backtop


Print 52 comment(s) - last by rburnham.. on May 24 at 12:34 PM


Conde Nast's GQ iPad app sold only 365 copies according to a recent interview.  (Source: Apple)
Condé Nast says GQ iPad/iPhone sales were grossly underreported

(Editor's Note -- The statement quoted by MinOnline conflicted with other numbers Condé Nast has released.  See the update below.)

When Apple demoed the iPad to its corporate contacts in the publishing world, they were thrilled.  Unlike e-book readers before it, the iPad had a large LCD screen, capable of displaying a book or magazine in glorious color.

Many publishers jumped at the opportunity to make apps for the platform and sell content via app updates.  Unfortunately they have found that despite there now being well over 1 million iPads in the wild, owners appear to have relatively little interest in reading magazines, thus far.

Gentleman's Quarterly, one of the most popular men's fashion and health magazines, debuted an app in the iTunes App Store some time ago, priced at $2.99.  The app came with one free issue of the magazine and offered future issues priced at $1.99.

According to GQ VP/Publisher Pete Hunsinger, in an interview with MinOnline, the app has only sold 365 copies (for a total of $1,091.35 in sales) on the iPad.  Still Hunsinger remains optimistic, insisting that the iPad app costs his company "nothing".  He comments, "This costs us nothing extra: no printing or postage.  Everything is profit, and I look forward to the time when iPad issue sales become a major component to our circulation."

The first issue was a reprint of the December 2009 "Best Dressed Men" issue and featured Jake Gyllenhaal staring out from the cover.   GQ hopes that the June issue which features the sultry Miranda Kerr (Victoria’s Secret Model and Orlando Bloom’s girlfriend) on the cover will do slightly better.

GQ publisher Condé Nast is unfazed by the poor sales and will also soon be debuting Glamour, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, and Wired magazines on the iPad.

Update: May 18, 2010 3:45 p.m. -
In separate reports Condé Nast says that it actually moved 57,000 copies of GQ on the iPhone/iPad since it introduced the magazine as an iPhone app in December.  This is dramatically different than the MinOnline numbers.  It appears these are the correct numbers.

The information posted on several Apple/Mac sites appears inaccurate, based on this info.  It appears that Apple followers do love their male fashion magazines after all.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

price
By dav16 on 5/18/2010 9:52:43 AM , Rating: 5
On Gq's site you can get a 1 year paper magazine subscription for 12 dollars 2 year 20 dollars. Why do they charge more for the digital download if it costs them less?
quote:
"This costs us nothing extra: no printing or postage. Everything is profit, and I look forward to the time when iPad issue sales become a major component to our circulation."





RE: price
By mcnabney on 5/18/2010 10:21:59 AM , Rating: 5
The publishers figure that the Apple consumer will continue to do what they have always done - pay far more for the same hardware/product. It isn't just GQ. The WSJ costs far more as an app than getting the physical paper delivered to your door AND having full web access to the Journal.

And the GQ executive quoted is an idiot. I am pretty sure there is an upfront expense in developing the app and ongoing expenses in porting their content. Plus the finance cost in managing a new 'SKU' of their product.


RE: price
By sebmel on 5/18/2010 9:23:39 PM , Rating: 3
Mick is playing the click baiter again:

If I remember correctly iPhone + iPod touch sales are 85 million...
the iPad adds 500 thousand

there is some overlap in use... so lets say 60 million unique users

57,000 / 60,000,000 x 100 = ?

you remember this, don't you Mick... percentages?

The answer, rounding up, just to be a little more conservative is 0.1%, or one in a thousand... and considerably less if GQ have sold more than one issue.

So, Mick, little by way of facts for todays troll... but that's never stopped you before, has it.


RE: price
By mcnabney on 5/18/2010 10:10:11 PM , Rating: 2
There is more than a little overlap. I know a lot of people that have iPhones and two that have iPads. FYI - they all have iPhone 1, iPhone3G, and iPhone3GS. So the iPad owners also own three other iCommunication devices. They all also own at least two iPods (remember those?). My cousin is the queen. Seven iPhones purchased (four broken), one shuffle, two nanos (different colors), and she says at least four more iPods - probably more. And don't get me started on replacing the Macbook Pros every other year. The iConsumer is the stereotypical American Consumer.


RE: price
By sebmel on 5/19/2010 11:34:12 AM , Rating: 2
Yet there's some overlap... but 50 million iPhones have been sold... and I used a figure of 60 million out of a total of 85,500,000... probably 86,000,000 by now. So I have assumed that there are just 10 million iPad or iPod Touch users who don't have an iPhone... and 25 million who do.

Pretty conservative assumptions... but if you wish just to consider the iPhone and ignore any chance of sales to the iPad or iPod owners ... and, of course, ignore that the sales figures are almost certainly for more than one issue (which would potentially half the final percentage)... and you still get:

57,000 / 50 million x 100 = 0.114%

Nothing changed. The Mick is taking the mickey and click baiting again.


