, subscription encourages loyalty, and subsequent subscriptions.

Imagine the cost and the "paperwork" burden of your proposal for a newsreader who may want to read 100 or more articles a day. Papers, like the New York Times are likely to have more than several hundreds of "current contents".

The same holds true why some people would want to have subscription music or movie, or package cable network subscriptions, a la carte or otherwise.

Netflix is an example of a successful subscription model, even if they may offer "pay per view" for other customers. It also worked for Wall Street Journal. New York Times had more than 100,000 initial paid subscribers for the first month, even at the high price it is charging; but NYT would need millions of subscribers, just to breakeven, because of its high debt exposure.

Apple Ecosystems

Well first of all, I was talking about magazines not newspapers.

But since you bring it up I will dispute your views on newspaper readership. I subscribe to the Houston Chronicle. There are 6 or 8 sections every day. Probably only 3 or 4 are even opened and then only scanned. There isn't much worth reading. I read the sports and the front page and that's about it. The business section is just local and not in depth. The editorials are slanted to the left and just propaganda. The best thing would be the weekly grocery ads. It's hardly worth subscribing.
post #45 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesmall View Post

The business section is just local and not in depth. The editorials are slanted to the left and just propaganda.

I was wondering what your problem was, now we know.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #46 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Its for providing a platform and a customer that they otherwise would not have had. There is a cost to Apple for building and maintaining all of this. They are not a philanthropy.

This would definitely make sense if Apple gave away iPads for free.
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
post #47 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

This whole magazine thing is a fu**ing disaster. I don't want an App that is a magazine. I want an App that holds my magazines.

Zinio is the only App that's gotten it right. Prices are reasonable and every month my new issues are waiting and I don't have to do anything to get them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

That's what I agree with. I don't need an app that's a magazine. I want an app that holds magazines.

I've been saying that for a while months back. Why are the publishers stumbling over themselves trying to come out with their own apps with more bells and whistles?

Start simple. Give us the familiarity of the print version and print layout and price for volume, i.e. for goodness sakes less than the newsstand price. Then work up from there. If people are still not buying, it's your content, adding more interactivity may not be perceived as having more value because it then feels more like a website rather than the "monumentality" of print.

The Wired iPad app, which BTW has the May issue for free, is alright, but it's really chock full of ads. The interactivity is cute but it weighed in at almost 500mb. I don't mind the pricing because it's cheaper for purchasers outside the US using US iTunes gift cards... But clearly in general people are placing less and less perceived value on magazines. So these publishers have to continue to rethink what to do.

Also, are people reading less magazines in general and spending less time with magazines on the iPad nowadays? Could be yes to both.

Then you have total disasters like the MacLife magazine which hasn't seen updates AFAIK and MacWorld which is a terribly designed digital magazine (or whatever you want to call it).
post #48 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I agree. Magazines should be delivered through the iBookstore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicy Magazine View Post

While the multimedia enhancements to iPad mags like WIRED are fun, I wouldn't even mind if these ipad magazines were just plain old PDF versions of their print editions. It's the prices that blow. Give us no frills WIRED for $1 an issue and I'll subscribe. Saves trees, less clutter, same content, minimal work for the publishers.

Bingo.
post #49 of 55
I have to agree with most sentiments here... I bought one copy of Wired... it weighed in at over 500Mb, and cost $4.00.... but for every issue? No way. I'll buy the print version...

More ridiculous is they have no subscription pricing (like the print version that has distribution, printing and paper costs on top)?

I don't know what's more obvious. That people aren't THAT into the novelty of the "digital magazine" beyond the initial offering to pay 300 ~ 400% more for the same content, or that price/accessibility are behind the "slow sales" to begin with.... I mean seriously. Cluetrain? "We want to charge $3.99 an issue, and we think it'll sell like hotcakes". Uh..... the actual result wasn't expected? Seriously?

The Music Industry has this seeming same lack of perception about the effect pricing/access has on their broader market. iTunes SELLS a lot of music (that was previously being stolen). But again, sales slowed when the labels decided to "go for the greed" and pop prices up from the 'magic' .99 cents level to $1.29. No good reason aside from wanting more profit....

