Peter Out

Masthead is finally paying lip service to our profession. First they publish a round-table discussion with three of our kind and then they launch an Ad Sales Coach blog by Peter Ebner (right).

Well I like the attention but who is Peter Ebner? Where has he worked? His first entry appears here and I hope the second one is a lot better. Cuz this sucked.

He has a mythical woman named Peter calling people trying to give away carpeting for free but she can't get past the receptionist. Receptionist?! In what year was this written? 1984?

And he makes ad sales sound like a terrible career choice, hardly the wildly fun job we all know and love.


P.S. Could Reptile be back?

Save The Starving Artists

I'm stepping out of retirement for a bonus reunion tour blog because today I received an email from a fellow reptile who had the audacity to ask me for money to help save the National Magazine Awards. Now I like editorial people as much as the next rep but they really don't like us very much so why do they come whining for money for their little prizes. This recession is hurting us not them. I don't see them having to write more words for less money but we're out there every day busting our butt only to come home with empty pockets to watch Glengarry Glen Ross on DVD yet again.

But in case you suffer from poor judgement and disagree with the wisdom of the King Cobra, here is the plea...

Maybe we ad reps are the black sheep of the industry who rarely rate a mention at the National Magazine Awards. Still, we don't let that stop us from attending and supporting the editorial people. Right?!

Kidding aside, the National Magazine Awards could use our help right now. I'm inviting the magazine reps of Canada to toss a little cash in the hat for the cause. It's tax deductible and frankly we can use the brownie points.

The goal is $1,500 and when we reach it, a 2009 National Magazine Award will be sponsored by the Magazine Advertising Representatives of Canada. I've gotten the ball rolling with the first $100 so we are already 6.7% to budget. All donations are welcome and $20 or more gets you a tax receipt. Sure commissions are down in this depression but brother, we can spare a dime, can't we?

Please email me (brian[at]keystonemedia[dot]ca) what you would like to contribute and I will pass your contact information on to the NMAF office who will follow up with you. For a running total, check my Twitter (twitter.com/bstendel).

Spread the word! It's what we're good at.

Vote with your cold heart.

The Fat Lady has sung for Reptile

When is a blog not a blog?

When the blogger has run out of steam and never gets around to actually blogging. So I guess that means this is curtains for this reptile. Really how much is there to say about the world of selling magazine ads? Even Masthead has no Ad Sales column. And Benjamin Briggs has left the building for web-land.

When I started this blog in November 2005, I had no plan or goals. And no audience of course. It was just a lark. I had no idea what I would write about but I found that even without an idea in my head, once I started, the words would unfurl magically by themselves. Not particularly well-written words but we reps aren't known for our literary talent. So I kept it up, less over time of course, because it was fun to explore this side of me. And then a small audience developed and this kept me motivated. For a while. But I'm done. For now anyways.

So Merry Christmas and Happy New Year and may all my fellow reptiles prosper big time in the year ahead.


Until further notice, thanks for reading and goodbye.

Hiss,

Reptile

Orange You Glad I'm Anonymous

It's been three wonderful months without a blog entry. For the three of you that hang on to my every word, sorry! Summer is so sweet and Toronto had a nice one (that is showing no signs of ending) that I decided to take a hiatus. And frankly, there hasn't been a whole lot to write about. It's been quiet. Could it be the calm before the recession? God I hope not. This business is tough enough thank you.

What prompted me to get back on the keyboard was a comment that I received earlier this week that got me thinking about a career move. Seems one of you believes my biting sarcasm and genial contempt makes me a candidate for a job. Yes, some hip-sounding magazine called Orange Life approached me and this is what they said:

"I'm the founder/editor of Orange Life magazine, I continue to enjoy your blog, and almost always agree with you.

I'm looking for a national director of advertising and would love to speak with you about it, or if you're totally happy where you are/not interested perhaps you know of someone amazing.

Hopefully someone as witty and insightful.

I don't just want someone to sell Orange Life, I want someone to be involved in building a company from the middle up!

We will offer a base, commission, profit sharing and ownership for the right person. I want a sales partner, someone who already gets the business.

Thank you for your time and keep writing. Please get in touch."

How cool - a job offer for an anonymous person. What do I do? I can't reveal myself as this could be a ploy to lure the Reptile out of hiding and expose me to Kryptonite. Where do I find a copy of this Orange Life to see if it's for real? Is the whole magazine really about oranges? Now I like oranges more than the next gal but I don't think I'd subscribe. Maybe it's a controlled-circulation magazine that bought a database of orange lovers from Tropicana and I'm not on it. And I have to ask - what sort of advertisers target orange lovers? I've heard of niche but this is ridiculous. But hey, maybe it is more about things that are orange and thus it could cover the triple threat of fashion, homes and food (just like Wish, but more orange). That would be a winner in my book. Orange is the new black!

So here is my plan. I'm asking you gentle readers to call or email this Susie Hutchinson at 604-628-7863 or Susieshutchinson@shinepublications.com and tell her you are interested in seeing a copy. That way when I call she won't know it's me. If any of you are willing to help, let me know with a comment (that I won't post). And if any of you are interested in this groovy sounding job opportunity, you have my blessing to go for it.

aWARds; what are they good for?...

We all know that freelance contributors are the heart of many a magazine. Yet the most talented ones earn so little relative to their contribution. Apparently they live on love. Which is why smart editors like Ken Alexander (The Walrus) and John Macfarlane (Toronto Life) make entering the National Magazine Awards many times in many categories a priority. Some magazines enter only what they consider their finest work and get few if any nominations. And some, like The Walrus and Toronto Life, enter a lot. No question they produce considerable stuff that is award-worthy, but they also have decided to allocate a sizable budget to the cause. At $85 per entry, The Walrus spent at least $4,335 this year (assuming every entry was nominated) and perhaps as much as $10,000.

Sure, writers and editors enjoy winning awards. Who doesn't?! Circulation Directors don't mind - after all, shiny seals sell subscriptions (try to say that 3 times quickly). The Magazine of the Year title is particularly coveted as the circulation wizards earn the right to place the official seal of approval right on the cover of the magazine to boost newsstand sales all year long. "Step right up and buy a magazine - you can be a winner too"!

Even we slippery advertising reps like to share the proud moment so we attend the award show and cheer on our team's nomination(s) as if we had something to do with it (hey, if there were no ads, there wouldn't be any award-winning editorial right?). And if our magazine should win something, the media kits and letters glow with pride. We let it slip on any and all sales calls and emails. We use it to support the notion that our book is "quality". This years big winner and Magazine of the Year was The Walrus and its reps wasted little time in issuing the standard propaganda -- "The like us, they really like us. Buy an ad!"

But at the end of the day, what does winning awards really do for us in the advertising trenches? Will The Walrus's big win send its ad sales soaring? Unlikely based on what we have seen in the past. For example:

• Toro was one of the top winners yet again. Remember Toro?
• Saturday Night was the winningest magazine of all time. Remember Saturday Night?
• Explore is always big winner. But are they making money?
  
• Maisonneuve was Magazine of the Year in 2005. Great little magazine.
  

Still, it's always nice to be a winner!

So Many Conferences, So Little Time

I'm not going to say I understand what is going on with the dueling magazine conferences that are scheduled to run back-to-back this June but I am going to to say that I've been receiving far too much email from these two organizations. I guess they really want me to attend. But what's a Reptile to do? Choose sides (my loyalty makes me want to go back to the Old Mill but the new conference seems so sexy) ? Cherry pick sessions from both teams? Skip six days of work in a ten-day period and pretend to be at some fabulous magazine festival?

