tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-48919609375306685092024-02-19T08:49:21.276-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak OutBoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-7454541190441334902008-12-04T18:27:00.000-08:002008-12-04T18:30:15.618-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: The Looming Pullback or the Start of Something Bigger?<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDtYFLw6B1uJSyHDLlSFv_tiZFn06ySQITOoASrtYYT5fW4eHdF_qpFYeRx4ePo1LphqswnDbd3zCoNU03W2AHzL1uVsKoVJrukNzy_aldJDDiBgJY_vN9W9yyi2yJ2hKrIV-zM5jfpgks/s1600-h/ATT2578325222.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 263px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDtYFLw6B1uJSyHDLlSFv_tiZFn06ySQITOoASrtYYT5fW4eHdF_qpFYeRx4ePo1LphqswnDbd3zCoNU03W2AHzL1uVsKoVJrukNzy_aldJDDiBgJY_vN9W9yyi2yJ2hKrIV-zM5jfpgks/s400/ATT2578325222.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5276127651453744018" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: The Looming Pullback or the Start of Something Bigger?</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Magazines, And The Looming Pullback In Automobile Adv</strong><br />Auto advertising and Rick Wagoner. Why is that name so familiar? We all know he recently flew in his corporate jet to the Congressional hearings, but how many remember him from a few years ago as the guy who tried to merge church and state by intimidating magazine publishers with threats to pull GM's advertising unless favorable editorial appeared in the same magazines? That's called extortion. This is the same guy who brought us the Hummer and the Lincoln Navigator. If GM gets bailout money, Wagoner's departure must be a precondition to any financial assistance. And, if David Pecker is such a strong supporter of the auto industry, why did he close AMI's auto titles a few short months after forcing their move to Detroit? What goes around, comes around. Sadly, this development will does not bode well for mass circulation magazines.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Dir of Mfg)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Consumers Bugged by Many Ads</strong><br />Reminds me that there are three kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies, and<br />statistics.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Icon)<br /><br /><strong>RE: What Makes the ebook Experience Potentially Viable</strong><br />If things get any worse, we are going to using real books and mags for kindling.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Dir of Mfg and Dst)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: NYT's 10K subscribers on Kindle: The start of something bigger?</strong><br />The only major issue I see with the logic at the end of this piece, is that subscribing to something on the kindle downloads it - so it's on the device. If you're reading it on the web, and you lose signal . . . in the subway, or at any point during your commute (when I assume most people use the device) . . . then suddenly it's no good. And I think there is a major draw for e-readers if we get them tailored to the point where students can use them for text books and for research . . . i think they have HUGE potential as research/reference tools that are not currently being exploited. Add a ready, searchable reference tool in addition to being able to search in books, and suddenly you can save articles and then search through them later to find the one you saved. You could actually create a device that has everything any consumer reads on it, where they can go "I know I read something about this..." and search and pull up exactly what they read. <br /> <br />Of course this will only be helpful with news if they remember this will have the opposite effect as the internet - it will lengthen circulation of each issue and each article so they will have to do more editing, not less. When people refer to something again and again errors will be less likely to slip through; if too many mistakes are present, it will discredit the paper, and people will not continue to buy it. <br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: The Mumbai Attack and Social Media</strong><br />Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. George Bernard Shaw <br />We gave up dreading liberty long ago, and shelved it instead. Liberty has been replaced with license, which is much less demanding on us as individuals and as a culture but only in the short term. Freedom, properly understood, means the freedom to do the right thing, not the freedom to do anything. Freedom to do anything based on the whims of our convenience and comfort is license, not liberty. It is what we currently practice. And it cannot last.<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /> <br /><strong>RE: Where mail goes to die...</strong><br />Bob- This is symptomatic of Philadelphia. We should not be surprised.<br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /> <br /><strong>RE: Magazine Survival Thoughts..</strong><br />Bob: I'm a former publisher of a few titles in the consumer print magazine biz; I was always a bit of a maverick in this industry, as I truly believed that our role, in the media, is not to sell customers advertising. Heretical as that may sound, I rather believe it was our role to sell their products and services. I have quite a few customers who could not agree more. Seems simple on the face of it, but the stark reality is that the magazine industry has rarely served in this capacity. <br /> <br />In media, we live in a zero-base market, where advertisers/agencies retreat to a re-evaluation of their media plans each year. How you have managed their ads, where you placed them, the discounts you've given and the added value you've thrown on top is irrelevant in the analysis. The full value of the medium or property is never exposed or exploited. When times get tough, and spending dials back, there's no foothold with the customer that ensures further business...all you get is a 'we're sorry'. <br /> <br />When you elevate the business philosophy to leverage captive and external assets to effect results on sales, you now transcend zero-base media planning. Immediately, the conversation shifts to 'what can you do for me next'. Customers will ALWAYS spend money with vendors that drive their business...regardless of what is happening to their traditional media budgets. I can cite one customer that sustained a 50% budget cut, and left my magazine untouched; we were intimately partnered in far too many shared initiatives that precluded a cut. <br /> <br />Publishers attempt to speak this language, and throw 'partnership' around with abandon; but, in reality, it's business as usual and they've taken no ownership of their customers business. Should they be surprised at the mass exodus of ad dollars? They shouldn't be...<br /> <br />So, where's this leading? <br /> <br />I've foretold the demise of magazines as we know them for the last 4 years. Why? Our business model underpinnings are irreparably broken; there's no fixing it. The 'too bad' part is that consumers still LOVE magazines- they really do- but we as publishers cannot make the candy store work anymore. Cost of reader acquisition is through the roof, ad rates are heavily negotiated, rate increases are tied solely to circulation increases, production costs and distribution costs continually escalate, and when was the last time someone paid for bleed? Add it all up, and we're in the midst of the perfect storm, and publishers have been selling ads. <br /> <br />Now, in the super-heated environment that surrounds us, the burner has really been turned-up, and the the pot has boiled-down and exposed the frailties of the business model. Just selling ads has left them painfully exposed, and now in trouble. <br /> <br />The fix is 1) a philosophical sea-change in how they conduct their business/ad sales, or 2) a shift to digital, and I don't mean a website, as impressions bought at $3.00 cpms is not an acceptable solution for anyone's business. So, I'll give you a hint: in my view, magazines fail for a couple of reasons: escalating costs, and mercurial ad dollar flow. Digital, done innovatively, can field the incremental cost ball and produce meaningful cpms; but why underwrite the business cost structure upfront, and then attempt to sell ads after? Why not take greater ownership of your customer's business and drive sales of goods and services? <br /> <br />Forgive the blatant pitch for investment funds, but there is a better way. Not to be coy, but I have that answer and business model ready to go...now, if I only had the seed capital to make a go of it....<br /> <br />Guess that's what happens when the creativity well is deep, and the pockets are shallow .. .<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-1926836452425365952008-12-01T17:35:00.000-08:002008-12-01T17:38:51.151-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: LIFE Magazine and Good Editors<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTciUjIjRtvhu6woqLvxvDq2QaLfVPlxEyLphM5Kmjj12wIsLouEsK1aDwRNqwaTizaH5PeicP2f7IMURN7d01H48lTuHl3RB-CJbNekd1XmZxrd7q08k4B9fcJlEjH_TERtVTNQ0NsHM4/s1600-h/a-lifemag.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 244px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTciUjIjRtvhu6woqLvxvDq2QaLfVPlxEyLphM5Kmjj12wIsLouEsK1aDwRNqwaTizaH5PeicP2f7IMURN7d01H48lTuHl3RB-CJbNekd1XmZxrd7q08k4B9fcJlEjH_TERtVTNQ0NsHM4/s320/a-lifemag.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5275001141284385490" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: LIFE Magazine and Good Editors</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /> <br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: LIFE Magazine Photo Archive</strong><br />Yea, it was a damned good magazine. <br />When it folded in '72, that decided it, off to art school, to hell with photojournalism. <br />Little did I know I'd be working on the inaugural edition of the 'new' Life as a prod assist for Time Inc. in 1978 at the old RRD Prairie Ave. Dept. EG ('electronic graphics') office, trying to figure out with the rest of the team how to fast close gravure . . . <br />(Answer: print four colors sans text, rewind, and print a late text cylinder).<br />Why is that writers are always allowed to be late, but not photographers?<br />(Submitted by a CIO)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: LIFE Magazine Photo Archive</strong><br />LIFE magzine was the best magazine ever was. <br />Iconic, simple, brilliant, moving, intoxicating, and cross generational. What else can be said? <br />(Submitted by a multi-title Publisher)<br /><br /> <br /><strong>Re: Which Consumer Magazines are the Next to Fold?</strong><br />There is something terribly morbid about guessing the death of magazines.<br />How about guessing what we media companies will do okay in a down economy?<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /> <br /><strong>RE: A Book in Need of a Good Editor</strong><br />Losing editors also removes much of the pleasure of writing a book. Heaven knows it can be tedium, and there are few things as refreshing as calling your editor, addressing some point, and then just talking for a few minutes as though you were still a member of the human race and not an author locked away, most likely for the greater good.<br />(Submitted y a Writer)<br /> <br /><strong>RE: A Book in Need of a Good Editor</strong><br />This is especially true today, when books have to compete for their slice of the entertainment pie. If they want to fill that gap in consumer's lives, they need to provide a product worth buying.<br />(Submitted by an Unknown)<br /> <br /><strong>RE: Flexible Displays Closer to Reality, Thanks to U.S. Army</strong><br />Wonderful, but why must everything start with warfare?<br />(Submitted by a CEO)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Opinion: Turning the Page</strong><br />And then there was one! I sure hope that is not the future of our collective businesses. As we all try to reinvent ourselves and the economic bumble bursts once again, we have to believe there will be another trend or idea that we all want to have or be part of good fortune. It's hard to imagine right now what the next opportunity will be with all the bad news in the markets. But some how, some way, we will be lured into another great scheme that will give us hope and allow us to think that this will be the new economic model of good fortune. <br />The question should be asked, can the magazine become the comeback kid in a down market? I believe that the magazine will make a come back in this economic downturn. Heck, maybe this period of slow growth and raising unemployment will give way to the American people actually cutting back on excessive spending on the must have, but don't really need it products. The consumer might have to find ways to cut spending and take a look at their monthly expenditures. Maybe even electing to cut out cable or their internet service and look for other ways to receive information. Or possibly, they might find reading a magazine more entertaining then surfing the internet or trying to find something to watch on their 60" flat screen TV. Now is the time to promote the value of a magazine in its original format. Separate the high cost of cable or internet from the low cost portability of a magazine. Turn off your electronics and save money on your eclectic bill and reduce your carbon footprint. There are many ways to reinvent ourselves, but we need to all band together and move this very large rock up the hill. Focus on the consumer and market their needs in a changing environment. Heck, maybe the next great thing is right under our nose? As the financial commercial once said, "we make money the old fashion way, we earn it! Now there's a thought!<br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: While it is Bad, it is not 2000-2002 for Printers</strong><br />Bob, In Terry Tevis's account of the "Perfect Storm" that exacerbated the print downturn of 2000-2002, he doesn't mention the seminal events of 9/11/01 as contributors to that storm. Everyone got scared - publishers hunkered down, consumers got more cautious in their buying habits and government focus turned hard toward anti-terrorism with the result that printers felt a direct downward impact.<br />(Submitted by a Printer)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-23176106436116369992008-08-24T19:41:00.000-07:002008-08-24T19:44:40.642-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Newsstands, Editors and Circ<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOWLCu-xPqQY6972VoWJh8RoCQu0lkvkK-OMVtMvXb29hgfl7gWmmsEOVsm_ldHc6S1Z76cRIbp1LQtFp3yehF1nJYEWWLlnajs99o5hS-X8JCffSDZ3ZFes7a4xH2KRkawhkXce5_sHAq/s1600-h/6a00d8341c4e6153ef00e5510904e38833-800wi.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOWLCu-xPqQY6972VoWJh8RoCQu0lkvkK-OMVtMvXb29hgfl7gWmmsEOVsm_ldHc6S1Z76cRIbp1LQtFp3yehF1nJYEWWLlnajs99o5hS-X8JCffSDZ3ZFes7a4xH2KRkawhkXce5_sHAq/s320/6a00d8341c4e6153ef00e5510904e38833-800wi.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5238280610267298770" /></a><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric."<br />Bertrand Russell (English Logician and Philosopher 1872-1970) </span><br /><strong>Re: Bo-Vent - Today, I Only Have Questions</strong><br />Bob, I have done some work in the UK newsstand market and over 30 years in the North American market. One difference I have always noted, which may be part of the answer to one of your questions; the retailers in the UK care about selling magazines and newspapers. It is their livelihood. If a title is low in stock, they call up and re-order. How many supermarket, drug store, or discount store managers or their employees actually care about the magazine category? How many have any clue about what magazines are selling in their stores and in what quantities? Many category buyers don't even seem to care except when it comes time to place new checkouts and the IPO $$ signs ring in their heads. Yet magazines are always ranked high in profitability among all general merchandise categories. So why is there this disconnect both at the corporate and store levels? Unless this changes, we will never achieve the sames sales levels as our frineds across the pond.<br />(Submitted by a Single Copy Newsstand Mgr.)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Bo-Vent - Today, I Only Have Questions</strong><br />While this is only a part of the differences - they do distribute much differently. Most of the magazines distributed in Europe - including the subscription copies - are sent to the newsstand - this is due to the exorbitant EU postage rates.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Production Consultant)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Bo-Vent - Today, I Only Have Questions</strong><br />Hey Bo,Don't believe everything or probably anything you read about U.K. circulation. Cant speak for the rest of Europe<br />At the moment there is not a day goes by without industry closures being announced and staff cutbacks.<br /><br />Within this economic cycle or credit crunch, call it what you like, the U.K. is probably lagging around 3 months behind the US.<br />So keep your eyes and ears opened close to the end of the year and see where Europe stands then.<br /><br />Your paragraph about the business model can be partly explained by the difference in the distribution chain setup, the amount of magazine retailers and of course the amount of available titles. Then honesty creeps into the equation.<br /><br />Moving on, text messaging is certainly playing a major part plus all the other distractions that we have provided the youth of today with in the name of progress, don't blame them, look to the future Bo in 10 years someone will have created a translator to turn all your writing over the years into text language so the kids can understand what it was you were on about.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Bo-Vent - Today, I Only Have Questions</strong><br />The reason subscriptions are more expensive in Europe is that nobody subscribes. People get their magazines from the corner newsagent, shoved through the letter-slot once a week or once a month along with the newspapers; therefore the publishers cannot brag to their advertisers about how many subscribers they have, so there's no reason to sell subs cheaply.<br />All good newspapers in Europe are national papers, and a lot of papers and magazines have a stronger identity than in this country. The conservative mantra about the press being dominated by liberalism is hogwash; the trouble with most American newspapers is that they don't seem to believe in anything much, while in Britain if you buy the Guardian or the Telegraph you know exactly what you're getting. And looking after a newstand in this country I can tell you that the British mags, even UK editions of USA mags, are aiming higher than armchair pilots who watch too much television.<br />(Submitted by a Semi-retired writer in Iowa who lived in England for 25 years)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Bo-Vent - Today, I Only Have Questions</strong><br />OK, now we're up to three. I tell you, these questions are dog whistles for me.<br />I'd like to point out that there is text messaging in Europe and I recall reading that their wireless systems are more advanced than ours. So maybe it's our educational system or maybe it's the more than 30 years of relentless teacher and higher education bashing by our politicos. wev<br />Go to B&N or Borders and pick up the English and other foreign magazines. Lay them out next to some of their "sisters" or "brothers" from the big publishers.<br />There's your answer. Their stuff is good. Good editors. Good writing. Good content.<br />Our stuff. Looks good, mass produced, designed for the advertiser. Same for our newspapers.<br />(Submitted by a Vice President, Circulation)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Kohl's, JCPenney Look to Reduce Print Advertising</strong><br />Bo, while the free standing insert business may be an important revenue source for the struggling newspapers, there is a downside to these inserts as well. I've stopped buying the Providence Journal on Sunday, solely because the volume, weight, and inconvenience of all these extra, and by me unwanted, inserts. If I want something from Best Buy, or Home Depot, my first choice in today's world is via Google, where I have yet to be unable to purchase what I am looking for on line. Last week it was a porch swing; the local garden store had only two models, and was out of stock on the one I wanted. Back home, I found exactly what I wanted for 25% less, and shipping of only $10 from Illinois to the northeast. Why do I need freestanding newspaper inserts, especially when I have to DRIVE to get to the sales these inserts are promoting?<br />Submitted by a Senior Director of MFG and DST)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Are Editors a Luxury that we can Do Without?</strong><br />Hey Bo, I got a great idea! Let's get rid of the accountants and MBA's first. They're the ones who started this clusterf*ck in the first place!<br /><br />And you know what? I've got a really cool 5 point plan to help us implement this new self contained-turnkey strategy that will help us prioritize our markets, increase our margins and make it possible to flip the company in three years while increasing our stock prices 23.267%! Let's meet at 10:00AM in the Grande(tm) Conference room and Charlie will show you the powerpoint.<br /><br />What's that you say? Crappy content is crappy content? Who cares, we've got a 5 point plan! Each point has 5 sub points! It was written by our new Senior Strategic Coach Advisor! He used to work for Time/Warner but he recently became available to us. He's so cool! And he knows how to contain costs! I'll show you over dinner. We'll charge it to the company.<br />(Submitted by a VP of Circulation)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Are Editors a Luxury that we can Do Without?</strong><br />bob, everyone except God needs an editor . . .<br />(Submitted by a Senior Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Is this the dumbest generation EVER?</strong><br />I don't buy into the overly simplistic and self-congratulatory notion of all younger people are idiots compared to ourselves. I have teenagers at home. Some of the classes they and their friends have taken and will take in high school are: calculus; advanced calculus; post modernist literature (including reading maybe five novels in one semester); advanced placement<br />American history, including the need to marshal extensive outside reading to support daily written compositions; levels of French and Spanish that require semi-fluent levels of conversation during classes; physics, chemistry, and biology; environmental sciences; "advanced" humanities, which is a synthesis of literature, art, sociology, psychology, and a number of other studies; and all that is on top of most of them working *and* playing<br />sports *and* taking part in other extra curricular activities. They regularly discuss and debate current events and, unlike many of their elders, at least try to do something about them. And this is the generation that people, who find it fashionable to be unable to do something as simple<br />as following directions to set the time on a VCR or DVD player, dismiss as being intellectually unworthy?<br />(Submitted by a Writer)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Where Publishers Are Thriving</strong><br />Fascinating article on German publishing. It reminded me of a comment I heard a few years ago from a senior American publishing executive: "No German magazine publisher has ever successfully expanded into the U.S." As far as I know, he's right. It's a slightly different publishing environment . . . but different enough, apparently.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Publisher and BoSacks Cub Reporter)<br /><strong><br />RE: How Can We Cure the Ill's of the Single Copy Sales</strong><br />It was fascinating in an aggravating sort of way to read Professor Husni's presumptuous thoughts on single copy sales. I have to say: circulation departments deserve a lot more credit than he's giving them, and I'll bet most publishers aren't quite as dumb as the article implies either. Professional circulators analyze reader acquisition costs in excruciating detail, with mountains of real-world data. No one can tell why a publisher picked a price, set a rate base, or chose a sales channel by looking at magazines on a newsstand . . . especially in today's incredibly complex and competitive marketplace. Since publications with good strategies will prosper and magazines with bad strategies won't, Husni's opinions are pretty much beside the point. The market will trump uninformed punditry every time.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Publisher and BoSacks Cub Reporter)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Discovering Real Magazine Profit in Sustainability</strong><br />While in substantial agreement with your part of this piece I do have one or two beefs with the EPA precepts, which I found fuzzy and incomplete.<br /><br />1. environmental protection does not preclude economic development.<br /><br />A major omission was made in failing to include the qualifier "necessarily," as in "environmental protection does not necessarily preclude economic development." When applied ideologically, religiously (as many greens do), or bureaucratically it can not only preclude development but cause regression in the standard of living.<br /><br />2. economic development must be ecologically viable now and in the long run.<br /><br />This makes sense. Of course, the rub is in how "ecologically viable" is defined but that's a much longer story. See point 1 comments for the short version.<br /><br />The biggest flaw in the EPA precepts is their failure to complete the thought and add:<br /><br />3. environmental protection must be economically viable now and in the long run.<br /><br />This is the key to making sustainability work. It is prosperity that enables environmentalism. If people did not understand the story of the Chinese economy before the Olympics, one look at Beijing's air should tell the tale. If you don't have a job and can't feed your family you don't really care if the river is dirty or the air is gray. The needs of people must be met first.<br />(Submitted by a printer)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-81984488623550213522008-08-21T19:19:00.000-07:002008-08-21T19:25:14.429-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Finally Some Uplifting News<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIEf2QHDevajKZfweWIc_zJybHPKb5RdCXFsqYVFpMrqK6fMEqdFQeTOWXSMYmt1vRzzdE8A96aqoIzIWEatyWz78dLjWwxByjKnIPl07RdHV1C6OONRLk73mFJvRL1iOl4orGAGrz0rMd/s1600-h/409518WCEB_w.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIEf2QHDevajKZfweWIc_zJybHPKb5RdCXFsqYVFpMrqK6fMEqdFQeTOWXSMYmt1vRzzdE8A96aqoIzIWEatyWz78dLjWwxByjKnIPl07RdHV1C6OONRLk73mFJvRL1iOl4orGAGrz0rMd/s400/409518WCEB_w.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5237162463864039266" /></a><br /><span style="color:#3333ff;">I was going to buy a copy of The Power of Positive Thinking, and then I thought: What the hell good would that do?<br />Ronnie Shakes</span><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Finally Some Uplifting News </strong><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />For me, some of the news is a downer because many people do not read between the lines. Because many companies that I work with and for react to the news, instead of trying to understand it and then see what positives they can take out of it.<br /><br />I see a lot of companies with their heads in the sand. Or, conversely, I see companies that are running around like Chicken Little declaring that the sky is falling.<br /><br />It's not, but if you don't watch out, you'll trip and fall.