|
 Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the whole "print vs internet" debate is the emergence of new business models. Many of these are being formed out of neccessity rather than design, but whatever the reasons, the outcomes are bound to be fascinating.
One of these is book publishing; most publishers are forced to maintain high cover prices because of the mechanics of the book trade. A £15 book, for instance has to absorb costs of around £9 per copy if you take into account print, paper, the cost of production, and of course wastage/unsolds. And that is before author costs as well.
So the new business model proposed by Chris Anderson (the ex editor of Wired) will be a useful test of whether there is another way of cutting this particular cake.
Anderson is evidently considering offering two versions of his next book (eerily entitled "Free"). Readers will either be able to buy the book for the list price, or download a second version, free of course, but full of advertising.
Anyone care to wager that he earns more from the advertising model than from the hardback ?
 There is increasing speculation in the US that Business 2.0, once the bible of the New Economy is set to close. Falling ad pages - down 34% year on year - and a mistaken advertising restructure by parent company Time have led to the imminent closure of a title less than a decade old. In that time, it has been sold for over $100 million dollars, and in its heyday saw 8 figure advertising revenues.
Time restructured its advertising sales earlier this year. Consolidated under a single banner, Time Inc.'s Business and Finance Network (or Tibfin, as it is known inside the company), Time sales representatives stopped pitching the distinct appeal and audience of Business 2.0 to focus on the larger titles like Fortune.
That often turned Business 2.0 into an afterthought; big advertisers like Microsoft and Intel were offered discounts on other Time Inc. business titles if they would also buy pages in Business
2.0.
Perhaps the most notable aspect of the whole episode is that unlike the Internet boom of 2000, there is no corresponding boom in tech advertising pages - a sign that this is no longer a "New Economy".
And even more appropriately, the moves to save the magazine have been led by a group on Facebook. The editor, Josh Quittner however, isn't convinced the group will help. "I know the internet has saved some TV shows," Mr. Quittner said. "I've never heard of it saving a magazine."
And eventually it didn't. Business 2.0 closed in August 2007, and to my mind will have the epitath not of the greatest business magazine of its time, but the magazine that saved Future PLC from an ignoble end.
The Observer carries a report on teenage magazine buying patterns, with some (un)surprising conclusions. The research, conducted by web research company Tickbox.net (and therefore probably a bit skewed towards online rather than offline consumption) found that UK youngsters say the internet has affected the number of magazines they buy.
When will this news become less surprising ? When publishers start to realise that what they are seeing isn't a temporary fad, but the effects of a covergence culture. Teenagers can multitask a 31 hour day out of just 24 hours, and their prevalence for games consoles, mobile phones and the internet is driving them away from print.
Hats off then to Dennis for sticking with Monkey Magazine when other publishers simply trot out flat online versions of their print magazines. Dennis are learning huge amounts about their users, capturing data and behavioural demographics which will give them a real head start in publishing's next big battle - against highly targeted social networks.
|