So to help me (and maybe you) decide here is my scoresheet on MagsU vs. MagNet:

Logo: No contest -- the shield by a knockout. It has your writing instruments, your paper, your handshakes and what appears to be your suspended bomb. The new guys have a name. 1-0 MagsU.

Slogans: "Canada's Magazine Conference" (MagNet) or "The Magazine and Internet Publishing Conference" (MagsU). Not much to choose from here so the shorter one that wisely avoids mention of that internet thing wins by a nose. All tied 1-1.

Websites: Sorry MagsU, cute shields only go so far. MagNet has a groovy splash page. But wait... beauty is only skin deep. The MagsU site might be dull but it won't induce a headache. The MagNet site is migraine central -- since when is reverse type ever a good idea! Especially on a computer screen. Big, loud, reverse type - oh my brain hurts. Turn it off!. Turn it off!!! 2-1 MagsU.

Location: 89 Chestnut versus The Old Mill. Which one has free parking? Charm? A sense of retreat? Score: 3-1 Mags U. Mind you, the out-of-towners might quibble here.

Speakers (ad sales): Big difference in approach - MagNet draws largely on people from our industry. People we know and like. MagsU largely draws on touring American speakers and locals with vested interests (like Bob White from ABC). 3-2 MagsU.

Sessions: Oh who cares. Doesn't it all sound the same? From MagsU we get: "Raise your sales IQ, Media Kits..., Sell extra pages..., Sell more..., and Sell more ad pages using circulation reports". Personally I'm very excited to attend the Schell session where I will finally learn the "#1 close preferred by buyers". Where has this guy been all my life?! And from MagNet we get three sessions led by Kim Peacock and one by Kim Machado. So if you like the name Kim, I'd go there. Call it a draw. Score remains 3-2 for MagsU.

$$$: Hurry hurry step right up - rates go up after May 4 at MagsU and May 15 at MagNet. Both rate structures are kind of complicated with member pricing, early-bird discounts, volume rates and session length rates. And unlike the real world these magazine types operate in, there will be no negotiating off card. But I see that MagNet offers a free "Rise and Shine Breakfast" so they get the nod here - all tied up at 3-3 .

Well I'm all out of categories and still on the fence with a 3-3 deadlock. So why don't you help me out by pressing the comment button and casting your vote.

Killer PMB

This was not a good PMB study for magazines. Few showed gains. Many showed big losses. TV listings magazines are quickly becoming magazine relics. But what about the Time's, Canadian Gardening's and Canadian Business's of the world (down 7%, 10% and 10% respectively)?

PMB numbers always bounce, usually without any apparent reason. Even with a big sample of 25,000 and the dampening effect of using a two-year rolling average, individual titles always gain and lose around inexplicably. But this year sucked for nearly every magazine. Can you spell WWW? Or maybe it was just a blip. A blip that will last two years as the "good book" goes away in 2008, the "bad book" stays, and the mystery book arrives.

How's about those new to the study. Last year, before PMB was released, I mocked the entry of a number of low-profile titles questioning the criteria PMB uses to allow new members. You can read it here. One reader alerted me to the fact the Ricardo was apparently a worthy magazine. To quote from his/her comment:

Be careful dissing magazines like Ricardo- this one has earned its stripes in Quebec over three years of publishing. And now that it is poised to launch an English edition, I would love to see Ricardo give the fat cat "Food and Drink" a run for the money.

Well to this readers credit, Ricardo did pretty well with 457,000 readers in its first complete (2-year data) study. But there is no information on its readers per copy because there is no information available on its circulation. I figure all those French fans must be confusing it with Ricardo's TV show. He's like the Oprah of Quebec with a TV show and his name and face on the cover of every issue. Must be a French thing and I clearly don't understand the French mindset because I was wrong about Adorable (17.7 readers per copy) and Summum (10.9 rpc) too. Jobboom was curiously absent (although it still has a PMB logo on its CARD listing) after produced a respectable 477,000 readers (4.9 rpc) in the 2006 1-year report.

But all of the English magazines I mentioned coughed up a hairball. And now with PMB 2007 - their first complete study, we see the complete damage:

• City Parent: 1.2 readers per copy
• Forever Young: 0.8
  
• Vervegirl: 1.7
  
• What's Cooking: 2.5 (although that does add up to 3.5 million readers)
  
• What's Up Kids: 1.8

And in this year's 1-year study, we have three of six new entries with less than 2 rpc.

Maybe it's time to cap this thing already. The old version before "recent reading" was showing fatigue as the number of magazines increased and the readership of each declined. Could we have hit the wall on recent reading now too? The new report produced results on 65 English magazines plus 10 daily newspapers. That's up from 55 and 7 just three yeas ago. Or do we really need new blood to suck every year?

March comes in like a lion

Magazines Canada is cursed. It seems that every time they schedule an event, the wrath of God prevails and Toronto gets whacked with an ice storm. Last year it was freezing rain in mid-February. This time it was heavy snow and ice on March 1 (famous for it's lionesque entrance).

Now perhaps I'm wrong and neither rain, nor snow, nor sleet, nor hail could keep the magazine and media minions away from the winning combination of free cocktails and an exhibit of award-winning magazine creative. Or maybe nobody made it and Magazines Canada should accept the harsh reality that despite our best efforts to warm the globe, Canada still gets nasty in the winter and try moving this event to April or May.

If you were there, please let me know if you had much company.

No Bull

So the same day Reptile pokes some friendly fun at Benjamin Briggs of Toro, the magazine announces it is shutting down. Coincidence? I hope so.

Frankly, I have always admired the reps at Toro who have had to launch a major-league magazine without the infrastructure of a major-league publishing company. Then PMB 2005 comes out and finds them less than one reader per copy which doesn't exactly make the job any easier. Still, they sold lots of ads including many exclusive to the magazine (meaning they made the magazine advertising pie larger).

I'm surprised that Toro is being shut down. Was there any attempt to find a buyer? Unless the ads were being given away for a mere fraction of the rate card, it sure had the appearance of a successful magazine. The final issue ran nearly 50 pages of ads with a rate-card page rate of $17,000. Even with the requisite discounts, bonus and contra, that issue should have produced at least $500,000 in ad revenue. That is much more than many successful Canadian magazines.

Not having much circulation revenue was not an issue since few Canadian magazines actually earn a profit on circulation after accounting for marketing, fulfillment and staff costs. And the up-front investment to get a critical mass is huge.

A long, hard look at the expense side of this magazine might have found a cure short of closure. Or perhaps "suspending publication" is a secret-handshake-club signal meaning "for sale". After all, suspend is defined as "to come to a stop, usually temporarily".

RFP's – can't live with them, can't live without them!

If you're lucky, you've been receiving media RFP's. Because if you haven't seen any of these suckers, you're probably about to have a lousy year. Receiving an RFP means one of two things:

1. You have a chance to get on the plan, or
2. You are already on the plan and the agency is using the RFP to get better value or creative approaches. It doesn't cost them anything so they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Both are good news. So then why do I hate them? Here are my top 10 reasons:

1. They always arrive when I least expect it and thus have to drop everything to work on them.
2. Briefs are usually weak with so little useful direction that it is impossible to customize a proposal.
3. They suck time. Mine. The Ad Director's. The Promotion Manager's. The Production Manager's. The printing plant's… We all have to jump through hoops to create and price concepts and spend hours or even days perfecting the proposal.
4. I end up offering a deeper discount than I probably need to.
5. American RFPs are numbingly dull and sound as if they are written in a foreign language.
6. Agencies often won't meet you to review your proposal.
7. They rarely use any of the ideas yet, thank God, still book the ads.
8. It's hard to be constantly fresh. Those ideas they didn't want last year are still looking pretty good to me.
9. Half the time the print campaign never happens. In part that's because sometimes they are used for spec pitches to their clients (or prospects).
10. NOT GETTING THEM!

