Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

meecect

macrumors newbie
Aug 3, 2009
29
0
And Apple when then, magically, awesome, amazing, become a newspaper and magazine publisher over night? Get real.

No, Apple becomes the facilitator for every group of 3 talented people to have a product with an equal distribution power of Time Magazine without all the encumbrances of Time Magazine.

Apple (and Amazon) will be the dominant force and will be able to dictate even more terms than they can now. They are in this position because they did what the publishing industry should have done a decade ago. So just like Apple ate the lunch of the music distribution industry, and then Apple (now along with google and shortly MS) ate the lunch of the phone industry, they will eventually eat the lunch of the publishing industry. My point is that the publishing industry is so full of idiots, that they will deserve it.

Newspapers and magazines are traditionally NOT in the software development business, and they do NOT want to change that. They want an electronic platform that does not require them to change the way they work and do business.

yep, that's their problem. No vision. But you're right, this might make it easier for them, because then they can focus on content and shed all that infrastructure that weighs their industry down. But you know what that means? They have to drastically downsize their operations and be a pure content company, and I really, really doubt they are ready for that.

Just like the record industry, that now has largely had the duplication and distribution piece of their pie taken away from them, still can't grasp the fact that this means they should be SMALLER. BUt all they do is bitch and moan about growth projections falling. They need to face the music. They are now glorified banks for risky investments and marketing/publicists. THAT'S IT. No one needs them to press records anymore, or to ship them around the country on trucks.

If Apple cannot provide them this platform, Apple will be out of business and somebody else will do the job. Amazon, maybe?

the iPad could be the worst failure in the history of failures and not drive Apple out of business.

I wonder who will become the Slate provider for Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler & Co. Since Apple, prude Americans that they are, have no problem with violent computer games but die of a heart attack when they see a naked breast, won't work with them, somebody else will have to do it. And whoever it is, he/she/it will quickly become the most important Slate eMagazine platform.

Can't argue with that one, you're probably right.
 

AwakenedLands

macrumors member
Nov 4, 2009
79
1
California
apple is creating a viable marketplace for them to make lot's of money where they have never been able to make anything at, and they say "no we want the users information so we can target advertise" "so maybe we won't do this new finagled internet thing."


and they wonder why their business is dying... they would rather slowly die a certain death than to grab the life-ring floating in the water right next to them.

Is it really a salvation? Would YOU buy a subscription to a newspaper for an iPad? Do you have subscriptions to newspaper websites? I don't know ANYONE who does this. The only people I know who have subscriptions are those who buy the actual newspaper that gets delivered to the door... and the online subscription is free with it.

I don't see this really adding significant subscribers to a news agency where it will save them from their slow death. At most I see it where they have the same amount of subscribers, but now they aren't in complete control of the revenue/customer info.

If I want to read my local newspaper, I can go to their website for free. Or I can use an RSS viewer. There is NO reason for me to pay for this as an extra service.
 

snugharbor

macrumors member
Oct 17, 2007
83
0
Big Brother Marches On

I commend Apple on the privacy data but as Amazon caved on pricing Apple will cave on the privacy issue. Help EPIC!

The best you can hope for is an Opt Out policy. You ain't going to have an Opt in policy. Save this posting and in a year tell me that I was stupid and wrong.

Big brother marches on and many don't care.
 

plokoonpma

macrumors member
Mar 14, 2006
84
0
Panama, Central America
That data is private for Apple use Only, that is what reads on the terms and conditions of iTunes. They can share some numbers but thats all.
I think that News papers and magazines are asking too much. What happened to their own data, they will discard it? There is no way to apply the same formula they have used for years just by looking what books, products move faster?
They know what market those products are targeted, it is just to match everything. in my opinion they don't need apple data unless they want to save research department expense and use apple work/data for FREE.
I think is kind of dumb of them to ask Apple to share that info that could lead to several sues by customers and even the government. Apple didn't shared that info with music industry. They really think Apple will start with them now?

I dont think so...
 