Publishers need to get the idea that this marketplace offers volume potential they could never return to with their print versions... and they get to eliminate the overhead costs of paper, print, and distribution for those sales. THerefore, it seems to me, the digital price should be *cheaper* than the print version... e.g. .99 cents an issue (like the print subscription comes out to, basically). Then their sales would skyrocket... it's pretty obvious... and with better digital distro, better ad sales/revenue as a result...

But, "Stupid is as stupid does", momma used to say....
post #50 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by ameldrum1 View Post

This would definitely make sense if Apple gave away iPads for free.

It would also make sense if Apple charged for the iPads.
post #51 of 55
I wonder if these publishers were seduced by the idea of Flash versions of their magazines, I see them on the internet if I bother to Click To Flash them. The past two versions of InDesign have integrated Flash, I couldn't figure out why until I saw Flash magazines and sale flyers for stores in Flash. Clunky on a Mac for sure and annoying. Now that Apple has blocked Flash what do they do, what about all of the development cost (ever check out what a Flash programmer costs?) Now they have to redo all of this and now on top of that insult Apple wants 30%. But punishing the iPad owner with higher prices isn't the answer of course, unless the answer is "fail."

I have worked in the graphic arts industry for over 30 years, many of those working for a magazine publisher. In 1995 I switched my focus to web design as I saw print jobs waning. Now I do mostly web but still I do at least 30% of my jobs for print. I was a head of my time for doing that, most publishers I previously worked with now have token web versions that are crudely done. If you want it both ways it is extremely expensive, one team who knows print work, one team that knows web. Double the work because it does not translate well with a click of a button. Perhaps more people will do what I do and know both, but that is a tremendous amount of work to learn both the programs and the protocols.

Sorry for the rambling, but to tie up my points, Flash IS the button to push to do both without spending the time to learn both hard copy publishing and web publishing so that you do them right. Doing it right being the sticking point there. Flash can do it easy, but really so wrong. Apple threw a monkey wrench in because they don't ever, ever do anything half a$$ (or allow Flash on iDevices). I have no evidence this is the case, but it all does make me wonder what is up.

Me, I work my a$$ off to do things right too and the rewards are worth it in my book. But my bottomline is not focused on the dollar but on the pride of good product. Maybe why I got out of the magazine publishing business in the first place and now I do a lot of work with clients to take their printed books (or whatever) and get them in epub/web versions. I could use InDesign to make epub files, but really it isn't that great, Pages is better. If I were to do a magazine I would format it for Zinio, that is my favorite app for reading magazines, who needs all of the buzzers and bells to the point where you think you are in a video game (sort of the nonsense that Flash adds in) I want to read the information not jump through hoops to get to it. And it is truly silly to have a separate app for every magazine out there.
post #52 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesmall View Post

Well first of all, I was talking about magazines not newspapers.

But since you bring it up I will dispute your views on newspaper readership. I subscribe to the Houston Chronicle. There are 6 or 8 sections every day. Probably only 3 or 4 are even opened and then only scanned. There isn't much worth reading. I read the sports and the front page and that's about it. The business section is just local and not in depth. The editorials are slanted to the left and just propaganda. The best thing would be the weekly grocery ads. It's hardly worth subscribing.

The behaviors of consumers subscribing to various media were cited. Some very successful subscription models.

You generalize from your personal experience. Anecdotal.

Apple Ecosystems
post #53 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsideOut View Post

It would also make sense if Apple charged for the iPads.

Quite.

I suspect Amazon will eventually give away their Kindle under some kind of book, magazine or newspaper subscription service.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #54 of 55
The publishing companies want too much, and too many of the apps are not intuitive or make it hard to devise the publishers intentions in how to access the content. So many of these apps are an exercise in frustration such that the price they want to charge is a double insult.

KISS!
post #55 of 55
What you miss is that none of the companies or organizations that are able to benefit from the iPad. Had to put up any money or risk in its development or success. Apple shoulders all of that responsibility to provide a platform for them to use.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ameldrum1 View Post

This would definitely make sense if Apple gave away iPads for free.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Soft sales prompt Conde Nast to slow addition of magazines to Apple's iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Soft sales prompt Conde Nast to slow addition of magazines to Apple's iPad