Fishing Magazine Circulation Figures

[Wildfisher]

These figures are pretty shocking considering they are established magazines which are distrubuted nationally as well as internationally in some cases.

they sure are.

I very rarely buy mags these days but even when I was a kid I got disallusioned with T&S because of the amount of ads.

I now never buy them. Apart from the odd article, mainly by Bruce and the odd other, I find I am unable to relate to them. With top quality forums and sites  like this and  with free vids on youtube etc the landscape has changed. Why on earth would I want to pay good money to read tackle ads, poorly written, dull articles or  tackle reviews I can't take seriously? I was told how much these mags pay, on average, for an article. Count the time and I wonder if it's  even minimum wage?  Perhaps a rethink is required? After all the articles are the reasons why  people buy the mags.  aren't they?

My publications spending   money now goes 100% on books.  

[Malcolm]

Amazingly low figures - once costs are taken into account I'm really surprised they are breaking even.

[Wildfisher]

Malcolm, I seem to remember T+S and TF are  from the  same stable and in turn I think they are part of a larger group. If  that is so they may benefit from economies of scale and shared resources. This may also  explain why  T+S can send out professional photographs for certain articles. T+S images are far, far better than FF+FT and the magazine is vastly more professional in appearance, but having said that, imo,  their articles are more contrived and dull.

To some extent we are  a difficult audience. No magazine could ever hope to match the spontaneity or convey the unique excitement and camaraderie  that goes along with  some of our forum outings, a few last season being classic examples.  Copy to die for. That said it's not really relevant as we don't tell anyone out with our community about them anyway!     :?   Some things are far more important than commercial gain and ego.  :

[scotty9]

Surely it all simply boils down to the internet. You can almost find all information you need, any article you might enjoy reading whether official or from bloggers and forums, any picture you want to view and any number of tackle items and offers to browse. And all included in your subscription to an ISP, which you are no doubt paying regardless and therefore it is deemed to be free in a sense. Why would you bother buying a magazine which has a relatively high one off cost for a few bits of paper with aforementioned information.

They are competing against an impossible competitor I would say.

I think Fred has hit the reason that they are probably still able to keep going - owned by a larger group who can keep the magazine printed to keep up the brand image/name even although it might be running at a small loss.

EDIT: Just noticed that further down this section Andrew has posted about catch magazine. Again if you like pictures, why would you ever pay for the glossy high street mag when you have that quality at your fingertips?

[bibio1]

I don't think the model is sustainable. I must have bought every ts and ffft magazine for the past 20 years and have now kicked the habit about a year ago. The reason was easy. They are not value for money. Internet is way beyond them and they will not be able to compete with the Internet.

Their cost base is actually very low. Most articles are on a commission basis at @ £300 and yir lucky if there's 5articles.  The rest of the mag is adverts.

I occasionally flick thru them when I buy a paper then conclude they are rubbish.

Cheers

Paul

[Wildfisher]

Their cost base is actually very low. Most articles are on a commission basis at @ £300 and yir lucky if there's 5articles.  The rest of the mag is adverts.

One writer told me he was getting as little 80 quid for articles in a certain magazine.

[Wildfisher]

Surely it all simply boils down to the internet. You can almost find all information you need

For sure. Only point I'd disagree with is I believe you can find all the information you need albeit coloured by  many different onions. You take or leave what you wish from these different opinions. In a magazine you get one opinion only, that of the writer of the article, filtered first  by the editor.  And let's not forget, just because they are printed on expensive  glossy paper and you paid 3 quid + for them does not make them anything more than an opinion.

The Internet has allowed us to  become informed, critical, discerning and has released us from the tyranny of magazine editors.

It's no contest.

[Wildfisher]

Aye Andy, no cash, but think of the kudos that goes with just being here amongst all us other elitists.    :lol: