Why is our subscriptions marketing so poor? Part 1
11 November 2007Audit Bureau of Circulation figures confirm that most publications have not shown much growth in paid subscriptions over the past ten years. Let’s examine the evidence, name the culprits and applaud the publishers who are leading the way
This year we carried out our usual random survey of the subscription promotions accumulated. It is clear that little has changed in subscriptions marketing. Most UK promotions are very poor — and there is no excuse.
We began surveying promotions in 1993. A year or so later BRAD began to list subscriptions as a separate entry in publications’ circulation details. The main change since then has been that more publishers carry loose insert cards and other in-magazine promotions in their magazines. But insert cards and house advertisements are nothing to do with marketing. They are rarely professionally produced and merely change the way the reader receives the magazine.
But publishers have definitely learned about collecting names and addresses. Most publishers are now sitting on huge data files — and do very little with them. Most just don’t bother to mail out subscription promotions or, if they do, they are sporadic and ineffective.
This has meant that over the years some of our most famous magazines have failed to make up lost circulation. Good Housekeeping has around 10,000 more subscriptions than it did in 1994, but has lost 76,000 newstrade readers. So overall circulation is down by an unnecessary 15 per cent.
Other big publishers send out thousands of free bulk copies when they could be selling more subscriptions. *IPC*’s Marie Claire, for example, distributes 16,667 bulk copies and sells 19,214 subscriptions. As we reported in March 2001 just before IPC was bought out, Marie Claire could easily have overtaken Cosmopolitan to become the UK’s number one in its field by selling just 70,000 subscriptions. Think what that could have done for a company sale!
Is it fear or ignorance that holds these companies back from promoting their most attractive magazines?
The result of all this inaction is that most paid-for subscriptions for consumer and business titles are showing less than expected growth. Considering the enormous advances in marketing knowledge and education since 1993, this is a puzzling state of affairs.
Selling the benefits
Most publishers are guilty of poor or non-existent marketing. There are thousands of people, for example, who rarely visit a newsagent, but would happily subscribe to a magazine if they knew what it contained. And when was the last time you saw a convincing direct mail pack or email promotion for the business publications in your marketplace? Or even a good, creative in-magazine subscription offer?
The only decent insert to be seen this year is from Drum, a provocative and addictive little magazine that is pioneering a new technique to build names through viral marketing.
Those publications with well-established subscription generating programmes, such as the Reader’s Digest, are guilty of their own personal crime. Picking up a copy of the Digest at my mother’s house, I immediately recognised the value and energy contained in its pages. But when have we ever seen a promotion telling us about the content of this great magazine? Never. Their glitzy, offer-led direct mail packs — like those from Which?, Time and Newsweek — are a camouflage that disguises the absence of creative copywriting.
Which writers among us wouldn’t jump at the chance to construct a sizzling list of editorial benefits for any of these impressive magazines?
Increasing profits
Publishers of glossy magazines with high postage and production costs feel they are in a dilemma. Why sell thousands of subscriptions when the cover price means they are unable to charge enough to make a decent profit? The answer, as laid out below, is to introduce a programme that will double or triple the revenue you receive from each subscriber. In fact, this is what the Reader’s Digest is very good at and we can learn a great deal from its methods. You can make far more money from ancillary sales than you do from subscriptions.
Selling related products to your customers is just one way to increase revenue. As we have discovered through price tests for various publishers over the years, a reader is usually prepared to pay far more than the cover price for his personally delivered copy. All you need to do is make the right offer.
The three principles of marketing
So where did it all go wrong? Why have so many publishers failed to keep up with our expanded marketing knowledge? It appears that publishers are ignoring the basic tenets of marketing and, indeed, of business, which are:
1. Talk to your prospects
2. Find out what they want
3. Produce and sell it to them
If business was as simple as that you would think that the impressive brains behind our business titles would see where the money is. But have you ever seen a controlled circulation publication run a subscription offer before launch to build some circulation revenue? Neither have I. If you are interested in making money, it seems an obvious thing to do: most publishers of free magazines understand that having 30 per cent or even 20 per cent of their readers as paid subscribers would transform the profitability of their magazine. Just choose one or more categories from your circulation list of potential readers and ask them to pay. New money doesn’t just come in from extra circulation, but also through your increased rate-base.
You can charge advertisers more for these higher-quality, responsive subscribers. Unfortunately, publishers realise this too late for effective action. Potential subscribers respond in much lower numbers after launch when there are lots of free copies around.
In part 2 of this article, I look at the key factors in subscriptions marketin success and what you need to do to achieve it.
Previous: Copywriting - using testimonials
Next: Budgets: how to plan them