SeattleMoose

macrumors 68000
Jul 17, 2009
1,960
1,670
Der Wald
Stop Living In The Past!!!

Print producers are stuck in the old paradigm. If you want to know how readers feel about your content....start a forum or blog where your fan base can provide feedback. Conduct online polls if you want to know the demographics of your readship.

Mining personal information to get feedback from your readers is "so yesterday".

You try and force Apple to divulge my info and I don't buy your product....it is that simple.:cool:
 

crash8130

macrumors member
Jun 6, 2008
36
0
First of all Devolping for the iPad will become easier as devolpers make a platform that will be easy to port the newspaper to it. Do you honestly belive that every newspaper has a webdesinger that desinged their website?

Secondly. The information they want to gather is simple. What is your income, your age, and sex. All of which they can gather when you first install the app and never doing it again. It will be anonymous. which is better imo. With magzines now they have your adress. They draw conclusions off of that. So this is a lit

I read on a blog the other day that 10% of the cost of books is printing and distirbuting. So, with that said. I have not clue on what Magzines cost to print and distribute. But, Apples revenue will be close to that. I don't think things should be cheaper because they are on this device. I think this is just another way for me consume the media. Why should I pay less?
 

JakeTheMac

macrumors regular
Jan 19, 2010
100
0
30% WOW... that's cheap

that's not very much for all the marketing will advertise the store, that pay's for taxes, credit card fee's, and storing it. The security of it as well. I never thought it was very much...
 

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
My thoughts are some smart publications will jump on early and revive themselves, and the rest will follow like little lemmings.

Sure not getting the data is a problem, but there are other ways then can gather data from their audience. So they will have to get smarter.

As for the 30%, get over it. Magazines have subscription prices that vary by 500% or more and newstand prices that are twice that, so claiming 30% of some standard middle ground pricing would hurt them is absurd.

I for one hope Apple stands their ground on the sharing of the information.
 

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
It must be hard for Steve to sit in the same room with some of these dumb asses and not hit them with chairs.

Are they stupid? They have an opportunity, through application development, to develop WAY more sensitive tracking information.

These guys have no clue. I hope Apple puts them all out of business.

Nah.

Knowing exactly how long a person views a particular page in the magazine is not nearly as useful to know how many people might have a mailing address in a particular zip code.

:)

You are right. These guys are idiots. Apple is throwing a vine to this quick-sand drowning dummies, and they want Apple to throw them some gloves so they don't get their hands dirty.

Imagine knowing which page most people stop reading your magazine on, or which page is the one that people read the most times...

Yeah no use for any of that kind of information... :)
 

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
Gold mine? Do you know how much extra cost it will take to develop content for the iPad? To add the nifty stuff like the NY Times demo showed, that's not going to come cheap. Every level of newspaper is cutting pennies here and there to just stay alive. All of this is a crapshoot since not a single iPad has been sold.

I'm heavily biased as a newspaper employee, and I can tell you that this is far from a sure thing. You're expecting people to spend $500 on an extra device to read your content, which right now costs them either 75 cents/day per single copy or FREE on a Web site.

This won't make money for the industry until the gravy train of free news is killed. The New York Times is going to be first down that road. After that, the other big boys must follow. I honestly don't expect people to spend that much extra money for the same thing.

Our publication's readership is skewed extremely old, so this stuff isn't going to help us in the long run unless we can attract new people. Are software developers going to emerge to work with the thousands of smaller papers across the country?

Maybe it is far from a sure thing for you and your paper.

However some existing publications will be smart enough to figure it out and stay alive, and a lot of new publications will crop up because the cost of entry will have been greatly reduced.

Sure if you want to rely on the old ways that have forced paper media to essentially disappear, then you and your paper will not likely make a change.

You call it a crapshoot. At this point you and your paper have no other alternatives. If this doesn't work for you you guys are going to go away anyways. Seems like it is the best bet you got going for you. So even if you feel it is a crapshoot, you really have no choice. Otherwise you will go out of business, and someone else will start up new local news organization that has none of the built in overhead of your paper and will be able to thrive publishing on media reader devices like the iPad.