Masthead round up

Okay okay! I'm being hounded as to why I haven't blogged in a few weeks. I realize that I must continue to post otherwise risk the small franchise of followers I have developed. But hey, I'm a rep, not a writer. And this is the season for selling isn't it. Aren't we all busy responding to RFPs? I think that will be my next subject. But for now, some random comments on the latest issue of Masthead:

• Bill Shields is back! And after racing motorcycles and fighting cancer, he shows us his cojones in a couple of columns about Ken Alexander of The Walrus". We hear descriptors like mad, bumbling, meddlesome, bully, erratic and destructive. And those are his good points! Personally I'd like to know how Alexander managed to arrange "an advance on his inheritance". Reminds me of that priceless Episode 16 from Curb Your Enthusiasm.
  
  So why does The Walrus get so much ink. Sure it's fun watching all the high drama and Alexander does know how to play the National Magazine Awards game, but this is still a puny little magazine with 25,000 paid subscribers and 9,000 single copy sales. Another 13,000 are sponsored subscriptions or giveaways. Big deal.
  
  
• Geoffrey Dawe, noted workaholic/slave-driver and sales rep of the century, is now going to travel for a few months and as a parting shot we get "It's hard for Torontonians to understand that life isn't actually about work". Great, now I feel like I've wasted all these years.
  
  
• D.B. Scott is truly a know-it-all. And I mean that in the good way. I can never find fault with his responses as the answer guy. Damn he makes me feel so D.u.m.B.
  
  
• LNA reports indicate that magazines have had "robust" third quarter results with a 6% increase in pages versus 2005. Personally I haven't thought of this as a stellar year. Any magazine dependent on car ads must feel likewise. What has happened to GM, Nissan and Subaru?
  
  
• In "Starts" we read about Blackfly. I'm taking bets on when we'll read about Blackfly in "Stops". Like why bother - circulation 2,000 (including a newsstand draw of 500 that will never sell) and page rate $500. They are hoping to make it to their 4th issue - the one-year mark, when they believe that the grant money will start flowing.
  

Also appearing was this ridiculous editorial cartoon. How many mistakes can you find?


Like since when do media planners visit us? Or dress up pretty? Or talk like Valley girls? Or seem to care about mundane metrics like reach and frequency. And isn't reach and penetration the same thing? And are those buttons right on her nipples. Ugh.

Merry Christmas to all the little reptiles!

That was so much fun... Not!!

The Ad Club threw their annual "Holiday Shmooze" this past Thursday at the Shmooze Club. Last year, there was a freezing rainstorm and I didn't make it. Unfortunately, the weather was very nice this time around.

Now I like shmoozing as much as anybody but this was painful. Too many people and too much noise. And what is that pathetic excuse for music they play in these settings? You know, the thumpa-thumpa background sound guaranteed to drown out any conversation. So we all stand around and yell into each other's ears for a few hours. What fun! I wake up the next morning with a headache and laryngitis. Friday was not a big sales day.

Then again, there was still a huge crowd when I left and this was long past the point where most people would have consumed their two "complimentary" drinks. Maybe they were having fun and I'm the one who is crazy. I'd love to hear some thoughts from others who were there.

What surprises me is that this event attracts quite a few media planners. Why is that? My guess is that with 10,764 reps in attendance, they knew that they would be seeing a lot more than two free drinks.

Reptile is 1. Will there be a 2?

I missed my first birthday as a blogger which happened this past Tuesday. Then again, so did you. No cards, calls or comments. Boo-hoo! Somebody told me I'd be done blogging after three months. I took it as a challenge. But sure enough, at exactly three months, I went dry. After posting my 19th entry in 13 weeks (one of my favourites - Introducing the Maras), it was a full month before I posted again. But I'm still at it. Question is, for how long?

It seems that all the little reptiles in all the media will be looking over their shoulders as a new ice age bears down on us - the age of Google. Personally, I love Google. How do you think I get images like the one to the left? But what the heck are they doing selling advertising on behalf of offline media?! That's my job they are extincting.

Now maybe it won't work so well with magazines. They did try selling this medium last year and even they couldn't do it (see here and here). And apparently:

"The lackluster results came despite deep discounts in magazine ad rates. Some ad pages were sold by Google for as little as one-quarter of the listed ad rates at these magazines, according to information provided by participating advertisers".

But that has not deterred the rapacious Google. In the National Post today (from the New York Times) we read the following:

• Media Buyers are quaking as the Internet giant makes a play to sell traditional advertising. Google could end up automating so much of the ad-buying process that companies no longer see the need to pay much to media buyers (ed: Since when are media buyers are paid much?!)
  
• Google executives say that they can save marketers money on print, radio and TV spots while taking a commission in the process (Hey, that's my commission!).
• Google hopes to one day provide a place where advertisers can buy ads in all media (ed: and live happily ever after).

The story continues. Hope to see you this time next year!

An agency pipes in

I've suspected some agency folk are lurking around. One finally pipes in with the comment that I republished below. Now of all the offensive statements that have appeared in this blog, I'm somewhat surprised that what cranked this contributor was a comment made by a small magazine publisher who believes that it's the agency compensation model that keeps them from recommending smaller titles.

Personally, I agree with the agency person. Compensation is the furthest thing from their minds - they simply want to perform well for their clients. Otherwise why bother negotiating lower rates? They end up spending time negotiating and then more time reinvesting savings in other magazines with which they have to negotiate again while earning the same compensation for investing the ad budget. While it is extra work justifying a small magazine on a media plan, it is the creation of a unique, intelligent plan that makes the job fun and challenging. Adding interesting, appropriate small magazines can make a plan shine. A client does not an agency to buy three pages in Chatelaine, three pages in Canadian Living and three pages in Reader's Digest. A monkey can do that.

On to the comment:

How about an agencies take on this thread. I find the comments about agency compensation to be far from the truth, let alone fair. Regarding the comment “agencies only wanted to deal with high cost media…” , if that were true, magazines would never even make a media plan. Heck I could burn through a $10 million budget in 5 minutes just on TV.

Secondly media or even vehicle selection has nothing to do with compensation levels. The original “commentor” states “the way agencies are paid…” I’ll assume you are referring to a commission basis. Let’s assume that archaic compensation system is still common across the board, it would make no difference if I went with high cost or low cost medium. If the agreed upon rate was 5 points, it doesn’t change with what I buy, it’s still 5 points at the end of day.

Finally smart agencies do not work on commission anymore. If they do it’s a small portion of their compensation package. Retainer Fee’s provide a more stable revenue base and better reflects the cost of actually running a clients business.

I received an interesting comment

In case you don't read any of the admittedly few comments I receive on the Rep Life, I am publishing the latest below. Some food for thought about agencies. Note that it isn't only niche magazines that feel this way, even mid-size and large books have been known to circumvent the agencies. A subject for a future blog I'm sure. For now enjoy this message from an anonymous publisher...

Reppy...

you did touch a few nerves, and now I am going to touch a few more...I am sure this will cause a shitstorm, (well, perhaps only a little shitstorm) but here goes...

I run a small mag...circulation is at 20,000 - we are worldwide. Most of our circulation goes to the USA and most of our advertisers are US based.

We are super niche and it's a flat organization. Me. I farm out the design work, but other than that, I handle it all.

I have built this magazine by being extremely focused. I am very adamant as to I let in the magazine and have refused to run ads if they don't fit with the mag. I'll repeat that: I have turned away ads.

