I am off too the second day of the two-day conference in Sydney which is being held as part of Magazine Week today.
While some on the magazine publishing and distribution side are working hard to strengthen their relationships with and support for newsagents, we, all of us, are only as strong as our weakest link.
Every time magazines are oversupplied newsagents hurt, other publishers suffer and the reputation of the distributor in question is tarnished.
Every time a retail competitor of a newsagent gets a better deal, promotion of some other benefit not available to newsagents you strengthen their position and weaken that of newsagents.
Every time newsagents are under supplied you reduce the opportunity for full newsagency sales potential to be reached.
Every new title distributed without consideration of the cost of newsagent floor space, labour and inventory cost is an additional burden which other channels most likely do not have to face.
Every time a newsagent over claims on returns the entire channel suffers.
Every early return which leaves a newsagency with less floor stock than recent average sales harms the newsagency, the newsagency channel and the publisher.
The Australian newsagency channel could have a bright future in magazine sales if we lifted our professionalism, were supplied based on sales, treated fairly when it comes to returns, rewarded for our support and respected in terms of title ranging. Achieving this depends on all stakeholders having common goals. Right now, not enough of us stakeholders do.
I think we should be trying to support IPS
as they are the only player who is asking
us what we want. Increased % to 27%
is not to be sneezed at (imagine GG and Network being 27% margin and what difference that would make to your bottom
line.)
We should be demanding 27% for our retail space at least because most newsagencies are working out (fast) that our original core product, newspapers and
mags, are simply not performing well enough and the need to diversify is becoming absolutely necessary.
If the publishers want us to continue to
handle their product they are going to have
to work with the distributors to enable the
endgame (us) to lift our profitability or lose
our retail space.
I doubt that their supermarket channels will take the product that newsagents have
traditionally taken?
If change does not take place (and soon)
newsagents all over Australia will be reducing the room that they have given (and paid for) to circulation product.
I remember John Hartigan calling us dinosaurs. He may have been right?
John has now become one himself and that
should scare us all.
The additional 2% comission received from IPS is making a difference to my bottom line and the ability to manage supply is assisting with cash flow. We should be supporting the distributors that are willing to make a change after listening to our needs. If we support them other publishers and distributors will have to follow.
but why still disallow early returns? frankly, i would love to support a distributors who listens…..BUT…..looking at the terms….its actually very skewed towards IPS’s favor.
“if it smells like shit……its probably is”
Thats pretty well what kept me from signing on with IPS. If they had allowed early returns (which covers me if they turn out to be like the other two distributors in the mid to long term) I would have gone with them and given them a go. The 2% addittional commission wasn’t worth the trouble accross the limited number and volume of titles for me too.
From what was sent to me unsolicitored there were, beyond the 3 regular titles I would have sold, probably only two others that suited my demographic.
I’d have a riot in my shop if I didn’t stock the Greyhound Recorder, Trotguide, Best Bets & Winning Post.
Gary , this is why i need ips , best bets winning post , and the for sale mags and thats about it really
I just subbed those from another source.
Paul, buying from another agency does not help our system. (it’s like buying stationery from Officeworks).
We need to fix our industry or we won’t have one.
IPS have at least sat at the table with us
and discussed our issues (and theirs) and
they should be supported for trying hard
to change things
June,
I’m not going to support a supplier that sits at the table and then proceeds to present a take-it-or-leave-it contract with terms that take control out of the agents hands and while while addressing some existing problems, proceed to create an entire new set for retailers to deal with.
Accepting the contract while IPS is new and relatively small throws away one of the few advantages we have. We need to send a message now that such terms are unacceptable before they become larger, like their competitors, and less likely to listen and change.
Jarryd, I accept that the no early returns
part of the contract is unacceptable but
referring to the “good bits” I was very
pleased with the outcome of 27% and so
long as we can continue to alter (and stop)
supplies that we do not wish to have, I will
continue to support IPS.
The “no early returns” should (and it may not) not be a problem if the agent is attentive to his supplies and changes them
as they arrive.
I personally find it easier to do them as the
product comes in because as the stock goes
up the returns figure is apparent and the
sales are obvious, so it is the right time to
alter online.
It takes a bit of effort but it appears to be
working ok for me.
I still feel that agents need to support this
new initiative or we are in danger of being
perceived as nay-sayers by the publishers
and the distributors and this company appears to be trying, at least, so it would
be churlish of us to not sign because of a
perceived problem.
Jarryd, the control available on title selection and quantity supplied with IPS is negating the need for early returns in my experience. Sure it was not a perfect contract – but it was far better than what else if out there. Newsagents signing with IPS has caused behavioural change elsewhere in the channel from which newsagents are benefiting.
That said, everyone is entitled to a view.
Thought I would go and double check all
my IPS supplies. Changed 10 titles
to reflect downturn/upturn in sales e.g.
Melb cup papers down and Bride magazines
up and all were accepted except for collectables trader so I checked my sales
and found I was asking for less than what
I have sold so I have faith that this company is trying very hard – you can only
have an oversupply if the sales reflect that
and we are at liberty to change down/up
according to sales EXCEPT where their system says we are asking for less than we
can sell and that makes sense
There are many agents out there with limited space. The IPS contract forces newsagents to take X number of new titles and then subsequently forces them to keep said titles if they sell a single copy.
IPS, being a relatively small startup, is going to have a significant number of niche titles. It is not profitable, nor possible in terms of space, for me to keep titles with low sales (we generally require at least 3 copies per month), yet this is exactly what the IPS contract requires.
The contract makes the assumption that agents have plenty of spare retail space, are willing to allocate it to IPS and don’t mind carrying unprofitable titles.
Jarryd,
My experience is that regardless of what the contract says, it is fairly easy to ensure you don’t receive titles you don’t want.
Also, I refused to sign the personal guarantee and IPS did not say anything.
Dean,
As June has said – you can change yourp allocation EXCEPT where the system finds such a request to be below your sales. I certainly don’t want a magazine I sell just 1 or 2 copies of a month, yet this is what IPS as asking.
But regardless, of the any difference between the current IPS policy and their contract, newsagents should have learnt from past mistakes in signing contracts. The fact that the contract allows them to dictate certain things, regardless of whether they currently do, is very concerning to me.
i have not seen an IPS contract yet, but they still send me stock that i dont ask for or need. i went online once to try and change, but online wouldnt let me change my quantity to nil