The Business of Magazines

From the Daily Mail article about the supermodels:
Naomi Campbell, though, remained a regular in British Vogue's pages and on its covers. She was the only Brit of the supermodel band and I wanted to support our homegrown talent

Although - at the time - I seem to remember Alexandra Shulman stating the magazine decided to stop using Naomi due to her chronic lateness/no-shows, because it showed disrespect to everyone trying to work with her.

After 2002, I don't think she got another UK Vogue cover until Edward arrived.
 
From the Daily Mail article about the supermodels: Although - at the time - I seem to remember Alexandra Shulman stating the magazine decided to stop using Naomi due to her chronic lateness/no-shows, because it showed disrespect to everyone trying to work with her. After 2002, I don't think she got another UK Vogue cover until Edward arrived.

''In 2002, I was waiting to interview Naomi in a suite at the George V Hotel in Paris. That was nothing new. 'Naomi is washing her hair', 'Naomi saw the wrong time on the call sheet', 'It takes a long time to get Naomi out in the morning' were just a few of the litany of excuses I was given by her long-suffering entourage as I waited.'' :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:

Source: The Daily Mail

You've gotta love Alexandra y'all for being so bitchy ahaha. I love how she writes these memories from her time as editor coz it's so graphic and I can totally picture this occasion in my head with Naomi ahahaah.
 
CNWWN will close in the end of November
This is really the end, goodbye vogue
Glad i did enjoy a little in the last years

Important Update - CNWN Closure
As you may be aware, Vogue House is due to close in early 2024, as part of an executive decision made by Condé Nast. In light of this, we are sad to announce that we also will be closing our doors permanently, both in-store and online, by the end of 2023.
We will continue to sell as normal in the meantime, with our showroom being open to the public until the end of October. Online trading will continue from this point onwards, until the end of November.
More details regarding the closure of our website will be forwarded to you soon or detailed on our website, but in the meantime, we will continue to keep you up to date on up-coming special events and promotions on our socials and emails.
Please note that Click & Collect will no longer be an option at checkout for our London based customers and will end on Friday 13th October. Please click here for the details - Click & Collect Update.
Any outstanding Click & Collect orders will need to be collected before Tuesday 31st October, 17:00 GMT. After this time, orders will be automatically refunded. If you wish for your purchase to be delivered, we will need to be notified before this time.
We are very sad to be ending our 11 year journey but, thank you to all our loyal customers for your continued support!
Please keep an eye out for any further updates.
Many thanks,
CNWN Team



Important Update - CNWN Closure
 
Rochelle Pinto is the new head of editorial content of Vogue India, following the exit of Megha Kapoor:



Chloe Malle is now editor of Vogue’s website, after Chioma Nnadi has left for Britsh Vogue as head of editorial content.
 

 

wow crazy....it can cost her position at this point...let's see
The apology was bad tbh...
 
I guess the new CEO's plan wasn't as good or as hot as he thought he would be.
It's not as if WE ALL HERE talked about it for monthssss but I guess now that they've the numbers they ''MIGHT WANT'' to do something about it but with Anna's Wintour's grip on Condé Nast I won't keep my hopes up.

Besides the new CEO kept saying that maintaining print magazines alive wasn't his main goal and to him magazines can actually be just as profitable or if not more in their digital format. Sure Roger... Sure :zany::grinningwsmilingeyes:
 

Condé Nast International Sees Profits Plummet in Fiscal 2022​

According to accounts filed at Companies House in the U.K., profits at the publisher's international division fell 41 percent in 2022 due to flat ad revenue and a series of extraordinary items, including severance pay for staff.

By SAMANTHA CONTI

OCTOBER 16, 2023, 12:18PM

LONDONRestructuring costs, disposals and Russia’s war in Ukraine dented profits at Condé Nast’s international arm in fiscal 2022, according to accounts filed at Companies House in the U.K.

The division, Condé Nast Holdings Ltd., oversees print, digital and special events. It posted a 41 percent drop in profits to 15.6 million pounds for the 12 months to Dec. 31. Turnover in the period was down 4 percent to 254.2 million pounds.

The accounts refer to Condé’s business in the U.K., Germany, France, Italy and Spain, where it publishes more than 30 editions of titles including Vogue, Vanity Fair, GQ, Architectural Digest, Wired and Condé Nast Traveller.

Condé Nast Holdings Ltd. is ultimately owned by Advance Publications Inc., which is based in New York.


The company, which describes itself as “digital first,” saw newsstand and subscription sales decline by 21 percent to 42.4 million pounds in the 12-month period, while ad revenues were broadly flat at 211.8 million pounds.

