I know, hard to believe but true.
So lots of companies want to advertise in the magazine...
Audio Editor, Gramophone
Then cheaper price please. Where is all the money going ?
Yes, there are a lot of adverts in the December issue - it's coming up to peak season, and the manufacturers want to reach as many potential customers as possible. That's business.
On the plus side, there are more editorial pages covering more products than any other rival publication - and a 36-page supplement on top, too.
The January issue - on sale 13th December - will be our biggest of the year: and that means products tested as well as sheer size of the magazine.
The test team (largest in the business) have been working extra hard - in our dedicated reviewing rooms (unique facilities) - to get everything from vinyl accessories to style speaker packages; flatscreen TVs to valve amps, tested and served up to you all in time for Christmas.
That's 80+ products awaiting in the January issue.
Oh, and developing and running this site, of course
Group Marketing & PR Manager - Computers Unlimited;
Former Group Editor of What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision and Whathifi.com
In common with every other magazine, WHFSV would be considerably more expensive if it didn't carry all that advertising. The only British audio magazine not carrying ads runs to about 50 pages, is published bimonthly and sells for £8 an issue.
A good review is probably the best advertisement a company can get.
Look at it this way and every page contains an ad.
Why do you think Ferrari is so popular? They never advertise, they just win races (& look great & sound fantastic).
Lighten up! You're probably smart enough to use the mag's reviews as best you can, and rely on your own judgment to pick and choose !
Indeed, and there's an argument that a company whose products get good reviews doesn't need to advertise so much in a magazine, whereas one that gets poorer reviews needs ads to keep its products in front of that magazine's readers.
Which kind of knocks firmly on the head the 'reviews favouring advertisers' theory one hears so often, too...
Why does an audio magazine have to be so costly ?
What Hi Fi is the only magazine (audio, car, gadget, lads, regardless) I know that has so many ads.
I accept that Haymarket has to make money. Of course, they are not a charity.
What annoys me most is that with so many ads in between articles and now you've got ads using high density (heavy weight) paper it is a pain to flick through and navigate to your desired page.
And of course increased price of the mag despite the increase in the ads does not go down too well personally.
If everyone (manufacturer) is swarming to place ads in the mag as Andrew says, please, please, please, increase the ad fee and have less ads. I'll be nice and won't ask to lower the price of the mag as well.
Due to the circulation differences between WHFSV and the other magazines in this market, our ad rates are already much higher than those of the others, and still we have all those ads (he said, like he was apologising!).
The price of the magazine is comparable with that of most other specialist monthlies, and has as many editorial pages as any other title in its sector, if not more.
You're argument is not making sense as always, I'm afraid.
First of all, I have never mentioned that WHFSV has less editorial pages than any other magazine. I have only stated that half the magazine is filled with ads. (May be it's something YOU felt)
I hope you don't read the owners' manual and whatever technical documents that the manufacturers provide you with the same amount of attention (or lack thereof)
Your response is not making sense for the following reasons,
1. If it has as many editorial pages as any other audio title and more ads at higher rates than others, why is the price ONLY comparable and not less ? No one has answered to my question, WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING ?
2. Even if the ad rates are already much higher than others, you should be able to charge higher and have less ad pages. ARE YOU BRINGING THE ADVERTISERS INTEREST (lower rates) BEFORE READERS' (lower mag price) ?
3. What is the circulation difference between WHSFV and the other magazines in the market ?Are you implying WHSFV has more ? Then in that case, shouldn't you be able too charge less per issue since you sell more copies ?
I was merely pointing out the magazine at least the same quantity of editorial content for the money, in an attempt to answer your question. There is really no need to be offensive, although I sense that you have an axe to grind here.
Your response is not making sense for the following reasons,
If it has as many editorial pages as any other audio title and more ads
at higher rates than others, why is the price ONLY comparable and not
less ? No one has answered to my question, WHERE IS THE MONEY
Like any business, the company exists to make a profit, and of course is going to maximise the profitablity of a successful title.
But do bear in mind that larger issues of the magazine have implications for paper costs (no small matter these days), print, distribution and so on.
And WHFSV does have a much larger editorial team than other titles in this sector, has made a substantial investment in a suite of listening rooms and so on.
