Are multi-covers the way of the future?

[t-rex]

I've started a thread to discuss the multiple covers of magazines (Interview's current March issue, for example, has four different actresses on their covers.) Within the past five years, these multi-covers have become extremely common in both monthlies (such as US Elle's Music, TV, and Women in Film issues) but especially those magazines that come out twice or four times a year. British magazines seem particularly fond of them.

Is this smart business for the print industry? Does providing several cover stars to pick from increase the likelihood a potential buyer will bite? Will we see multi-covers more and more, even in monthlies like Vogue? (Choose your Vogue cover - Jennifer or Angelina?!)


US Elle's November 2014 "Women in Film issue." source, paperblog.com


Another Magazine's SS16 issue had three different covers to pick from. Source: tailofwood.com

 

[A.D.C.]

I can tolerate Interview Magazine having multiple covers because they all seem to have a running theme. It's easy to tell they are for the same issue. Other magazines, however, just produce multiple ugly covers. Elle has no business making more than one cover. They need to be able to produce one solid cover first. A feat they are currently incapable of.

 

[MON]

The trend should be abandoned. Multi covers,

a. In the case where there's only 1 cover star, but multiple covers - show nothing but the indecisiveness of the publication. Get the BEST photo and stick with it.

b. In the case where there are multiple covers with different cover stars - show nothing but the desperation of the publication to boost sales because multiple cover stars denote more demographic

What's worse than a multi-cover? A multi-covered issue that's all over the place - the let's-get-a-photo-from-every-editorial kind

 

[Gary101]

Add in the fact it is so rare to get the cover you actually want especially overseas.

 

[russianelf]

From personal experience with that Another SS15 issue - I was going to skip it, because I didn't like Lea's and Rihanna's covers that were all over the place, but then accidentally saw the McQueen cover at a small store and decided to get it, because it was so captivating.

Overall, I do believe it helps sales, because different things appeal to different audiences. Also, they allow to feature different designers on covers (i.e. one cover star in Prada, another in Chanel etc.) - do magazines get revenue from that?

I'm sure multi-covers are here to stay - and I'm certainly loving it! I personally love the excitement of getting my hands on a specific cover that I need

 

[Benn98]

Personally, I hate multi covers because I either cannot get the one I want at all, or I'll have to run from Pontius to Pilatus to get it.

But with all that said, I can sort of deal with Elle's TV & Women in Hollywood editions. So the idea behind these covers was to celebrate whoever would be trending, or reached an interesting point in their careers. And because there's never only one such woman, it ultimately makes sense. Same applies to W and Interview etc. There's mostly a running theme and whether we may agree or disagree with the casting or quality of the shot is besides the point.

I think as a business tactic it could be effective because suddenly the magazine taps into a much wider demographic. Also, it gives some women a chance who would probably never book a cover on their own (see Gugu, Anette, Jessica, even though they only got the subscribers version).

The worst multi-cover concept comes from Vogue Paris....three different girls, same dress or coat, and pose! Or the same woman with different poses/by different photographers.

 

[Phuel]

My impression is they already are a part of the mainstay in fashion publications— for all the reasons MON has stated.

I’m all for multi-covers if the covers are visually strong, as well as having a distinct direction for that issue, like A.D.C. mentioned. Most of the times however, it’s just tepid shots to mimic the amateur shots of SM to get kids into their rag. And, that’s when you realize that the publication is only in it for monetary gains, and not about creativity and vision— which incidentally, are such rare traits these days with publications: The people that work there are amazingly lacking in every aspect of design-vision.

 

[squilliam]

I hate multi covers but I understand why they exist and they will probably become more prevalent. But I feel like they choose quantity over quality. Instead of one good cover they have multiple bad ones. As for wanting multiple people for the cover, I'd rather they do a group shot, put several pics on the cover, or have a fold out.

 

[kokobombon]

I think they´re trying to appeal to collectors who´d want to buy all covers. My past 15 yo comic book collector self can relate
It´s all about selling the most amount of copies (now that print business is dying) in order to be able to increase ad page value imo...
eg V´s latest issue with Gaga, you can get all 16 covers in a nice binder.