Fortunately for you, and other publications, the iPad does a lot more then just display your newspaper.

Some big publications might even sell discounted ipads. Buy a two year subscription to our paper and get your iPad for $399.

There is a lot of room for newspapers and magazines to reinvent themselves. Those that just sit around and try to sell their content straight through the web are going to disappear. It is not like your newspaper needs fancy videos for every story right away. You just need to get your publication to a good format for the iPad initially based on your current layout. Then you can work on improving it and adding video and the rest. Partner up with local tv stations for additional video.

There are a lot of opportunities here, but your thinking is the thinking of most print media and is why they are all in such dire straights in 2010.
 

Peace

Cancelled
Apr 1, 2005
19,546
4,556
Space The Only Frontier
Yeah, I've seen that and all, but I don't quite get that in the context of this story about revenue models.

This story isn't just about revenue models. It's also about publishers wanting access to Apple's data about the consumer.

[edit]

The SI app that Time showed has advertising in it. The Magazine people would like Apple's data on the consumer so they can change that interactive ad to "suit the consumer".

[/edit]
 

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
Is it really a salvation? Would YOU buy a subscription to a newspaper for an iPad? Do you have subscriptions to newspaper websites? I don't know ANYONE who does this. The only people I know who have subscriptions are those who buy the actual newspaper that gets delivered to the door... and the online subscription is free with it.

I don't see this really adding significant subscribers to a news agency where it will save them from their slow death. At most I see it where they have the same amount of subscribers, but now they aren't in complete control of the revenue/customer info.

If I want to read my local newspaper, I can go to their website for free. Or I can use an RSS viewer. There is NO reason for me to pay for this as an extra service.

Those who do it right are not going to recreate the clunky inaccessiablity that are newspaper websites.

They will be able to provide a reader friendly format and layout that on a device like an iPad makes sense to read.

I will certainly be interested to go back and read a dailly paper again. I used to read multiple papers a day. I haven't read through an entire local paper in many years now, and rarely do I go to their sites for news. Reading via the web is not the way to go... and that is not want the surviving publishers will be doing with their iPad subscription.

As others noted, they have to view themselves as unique content companies and not as ink and paper marriagers.
 

subatomicsatan

macrumors newbie
Jul 13, 2008
11
0
If it's all about making the reading experience better for the consumer, why not post a questionnaire in your first issue and let your consumers decide how much info to share?
 

cured.not.dried

macrumors member
Nov 23, 2008
62
0
like a sieve

just spouting my opinion here;

i'm personally relieved that apple is refusing to share customer data with any business partners. that is one of the aspects of apple's policy that separates them from the fold.

if you buy an apple product, you won't get a bunch of junk in your inbox trying to sell you something else from somebody else.

if the subscribers choose to share their data with each publishing company, they can demarcate that preference with a link in the file itself.
 

surferfromuk

macrumors 65816
Feb 1, 2007
1,153
0
Apple should be smart enough to leverage these 'asks' as bait as this is one set of content producers they need to get locked in before everyone else comes to the pad party.
 

Tamara

macrumors newbie
Oct 31, 2005
14
0
The big city daily papers must surely all be just itching for the day when they can go to entirely digital distribution. The arguing over a bit of data mining of subscription customers will be resolved and the future will be a step closer.

The golden goose is digital distribution - and Apple and all current print media publications know it. The dailies are tantalizingly close already. All the papers are all digitally created already. The last hurdle is to get rid of the hugely expensive and time and energy consuming wad of newsprint thrown on the porch at five AM.

Apple's iPad is their toe in the waters of a new stream. - But we already know that, right?
 

nelsonx

macrumors newbie
Sep 13, 2008
6
0
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Isn't 30% excessive for a retail margin, especially if it's an online store? And why should it be the same as the app store? You'd think the cost of storing / distributing book files would be less than apps..
 