RE: price
By sebmel on 5/19/2010 12:10:57 PM , Rating: 2
First issue for iPhone came out 18th November, 2009... that was the December issue. So the June issue is out now... the 7th available. The 57,000 sales figure thus almost certainly represents sales for 6 issues, Dec to May.

Take the 50 million iPhone sales... assume, very generously, that 40% have broken...

57,000/30 million/6 x 100 = roughly 0.03% of iPhone users interested in GQ

Assuming no sales to iPod Touch and iPad users. 3 in 10,000 users.

Stop trolling Mick.


RE: price
By TheDoc9 on 5/18/2010 10:30:58 AM , Rating: 3
Modern business schools teach that you charge the maximum that the market can bear.


RE: price
By theapparition on 5/18/2010 10:45:00 AM , Rating: 5
Apparently, the market didn't bear it too well at that price.


RE: price
By quiksilvr on 5/18/2010 3:44:20 PM , Rating: 5
Bears are destroying our US economy.


RE: price
By ClownPuncher on 5/18/2010 5:23:26 PM , Rating: 4
Bears eat beets...Battlestar Gallactica


RE: price
By rdawise on 5/18/2010 9:06:25 PM , Rating: 2
Nice "The Office" reference!


RE: price
By VahnTitrio on 5/18/2010 11:30:55 AM , Rating: 5
But is printing and postage still more expensive after Apple takes it's share?


RE: price
By lowsidex2 on 5/18/2010 12:37:06 PM , Rating: 2
Buying 1 issue will always cost more than a years worth. It's the newsstand price.


RE: price
By Drag0nFire on 5/18/2010 2:07:17 PM , Rating: 2
And why are they charging for the app? Comparisons to the print version aside, this is simply a poor business decision. I'm much more likely to pull down a free app on a whim. If I like the magazine/format, maybe I'll get suckered into $2 per issue...


RE: price
By zonkie on 5/18/2010 4:32:28 PM , Rating: 3
If it comes in white after labor day they blew it!


RE: price
By artemicion on 5/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: price
By chick0n on 5/19/2010 9:13:07 AM , Rating: 4
Cuz Apple users are morons. and those people at GQ knows it.


Miranda Kerr
By Spivonious on 5/18/2010 9:33:04 AM , Rating: 2
Yum.




RE: Miranda Kerr
By troysavary on 5/18/2010 9:54:12 AM , Rating: 5
Once they put a hot girl on the cover, it will become "porn" and Jobs will banish them.


RE: Miranda Kerr
By Xaussie on 5/18/2010 12:36:08 PM , Rating: 2
And no-one on this planet finds hot guys appealing? I think it already classifies as porn. I prefer Miranda Kerr personally but I'm not everyone.

Shame on you Steve, promoting this hot-bed of eroticism!


RE: Miranda Kerr
By Anoxanmore on 5/18/2010 4:34:45 PM , Rating: 4
I find hot guys appealing... :)


RE: Miranda Kerr
By rdawise on 5/18/2010 9:08:21 PM , Rating: 2
Are you saying the Jobs is ok with "hot guys" but not "hot women"? Perish the thought...</sarcasm>


RE: Miranda Kerr
By Vagisil on 5/18/2010 9:58:14 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Miranda Kerr
By Spivonious on 5/18/2010 10:14:08 PM , Rating: 2
Orlando Bloom is a lucky man.


RE: Miranda Kerr
By afkrotch on 5/19/2010 1:05:18 AM , Rating: 2
Anyone with a lot of money can get hot chicks. Sure, they're probably gold diggers, but they'd be hot.


RE: Miranda Kerr
By iamezza on 5/19/2010 2:32:34 PM , Rating: 2
she could be hot.. if she gained a few pounds. I find a visible ribcage to be very un-sexy.


So?
By whiskerwill on 5/18/2010 8:57:33 AM , Rating: 5
Technogeeks aren't big on fashion. But then we already knew that.




RE: So?
By MrBlastman on 5/18/2010 9:03:18 AM , Rating: 5
Correct, but the people who buy i-Pads and Apple products in general, are (at least as far as I can tell). The true geeks that I know would rather round up a large pile of Apple devices, douse it with lighter fluid and ignite it into a glorious blaze of whimpering electronic screams than subject themselves to the torture of trying to actually "use" one of Jobs' dastardly traps.


RE: So?
By StevoLincolnite on 5/18/2010 11:15:16 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
The true geeks that I know would rather round up a large pile of Apple devices, douse it with lighter fluid and ignite it into a glorious blaze of whimpering electronic screams than subject themselves to the torture of trying to actually "use" one of Jobs' dastardly traps.


Not true.
In-fact, we don't want to just simply douse a large pile of Apple devices into a glorious blaze of whimpering electronic screams... Just every Apple product ever released world-wide, not to much more to ask for.

Dropping a few nukes on top wouldn't hurt either.


RE: So?
By Motoman on 5/18/2010 11:59:05 AM , Rating: 4
Technogeeks don't buy Apple products. People who *think* they are technologically savvy, but actually are just cowed by advertising and propaganda, buy Apple products.

I would suspect that there is a huge overlap between GQ readers and Apple consumers.


