Comments on: Scrapbook Magazine Circulation & CK Media

By: Claudine

Claudine — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 04:37:22 +0000

Thanks Angie for your comment. I’m still really sad to hear about Simple. I was avid subscriber for past 3 years and was just about to renew too!
Hope you are able to find a new job soon.

By: AngieLucas

AngieLucas — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:06:49 +0000

As the former managing editor of Simple Scrapbooks magazine, I’d like to briefly chime in on the circulation discussion. Circulation is a complicated business. The circulation dip from 2007 to 2008 was due to its removal from school programs. (Simple was later put back in the school programs…in fact I got a fundraising flier from my nephew the week after I heard about Simple closing.) Anyway, these programs offer magazine subscriptions for next to nothing, and they can cause a temporary uptick in circulation, but these subscribers are unlikely to renew and they bring almost no money to the titles. I can attest that, according to the last statistics I personally received, Simple’s overall subscriber numbers were slowly but steadily increasing, and newsstand sales were holding steady in a declining newsstand market. Also, one major indicator of the health of a magazine (and whether its message is resonating with readers) is the rate at which subscribers renew. Simple’s renewal rate was 38 percent, which is very strong comparatively. The demise of simple had to do with two primary things: 1) If you don’t have enough advertisers to support two scrapbook magazines, you close the smallest one, and 2) while Simple was growing, it wasn’t growing quickly enough, and bi-monthly magazines simply don’t have the ability to make dramatic or immediate financial transformations. Thanks for opportunity to contribute to this discussion.

By: Artemis

Artemis — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:57:18 +0000

Nancy
This is really interesting. I always assumed CK had stronger circulation than SBE. But I don’t live in the US and I rely on my subscriptions (I actually once bought a SBE here in Jamaica but I was very very surprised to see it in the store; I am sure it was a fluke.)
I’ve written to you about this before, but I’m sure CK’s terrible website(s) has something to do with their poor financial performance. Even after their website relaunch it was still really poor. From day one of my life as a scrapbooker I couldn’t understand how they could allow their website to be so awful, when websites are so important in this business, and where it’s not rocket science to have a decent, properly functioning website.
Anyway, keep reporting on this please; I am following it all with great interest.

By: Steph H.

Steph H. — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:18:26 +0000

“Steph, are you saying that you have information that upper management at CKMedia was paid unusually high amounts? Or did you mean that you’re just wondering?”
Noell, I’m just wondering. When the financial reports of major banks and corporations (for ex. the auto industry) have been made public, the upper mgt. and CEO’s, CFO’s etc. made huge salaries and received bonuses that were over the top. It is also what contributed to the companies needing bailout money or closing their doors. That is why I would love to see CK Media’s financial reports, to see where the money really went.

By: noell

noell — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:59:19 +0000

Steph, are you saying that you have information that upper management at CKMedia was paid unusually high amounts? Or did you mean that you’re just wondering?
Nancy, although MM has low circulation numbers, I wonder if they could still be in strong standing if their financing and managing are good. It’s been obvious for a long time that CK was not being run well as a business. I have limited experience with MM, but from what I’ve seen, MM is managed well (at least currently) and they are very professional and ethical. If a magazine runs itself in a way where it can pay its debts/people and still make some kind of a profit, I hope it can stick around, even if the circulation and advertising is low.