Time Out or Time In?

2419367 — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:49:00 GMT

Marketers are not always keen to discuss their difficulties in public – especially in times of an economic crisis. It was something of a surprise then that Catherine Demajo, Time Out London’s head of marketing, was in such a candid mood at a recent round table discussion hosted by community media company Chinwag.

Demajo explained that Time Out started to notice the recession biting a year and a half ago, resulting in an increasing shift in focus from the print title to the web and mobile. As the traditional print side of the business has declined, new media is increasingly being seen as a way of stabilising the business. But this strategy can only do so much.

“While new media is growing, it’s not compensating for what’s lost,” said Demajo. “As a result we’re looking more and more at integrating our media”. Another side effect of this is that Time Out has been forced to “become more flexible, open and creative.”

While Demajo admitted to feeling “some trepidation” about the months ahead, she was keen to explain that Time Out is going to “try new things” in the future. “The downturn has forced us to be more innovative, to challenge ourselves and to take more risks. We have to or we will die.”

Traditional publishers have of course been discussing how web integration can work for many years now. In the current economic climate, this is more pronounced than ever. Just this week Walter Isaacson, former managing editor of Time magazine, appeared on The Daily Show arguing that publishers made some fundamental mistakes in the early days of the web.

But, as Demajo explained, Time Out is facing some very particular isues with the recession was hitting the brand in some unique ways. Not only are people less willing to buy magazines and brands less willing to advertise, but consumers are now less willing to go out and about - the meat and veg of Time Out’s traditional content.

Demajo admitted that this will lead to major changes for Time Out, most notably in terms of editorial. “There will be a shift from content about going out and doing things to content about staying in and doing things,” said Demajo. So, for the near future at the last, expect to see more in depth coverage of the goings on in Coronation Street than the latest dinner for two deals at Claridges.

Follow the IAB on Twitter

Walking with the dinosaurs: Time Out magazine

255762 — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 11:19:00 GMT

Time Out boss Tony Elliott has joined that growing band of ranters who like to blame the BBC for all of their woes. It is 2008 and Time Out sells less than 80,000 copies and it is struggling to face the digital future. Of course it must be the BBC's fault.

Elliott might have built a global cottage business out of Time Out, but he has missed several boats in pushing the business forward to ensure its survival in a digital and freesheet world. It is in danger of going the way of dinosaurs.

The magazine now faces one of the most perilous times in its history as a magazine as its main sources of revenue, namely cover price and a rapidly deteriorating advertising market, fall away. Must be the BBC's fault.

The magazine's circulation is down to just over 76,000 copies a fall of 12.5% year on year. That's a hefty fall, but you can understand why. It is a magazine in a city of 7m plus people that very few buy. That problem will only exacerbate.

In an interview with the Guardian today Tony Elliott says "you've got a situation in two to three years where the main role that we play is online ... the question is what shape does the print magazine take?"

In two or three years? That's terribly optimistic in my view. Time Out should already be a free magazine, but with the London freesheets Thelondonpaper and London Lite on the streets and several free magazines (Sport and Shortlist) it is a tough and crowded market with little ad revenue to go around.

It seems that the thinking the magazine is doing now should have been done two years ago not looking two years down the line. Must be the BBC's fault.

Time Out should also already have a great website. It should be the first and only stop for listings in London or elsewhere in the UK. It could have owned free listings across the UK and built up a powerful website. But it hasn't and there are many other places to go and find that information. If Time Out wants to get there now it will have to hustle and muscle to do so and that will be expensive. Time Out doesn't have deep pockets, Elliott is talking about partners, but in a climate where cash is fast drying up they will be hard to find. Must be the BBC's fault.

And that brings us onto the BBC. Elliott goes on in the Guardian interview to vent about BBC Worldwide's acquisition of Lonely Planet, which hits Time Out's own travel guides. He desperately wants to see BBC Worldwide broken up to help boost his business and he tells the paper he thinks this will happen while at the same time saying "I think the BBC is fantastic".

However, the piece in the Guardian goes on to reveal that Some within the BBC believe Elliott's anger is all down to the fact that Time Out and the BBC for several years had talks about making Time Out's listings available to the corporation.

The deal never happened, which is no surprise as Elliott is very hands on and wants to keep control of his business. This can work for him, but it can also work against him as it seems to have done in failing to cut a deal with the BBC.

"BBC Worldwide were not really prepared to entertain, let's call it a joint venture, of any description. Really what they wanted, in the two or three times we talked about it seriously, was to own the business and I was not interested in selling the business. We just never got anywhere and then they went off and bought Lonely Planet, which pissed us off to say the least."

So when he calls for the BBC to be broken up it seems to me that Elliott is a sore loser with an axe to grind. He should have signed the deal when he had the chance.

I for one hope BBC Worldwide is not broken up. I think Lonely Planet was a perfectly legitimate service. It is a business that could work commercially really well for the BBC and the people who use it.

It would be great to see a brand like Time Out survive, but if it fails to innovate it has no right to do so and that is nothing to do with the BBC.

Follow me on Twitter

Search results matching tag 'Time Out'

Time Out or Time In?

Walking with the dinosaurs: Time Out magazine