Search results matching tag 'emap'

Goodbye Media Week, it was a comic anyway

1641923 — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:48:00 GMT

Some media owners and agency leaders would be forgiven for greeting news of Media Week’s closure with initial relief on Tuesday.

It’s never easy being watched, let alone reported on and critiqued as well. And in the current climate, where every major launch or account win is offset by a deluge of loses and people moves, it must’ve at times been plain annoying.

Yet, once the dust settles and the world keeps turning, I suspect Media Week’s attentive gaze will be missed. Working in “meedja” is never going to hold the attention of the nationals for long, and no other business mag is devoted to it.

The commercial media business has had a committed advocate in Steve Barrett, who genuinely cares about the business and the people in it. I could only admire as he repeatedly pushed media launches and wins to the front of an issue, while relegating redundancies to online or a few pars at the back. The focus was always on the positive, while acknowledging the challenges facing the market.

Media Week’s focus on bite-sized exclusive news stories (in addition to great, industry-led features) and its bitchy back page, made it a weekly 20 minute romping read, a comic to its harshest critics perhaps, but it was the media industry’s own comic nonetheless.

(Naval gazing warning ahead)

But let’s be blunt: the writing’s been on the wall for Media Week for some time. The heady circulation days of 20,000 had long past, and once the worst advertising recession in living memory took hold, drastic action was required.

The phasing out of the controlled circ model for the subscription-only one introduced this summer was initially intended for media owners (because they’re loaded right now of course) but was soon extended to encompass agencies as well.

Many questioned the move, especially when the magazine’s content was still available for free online. But these were desperate times.

The good news is that most companies did indeed see a value in the magazine and initial orders, although low, were placed. I’m reliably informed these continued to rise right up until its demise.

But it all proved too little, too late for Haymarket management, and, while I haven’t been privy to the P&L sheets, I know enough to admit they couldn’t have been pretty.

Yet Media Week becoming an online-only proposition had been muted long-before any downturn. The magazine’s own founder Tim Brooks, now steering Guardian News & Media through the choppy waters, predicted the magazine, along with most other B2B titles, would close its print offering by 2010, and that was five years ago.

His reasoning, while surprisingly candid – especially made as it was in an interview with Media Week – reflected the growing groundswell of opinion. As the possibilities of the internet began to unfold in a post dotcom-bust world, B2B publishers were well aware of the need to reposition themselves.

I remember reporting on David Hill, president and chief executive of IDG, one of the largest B2B powerhouses in the world, when he announced “we’re not magazine publishers any more” in 2002. At the time it was near-revolutionary. He preferred instead the idea of being a media content provider, regardless of vehicle.

This sentiment of diversification soon became the newly-labelled B2B media’s mantra, and to be fair Media Week embraced it with open arms. With its website, two news bulletins a day, podcast and Media Week TV, in addition to its annual Media360 conference and those coveted awards, it has set the pace for Haymarket's Brand Media's portfolio. It will be interesting to see if these brand extensions continue to prosper without the magazine.

But there has always been an elephant in the room, whose presence now looms larger than ever: online ad revenues alone do not generate enough to sustain the costs of running a substantial news desk.

I learned this lesson first hand as I watched my colleagues ebb away at Centaur’s Mad.co.uk. That had been an exciting, dynamic news wire environment that broke its fair share of exclusives – not least Bauer’s decision to buy Emap (a move which in itself seemed to symbolise the seismic shifts taking place).

But falls in recruitment ads started to take its toll. It's interesting to note that during this time Brand Republic’s own dedicated news desk was also at its strongest (& biggest), and proved a daily nuisance to all of Haymarket’s magazine brands. But that elephant just wasn’t going away, and so in the last couple of years the power at both companies has shifted back towards their stable of print brands.

This week’s announcement at Haymarket signals another step-change, and for me it makes the most sense to-date. Keep a hub of news reporters feeding into both online and magazine brands, with the emphasis in print more firmly placed on features, comments and analysis.

I’ve no doubt it’ll be messy at first, but certainly more efficient – and who knows, it might just satisfy that elephant.