<br /><br />What I am doing today is remarkably different from what I did 5 or 10 or even 15 years ago. That excites the heck out me. I love the research capabilities that are available and I love being able to work the data to reveal proper interpretations. I love the presentation capabilities I have now.<br /><br />On the other hand, the thing that I miss is the independent thought and engagement I used to have. I used to be able to sell. I used to be able to persuade. I used to be able to call on experienced people who looked at data and made an "educated' decision (sometimes the wrong one). I used to have long standing, long nurtured business relationships. Now I call on educated people who can't or won't make a decision because all of the decision making has been taken out of the process. There is no selling.<br /><br />However, there are accountants and MBA's, but we've already talked about them.<br />(Submitted by a Vic e President, Circulation)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Bo: I agree with your sentiments and as one who "publishes" a news briefing daily, I share your struggles to find positive news about our industry. My focus is on the paper industry, however, I also include news pertaining to the many end users of paper, print and packaging. Our industries will only prosper if the folks earning a living from them make the conscious decisions to be informed and to become part of the solution.<br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Bob - you are reporting on the state of our industry and the tangential factors that impact it as well. For any subscriber to perceive your reporting as too much bad news, they are not looking at the information in an intelligent way, nor are they perceiving the value of the news that you report. I find the BoSacks reports to be vital to how I do business today and how I plan for tomorrow. Keep them coming Bob, don't let the "doom viewers" bring you down!!<br />(Submitted by a Senior Industry Consultant)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Bob - Since you asked: Ten years ago I was blissfully enjoying being a print publisher. Five years ago I thought I knew how to cross the Web/print divide. Today I'm thrashing around, thinking 'Damn, I used to be good at this stuff. What happened?'<br /><br />Today I'm finding the biggest challenges are not coming up with creative and interesting ideas for Web properties, but in getting consensus for these ideas among our staff and owners while trying to keep print revenues ahead of print expenses. Yikes.<br /><br />Two or three years ago, I told you something like, 'At my age, I wish the Web had come along either 10 years earlier or 10 years later.' This is still true. A new Golden Age of publishing may be dawning, but so far it's mostly only from the consumer's perspective.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Keep preaching it! There has never been more opportunity in publishing than right now, it just won't be the publishing we have ever known, or can even understand at this point.<br />Thanks for the great stories!<br />(Submitted an Unknown)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />I don't know, Bob, I haven't heard any uplifting news of late.<br />In the beginning of this year, people in my industry (PR) were saying that they were knocking on wood because they weren't feeling that the recession was having an effect on their business. The theory was that clients wouldn't put their money in advertising because it was pretty much passé and ineffective, but PR was becoming more and more important, so business was good.<br /><br />I wondered to myself how we were going to get the message out with all the "old media" dying off. We PR people do understand how to engage in two-way dialogues, so we grasp much better than people from the ad world how to work in the world of online social media. Social media are all very well and good, but they are not necessarily the right vehicle for every client. For example, I just don't think a mutual fund client would buy launching a new mutual fund via Facebook and Twitter - the client wants professional journalists to write about the new fund. By the same token, B2B tech clients need their trade magazines (whether online or in print) to get the word out to customers, but the trade media are going through just as tough a time as the consumer media.<br /><br />I've heard younger PR people complaining that the job market is tightening up, too. It seems that out-of-work journalists are pouring into the PR profession, which they used to treat with the utmost scorn, and flooding PR agencies and headhunters with their resumes! There are many applicants going after the available jobs. At the same time, potential clients are also now hesitating about committing their budgets, and taking a wait-and-see attitude, so agencies aren't hiring the way they were a year ago.<br /><br />All in all, it's not such a rosy picture as my colleagues were painting at the beginning of the year.<br />(submitted by a PR Person)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />A friend recently told me that the only way she likes her morning<br />coffee is with cream, sugar and Bosacks. She's right.<br /><br />"Today, I Only Have Questions"<br />"The Unbearable Lightness of Art Supplies"<br />"Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks?"<br />Pass the biscuits.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Bo, It must be an age thing. I am in the production side of the business and I love it. I am having the time of my life envisioning my company's future and great world of communication we are creating, right here, right now. I have 12 years of publishing background and I love the digital directions we are bound for. You are correct what's not to like?<br />(Submitted by a Production Director)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />I think you're doing fine. I'm not interested in all the subjects you cover, but if people in these industries have their heads in a hole, they'll deserve to lose out. As a lifelong music freak and record collector, I can tell you that that industry is many times bigger than it was when I was a kid . . . . It took until 1947 for the record biz to sell as many units as it had in 1929, then it quadrupled during the 1950s, and now with downloading, digital copying etc it's in another crisis, but a lot of the music could disappear and nobody would miss it. Looking after a newsstand now, I can tell you that there are so many haircut mags, wedding mags, gun mags, car mags etc that there is bound to be a clearout with so much info available online. I am also the author of an A-Z reference book which once earned royalties, and is now on the Internet, the natural place for it. But books and magazines won't disappear. Ever.<br />(Submitted by a Semi-retired writer in Iowa)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Hey-it is hard to find articles that are uplifting. I've been in the industry over 20 years and my life and job in production (manufacturing and operations - magazines) has changed DRASTICALLY. A few years ago when my division was sold twice, I started realizing production as I know was not going to take me to retirement. I recently went back to school and got a Masters in Health Administration - looking to leave publishing as soon as I can. But what I tell young people is IF they are interested in production, obviously they need to work for companies that have a big online component - and for people my age looking for that next production job - I ask WHY - how long will you have that job before you are downsized or outsourced? Keep telling it like it is with a dash of uplifting news whenever you can find it . . .<br />(Submitted by a Production Person)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Bo, It must be an age thing. I am in the production side of the business and I love it. I am having the time of my life envisioning my company's future and great world of communication we are creating, right here, right now. I have 12 years of publishing background and I love the digital directions we are bound for. You are correct what's not to like?<br />(Submitted by a Production Director)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />Those that are purposely tuning you out for speaking the truth are no different than my 4 year old who plugs his ears each night when I tell him it's time for bed . He knows its bed time, and that it's inevitable that he put his pajamas on, brush his teeth and read books - but he figures if he tunes me out he can stay up and party a little longer. He's in a state of denial, as are publishers who think they can continue to do business the way they did 10 years ago.<br />Don't stop the truth. It will set us all free.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Finally Some Uplifting News From BoSacks</strong><br />I have been in circulation for just over 6 years now, and have seen first hand how difficult it is for magazines. I feel lucky that early in my career I found your newsletter. Whenever I have changed magazines, I've always made sure to update my address with you so that I can be sure to keep the Bosacks coming! Although I have to admit that I don't read every article, every day, I always read the subject lines to see if I can glean something from the articles. BUT I have never skip an email because I thought of them as too negative. It's usually only due to time constraints.<br />I think you're right on the button with what you are saying here - and I just want to thank you for everything that you do! You're an inspiration to me.<br />Keep up the good work and don't let the negative naggies get you down. The other thing that I have found in my job is that nobody ever complains that you're doing too good a job and so sometimes these letters get seem out of proportion. I bet you'll get lots of comments similar to mine.<br />(Submitted by a Circulator)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-43188482305030731372008-08-14T20:24:00.000-07:002008-08-14T20:29:39.924-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Magazine Measurement ,BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Magazine Measurement ,<br />Magazine Profit, Manufacturing Woes<br />www.bosacks.com<br /><strong>Re: Magazine Measurement: Right Direction, Wrong Speed</strong><br />Ms. Frank lays out some important truths about the intrinsic value of magazines, truths you and I have discussed and analyzed and beaten to death for years. The problem, as I see it, with putting this truth to work for the mutual benefit of advertisers and publishers (and, not incidentally, printers) remains the same. Media buyers are entry level kids who know only what they know, which amounts to very little. They have grown up planted in front of a screen, being told everything else will pass away but the Internet will not pass away. <br /><br />This results in media money poorly spent and clients ill served. And the fault lies neither with the inexperienced media buyers nor with magazines. The fault lies with upper management in the ad agency community who are too busy with the sexier, creative aspects of their agencies to rethink what actually helps to sell their clients to consumers. This amounts to nothing less than negligence and perhaps malfeasance. <br /><br />As a legendary ad man said, "If it doesn't sell, it's not creative." One hopes that someone in agency management will remember this, use it to reinvent the lost art of effective media planning, and perhaps make his own legend in the process<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Discovering Real Magazine Profit in Sustainability</strong><br />The future can't be paper bob, it has to be devices and downloads. 100 per cent sell through means no newsstands. I live in the burbs where optimum on line already delivers 90 per cent of the media that comes into my house via my local distributor cablevision. I am sure they would be happy to set up a digital newsstand for me and add it to my ever growing cable bill and even supply me the hardware to read it on in addition to the various modems and cable boxes they supply and service).<br />(Submitted by an Industry Supplier)<br /><br /><strong>Re: The Classic Rock Magazine Is Switching to a Smaller, Rack-Friendly Size</strong><br />That's a mistake. It will get lost on the newsstand. Size matters.<br />Submitted by an Unknown)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Reading in Public Accounts for 45% of All Magazine Reading</strong><br />Bob, just how many pages of a magazine does the patient in a Dr's or Dentist office actually get to see or read. Bet it is not more than 25%. Dentist office yoy do not take publication to the chair. Dr's office you might- Eye Dr's office you have to wait, and might see 50% of the full copy. Just do not agree with that survey. Unless someone is very EARLY for appointment your wait is usually under 10 minutes.<br />Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: PPA warns members against magazine sharing website</strong><br />Oh, this is beautiful. It isn't enough that our industry is in the crapper. Now we are going to go after people WHO ACTUALLY WANT TO READ! Targeting file sharer's certainly worked for the RIAA and the music companies, didn't it?<br /><br />Anyone think that file sharing can be a good thing? After all, it's eyeballs on our products. And since most of us are giving away our content on our sites, we should be looking at monetizing the peer to peer process. <br /><br />Do advertisers care if readers are buying magazines vs downloading them for free versus controlled circ? It's not the method of transmission, it's the message!<br />Submitted by an Executive Director of Manufacturing)<br /> <br /><br /><strong>Re: In my book, the Kindle is not a kindred spirit</strong><br />Bo, I love your newsletter and I also love my Kindle. It doesn't replace reading books, it supplements them; just the way you often describe online reading supplementing newspapers and magazines.<br /><br />When I have an interest in a subject, I can download sample chapters of several books from that niche for free. Then I can download the entire book I perceived<br />as the most valuable immediately, most of the time for only $9.99. <br />O.K., reading the kindle is not the same experience as reading the physical book, but there are many advantages I haven't discussed that make it a great informational tool, and it is now in my briefcase daily right next to my laptop computer. <br />Submitted by an Unknown)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Facing Today's Woes </strong><br />Ink? She wants me to get all concerned about ink prices going up? That's 4% of my print bill. (Not sure where you get 8% from Alex, unless you are running a 16-color,16-page form.) Ink could go up 50% and I would still be "unscathed" so bring it on you Printers! Raise my ink prices! Go ahead! Make my day! It's about time the cost of ink increased since the cost of oil has gone up 400% in less than a year. Most Printers have not passed on fuel surcharges, let alone the cost of ink so it's about time. Although some inks are soy based, most inks are still made from oil. (Gee Alex, why do you always make the Printers out to be the sneaky, underhanded, bad guys? Clearly, this ink increase is prompted by the greed of the oil companies and us self-absorbed Americans who can't stop driving our cars. Don't blame the Printers. It ain't their fault.)<br /> <br />P.S. "Keep your guns in their holsters?" I have purchased printing for 20+ years and I have never found it necessary to wear my holster--let alone bring my guns--for negotiating a printing contract. All my printers wear white hats. <br />Submitted by a Senior Manager, Production)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Free Textbooks Coming Near You</strong><br />Bottom line is you can't get something for nothing! Doesn't matter if it's<br />textbooks, music, magazine, etc. etc. Someone has to create the content!<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Magazine People - Arrive to Teach Ink-Stained Wretches a Thing or Two</strong><br />Bob, This was a great bit. Since no one I know has a working crystal ball, I won't dare profess to know what could really save the newspaper industry. Maybe it just needs to implode, go niche and come back up as something no one has even thought of? Who knows? One thing I do know - as a former Times Mirror person - is that the LA Times has and has had such deep rooted problems, from mega-inflated budgets to a management hierarchy that would make Homeland Security look like a modern marvel of efficiency. Somehow they always pumped out great news despite themselves, but as a business it was a publishing tsunami. So people shouldn't get too bent out of shape about this cute little magazine diversion. In the scheme of things, it is just a bit of seaweed on Otis Chandlers' surfboard.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Sales person)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE:IPDA Newsstand Forum.</strong><br />Bob- Saw you published items from the August issue of IPDA Newsstand Forum. We're always glad to see you pick up and redistribute our articles. <br /><br />However, as we explained, in this case, one article, "Putting A Rough First Half in Perspective," was not yet finalized when you picked it up from our site (we hadn't yet actually sent the August issue out to our email subscribers). Thanks for offering to publish the link into the Newsstand Forum site, for those who might be interested in reading that full article and other content in our August issue: http://www.news.ipda.org. <br /><br /><strong>RE: The Numbers</strong><br />Bo, A good one. My answer to all this cutting back of advertising is my wife, Judy and yours truly. We refuse to watch TV because of all the advertising glut. Nightly National Network news is so loaded with advertising, the actual news is incidental to the ads. Likewise, the PGA has allowed so much advertising, that the actual play is incidental to the ads. Exceptions to this are the Masters and British Open, both of which limit the amount of advertising so they are fun to watch because you get to see a lot of great golf.<br /><br />I historically listened to WBBM radio out of Chicago because they built their reputation as the "all news radio station" Not anymore you cannot dial into that station without hitting an ad 80% of the time. As far as I am concerned they should change their moniker to "the all advertising news radio station". At least we can get the traffic and weather on the 8's, and sports at 15 after and 15 before the hour. what a shame.<br /><br />The weather channel on cable has gone down the same path, where they used to have interesting topics inserted between weather news, has been replaced by ads. Same situation, the local weather news comes on the 8's. Do not dial in 3 minutes before the 8's because guess what , you are right, ads, sometimes 2 to 3 straight minutes of them.<br /><br />The last survey we saw was well over 60% of TV viewers complained there are too many ads. Takes a few of the big guys like P&G and Johnson and Johnson to voice there displeasure with a medium and make cuts. Remember, P&G is the Pied Piper in the consumer products industry and the rest of the suppliers to consumers will take notice and follow suit.<br />(Submitted by a paper Person)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-46642061343255137582008-08-10T17:03:00.000-07:002008-08-10T17:06:44.472-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak out: Kindle, News and Magazines<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhu6SWuG9MrcjVQa5FU65TsGu8t0MbMgDuXNTTuLBsxKHfUA8ITlPYwoaCC2DI3Wu62KioY3wo0wrDWFoHhvLyLnywJOk9-EYLpqi7Hxp_ZGJ8fSNKhfAh1vPE_DrOshwfkJclbvz586ldD/s1600-h/Public+Speaking.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhu6SWuG9MrcjVQa5FU65TsGu8t0MbMgDuXNTTuLBsxKHfUA8ITlPYwoaCC2DI3Wu62KioY3wo0wrDWFoHhvLyLnywJOk9-EYLpqi7Hxp_ZGJ8fSNKhfAh1vPE_DrOshwfkJclbvz586ldD/s320/Public+Speaking.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5233044688007440738" /></a><br />BoSacks Readers Speak out: Kindle, News and Magazines<br />www.bosacks.com<br /> <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Re: In my book, the Kindle is not a kindred spirit</span><br />"He says that paper's immutability means that: "The book you place on your nightstand as you drift off to sleep will be exactly the same book when you wake up in the morning." This comforts us. . . . "Every fifth book that my eyes wander over is not yet read. It is waiting for me to pick it up. Some would think this a terrible waste, but I take comfort in having books at the ready."<br /><br />OK- perhaps the Kindle is not the perfection of the electronic read. But articles like this make me despair. I confess. I have thousands of books at my home. But I also now have a Kindle. <br />I look at the copy of the most recent War and Peace translation I purchased last year, and wish I had it on my Kindle instead- I might actually lift it up to read! (but perhaps not the book- although my chiropractor wishes I would!)<br /><br />These "odes" to print are sounding more and more elitist and detached. Are we to say that those millions of people who can't afford a personal library are somehow diminished irrevocably? Those unfortunates who patronize libraries- where books are shared, not owned? <br /><br />Come on- can we please get back to the content! Reading trash (not that there's anything wrong with that, if it's your thing) is reading trash, whether it's from dead trees on your nightstand, or anonymously bound into the black "faux-leather" Kindle cover, or on a computer monitor or blackberry. Get people reading, whatever the medium. Help these readers become critical readers. Make people want more, not less, well-written and researched content. <br />Delivery moves on, intelligence has to be nurtured . . . This is what should demand our attention!<br />Submitted by a Senior Circulator)<br /> <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Re: In my book, the Kindle is not a kindred spirit</span><br />And why does the author not go back to a horse and buggy? In that way he will not "miss the pleasure" of feeding his conveyance real food in lieu of gasoline. Likewise, I would guess he wrote this piece using a computer. What's wrong with "the weight" of a typewriter? Does he bemoan the lack of a ribbon and ink and retyping an entire page simply because one word is incorrect? Come on. . . . there may (or may not) be many reasons not to want a Kindle, but his just seem specious!<br />Submitted by a Publishing CFO)<br /> <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Re: In my book, the Kindle is not a kindred spirit</span><br />Bo,I love your newsletter and I also love my Kindle.<br />It doesn't replace reading books, it supplements them; just the way you often describe online reading supplementing newspapers and magazines. When I have an interest in a subject, I can download sample chapters of several books from that niche for free. Then I can download the entire book I perceive as the most valuable immediately, most of the time for only $9.99. <br /> <br />O.K., reading the kindle is not the same experience as reading the physical book, but there are many advantages I haven't discussed that make it a great informational tool, and it is now in my briefcase daily right next to my laptop computer. <br />(Submitted by an Unknown )<br /> <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Re: In my book, the Kindle is not a kindred spirit</span><br />Bo: This guy needs to open his mind a little. Not one word of The Great Gatsby, or A Tale of Two Cities, or War and Peace will be different on a Kindle. I thought it was all about the words. Substance, not form. I'm getting my Kindle on Friday. I am looking forward to it for many reasons. <br /> <br />First, of all, it's something new. I'm proud of my middle-aged self for being willing to try it. From what I read, it does all the things that I do when I read books . . . write in margins, look up words in dictionary, etc.<br />Secondly, as an apartment dweller, I am always forced to get rid of books every so often, for simple lack of shelf space. The Kindle is perfect for that. I can archive a cyberspace library of books that I bought, without their having to be there. If I want to re-read Moby Dick ten years from now, I can, since it's mine already. The paperback Penguin Classics don't turn brown! Need I continue?<br />I'll let you know how I like it after I play around for a while.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing and former Co-Worker with BoSacks)<br /> <br /> <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />RE: I Read the News Today . . . Oh Boy</span><br />Eric Alterman is right to be concerned about the role of news and the future of our democracy, but he's got only part of the story. And Vartan Gregorian's "Idea" has been tried. The NY Times, USA Today and various local papers call it the "college readership program." Mainly it dumps newspapers on campuses and gets to count them as paid. But that's another story. <br /> <br />The other part of the story is in the place where the schools and the press used to meet. Once upon a time, each of the three newsweeklies had education programs where they sold classroom sets of magazines to teachers and supplied vast quantities of supplemental curriculum materials to held said teachers 1) bring current news into classrooms; 2) engage students with civic issues and 3) teach about the role of the press. Once upon a time over 700 newspapers in the U.S. had NIE programs (Newspaper in Education) that did the same thing on a local level. Time pulled out of the market three years ago. US News followed a year later. Newsweek folded its 50-year old education program in June. Many newspapers see NIE programs as luxuries they can't afford. <br /> <br />Granted, for the magazines and the newspapers, the programs were designed to boost circulation or support the rate base. But they did something else, too, which is get newspapers and news into kid's HANDS (literally) and helped further the cause of civic education in ways large and small by engaging kids with real issues. <br /> <br />It's now harder every day for teachers to do that. Yes, there are a couple of great online programs (NY Times Learning Network and Newshour Extra), but - and here's the other economically driven rub - civic engagement just isn't on the radar screen when it comes to what we expect of schools these days. That might surprise you, because most literate people have heard something somewhere about the connection between education and democracy, and they probably remember that the main reason for having public schools in this country in the first place was to produce an educated citizenry. No more. Today the sole purpose of education is preparing workers for the global economy. Look closely at No Child Left Behind, dozens of school reform movements or either of the presidential candidates' platforms and you'll have a hard time finding even a reference to social studies, news or civic education. In elementary schools, social studies has been essentially eliminated in favor of reading and math, and I've met many high school history and civics teachers who have been told that "all teachers are reading teachers" these days. <br /> <br />I'd like to think that all teachers are civics teachers, but I'm an old curmudgeon. <br /> <br />So there are two engines of democracy in trouble. Everyone is talking about the press, but no one seems to be talking about the schools in that light. <br /> <br /> <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Re: The Production Traffic Cop</span><br />Bob - this article by Bob Wiemers is EXCELLENT. What a thorough, fair and balanced piece on the state of closing a magazine today. Every magazine, ad agency and client should be forced to read and comprehend the excellent points covered here. I have sent this to my clients for a thorough understanding of why, after 30 years, I am still a Traffic Cop above all else!!