The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

Crimson Trace · November 7, 2002, 11:17 AM

This is getting tedious, but let me give some input from an advertisers standpoint.

I don't think my views are in any way unique. Although I am definitely more thick-skinned than the average advertiser.

The reason I advertise in a book is to reach the readers of this book. There are two factors playing here: the first is the quantity of readers, the second is quality of readers.

I am paying for the service of getting my message in front of these readers. This is what's know as a "marketing controlled message". A consumer will then take this message along with all the other info they have and make some sort of informed decision.

All other information includes: editorial (non-marketing controlled info), online searches (including chatrooms) and influence of friends.

A consumer will (generally) assimilate all this info to make an informed decision.

If there is a huge disparity between the marketing message, editorial and other information, the credibility of the magazine and the advertiser are in serious jeapordy. When this happens subscription rates plummet. Ad rates are based on subscription rates, so if you don't have readers you are out of business anyway.

My point is, Rich's business in dependant on his credibility. People can see through obvious favoritism for advertisers and will stop buying the mag. If people stop buying the mag, people like will won't advertise in it. Get it?

Now there are certain magazines in every industry that people read (for whatever reason) and the understanding between reader and magazine is that they never say anything bad about any product. We've all seen these and they are easy to spot.

They have all glowing product reviews, shootouts with no loosers, poor accuracy is excused, etc...

People see this and weigh this editorial info less heavily than other info sources. (like experience or peer input)

Bottom line: Consumers are pretty sharp. Magazine that whore themselves lose readers. If circulation numbers are down, there's nobody to advertise to. And the spiral goes. But the first step is losing journalistic integrity.

My product has gotten slammed plenty of times. Its resulted in many product improvement and has helped our company. The best magazines will always give a manufacturer a chance to present their side of a bad review. Consumers generally like to hear both sides of a story.

Sorry for the long post, it seems like such a simple issue.

-Z

November 7, 2002, 11:17 AM	#30
Crimson Trace Member Join Date: August 2, 2002 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 98	This is getting tedious, but let me give some input from an advertisers standpoint. I don't think my views are in any way unique. Although I am definitely more thick-skinned than the average advertiser. The reason I advertise in a book is to reach the readers of this book. There are two factors playing here: the first is the quantity of readers, the second is quality of readers. I am paying for the service of getting my message in front of these readers. This is what's know as a "marketing controlled message". A consumer will then take this message along with all the other info they have and make some sort of informed decision. All other information includes: editorial (non-marketing controlled info), online searches (including chatrooms) and influence of friends. A consumer will (generally) assimilate all this info to make an informed decision. If there is a huge disparity between the marketing message, editorial and other information, the credibility of the magazine and the advertiser are in serious jeapordy. When this happens subscription rates plummet. Ad rates are based on subscription rates, so if you don't have readers you are out of business anyway. My point is, Rich's business in dependant on his credibility. People can see through obvious favoritism for advertisers and will stop buying the mag. If people stop buying the mag, people like will won't advertise in it. Get it? Now there are certain magazines in every industry that people read (for whatever reason) and the understanding between reader and magazine is that they never say anything bad about any product. We've all seen these and they are easy to spot. They have all glowing product reviews, shootouts with no loosers, poor accuracy is excused, etc... People see this and weigh this editorial info less heavily than other info sources. (like experience or peer input) Bottom line: Consumers are pretty sharp. Magazine that whore themselves lose readers. If circulation numbers are down, there's nobody to advertise to. And the spiral goes. But the first step is losing journalistic integrity. My product has gotten slammed plenty of times. Its resulted in many product improvement and has helped our company. The best magazines will always give a manufacturer a chance to present their side of a bad review. Consumers generally like to hear both sides of a story. Sorry for the long post, it seems like such a simple issue. -Z __________________ "Helping bad guys make informed decisions..."