Over the last year, I have started to realize that I am not that interested in working with ad agencies either. We are not listed in CARD, SRDS and I will not reply to RFP's.

When it comes to niche publishing, publishers need to look at their magazine as a valuable brand...and the more influencial the magazine, the more protective they should be.

It's pretty obvious that unless you have oodles of cash, there will be very few mass market mags starting up. However, niche publications will continue to blossom....some will thrive and some will die. The way agencies are paid means that small niche mags (with small billings) require the same kind of traffic as big mags.

It's in an agencies best interest to work with BIG numbers.

I am working in an alternative universe. We are about small but significant numbers.

Quite frankly, I am not interested in dealing with people who have very little understanding of what the mag represents.

To put it another way, I am ONLY interested in working with my community. I am protective of what I have built and I see no reason to let ad agencies in.

Again, this probably won't work for most magazines. (I am talking about consumer publications, by the way) However, if you're a niche magazine, this maybe the only
way to really differentiate yourself and to really drive your readership wild...as I do.

Hmmm, somebody sounds a little lonely.

Touched a Nerve

Well judging by the comments my last blog generated from fellow reps, it is apparent that I have touched a nerve. What is also apparent is that there is a great divide between reps at the big magazines and those at the small ones. But one thing we all have in common is simple human suffering -- seems nobody is happy.

To set a few matters straight:

• I have worked on both large and small magazines. Launches and established titles. But don't assume I work on a small title now. I am an equal opportunity offender and was being somewhat facetious when I called reps at larger titles rich order takers. Still, I'll take a large, established title any day because the ultimate reward of this job is the great feeling of bringing in the business and big magazine reps get the buzz that much more often.
  
• I worked equally hard on both large and small magazines. When it comes to hard work, it's not the magazine, it's the rep. And I know most magazine reps work hard. But nobody is making calls after hours. Often those at the bigger titles are working late because they have been invited to respond to an RFP, something reps at the small titles don't get to see much.
  
• Reps at large magazines have high bars to clear and all that matters to the Publisher is making budget. So even if your territory scored an easy $2 million in sales (say the Christmas issue of Food & Drink), if your budget is $2.5 million that other 500,000 where the bread is earned. Reps at small magazines consider every page sold to be a coup and, with far less in sales, can sometimes earn as much as a rep at a big magazine.
  
• The phones ring at the big magazines. But that doen't mean they get the business. Advertisers will indeed pit magazines and even publishing companies against each other for share of pie and even sometimes for the entire budget. Losing one of those battles does indeed suck, especially if you won it last year and your boss asks how you intend to replace that $300,000 account as if you have secretly been squirelling away some big advertisers for a rainy day. The phones don't ring at small magazines.
  
• Yes anonymous commenter #4 - big magazines receive more pie because they do perform better. They typically offer more audience for the dollar and do so in a quality package. Frankly, they should be easy sells but I will admit, it is still challenging. Nonetheless, at least these magazines are in the game. Reps at small magazines don't get to play much.
  

So anybody interested in leaving their rep job at Canadian Living for one at Canadian Dimension? Not me, that's for sure!

We're making money but not changing the world

Well the Reptile Salary Survey turned out to be a bust. I guess we'll all have to wait to see what Masthead comes up with.

A few more entries came in bringing the sample to a lucky seven. Final results:

• Last Year's Range: $68,000-215,000
• Last Year's Average: $112,300
  
  
• Best Year's Range: $70,000-215,000
• Best Year's Average: $123,000

I'd like to snuggle up with the rep that earned 215,000. Damn that's fine money. The only way to make that much is to work for a magazine that sells itself. Isn't that ironic. The reps hustling on the margins make diddly-squat and the order-takers get rich. Imagine how hard it is to sell an ad in say Canadian Dimension, the little lefty magazine from Winnipeg (For People Who Want To Change The World)? Sure the ads go for only $1,075. But apparently there are only 3,000 people in Canada who want to change the world badly enough to subscribe and that makes for a sky-high CPM of $358. And which advertiser is targeting people who want to change the world anyways? Somehow they have managed to publish since 1963 however I don't suspect it is their ad sales that is keeping them alive. But then I've never seen an issue and for all I know, it's full of home decorating ads (maybe people who want to change the world start small, perhaps by first changing their mattress or paint colour).

Now I don't mean to pick on Canadian Dimension, it was randomly selected from the hundreds of small magazines that populate CARD. But really, it must be a bitch to sell -- no natural ad category, no audit, no PMB, no size, no sexiness... The poor rep trying to sell ads into a magazine like this will never cut through the clutter, and why should she - would you find the time for her if you were a media planner?. Then again, I don't suspect that Canadian Dimension is in it for the lucre. But many small magazines are. And it is tough!

Then there are the Chatelaines and Canadian House & Homes and Flares of this world and the fish are literally jumping into the boat making the fishermen rich paper pushers. How hard could it be answering the phone all day and printing out insertion orders? The biggest challenge is where to place all the damn ads since they all want to be up front, on a right hand page, opposite 100% editorial with six pages of separation between their competitors. Where is the justice?

Show me more money

Hardly scientific but gathering steam is the Unofficial Reptile Salary Survey. Yes there have been four fabulous responses (see them here). A quick tabulation reveals the following:

Last Year's Range: $90,000-179,000
Last Year's Average: $117,000

Seems last year was a relatively good year for the reptiles of the world because:

Best Year's Range: $98,000-179,000
Best Year's Average: $125,250

Not bad. But is this representative? Keep them coming by clicking the comment button at the bottom of (click here) and answering the following two little questions:

1. Last year, including commissions and bonus, I earned $______
2. In my best year as a rep I pulled in $_______

If only...

From the September 25 issue of Marketing. This is funny. Particularly after the piece on magazines that ran in the September 18 issue. It was title "Rest in Peace ROP" and glorified the "tinkering" magazines have done with their editorial integrity offering a "virtual smorgasbord of opportunities to make advertisers feel "special."" That's right, we advertising people are no longer in the business of supporting the marketing efforts of good and services; we're here to make insecure advertisers feel special. Hey, when is it our turn to feel special?!

Show me the money

Does anybody know where August went? Sorry for not blogging even once.

A little while back I provided the top ten reasons I like my job. Astute readers will have noticed that "the money" scooped two positions. We reps are on the money side of this business doing little but creating undesirable clutter to pay for desirable non-clutter. We are all about the money. So one would assume that we want to make some money ourselves. Preferably a lot of money.

In a catty comment on DB's blog, I mentioned that Reptile doesn't get out of bed for less than six figures (a tribute to my idol, Linda Evangelista). But isn't that true of us all? In fact, aren't many reps making $200K+?

My comment was in reference to this dreadful sounding job at CLB media (click here and check out the posting of August 24). The salary range for this position is $31,815.00 to $42,420.00. Yuck! (By the way, if you have any idea where these numbers came from, let me know -- all I could tell is that the top end of the range is precisely 33.33333333333...% higher than the bottom end). Even worse, the posting asks respondents to complete an obnoxious screening questionnaire. The final indignity is that you are disqualified if "you ever been convicted of an offence, other than a provincial offence, for which a pardon was not granted or for which a pardon was granted but was revoked." I don't even understand what that means but somehow I suspect that a wild weekend in Wawa back in 1992 has knocked me out of the running.