<br />(Submitted by a Senior industry Consultant)<br /> <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Re: The Production Traffic Cop</span><br />"If we change this page on Friday, we'll have to track down all the trucks, buy some more paper, and print the whole thing again-but yes, it can be done." <br />Bob Wiemers<br /> <br />This story really hit home with me and I just had to share this "real life" experience with you. And yes, Bob Wiemers is correct, it can always be done . . . <br /> <br />I had scheduled my Aunt's move from her second floor, walk-up apartment in the city to a retirement community in the suburbs. One of our monthlies had gone to the Printer 8 days ago so I felt "safe" scheduling her move for this week. After all, the publication would be loaded on trucks today and put in the mail. What could possibly go wrong?<br /> <br />It was a scorching hot day in Chicago, the movers were packing in a flurry, and my Aunt was shuffling around on her walker saying. Wait, I want to look through those books before you pack them. Too late, into the box they went. My cell phone rings. It's my boss. I walk down to the landing between the first and second floors for better reception and she says:<br /> <br /> We need to pull the story on page 3 of the issue.<br /> Which issue?<br /> The June issue.<br /> But, we can't," I say. It's mailing today.<br /> No they're not mailing it, she said. I called them and said not to mail it.<br /> But it's printed already. It's too late.<br /> <br /> Well isn't there someway that they can just tear out page 3 and put a new one in? (Now, this is my fault because I had done a "rip-and tip" on a book at our Annual Meeting when someone discovered the wrong author name on a Section Opener page. So I got out my glue stick, an exacto and a ruler, cut out the old page, and glued in a new one.) <br /> No, there's no way that can be done. It's saddle stitched. And besides, it's 25,000 copies!<br /> So if we need to pull that story, we'll have to reprint the entire issue?<br /> Yes, that's right, I say. The entire issue will have to be printed again. <br /> How much will that cost?<br /> <br /> It will cost the same as if we printed a regular issue. <br /> Well, we'll have to do that then. Find out how soon they can do it. Tell the Printer we need this done ASAP!<br /> Can I ask what the problem is with the story? Why does it have to be pulled? Did we misspell our CEO's name again?<br /> <br /> No, we got right this time, but the author's corrections for the story on page 3 did not get back in time. The author is furious! Since he is on the board we have to pull this story. We have no choice.<br /> I don't understand . . . why didn't the writer call the author and say we're going to press, we need the changes today or we can't print the story? <br /> <br /> Well he tried but the author never called him back.<br /> And he couldn't have called him again? Don't we have rules about not publishing a story without the author's changes? What's the procedure for this? <br /> <br /> You're right, this should have never happened. I know we have issues with this whole process. <br /> But this always happens, I said. Editorial has ALL the time in the world to write this stuff. They have spell check, cycles and cycles of proofreading, and they still don't get it right! So now, when they screw things up, and we don't catch it before it's printed, we're gonna start pulling issues off the truck! <br /> <br /> No, we are not making a habit of this. I have an idea, why don't you give this some thought and see what you can come up with. <br /> <br /> Me? Give it some thought? I don't even need to think about it! It's real simple. <br />Number 1: Editorial must establish a process for writing and finalizing copy. <br />Number 2: Editorial must create an editorial schedule and meet every date on it.<br />Number 3: Editorial needs to understand that Production cannot fix everything.<br />Then I hear a crash from upstairs. I hear my Aunt yell, Mary! You'd better get up here.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Production Manager)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-25293883772497734652008-07-29T18:24:00.000-07:002008-07-29T18:26:25.386-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Outsourcing, Printed Words, Google<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2XzEiL4DrgcmTmucxjErsOS_LYILMAJQfXSl0uzE9QMUtSaxc2YQkp6zJG8e_JG39weLCdnkTFiuYLdnnZUyXoxZQBojY8e5ZGNCs8sWxXdqzrIzqzZbkPI0P48ZurQVbi40qhli_UO4Z/s1600-h/wimp.png"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2XzEiL4DrgcmTmucxjErsOS_LYILMAJQfXSl0uzE9QMUtSaxc2YQkp6zJG8e_JG39weLCdnkTFiuYLdnnZUyXoxZQBojY8e5ZGNCs8sWxXdqzrIzqzZbkPI0P48ZurQVbi40qhli_UO4Z/s400/wimp.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228612328769802162" /></a><br /><strong>FW: Outsourcing Circ: "Bad short-term thinking."</strong><br />Nobody is cracking the real story here Bob. Once upon a time, IDG pushed their head of circ out, presumably to save costs, and replaced her with lower level people already on the team. Ziff Davis did the same thing with Charles Mast. Now both IDG and Ziff have realized those moves were mistakes -- as those heads of circ were amongst the best in the game with long, successful histories at both companies. Now all the buzz is about how two tech publishers decided to outsource their circulation to consultants -- but the real story is that those original moves didn't work out and that circulation veterans still have real value in this market. Without proper succession planning and transition, the stripped down (from defection), leaderless teams at both companies failed. So now both publishers are really going back to their original, veteran stars to get back on track. Albeit with a more effective pricing model. No FTE's on the books, no benefits, no rent/overhead and no need to meddle with how each leader decides to staff up and get the job done. Thoughts?<br />(Submitted by an anonymous circulator)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>RE: Outsourcing Circ:</strong><br /> Hi Bo-Outsourcing affords publishers large and small the opportunity to draw on the experience and talent they can not get in today's market.<br />This experience brings forth knowledge which is applied to the Publisher's circulation function. In fact, Outsourcing in many cases brings talent in both single copy and subscription sales combined.<br />Therefore, a cost savings that cannot be duplicated by putting employees in that function.<br />Publishers will find out that in today's market Outsourcing is the only way to go to apply the talent that is both affordable and smart, and I am surprised this has not been done to their advantage 15 years ago.<br />(Submitted by a Circulator)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: Thanks, old boy, you taught us well</strong><br />When I was a kid, I thought of Esquire as a sex magazine. We, my friends, <br />had to sneak a look at the magazine stands. And it was a WOW.<br />(Submitted by the Father of BoSacks)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Thanks, old boy, you taught us well</strong><br />What a travesty not to mention Men's Health magazine with the likes of Esquire, GQ, Details, & those others? (are you kidding me---Ebony Man, Men's Vogue].<br />Sham on you Mr. Burnett. <br />(Submitted by an Executive Director)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: MagCloud: The Future of Magazine Publishing?</strong><br />Of course all of this keeps going back to editors/publishers who have ideas, yet need more economical, creative ways to publish/print... but no one addresses how to find your readers in a cost-effective way.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Circulator)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>RE: Time Anthology Reaffirms the Printed Word</strong><br />How quaint, is it available for the Kindle?<br />(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing) <br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: Can Consumer Mags Profitably Transition To Digital?</strong><br />i really liked this one.<br /> <br />magazines are good because they don't have a high margin classified business which has been declining severely in newspapers.<br /> <br />newspapers are drowning in competition from other media, including magazines, who can run cross platform programs while newspapers cannot.<br /> <br />let's go back 20 or so years . . . <br />newspapers are better than magazines because they can generate content that is more timely than magazines<br /> <br />newspaper organizations are making substantial investments in new technologies like cable, text delivery (remember videotext, folks?) along with continuing investments in broadcast media, unlike magazines<br /> <br />let me see if i understand this . . . . <br /> <br />magazines would not do as well because they did not have the resources or the timeliness of newspapers<br /> <br />now, magazines will do better than newspapers because . . . well . . . . ummmm . . . . because they're not newspapers!<br /> <br />does anyone else get the irony in all of this?<br /> <br />newspapers always acted to protect their supposed core business, and only made half hearted investments in the others (scripps howard is a notable exception). so of course, the got half-hearted results, and most missed the information explosion and instead fought against google and others to protect their legacy turf<br />(Submitted by an Industry Pundit)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: What Mainstream Publishers Don't Want You to Know</strong><br />Yeah, well, there's *another* reason not to use agents. What a travesty. I figure, if someone <br />wants to subscribe to my magazine, it's easy enough to find me, so I use NO AGENCY subs. None. <br />Zilch. In the days before the Internet, this silliness made a modicum of business sense. Not anymore.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Resisting Google</strong><br />Bob, have you noticed that Google is constantly adding storage capacity and enlarging the personal storage allowances for all their users? For free? I have hundreds of photos, emails not deleted, etc., and gmail says I'm still only using 4% of my allowed (free) storage capacity. A far cry from the $24.95 per month I was paying fifteen years ago for early AOL . . . <br /> <br />As Google continues collecting our electronic data trails to learn everything about all of us, I wonder if they also keep track of our whereabouts? Wouldn't it be easy for them to note the locations from which our Google accounts are activated, via wireless or other web portals that we connect through when travelling? If so, they know exactly where I am, and have been, for virtually every day of the past three years. Now THAT possibility is really frightening.<br />(Submitted by a Senior VP MFG)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-837799540720686762008-07-17T20:03:00.000-07:002008-07-17T20:07:30.486-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Print Survival, Editorial Church-State Line,Digital Media<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfkDO8HPWJoeJBBP4v_nm3iLIkXcDrOY7-3Vk4zg7bijnYtT00ch7gcuOPCYjbpK0CQLokkI1EN8Ytvt4ADo59b6S8p388b3XTnfOMSWnnVqyxaZpK579SFx3A5KpG8xTZ73m3yl-3JSqk/s1600-h/FP1334~The-Simpsons-Posters.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfkDO8HPWJoeJBBP4v_nm3iLIkXcDrOY7-3Vk4zg7bijnYtT00ch7gcuOPCYjbpK0CQLokkI1EN8Ytvt4ADo59b6S8p388b3XTnfOMSWnnVqyxaZpK579SFx3A5KpG8xTZ73m3yl-3JSqk/s320/FP1334~The-Simpsons-Posters.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224185363141764546" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Print Survival, Editorial Church-State Line,Digital Media</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: Will Print Survive? Find Out at the 3rd Annual Print Buyers Conference in Boston, Sept. 10-12</strong><br /> <br />Yo, Bo, Somehow I think the answer to the subject-line question will be an enthusiastic, unqualified "yes." I find it interesting that a lot of these print-survival and even green initiative conferences and studies are financed or otherwise supported by the paper industry.<br /> <br />A player in the ad-agency recruitment market told me this week that business in that field is steady (for the headhunters) only because money is being poured (read: diverted) into e-marketing; there are more openings than there are qualified production people for that, yet jobs are going down the tubes in more traditional media.<br /> <br />The answer for individuals who want to remain employed is retrain, retrain, retrain. But few will be offered the opportunity within to do that. Evidence: the headhunters, who are getting the listings from the agencies, can't find enough qualified new-media production people to work in the same agencies laying off print production specialists and managers. The agencies apparently feel it's a better bet to pay for layoff packages plus big recruitment fees than to retrain current employees. <br /> <br />Once again, shortsighted executives doing shortsighted things. To those who say it's mostly the workers' fault, I ask which came first, company disloyalty to employees (the chicken) or employee disloyalty to companies (the egg)?<br />I'm just sayin',<br />(Submitted by A Nonnimus)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: Digital Media Comes of Age</strong><br />"Business is business and not a place for the sentimental, even those sentimental about old brands."<br />This was a great article...reminding us all that no matter how a print product resonates for us (readers and print professionals) we have to develop the ability to step back and see how these brands are really performing, and for whom.And admit that the stars (print products) of own own youth are not necessarily geared to be the stars of the digital world --- that hurts!<br />Probably why it's easier to be creative in a digital startup, with no print umbilical cord, than to be challenged with the idea of taking a print product and reinventing it for the web.<br />(Submitted by a senior Circulator)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: Buyers Putting Heat on Publishers to Cross Church-State Line</strong><br />BoSacks, Just reading the intro to this piece, I have to say that working in B2Bmagazines, I'm seeing this more (I hope) then most. Our sales girls are included in our editorial meetings and have a direct say on our editorial calendar. We ALWAYS have a advertiser on the cover. If an advertiser with enough clout raises it's vicious head, we write a piece special just about them. Granted, this is a B2B company, so we don't make any revenue from subscriptions, and all income comes from ad sales, but it's still enough to worry me - how much is this occurring on the other side of the publishing line? When will magazines stop being about the reader, and blend with catalogs until the two are one and the same?<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Buyers Putting Heat on Publishers to Cross Church-State Line</strong><br />This was one of the funniest articles I've read in a long, long time. The idea that there ever has been any kind of church-state integrity at fashion magazines is hilarious. Harper's Bazaar? Life and Style? These pillars of journalistic ethics are under siege? Jeez, I hope the stalwart defenders of editorial independence at Marie Claire can hold out!<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Buyers Putting Heat on Publishers to Cross Church-State Line</strong><br />It is despicable that advertisers attempt- and do- disguise their pitches as editorial, but then again, in the rest of nature, subterfuge and ambush is often the key to survival of some species. As always, buyer, and reader, beware.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Publisher)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Resisting Google</strong><br />Hi, Bob Talk of Deja vu`. I guess it was about a year ago I sent a note your way, expressing similar thoughts about a company with search and compilation tools so powerful, and storage so expansive, that all you write, or search can be sifted by unmanned algorithims (as happens now), and categorized as to content or intent and responded to, (as happens now) that could be (and probably has been) approached by one or more government agencies (as was the case with wiretapping) to determine who is naughty or nice. It continues to be one of the more scary daydream/nightmares I can have. <br /> <br />Last year, when I queried Google about their use of Spyware, the response was sphinx-like. One of my mentors once advised that all private affairs be conducted as though they would be in tomorrow's newspaper front page. That should be include the privacy of one's keyboard.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Circ </strong><br />bob, as i've said since 1972, the single copy system is antediluvian and idiotic . . . the sword that will cut the Gordian knot is firm sale . . . why are magazines still sold on consignment?<br />all the lamentations and tweaks to the "system" are futile . . . .the system is the problem . . . we need revolution, not evolution . . . <br />(Submitted by a Senior Publisher)<br /> <br /> <br /><strong>Re: Will Print Die? Not Today PART 2</strong><br />Liked your response.<br />Trees will be used to make paper for years to come, just not as many as in the past. For the tree huggers who read your stuff, let them know there are 40% more trees in the USA than there were in 1930.<br />(Submitted by a paper person)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: Will Print Die? Not Today PART 2 </strong><br />Someone might explain to "paper person" the difference between soft wood grown in rows for harvesting and hard wood forests.<br />(Submitted by a Circ Person)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-67949389421784968862008-07-01T09:08:00.000-07:002008-07-01T09:12:12.224-07:00BoSacks readers Speak Out<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTn7pb8v2estMjxrJVing0v3GIsC4c0TuBh19HWvKvBT0bogGmxka-OAu9Lvu1Dzdd_vPMciedC2uMZVChgRQ3LyauV3Y8wAVWypYpvV6_-YLhy03uBNJkDYsWYkAEpERfu4pH1IpogZam/s1600-h/5-tips-to-prevent-it-extinction.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTn7pb8v2estMjxrJVing0v3GIsC4c0TuBh19HWvKvBT0bogGmxka-OAu9Lvu1Dzdd_vPMciedC2uMZVChgRQ3LyauV3Y8wAVWypYpvV6_-YLhy03uBNJkDYsWYkAEpERfu4pH1IpogZam/s320/5-tips-to-prevent-it-extinction.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5218079138870335410" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks readers Speak Out:</strong><br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=tzk7uocab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0350&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F" target="_blank" ts="S0350&p=">http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=tzk7uocab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0350&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F</a><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Who Should We Put On The Cover</strong>?<br />My only advice as you await the return of thoughtful, subtle, clever, insightful covers lines is this: Don't hold your breath. We do not live in a thoughtful, subtle, clever, insightful culture. We live in an amoral, irrational, anti-intellectual, emotion driven, Six O'clock New "If it bleeds it leads" culture. Cover lines are merely one minor symptom of the general decline of Western Civilization in general and American culture in particular. We have created a society where life is disposable, the sanctity of the bedroom has become a spectator sport, the care of the soul is replaced by an obsession with the body, and the insights of maturity scrapped in favor of our worship of the follies of youth. Cover lines on the newsstand merely confirm what we should already know: that the road ahead follows the same, steep, downward slope. As the World's Foremost Authority - Professor Irwin Corey - aptly summed it up, "If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going."(Submitted by a Printer and life-long friend of BoSacks)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Who Should We Put On The Cover?</strong><br />I think the dumbing down comes from the editorial side - that is, many editors are bringing less intelligence to the job and assuming that they are talking to people who know even less than they, when that may not be so. How many times have you seen editors set off on a topic or story angle that assumed the worst of their readers, or that wanted to prove a theory of theirs, no matter how much evidence suggested that they were wrong? Maybe if we want better copy that will really attract readers, the industry needs to stop low-balling salaries of everyone other than the EIC so they don't have to focus so much on the next jump of their career, because they aren't having to live out in NJ on $28,000 with 4 roommates. Perhaps magazines could attract some people who not only love the work, but are smart and willing to consider things from the readers' vantage. And maybe have more of those editors actually talk with a lot more readers. What a concept, talking to your customers.(Submitted by a Writer)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Internet Is Making Us Dumb, Author Says</strong><br />A couple of observations on this odd article: 1. Witness the voter registration statistics for the DNC and now the Obama campaign. The under 30 crowd is storming into politics and thus current events. 2. ". . . . the intellectual wherewithal to create advertising that is more than a collection of juvenile punch lines?" Some of us might argue that the ad business has always been about juvenile punch lines. What's the ultimate goal of any ad campaign but to provide a memorable punch line that connects a consumer with a product? He acts like once upon a time advertisers were intellectuals :) So for fun, here's a few tag lines from ads placed in a wonderful book from 1950 called The Iron Gate of Jack Charles "21", as in the 21 Club. Got this treasure as a hand-me-down from my father, an old time PR guy. (The associated pictures and art work of course are priceless)> Martins Scotch. A two headed bartender is talking to himself. "Did he say Scotch?" the first head asks. The 2nd head says "No, he said Martin's VVO Scotch". > Lucky Strike cigarettes. A cowgirl with a cigarette in one hand and a hammer in another putting up a poster which the punch line "Be happy, Go Lucky". > Pontiac Cars "Dollar for Dollar, you can't beat a Pontiac" > Watches. "America runs on Bulova Time" > Marlboro cigarettes. This one is incredible. A picture of a sad faced Baby with a party hat on in front of a pack of Marlboros with a headline saying "Before you scold me, Mom... maybe you'd better light up a Marlboro". My point is that advertising is often goofy, sometimes clever, but always about the punch line. His other odd statement is "First, the ad industry is obsessed with the Internet." The fact that there is yet again another new generation socializing in new ways is as old as consumerism itself. Ad agencies are always obsessed with the newest trends. The examples above were print ads, but could've been web banner ads. And what happened in the 1950's with the under 30 crowd that horrified the older generation? TV and talking non-stop on the phone. TV was the demise of our generation yet I am happy to report I still read books, magazines and newspapers, as do most of my non-industry friends. Ad agencies jumped on TV like a . . . . pick a metaphor . . . . ? It's only a matter of time before micro-messaging from services like Twitter start preceding communications with one word ad slogans because the user message itself is only one sentence long. 100 years from now we won't be able to read a Webster's Dictionary do to changes in the language. I often find myself being nostalgic for things from my past or even before my time but the fact is that change is life, and new generations create new methods of communication and entertainment. This is how it has always been and how it will always be for as long as we live in a democracy. So the writer needs to lighten up and figure out the new audience, not try to stop the clock.(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Internet Is Making Us Dumb, Author Says</strong><br />Are today's young people as we were or are they dumb? Yes. In a lot of ways, we were pretty smart at that age but we were still dumb. It is the innate condition of youth and that will never change. As my Grandma used to say, "You can't put an old head on young shoulders." There are some key differences, however. When we were young and dumb no one much cared about our opinions. We lived in an adult culture. Today's culture worships youth, listens to youth, and actually thinks youth has something to contribute to the life of the mind beyond energy and enthusiasm. Big mistake! The other key cultural difference is the general dumbing down that has occurred. Unbounded tolerance and unfounded self esteem have replaced education, and feelings have trumped reason. But don't blame the dumb kids for that. And don't blame the Internet. Each of us should look in the mirror and blame the person who looks back. We made this world. The dumb kids will inherit it.(Submitted by a printer) RE: Internet Is Making Us Dumb, Author SaysMaybe he should talk to some older people. I'm not convinced they know howto reason either. Look at presidents elected, companies that tanked, warsstarted, and the many other examples of human irrationality.(Submitted by a Writer)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Is It Goodbye Printed Page?</strong><br />No Not Yet!Bob, Everyone seems to agree that the preferred format for a book is the printed thing with the covers the world has known for 500 years. Everyone also seems to agree that format is unsustainable. As long as there's a demand for the printed version, it will survive, but probably at a much higher cost to the consumer. It makes me wonder if this would be a good time to start hoarding used books, which can be bought for cents on the dollar. Ten years from now, when new hardcover books go for $75, for how much could I sell the copy of The Great Gatsby my son just received as a graduation present?(Submitted by a Multi-title Publisher)<br /><br /><strong> RE: Striving for Zero Returns on the Newsstand Re:Future of paper:</strong><br />I've been predicting to paper producers for some time that paper would cease to be a disposable commodity. With oil at $130 a barrel, and the cost of producing paper (remember - paper is all about energy and water removal) skyrocketing, will people buy People, read it in 15 minutes, and throw it away? I've tried to articulate that I feel coated paper will become something of more permanence and value. The article below does it better than I ever could. Re: Magazine "If it seems too good to be true" Scam: Everyone asks "How do they supply 12, perfect bound, glossy, high quality issues for just $12?!" I now know how they do it - they don't. After buying Vanity Fair on the newsstand every month for years, I decided to get 12 issues for $12 through a subscription service. I got my 12 issues - 8 were back issues that I had already read (print over runs or newsstand returns that I'm sure they keep in reserve). My husband used the same service at the same time to subscribe to a small, niche technology title - and he's gotten 12 current issues. So, I have to wonder if it's a Conde' Nast policy to rip off' subscribers. Either way, I will NOT renew, and this tactic has caused me to reassess my feelings about the magazine and the publisher in general. Re: New Magazine Launches: One relationship that I think would be interesting to study would be the cost of paper (specifically sheet fed offset or web offset - the grades that most new launches are printed on) versus new PRINT title launches, as well as DIGITAL launches (or conversions from print to digital). If I wasn't so consumed with raising my prices, I'd do the work myself . . . (Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong> Re: Bits, Bands and BooksHi,</strong><br /> Bob: I thought of you while reading this Krugman Op-Ed piece the other day. So, the question is: We now know you read Krugman, but does Krugman read Sacks; or is it mutual?