Chupa Chupa

macrumors G5
Jul 16, 2002
14,835
7,396
Gold mine? Do you know how much extra cost it will take to develop content for the iPad? To add the nifty stuff like the NY Times demo showed, that's not going to come cheap. Every level of newspaper is cutting pennies here and there to just stay alive. All of this is a crapshoot since not a single iPad has been sold.

I'm heavily biased as a newspaper employee, and I can tell you that this is far from a sure thing. You're expecting people to spend $500 on an extra device to read your content, which right now costs them either 75 cents/day per single copy or FREE on a Web site.

This won't make money for the industry until the gravy train of free news is killed. The New York Times is going to be first down that road. After that, the other big boys must follow. I honestly don't expect people to spend that much extra money for the same thing.

Our publication's readership is skewed extremely old, so this stuff isn't going to help us in the long run unless we can attract new people. Are software developers going to emerge to work with the thousands of smaller papers across the country?


I agree "gold mine" is probably overstated. It's more like Apple is tossing them a "life ring" and they are refusing b/c it's square & red and they like traditional round & white w/ blue stipes.

1) Extra $ to develop content for the iPad? I presume you mean additional content, aside from traditional print stories? How is that different than developing content for a web site? Why could web content not be transferable to the iPad version? Why would they even need content apart from the regular print version?

2) Newspapers & Mags are dying. Obviously their century old business model is no longer viable, yet they are unwilling to try someone else's model, on that model maker's general terms. Personally, I'm grateful Apple is refusing to give publishers my phone number so they can call me at the most inconvenient time to sell me something I don't want.

3) Apple legitimized paying for music downloads. They did it by giving people an easy way to do it, at reasonable price. If news is generic then newspapers are already obsolete. But there is something more satisfying about reading a paper newspaper as opposed to a newspapers web site, except that newspapers don't fit into the modern lifestyle. That is where the iPad comes in. People may or may not pay for an iPad subscription, but don't know until it's tried. Certainly nothing else is working for the newspapers. Readership is skewed "old" b/c newspapers fail to embrace modern methods of distribution that people actually use.

4) Personally, I am (was?) looking forward to be able to reconnect to newspapers and magazines w/ the iPad. From the looks of this article the industry would rather die of starvation than cry "uncle,"... or is that "Apple." If that happens so be it. I won't be shedding any tears, but I will pity the poor writers, editors, photogs, etc. that had to follow their management down to the grave like and Egyptian burial.
 

Michael CM1

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2008
5,681
276
Maybe it is far from a sure thing for you and your paper.

However some existing publications will be smart enough to figure it out and stay alive, and a lot of new publications will crop up because the cost of entry will have been greatly reduced.

Sure if you want to rely on the old ways that have forced paper media to essentially disappear, then you and your paper will not likely make a change.

You call it a crapshoot. At this point you and your paper have no other alternatives. If this doesn't work for you you guys are going to go away anyways. Seems like it is the best bet you got going for you. So even if you feel it is a crapshoot, you really have no choice. Otherwise you will go out of business, and someone else will start up new local news organization that has none of the built in overhead of your paper and will be able to thrive publishing on media reader devices like the iPad.

Fortunately for you, and other publications, the iPad does a lot more then just display your newspaper.

Some big publications might even sell discounted ipads. Buy a two year subscription to our paper and get your iPad for $399.

There is a lot of room for newspapers and magazines to reinvent themselves. Those that just sit around and try to sell their content straight through the web are going to disappear. It is not like your newspaper needs fancy videos for every story right away. You just need to get your publication to a good format for the iPad initially based on your current layout. Then you can work on improving it and adding video and the rest. Partner up with local tv stations for additional video.

There are a lot of opportunities here, but your thinking is the thinking of most print media and is why they are all in such dire straights in 2010.

OK, I think you have some good ideas, but I also don't think you know "much" about the various sectors of publishing.