Extraordinary losses in the period totaled 3.1 million pounds compared with 13.1 million pounds in the previous period. They resulted from a number of factors including restructuring costs, which Condé said were mainly due to staff severance pay as the publisher reorganizes its editorial and commercial teams.


As reported, Condé has been consolidating editorial staff and sharing content across territories as part of a new structure.
The teams ultimately report to Anna Wintour, Condé Nast global chief content officer and Vogue editor in chief, who has solidified her dominance over the company’s editorial operations over the last few years.

Last month, Condé named Chioma Nnadi as British Vogue’s head of editorial content, taking over responsibilities from Edward Enninful, who will be assuming a new role at Condé Nast.

Unlike Enninful, Nnadi will not hold the title of editor in chief. Rather, as head of editorial content, she will look after the day-to-day running of the magazine, mirroring the setup at all of Condé Nast’s titles.

In fiscal 2022 Condé also ceased publishing in Russia following its invasion of Ukraine, and wrote off 5.1 million pounds as result. The company also divested its London-based education businesses, incurring a loss of 1.3 million pounds.
The Condé Nast College of Fashion and Design, which launched in 2013 and offered a range of courses as well as bachelor and master of arts degrees, was sold to BrandEd, a global education company.

Source: WWD

The biggest decline is in the "newsstand and subscription sales". The execs probably think people can be fooled with "shared contents" but the readers still know what is quality content and what is not, what relates to them and what is not.. but of course they're going to blame the decline to "people are not buying physical magazines anymore" reason ...
 
Last edited:
I actually wonder how much export sales really count(ed) for the various international issues of Vogue, it couldn't be that much? Can it? Maybe the endless reprints don't have anything to do with it, in that case... versus lack of relevancy/bland content in general? I don't even understand who any edition of Vogue is marketed to these days.

(Earlier this evening I realized that there are likely a handful months in my Vogue Collection that I must own practically every issue of Vogue available issue of for that month that I could get my hands on -- US, UK, Italia, Paris, Spain, Russia (RIP), Germany, Nippon (RIP)... even India and Australia, sometimes!! Imagine willingly buying some of those editions now! :rofllaughing:)
 
I actually wonder how much export sales really count(ed) for the various international issues of Vogue, it couldn't be that much? Can it? Maybe the endless reprints don't have anything to do with it, in that case... versus lack of relevancy/bland content in general? I don't even understand who any edition of Vogue is marketed to these days.

(Earlier this evening I realized that there are likely a handful months in my Vogue Collection that I must own practically every issue of Vogue available issue of for that month that I could get my hands on -- US, UK, Italia, Paris, Spain, Russia (RIP), Germany, Nippon (RIP)... even India and Australia, sometimes!! Imagine willingly buying some of those editions now! :rofllaughing:)

The export sales probably doesn't really counted that much..

But I do honestly think that even local regular reader can still know/detect whether a magazine still have a heart / point of view or just a bunch of random articles / editorials thrown in (which is the state of Vogue that still operates directly under Conde now).
 
wow a decline by 21% in print sales is a lot! I know I contributed to that by not buying their magazines anymore, where I used to buy at least 3 or 4 issues from various countries each month before. Hope it wakes them up
 
Well, they really need to make their paywall more appealing and worth it. As for Vogue World, it needs more than being a travelling trunk show and payable networking event.
 
We all buy less of the different issues of Vogue...it;s not only the shared content but as a product Vogue decreased quality as well, hope they do something about it bc generating buzz or likes it;s not gonna be enough...
 
So you’re Conde Nast, you’ve spent decades ensuring you’re one of the biggest names in print magazines. You did this by knowing your audiences and providing them with some degree of excellence.

The internet offers enormous opportunity – both for success and failure. It’s a different world where new rules apply, and Conde Nast are deluding themselves if they think anything about their time in print guarantees them an equally golden future online.

Everything on the internet has a limited lifespan – we’re not even that far into its history, and redundant social media sites are starting to pile up like layers of archaeology. If a business really wants to stick around, it would be prudent to lift their head and take a longer view of things. Waves of opportunity will always be coming towards you, but it’s important to never mistake those moments as any sort of permanence.

So your entire brand was based around print magazines. You have a heritage brand like Vogue, with decades of content to call on, unlike all those companies starting out fresh on the internet. You can reduce your product to its logo, and people immediately recognise the value of those five letters, thanks to the constant reinforcement of a million pages selling impossible dreams.

So you stand on the doorway between your past and your future… and you decide to trash your irreplaceable heritage products which have lined your pockets and brought you to this point of arrogance, a point where you think a good business decision means abandoning what sets you apart from every other hustler online.