The last Masthead salary survey pegged the average rep salary at about $80,000. For consumer magazines with 100,000+ circulation, that figure rose to $98,000 (and in Toronto, that would surely be even higher). But I don't think the real money makers would bother filling out some dorky paper survey, folding it origami style and then popping it in the mail. So I'm asking you all here and now to share your most intimate earnings information by clicking the comment button below and answering the following two questions:

1. Last year, including commissions and bonus, I earned $______
2. In my best year as a rep I pulled in $_______

I have no way of identifying you if you post a comment anonymously (as everybody seems to do on this blog) so don't be shy.

Hello. Goodbye.

This is supposed to be a relationship business. But the majority of media planners don't stay in a job for more than two years so how do you create and maintain a relationship? Sure the seniors often hang around but they aren't the ones we have to sell.

Just as soon as we get close enough to somebody so that they will return the occasional call, they're off to another agency (or worse, they have moved to the media side as a rep - a subject for another day). And when we locate them, they are working on a TV-only account. So it's back to the drawing board.

We can spend as much time managing our databases as we do selling. And the new faces just keep coming. You know, those 12-year old media assistants who do the leg work of calling reps for information; one in ten of whom will still be in this brutal industry by this time next year.

Why do they leave so soon? For an office? A couple grand more? A better boss? A more interesting account? A TV account (do TV reps call planners non-stop?)? A funky office with a pool table and cafe? A better-sounding title (I've always liked that MBS calls juniors "Media Executives" - probably saves them $5,000 per employee)? The promise of work-life balance? Because they are bored to stink can't imagine another day doing this shit but aren't qualified for anything but another media job? Me thinks it's a combination of all the above and who can blame them! Would you want to work in an agency fielding/avoiding 1,000 calls a day from hungry reptiles? The very thought sends shivers down my spine.

Sure it sounds cool "Ad Agency Media Executive" but when you are working for peanuts, always being asked to produce more work faster and doing insane hours, the cool factor wear thin fast. But where to go but another agency in the vain hope that it will be better.

One agency that used to keep their people was Leo Burnett. In fact so few people left that everybody would be promoted at the same time (new title, small salary increase, same job and boss). But today even it (now Starcom) suffers from the revolving door syndrome. A classic example was when Suzanne Ware left the agency and her husband John Ware took her job.

This is a big issue for us reps but an even bigger one for the agencies. Some turnover is healthy but this industry is nuts. Why can't they get a handle on this?

Top 10 reasons I like my job

In looking back at this blog, I realize that it might appear that I don't much care for my job or this business. Well it's time to set the record straight and provide some necessary balance (before I re-embark on my mean-spirited tear, after all it is much easier and more interesting to poke at the sores).

While it might not have been my childhood dream, I've enjoyed my career in advertising sales and still do. Yes it's getting tougher and less personal. But it sure beats being a doctor or lawyer (ever seen a happy doctor or lawyer?). So without further ado, I present the top 10 reasons why I like my job:

1. No punch clock. We have a job to do and the hours can be long but we have more freedom to come and go than almost any other occupation.
2. It's nice to have a job where you talk to people for a living. I enjoy one-on-one meetings as well as formal presentations before a group where all eyes are on me (and preferably those eyes are open!).
3. The money. It can be pretty good. Of course it helps to sell a lot of ads.
4. The expense account. Lunches, spas, golf – these are the perks of the trade. Good idea to bring a client.
5. Magazines are interesting. And the product changes with every issue. It's not only readers that look forward to the next one and greet it like a new present has arrived.
6. Lots of free magazines to read. And reading makes you smarter!
7. Creative people. It's a privilege to work alongside the creative people that write, edit and art direct magazines. Sure I feel a bit guilty that I earn more and have not one iota of their talent but all the same, I enjoy observing the creative process.
8. You might find this hard to believe, but I really like agency people. So much so that I call them all the time and will meet them at the drop of a hat. But seriously, they are mostly young, fun, friendly, and smart (they must be reading lots of magazines too). I've almost never left a meeting with a planner and not felt like I made a new best friend.
9. The money can be pretty good (did I already say that?).
10. Making a sale. Does anything feel better? Okay maybe a few things do provide more of a rush. But you gotta admit it, this is near the top of the list.

Now somebody send me an insertion order. C'mon, you can do it.

Will the real Pinocchio please stand up!

We are reps (except for a couple of editors and a few media buyers that stumbled into my terrarium). That inherently makes us untrustworthy. Not that we lie or even embellish, but we are unlikely to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". Some would argue that that is the job of the competition's reps. Others say "buyer beware". I say: tell the most positive version of the truth you can. And I do. And I like to think the media planners I meet believe me. Of course negotiations require some degree of poker-face but that's true for players on both sides of the table.

But what about those people sitting across the pot of money. Are they to be trusted? Not always apparently. For instance, why is it that some media planners tell you something that is simply untrue as if you will never find out? How many times have I heard that there will be no magazines on the plan only to see ads in print a few months later?! Or that we are only using magazines belonging to one publishing company because they fought for and won 100% share only to see ads elsewhere a few months later?! Or that they are planning a campaign and need some really creative ideas only to learn that they were really pitching an account and naturally they did not win it. Or even worse, they did win it but the print campaign will be quite different than initially conceived. Like it won't have my magazine there after all. Well all of these have happened to me this spring. Have they happened to you too? And if these obvious fabrications are popping up, can you imagine how many other loads of bullsh_t are shipped our way? How often do they cast blame on to their mythical "client" when it's just not true?

Hey, I can live with the feeling of being an unworthy, obsequious reptile but please don't lie to me. I'm not a baby. I won't come crying because my magazine is not on the plan. Just tell me and provide a brief explanation that I can share with my boss. An honest one. One that won't reveal itself as pure fiction in the very near future.

Now that I got that bit of ugliness off my chest, back in my cage.

Thanks for the feedback

Well that kinda worked.

Seems that there are indeed a few people checking out the terrarium that is Rep Life. More than ever now thanks to uberblogger D.B. Scott who posts an average of 263 blogs daily and has quite the following over at Canadian Magazines. His plug sent over a busload of tourists and set a one-day traffic record for this site. Y'all come back now.

In typically polite Canadian fashion, the comments I received were all pats on the back rather than kicks to the head. One of you is obsessed with my true identity (yet you yourself posted anonymously) and I respond thusly:

I prefer hiding behind the scaly veneer of Reptile - (Wo)Man of Mystery. And isn't it more fun speculating? The truth is almost always a letdown. So once outed, I'd probably quit.

Besides, have you considered the possibility that Rep Life is the work of more than one person?

Those of you that did drop a line would like me to blog more often. What a culture we live in - never satisfied. Must be the cumulative effect of all the advertising we've been exposed to. But I subscribe to the wisdom of those who believe that "less is more", whatever the heck that means. So if you are tired of tuning in to see nothing new, might I suggest a modern way to keep track of new postings - subscribe to my feed (and others you follow). This is one of those free subscriptions (or as our industry sometimes calls it -- "by request"). You can start by visiting www.bloglines.com. It's free too. Once you set up your subscriptions, you need only check one site to get all your favourite blogs. Mine is at http://feeds.feedburner.com/RepLife. Or, if you have a supported feed reader, click on the orange XML button on my blog and take it from there. If I figured it out, so can you!

Dear reader:

I've been blogging for six months now. Yes, the entries have been coming less frequently and I'm sure I lost most of the small following created after that plug by Bill "Knievel" Shields over at Masthead (are you nuts Bill - motorcycle racing!). Still, I'll probably keep at it because it's more fun to be a writer than a reptile and fun is at a premium in this mad world.

Frankly it's a bit lonely being an anonymous blogger and I could really use a pat on the back or a kick in the head or something resembling feedback. We reps feed off of feedback. How do those writers do it? Toiling away for a buck-a-word and the faint hope of a National Magazine Award. How do they know if anybody read their piece or what they thought of it. That must kill them. At least we make sales and get commissions - that's feedback.