First of all, most newspaper revenue comes from advertising. It has for as long as I can remember. I'm pretty sure magazines are the same way. All of a sudden, you think that's going to change? The problem on Web sites is ads aren't nearly as effective unless they're obtrusive as hell. Classifieds, another huge source of income, are a different monkey. What's sad is how most newspaper classified sections online are painfully bland. They're also just as segmented as the print variety, which is how craigslist got so popular. It may be kinda bland, but it's localized without being only localized. I had an idea for some massive online classified site back about 10 to 15 years ago, but students don't usually develop such things.

Here is the huge caveat: Who is going to buy an iPad? I probably will at some point, but thanks to a new heating system, it won't be anytime soon. This is way more of a "want" device than a "need" device for most people. People pretty much need computers and need phones. The iPad can't save any industry if it can't survive itself.

I still think a combo of PCs and smart phones will "save" print more than anything. I read a ton of a news on my phone via major news apps. Mobile Safari is the top mobile browser that hits our site, so I'm not the only one. I think the mobile problem is the utter crap browsers that were on smart phones before the iPhone. I haven't seen a BlackBerry browser worth writing home about, and I don't know much about the ones for Android and Palm phones. Get good browsers on more mobile devices and the news industry will find ways to make money.

As far as someone creating a startup, doubt it. Most people aren't dumb enough to do what we do for so little. Most of us also have good products to sell. Our damn problem started in the 1990s when geniuses started to throw it all online for free. I think the bigger companies thought the print side would be able to subsidize the Web side and there would be some smooth transition. Well, there were a lot of dumb moves. My generation has pretty much grown up expecting almost everything for free. Just check out the whining on the App Store when an app with a little usefulness costs TWO DOLLARS! The nerve! A lot of people think it's OK to steal music and videos online because they cost too much on iTunes or at the store.

I think the entire news biz is going to start playing hardball over the next five years or so. I'm hoping that the New York Times can figure out some method of subscriptions online combined with free reads of a story or two. If that happens, I then hope the big dominos start to fall with USA Today and the big metro papers. Google, Yahoo and many other sites get a lot of hits from people seeing OUR stuff. If oodles of news sites started pulling content off those sites and found one of their own, either through a Web site or application, hello gold mine.
 

Truffy

macrumors 6502a
Publishers have spent decades collecting information about subscribers that influence marketing plans and, in some cases, the content of the publication itself. Apple's policy would separate them from their most valuable asset, publishing executives said. "We must keep the relationship with our readers," says Sara Öhrvall, senior vice-president of research at Swedish publisher Bonnier . "That's the only way to make a good magazine."
Perhaps Bonnier do things different(ly), but I've noticed precious little improvement in periodicals that I've subscribed to from the personal data that they've collected from me. Which is one of the primary reasons that I've stopped subscribing. :rolleyes:
 

shakenmartini

macrumors 6502
Apr 29, 2008
432
0
OK, I think you have some good ideas, but I also don't think you know "much" about the various sectors of publishing.

First of all, most newspaper revenue comes from advertising. It has for as long as I can remember. I'm pretty sure magazines are the same way. All of a sudden, you think that's going to change? The problem on Web sites is ads aren't nearly as effective unless they're obtrusive as hell. Classifieds, another huge source of income, are a different monkey. What's sad is how most newspaper classified sections online are painfully bland. They're also just as segmented as the print variety, which is how craigslist got so popular. It may be kinda bland, but it's localized without being only localized. I had an idea for some massive online classified site back about 10 to 15 years ago, but students don't usually develop such things.

Here is the huge caveat: Who is going to buy an iPad? I probably will at some point, but thanks to a new heating system, it won't be anytime soon. This is way more of a "want" device than a "need" device for most people. People pretty much need computers and need phones. The iPad can't save any industry if it can't survive itself.

I still think a combo of PCs and smart phones will "save" print more than anything. I read a ton of a news on my phone via major news apps. Mobile Safari is the top mobile browser that hits our site, so I'm not the only one. I think the mobile problem is the utter crap browsers that were on smart phones before the iPhone. I haven't seen a BlackBerry browser worth writing home about, and I don't know much about the ones for Android and Palm phones. Get good browsers on more mobile devices and the news industry will find ways to make money.