You look at social media and believe this is the best way to target emerging consumers. You look at this landscape and see that it’s full of low-effort input where everyone allows themselves to be pushed around by whatever the current ‘mood’ is.

You tailor your output to match the landscape. You feel success is bound to come your way. You’re saving so much money because you no longer need ‘excellence’ as a value. You can repeat this year after year, because you believe you’ll never need those investments again.

But you make the mistake of thinking this landscape has any relation to real life. You ignore the mass of real-world adults in favour of teenage-level noise on the internet.

In addition, if you live by social media, you die by social media. And if you manage to escape cancellation, you won’t avoid the inevitable cycle that people quickly grow up and out of things they were once intensely attached to. Also, looming in the future as a trend, it’s possible to get sick of the internet entirely (but you’ll not hear that from anyone overly invested in it).

So when it comes to Conde Nast, will its hubris run out before its money does? Every company pays good money to corporate bullshitters who’ll tell them what they want to hear about their chances of success online, when that depends a great deal more on sheer luck.

And when your luck runs out, you’ll have no investments left, you’ve run your reputation into the ground, and you ignored your regulars in favour of people who’ll ditch you in a heartbeat…

If someone from Vogue were to write an article about succeeding in life, they would roll out all the clichés about self-worth, investing in yourself, treasuring the things that make you unique, and never lowering your standards. Time to take their own advice.
 
This is the result of Friedman and Wintour turning Vogue and other Conde titles into badly edited political pamphlets, full of reprints by talentless new ‘creatives’, mistaking digital engagement as a substitute for decades long loyal readership and arrogantly talking down to the few readers they still have left, without having the slightest credentials in doing so on those topics.
 
I'm conflicted over the news. Part of me will always and forever want print to stay, but the other half wants Condé Nast to be punished and reprimanded so hard for what the suits (and Anna Wintour) inflicted upon my beloved Vogue Paris. In all honesty, I will never EVER forgive them.
 
So you’re Conde Nast, you’ve spent decades ensuring you’re one of the biggest names in print magazines. You did this by knowing your audiences and providing them with some degree of excellence.

The internet offers enormous opportunity – both for success and failure. It’s a different world where new rules apply, and Conde Nast are deluding themselves if they think anything about their time in print guarantees them an equally golden future online.

Everything on the internet has a limited lifespan – we’re not even that far into its history, and redundant social media sites are starting to pile up like layers of archaeology. If a business really wants to stick around, it would be prudent to lift their head and take a longer view of things. Waves of opportunity will always be coming towards you, but it’s important to never mistake those moments as any sort of permanence.

So your entire brand was based around print magazines. You have a heritage brand like Vogue, with decades of content to call on, unlike all those companies starting out fresh on the internet. You can reduce your product to its logo, and people immediately recognise the value of those five letters, thanks to the constant reinforcement of a million pages selling impossible dreams.

So you stand on the doorway between your past and your future… and you decide to trash your irreplaceable heritage products which have lined your pockets and brought you to this point of arrogance, a point where you think a good business decision means abandoning what sets you apart from every other hustler online.

You look at social media and believe this is the best way to target emerging consumers. You look at this landscape and see that it’s full of low-effort input where everyone allows themselves to be pushed around by whatever the current ‘mood’ is.

You tailor your output to match the landscape. You feel success is bound to come your way. You’re saving so much money because you no longer need ‘excellence’ as a value. You can repeat this year after year, because you believe you’ll never need those investments again.

But you make the mistake of thinking this landscape has any relation to real life. You ignore the mass of real-world adults in favour of teenage-level noise on the internet.

In addition, if you live by social media, you die by social media. And if you manage to escape cancellation, you won’t avoid the inevitable cycle that people quickly grow up and out of things they were once intensely attached to. Also, looming in the future as a trend, it’s possible to get sick of the internet entirely (but you’ll not hear that from anyone overly invested in it).

So when it comes to Conde Nast, will its hubris run out before its money does? Every company pays good money to corporate bullshitters who’ll tell them what they want to hear about their chances of success online, when that depends a great deal more on sheer luck.

And when your luck runs out, you’ll have no investments left, you’ve run your reputation into the ground, and you ignored your regulars in favour of people who’ll ditch you in a heartbeat…

If someone from Vogue were to write an article about succeeding in life, they would roll out all the clichés about self-worth, investing in yourself, treasuring the things that make you unique, and never lowering your standards. Time to take their own advice.
Bloody brilliant. Condé Nast has sold their soul in order to appeal to teenagers.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,542
Messages
15,188,533
Members
86,435
Latest member
somethingswrong
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->