(Submitted by a Publisher)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-66729685547013405542008-05-16T04:35:00.000-07:002008-05-16T04:39:23.826-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Brands, Trends, and Truth<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWoEQj7jeLHR4Zq6-NJgTizXDrbk7ZICpmlkLahxoI9YdcQEa2Wmty-yTyEskezkEeKhFHKs4KjZ7viGSKiC7vTjQ9ECyG_R3_nCYyrlaMh9kRstlR1Ce34BsmfPzxc97lTWvkb7t1rVOw/s1600-h/boss-yelling.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWoEQj7jeLHR4Zq6-NJgTizXDrbk7ZICpmlkLahxoI9YdcQEa2Wmty-yTyEskezkEeKhFHKs4KjZ7viGSKiC7vTjQ9ECyG_R3_nCYyrlaMh9kRstlR1Ce34BsmfPzxc97lTWvkb7t1rVOw/s400/boss-yelling.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5200938843528427890" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Brands, Trends, and Truth</strong><br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" ts="S0340&p=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=nggkfncab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0340&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F" target="_blank">www.bosacks.com</a><br /><br /><strong>Re: "The New Next: Brands That Bond"<br /></strong>Bob, I can't imagine being able to describe my magazine outside of the context of its brand image.<br /><br />I would expect my magazine to be leading or at least facilitating as many important conversations as possible in the particular niche we cover. In fact, because we are not offering a product to our readers that is, similar to that of our advertisers and other industry suppliers, it is even more central to brand identity for a magazine to be out in front of people, talking and listening and prodding everyone involved or interested in the niche to do the same. Doing this also dredges up tons of fodder for future articles we can present to the entire readership, not just the in-person crowd you get.<br /><br />And besides offering copies of recent issues for people who do not subscribe to or purchase it, we can also hand out items or products from partnering firms--products that help the readers do whatever it is they do that prods them to read the magazine. We can put our logo in a subtle spot as well.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Youth Speaks: If u dk what this is, gl<br /></strong>This would be more impactful if the writer knew that "LOL" meant "laugh out loud" and not "lots of laughs". I just uttered the same groan not used since my dad said "hep cat" in front of my friends many years ago.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Provider)<br /><br /><strong> RE: 5 Key Future Magazine Trends and 8 Ways to Prepare for Them<br /></strong>Bob, You are RIGHT ON!<br />There is a bright light at the end of the tunnel, I can see it.<br />(Submitted by a Director of Mfg and Dst)<br /><br /><strong>RE: 5 Key Future Magazine Trends and 8 Ways to Prepare for Them</strong><br />FYI, your editorial "Printed Magazines Will Follow the Path of the Plastic Record" is hanging on my home office wall. Some guys have girlie calendars, I have Bo Sacks.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: What is Happening in our Industry?<br /></strong>What inspiring words Bob, especially after reading the doom and gloom stories of another QuebecorWorld plant closing/layoffs and other industry layoffs. I still love what I do and I am still kept busy with my client's print and digital needs. I've reinvented myself to some extent, but it is still ink on paper or bytes on a cd and getting it into readers hands on time. Thanks for the great words Bob.<br />(Submitted By a senior Publishing Consultant)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: What is Happening in our Industry?<br /></strong>Bo that was amazing. Really uplifting stuff. The best part of your newsletter is the unexpected. You have always told it like it is. That would be the good news, the bad news and technology we need to know of to stay employed. You are my hero. I've been reading you since my first job in the industry . . . some fifteen years ago. The job seemed less stressful and easier then. Thanks.<br />(Submitted by a Production Manager)<br /><strong><br />RE: Retouching</strong><br />Hey Bo, I know this is a little late but . . . <br />As you know covers of EVERY mag are retouched . . . aside from making models look perfect, in the "Home" category we also add sky to images retouch out cords, electrical sockets, make winter shots into summer by removing snow and adding bushes, landscaping etc . . . All shots of a the same room are made to look the same no matter what time of day the various shots was taken.<br /> When I used to do allot of work for the Conde Nast mags thru AGT (remember them), the covers were worked for hours to get rid of lines, wrinkles, facial hair etc. We did a spread on Linda Evans that was shot very soft to help with her wrinkles, then we had to take them down even more . . . I can't imagine a room full of "Art Directors" that would ever agree to giving up retouching and letting the images stand on their own . . .<br />(Submitted by a printer)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Hanley Wood Moving Toward Becoming a 'Web-First Company'</strong><br />A sad day for us all! Soon there will be one mill, one printer and one magazine. And tons of crap on the web that can never find an audience that it knows or really understands. <br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: The Important Truth Behind the IDG Story</strong><br />The truth is rarely pure and never simple.<br />Oscar Wilde<br />Wrong on both counts. The first because truth is pure by definition. The second because of the common tendency to confuse something simple with something easy. Because something is simple does not mean it is easy. Truth is simple. It is rarely easy.<br />(Submitted by a Printer)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-34571014193001602082008-05-08T19:31:00.000-07:002008-05-08T19:33:42.878-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Mag Subs, Circ and other Publishing Lore<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTSU2CbvWXgG3mCfN6Bbj98nEluWwVGkWwfae-X1Ln2YxK3LKNPF9jXKX9VOS4gibucbJNntR7dCA2y5VC_gNsnoSASuoEeFnyQQvFyuK35xq8g1HYKZ1VN23C_Q5_o49Jd3RRX_ER8kml/s1600-h/BizFind-girl-thinking.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTSU2CbvWXgG3mCfN6Bbj98nEluWwVGkWwfae-X1Ln2YxK3LKNPF9jXKX9VOS4gibucbJNntR7dCA2y5VC_gNsnoSASuoEeFnyQQvFyuK35xq8g1HYKZ1VN23C_Q5_o49Jd3RRX_ER8kml/s400/BizFind-girl-thinking.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5198200696359775282" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Mag Subs, Circ and other Publishing Lore</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /><br /><strong>RE: Want to read those magazines? Read the fine print first</strong><br />"Newsub Magazine Services, a Salt Lake City firm" . . . is a subsidiary of Synapse Group, located in Stamford, CT . . . which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of (drumroll)<br />TIME, Inc.<br /><br />Once upon a time, long-long ago, in the la-la-land galaxy known as SW Connecticut . . . . there was an idealistic young Jedi newly enlisted into the SynapseArmy. She was swayed, mesmerized, enthralled by the pronouncements and musings of the Fearless Leader.<br /><br />Fearless told his assembled throng "Together we will change the world, starting by changing the way magazines are marketed and sold. Behind my curtain lies a patented consumer-friendly subscription model. EVERYBODY WINS! Yaaay for us! But especially for me 'cause I'm gonna get rich!"<br /><br />Soon the recruits learned what was really behind the curtain at Synapse. Every month the offers became a little less lucrative, and a little more misleading. 'Disclosure' was painstakingly worded to fake-out more consumers yet pass muster with the beleaguered staff attorney. All this was served up with a free lunch to make it go down easier.<br /><br />Seems the Ivy Leaguers and Ivy-wannabees in charge had succumbed to the same disease that afflicts their classmates on Wall Street . . . GREED! The bank 'marketers' and publisher 'partners'? All cheering them on!<br /><br />The consumer? Screwed.<br /><br />After a failed IPO, a sellout by Fearless to the Evil Empire was the only thing left to do. They got Time guys running the joint now, but the website still drips with mental superiority. Yeeeccch.<br /><br />As Steve Miller once said "go on, take the money and<br />run". And that's what they did.<br />(Submitted as requested by a Publishing "Nobody")<br /><br /><strong>Re: Want to read those magazines? Read the fine print first</strong><br />We have a simple rule: we don't use agencies, agents, or allow our magazines to be used as promotional kickers. In fact, we don't even do "buy 1 get 1" holiday gifts anymore, the people who responded to the cheapie offers turned out to be more trouble than they were worth. The sort of garbage discussed in the article debases the entire industry.<br />(Submitted by a Multi-Title Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Newsweeklies Under Constant Pressure</strong><br />Oh please, this again?<br />Haven't we been talking about the demise of the newsweeklies since the '80's?<br />Also interesting that the article does not talk about The Economist. I believe that their last ABC report showed single copy sales up around 10%. And their sales are double what they were in 1999.<br /><br />Could it be that Time, Newsweek and US News are having trouble because they aren't relevant? Could the relativity issue be more to the fact that those three magazines aren't well designed for today's market? Could it be that Time and Newsweek can't make up their minds if they are celebrity rags or news mags and US News can't reach a page count where the purchase of the magazine at the newsstand would justify the expense?<br /><br />Could it be that The Economist is doing well because it is well written, has thoughtful articles, has a bite, an edge, a point of view, and is thick enought to justify the cash you have to lay out to buy it?<br /><br />Isn't Rule #1 of magazine publishing would be to create something that your readers want?<br />(Submitted by an Unknown Professional)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Are Always-Connected Consumers Really Virtual Crackheads?</strong><br /> I don't mean to sound like one of those homeless people who go around muttering all the time, but the source of your history trivia seems to be a little off-base.<br /><br />People of all classes, not just the upper classes, read American magazines throughout the 19th century. In the second half of the century, magazines targeting the modestly-educated had much larger circulations than magazines targeting the better-educated. And as for "looking toward Europe," many of the country's best magazines, like The Atlantic Monthly, The Dial, and the North American Review were dedicated to promoting American literature.<br /><br />Press capacity was never much of a limiting factor in 19th-century magazine publishing. In 1849, Hoe introduced a press capable of 20,000 single-sided impressions per hour. By 1879 Bullock was selling a perfecting press yielding 28,000 folded 8-page signatures per hour. Well before 1880, some magazine publishers were producing press runs in the hundreds of thousands every week. . . . and some newspapers produced larger runs every day.<br /><br />The Postal Act of 19879 was definitely a landmark event, but the Post Office had been carrying magazines unlimited distances at declining rates for decades prior. The evolution of 2nd class mail began long before 1879, and besides, single copy sales represented a significant portion of total magazine distribution in the 19th century.<br /><br />The revolutionary price decreases of McClure's and Munsey's came in 1893, not 1883, and credit should also go to J. B. Walker, who priced Cosmopolitan at 12.5 cents. What made the decreases significant was that advertising sales made up for losses in production and circulation. This business model has been copied by other media so many times since that it's become commonplace. But the model wouldn't have succeeded if it weren't for the growing need of newly-emerging brand advertisers to reach a large national audience. The emergence of national brands (made possible by advances in mass production) and of middle-class magazines with large circulations (driven by the price decreases) coincided to mutual benefit. You can date the rise of brand-oriented American popular culture to 1893.<br /><br />Finally, I'm no expert on Horatio Alger, but I'm pretty sure that Street and Smith, not Munsey, published the vast majority of his stories.<br /><br />Because I'm a full-blown crank and not some garden-variety amateur, I'll be happy to send the full details on this stuff if you like. The factors that enabled the growth of magazine publishing in the 19th century are fascinating, and (naturally) hold lessons for publishers today. I'll also stop chewing your ear on all this if you tell me to shut up.<br /><br />PS. The obituary that William Allen White wrote for Munsey is too good not to repeat:<br /><br />"Frank Munsey contributed to the journalism of his day the talent of a meat packer, the morals of a money-changer and the manners of an undertaker. He and his kind have about succeeded in transforming a once-noble profession into an 8 per cent security. May he rest in trust."<br />(Submitted by a Publisher and official BoSacks Cub Reporter)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-75573057346009721602008-05-05T17:39:00.000-07:002008-05-05T17:41:40.447-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Printing as a Premium Format<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjo1tzGWsykKJlFpU1fJm9Uj8d245ITED8O-sM2N9rBFpi8DgdAq0emR2dbbXjKRHUw1WRWyUcLjrqQipgvq1nwyJQdvN-nCS39SysRw3TDJ8L5tc1PIQKEa2pFmbdzHgAoVO-oz7Mqr_Vw/s1600-h/342122682_7e3172f130.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjo1tzGWsykKJlFpU1fJm9Uj8d245ITED8O-sM2N9rBFpi8DgdAq0emR2dbbXjKRHUw1WRWyUcLjrqQipgvq1nwyJQdvN-nCS39SysRw3TDJ8L5tc1PIQKEa2pFmbdzHgAoVO-oz7Mqr_Vw/s400/342122682_7e3172f130.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5197058397122578626" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Printing as a Premium Format</strong><br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" ts="S0340&p=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=xhsxxmcab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0340&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F" target="_blank">www.bosacks.com</a><br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: It's Web 3.0, and Someone Else's Content Is King</strong><br />Um, Bo, pardon me if I am getting this wrong, but it sounds very much like a dog chasing its own tail. Who is actually going to be writing the stories everyone is aggregating?<br /><br />In my market, there's dozens of "free" sites, rife with bad grammar, egregious spelling, and obvious errors of fact. Not to mention copy that would never, EVER grace my titles. Yes, I've seen some ads migrate over there, but, just like paid search, I expect to see them back again as the channels clog with trolls, moles, and wannabe writers that don't know their head from an ampersand. Call me arrogant, or simply follow the money: free content almost always sucks. How many "cute kitty" pictures can we actually stomach?<br />How long before the masses move on to the next circus?<br /><br />Me, I'm looking forward to being able to deliver my content electronically via an open-source reader that doesn't greedily demand 85% of the retail price. (Amazon Kindle, anyone?) Until then, I'll stay paid, small-but-profitable, and happy.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Magazines Face Curbs to Photo Airbrushing</strong><br />Hey Bo, Maybe it's a little late for a comment on this but- Retouching has been going on for as long as I have been in the business (over 30 years) before it was done in the sink or the darkroom (dot etching for the kids at home), then Cromacom CEPS systems & now we use photoshop. All of the models were (and still are) retouched to smooth wrinkles, blemishes, whiten eyes & teeth, re-style hair, enhance eye color, reduce unsightly bulges, facial hair yada, yada yada. This also goes for interiors (and exteriors) of houses in the " home " mags. Curtains are fixed, outlets removed, walls squared up, houses under construction finished etc.<br /> If the general public thinks that these models actually look anything like their printed counterparts, I've got some swamp land in Florida that they may be interested in . . .<br />PS Keep up the good work<br />(Submitted by a printer)<br /><br /><strong>RE: The State of Digital Magazine Delivery, 2008</strong><br />I'm amazed that so many digital magazine companies are still competing in this market space. With the exception of some double digit paid circ at US News & World Report, Playboy and Seventeen the impact of digital magazine facsimiles on consumers is near zero. While suppliers claim 2,700 digital titles I have yet to have a conversation with a person outside of magazine publishing who has ever subscribed to or even looked at a digital edition. If 2,700 trees fall in the forest and no one hears them fall do they make a sound? I can't speak to B2B success with digital versions (and I know there has been some) but after many tests with digital facsimiles my company primarily sees their value as a tactical tool for sampling or displaying archived content. That isn't to say that the idea of digital magazines is bad one. There are some highly interactive digital magazines designed for the screen that are attracting consumers and advertisers. These editions have merit but so does the web. Perhaps the digital magazine of the future is, in fact, a website.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Magazine Manager)<br /><br /><strong>RE: The State of Digital Magazine Delivery, 2008</strong><br />Bo, I see this as a great work in progress. The subscribers to my digital editions are small by percentages but growing everyday. I think in just a few short years, the tide will turn and the bulk of my business will be web/digital editions. The market forces are driving my company that way, and I see no other alternative. Do I expect paper and postage to suddenly go back to the 1990s. No! What I do expect is constant manufacturing and distribution increases. For those of my readership that still want paper and are willing to pay for it, I'm sure I will still have those editions. But for the other readership, there is another more frugal course of action.<br />(Submitted by a publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Want to read those magazines? Read the fine print first</strong><br />We have a simple rule: we don't use agencies, agents, or allow our magazines to be used as promotional kickers. In fact, we don't even do "buy 1 get 1" holiday gifts anymore, the people who responded to the cheapie offers turned out to be more trouble than they were worth. The sort of garbage discussed in the article debases the entire industry.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Finally something for you magazine people out there to think about.</strong><br />Posted BY Michael Turro<br />From the BLOG <a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" ts="S0340&p=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=xhsxxmcab.0.ahrlllcab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0340&p=http%3A%2F%2Fmturro.bluepear.org%2F" target="_blank">http://mturro.bluepear.org/</a> <br /><br />While I hate to sound like chicken little - and though the print is dead meme is way overplayed - I had to post this quote from Steve Frye. In a sidebar in the current issue of Publishing Executive titled The State of the Printing Industry Frye drops this bomb:<br /><br />I think we need to change our philosophy of what a magazine is. We are no longer a cheap means of dispensing information, and that's what we were until the Internet came along. Now we are an inefficient and expensive means of distributing information. . . . We need to reinvent ourselves as a luxury item that people want and are willing to pay for. And until we change our own image of who we are, we're going to find out that our vendors are gong to change it for us. Because, right now, postage is a premium. Paper is a premium. Soon printing will be a premium. How long can we buy at a premium and sell at a discount? We can't.<br /><br />Damn straight. I've been singing this song for a while now and it's refreshing to finally see these kinds of blunt words in the pages of an old school cheerleader like Publishing Executive (I couldn't find them on the PubExec site that's why there is no link for the quote - had to transcribe it myself).<br /><br />Hopefully this marks a turning point in the direction of not only Publishing Executive's reporting, but in the reporting of all the media that cover the magazine and printing industry. Hopefully they'll awaken from the coma that has produced little more than a sleepy rhetoric of change management and stir the pot a bit. They need to give publishers a sense of urgency. They need to stop rewriting and regurgitating vendor press releases and start doing some hard, studied thinking.<br /><br />Ultimately - when you get right down to it - the road ahead is uncharted and there isn't a vendor alive today that has anything close to a solution for the kinds of questions we face. To answer those questions we need journalists, not marketing contacts.BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-11816664484309213072008-04-30T19:20:00.000-07:002008-04-30T19:23:18.880-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Magazine Trends & Industry Consolidation<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8Il0Eo44oHQ7h7TwEUkfqPxjxSw95_Z1rSoRFL3DbCmg1gX8gOjB1hMJ443CEnGVUOhVIBp3Sj3e-6QTEcVci0NTozB3Qj-4ibG_clJC5RvEEHa-YBvpeR3c6SRXM2TfblCaNYfTVDkhF/s1600-h/3287886.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8Il0Eo44oHQ7h7TwEUkfqPxjxSw95_Z1rSoRFL3DbCmg1gX8gOjB1hMJ443CEnGVUOhVIBp3Sj3e-6QTEcVci0NTozB3Qj-4ibG_clJC5RvEEHa-YBvpeR3c6SRXM2TfblCaNYfTVDkhF/s400/3287886.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5195229312285132866" /></a><br />BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Magazine Trends & Industry Consolidation<br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" ts="S0340&p=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rzvmpmcab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0340&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F" target="_blank">www.bosacks.com</a><br /><strong> Re: 5 Key Future Magazine Trends</strong><br />Bo, I couldn't agree with you more about digital magazines and delivery of content. It's definitely the future of our business. But we're struggling to find technology to deliver content to niche audiences. I don't like the "page flip" technology that's currently being implemented by some publishers and e-media companies like XXXXXXX. The few customers I've spoken with agree - too bulky. And frankly my company is much too small to blaze a trail to create our own technology platform.<br />So, if we see the future but don' know how to get there, where does that leave us? <br />I'm struggling mightily with this, any advice?<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>BoSacks Responded to Publisher thusly</strong><br />Consider it this way. You are an explorer. Your journey is across an uncharted land. You know you will survive because you are alert and savvy. You don't know which technologic river to transverse or which digital desert will bring disaster. All you know is that there is a bounty at the other side. That is what Explorers do. That is what Lewis and Clark did. They made it up as they went along. And just for fun as a sidebar Lewis and Clark lost only one man, and that to a busted appendix, which would have killed the guy no matter where he was on the planet at that time.<br /><br /><strong>Re: 5 Key Future Magazine Trends<br /></strong>Bob, great article. I saw you and your partner deliver this lecture to a packed room last month. Down here in the production trenches it gets harder every day. The pressure is intense and much less rewardng than it once was. I like the excitement of publishing, but the technology changes so fast that it is hard to keep up. And the head count keeps getting smaller. Some days I feel like it is a war zone and that there are snipers in the rafters. Every now and then somebody goes down and there are no new troops on the horizon to take their place. (Submitted by an Ad Manager)<br /><br /><strong>Re: 5 Key Future Magazine Trends</strong><br />Bob, great article.All the nay sayers are dead wrong. I read two digital editions every day. I read my newspapers on my laptop and I love it. Doesn't matter where I am on the planet they are alwasy there for my education and enjoyment. It is the future and I am living it now. Perhaps because I am a sales guy and travel quite a bit, it was easier for the transition, of that I do not know. My request for you is to continue to keep the industry honest and introspective. Good show!<br />(Submitted by a VP of Sales)<br /><br /><strong>Re: The Effect of Industry Consolidation</strong><br />Um, wow, the bookstore wanted me to *give* him copies of my zines for free (only paying for shipping, gee thanks!) so he could get an infinite profit margin on their sales. Well, I guess if any publishers were foolish enough to do that, it would have propped up Magpie a little longer, but it sounds like if that was his business model, he was emulating his mascot a little too well. Everyone knows that magpies *steal* their loot wherever they can get it.<br /><br />Word to Magpie -- I actually have to make money on my newsstand copies, or I'm out of business, too. Advertising is a good part of my business model, but old-fashioned circulation (including the 2/3 of my copies sold on newsstand) are absolutely essential to my bottom line. I sell direct to stores, at 50% off cover, no returns, no shipping charges.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: If You Have ChaCha , You Have Answers</strong><br />I just tried Cha Cha. Wow. Very clever!<br />They make their money from issuing two text messages for every question you ask, and taking as commission from the phone company.<br />Kudos to the one who figured this out.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Vice President Marketing)<br /><br /><strong>Re: If You Have ChaCha , You Have Answers</strong><br />Bob, Your newsletter is like nothing else. ChaCha indeed. Each morning I never know what to expect and you never disappoint. The fact that you managed to link ChaCha to publishing was brilliant. I would never have heard of it if not for your daily interpretation and inspiration. Fun and informative . . It doesn't get any better than that.<br />(Submitted by a multi-title Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Condé Nast Eyes Eye-Tracking<br /></strong>While it has some benefit if you think that online advertising is just about branding - but if advertising is also about engagement with the audience - then the metrics have to be built right into the ad (ad widget) itself. Eye tracking was very interesting a couple of years ago but the direct measurement systems have greatly matured. You can imagine what data will be soon available from DoubleClick + Google Analytics - across ALL digital mediums.