As far as someone creating a startup, doubt it. Most people aren't dumb enough to do what we do for so little. Most of us also have good products to sell. Our damn problem started in the 1990s when geniuses started to throw it all online for free. I think the bigger companies thought the print side would be able to subsidize the Web side and there would be some smooth transition. Well, there were a lot of dumb moves. My generation has pretty much grown up expecting almost everything for free. Just check out the whining on the App Store when an app with a little usefulness costs TWO DOLLARS! The nerve! A lot of people think it's OK to steal music and videos online because they cost too much on iTunes or at the store.

I think the entire news biz is going to start playing hardball over the next five years or so. I'm hoping that the New York Times can figure out some method of subscriptions online combined with free reads of a story or two. If that happens, I then hope the big dominos start to fall with USA Today and the big metro papers. Google, Yahoo and many other sites get a lot of hits from people seeing OUR stuff. If oodles of news sites started pulling content off those sites and found one of their own, either through a Web site or application, hello gold mine.

I don't think you understand how inexpensive it is to start up a quality news organization without print and without legacy costs. Here in San Diego the local paper the Union Tribune has sucked for years. Sure enough a non-profit news org has started, voiceofsandiego.org and they have been doing hard hitting stories for many years now. Not only are they web only, but they are donation only and have a sizable staff. They also go up against the local government, while the Union Tribune is off at the beach reporting how many lovebirds went to the beach on Valentine's day (it was upper 70's on V-day).

It is seriously sad how bad the UT is compared to the small staff of the voiceofsandiego.org. VoSD even has a really good photog on staff who does really good photojournalism.

If you are an old media pub and you print your news, you need to realize you expiration date was 2003. If you don't have a new revenue stream model, you will not be in business in 5 years (and probably be out of business by 2012 for sure). This goes for he NYT, to you small town paper.

Craigslist killed your classifieds and google is sopping up the rest of the ad $. You need to figure out how to get more revenue from your consumers and how to sell advertising with your content for a premium vs. google and craigslist. This means better content, and asking your most loyal consumers to pay for it, even though some will get it for nothing, and no the "TimesSelect" model is not the answer. This also means fewer sponsors who pay more for the privilege of reaching your consumers.
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
Isn't 30% excessive for a retail margin, especially if it's an online store? And why should it be the same as the app store? You'd think the cost of storing / distributing book files would be less than apps..

It's very low. Everything in your nearest department store has at least 50% margin.
 

strawmanruss

macrumors newbie
Feb 16, 2010
3
0
I, for one, don't appreciate the idea that data must be mined from consumers to deliver better products. In our age of wifi, "the cloud" and twitter, doesn't EVERYONE have the ability to access whatever direct feedback their customers want to provide them?

I think it's demeaning to assume that someone needs to spy on me in order to deliver products and services I'm too stupid to ask for. That being said, I can't say it doesn't strike the same nerve to have things blocked from the App store for content Apple sees as inappropriate, but I think this is where competition from other content providers or digital distribution systems will prove beneficial.

Let's face it, it worked with DRM on music. It can work here too. Those publishing dinosaurs are going to have to (unfortunately) trim some fat off the company backside. It will require boldness to move forward, but when you're a dinosaur you've either gotta give up the teeth and fly away or go extinct.

I, personally, would love to pay for really good content in the same way I love to pay for really good music. I think National Geographic and Fortune are vastly interesting publications and worth the price of admission. Adding the flexibility and portability of having hundreds of magazines and books in a slick looking tablet is worth the price of admission to me. I think an open and free market for stuff can be useful, but take a look at all the junk on the internet (Craigslist being a great example) and see what a cesspool it can turn into when there is no moderation of content being provided. I don't think Apple is unjust in taking a cut of the market they're providing to publishers.

Just a few thoughts.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.