2. Even if the ad rates are already much higher than
others, you should be able to charge higher and have less ad pages.
ARE YOU BRINGING THE ADVERTISERS INTEREST (lower rates) BEFORE READERS'
(lower mag price) ?
Experience suggests that the size of the magazine's circulation means advertisers bite the bullet and pay more to advertise in WHFSV. If we reduced the price and sold more copies, then surely even more companies would want to advertise to that increased readership, so there would be more ads in the magazine, not less.
Your block capitals question is too bizarre a conspiracy theory to even answer - you do seem to have quite a bee in your bonnet about this one, don't you?
3. What is the circulation difference between WHSFV and the other magazines in the market ?Are
you implying WHSFV has more ? Then in that case, shouldn't you be able
too charge less per issue since you sell more copies?
No, I am not implying anything. It's a fact, which you can check on the website of the Audit Bureau of Circulation.
To save you the trouble, the most recent figures, for 2006, give WHFSV's total circulation as 61,494, Hi-Fi Choice as 11,567 and Hi-Fi News as 13,176. Home Cinema Choice was at 13,492 and What Video and High Definition TV at 16, 207. I would be remiss in my duty as a Haymarket employee if I didn't point out that this means WHFSV comfortably outsells the other four mentioned put together.
But the 'more copies lower price' argument doesn't hold water - does Ford charge less for its cars because it sells more of them than less successful mass-market manufacturers? Usually the onus is on the underdogs to offer more for less in order to gain share of the market.
Thank you Andrew.
Although I could not follow all of the logic of your response, I understood your point.
In short, WHSFV can charge less to advertisers and readers but they won't because they're in a position to rip both off and get away with it.
BTW, I did not raise a conspiracy theory. Is it something you feel you are vulnerable to ?
I just questioned which is more important to you at the end of the day, the advertisers or the readers.
The answer seems to be neither from the previous response. And that is fine now that I know.
Thank you Andrew again for your honest response.
You know, I think you knew what you wanted to understand even before you started reading my answer.
No, I didn't say that at all. Again you are applying your own agenda to my answer in order to infer things I am quite clearly not saying at all.
And no, we are not ripping anyone off - the cover price is the cover price, and no-one forces you to pay it, or indeed read the magazine if you think we are as evil as you clearly do. Or indeed use this forum, since by doing so you are presumably increasing our web traffic and thus allowing us to rip off the advertisers again.
That's a really rather silly response, suggesting someone is guilty by the mere fact they state their innocence, isn't it?
The conspiracy theory I referred to was the usual 'in the pocket of the advertisers' stuff we've heard a million times before. And yes, you did raise it, by suggesting we are serving the advertisers, not the readers.
I, Clare and several of the other staff have made it very clear there is no connection between advertising rates or spend and the editorial content and test results. Oh look, I've brought that up - perhaps that means exactly the opposite is true, huh?
Here's how it works - there is a budget for a certain number of editorial pages each month. The advertising department will tell the editor how many advertising pages they require, and which positions some of those ads require - eg so many right hand pages, so many left hand facing editorial, so many double page spreads, etc.
The production editor and editor then work out a flatplan to accommodate the editorial and advertising requirements, but clearly with a fixed number of editorial pages and an increasing demand for advertising pages, that means more single editorial pages facing adverts.
The only way round this is to increase the editorial pagination, but we simply don't have the editorial resources to create even more pages.
However, having accused us in your previous post of serving advertisers rather than readers, now you seem to be saying we are serving neither readers nor advertisers, although the success of the magazine in terms of circulation, profitability and the number of overseas licensed editions we have seems to suggest we serving both groups much better than the other titles in this market.
The simple facts are
a) the editorial department serves the readers - always has, and always will.
b) the advertising department serves the advertisers
c) matters such as cover price and advertising rates, not to mention editorial page allocations, are set at a much higher level than those of us posting on this forum. That's the same in any publishing company.
d) as evidence of our attitude to our readers, might I suggest you take a look at the time-stamp at the top of the post you are now reading. Would you be working unpaid at 12.30am on a Sunday morning to serve customers for whom you had the kind of contempt you suggest we have?
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing