The Business of Magazines

[congacon]

I think the main reason W lost out on sales with that cover was the poor execution. Rihanna got the safest month of the year yet failed to make an impression. It was too unconventional and blurry and it didnt stand out on the newsstand. Multi covers couldnt even save Bazaar from it's slump. Those covers too were too quirky and marked Gaga's 2nd cover in one year. That's overmuch, Glenda's really insulting her reader's intelligence if she thought nobody would notice. Probably Bazaar had an even tougher year since they had Daria for Feb. If a group shot of famous models couldnt break even for Sept, just imagine how foul Daria's sales mustve been in a quiet month like Feb. Hopefully Aniston's current cover will lighten their balance sheet. They really should get rid of Glenda, but they wont as she's a yes (wo)man. She's running that magazine to the ground with her mediocre vision. Tilberis must be turning in her grave. Theoretically Vogue had a stellar year and just about broke their own records from a pc pov. Women of colour, women of different shape, a man, models etc all in one year. It's a shame that the sales apect of it was so dissapointing. Anyway, that September dud is just further proof that models just isnt profitable for US Vogue. I'm still a bit annoyed with the random inclusion of Imaam though. I found her very lacking and all the other girls booked international Vogue covers and campaigns except her.

someone/article has mentioned earlier that multi-models cover doesn't really mean that it will out perform solo cover. in fact it is quite the opposite.

if daria cover did badly, i don't think it was a smart choice for hb to have lara and kate moss later.

it's shocking that vogue sept did so poorly. i just think that girly looking models on the cover were not vogue us audience's cup of tea.

the cover was definitely more appropriate for teen vogue but not vogue us. a combo of supermodels like giselle, kate moss, lara stones and daria would have created a more appealing cover to vogue us audience.

 

[Deleted member 45369]

I honestly didn't realize that Harper's Bazaar sells so badly in comparison to Vogue, damn (164,500 vs. 359,703). Have they always been that different?

Yes. Last year Bazaar averaged 119,000 to Vogue 269,000 and circulation wise Bazaar is at 750,000 to Vogue's 1.2 million. Needless to say it hasn't been a worthy competitor to Vogue in a long time. It's still pretty profitable though, hence why Glenda is still around.

 

[Benn98]

if daria cover did badly, i don't think it was a smart choice for hb to have lara and kate moss later.

The article posted way above mentions that HB initially planned on Kim for that cover, but she cancelled and went with Vogue. Glenda was left looking for a last minute replacement. It's still weird that they went with Daria since she doesn't even work with them on a regular basis.

I'm on the fence with Lara, I don't really think she performed very well for them even though the image looked stunning. Kate Moss is generally a good seller for Bazaar, her last cover for them just about broke even.

 

[t-rex]

Vanity Fair would have been perfect for Kim. They are a culture magazine. I'm sort of surprised the VF staff had to debate it but Vogue accepted Kim.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^ Me too, she would have made much more sense for them.

This marks the worst selling September issue US Vogue has had in years!

 

[vogue28]

I'm stunned about Vogue's September issue with the models! We're always reading about the lack of models on fashion magazines yet when we're treated to a cover with models on.. no one makes a purchase therefore the issue fails to shift. You cannot blame Anna Wintour for using celebrities over and over for the sake of those sale targets!

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^ So true! And what is even more funny that even on a fashion forum like this, when there is a model/models cover its filled with complaints. There is no pleasing some people. It is not even remotely shocking that Wintour has celeb favorites, she knows her market!

 

[MON]

This makes me appreciate Wintour and her fascination with celebs. She definitely knows her market. But wow, that sales figure is a mess.

 

[Deleted member 45369]

I'm not expecting a model comeback at US Vogue but is two model covers a year too much to ask for?? I'd even settle for one commercial model cover and one high fashion model cover. Just because a lot of these girls (Daria, Caroline, Sasha, Raquel, Lara, etc) really deserve their own solo cover.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^ I so want to know how much Vodianova sold on Nov, because if her numbers are as dismal as they were for VF, then absolutely! Too much to ask for, its a business after all, and this is the times we are living in, people don't care for models. Well those outside of TFS, at least.

But still, hopefully Wintour does give at least 1 cover to a model per year, and those models you named, would all make for an epic cover.

WWD hopefully will do best & worst article, like they do usually, next year. I really wonder which celeb bombed (Apart from Rihanna on March), and how hard!

 

[Deleted member 45369]

^ I so want to know how much Vodianova sold on Nov, because if her numbers are as dismal as they were for VF, then absolutely! Too much to ask for,

Well you are forgetting that newsstand isn't everything. Vogue'a circulation is 1.2 million. That's the number they guarantee advertisers. 1 million of those are subscribers so they only need to move about 200,000 copies of any particular issue. They have enough of a cushion there to take a few risks.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^ That is true, because of so many subscribers, they most certainly can take a risk. But why take unnecessary risks when models are doing this bad at newsstands? it would put anyone off from experimenting.