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell 'em, "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. -- Theodore Roosevelt</strong><br />TR was an interesting and, in some aspects, an inspirational figure. The sickly mama's boy who made himself into a man's man, a man of action is an iconic American adventure of the first water. As U.S. president, he was significantly less admirable; being the very prototype of the modern busybody bully boy chief executive. But he did get off some good sayings. Without having heard it before, at least that I remember, the one above has always been my approach to my work. And the TR quotation I have posted on my bulletin board offers similarly useful advice: "Do what you can where you are with what you've got,"<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /><strong>Re: The New Hampshire working forest is in crisis</strong><br />Sad story, but the same here in Wisconsin and we have a much bigger stake in the forest industry than New Hampshire. The whole picture across the USA is pretty sad. The Finns and Swedes are also feeling the same pinch.<br />(Submitted by a paper person)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Now Fashion Mags Make Models 'Fatter'<br /></strong>So now you can have big boobs, fuller thighs, no bones showing . . . and a tiny little waist? My gosh! Why do magazines insist on manipulating women's bodies like this? I am with Susan Ringwood. The industry is missing the point so egregiously that it would be guffawable if it weren't so devastating.<br /><br /> . . . . Or maybe they're not missing the point at all. It seems to me that "fill out their chests" may not be such a laudable move. Could it be that "social awareness" has now become just an excuse to hide behind while you're turning women into hourglass cartoons in the hopes of selling more mags?<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Now Fashion Mags Make Models 'Fatter'</strong><br />Bob, I don't know if I should complain or compliment. I really like the new look to your newsletter and you seem to have more great info than ever before. The snippets at the margins are a terrific new addition.<br /><br />As to the retouching of magazine models . . . it has been happening since magazines were first produced. The magic is much easier now but no different than when I designed my first advertisement in the late 1960s. Please keep up the outstanding work. Oh Yes, my complaint is that your newsletter is so sticky that I read it all every morning. Coffee, Bosacks and a cheese Danish. <br />(Submitted by a Retired Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Newsweeklies Under Constant Pressure</strong><br />Oh please, this again?<br />Haven't we been talking about the demise of the newsweeklies since the '80's?<br /><br />Also interesting that the article does not talk about The Economist. I believe that their last ABC report showed single copy sales up around 10%. And their sales are double what they were in 1999.<br /><br />Could it be that Time, Newsweek and US News are having trouble because they aren't relevant? Could the relativity issue be more to the fact that those three magazines aren't well designed for today's market? Could it be that Time and Newsweek can't make up their minds if they are celebrity rags or news mags and US News can't reach a page count where the purchase of the magazine at the newsstand would justify the expense?<br /><br />Could it be that The Economist is doing well because it is well written, has thoughtful articles, has a bite, an edge, a point of view, and is thick enought to justify the cash you have to lay out to buy it?<br /><br />Isn't Rule #1 of magazine publishing would be to create something that your readers want?<br />(Submitted by Anonymous)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-85756023355048257212008-04-24T04:16:00.000-07:002008-04-24T04:20:01.376-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: New Language, The Printer, Mag Efficiency<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqnHQci6rYvseFgq7rfgNJY1Plx2qpXI66OjvZUjv3V5KeevS3bCsLdYxtvY3JvLy1x9W3_Y8j4_Iy0CrfXf8ZuVjMQGoU_PnfzFsrWxBArh2hXk9sFmHb2nrU8v-HFiIwfGB50ebQJrUd/s1600-h/direct_communication_marketing.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqnHQci6rYvseFgq7rfgNJY1Plx2qpXI66OjvZUjv3V5KeevS3bCsLdYxtvY3JvLy1x9W3_Y8j4_Iy0CrfXf8ZuVjMQGoU_PnfzFsrWxBArh2hXk9sFmHb2nrU8v-HFiIwfGB50ebQJrUd/s320/direct_communication_marketing.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5192770039781246786" /></a><br />BoSacks Readers Speak Out: New Language, The Printer, Mag Efficiency,<br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" ts="S0331&p=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=ggv4imcab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0331&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F" target="_blank">www.bosacks.com</a><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: The World's Newest Language</strong><br />As a seasoned production veteran, experienced with glue pots to laptops, I would like to answer your question. No, I no longer look at my job as a manufacturing job. I see it as a digital creation and output position. We create and design ads and magazine pages that are then output to paper and to digital edition. The work (the job) to me is in the process, not the result.<br />(Submitted by a Production Director)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: The World's Newest </strong>Language<br />Bo, that was a great riff and a great Bo Speaks Out. Yes, things have changed and changed greatly. I am pretty damn sure that my old boss who was in the industry for 40 years could not have kept his job under today's conditions. He taught me so much of the business and left just in time. He was one of the old style mentors. Do we have any of those left? Keep up the great work. You keep me informed and employable.<br />(Submitted by a Director of MFG and DST)<br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: The World's Newest Language</strong><br />Prepress is everything that happens before you bend 'em and send 'em.<br />(Submitted by a printer)<br /><strong><br />RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: The World's Newest Language</strong><br />I prefer Techish to Nerdic. Jonathan<br />(Submitted by an Unknown)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Mag Efficiency, GM Ads, Revenue and Green Pubs</strong><br />Bob: I just finished reading this RSO and felt compelled to comment on the last exchange - "print 10 and sell 3" - as you noted, this is specific to the newsstand copies. Do you have any data on the total % of copies delivered to an end user via newsstand sale and/or subscription? I once worked for a multi-title publisher (Meredith) that had magazines that ranged in distribution from 100% newsstand to >98% subscription so I am fairly certain that on the whole, 70% of the magazines printed are not tossed. I'm sure that I won't be alone in appreciating a more accurate reflection of the "waste" magazine production.<br />(Submitted by a paper person)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Mag Efficiency, GM Ads, Revenue and Green Pubs</strong><br />No doubt that the newsstand situation is broken. When in history has 35% efficiency been a laudable goal? The greenies and extremist tree huggers have plenty of dirt on the ink-on-paper set, we don't need to help them fill their shovels by giving them more data to twist to meet their needs. I've been in the industry (printing, then publishing, now paper sales) for 22 years and hope to get at least 20 more out of it. As you know there are a great number of good people working diligently to increase the effectiveness and environmental friendliness of ink on paper while still trying to turn a reasonable profit. Times are tough and will surely get tougher, with a lot of hard work and a little luck, we'll continue to reduce the waste and make the business more "earth friendly".<br />(Submitted By a Paper Person)<br /><br /><strong>RE: green</strong><br />Hey Bob, you know I'm sorta an old deadhead/hippie/liberal freak.<br />But, I just don't give a darn about these "green" initiatives. The only thing I care about is that's green is the paper with dead presidents on it. Let the print/paper/information industry rape the earth. It's gonna happen anyway. Might as well get mine. Besides, we're all gonna die from an attack anyway.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing and Distribution)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: Today's Top Contrarian Pick</strong><br />I like the new look to your blog; you seem to be busier (or more efficient) than ever; the snippets at the margins of your blog are as interesting as the body of text; Keep up the good work. In Paragraphs 9,10,11, the author of this article seems to have taken a page from Sacks. For all those who predict the eradication of print, they're likely wrong . . .<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: "Now Amazon wants to Eliminate the Printer."</strong><br />it is what it is . . . the Darwin model fits for business as well as life.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing and Distribution)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Quebecor World may Lose parent's Printing Business</strong><br />Would this qualify as the first recorded instance of the ship leaving the sinking rats? I'm just asking.<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Quebecor World may Lose parent's Printing Business</strong><br />Here's a novel thought why not call the Quebecor World spin-off, World Color Press?<br />(Submitted by a Traffic Director)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Canadian newspapers avoid U.S.-like decline</strong><br />Ummmm . . . they're not exactly comparable<br /><br />canada has never had as big an emphasis on sunday circulation, with some having weekend papers<br /><br />there has always been a bigger emphasis on nondailies in canada. nondailies in the u.s. are doing well here, too.<br /><br />there are fewer "big metro" dailies in canada of the size of the u.s. "big metro" dailies because there are fewer "big metros". few people realize that toronto is the fourth largest metro area in north america, but there are few canadian cities that can muscle their way into that list.<br /><br />canada's economy is smaller than california's, with a population spread over a land mass that is larger (ok, most of it is within 100 miles of the u.s. border, lest we forget that toronto is more southern geographically than minneapolis).<br /><br />its newspaper industry's very nature means that overall it have more going for it demographically and economically than that of the u.s.<br /><br />as far as western canada goes, that economy is just booming because of the rise of commodity prices. few people know that our biggest source of imported oil is canada. on a trip west last year, the number of help wanted signs was staggering. the economy in the western provinces is far different and "newer" than the older eastern ones, and in the long run, is probably more robust, even if commodity prices pull back. canada newspapers are probably a good place to keep investing, while in the u.s., it's the big metros that are having the problem, and the more "canada-like" small and mid-market segments in the u.s. is kind of an untold good story. when elephants fight, the biggest losers are the ants, as they say. there's lots of good stories out there that are getting trampled.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Pundit and long time e-pal of BoSacks)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-37647887358792205712008-04-13T19:25:00.000-07:002008-04-13T19:27:20.266-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out; Editors; We Are Not Worried!</<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFReB8e6-NZoXjS8OD5qNV0XpCbzYb6693gH2m5n65duNQgPTUctvlI0mrZoAjwmB9G3qW8b8QIX5tDjt4WUscKmVbklcxrhar2hCyTMBY7KmL2_otYIP6NUpzyCocmqp1admD6jP61sUo/s1600-h/istock_000002694919xsmall.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFReB8e6-NZoXjS8OD5qNV0XpCbzYb6693gH2m5n65duNQgPTUctvlI0mrZoAjwmB9G3qW8b8QIX5tDjt4WUscKmVbklcxrhar2hCyTMBY7KmL2_otYIP6NUpzyCocmqp1admD6jP61sUo/s400/istock_000002694919xsmall.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5188921904434897106" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out; Editors; We Are Not Worried!</strong><br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" ts="S0331&p=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=b7wd8lcab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0331&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F" target="_blank">www.bosacks.com</a><br /><br />RE: Magazine Editors: We're Not Worried About Internet<br />Wow! Remarkably misguided even for insular magazine insiders.<br />(Submitted by a Director Of Technology)<br /><br />RE: Magazine Editors: We're Not Worried About Internet<br />It is the idiocy correctly depicted here that is destroying our industry. These editors have no clue, no clue whatsoever. They make too much money. Someone should take away their expense account and let them see what is going on in the real world.<br />(Submitted by an Editor)<br /><br />RE: Magazine Editors: We're Not Worried About Internet<br />I think this falls into the category of "ignorance being bliss" for many. They aren't afraid because too many still don't get it. And that's just the Editor. The Publisher has a whole slew of problems of their own. I was at an event the other day and spoke to the Publisher of a large home decorating title. We were discussing the problems they are having in being innovative with selling ad packages that include the web, events, etc. After 10 minutes of chatting about things like Stylepress, new digital opportunities etc. her comment was "You need to help me yell at my sales team, they just don't get it". <br /><br />So the bottom line is there are still an awful lot of smart people not "getting it". Newspapers are heading into oblivion and magazines should be the bright and shining light, but it may take another slight generational change to get the right management minds - both editorial and business - in place to fully grasp the situation and drive the transition to new mediums. Not sure that means editors are going to become "brand managers" quite honestly, but they probably will be much more market savvy. Actually the concept of Editorial Brand Managers is a little bit disconcerting, dumbing down journalism to aid and abet the sale of washing machines and Rolex watches :) Why does progress have to imply a dilution of what makes the whole magazine experience great?<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br />RE: Magazine Editors: We're Not Worried About Internet<br />Yep, that makes sense. The tactile experience will save the medium. Just look at what the intricate album covers of the 60's and 70's (Sgt. Pepper, Kiss' Love Gun, and oh so much more) did to keep music from going digital. Not even embedding premium access and videos onto CD's has been able to slow the move to digital. Come to think of it the tipping point was a great device backed by a quality and sensible way of obtaining music. Once that cat is skinned the gooses will be cooked.<br />(Submitted by a Printer, media enthusiast and aspiring futurist)<br /><br />RE: Magazine Editors: We're Not Worried About Internet<br />Bo, Its management like this that depresses me. The industry can and should have a great future. All it takes is good leadership. Have you seen any? The bigger the publisher the less vision and flexibility the corporation has. There must be a Murphy Law in that statement somewhere.<br />(Submitted by a Circulator)<br /><br /><br />RE: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: What is a Magazine?<br />Bo, Until the last print subscriber goes, it's still a magazine. That day is still a long way off.<br />(Submitted by a Sr. Production Manager)<br /><br />Re: Magazines Face Curbs to Photo Airbrushing<br />I have a slightly biased opinion in this being that outside of my work for a national distributor--- I do a lot of work with digital art. I have been recognized for my skills in Photoshop and take pride in helping models take their images to another level. The problem here is not what artists such as myself do to images or if magazines use them. What's being discussed is how manipulation alters perception of reality causing models to go down unhealthy paths---<br /><br />The modeling industry is extremely demanding and there are millions of people in the US alone aspiring to be the next great model. If manipulating photos to achieve desired results becomes frowned upon . . . models will have to struggle that much harder to look "perfect." The root of the problem is not how we get to an image considered ideal or adequate for print, the problem is what is considered ideal.<br /><br />Taking manipulation out of the equation at this time . . . will just make it that much more difficult for a model who doesn't meet industry standards. Nearly all new photographers consider photoshop today's dark room . . . . and the manipulations being discussed aren't limited to what's being done in print . . . it's being done by many people in every town in the country . . . and it's becoming easier for people every day.<br /><br />What people don't recognize is that there is already a shift happening. As average photographers can more easily make a model look perfect by standards of old--- the challenge becomes to make a model look more perfect in a natural way. Flawless skin will start to look plastic . . . assumptions will be made that it was photoshopped. Perfect curves will start to look too perfect . . . and assumed photoshopped.<br /><br />Anything can be done with photoshop . . . and eventually people will attribute "too perfect" with photoshop. This will definitely happen as the market becomes saturated with images of models that look just as beautiful as the ones in the magazines. People go to magic shows not to see real magic but to see the illusive. . . Everyone knows that the images in magazines are altered to one degree or another . . . but the full extent of the illusion is not known. The veil is quickly being lifted. The magazines won't have to struggle to find a market for something for more real... less "air brushed," The market will want it before long.<br /><br />When people like myself with a limited background in photography but years and years of photoshop experience can make avg girls look as beautiful as a model on the cover of Cosmo... centerfold of Playboy... etc it's just a matter of time before most photographers can. Every new edition of photoshop comes with tools that make it that much easier.<br />(Submitted by a PhotoShop user)<br /><br /><br />Re: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: What is a Magazine?<br />Bo, Way back in April 2002, The Smithsonian ran a piece by Owen Edwards (a senior consulting editor at Forbes in those days and co-author with Jim Clark of the book "Netscape Time") in which he wrote about magazines. The head was "A MAGAZINE SHOULD HAVE THE ZEST OF A GOOD DINNER PARTY" and in the article he said, "As an editor myself, I have always believed that the best magazines resemble memorable dinner parties . . . intimate experiences, aking to visits with knowing wordly acquaintances."<br />Old fashioned, maybe, but I contend that the best magazines today are still distinct organic entities which deliver a sense to the reader of having a conversation with a knowing wordly acquaintance.<br />Or has the world passed me by?<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br />FW: Today's Top Contrarian Pick<br />Good Morning Bob! I like the new look to your blog; you seem to be busier (or more efficient) than ever; the snippets at the margins of your blog are as interesting as the body of text; Keep up the good work.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br />Re; PMG newsletter<br />Bo, I have to be one of your oldest, long time readers going back to the early 1990s. I have followed your point of view and proven accuracy with great joy. I wonder how many of your readers remember your prediction of CTP before it was even called CTP? What I enjoy the most is that you are what I would call a grounded futurist. All your prognostications have always been stuck with hard realism and bottom-line profit as a sobering benchmark for progress. And I think that is why you tend to be correct on so many issues. It is the stable business sense behind the predictions that makes your observations so valuable. Anyway, all I wanted to say was that I love the new look of the newsletter. The sidebars are a great new feature, almost as good as the quotations.<br />Thanks for all the hard work and terrific information.<br />(Submitted by a Multi-Title Publisher)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-29802420628506391612008-04-08T14:02:00.000-07:002008-04-08T14:07:23.795-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Magazine Efficiency, GM Ads, Revenue and Going Green<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhud6uSV0nBXz6Bo6eo5Xz2xruvzpGoqkgiklrQrxLbSG6BhAvjv7XKnlOWbOfnKEHl1u3fZRy-p-OmADg6CkoCFSw7-oYYvw0SDGEYil2sHewqKvMQHq4y4OUrjen26AhaZhWYftilMZ75/s1600-h/yelling.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhud6uSV0nBXz6Bo6eo5Xz2xruvzpGoqkgiklrQrxLbSG6BhAvjv7XKnlOWbOfnKEHl1u3fZRy-p-OmADg6CkoCFSw7-oYYvw0SDGEYil2sHewqKvMQHq4y4OUrjen26AhaZhWYftilMZ75/s320/yelling.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5186984031922246786" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Magazine Efficiency, GM Ads, Revenue and Going Green</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /><br />Re: What Is a Magazine?<br />I'm sure that everyone has a different opinion as to what a magazine is, and who knows?-maybe everyone's right. <br /><br />Your definition (metered or paginated, edited, designed, date-stamped, permanent, and periodic) is very interesting. It shares some similarities with the USPS's qualifications for periodical postage, which, like yours, are based largely on form and not on content. In very broad terms, the postal regulations define a periodical by saying that it must be:<br /><br />-Published at a stated frequency of at least quarterly<br />-Printed<br />-Paid or requested by at least half of its subscribers<br />-No more than 75 percent advertising<br /><br />Of course, both your definition and the USPS definition apply to newspapers as well as to magazines. Your definition could arguably apply to catalogs, too.<br /><br />Call me simplistic, but I think it's more useful to think of magazines as a cross between newspapers and books. Like newspapers, they're published periodically, which imparts currency to their contents. Like books, they're dedicated to one topic, theme, or purpose, which they tackle in some depth and in an assortment of ways. <br /><br />In July, 1900 Arthur Reed Kimball wrote in The Atlantic Monthly that the function of a magazine "is to interpret the significance of life as it is being lived, after it is mirrored, en passant, in the press, but before its perpetuation in the book." Kimball may have used formal prose, but he came up with an interesting way of describing the medium.<br /><br />On a slightly different note, I don't know why ASME shouldn't give awards to Web sites, especially if the substrate doesn't matter.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher and a BoSacks Cub Reporter)<br /><br /><br />Re: Mag Industry Inches, With Some Success, Toward Efficiency<br />The excerpt from the circulator about sounds like it could have been submitted by me. <br />The first time I asked my national distributor about retailer locations it took two weeks and several follow ups to get a response. Later when I offhandedly asked about nationwide retail locations, the ND did admit that they had the info but couldn't give it to me unless I pay an annual fee for use of their data sharing software. Which still does not pull complete retailer details. I felt I had to back them into a corner by saying that my company pays them to distribute my magazines but they cannot tell me where they distribute them to.<br /><br />It seems like an unbelievable runaround. In this techno age of information when we can seemingly push a button and get a detail of the national debt we still cannot get real time sales data or distribution information. The real time data would better drive a Publisher's marketing initiatives as we would more easily be able to see where our best sales are coming from.<br /><br />If this is remedied by SBT, then I feel we should move forward with it. From the publisher's perspective we still need to tread lightly as we have not seen all of the pitfalls here, but to stick our heads in the sand and ignore the future isn't going to help anyone. Yes, there are many middlemen here in the whole distribution scheme, but it seems as if they are a "necessary evil". But like it or not we are all on the same team. We are all behind the counter waiting for the consumer to purchase our magazines. It is unfortunate, however, when the $2 to $7 are passed across the counter everyone is scrambling, clawing and scratching to get the biggest piece of the pie. <br /><br />It is also unfortunate that I can foresee that the increase in costs, the lack of immediate data and slowed sales will drive a Publisher further away from print and closer to the web.<br />(Submitted by a Production Manager)<br /><br />RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: GM rethinking about Mags and Branding<br />Bob, The targeted marketing campaigns by GM are very effective, I know this because I'm selling new GM cars and trucks after being laid off from my production operations job. GM is marketing to all levels of past and future consumers. I have seen internet coupons and printed coupons at the dealership. The marketing campaign is delivering these targeted offers how ever the consumer wants them. In addition they are in newspaper print ads and on the TV. The sales team is allowed to call these people for a follow up call.<br />(Submitted by a former Production Director)<br /><br /><br />RE: Husni Vs. BoSacks - The Whole Experience vs. the Hole Experience<br />Bob, I've been a long reader, studier, and huge fan of print magazines. I've tracked their successes, their failures, I've tried to educate my customers about their trends to better serve the needs of publishers and mag advertisers. I've been fiercely loyal to print. I've purchased hundreds of newsstand copies to the tune of thousands of dollars (and NOT on an expense report). My very livelihood depends on the success of magazines. I've worked to convince advertisers of the importance of the tangibility of that printed piece.<br /><br />You know what? I haven't bought a magazine for 10 months.<br /><br />I realize now that I didn't buy them for the paper, or the convenience. I bought them for the content, and I found a better way to get much higher quality content. Jezebel.com has replaced any random women's title (my intro was from an ADAge. Com article). I've literally replaced every bit of content that I once got from mags with free content on the web.<br /><br />Now, I still buy print. Mostly books (lots of engagement hours for the money) and newspapers (lots of info for the amount of money) when I travel. Magazines fill neither niche . . . high cost for the time of engagement provided. The exception, of course are magazines like Vanity Fair, New Yorker, Esquire and Atlantic Monthly. And I feel THIS is the category of mag that will survive. Keep up the good work!<br />(Submitted by a Vocation Unknown)<br /><br />Re: How Eco-Friendly Can Green Mags Really Be?<br />How many puglishers who use recycled paper in the print process, use paper proofs in the proofing cycle? GREEN????<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br />Re: How Eco-Friendly Can Green Mags Really Be?<br />It is not possible to be Green and be a print publisher. You can write about green initiatives, and proper business thinking, but you cannot be a green print publisher. The carbon footprint is impossible to justify. You can have a smaller footprint than another publisher, but the difference is hardly noticeable.