There are alternative, interesting business models emerging in the sector of course, not least PaidContent and Utalkmarketing. Both are fleet of foot and relatively inexpensive, but they also rely on other peoples good old fashioned, expensive journalism upon which to draw. The Guardian is also set to unveil a new regional blogging initiative too, an innovative move that just might go some way in redressing the balance of news coverage at a local level.

But for now, spare a thought for the one that didn’t make it, just three months before turning 25. I know in the grand scheme of closures in 2009 Media Week's demise is small fry, just last week GNM announced it was scrapping its Business & Media supplement after more than 30 years and making more than 100 redundancies to boot, but its passing is indicative and will leave a void all the same.

Now Mystic Tim, if you’ll just email me next week’s lottery numbers, and I’ll get my coat.

Jeremy Clarkson a possible top earner as people vote for micropayments over subs (Emap?)

255762 — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:33:00 GMT

People have said they would be willing to pay small amounts for online content (we're talking 2p to 20p), which is very encouraging. And good news for Rupert Murdoch as Jeremy Clarkson tops the list of online columnists.

Having read this research Murdoch is no doubt on the blower to Google's Eric Schimdt (now that he has had his chat with Gordon Brown) spreading the word that people would be willing to pay for his top columnist Jeremy Clarkson.

Interestingly, while other research has suggested subscriptions are the favoured option Continental Research found that micropayments came out on top (although clearly 500 polled is not a massive sample) with 21% saying they would pay this kind of charge as opposed to only 5% saying they would be prepared to pay a monthly or yearly subscription. This could possibly be bad news for Emap with its £150 subscription charge, but i have a feeling that the difference here is that between the B2B market and the consumer. B2B is a traditional subs market with people used to paying that way (not to say that it wouldn't benefit with different payment options).

The good news doesn’t stop with Clarkson for Murdoch. Other News Corporation columnists feature heavily in the top ten, according to Continental: Giles Coren, gossip writer Gordon Smart (pay for gossip – that's a stretch) and Jane Moore also feature. I see a stack of coins behind up at Murdoch towers.

One point though: you have to ask where Continental found these people, I mean seriously this is a bag of mostly right wingers with a few honourable exceptions.

1. Jeremy Clarkson
2. Charlie Brooker*
3. Richard Littlejohn
4. Giles Coren*
5. Simon Heffer
6. Gordon Smart
7. Lorraine Kelly
8. Peter Hitchins
9. Jane Moore
10. Melanie Phillips.

What the list does help articulate though is an idea of what some form of paid content might look like. The pulling power of these big hitters could be the driving force behind a paid content package….if the amount was small enough.

Of the above I could imagine paying for only of the above, but I could easily imagine paying small sums for similar types of content in a iTunes kind of way. That kind of "content shopping" can be quite addictive (certainly in terms of music and video) and would I'm sure work for words as well.

What Continental found (and clearly this is not a surprise) is that if you raise the entry barrier higher than 2p the numbers swiftly fell away. While 35% said they definitely or probably pay 2p per article that dropped to 22% who were prepared to pay 5p; 13% and 7% prepared at 10p and 20p.

Clearly, 2p is too little (plus think of all the small plastic bank bags you would need for that stuff), but 20p is far more attractive and not unreasonable. At that point you still have 7% willing to pay and you do not need large numbers to pay to make paid content work.

What is encouraging here is that the figures chime with the research done by the blog paidContent:UK back in September. It found that 5% of people who read a news site at least once a month would pay.

Putting top columnists and other pieces of content behind a pay wall makes some sense. While Continental's research is about micropayments (possibly complex to implement) the model of restricting access to certain articles would work as easily for either a club or some other subscription package.

Follow me on Twitter

More pay walls – Emap makes its pitch/readers respond

255762 — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:42:00 GMT

There are some interesting comments cropping up on Retail Week's blog about its plan to charge readers £150 and put some online content behind a pay wall on November 13.

In the blog post Retail Week editor Tim Danaher makes his pitch to the magazine readers telling them about Emap's plans to boost its online offering with a raft of new services and explaining how this new content should only benefit subscribers.