So since you are still there, it would be great if you would take a moment and pat me on the back or kick me in the head by sending along a comment. It's easy. All you have to do is click below where it says "0 comments" or maybe "1 comment" or if this works really well "21,234 comments", and then type in a few words (let me know if you don't want your message published) and the word verification and click publish. You can call me a fool, an illiterate, a nasty bitch or a witty observer of this tiny corner of the world we inhabit. Just so long as you call me.

Your friend and mine,

Reptile

They don't like us! They really don't like us!

For those of you who do not call on M2 Universal and thus might not have seen the annual report on the magazine industry published in the "Media Mix Outlook 2006" authored by Elizabeth Kan (now at Mediavest) and Melissa Williams, I present it here in full, with my comments in red. A warning - it isn't always pleasant reading. But then, isn't it their job to push the media?

Technology is redefining the consumer's relationship with media. Many traditional and emerging media enjoy great expectations and excitement over new opportunities to engage consumers in this brave, new world. In contrast, magazines suffer from the perception that they are stale, uninspired, and dull. To many, magazines have become nothing but an afterthought in the changing media environment. Surely with more than 1200 Canadian magazines, there must be a few that aren't dull. Like Rich Guy. How stale is that? Or how's about Canadian Wildlife? Grrrrrrrrrrr! Nothing uninspired there. And could anybody in their right mind actually label a Canadian history magazine called The Beaver dull? I don't think so.

In reality, figures show that magazines are holding their own in the key measures of circulation, readership, ad pages and revenue. Selection has improved with new launches - from the crop of shopping magazines in the last couple of years (LouLou and Wish) to the new celebrity weeklies (Weekly Scoop) that are just hitting the newsstands. The quality of magazines is also improving, with titles being refreshed, redesigned and renovated to stay consumer-relevant.

No, the magazine medium is certainly not dead. Phew! The fundamentals are there; but it could sure use an extreme makeover! Me first! The following are ideas, which publishers might take to heart if they truly wish to compete in this very complex marketplace:

• As an industry, magazines tend to be myopic and inward looking. Publishers seem to focus only on their own performance in the short term. They should stop chasing a bigger piece of the pie and look more to growing the industry by focusing on advertisers' needs. Clients are looking for customized, innovative solutions to address communication needs. Publishers leading the pack are the ones that are selling ideas, not just pages to meet tomorrow's sales budget. Just what they want - little magazines with big ideas. Actually, I've witnessed many an RFP requesting creative solutions only to see the buy go to a corporate packaged buy where the only good idea was an unbeatable package price. We spend countless hours developing concepts and mockups for naught.
  

• Product placement and content integration are happening routinely in many media. Cars, food products and fashion items are frequently seen in movies and television programs. Magazines, however, take great pride in the separation of advertising and editorial, which M2 Universal believes is an antiquated notion. But it's so quaint; having a magazine where readers trust that the writers and designers are free-thinking artists and not commercial whores. A recent sponsorship by Cadillac of a section in MacLean's magazine caused a great deal of ink in the industry press, questioning the degree of client input into the content of the section. How ridiculous; this was a shrewd media buy, nothing more. Publishers should give their readers more credit. They are savvy consumers who understand and appreciate this type of placement, when done properly, not hapless victims in need of protection from unscrupulous advertisers. It is possible to uphold editorial integrity and be advertiser friendly at the same time. I agree and you can read my thoughts on the issue here. Sponsored sections and features, labelled advertorials and, in the case of Canadian Geographic and Toronto Life, sponsored guides with front cover logos, do nothing to damage the integrity of the content. But I also see that advertisers are asking for more in the way of "content integration" which sounds vaguely coital to me. Magazines market themselves on the unique relationship between the reader and the book. Unless they can help advertisers leverage that emotional bond, this is nothing but a tired cliche.

• Magazines are a tactile medium, which is truly a differentiating factor in this digital age. Let's have some fun with that. We would like to see production-led innovations that provide advertisers with strategic options, while allowing readers to interact with the book beyond run-of-press pages. Most importantly, these innovations, like gatefolds, vertical half pages and belly bands/wraps, should not cost clients an arm and a leg. Sounds like it's time for a plant tour.
  

• It is absolutely key that magazines develop research, which breaks down readership in more detail. What is reader traffic by section; do people read front-to-back or back-to-front; what is time spent by section? Do customized purchases (e.g. gatefolds, wraps) garner reader attention commensurate to the rates charged? The PMB Reader Engagement Study planned for later this year will provide great insight by studying quality of readership, audience relationship with the book and how avidly it is read. Is any medium researched more? And where are media planners going to find the time to review all this data? And if they find that the back of the book is better read, will they ever actually request "position well rearward". I don't think so.
  

• Our perennial favourite - how about sales reps that sell, not just take orders? Don't I wish. About the only order I ever get is "jump through the hoop!" Where are the media partners who listen to client needs and earn the business? We're leaving you countless unreturned messages and emails begging for meetings and information. HELLO!!! Why can't reps understand the seasonality of the client's business and planning cycle and make sales calls accordingly? This is my favourite - call during planning and "we're too busy"; call any other time and "we have no brief so there is no point in meeting". M2 Universal is asking for and expects sales reps and publishers that understand the advertiser's business, the strength of their own books and the power of their medium. So that must be my problem - I'm focusing on my book's weaknesses.
  

It is extremely frustrating to see magazines fade into the background when there is potential for so much more. It wasn't that long ago when magazines led the industry in creativity and innovative thinking.

OUR ADVICE IS: TAKE SOME RISKS AND RECLAIM THAT POSITION. PLEASE GIVE US SOMETHING TO WRITE ABOUT IN OUTLOOK 2007. Don't advertisers love risks! They jump into new magazines like kids into a pool on a hot day. Maybe they would like a sponsorship proposal from Maclean's on a fresh, exciting new series of Mohammed cartoons. Yeah, that's the ticket!

Tiddlywinked

The crew at Magazines Canada have been very busy putting on a variety of events for the industry. They have certainly been very well organized and I give a hearty bow to Gary Garland and his merry crew.

GG presented the annual State of the Magazine Nation address last week where a near-full house at the Isabel Bader Theatre heard that there are now 1,160 Canadian consumer magazine choices (up 67% in ten years) with 167 new titles launched in 2004/05 alone. And he managed to make it sound like this was a good thing. Personally I say enough already! Time to put some rules in place akin to those we have for private clubs (e.g. before launching a magazine the publisher must be sponsored by at least three media planners).

GG then introduced Guy Consterdine, "one of the top magazine research gurus on the planet!" Sounded like a real winner. But did GG do his research? Could this be the same Guy Consterdine who was the Chairman of the English Tiddlywinks Association (1965-1967).


I don't mean to be cruel but this was possibly the dullest presentation I've ever attended. Is it possible to have a less engaging presentation on the subject of engagement? Pass the Red Bull!

Okay, I can tolerate a boring speaker when it comes to presenting predictable research but what in tarnation was he thinking with that ditty he created. If you missed it, it went like this (accompanied with a creaky old recording from the 1930's):

My magazines are my favourite friends.
My love of reading them never ends.
All my interests need
A magazine that I can read.
... and so on for another 43 excruciating lines

It was very painful the first time. But when he decided to play it again at the end, I wished I'd remembered to pack the cyanide.

