Subscriber Covers : The Pros & Cons

[Luxx]

Recently we've been seeing more and more magazines offering special covers available only to readers who subscribe. These covers are usually a bit more visually appealing than what is offered on the newsstand - they usually have less text and a different / less conventional photograph. For all intents and purposes they cut out a lot of what can be (at least in my opinion) annoying about magazine covers.

Example:
Harper's Bazaar - Newsstand Covers vs. Subscriber Cover



How do you feel about subscribers covers? Are they a nice perk for those who sign up or should the more aesthetically pleasing covers also be offered to newsstand buyers? Which magazines do you wish would have special covers like this, if any?



Image credit | Scan by flyme2themoon, Kate Hudson.net & Drew Barrymore Collective

 

[Luxx]

W has also begun to feature subscriber covers - though perhaps this is only for this month. I see the same amount of text so I'm a little suspicious.

Newsstand vs. Subscriber covers Feb. 08

Image Credt | W Magazine.com

 

[xPedro]

you forgot Elle UK February w/ KK

 

[BerlinRocks]

this is funny because H&B's doing a real cover for suscbribers
i.e : almost NO writings.... they are NOT doing a cover to sell the most.... they are doing a cover like an 'artwork'... they put real effort to please their suscribers....
they don't care if it will sell or not.... it is already sold....
no studio neutral shooting, too... they dare something else....

but W... they don't care, they just change the picture from the same set.... full stop.

 

[baddabling]

i think it is an interesting marketing strategy... for only subscribers to receive a particular cover. especially for a special issue or feature
but overall, it doesn't quite seem worth a magazine's while to do it every month.

 

[Annu]

I guess it kind of work - many times I like more subscriber cover, so I guess I'm then potential customer who would order magazine because better cover. But if we think multi covers too, I don't have possibles to choose cover which I like (because import magazine in magazine store and there is no many choices). And I don't know if many people buy many mags just for different covers. Those example covers are really great, I would like to see them in newsstands too.

 

[BerlinRocks]

And I don't know if many people buy many mags just for different covers.

i'm pretty sure you can find some on tfs......

 

[Annu]

^yeah, but we are heavy users
(maybe they do those different covers just for us?!)

 

[Miss Dalloway]

I was thinking aobut this,so great that you started a topic.It is interesting,and i do almost always preffer subscribers covers,specially when it comes to HB.

But to be honest,it annoys me.I think they should put effort in making ONE good cover for all,instead we often get two versions of equally bland ones.

 

[seanutbutter]

they put real effort to please their suscribers....
they don't care if it will sell or not.... it is already sold....

Exactly! They don't have to worry whether or not it is convincing enough to sell, because it already has been sold.

Harper's Bazaar is a prime example of this - the covers for the newsstands feature a portrait of a face, in order to grab someone's attention, while the subscriber's cover generally has a more detailed, expanded image.

I think this is something more magazines should make an attempt at, because sometimes I feel that subscribers don't get enough for the money they're paying. It's a nice incentive, if you will.

 

[Annu]

But to be honest,it annoys me.I think they should put effort in making ONE good cover for all,instead we often get two versions of equally bland ones.

Yeah, but what is good cover anyway? Beautiful cover with maybe less text or celeb who sell, nowadays feels that only gossips or celebs sell

 

[chanelnumber5]

I way prefer the UK HB subscribers cover, as they are practically the same but with virtually no text, so you can see the cover photo better without half the persons face being covered in writing

 

[Miss Dalloway]

Yeah, but what is good cover anyway? Beautiful cover with maybe less text or celeb who sell, nowadays feels that only gossips or celebs sell

Yes its very subjective,and sadly it is true celebs sell more.But just because its a celeb on the cover it dosent mean it has to be a bad one.
I prefer covers that have a beautiful,interesting image that catches my eye and with minimal,if no text.

 

[TomFordforGucci]

I love the idea of subscriber covers.. especially in American magazines. You usually get more bang for your buck due to the fact that they are less commercialized and have a slight touch of artistic vision, even with a celebrity on the cover.

 

[bluejeans]

the subscriber covers can afford to be a little more arty because they don't need to sell the magazine, the purchase has allready been made. newsstand covers are designed to catch the eye and sell the magazine to as many people as possible. i think this is the reason for all the text. so, for example, X person looks at a copy of ell that says '20 buys for under 20 quid' and thinks "oooh, i like spending 20 quid on things, i'll get this." if the subscriber covers sold magazines then they'd be on the newsstands.

 

[bluejeans]

in answre to the question, yes i think they're a good idea.

 

[jf813]

I wouldn't mind subscribing to magazines if they actually were delivered before they are put on the newstands.

 

[frednginger]

Hmm this is a tough subject. Most of the time I prefer subscriber covers. I recently began subscribing to HB for that reason - I got tired of seeing faces on their covers. I saw what they were offering their subscribers and I jumped at the chance of owning the alternative, more creative cover.

On the other hand, I currently subscribe to W magazine as well and I hate the new cover they came up with featuring Keira and James. I would prefer to get the newstand copy (even though just Keira by herself is not much of an improvement). So, I guess it's a give or take kinda thing with subscriber covers; sometimes I like the newstand cover and other times I prefer the subscriber one.

 

[Symetrie]

I way prefer the UK HB subscribers cover, as they are practically the same but with virtually no text, so you can see the cover photo better without half the persons face being covered in writing

I agree. HB's subscriber cover is better because of less text (a la Vogue Italia)

 

[iluvjeisa]

the subscriber covers can afford to be a little more arty because they don't need to sell the magazine, the purchase has allready been made. newsstand covers are designed to catch the eye and sell the magazine to as many people as possible. i think this is the reason for all the text. so, for example, X person looks at a copy of ell that says '20 buys for under 20 quid' and thinks "oooh, i like spending 20 quid on things, i'll get this." if the subscriber covers sold magazines then they'd be on the newsstands.

Except....if Vogue caters to people who like spending $20 on things, then perhaps they should ditch their Balenciaga ads. Errrrr....I think they're selling Vogue and Bazaar too cheap, compeating with Glamour and Cosmo, when they really shouldn't.

They should work on improving the covers of Lucky and Glamour and get the celeb-hunting low-budget consumers that way.