<br />(Submitted by a multi-title Director of MFG)<br /><br />Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Biggest Ad Revenue Plunge in 50 Years<br />Your faith in the future is not only inspiring but also on the mark.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br />RE: MPA Retail Conference and Time Inc's Green Thinking.<br />So where is the new model or opportunity of selling magazines on a direct basis - no returns . . . SBT will do some of that but what about selling, packaging combos or multi copies, distributing copies for further readership instead of shredding so many copies - many of which have never seen the light of day.<br /><br />I could package 5 issues of a celebrity title for $10 a summer pack but there is no outlet . . . or the cost of the nat Dist, Wholesaler, retailer eats up the cost of packaging and marketing . . . We need to use our product to market the category - encourage returns for further readership and get ABC on board . . . . but it seems it is too expensive to get them back.<br /><br />RE: MPA Retail Conference and Time Inc's Green Thinking.<br />Hello, I am surprised by the figures you mention : " We print 10 and sell 3 " How can that be ? Is it not rather that 10 is printed and 3 are unsold?<br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /><br />BoSacks Reply to the Paper Person<br />No, I am sorry to tell you that we print 10 sell 3 and 7are unsold. This is the newsstand average. It is real and has been that way for a very long time. That is a huge problem in the 21st century.BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-21538138446440664082008-04-01T19:29:00.000-07:002008-04-01T19:35:48.771-07:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Evil Mantra, Scan Based Mags and Husni<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsMRxKokCl_WXGf2Qzoj199UwOErqYxPjz-QEQ0bqkdaMSNUS6ZQR_VdT8gWJDIkaFmE0KvW-gZEYk5poPf3HbwvGEUjLlXSsveGqQcYDmL-jvrvv-AnO_gOHlj_VNbCt0AIg5j69qSGmb/s1600-h/bo+right+mr+mag+wrong.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsMRxKokCl_WXGf2Qzoj199UwOErqYxPjz-QEQ0bqkdaMSNUS6ZQR_VdT8gWJDIkaFmE0KvW-gZEYk5poPf3HbwvGEUjLlXSsveGqQcYDmL-jvrvv-AnO_gOHlj_VNbCt0AIg5j69qSGmb/s400/bo+right+mr+mag+wrong.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5184471085212062674" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Evil Mantra, Scan Based Mags and Husni<br /></strong><a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=qduqmlcab.0.0.cuf4zubab.0&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F&id=preview" target="_blank">www.bosacks.com</a><br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: Is the Real Mantra? Be Evil. Very Evil<br /></strong>What happened to words like trust, ethics, civility, common courtesy, or morality (not to be confused with "religious")? Articles like this make me want to quit my job and live in a small cabin in the middle of nowhere.<br /><br />Thanks for sharing this, I needed a little fire in my belly this morning to get the juices flowing.<br />(Submitted by an innocent bystander)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Is the Real Mantra? Be Evil. Very Evil<br /></strong>Google has me scared . . . really scared. I am fearful as a publisher, as a father, and as a citizen in an open democracy. Where does this intrusion end? Can it actually end? The genie is out of the bottle. We have willing given out information everywhere to everyone. I can't see a way to stop this and at the same time I am fearful of it, even though my business does it's best to collect the very same data.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher) <br /><br /><strong> RE: Is the Real Mantra? Be Evil. Very Evil.</strong><br />Privacy. Hm. What's that?<br />Well let me give another example of a "time bomb".<br />Let's say you sign up with Earthlink.net for an email address. You use it for a couple of years and then something better comes along. So you cancel your Earthlink.net account and signup with your new subscriber. You take the time to make all the changes to all your accounts, you think, so they send messages and newsletters to the new account. <br />Then one day, a year or two later you get an email from a stranger. They have randomly chosen your old email account. An account that Earthlink.net conveniently re-activated as an available email name since you were not using it. This stranger tells you he was able to access your Classmates.com account using your old email address. How? Well, since he now has your email address, he can conveniently say he lost his password and they'll send him a new one, to the email address! Voila! Access to an account and ANY information, credit card info, personal data, that may be there. And, the stranger says, that any email list that you were on that hasn't updated their list, he is now receiving. Oh boy, you'd better not let you Mom/Wife/co-workers see THAT newsletter. That could be embarrassing. If the stranger wasn't an honest person, well let's just say that blackmail and identity theft from an old email address pops into mind.<br />So what do you think? How many of you dropped your dial-up email address for a new DSL email address? Did you know that your email address is being recycled?<br />Just something to think about.<br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Jerry Seinfeld quote</strong><br />"There's very little advice in men's magazines, because men don't think there's a lot they don't know. Women do. Women want to learn. Men think, "I know what I'm doing, just show me somebody naked.""<br />Jerry Seinfeld quotes (American television Actor and Comedian, b.1954)<br /><br />I love this quote! And it's pretty much exactly what Mike LaFavore was told when he presented his pitch more than a decade ago for a new magazine idea: Men's Health.<br />Fortunately, Men's Health has proven Jerry's comment to be largely -- but not entirely -- incorrect. Men's Health does have a lusty "Cex & Relationships" section - and Cex is always a top-ranking Web feature as well.<br />Men DO want advice. They just don't want to admit it.<br />(Submitted by an Editor)<br />(BoSacks has intentionally changed the word CEX to hopefully bypass silly corporate filters that have no understanding or sense of proper usage and propriety)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: Scan-Based Trading's Hold-Up</strong><br />A couple of comments . . . .<br />SBT is a way of the future - no doubt about it. Why in your whole story on SBT was the term "Issue code" not mentioned? (I searched) Simple scan based trading is logical and can apply to gum, except we change our product every week/every month and want to know if Angelina outsells Posh Spice. Retailers have not come to grips that requirement. Shall we change the manufacturing code every week as I believe People does? Then there will be 10,000 bar codes in the system. Also - not all retailers scan . . . will wholesalers have 2 classes of retailer. Many independents will likely never afford SBT.<br /><br />It was also amusing when in the same set of BOSACKS emails, one had advertisers demanding magazines be more environmentally friendly then in the second email they we being suspicious of any audience calculations. The fastest way to efficiency in the use of magazines is to count pass along. To demand inflated circulation for the sake of rate bases is environmental hypocrisy - and a poor business model as well.<br />(Submitted by a Director, Consumer Marketing)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: Husni Vs. BoSacks - The Whole Experience vs. the Hole Experience</strong><br />Bob, I've been a long reader, studier, and huge fan of print magazines. I've tracked their successes, their failures, I've tried to educate my customers about their trends to better serve the needs of publishers and mag advertisers. I've been fiercely loyal to print. I've purchased hundreds of newsstand copies to the tune of thousands of dollars (and NOT on an expense report). My very livelihood depends on the success of magazines. I've<br />worked to convince advertisers of the importance of the tangibility of that printed piece.<br /><br />You know what? I haven't bought a magazine for 10 months.<br /><br />I realize now that I didn't buy them for the paper, or the convenience. I bought them for the content, and I found a better way to get much higher quality content. Jezebel.com has replaced any random women's title (my intro was from an ADAge. Com article). I've literally replaced every bit of content that I once got from mags with free content on the web.<br /><br />Now, I still buy print. Mostly books (lots of engagement hours for the money) and newspapers (lots of info for the amount of money) when I travel. Magazines fill neither niche . . . high cost for the time of engagement provided. The exception, of course are magazines like Vanity Fair, New Yorker, Esquire and Atlantic Monthly. And I feel THIS is the category of mag that will survive.<br />Keep up the good work!<br />(Submitted by an unknown Publishing Professional)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: Husni Vs. BoSacks - The Whole Experience vs. the Hole Experience</strong><br />Bo, Your on-going debates are a joy to be a part of. You and Samir are both passionate defenders of your particular points of view and both unyielding of your turf. I think Samir is on the wrong side of the equation, but I applaud his last man standing approach. Having seen you both several times, you both make terrific and convincing arguments. I would see you again at any given moment. But Bo, is more correct than Samir. Magazines will be around for a long time as Samir says, but it will be the digital world where all the action and the advertising dollars will be. And that is coming from a multi-title print publisher. But in my niche, my readers are saying they prefer the digital path 2 to 1. I will not argue with my bread and butter as they pay the bills and the digital subscription fees.<br />(Submitted by a Multi-Title Publisher)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-8493414563948288002008-03-27T12:20:00.000-07:002008-03-27T12:22:30.683-07:00<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfG_6gwCtimAz5a4CyCJKjF_b21kDV_RqpoyDZ-c_LePXU98mJr7B0FiRsUEFNGG5IZ4b3iDhTn06S-W6DSp6xQ1pGg7XSGxQ0xbMqYoGzPP8LQyoKXB4Xf_485xdATbsVJLWJDsB56DfX/s1600-h/direct_communication_marketing.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfG_6gwCtimAz5a4CyCJKjF_b21kDV_RqpoyDZ-c_LePXU98mJr7B0FiRsUEFNGG5IZ4b3iDhTn06S-W6DSp6xQ1pGg7XSGxQ0xbMqYoGzPP8LQyoKXB4Xf_485xdATbsVJLWJDsB56DfX/s320/direct_communication_marketing.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5182503985895527186" /></a><br /> BoSacks Readers Speak Out: The Push for a 'Greener' Industry<br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=" ts="S0322&p=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=emmielcab.0.rkwpa6bab.cuf4zubab.1&ts=S0322&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosacks.com%2F" target="_blank">www.bosacks.com</a><br /><br /><br /><strong>The Push for a 'Greener' Industry</strong><br />I have to say that Barnes & Noble's magazine op has been transformed in the last couple of years. At my store at any rate, opened only three or four years ago, they finally figured out that we were throwing away 1,000 mags a week and it is much more rational now. And instead of tearing the covers off and sending the excess mags to landfill, all the chain's leftovers are recycled now.<br />(Submitted by a 67-year-old wage slave, er, retired author)<br /><strong><br />The Push for a 'Greener' Industry</strong><br />Bob, For what it's worth, and there is still no justification for the inefficiency at newsstand, but virtually 100% of unsold copies, returns, are recycled. Most of it ends up in newsprint.<br /> . . . It is just a fact that magazine wholesalers have one of their few profit streams in selling magazine waste to recyclers, so they collect it all. In the SBT study . . . one of wholesalers' concerns about not having to process returns, as a long term result of SBT, was about losing the waste sales. Most indicated they would probably continue to pick up the returns from retailers even if they didn't have to process them at the warehouse.<br /> (Submitted by an Industry Distribution Specialist)<br /><br /><strong>The Push for a 'Greener' Industry</strong><br />Same stuff as the Sierra Club who claims to be green, only problem is, their mass direct mail programs are not exactly green.<br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /><br /><strong>The Push for a 'Greener' Industry</strong><br />As an environmentalist . . . , it pains me to say that the Evil Empire (Time) "gets it" when it comes to the environmental impact of paper and that the environmental groups generally do not get it. Using recycled fiber in magazine paper does not save trees, it just diverts that fiber from other (often more efficient) uses. In environmental parlance, it has no "additionality". Using post-consumer recycled fiber back in the 1970s meant something because it was important to create more of a market for that fiber. But now there is plenty of demand for post-consumer fiber -- more than can be fulfilled -- so creating more demand for it does nothing for the<br />environment. Time Inc's Refkin is correct to focus on the real issues -- increasing the supply of recycled fiber, using sustainable forestry, and reducing the carbon footprint of the energy-intensive paper industry.<br /><br />By the way, as wasteful as our industry's newsstand practices are, they generally are not causing landfills to fill up. The recycling rate for newsstand returns has always been high, which is why environmental groups have focused on encouraging the use of post-consumer fiber. Also, I don't think Myllykoski claims that all of the recycled content in the paper from its Alsip mill is post-consumer because it uses waste from printing plants and newsstand returns. Given the generally poor quality of post-consumer fiber in the US, using high-quality pre-consumer waste to make coated paper probably makes more environmental sense than relying solely on post-consumer waste. And as for claims that recycled fiber has a lower carbon footprint, two mills that make coated paper with recycled fiber could not tell me their carbon footprint and the third had a relatively high footprint. What matters more than type of fiber are the mill's sources of on-site energy and purchased electricity.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Bosacks Video</strong><br />you sir, are a voice of reason . . . the sony is a model t . . . and yes it is . . . too bad u didn't have a kindle with you which is the tucker of e-book readers<br />(Submitted by an Industry Pundit)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Vive Les Dead Trees</strong><br />Bo,It has gotten hackneyed and self-serving of would-be environmentalists to continously refer paper based reading material as "dead trees" or "tree killing" for that matter. Such people need to get the message that trees are a renewable resource (and regrown as such -- and I am not talking about old growth forests, a related, but different argument), like corn and other vegetable matter. Do these same individuals refer to their shoes as "dead animals", their shirts as "murdered cotton", their next broccoli and mushroom side dish as "terminated vegetables", their next espresso as "whacked beans" or the next sashimi platter as "offed fish"? The context of such arguments is critical of often ignored. Paper companies, printers and publishers are not the bad guys per se --- many of them do their jobs green-consciously and well, with an enviromental awareness and commitment that goes beyond mere sloganeering.<br />(Submitted by a printer and proud of it)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Vive Les Dead Trees</strong><br />Bo- Maybe French publishers are doing something novel - like producing a product for the reader. I'm not a Francophile and my knowledge of the language is a notch above non-existent, but when I see a copy of Le Figaro or Le Monde I can't help but think that the reader is very much in the editor's (and publisher's) mind. When I unfolded the Sunday copy of my local Long Island newspaper the flyers and inserts that fell to the floor, or came between me and the editorial were enough to make me throw up my arms in frustration. I applaud the ad staff, but after fliiping through 10 (or was it 12?) full page ads to get to the next page of news it wasn't applause I wanted to give the publisher. Maybe that's why I now read the Sunday issue only. And our magazine brothers and sisters are no better. Did you ever count the number of ad pages before the table of contents? Or, when you're trying to find that article continuation on page 132, the number of pages that are not numbered?<br /><br />Don't get me wrong. Without ad sales the publishing industry would only be a shadow of itself and I wouldn't have a job. But let's put things in perspective. If want to stem the loss of readers shouldn't we pay a little more attention to the reader? We talk a lot about wanting things to be more user friendly. Let's remember who the ultimate user of newspapers and magazines is. It's sure not the advertiser.<br />(Submitted by a Marketing Executive)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-84058990930936762642008-03-16T13:24:00.000-07:002008-03-16T13:31:15.484-07:00Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Review of the Kindle<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxMxpw17gy4qYVfBcYvx7lSZ0r4lOfNvZ9un779qwnz9242VMBU4ydbzJrvfXxwGx5y1rVR02KzlNytsAYqCfPLt8pnLYT4SlYYAL_alpsaG5rYWPJAzqvu5gl9RyD9UQudSqUFrVHfcB2/s1600-h/pic_763213001187535137.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxMxpw17gy4qYVfBcYvx7lSZ0r4lOfNvZ9un779qwnz9242VMBU4ydbzJrvfXxwGx5y1rVR02KzlNytsAYqCfPLt8pnLYT4SlYYAL_alpsaG5rYWPJAzqvu5gl9RyD9UQudSqUFrVHfcB2/s400/pic_763213001187535137.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5178439745123019970" /></a><br />BoSacks Speaks Out; My good friend Peter Meirs of Time Inc fame has <a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001TC1A8L0FbhXFsgXgKgT0mlhybuAWVrBU5NWi-wrK3mhth1rzm3qZETHHJYP65jIxb6uPCfo3Eel2xgCG1wjpOD1XXxCH3HCNk4ITKtegMuAmhxyI6HrXwhVgK6zfKbRtKcp8ZOsoKcdfYao0dhDVKv6WQVPxQ48-" target="_blank" track="on" linktype="undefined">created a short video </a>that I think is really worth viewing. He was the chair of an excellent group discussion on digital magazines at the Publishing Executive trade show last week. Every time Peter and I get together in the same room, there is a wonderful time warp of sorts and our conversations careen towards that semi-accurate future of our business. I know that together we have conceptualized many reading devises that are 25 years or more on the horizon. When we do this, I know we are not wrong, we are just not right yet.<br /><br />Adapt or perish, now as ever, is nature's inexorable imperative.<br />H. G. Wells (1866 - 1946)<br /><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Mag Industry Successes, Kindles, Ziff and more</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Review of the Kindle</strong><br />and i would tell you that the magazine publishers don't want digital magazines to work. i really suspect they have no clue what to do with them since they don't get paid to make them work . . . but the kindle tells another wonderful story: linux works and works well, and great things can be built with it . . . i took windows off my two notebooks and i don't crash and i don't lose wireless signals.<br />(Submitted by an industry researcher and daily morning IM pal of BoSacks)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Book lovers have emotional bond with paper</strong><br />bob, this is absurd . . . i have always loved magazines, books and newspapers, now, i love my kindle . . . what a great way to buy and read books, especially if you are a 2 or more books per week reader, as i am.<br />i have no doubt that some years from now, most people will be doing most of their reading on egizmos . . . regards<br />(Submited by a Publisher)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Review of the Kindle</strong><br /><a title="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=" href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001TC1A8L0FbhXFsgXgKgT0mlhybuAWVrBU5NWi-wrK3mhth1rzm3qZETHHJYP65jIxb6uPCfo3Eel2xgCG1wjpOD1XXxCH3HCNk4ITKtegMuAmhxyI6HrXwhVgK6zfKbRtKcp8ZOsoKcdfYao0dhDVKv6WQVPxQ48-" target="_blank" track="on" linktype="undefined">you sir, are a voice of reason </a>. . . the sony is a model t . . . and yes it is . . . . too bad u didn't have a kindle with you which is the tucker of e-book readers.<br />(Submitted by an industry pundit and writer)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Book lovers have emotional bond with paper</strong><br />Bo - I could not get into the show this week to hear your talk but hope that you would have talked about the Amazon Kindle - perhaps outfitted in full body armor. I have used the Kindle for a few months and it has become a must carry along. It has not 'replaced' the paper book nor do I feel it will ever do so. The Kindle is not all that useful on the beach (sand would not be a good thing). It is not yet readable in the dark (I cannot believe they did not find a way to offer even a light extension since the technology offers no backlighting). The graphs and photos do not work well at all. The wireless access is surprisingly fast and versatile and the bookmark, dictionary, notes and other features are quite intuitive (which is good since I hate reading directions). Most of all as with any first generation application it will be refined, they will get it better the second time around and likely the third time will be the charm. It is here to stay. Embrace it folks. It's not the end, it's only the beginning. <br />(Submitted by a longtime print and now marketing application guy)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Review of the Kindle</strong><br />I like mine as well, cool, but the back lighting real big disappointment, mags a total bust.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Review of the Kindle</strong><br />Bo, I saw you at the show last week and was very impressed. Your three lectures were the best of all the meetings that I attended. But for me it was more the sum of the parts. Your keynote, then the Bo-epaper dissection and predictions and followed by your key trends of the industry, blended for me into a terrific forecast of where I need to apply my energy as a publisher and career focused family man. Many thanks for the very rational approach to a confusing business forecast. I guess I'm trying to say that you grounded me, and I need that.<br />(Submitted by a multi-title Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Mag Industry Inches, With Some Success, Toward Efficiency</strong><br />This is fascinating, and I've anticipated it for well over a decade.<br />If only the distros would buy all the copies -- like any rational business -- instead of the<br />consignment shellgame -- they would make it their business to get sell through up. Same should go for the stores.<br /><br />I've been selling a significant portion of my niche titles NO RETURNS (at 75% off cover) for a decade. Some of the larger niche distributors (notably, XXXXXX) now request no returns contracts with all their vendors. (I was the first to suggest it to them, by the way.) These distributors that buy "no returns" from me keep the copy count really, really tight, but their sell through is great. I get a steady source of income in a timely fashion and they get a really excellent discount. Win-win-win.<br /><br />Oh, and why should I, the publisher, pay for shrink? It's utterly beyond my ability to<br />control. If someone steals a box of cookies at Safeway, does Safeway tell the cookie company "too bad, it didn't scan?" Or if someone breaks a box of eggs, does Safeway tell the egg farmer -- "too bad, you should have made the eggs harder to break?"<br /><br />BTW, I think if we are to be faced with shrink and SBT then we should get *paid* net 30 days from when the issue scans. Live by the scan, die by the scan, indeed.<br /><br />P.S. I would dearly LOVE the big chains and distros to regulate for 50% sell through. It's<br />been my goal for years; I have tiny niche titles and I need to actually make *money* on newsstand.<br />(Submitted by a multi-title Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>RE: ziff davis media files for bankruptcy</strong><br />Do you know if the big creditors are printers? At first I thought it was strange that they were going to write off so much in return for the big majority stake in common stock. On reflection, it started sounding like someone pretty desperately needed those publications to keep printing, and that might well describe major printers who would be hard pressed to see that much business suddenly drop off the revenue side, which would smack their own stock prices.<br />(Submitted by a Writer)<br /><br /><strong>RE Why do good magazines die</strong><br />Bob: Greatly enjoyed your column which I read in a place I never bring my laptop.<br /><br />My business depends in part on digital information and the web but I am<br />certain the flight from print is folly. Smart people will be making money<br />from print for as long as people can read - the written word is the basis of<br />our civilization and print is still the one of the best technologies for<br />disseminating and preserving the written word.<br /><br />My motto in this business has always been, "first figure out what you want<br />to say, then figure out how to make it pay." The trouble with a lot of<br />corporate information businesses is that the decision makers really don't<br />care about the products. Editorially driven information enterprises are the<br />kind I love.<br /><br />I just signed up for your newsletter. My interest in paper and pulp is due<br />to my involvement in a timber magazine, not as a potential buyer of paper.<br />(Submitted by an Unknown)<br /><br /><strong>RE; Does the next generation read?</strong><br />Finally I have a few moments to respond to your question of October, 2007 "Does the Next Generation Actually Read?" which you posed in Publishing Executive.<br /><br />The one word answer is "Yes".<br /><br />However they do not read useless words which still fill the gaps between ads and pretend to be of importance.<br /><br />They want the information they need and they do not care whether it comes to them in leather bound, gold leaf, low acid content volume, which they physically have to access somewhere or visually in pictures or abbreviated in an IM. They can't waste their time with what the publishing industry habitually tries to pass off as important knowledge.<br /><br />Their generation has to absorb about 10 times the knowledge we did and they have to do it in much shorter time. I like to compare our knowledge transfer industry (schools) as the most inefficient time spent in our lives. It is as if we tried to eat all we will need for the rest of our lives in the first 20 years. It does not work. They can no longer spend 20 years to learn all that we will need to know for the rest of our lives. Most of what the next generation will have to know has not even been invented yet. They will need access to knowledge instantly, whenever, and wherever they are. <br /><br />I have just begun the 32nd year of publishing Futurific Leading Indicators. Part of the reason our very small circulation is reaching a new high every month is our formula for reporting news by:<br /> eliminating all the unnecessary words to get the story across.<br /> we also skip all self-serving, promotional verbiage that helps to fill news pages.<br /> we make sure to eliminate all dead-on-arrival news items. These are items that are done with and have no impact of the future.<br /> we do not promote any creed, politics or products.