Bits and bites

As mentioned earlier, I attended the Ad Club's Magazine Day (and did not even get nominated as Reptile of the Year!!!!!). Very well attended. Tons of free magazines. Yellow Lou Lou shopping bags (a bit girly for all the male reptiles) with an embarrassing lack of decent swag. Four Seasons class. A commanding Jane Bradley at the helm. A well staffed panel. A bit too long. A bit too predictable. A bit too polite.

Highlights:

• Ken Whyte provided the zinger of the day: five minutes after what's-his-name from Readers Digest plugged his magazine (yet again) with a comment about how much time they spend reading it, Whyte used his first opportunity to congratulate him and his slow readers
• In a fit of illogic, Steve Meraska of Leo Burnett (now VP of Holistic Bullshit) suggested to the industry that "if it ain't broke, break it!"
• Ceri Marsh of Fashion took the fifth when asked if she ever purposely ran editorial to support an advertiser (like we didn't know)
• Tim Hughes of Mindshare accused an unnamed "major" magazine of blackmailing him with the threat of no positive coverage if the ad campaign does not run. If this is true, it is the new low point in Canadian magazine publishing history. But then, since when do whores give freebies?
• Geoffrey Dawe was awarded "Man of the Millennium" or something like that and for the first time in his career, was a man of few words. Was this award a surprise? Or is there a new Humble Geoffrey.
  

Reptile is green… with envy

Well some gratitude. I cheekily suggest an award show for reps (see blog here) and sure enough the good folk at the Ad Club go ahead and bring my dream to reality. But do I even get an honourable mention? Nope. Today, at the very well attended Magazines Day held at the Four Seasons, Deanna Oliphant was awarded Reptile of the Year. And when she comes up to accept this great award, she is speechless. Her exact words - "I don't know what to say". Totally unprepared as if this was unimaginable despite the fact that she was one of five nominees and had a large audience of prospective employers and media planners hanging on to every word. What kind of rep has nothing to say? Obviously a popular one. Maybe I'll try that next time. Just call them up and say hi. Just hi. Maybe hi, it's Reptile. Then let them do all the talking. Let them go on long enough and maybe an insertion order will spit out. And then I can get rich. And popular. And be the 2007 Reptile of the Year.

More about Magazines Day in my next blog.

P.S. Lots of kisses. No bowing. Aren't you listening people?! See here if you have no idea what I'm referring to.

2nd term report - much improved Maggie

On Friday December 2, your very own Reptile dissed the Magazines Canada "Financial Connection" Event (read here). And it looked as if the "Automotive Connection" was travelling the same road when it was postponed because of sudden speaker unavailability (read here). But today I attended the rain-checked 2nd instalment in the Connections series and was pleasantly surprised by the attendance (standing room only) and the panel. Al Zikovitz (Al-Z) presided. Of course, the key players from Ford and BMW opted out again and in their place we had John Capella (JC) of BMW and Andrew Schiavetti (AS) of Ford. Bright guys both but after listening to them for a while, it's obvious that media planning best be left to the media planners – Alex Gillespie (AG) of Doner was casual, comfortable and knew what he was talking about.

Al-Z moderated well and kept it on track although he did take a few cat naps (or was it early Al-Z-heimers). For instance he introduced John Capella and then introduced John Capella again. And when AS asked if there were a whopping 1,000+ new magazines launched last year, Al-Z agreed as if he hadn't heard the question but was too embarrassed to admit it.

Some highlights:

• Once again that phrase "content integration" came up. AG: "Hey, if they can do it in TV…" The barbarians are at the gate.
• Nobody on the panel had any idea if their magazine advertising was working. AS: "I don't have the answer". AG: "There is so much going on, it's hard to know what's working".
• AG commented that he has 100 reps on his list and he can't get back to them all. So Al-Z asked JC whether reps can call him if they can't get the information from the agencies. The audience tittered and after a brief pause came JC's quiet response - "No". Seems nobody wants us to call. How strange!
  

The most comical part of the morning occurred when AS pulled out a copy of Lou Lou to demonstrate the magazine's out-of the-box thinking. For some reason I can't recall they masked the Ford logo on the Fusion ad with a peelable label which AS attempted to remove in a showy display. Upon damaging the ad he was heard muttering "Well that didn't work out so well".

And the Hee Haw moment arrived late in the proceedings when Farmer Brown of, I believe, Country Connection asked how his under 5,000 circulation title can get sum-a-dat fancy car advertising. AS, feigning oblivious to the hick publisher's unusual attire and grooming, provided an awkwardly lengthy reply and requested a copy his magazine. Keep your eyes peeled for a Ford Truck ad in the next issue. Because if that happens, I'm never calling an agency planner again – straight to the client for me.

Bottom line - did I learn anything? Hell no. And what a relief. The day I hear something I don't already know at one of these things is the day I'm officially obsolete.

On to the report card:

• Where the auto industry is headed: B
• How current trends affect media choices: F (Al-Z missed this one)
• Acquisition versus branding: A-
• Where magazines fit in the mix: C+
• How magazines are judged: D+ (focused on ROI, not selection process)
• How to get magazines into the driver seat: C+

P.S. for D.B. - before you ask if the breakfast was any good, let me tell you that it was a simple yet adequate buffet of croissants, muffins and fruit.

P.P.S. I didn't see anybody bowing. Lot's of kissing. Remember, we must do our bit to keep the pandemic at bay (see last blog here).

Let's All Take a Bow

The other day I showed up on time for an appointment but the person I was meeting was not in the office. Geez, that bugs me. My time is valuable too. In fairness, the planner was off ill. I guess I should always confirm appointments but I'm afraid that a friendly reminder will turn into a postponement until like forever. And besides, such incidences are very rare and when they happen, the planet tips slightly in your favour. For a little while anyways. Still, it made me think -– I never cancel a sales call when I'm sick (unless deathly so) and if other reps are like me, we must be major spreaders of colds and flu. With diseases getting more frightening every year, maybe it's time we reconsidered the tradition of handshakes, hugs and kisses. Maybe it's time to introduce... the bow.

Since we are so proficient at kissing ass, we should certainly have sufficient flexibility for a simple bow. But aha, there is no simple bow. In fact, there is an entire language to the bow with proper etiquette on its length, depth and appropriate response. For instance, in Japan, there are bows for greetings, bows for apologies, bows for gratitude, bows for different emotions (humility, sincerity, remorse, deference...). Think of the fun we can have - we can create bows for our own industry:

• The "makegood offer" bow
• The "why didn't I get the RFP" bow
• The "I'm not worthy but if I bow long and hard, maybe I'll get a sympathy page" bow

So start practicing your bows in front of the mirror for no less than five minutes daily. Start slowly with gentle head nods and work your way up to a 10-second, 90-degree bow. Then try a dry run at the next Magazines Canada rep-only function by bowing to everybody you meet. If they read this blog, they'll be bowing too. If we can get this going with the enthusiasm of the 1990's stadium Wave phenomenon, we can then move it from the practice field to the real world and do our part in keeping the next pandemic at bay. Fellow reptiles, start your bowing.

PMB, SHME MB

PMB 2006 will arrive on March 30. Big deal.

Nothing much changes from year to year and by the time you see it the data is as stale as a week-old croissant (it covers a period starting 2-1/2 years prior to release and as of today, some data in PMB 2005 is actually 3-1/2 years old). Well actually everything changes just a wee bit, and thus every media kit, promotion piece and sales letter is immediately obsolete keeping those research managers employed for another year.

There was a time when being in PMB really meant something. Your magazine was "worthy" and automatically considered for media plans. The data was actually used to make decisions and being in the study meant your magazine had a shot. Mind you, the flip side was that bad numbers could be the death knell.

