Publisher Westwick Farrow launches digital editions

Interesting; we did a survey of all our subscribers and the result was a loud and resounding ‘NO!’ 71% wanted to keep a subscription via paper copy and 41% said they would read online but still wanted a paper copy as well. Only 18% would prefer online only.

I still maintain going online is a decision mostly made by publishers for their benefit rather than the reader. Ask just about anyone whether they prefer, for example, a PDF manual or a paper based one, and I know the reply.

David – I would have thought an 18% preference for a digital version only was a pretty good start?!
You could have reduced print and distribution costs by 18%, given 18% of your readers EXACTLY what they wanted and saved a tree or two in the process.
Sounds like an opportunity lost for a win all round to me!

Except that printing 18% less doesn’t cut costs by 18%. The less you print, the more / edition it costs.

From my experience, they enable stronger and more valuable reader communication as notification emails have significantly higher open and click-throughs, effectively linking up your print and web assets better than your newsletter and getting eyeballs on your content.

They also greatly assist sub/circ departments with stronger renewals and cost savings associated to your traditional direct mailing renewal offers. Marketing departments have cheaper alternative to cross promote print assets and acquire print subscribers emails more successfully and again cost effectively.

From your digital side, they drive more traffic to your site, both from existing subscribers and organic search engine traffic, increasing pageviews to the website and can include IABs for more ad rev. Many other benefits as well…

Yeah, I’m biased, a supplier, but with benchmarking for all the above from real clients.

From the horse’s mouth…

We surveyed our readers of Sustainability Matters and 45% of 300+ respondents said they would prefer a digital version of the magazine. And 30% of Voice&Data readers surveyed said the same.

We are committed to give readers what they want, when they want it, and how they choose to have it delivered – thus we will offer our information resources via print and digital magazine versions, eNewsletters and content-rich industry or technology specific websites.

Some sectors are embracing digital media (websites, eNewsletters and eMags) faster than others, so our roll-out of digital magazines will reflect this, with two more (of our 10) titles planned prior to end of year.

We are also still well and truly committed to print, as many readers will continue to prefer this medium, but we are aiming to reduce our carbon footprint with this initiative, without losing quality and quantity of circulation. We will still be printing magazines for some considerable time to come, just less than we used to.

These digital magazines are fantatsic with regard to the reporting and usage statistics available, and have already delivered us a major spike in sub renewals and new subs from the first issue of each.

Geoff Hird
Publisher
Westwick-Farrow Media

I am not sure if readers would want a replication of a magazine online “digital edition” or whether the mean they would like an online resource errrmmm I think it is called a website.

I agree – I prefer a print mag over an online PDF. Now I also do not mind a website – but please dont give me a print mag literally online…

Adam, each to their own… many readers want both and some want one or the other. The research speaks for itself, check out some audited research from over 30,000 respondent of 164 different mastheads. http://www.texterity.com/survey/

Without a doubt, in my mind, the digital edition implemented with the correct strategy, to support the print and website assets, is invaluable to a print publishers overall business to broaden their channels of communication and services. Could it be you are just not part of the target audience for this medium? Cheers