<br /> we do not entertain, distract or create hype of any sort.<br /><br />After this filtering we are left with bare facts that are organized in a logical format which continues and refines the picture we are presenting, month after month.<br /><br />For these 32 years, our only agenda has been, and continues to be, to accurately forecast the future. It can be done . . . and somebody had to do it.<br /><br />Hope this answers your question.<br /><br />Keep asking why.<br />Yours for a better future,<br />(Submitted by a President)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-40974022692627595722008-03-04T19:04:00.000-08:002008-03-04T19:07:38.616-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out; Time, Newsweek, Teens and Google U<strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out; Time, Newsweek, Teens and Google U</strong><br /><br /><strong>Subject: Re: Time Vs. Newsweek: Battle Of The Print Dinosaurs</strong><br />Bob: To paraphrase Montaigne, whether poring over TIME or N/W on the bathroom throne, or reading all the Oscar Gossip online, we are still sitting on our ass. The author reminds me of the spoiled creatures who write reviews of new vehicles for car magazines, wondering why the manufacturers offer limited GPS options, or could find only 6 more horsepower than last year. <br /><br />Didn't TIME deliberately pare their circ base to contain costs and get more right with ABC? I can't imagine that they would have lost so much more readership proportionately to N/W in an even race on level ground. As logical references go, it is non sequitur.<br /><br />Yes, I read more news online, and eschew gossip as best I can, but I haven't cancelled my subs to newsweeklies. They offer perspective, and insight, maybe because they have to be good and be right between the event and the print deadlines. 3.2 million readers are counting on it and paying for the privilege.<br />(Submitted by a self-diagnosed dinosaur, retired)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Time Vs. Newsweek: Battle Of The Print Dinosaurs</strong><br />Not in a million years will I pick up a print copy of these two magazines, but I'm in love with Newsweek.com!!!!<br />(Submitted by an Online Production Manager<br /><br /><strong>Re: Time Vs. Newsweek: Battle Of The Print Dinosaurs</strong><br />Bo- I'm not sure if my attitude is tainted as a publisher or not. I used to love both titles. I would read both on a regular basis. Now I find I almost never read either. Why is that? The internet? I couldn't really say. I continue have great respect for both houses, but my addiction and their usefulness or my lifestyle/needs have changed. <br />(Submitted by a multi-title Publisher)<br /><strong><br />Re: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Snakes, Music, Publishing and Reading</strong><br />This is a sad commentary about how the printing business has turned into the "business" of printing. Many of the big printers today--except for the one that sprouted out of the cornfields in the Midwest--are run by MBA suits who don't know anything about it. To them, a magazine or catalog is just another widget to be counted and counted, and they push and push, to produce more and more, with less and less. At the end of the day, they are only concerned with showing a profit since that is what will ultimately feather their pockets. So in order to achieve that, they shut down plants, lay off employees, and in the process, they have destroyed the business. With that goal achieved, the MBA suit walks away with a multi-million dollar bonus in his pocket. "What a world, what a world." <br />Submitted by a Senior Production person) <br /><br />The inside baseball character of replies to replies can get tedious, I know. So this will probably remain between you and me, and that's fine. While Senior Production Person makes some valid observations, I believe he misses the point and wanted to run my POV by you. <br /><br />Yes, MBA's and similarly soulless types pocketing obscene amounts of money is an offensive reality. But it is the nature of American business, not just the American printing business. Change it if you can and more power to you. But Wall Street might be a more fruitful starting point than Printer's Row. <br /><br />As to the continual push to print more and more for less and less, my fellow reader puts the arse before the torse. Could it be that the amount of money that Senior Production Persons will pay their printer might have something to do with this state of affairs? And perhaps the overall nature of the marketplace? "Mmmmm, could be." (Bugs Bunny - American cartoon rabbit and personal role model). Ben Franklin, patron saint of American printers, got it only 2/3's right when he enumerated the things in life that are certain. Actually, there are three: death, taxes, and lower printing prices. There is less, and the customers want more. So, we do more with less. <br /><br />As for the outrage over the fact that, "at the end of the day, they are only concerned with showing a profit," well, duh! The same is true for the beginning of the day, noontime, and the commute both ways. The first condition necessary to doing a good job is having a job. Whether you are a CEO, a production person, or a pocket feeder, that means contributing more than you are paid. That means making a profit. Call it feathering your nest or feeding your family. Either way, there is nothing shameful in it. In business, it is a moral obligation. That obligation can be met humanely or inhumanly but that is a question of execution and personal responsibility. The goal itself remains honorable.<br />Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /> <br /><strong>Re: U.S. teens stumped by history Survey</strong><br />There's absolutely no question that the liberal arts, including history, are essential to every student's education. But this story suffers from serious flaws. <br /><br />First it offers no points of comparison. Do today's teenagers know less history and literature than teenagers did ten years ago? Do today's teenagers know less history and literature than people in their 40s or 50s? <br /><br />Second, the survey methodology certainly influenced the results. Who among us is willing to focus carefully when answering 33 multiple choice history questions in a random phone call from a stranger?<br /><br />Finally, which of the results indicates "stunning ignorance?" <br /><br />-Half of the respondents knew the dates of the Civil War.<br />-Three quarters knew when Columbus sailed.<br />-Three quarters correctly identified Adolf Hitler.<br />-40 percent were familiar with Ellison's "The Invisible Man." <br />-Half were familiar with Job.<br />-80 percent were familiar with "To Kill a Mockingbird."<br />-Virtually all identified Martin Luther King from his famous speech.<br /><br />Would we expect any random group of American adults to score much better?<br /><br />This story is cut from a well-worn mold . In a few months we'll hear how ignorant American students are about geography. Then another group with an axe to grind will find another subject in which American teenagers are woefully underinformed. Common Core, the organization behind the survey, owes their extremely important cause less sensational and more serious treatment. And we're as "stunningly ignorant" as the kids we're snickering at if we swallow this stuff without thinking about it first.<br />Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Google U</strong><br /><em>"It is quaint that people speak of separating dogma from education. Dogma is actually the only thing that cannot be separated from education. It IS education." - G. K. Chesterton </em><br />In his Google U essay, Jeff Jarvis (the creator and original Managing Editor of Entertainment Weekly, whose early version of that title was hipper and more insightful though perhaps less commercial than the magazine's current iconic incarnation) has discovered home schooling. Welcome aboard! <br /><br />As the failure of the model enforced by the government schools and the culture at large becomes more obvious to more people the collapse of that model becomes more and more of a likelihood; a consummation devoutly to be wished. I'll take Mr. Jarvis' comments as a positive sign, especially considering his track record for getting in front of cultural trends. <br /><br />The educational system as it currently exists does not, cannot, and will never provide actual education. According to the model of its founder, John Dewey, it provides indoctrination for the production of usable, lead-able citizens. According to the wishes of the teacher's unions, which appear to be modeled on the coal miners, it provides gainful employment for life for anyone willing to keep paying their dues and pass along whatever drivel is put in front of them. According to the pleasure of academics and administrators, it provides a cocoon safely insulated from the demands of the real world and protects their phoney baloney jobs. For politicians, it provides another means of access to taxpayer dollars and a power base built on spending those dollars. But education? Sorry, wrong number. . . . <br />Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /><strong>Re: In men's magazines, a question of size</strong><br />Bob; With the seemingly perpetual increases in paper and postal costs, the next major "universal" trim-size reduction (from the current 10.5" short-cutoff) will be the aptly named "handbag" size. Unfortunately, there is not currently a "natural" press-cutoff within the U.S. web-offset world to deliver this product efficiently. I know this because we looked at producing such a product. It is my understanding that the current U.S. titles -- produced at the handbag trim size -- are printed on short-cutoff presses. The oversized sigs (i.e., at 10.5" + trim) are sent to the bindery...where the book is trimmed to the smaller 9" trim size. This is a huge -- and expensive -- inefficiency/waste. For my project, which was ultimately tabled, the other option was to look at a rotogravure scheme. Alas, the relatively small print order did not justify this. <br /><br />It is my prediction that the handbag trim size will become a viable option -- and viable press platform -- in the not too-distant future. This will occur when one (or more) of the major magazine publishers "challenges" one (or more) of the "Big 3" -- RRDonnelley, Quad Graphics and Quebecor (?) World -- to convert a significant portion of their press platform to a 9" trim-size press cutoff...in exchange for a very robust portion of their titles/print order. Only a large -- and committed -- publisher volume would justify the significant investment that this would represent to any one of the printing Big 3. Could another candidate (e.g., Brown Printing), beyond the Big 3, emerge to seize some of this "new" trim size volume? Maybe...but less likely. And one of the Big 3 already has its hands full with financial challenges.<br />Submitted by a Dirctor of Operations)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-7578656122286755752008-01-13T13:56:00.000-08:002008-01-13T14:02:32.737-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Quebecor, Publishing Success, and Car<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZBFMKr00cgJp8u3gZdjgiu7dUy9ny6ZAGVbNE9DzImJqallyZBrlhyphenhyphen85rOKF9cnvyg__XWpog1cja6C2CQdesgA2Z2f3OfchEU2RSoPcGaMcBzE-3jcrNS3XPIat7Z3o5LpI3KmmP9sTf/s1600-h/boss-yelling.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZBFMKr00cgJp8u3gZdjgiu7dUy9ny6ZAGVbNE9DzImJqallyZBrlhyphenhyphen85rOKF9cnvyg__XWpog1cja6C2CQdesgA2Z2f3OfchEU2RSoPcGaMcBzE-3jcrNS3XPIat7Z3o5LpI3KmmP9sTf/s400/boss-yelling.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5155084922569073058" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Quebecor, Publishing Success, and Car Parts</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Quebecor, Magazines, and Steve Florio</strong><br />Boman, I've been in this industry for 35 years. Like you I have seen a lot of ink poured onto billions of pages. The continued consolidation of the industry from all sides and all suppliers bodes ill for our continued success. There are so many aspects of our ability to make a profit that are under attack that I despair of ever breathing correctly again.<br /><br />It's the paper problem. Paper makers have a right to make a profit too don't they? It's the printer problem. Shouldn't printers be able to make a fair profit? It's the advertisers. Shouldn't they be able to maximize their dollar investment and get accountability for money spent? It's the generational reading trends. Still an unknown but sizable problem for the printed page. <br /><br />The Quebecor situation is just one item of hundreds that is putting continued pressure on a fragile industry at a unique moment in time. How do we continue under such diverse unfriendly conditions? For my part I don't blame anyone or any part of the industry. It seems to just be what they call a perfect storm. <br />Submitted by a Senior Multi-Title Publisher)<br /> <br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Quebecor, Magazines, and Steve Florio</strong><br />Bo: As someone who has worked for both printing and publishing companies over the last 34 years, I feel obligated to chime in on the current hype about Quebecor World. Quebecor World has provided publishers and catalogers with a valuable service for a long time, they have kept the cost of printing competitive. IF RRD, Quad and other large printers had their way, our costs would be significantly higher. To rationalize where Quebecor World is today, we have to take history into account. First lets realize that the US plants started as WA Krueger, then became Ringier America and then World Color before becoming Quebecor World. Lets talk about the fact that the previous owners were interested in making money by any means and did not keep up with technology or invest in their infrastructure. Lets face it, by the time Quebecor purchased World Color, the plants and equipment were becoming obsolete and were in desperate need capital expenditures and improvements. Lets think about the determination and faith that it took to consolidate plants and purchase a huge amount of equipment to bring them up to today's quality and efficiency levels. They accomplished this in a remarkably short period of time and while there were specific problems along the road they have reached the pinnacle only to have the financial bridge for the cost of modernization collapse. Lets also ask if the current financial situation might be different if not for the tremendous problems caused by the sub-prime mortgage segment. As one who prints with Quebecor World, RRD, Quad and several other printers, I do not look forward to the demise of Quebecor World and especially if another major printer becomes the owner. I hope that the financial turmoil can be overcome for all of our sake. Lets hope that printing doesn't follow what's happening in the paper industry with mega-mergers and consolidations.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Supplier)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out - 3 Concepts for Every Publisher's Success</strong><br />I'd suggest three other points:<br /><br />1. Content isn't important; creating something that interests an audience is. When you drain the blood out of the activity and leave it as a set of numbers, it's going to fail.<br /><br />2. Having targets isn't important; you want an audience that really wants to hear what you have to say.<br /><br />3. Long term profitability and innovation may not go out of style, but they are meaningless when they aren't an organic part of pleasing the customer. Profitability is a byproduct of pleasing customers and running a business smartly.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Writer)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out - 3 Concepts for Every Publisher's Success</strong><br />Bo, Simpler words couldn't tell the story! A sound business model and a template for success applies no matter what we're talking about. You can only "push" so much information - it's the end-users' desired "pull" that sustains that publishing entity. You've got to have them engaged, once you do and you continue to fuel that engine, then it's perpetual . . . <br />Submitted by an Industry Supplier)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Print is Dead: Long Live Print</strong><br />It's the first time I have read something we can all agree on, right Bo? Just give it a little time and what is old will be new again. And that goes for print and pretty glossy pictures.<br />Submitted by a paper Supplier)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: For magazines, New Year of Challenges</strong><br />Bo, Don't you love challenges? <br />Sounds like a motivational seminar from the 60"s.<br />Submitted by a senior paper person)<br /><strong><br />Re: For magazines, New Year of Challenges</strong><br />Here is a shortened view of the top three challenges for 2008 <br />1. Paper <br />2. Advertising <br />3. Postal <br />Pretty much in that order in my opinion.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Paper Person)<br /> <br /><br /><strong>RE: MPA Magazine 'Readers' Are Now Called 'Users' - Gen Y Loves Luxury Paper</strong><br />Why not just call them the audience? It works for all the types of media,<br />and calling them users creates the wrong emphasis on the specific<br />technology, and not the unifying concept of communications.<br />Submitted by a Writer)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE; you see this in FOLIO?</strong><br />I was idling around the newsstand at lunch and was surprised to see the December issue of Hemmings Motor News sitting there, weighing in at 696 pages. Hemmings is basically an antique car and car parts directory. Looking for an antenna for that 1964 Corvair? Find it in Hemmings.<br /><br />The curious thing is why the print publication is still thick as a phone book. If ever there was a publication to become disintermediated by the Internet, this is it. Hemmings is a place where you go to find things you are looking for, not for random discovery. And, in fact, it has a robust Web site, claiming to be the "world's most comprehensive and informative web site of its kind, featuring over 30,000 searchable cars-for-sale ads, 10,000 Car Club listings," etc.<br /><br />Maybe it's because car collectors are old and don't use the internet. Nope, we know that all age groups are active users of the Web. Maybe the Hemmings brand is so strong that they can REQUIRE classified advertisers to use print if they want to advertise online. Not so-you can advertise online exclusively. I just don't get it. Why is their print edition so robust? Any ideas?<br />Submitted by a Senior Publishing Executive)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-73357631734184395932008-01-08T18:30:00.000-08:002008-01-08T18:37:32.752-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Quebecor, Magazines, and Steve Florio<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWA1FJ8RhEKu9a53F7m3006ax8c5iexzN7ikQZaSul6t8j9XSVEZAVY8YvcnCMnEzmFzMTg1aZDxHbjV89mRsc5xHQlfTqddBBlpZKqqKrTw8Vvjy7nOsAWyS_myrUGcTOo7R_KiuqCacq/s1600-h/FP1334~The-Simpsons-Posters.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWA1FJ8RhEKu9a53F7m3006ax8c5iexzN7ikQZaSul6t8j9XSVEZAVY8YvcnCMnEzmFzMTg1aZDxHbjV89mRsc5xHQlfTqddBBlpZKqqKrTw8Vvjy7nOsAWyS_myrUGcTOo7R_KiuqCacq/s400/FP1334~The-Simpsons-Posters.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5153300385132421426" /></a><br />BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Quebecor, Magazines, and Steve Florio<br />www.bosacks.com<br /> <br /><strong>Re: How Many Magazines Debuted This Year?</strong><br />Whoa! Prof. Husni says that 7,200 consumer magazines are a "sign of health"? Whose health? The paper and printing trades, maybe. His own, surely, if he makes a living teaching about and consulting with periodical publishers. But to take this bloat as a sign of the health of the magazine business in general is like pointing to a 400-pound man and saying, "Wow-imagine all the food he eats! Wonderful!"<br /><br />Markets that were once legitimately served by a handful of magazines are now staggering under 20 or 30 or more titles (never mind what's on-line). More and more of our creativity and dollars have to go to fighting for market share instead of what we were good at originally. Competition is healthy, but when the pie has to be sliced this fine, where's the health? At some point too much choice becomes onerous and wasteful. Take our 400-pounder, put him on a diet and send him to the gym.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher, COO)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Quebecor Financial Fortunes Dwindling</strong><br />Whatever happens to Quebecor, the Merced facility is unlikely to close its doors. Industry trends combined with local environmental regulations and taxation levels in the People's Republic of California ensure that there will never be another large printing facility built in that state. RRD's Torrance and Quebecor's Merced provide cost effective access to the most populous state in the union and, as such, have tremendous value. In the future, the sign might say Cenveo or Donnelley or Quad but that sign will stand in front of a productive and profitable Merced printing plant.<br />(Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Quebecor Financial Fortunes Dwindling</strong><br />Bo: You can forget RRD acquiring Quebecor, they still house too much junk for equipment that RRD does not want. They have their own problems getting rid of junk they took ownership of during the acquisitions of Banta and Perry Judd's.<br /><br />Everybody seems to forget Pierre Peledeau who led Quebecor into the stupid proposition of paying 33% premium for World Color years ago. KKR, the investment group from New York, that put World Color together, owned 25=30% of the stock and were the main reason they were on the market as "all or nothing". Several printers tried to cherry pick the good pikes of World Color prior to the purchase by Peledeau. He wanted bragging rights to be named the "largest printer in the World". He achieved that goal, but all the junk he picked up with the buyout ultimately buried him, as we see today. Peledeau never cleaned up the inefficient plants, because he was afraid of the negative sales numbers he would have to give up as it related to Wall Street. Sad story, but let's put the blame on the right person.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Paper Person)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Quebecor Financial Fortunes Dwindling</strong><br />I too have had a great experience and history with the Merced plant. The people there over the years that provided more than just service, but critical saves on a regular basis, ensuring that our weekly mag hit the newsstands on time every time was quite an accomplishment.<br /><br />The plant's nearness to Yosemite was always a nice travel addition, if mostly only in though as the best laid plans only materialized once for me.<br /><br />I remember coming back after spending hot summer days there and not being able to look at Italian food or tomato sauce for the smell I couldn't get out of my head for the food processing plant that shares the valley.<br /><br />I wish the good people of Merced the best in this new year and new age. As for Quebecor World, well . . . <br />Submitted by an Industry Supplier)<br /><br /><strong>re: What the Reader Wants</strong><br />"We must lead readers, not be led by them. Really great journalism must do more than merely give people what they want. There has to be room for the unexpected, for stories the public has no idea it wants until it sees them. . .The reader is a paradox. . .The reader, ladies and gentlemen, is not king; actually he is a nice hypocrite. . .Editors are an endangered species, but only a good and professional editorial team can decide what is news and what is humbug. "<br /><br />These are the smartest things I heard from someone in our business in all of 2007, and these comments should be posted in editorial offices everywhere. <br /><br />Readers have jobs and busy lives. So our job is to present them a panorama that they would otherwise never find and observe on their own. <br /><br />If you give readers only what they think they want, they will soon go somewhere else. Those who are bewildered by that notion are not smart enough to be in this business. <br />Submitted by a Senior Editor)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Publishers Investing Millions</strong><br />Just wanted to wish you a happy holiday, and to let you know how much I enjoy reading the newsletter. Yesterday, I was reading an article in Folio about how online revenue for publishers is not yet at the mature stage where it is actually covering costs, and I wondered-are we making the same mistake some printers/publishers made a century ago? <br /><br />If you were starting a print magazine now, you wouldn't go out and buy a press and all the software and staff to run it, and you probably wouldn't start your own distribution company either. So why do most publishers create their own web site platforms, investing millions in hardware, software, programmers and IT staff? Why do they want to own the printing press?<br />Shouldn't we be able to supply content-just as we give a PDF page to the printer-to a web vendor with the expertise, capital equipment, and staff to turn it into a great web site? That would allow us to concentrate on supplying information (and selling advertising), instead of re-inventing the wheel to figure out how to get it into the form our audience wants. The vendor would bear the cost of upgrading to new technology every few years, and in return the publisher would pay ongoing fees. This would also allow a publisher to shop around to get the best price and service, since it would be in the vendor's best interest to be able to use standardized content, whether it's PDF, HTML, XML, or whatever comes next.<br /><br />I'm sure that this has been addressed by others in the industry, and it may be that the vendors aren't out there yet who can supply this service cost-efficiently and adequately. If not, I would have to guess that it will come sooner or later.<br />Submitted by a Vice President Manufacturing)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Fast Forward: Up In Smoke</strong><br />Your choice in articles has really sparked something for me of late - Thanks!<br />I love Chris Anderson's writing, and yes, text has become a way of life for me - personally and professionally. I can reach family at work, in school (hopefully not during class periods!) and we can update for critical day's activities. At work I can text my meeting Facilitator with important updates or insights without having to cross the room and whisper in his ear...<br />God love the effective use of technology - and so do I!<br />Submitted by an Industry Supplier)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Fast Forward: Up In Smoke</strong><br />Holy cow, I was thinking exactly the same thing about texting just this morning, as I have maintained a conversation over the past 2 weeks via text with my German-born friend who went home to Stuttgart for Christmas. It's good because the recipient can respond at his or her convenience, and it's much less expensive than calling too.<br /><br />I used to hate texting because I figured I could simply call someone and exchange info in seconds as opposed to texting repeatedly. But besides having flexibility as to when we can respond to each other, my friends and I have developed a shorthand vocabulary, and it is amazing how much you can get across in three lines on a cell phone.<br />I still hate seeing kids who never look up in public because they are so busy texting, but it's not the communication channel's fault--it's how people use it.