By the mid-90s the writing was on the wall and PMB began lobbying the industry to embark on a major methodology change. The move to recent-reading methodology was necessary as the through-the-book method had clearly hit the wall. The study had become cumbersome and as more magazines joined, reported readership of existing PMB publications began to tumble.

But just as clutter expands to fill the space of a bigger home, the new method opened the floodgates to a pile of marginal magazines and today being in PMB no longer has cachet. Not when PMB 2006 will introduce the likes of City Parent, Forever Young, Vervegirl, What’s Cooking, What's Up Kids Family, Adorable, Ricardo, Summum and Jobboom. What are the criteria for becoming a member other than having printed words on paper and cash in the bank?!

In my humble opinion, being measured in PMB is simply a way to avoid getting blown off by media planners that have to dump 1,000 magazines from the list in one fell swoop. That's why the successful magazine Cottage Life reluctantly joined – Al's gang was tired of hearing from planners that it wasn't being considered because it wasn't in PMB. Fat lot of good joining did – its ad pages have actually declined since the release of PMB 2005 despite strong audience numbers. Looks like those wily planners found another reason to blow off Cottage Life. The same thing happened to Inside Entertainment which received surprisingly good numbers only to go on and lose advertising pages. Yet PMB coughs up a one- reader-per-copy fur ball called Toro and the magazine flourishes. Why? Because PMB is no longer all-mighty.

Rather, PMB is something akin to a circulation audit – a necessary but nearly useless sales tool. Without it forget about getting on many plans. With it, well they'll just have to come up with a different excuse to blow you off.

Introducing the MARAs

Did you catch Toro's Benjamin Briggs on the cover of the National Post's Toronto section on Saturday February 18 (The Worthy 30 - They're Smart, handsome, talented - and unattached")? Inside we discover that Briggs is 29, Gemini, eats Marmite on toast for breakfast, always carries a hanky and drives a BMW (with a Vespa on the side).

Which brings me to my thought du jour - it seems that every corner of this industry has it's awards - NMAs for editorial, MIAs for media planning, ACEs for circulation excellence. Why nothing for the reps? Sure most people are under the impression that we are dumb and lazy yet still are rewarded with obscene compensation packages and fat expense accounts. But that doesn't mean our fragile egos don't need a gentle stroking every so often. Something to emotionally counterbalance all the humiliations, degradations and rejections that are our daily existence. So let's create the MARAs (Magazine Advertising Rep Awards).

Judging can be done by panels drawn from the ad agency community. Categories can include best dressed (Benjamin Briggs), most handsome (Benjamin Briggs again), most entertaining presenter, most persistent, most honest, least honest, best golfer, best lunch and of course - Reptile of the year!

Missed another one

Your weather-averse lizard missed yet another party, this time because of the freezing rain. And I hear it was a pretty good one. But how can you lose with free booze, free food and free coat check. I'm told that there were attractive young women in spandex body suits walking through the crowd making the ladies feel a little old and out of shape and the men feeling a lot old and in no shape. And there were many freelancers and consultants (aka: formerly employed people) looking for their next gig. Oh yeah and lots of magazine ad creative from around the world. But the lousy weather might have scared away a few people other than yours truly as the big room that is Koolhaus was apparently quite, well… roomy.

I'm also told that nobody was seen drinking a Keith's (Those who like children, can like them too much). Perverted actors - one more reason for print.

Anybody who was there and wants to tell me more, feel free to comment.

Don't you just hate it when they yawn

An advertising sales presentation might not be as entertaining as a date with Jim Carrey but that's no excuse for yawning with abandon in group meeting. Maybe I shouldn't take it too personally as it was just one person and I can't remember the last time I had a narcoleptic in the crowd.

If you are a media planner and a rep is boring you to tears (or maybe you're so hung over that even a pole dance by Pamela Anderson would bore you to tears), might I suggest a simple solution - ask a question or two. A little participation, much like the traditional 7th inning stretch, might snap you from your stupor and get you back in the game. Then again, why not use the opportunity to catch a few z's; it's just another rep going blah, blah, blah.

The fat lady has sung for Dr. Karl Moore

Dr. Moore, I had you all wrong. Seems I mistook you for a highbrow academic who had never sold a thing in his life (other than the good people at Marketing on your life-of-a-sales-call trilogy). But buried in the grand finale is the telling comment: "A mistake I often made early in my sales career was to interrupt a customer early in their question". So with a couple of mouse clicks , I discover that prior to joining academia, Dr. Moore worked 12 years in sales and marketing management positions with IBM, Bull and Hitachi. I seriously wonder how many weeks were actually in sales.

Despite his pedigree, this Dr. Moore has managed to produce a totally lame paint-by-numbers series on selling. In this final instalment, "It ain't over 'til it's over" we are told that we should appreciate buyer objections and should respond to them. (Personally, I like to respond by crying profusely in the hope of generating a sympathy sale -- I call this technique the "wail close". Really quite effective.). He then suggests we close by asking for the sale. Apparently they expect us to do that the same way you expect to be asked to remove your shirt by your physician. Dr. Moore does not tell us whether to say "pretty please with a cherry on top" or when to negotiate or how we could add value to the buy with some customized proposals… In fact he tells us nothing of any interest or value. But he does slyly suggest that, because once the sale is made the buyer will likely feel suckered in by our newly-slick approach ("buyer blues" he calls it), we should take them to lunch and reassure them that it's all going to be okay.

I'm going to miss him and his witty column.

Gag me Google

I've been ruminating a new business model for this business, one that would virtually eliminate the need for reps. Looks like Google is one giant step ahead of me. I paraphrase from todays MediaDailyNews:

Google has quietly launched a new phase of its offline media expansion strategy: a pilot test to gauge whether Google's online advertisers will bid for advertising space in major consumer magazines. During the test, advertisers can bid on Ellegirl, Martha Stewart Living, Motor Trend, Car and Driver, Budget Living, Entrepreneur, Women's Health & Fitness, PC World, Official Xbox Magazine, and InfoWorld.

The first ads will appear in April. The pilot is part of a Google's ambitious plan to provide advertisers with inventory beyond online search ads while helping the publishers themselves do better yield management.

It's not quite time to pack it in but the current system of selling print ads, virtually unchanged in over 100 years, is due for a technological overhaul and it's on the way.

Meowww

"Catty and insightful". Ooh, I like that. Yes Masthead stumbled into my blog and that's how Bill Shields referred to my observations. But Masthead did not do much for my hits which dropped 2% in the week after the article. Surely ad reps can read. And even if they can't, surely they would read a column by Editor Shields prominently positioned below the TOC (page 3) with the graphic head "Who'll swallow BIG?" Subtle Bill. Very subtle.

In fairness, Masthead does have more fun stuff to read nowadays thanks to the new underpaid, over-exposed consultant columnists: D.B. Scott, Scott Bullock and Paul Jones. The highlights for me were:

1. The perfect response by Kenneth Whyte to the lame article by Don Obe (see my blog where I supported Whyte's approach by clicking here). I'd work for this guy anytime, damn I still enjoy the National Post.

2. Scott Bullock with another sweet rant. Bullock writes very well for a self-proclaimed circ-geek but why is he so angry? Will he still be angry when the conservatives sweep to power? I guess he can still be pissed off at "controlled circulation". But then, isn't "Control" good and "Kaos" evil (Maxwell Smart, rest in peace).

3. Paul Jones's hilarious slice-and-dice of Esteem magazine. You gotta read every word and applaud Mr. Jones who can say it like it is without fear of impunity (unlike your very own Reptile).

Finally, Shields asks that I call. Sorry Billy-boy, no can do. But if you have a question, click where it says comment and send me an email. I might even publish it and respond.