Here’s what Newslink at Wynyard station in Sydney looks like from one side. The other side is the same. Basic but impressive. The transit market sure is different.
Nice magazine rack
Mark
March 21st, 2007 · 11 Comments
Category: magazines
11 responses so far ↓
1 Luke Scott // Mar 23, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Looks good. This is the ideal way for magazines to be displayed 100% full facing, however I wonder if newsLink has to support the 1000 odd titles a newsagent is required to carry from the suppliers or are they in a similar position to the supermarkets where they can pick and choose. The magazine rack looks to be only 3 teirs high, to display all newsagent titles like this would mean a bloody long shop, with a coffee break at 1/2 time to perk up the customers. Again looks good though
2 mark fletcher // Mar 23, 2007 at 8:52 PM
Good question Luke. No, they don’t. But we can reduce the titles we carry. Cut the shelf space, advise the distributors and request the dead stock cut. There are processes for this.
3 Nelson // Mar 24, 2007 at 8:17 AM
Do you people do anything but whinge & whine about being a newsagent. Perhaps the distributors could cut you off & say you were not profitable enough for them & not worth the hassle.
4 Matt // Mar 24, 2007 at 8:48 AM
the distributors would never do it. Because then they have to find new ways to strip cash out of the newsagency channel.
And find more unwilling agents to dump their stock onto.
5 mark fletcher // Mar 24, 2007 at 8:54 AM
Nelson, Let me know where you are located and I’ll arrange a few days working with a newsagent. Then you can make a more informed comment. Mark
6 Nelson // Mar 24, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Mark, I have a 30% share in a newsagency in south west sydney, sure we face problems and difficulties with distributors from time to time but nothing like you document. We are busy getting the job done at my shop and don’t have the time nor inclination to get involved in the politics. I am sure there are many newsagencies with the same outlook.
7 Matt // Mar 24, 2007 at 12:05 PM
No matter how busy you are it is still important to keep stock control in mind.
I have a busy newsagency; and I still find the time to analyse poor performing titles; and adjust as necessary.
If I didn’t do this I would find that I would be oversupplied with quantities of titles; and have to endure long shelf life magazines.
8 Nelson // Mar 24, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Matt, Sure we all need to do that and would be poor business practice no to, from my experience if you deal with these distributors / publishers in a sensible manner & have some facts they respond. Its about gaining a compromise between whats best for your best and whats best for theirs.
So many newsagents complain about the treatment by big publishers /suppliers and the contracts since dederegulation and the dilution of territories and goodwill but have no qualmsabout signing employees onto AWA and taking away their rights. I guess so many people look at things selfishly. I am only a recent entry into the newsagency industry about 9 months and I have been able to gain many changes to allocation levels particular with the new Network Services website. It is possible to do these things, sure I would like a few more changes particulary with NDD allocations but we manage and we make money.
If you don’t like get out I say.
9 mark fletcher // Mar 24, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Nelson,
I suspct you are attaching to me some complaints you ghave heard from others.
Here, I blog factually about events in my newsagency and others I have direct knowledge of.
Yes, in the main suppliers are good. However, NDD has been appalling at scale out and is responsible for a catalogue poor performing product - more than 60% of their titles are cash flow negative. They do not have a contract with us and they know that this offers them, indirectly, a form of protection against action by newsagents.
The other issue I cover is poor communication by suppliers. Newspaper publishers would have us believe it is business as usual when their actions away from newsagents paint a different picture. I hope that my words here educate newsagents about the changes facing their businesses.
On the territorial issue, I wonder how you would feel to find that $20,000 NET is removed from your business by a publisher contracting another party to handle your sub agent business. Would you consider that fair? Especially if you boght the business on the basis of no plans for such damaging and unilateral action by the publisher?
I am not fighting the deregulation per se but the execution. In many cases it is one sided and unfair against the small business. Publishers cannot expect newsagents to do just the less profitable work. It ought to be all or nothing.
mark
10 Nelson // Mar 24, 2007 at 8:33 PM
Mark, My opnions are formed but I on my own, I pay no attention to the scuttlebut of others.
I do what is best for my business & i am sure that the publishers / distributors do waht is best for theirs. It is not always I fair but such is life.
I am a Zimbabwean by birth & watched my families farm taken away from me & my brother & nephew killed in front of my own eyes as we defended our farm, i left my country behind and a 150 years of family heriatge to start a new life, so I know what pain & suffering is. So don’t lecture me on suffering.
11 mark fletcher // Mar 25, 2007 at 7:14 AM
Nelson,
No lecture intended in my comments. Sorry. The only personal to you aspect of my comment was a question about how you would feel is $20K net was taken unilaterally.
Thankfully, Australia is not Zimbabwe.
I do not engage in scuttlebutt here. Rather, I document issues and situations in to hope that newsagents make better business decisions.
The newsagency channel in this country is 150 years old and is under challenge. Change is inevitable. I hope newsagents lead themselves through rather than suffer as victims.
Mark
Leave a Comment