For B2B publishers in particular this is the pitch. It is the same one that Centaur and its NMA title made this week as these titles look to protect their magazine subscriber base in a tough climate where the B2B sector has been as hard hit as any. There have been a slew of magazine closures and job losses and that pain is far from over. More magazine closures are almost guaranteed.

Haymarket Media, which owns Brand Republic, yesterday reported a 43% drop in pre-tax profits (in the year to December 31 2008).

Today United Business Media, publisher of Music Week, Travel Trade Gazette and the Publican, said it planned to reduce the number of print titles that it published as they become "complementary components of an integrated product portfolio".

"In anticipation of this market trend, we are managing our portfolio towards a smaller set of market-leading, commercially sustainable titles, each operating within an integrated product portfolio."

As for Emap and Retail week it must be nerve racking to announce all this in the same week that Rupert Murdoch revealed that his plans to introduce paid content are not on track. Questions will inevitably be raised by readers and rivals.

The comments in response to Tim Danaher's blog post are only a few in number, but I think they are indicative of the spread of opinion in the market. What is encouraging to note from Emap's perspective is that there is positive in with the negative as it asks people to pay up during a steep economic downturn.

The very first commenter seems to sum up well the issues that everyone considering such a move will no doubt be mulling. I'll bullet point:

1. I cant afford it.
2. Mr Murdoch thinking about charging is relevant, however I have an alternative to the Times website and that's the BBC which is much better.
3. He's going to read The Grocer (the rival to Retail Week) instead
4. He wishes retail week Good luck as we all do.

Clearly, Emap has already researched this and worked out that if enough of its readers will join it on its foray into paid content and pay £150. Although I wonder if it asked readers if they would switch to a rival if a charge were introduced.

Clearly, having a healthy well resourced rival that remains free could prove a major stumbling block to achieving a successful paid content strategy.

There are a few other points that Retail Week readers raised. A couple expressed interest in an "online only service if it was cheaper than the printed and digital versions combined".

This sentiment appears to echo what UBM is talking about and while the reader might what it their desire does not chime with what Emap and Centaur are trying to achieve with their desire to protect print copies and any offline ad market they have a slice of as well.

Follow me on Twitter

Murdoch stalls on the road to paid content/NMA raise pay wall

255762 — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:06:00 GMT

First it was the New York Times and now Rupert Murdoch has hinted that News Corporation may not hit its year end deadline to implement paid content.

Murdoch, who owns the Times and the Sun, Wall Street Journal and New York Post (what a great front page; great game), told reporters that he can not promise that News Corp will meet its own deadline.

"We are working all very, very hard at it but I wouldn't promise that we are going to meet that date. It's a work in progress and there is a huge amount of work going on, not just with our sites but with other people," Murdoch said in a conference with journalists.

According to the Age when he was asked about the delay Murdoch said he was "not prepared to comment on that at all". Thorny issue.

Murdoch & Co are struck by the exact same thing that has hit the New York Times execs earlier this week when executive editor, Bill Keller, admitted that the issue of charging had proved a much tougher and more complicated decision "than it seems to all the armchair experts".

This seems to indicate that executives at both News Corp and the New York Times Company are struggling to work out which system they are going to opt for in their pursuit of paid content.

The delay will validate critics who say that newspapers are going to find it very hard to successful erect pay walls and get cash from their readers who are so used to a world of free.

The news that News Corp is delaying its decision to implement a pay wall came as its first quarter results revealed a sharp fall in operating income in its newspaper business, down to $25m in the three months to September from $134m last time as advertising revenue fell in the UK 15% and at the Wall Street Journal.

All those numbers say that Murdoch is not going to turn away or balk at the paid content conundrum. He doesn't think he can with news papers losing money like that. My bet is for some kind of limited subscription model – like the Financial Times where a certain amount of articles are given away (30 a month in the case of the FT) – or a membership club, which is something being looked at with interest by a lot of media firms including the New York Times, The Times and Guardian News & Media.

