A magazine recently had a sell through of 91% in a study group of newsagencies, a pretty amazing result. Many of the stores in the data group sold out. The problem is that every newsagency in the selected data group early returned the title. In fact, they early returned 37% of the inventory they received.
The sales result for the issue makes the rely return move look dumb. Most of the newsagents involved lost sales as a result. Maybe they are rich enough and don;t want the additional bottom line profit. Maybe they are not planning to sell their newsagency and therefore don;’t want every extra dollar in valuation they can achieve.
The performance of this particular title in the newsagencies studied shows that every newsagent included, without their knowledge, in the data study was clueless about early returning this title. The result is not only a failure for the businesses but a failure for the newsagency channel.
The actions of these dumb newsagents is giving one publisher good commercial reasons to look outside our channel.
Dumb early return decisions, decisions not based on good data, could be a factor in publishers more widely seeking out alternative outlets for their magazines.
Publishers talk. They share stories about how their titles are treated by newsagents. It is entirely possible that the ill-considered actions of some newsagents could hurt the whole channel.
While newsagents bleat and moan about things they cannot change, it frustrates me that they do not invest time in resolving things they can change.
I urge newsagents to review their early returns process. If you are not sure about the criteria to use, ask. Plenty of professional help is available.
We must change how we handle early returns for the future of the channel.
Footnote: While I am referring to one issue of one title here, this post could be about hundreds of magazines. I know of at least six Australian publishers with titles which have been treated as I have described.