 

[Benn98]

Newsstand comes first. In order to maintain or even create a subscription base, you need to recruit new readers with captivating newsstand coves/content. "Favourable' covers will expand their audience which eventually leads to an attractive subscriber figure. Healthy subscription figures does court advertisers but that's not enough. Vogue boasts with a profound authority and prestige on fashion, poor sales would tarnish that status. I personally think they should take more calculated risks when it comes to models. Kate Upton's cover apparently did ok for them because there was an angle. Apart from the pictures, they ran a detailed feature on her. The feature provided some insight into her which one couldnt get via social media. Print - 1, Web - 0. It pains me to say this but her June cover along with the shape feature in April paved the way for the Sept model cover. Unfortunately, apart from the 'Instagirls' cover shot wasnt even a feature which extended on the theme. We were forced online to look at the girls' web presence and see for ourselves why they are so famous. Why bother buying the issue then? Web - 1, Print - 0.

 

[Deleted member 45369]

^so basically treat models like celebrities? I'd rather if they used a model, make it obvious why a model was used in the first place. Give us a striking "model" cover. The type of cover that sells itself. If you put 9 models on the cover in what looks like a prom picture of course it won't sell. A cover like British Vogue's December 2008 issue in that glorious yellow Galliano is what models are made for and should be used in that way. The model shouldn't have to "sell" the magazine. They should be used for their ability to creat impactful covers. After the two lackluster cover models we got from Vogue this year. I really don't care as much weather they use models or celebs.

 

[mepps]

Idk.... All of these numbers are really bad. I think it has less to do with models vs actresses and more to do with the times were living in. I'll admit, it becoming rare for even I to buy a magazine these days and I love them. I think Grayson Carter had a blunt quote a about "nothing working on the newsstand" plain and simple.

It's been this way for years in the American market. It's not a recent phenomenon. Model covers don't sell for Vogue. American women are interested in celebs. Anna new this decades ago, when she put Madonna on the very first non model cover.

 

[Benn98]

@ A.D.C Not make them celebrities, but just give us a narrative behind the face. Their last Sept model cover had a 1 page article on every girl. That's enough. Besides, the top models of today are already becoming quasi celebrities via social media. Why not have magazines capitalize on that? We live in a different era. People want to know who is on the cover and why. Styling and setting is almost secondary, at least for Vogue. Basically what I'm saying is the styling no longer sells Vogue, faces does. Nowadays you can get certain celebrities who can 'model' edgy styling as provocative as working models, so what's the edge models have over them? This is where the branding, persona and social media profile comes in. I'm on your team here A.D.C., but unfortunately this is the sad state of affairs we're in. As with most things in life, I'm on the fence with celebrities on covers. I feel they've saturated and dumbed the industry down, and yet I can appreciate that they've democratised the fashion and made it less insular.

 

[Benn98]

It's been this way for years in the American market. It's not a recent phenomenon. Model covers don't sell for Vogue. American women are interested in celebs. Anna new this decades ago, when she put Madonna on the very first non model cover.

Trust Mepps to somehow tie Madonna into this discussion.,.....

 

[Deleted member 116957]

It's been this way for years in the American market. It's not a recent phenomenon. Model covers don't sell for Vogue. American women are interested in celebs. Anna new this decades ago, when she put Madonna on the very first non model cover.

Huh? Vogue put the occasional non-model on covers way before Madonna was around. How do you explain Cher, Goldie Hawn, Ali McGraw, Barbra Streisand, etc.? Hell, in the 1930s the actress Miriam Hopkins had a cover!

 

[Deleted member 45369]

Huh? Vogue put the occasional non-model on covers way before Madonna was around. How do you explain Cher, Goldie Hawn, Ali McGraw, Barbra Streisand, etc.? Hell, in the 1930s the actress Miriam Hopkins had a cover!

I think Madonna was the first non model Anna Wintour put on the cover as Editor of Vogue.

 

[GIVENCHYlover]

Good news guys!!

STYLE.COM IS SHUTTING DOWN ITS PRINT MAGAZINE

Style.com is ceasing production of its quarterly print magazine, Style.com/Print, which debuted in 2012 back when it was still a part of Fashion Fairchild Media. A rep for Condé Nast attributes the decision to increased traffic on the website. "Since relaunch in early September, the site continues to exceed growth expectations," the rep said in a statement over email. "To continue that momentum, we've made the decision to focus 100% of our efforts on our core digital business."

When Condé Nast sold Fairchild in August, Style.com was exempt from the sale and brought under a new leadership structure as a part of Vogue. And in September, it launched a redesign with expanded coverage.

At the time of the sale, it was not yet clear how Wintour's influence might affect the website, and it seems like her first major change has been to shutter the print side to focus online.
fashionista.com