What I really wouldn't expect is micropayments. Well not in the short term at least. I'm sure the first step will be a limited pay wall option that could later be extended to something more complex.

It has been a busy week in paid content all round with real stuff happening – in B2B at least. Earlier this week Emap plumped for a £150 charge and now rival Centaur has opted to put more of the content of its digital magazine NMA (already £99-a-year with a subscription) behind a pay wall.

In a statement on its website NMA says the move is part of the "title's phased strategy to introduce a range of premium content and services to add value to bundled subscriptions".

"Like all other publishers, we're experimenting with paid-for models online," said editor Justin Pearse. "While previously lead stories from the magazine were accessible for free, we’re confident this content, together with the analysis our site provides to the industry, is worth paying for."

Next up?

Follow me on Twitter

Decision time in paid content (stuff starts happening)

255762 — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:29:00 GMT

This week is officially deemed paid content week (again), but yesterday unlike most weeks things happened. The New York Times said it was struggling to decide; Emap came out and (boldly) said it's charging £150; and a VC guy said newspapers need less than 5% of customers to pay. Bonus.

Venture capitalist Dharmash Mistry, a former MD of Emap Consumer Media and Emap Performance, told MediaGuardian that national papers "need to convert less than 5% of web audience to pay model" for the whole thing to work in a move away from solely relying on advertising revenue.

Dharmash Mistry, who is now at venture capital firm Balderton Capital, said that national newspapers need to get about 3% to 4% of their online audience to pay £3 a month. That would cover the entire annual digital advertising revenue he estimated most groups currently make.

"On a like-for-like basis, if newspapers convert an order of magnitude of 3% to 4% unique users to a pay model – at roughly £3 a month or 10% of the monthly price of buying print editions daily – you could probably generate as much in revenue as is being made from total online ad revenue currently," Mistry told MediaGuardian.

Now less than 5% seems achievable doesn't it? Well, I think so, but the question is how is it achievable? What is the system that will most easily deliver you that cash? Is it micropayments, premium content areas, members clubs or subscriptions or, you know, something else entirely.

It is this issue that has the newspaper industry acting like shot putters trying to do the 110 metre hurdles.

No clearer was this illustrated than yesterday when the New York Times took it upon itself to air the internal struggle it has been having with the issue of paid content.

Bill Keller, the executive editor, said yesterday that the issue of charging had proved a much tougher and more complicated decision "than it seems to all the armchair experts".

"There is no clear consensus on the right way to go," Kellner said, but added that the paper was "within weeks of a decision".

The New York Times has been looking at this for many months and it is finding it hard to know which way to jump. Getting it wrong could be a serious setback even for one of the world's biggest newspapers.

What keeps newspaper executives awake at night is this: if you opt for one system, invest and roll it out and then find it doesn't work what do you do then? Answers in 140 characters to the usual address please.

While one former Emap director was espousing; one newspaper wringing its hands; the B2B arm of Emap dived off a cliff. This might be for Emap a bold and elegant act, worthy of an Olympic podium place, or it might well be a rash act of folly more akin to tombstoning.

This is what it has done as reported by Media Week: it will start introducing pay walls across its magazine websites, which include Drapers Record, Broadcast, Health Service Journal and Retail Week, within two weeks and will no longer giveaway online content. Wow.

First at the plate is Retail Week. It will introduce a pay wall on November 13 with others likely to follow later.

To be honest my feeling here is, and working for a rival B2B publisher I will try to be careful with my words, good luck with that one. I don't see a lot of reasons why much of its audience would pay much at all for the news driven content on its websites.

So much of what is in Retail Week, Broadcast and the others exists elsewhere on the web. And while it covers these industries well, that isn't I think anything like enough to persuade people to pay £150 of thereabouts in this climate. I could, of course, be totally wrong, but it will be interesting to watch all the same.

Follow me on Twitter

Bauer announces the end of Arena

1641923 — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:27:00 GMT

Bauer’s decision to close Arena today shuts the chapter on a 22-year-old rollercoaster ride never before seen in men’s magazines.

