This is ever so slightly off topic, but being quite interested in the magazine publishing world it’s certainly something I’d be interested to know.
Have you any idea (if such information is available to you) how big a market the casual buyer is to you? By that I mean does more of your revenue come from the repeat buyer or the casual buyer?
The very thing that appeals to me about Singletrack has always been the less bitesize articles – everything is more in-depth – and this will never lend itself to the casual market as much as the bullet-point editorial style of the competition.
I’d imagine the vast majority of casual buyers (even when faced with the louder retail version of ST) will still be drawn to the competitiors’ much louder, brash and dare I say more superficial offerings. So how much would be lost by not trying to be part of that race?
The idea of the clean cover is great, and as an LBS customer the one I buy, but understandably you feel this wouldn’t grab enough attention amongst the competition on the shelves of Tesco/WHSmith etc.
Since I became involved in such things I’ve had a particular interest in editorial design and it has always surprised me (not surprised me, more nagged me) that few magazines outside the niche worlds of fashion and design dare put out such sparse cover designs for fear of getting lost on the shelf.
It has always been something I’d love to put to the test – the theory that a sparse cover could be, in the current race for attention, the perfect way to stand out amidst the noise and action of the magazine rack.
I’d love to hear the results of a small experiment using the clean cover on a busy rack. To find out* if, on a rack full of noisy covers, a sparse leafy Singletrack cover would be totally lost or if it would work the negative space and stand out a mile.
*not enough to offer to cover the revenue losses it might bring, which I understand is the bottom line 🙂 It’s just an interesting concept.