<br />Submitted by a Senior Editor)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Magazine Executive Florio Dies</strong><br />Hi Bob: Such sad news. <br />I served with Steve on the MPA BOD. He was always a presence: Fun, focused and a fervent believer in his products. Last time I spent some time with him was in FL after he had his first heart attack. I had just retired from Rodale and he was contemplating the same from Conde. "So how to you spend your day? Give me your schedule?" He was so concerned that he could ever (perish the thought) be bored. <br />Hope he finds his Rest.<br />PS: of the things I'm thankful for in 2007 is the magnificent job you do in keeping the connections connected.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Publisher)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Magazine Executive Florio Dies</strong><br />Steve Florio hired me 20 years ago to represent The New Yorker in Italy even though I had never sold advertising space anywhere let alone in Italy in Italian. Now everyone speaks English here but then the Italians did not. I think he hired me because I read The New Yorker but he never would say. He was the best sales person I have ever seen and in the early days of The New Yorker when things weren't really going so well he could convince the entire staff that it was. He had weekly meetings with the sales assistants to teach them about publishing and advertising and he did it with enthusiasm.<br /><br />One day we were in the Galleria in Milano before going to a luncheon he was giving for the advertising community and he suggested going to see a Donatello sculpture which he liked in the Cathedral. I was the art major and not he so I was sure he was wrong but there it was. We were early and no matter how hard I tried to be earlier than Steve he was always there first and waiting. Promptness is the courtesy of kings and he definitely was. A perfect gentleman at all times.<br /><br />Tina Brown was quoted today about how much fun he was. When he, Lynn Heiler and I would be in the elevator leaving a call in Milano that had gone well we would have to wait to get in the elevator where we could laugh. When he hired Tina Brown then we could really laugh as the Italians were thrilled. My job was never again as much fun as when he was there.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Representative)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-57475999709244081882007-12-18T03:55:00.000-08:002007-12-18T04:05:52.196-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Paper, Printing Trends and Circ.<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4CYZ9gcD-opYsQSf-O7VswT_1P1nALlrKnHbQvr2qzrwe6jBcfqGIa5zms4vjjCiymX7WXawpRaur57GlUuwneABr6AQAqmcbWX149grt-SNocAeWZP2nKeb8X_WhElNOJJ8oZjLaXXna/s1600-h/yelling.gif"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4CYZ9gcD-opYsQSf-O7VswT_1P1nALlrKnHbQvr2qzrwe6jBcfqGIa5zms4vjjCiymX7WXawpRaur57GlUuwneABr6AQAqmcbWX149grt-SNocAeWZP2nKeb8X_WhElNOJJ8oZjLaXXna/s320/yelling.gif" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5145282922436337346" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Paper, Printing Trends and Circ. </strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /><strong> <br />Re: Long Live Paper!</strong><br />A very big yeah! From a paper dude! I once had a cartoon I saved from the Economist that showed a lumberjack ready to cut the last tree and and eviromentalist standing proclaiming it was the last tree and the lumberjack only had the vision of the "last chair". I really don't think we will witness the end of trees or paper (but it always strikes me a little funny). And I love the debate and the fact that we all have to work a little harder to ensure or future!<br />(Submitted by a Paper Person)<br /><br /><strong>Re: Long Live Paper!</strong><br />I just got around to reading this... On my iPhone. And I sell paper for a living.<br />How sad is that?<br />(Submitted by a paper Person)<br /><br /><strong> Re: Identifying the Top Trends for 2008</strong><br /><br />Bob: Say hi to Nick , . . . He has it right! It is all about the reader. It still is simple to round up the right readers and sell them to the advertisers! Give the advertisers what they really want - response. Give 'em what they want! One more thing! Taking newsstand alone out of the total circulation mix is silly. Great, let's raise newsstand prices, but still 'sell' subs at 12 issues for 12 dollars. then we can all complain about the decline in newsstand sales, and how smart the sub folks are. Let's compare the intro sub prices (forget basic rate) on some of the same titles to their newsstand prices, and track them over the last 5 -7 years, interesting.<br /><br />Oh, and by the way, how about some newsletter writers who actually worked selling ads, or circ or with full P & L responsibility. Some things are easy to criticize, but very very hard to do<br />(Submitted by a Senior Distributor)<br /><br /> <br /><strong>RE: the-future-of-newspapers-the-problem-is-in-the-newsroom-not-the-newspaper</strong><br />I guess I don't understand why "news" has to be an online medium and "information" has to be print. While there are some unique aspects to "paper technology" - emerging developments in e-paper readers and cost reductions in technology will erode this advantage over the next several years. Personally I'd like to see a tablet type portable that <br /><br />allows me to download my paper or magazine or book via wireless and where appropriate read it in a design format that approximates to the analog original. Maybe the rumored ultra-portable from Apple, supposedly making an appearance at Macworld Expo in January will give some pointers to future trends.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Re: Americans' Reading Proficiency in 'Alarming' Decline</strong><br />The article asks, What are the consequences if America becomes "a nation in which reading is a minority activity"?<br /><br />I know the answer to this question.<br /><br />Specifically, I know what happens when people stop reading novels. Now, this article was at pains to say real *reading*, serious, manly, commercial *reading* was more important to study than an earlier NEA effort that got, I guess, bogged down in literary reading which "led critics to downplay its implications."<br /><br />Novels, then, are the least of our problems: they're frills and idle pleasures, and if women want to go on reading them that's OK, but men surely don't have to, and maybe we can rework school curricula so they begin to disappear. Novels are not important.<br /><br />Excuse me, but they are. Staggeringly important if it comes right down to it. This is serious, so allow me to explain.<br /><br />Reading a novel requires entering the interior life of its characters. It's not a place any other art form can take you quite as fully, because you arrive there with the opportunity to reflect on your own life. (Movies, operating in real time, have extremely <br /><br />limited opportunities for reflection, but thanks for playing.) By reading a novel, you develop three extraordinary skills: empathy, because a character's choices will actually make sense; sympathy, because a reader can share a character's emotions; and self- <br /><br />knowledge, because the choices, circumstances, and behaviors the reader reflects on will doubtless extend his experiences, imaginary though they be, to include crucial decision about identity and self.<br /><br />Let me put it another way. Could you invade Iraq if you'd read Moby- Dick and Middlemarch? <br /><br />Not unless these books' insights into hubris and the nature of society's interdependence somehow eluded you. When reading a novel, I learn about myself and I learn about the world and I'm hard-pressed to think of any other thing that can teach so much, that can strengthen me so much. <br /><br />I admit, reading is harder than video games. It's harder because reflection is involved. (And sometimes vocabulary, and a certain generosity toward cultural oddities of other times and places.) But reflection would be one of the last bits of baggage we'd want to discard. It is what makes society possible, tolerable, even hopeful. It is what makes death endurable, too.<br /><br />So, if reading becomes a minority activity, we will have greed and useless levels of self-assurance and very little tolerance. The inner lives of others will become closed to us. That would leave us, I suppose, rather mystified by other people, and quicker still to see them as enemies. We will stop understanding each other.<br /><br />Novels look like little pleasure craft floating along in society, not a causal force. But if we could dissect the fabric of thought and belief, we would surely discover that the cultivation of imagination had a great deal to do with the advances of science, and that the cultivation of empathy had a great deal to do with every bit of political, philosophical, and social progress mankind has made.<br /><br />Literary reading is not a minor scrap of pleasure but the source of thinking that engages the self and world honestly and compassionately. Go ahead--try to think of something else that does.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Supplier)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-71998716258722331492007-12-13T19:29:00.000-08:002007-12-13T19:34:47.908-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Roy Reiman, Time's Maghound, Bad Math and Prints Future.<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIrGhkUSGMaYk2-tboBJdQf3fDR0I6OjxeTMaANnP4w5R-o4LeU5_C2l0pzVYq2srV4HB7ATlGapuPOJDL2c9sTynkq6gwUgtMq2lwWBp7w3eE9P1lKLerbpoaSPSfK-cEek4F2n-dLC_Q/s1600-h/The-Simpsons---Homer-Scream-Poster-C10284779.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIrGhkUSGMaYk2-tboBJdQf3fDR0I6OjxeTMaANnP4w5R-o4LeU5_C2l0pzVYq2srV4HB7ATlGapuPOJDL2c9sTynkq6gwUgtMq2lwWBp7w3eE9P1lKLerbpoaSPSfK-cEek4F2n-dLC_Q/s320/The-Simpsons---Homer-Scream-Poster-C10284779.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5143666863681805954" /></a><br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: On Roy Reiman, Time's Maghound, Bad Math and Prints Future. </strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /> <br /><strong>Re: The Future of Print Publishing and Paid Content </strong><br />Scott Karp's thoughtful piece on the future of publishing had a fairly straightforward central premise: since readers know that online content doesn't cost the publisher anything to distribute, they won't pay as much for online content as they will for content in print. Karp said that consumers "intuitively understand that it doesn't cost the publisher nearly as much to make the content available digitally as it did to put all of those books physically on a shelf." <br />Are manufacturing and distribution costs what make print different from online? I'd suggest that the answer is a resounding no. I think many customers pay a premium for content in print because print has intrinsic qualities that make it more valuable.<br /><br />Let's look at another guide to the relative value of print and online-the advertising revenue stream.<br /><br />There's a serious difference between the CPMs of print and online advertising. An ad that runs in a magazine or newspaper commands a much higher price per exposure than an ad on the magazine or newspaper's Web site . . . even if the ad appears in the same content in each medium.<br /><br />The cost difference is a pretty clear indication that print has higher value for an advertiser. It's hard to imagine that advertisers would pay a premium for print if they didn't recognize additional value, or that publishers wouldn't charge more for online advertising if they could.<br /><br />We could debate the relative merits of the two media for years. In fact, we have. But why print CPMs are higher than online CPMs isn't as important as the fact that they simply are.<br /><br />Karp's piece ended just when he got to the good stuff. He mentioned that the "citizen-journalists" who contribute to BostonNow prefer to be published in print rather than online-another way of saying that print offers higher value . . . which is why writers prefer to see their work in print and why marketers are willing to pay more for print advertising.<br /><br />As practitioners of the publisher's craft, we owe it to ourselves to promote the advantages of print. It's certainly in our financial interest to do so, and the intrinsic merits of different media aren't insignificant. Writers recognize the difference. Advertisers pay for the difference. Of course publishers need to embrace the Web, and of course exciting opportunities await online . . . but it's worth remembering that from the customer's perspective, the value of print (like the value of any medium) is completely unrelated to a publisher's costs.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Bad Math Among eBook Enthusiasts</strong><br />Tim O'Reilly is a very smart publisher. I'll add a different angle. Let's assume that he's wrong and that prices do fall to, and remain at, $5 a title. What publisher and author combination can make money that way? Reading hasn't reduced in volume because the prices are too high - books just aren't that expensive. If you have a current business model under which most titles don't even make back the pitiful advances that authors get, and where the cost of the actual paper is only about $1.50 a copy, then dropping the price by 60 to 80 percent is going to mean that publishers won't be able to afford to print anything that isn't going to be wildly successful. Current backlists may stay around (if the publishers have acquired the necessary rights), but forget the variety of titles coming out now. You'll be down to a handful of authors who can generate the necessary sales. Then<br />supply and demand will kick back in, because there are those massive infrastructures to feed, and prices will head back up anyway. Some individual authors might be able to self publish, but if they're getting 35 percent of $5, that's $1.75. Take out costs of design and production, and maybe they're at $1 a book if they're lucky, which is the inadequate stream of money they made from publishers - too low to support self-publishing. So $5 a copy, if really gutting the paper model, would really leave book publishing virtually dead.<br />(Submitted by a Writer)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Can Time Inc.'s Maghound Concept Work?</strong><br />This seems like an awful lot of work, with a whole bunch of folks needing to pay attention to the details, for not much convenience. If I want a magazine, I will subscribe, often for years at a time (to keep those annoying renewal notices at bay.) Who really thinks there are consumers with the time, interest, and inclination to work through a market basket of different magazines on a try-it-I-might-like-it basis? This has a funny odor to it, smelling something like the old Publisher's Clearing House stamp programs, and we all remember how that ended up. Sorry, I just don't get it. Seems very last century in the internet world!<br />(Submitted by a Director of Mfg and Dst)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Can Time Inc.'s Maghound Concept Work?</strong><br />This is overblown.. . . They've been fooling with this for years, even printed and mailed a catalog in 2004. It's just Time Inc's new age version of PDS, and is not likely to be a big hit. There's trouble in Stanford, don't you know . . .<br />(Submitted by a CEO of a Distributer) <br /><br /><strong>RE: Roy Reiman Speaks Out; Setting the Record Straight:</strong><br />Hats off to Mr. Reiman for clarifying this muddled issue. Roy Reiman is so correct regarding the significant differences between a national magazine business model and a regional magazine, particularly with regard to circulation levels. Years ago the brilliant and venerable Bill Ziff, owner of Ziff-Davis, stated a very similar thesis in a Folio article that encapsulated most, if not all, of the great truths about running a profitable magazine business, i.e., serving the reader first and foremost is the key to profitability.<br /><br />What I find particularly troubling is the obvious question that RDA avoids mentioning, i.e., If Reiman Publishing didn't make money (and make money hand-over-fist) why did RDA bother to buy it? If the Reiman business model didn't work at the time of purchase, the senior management at RDA and all of its many consultants would never have pursued the purchase particularly given RDA's own profit problems at the time. I would love to see what happens to the renowned Reiman renewal rates over the next three years and the consequent cost of replacing lost renewals due to the dissatisfaction of subscribers who were sold on the premise of no advertising and are now experiencing a magazine that is just another advertising vehicle. <br />(Submitted by a VP Circulation Marketing)<br /><br /><strong>Re: How an electronic newspaper could become profitable</strong><br />Bill Richards may know the newspaper business from a reporter's perspective, but he doesn't understand the business side. Eliminating paper by going electronic does not eliminate the need for circulation. The paper still has to be promoted and fulfilled -- and audited. Emarketing is a lot cheaper than traditional marketing, but it still has to be done.<br />(Submitted by an Unknown)<br /><br /><strong>RE: Roy Reiman Speaks Out; Setting the Record Straight:</strong><br />What a refreshing new take, people in the know directly responding in an open forum.<br /><br />Bob, I believe this is what you have strived for all these years, an open honest discussion among the leader's of the publishing industry.<br /><br />Now that the record is set straight with RDA and Mr. Reiman, here's what I want to know:<br />How much more downsizing, outsourcing and consolidation will happen in '08? <br /><br />How are today's publishers going to make a profit in '08 and beyond? <br /><br />What is being done to counteract the rising costs of paper, postage and manufacturing costs? <br /><br />What efforts are underway to increase advertising spend in print? In digital? <br /><br />Is a no-advertising model like Mr. Reiman suggests in the works? <br />Who today has a national title that could support itself without advertising revenue given the rising costs of paper and postage? <br /><br />There seems to be a big surge in outsourcing of non-core business functions (latest is production management and print buying). What are the printers doing to bring value added to the publishers without giving away the profit margins? What are the publishers doing to help their printers and paper suppliers stay in business?<br />(Submitted by a Director of MFG)<br /><br /><strong>Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: Mea Culpa on RDA, Reiman and Ripplewood.</strong><br />Bob: I thought I had seen the article before too, but figured maybe it was a slow news week. It is good to read the viewpoints of each of you in the same posting, as now. As an observer, and a subscriber to these magazines, I don't believe my core thoughts on Ripplewood's approach has changed much, but today's post certainly adds perspective. <br /><br />That you are at the 'epicenter' of a huge volume of communications regarding this business and yet retain your sanity, perspective, and optimism, is a major accomplishment, beyond the ken of most.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4891960937530668509.post-4546755382789550642007-11-04T09:33:00.000-08:002007-11-04T09:37:43.158-08:00BoSacks Readers Speak Out: This is Important"Courage is doing what you're afraid to do. There can be no courage unless you're scared." <br /> Edward Vernon Rickenbacker (American Pilot, Businessman and Aviator. 1890-1973)<br /><br /> <br /><strong>BoSacks Readers Speak Out: This is Important</strong><br />www.bosacks.com<br /> <br /> <br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />that was great! the biggest story of all is how small an organization you really need to create and deploy content today and tomorrow to what is becoming a global audience in the past, the only book that was global was the bible. today it's me in my pajamas pecking away at a keyboard with the words going around the world :)<br />these are marvelously disruptive times, with more turmoil and opportunity to come<br />(Submitted by an Industry Consultant)<br /><br /> <br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Well said Bob. At the same time, we are in the process of purchasing a new, 8 wide, 64 page press capable of producing over 3/4 of a billion impressions of print volume per year. Mark my words, it will be full in less than three years time. Granted, we will be producing more catalog volume than in years past but there is still a solid business here for the efficient few that will remain standing.<br />Submitted by a Printer)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Heavy sigh. You are right. Even worse it's our own fault.<br />A big part of the problem is that we are the media. We are very good at disseminating information. And of late we are wallowing in self pity and many of us feel compelled to write about our sorry state and publicize our problems rather than do something tangible about them. Distributing the written word is what we do best after all. <br /><br />The end result is this misery-loves-company mentality which is kind of like a circular reference that goes like this -<br /><br />Things are bad, but they are worse for other publishers so I'm in good shape. The thing that really grabs me is the response to any new ideas - nobody else (a.k.a. The other publishers who are in worse shape) are doing that so it won't work, and it's a waste of time to try. <br />I'm sick of the whining and complaining. We all need to either pick up the ball and run hard and fast with it in different directions than we have been been leisurely strolling along for decades. Or move on and do something else. Putting our energy into this Things Are Bad and Things Are Going to Get Worse message is self defeating. <br /><br />And that is a long winded way of saying you are right. I could have stopped after my first paragraph.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /> <br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />I, for one, have been encouraged by the recent articles you found on the effectiveness of magazines as part of integrated ad campaigns.<br /><br />Besides, as a writer, I need to know the various ways media companies are building their electronic outlets and rethinking their print products, and what their editors and business-side folks think about how people will digest content in the future, so that I am capable of creating content that works for their new models. <br /><br />As for the production and distribution people in our business, I certainly feel for them. But not wanting to hear reality is not going to make them more secure. People should take stock of what their best individual traits and skills are, and figure out how they can be best used, even in other industries. Besides retirement, what other choice is there?<br />(Submitted by an Editor)<br /><br /> <br /> <br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Amen, brother. You have it right on the nose. In B2B it's either adapt or become extinct. There is no other choice.<br />(Submitted by a Publisher)<br /><br /> <br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Bo, even though I work for a separator, I've also come the conclusion that ink on paper is on its way to be diesel. Steve Jobs of Apple Inc. likes to say how he comes up with ideas just by walking around and with a kid's mentality envisions something that would be really cool. Well I've come up with an idea that would surpass e-paper. Flip down screen glasses that would be remoted from your phone where you could toggle back and forth from newspapers to magazines to books then also e-mails and downloaded movies. The ear-buds would come right on the glasses(easily changed of course). We would only need to flip up the glasses to speak to a person(conductor on the train), walk or drive. Think of how much paper we would save and still not have to carry around an e-book.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Supplier)<br /><br /> <br /><strong> <br />RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Bo, this reminds me of American Idol, you are Simon and this industry is William Hung. Tell me I am good even though I suck. I thank you for giving it to us straight even though you seem to have a digital slant on some of the topics. Hey that e-paper is 5 years away!! This is a crazy market right now with mills closing and consolidating and people loosing their jobs and now paper companies are yelling Yahoo!! as they raise their pricing way too fast thus killing their future demand. I forecast over the next few months a big reduction in catalogs and mailings and you will see magazines that were on the edge closing up shop. It would be nice to contemplate retiring from this business but I am not planning on it. A wise man once told me have a few good talents to fall back on and that is exactly what I am currently cultivating. I'm not planning on going anywhere but if my number comes up I will be ready. This is a crazy industry indeed but tell me how beautiful I look again.. . .<br />(Submitted by a Major Paper Buyer)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Bob - you do a great job bringing us all the news - good or bad - those with their heads in the sand are looking for good news in the wrong places.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Consultant)<br /><br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Dude, you are on a roll! This is incredibly well-written.<br />And I love that there is no article attached -- just straight 'Bo' !<br />(Submitted by son of BoSacks)<br /><br /><strong> RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />I have heard that comment - about your negativity - from many sources over the years. Especially from vendors. Every now and then I agree with them. And I too was the head of McCall's manufacturing, before G+J hooked up the ROSIE and the rest is history. But in the end you are correct; the bad news is drowning out the good. If I find the good news, I will pass it on.<br />(Submitted by a Senior Production Director and Industry Icon)<br /><br /> <br />RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important<br />Bo - If nothing else, and this would be an understatement, you are honest and direct. You are also absolutely correct about the direction of print, or better yet, communications coming out of print these days. Silicon may actually be a bit limiting though, and bits may be more accurate and then the output determined by the end user and their comfort level or technological capabilities.<br />(Submitted by an Industry Supplier)<br /><strong><br />RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />Well said, Bob. We all get pulled down by the whirlpools of negativity and bad news, but some people can compartmentalize those feelings and still experience joy and pleasure in dealing with the "printed" word (choose your delivery medium please!). <br /><br />Sadly the reward of single-minded devotion to a salary-paying job, rather than to a philosophy or skill-set, is turning yourself into an undesirable dinosaur. No one will reward you for keeping blinders on and "doing a good job"- you need to reward yourself through intellectual curiosity and the knowledge that you will always have new things to learn and contribute. <br /><br />If depression and stress are all that accompany you in your work day, then you're doing the wrong job and need to re-invent yourself! (and develop a more well-rounded life)-someone who has <br />(Submitted an Industry Advisor)<br /><br /> <br /><br /><strong>RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: This is Very Important</strong><br />I call you I-Bo : )<br />(submitted by a Printer)BoSacks "Heard on the Web"http://www.blogger.com/profile/00778281619877859415noreply@blogger.com0