When Arena first hit the newsstands in the winter of 1986 the UK and its media was a very different place.

The year had started with the unveiling of ambitious plans to connect with mainland Europe via an undersea railway line called the Channel Tunnel, and had gone on to witness the marriage of Prince Andrew to one Sarah Ferguson.

There was a confident, capitalist swagger that seeped into ever part of society. Socks were fluorescent, gloves had no fingers and the likes of Madonna, Europe (Final Countdown) and Berlin (Take my Breath Away) provided the sound track.

Into this mix enters Arena, initially a quarterly magazine launched with the novel idea of targeting British males. The front cover of the launch issue featured a fresh-faced exciting young actor called Mickey Rourke.

It offered an eclectic mix of quintessential ‘male things’, including features on shaving, suits, Mike Tyson and, of course, supercars. But there was also recognition of the less obvious parts of the male-psyche – the low down on Paris, collectable art and, er, Joe Orton.

It’s easy to forget how ground-breaking it was to have a monthly lifestyle magazine specifically for men, who at the time were more concerned with hating Argentina’s cheating Diego Maradona. It was of the moment, a style magazine for men just when cash-rich British males were starting to really care about fashion, brands and lifestyle choices.

The brainchild of Nick Logan, the man behind Face magazine which had already made magazines more paletable to British males, it quickly cut a swathe through the women with big hair on the front covers of Vogue, Cosmopolitan and the like.

With no direct competitors, circulation soon soared past 60,000 and by the start of the 1990s was selling more than 90,000 copies each issue. Its rise was enough to prompt early investor Conde Nast to launch a British version of GQ in 1989, which quickly assumed top dog position.

NatMags’ Esquire also followed and while Logan didn’t know it, the magazine had already had its heyday.

Throughout the last decade, strong competition from both online and in print has seen Arena’s circulation tumble. By 2007, despite numerous redesigns and repositionings the magazine was still struggling to maintain circulation above 30,000, an important figure for any would-be advertiser.

In the last year the magazine has been further squeezed by friendly-fire, with Bauer's other monthly FHM deciding to move into its more upmarket territory too.

In February’s ABC report for the second half of 2008 Arena's circulation was up 16.4% year on year to 29,374, but the figure masked the fact only 17,000 were being actively purchased.

The writing has long been on the wall for Britain’s longest-running men’s monthly, as clear as over-sized 80s graffiti.

Bauer Buys EMAP Radio (and some magazines too)

1841938 — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:50:34 GMT

No, not Jack Bauer, he couldn't buy anything as he's in jail. H Bauer, the German media bods have bought Emap's radio and magazine arm as well as their shareholding in the Emap-C4 joint-venture Box TV (that runs all the music TV channels). The radio side was valued at £422m.

The deal's bad news for lots of people who hoped they'd be the winner. As well as a load of VC money with various people like Tim Schoonmaker and Phil Riley fronting it, Global Radio (the operators of Heart, Galaxy and LBC) are going to be a bit miffed about their loss. Global was created as an organisation that would drive consolidation and extract value from new scale. Instead they're now at risk of being sidelined and they're going to have to do a deal or they'll probably be flogged off to someone like GMG. New pants time at Bramley Road.

We're also going to have to find out what H Bauer's view is on things - from digital radio to localness, their involvement is a wild card for the radio industry. Or have they just acquired these assets to sell them on to someone else. We'll have to wait and see.

Heat Radio Launches

1841938 — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:08:11 GMT

So, i'm sitting here at Deegan Towers listening to the newly launched <a href="http://www.heatradio.co.uk">Heat Radio</a>. Well, that should probably be re-launched as a non-stop music version's been on-air for about two years. The launch at 2pm today, is the culmination of a re-jig of EMAP's multiplex network, resulting in the appearance of 'Heat Radio' in more places around the UK and at a slightly more ear-palatable bitrate, if you're interested in that sort of thing. It also has, shock horror for an EMAP digital radio station, actual live presenters.

They're also integrating tightly with the <a href="http://www.heatworld.com">Heat World</a> website and connections with Heat Magazine editorial staff. It's actually surprisingly speech heavy with 1 minute entertainment news every fifteen minutes (well, at the moment anyway) alongside interview clips and general presenter chatter.

It's as you'd expect quite girly with the music pitched as a slightly more credible Heart.

They're also doing a good job of integrating this show's only commercial sponsor - Diet Coke (Heat has just five premium sponsors across the station) in a sailing close to the programming code kind of way.

It will be interesting to see if it can keep the momentum.

Emap Disposals

1841938 — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:06:47 GMT

There's been a great deal of discussion recently about EMAP demerging its business or selling off chunks to anyone with a large enough cheque.

The nature of EMAP's business is going to make that difficult for whoever's going to cast an eye over the main consumer brands.

EMAP has led the way in producing cross-platform entities, all of which reinforce each other. Would Smash Hits Radio do (apparently) so well, if there wasn't a TV station that supported it? What happens to the support Heat magazine is giving the relaunched Heat Radio if they go their separate ways?

In an ideal world the buyer would scoop up all the branded bits together, for Kerrang this would include the magazine, website, events, TV and radio - but are the potential buyers - GCap, GMG and Global have all been mooted - really geared up to run all of those different businesses? And if they stretch their core competencies will the brands they've paid handsomely for start to lose their value.

There is also a fly in the ointment with regards the TV channels. EMAP has of course just flogged off half of the TV operation (The Hits, Smash Hits, Kerrang, The Box, Kiss, Magic, Q) to Channel 4. EMAP's had enough trouble keeping each of the platforms 'on brand' and that's when they own them all, it's going to be hugely difficult when these are all owned by separate companies.

The perfect men's magazine

255762 — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 08:30:35 GMT

With Mike Soutar announcing plans for a free men's weekly magazine there has been a lot of speculation about what kind of magazine it might be and whether it poses a serious challenge to the paid-for men's titles.

We have spent much time around Haymarket talking about it. Craig Smith wrote on his blog yesterday that given that it will be edited by "Phil Hilton, former editor of Nuts, and is expected to compete with the paid-for weeklies, expect the sort of titillation that, when I was entering that age group, could only be found on the top shelf".

The market it is targeting of 18-35 year olds suggests Smith is right. It is the same audience that Nuts and Zoo is aimed at although, if it turns out be acres of flesh with picture captions, it will be a wasted opportunity.

This is because there is an opening with the development of the men’s market to produce something better and more interesting - yes that's right, I am talking about the all-elusive intelligent men's magazine.

What is that exactly? Well, ‘Sport’ offers a glimpse into what this might be. I'm not a terrific sports fan and really have no interest in surfing, sailing, F1 or cricket for that matter, but the magazine has plenty of words with big-name interviews featuring decent pictures spread over three or four pages.

It also has plenty of decent ad pages and has attracted a variety of major brands Mazda, Dolce Gabbana, RBS, Sony Erricsson and Toyota. Today's issue for instance has a BMW cover wrap. These are not bargain basement advertisers.

It points the way for a slightly older intelligent market. We all know Nuts is read by school kids and, if it has many readers over the age of 25, then my guess is that they are mentally challenged…wait that could also describe readers of Maxim as well.

There are other magazines out there doing interesting things and still going strong. Uncut, for instance, but really it is too much about the music and geeky with it too. It always seems to be full of stuff on Bob Dylan. I own a lot of Dylan, but don't really want to read about it.

So what I am suggesting, what I think would work is geeky, but not too geeky, cool, but not too cool. Affordable and not outrageously expensive – I mean I read GQ, but really I know it is aimed at investment bankers.

A mix of music and TV and film, and yes, some sport and fitness as well, fashion, architecture and, yes, some politics and books.

It means also that you don't put some girl in her underwear on the cover every week…actually any week. Women on the front page sure, but in a relevant way. Jessica Alba promoting the Fantastic Four is not a problem (although the Silver Surfer is better – maybe pushing the geek barometer up there), but she doesn't need to be in a bikini does she?

There are other ingredients I'm sure, but what do people want to read?