RE: So?
By rburnham on 5/24/2010 12:34:42 PM , Rating: 2
So you are saying my Half-Life 2 t-shirt that came with the collectors edition of the game is NOT fashionable?


Um...
By amanojaku on 5/18/2010 9:15:19 AM , Rating: 2
How does "GQ" become "magazines"? My gut tells me that magazines would have a hard time selling on electronic devices, but GQ sales is hardly the bellwether for magazine trends. And wtf were they thinking by charging for the app AND the magazines? One or the other, people.

On a different note, I saw the iPad yesterday. You can't type on it easily because of the rounded bottom, which means it's best used as a display device, e.g. video player or web browser. But I wouldn't want to hold the thing as it's heavy and bulky. You need a stand to use this comfortably, and that pretty much kills mobility.




RE: Um...
By jonmcc33 on 5/18/2010 9:18:14 AM , Rating: 4
It's easy and the same as the hundreds of women's magazines. Just get people to write stupid stuff, pay some famous person to pose on your cover, fill half the magazine with ads for your revenue and there you go! You are now a magazine CEO!


RE: Um...
By Murloc on 5/18/2010 12:37:47 PM , Rating: 2
lol I didn't know that there were stupid ad-filled women magazines for men too.


RE: Um...
By sviola on 5/18/2010 1:13:03 PM , Rating: 2
I think he was questioning the author of the article on how did a not very popular magazine represents all magazines...but nonetheless your post was fun. :)


RE: Um...
By Ammohunt on 5/18/2010 2:45:20 PM , Rating: 3
Don't forget you need a Marxist bent as well.


Gentleman Quarterly? how about G*y Quarterly?
By superPC on 5/18/2010 9:02:35 AM , Rating: 2
Hmmm I thought this kind of thing would sell well on the ipad, since it's geared towards a more "metro" user.




By chagrinnin on 5/18/2010 9:53:29 AM , Rating: 2
Meanwhile,...back at GQ headquarters, it's high fives all around as sales have exceeded their wildest dreams.


RE: Gentleman Quarterly? how about G*y Quarterly?
By Taft12 on 5/18/2010 1:21:13 PM , Rating: 1
I hate to rain on your (upmodded :( ) gay bashing, but a "metro" user is hetero by definition.


By bigboxes on 5/18/2010 5:58:39 PM , Rating: 1
I hate to rain on your metro defending, but a "metro" user tries to convince himself that he's hetero. See the Miller Lite ad. (man with "carryall")


What are people using them for?
By alanore on 5/18/2010 9:14:59 AM , Rating: 2
When the iPad pushed the 1 million mark, it has only 'sold' 12 million apps. That works out an average of each iPad having 12apps, of which there is no way of telling how much of these people actually paid for, or download for free.

In general its a pretty expensive device, with the initial cost, and then cost of apps, which in most cases provides public data bundled into an app.




RE: What are people using them for?
By Inkjammer on 5/18/2010 9:45:57 AM , Rating: 2
Don't forget, Apple generally just ranks thing in "downloads" whenever they promote how popular their devices are. But each download includes patch updates, etc. So if you buy an app, and download four updates... Apple just lumps that together as 5 downloads.

Makes their numbers look bigger, more impressive.

Certainly doesn't help that most iPads apps are more expensive than their iPhone cousins.


By Tony Swash on 5/18/2010 6:37:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Don't forget, Apple generally just ranks thing in "downloads" whenever they promote how popular their devices are. But each download includes patch updates, etc. So if you buy an app, and download four updates... Apple just lumps that together as 5 downloads.


I know this is probably being overly rationale - but do you have any evidence to support that assertion?


I dont understand why it didnt do better really.....
By jabber on 5/18/2010 12:37:42 PM , Rating: 2
...after all GQ is the most vacuous magazine for the most vacuous readers.

Should have sold thousands on the iPad for that reason alone.




By Taft12 on 5/18/2010 1:22:06 PM , Rating: 2
How did Cosmo do? That's far more vacuous!


iPads (& apps) vs. Snuggies
By MikeBurtner on 5/18/2010 9:41:59 AM , Rating: 3
So Apple has sold 1 million iPads, and that is supposed to be some sort of bellwether of the hipness quotient of American 'wired' consumers. The Snuggie(tm) has sold 20 million units, and that's just the one we see in CVS stores and on TV - tens of millions of its predecessors sold in Bed, Bath & Beyond, et al.

Anyone who spends upwards of US$1000 on a proprietary platform e-reader (after the inevitable subscriptions and accessories) has more money than sense, but that's not really a pejorative here in the US. In fact, it's a capitalist badge of honor.




No Pirks, No reader1????
By satveeraj on 5/18/2010 4:12:25 PM , Rating: 2
I was expecting the iFans to jump all over this but apparently there must be some secret Apple convention going on at the moment :-)




RE: No Pirks, No reader1????
By Fred242 on 5/18/2010 4:58:12 PM , Rating: 1
Dear God, this is a puerile thread. Haven't any of you got something constructive or at least amusing to say? All this Apple bashing is so much like penis envy.


apple = gay
By p05esto on 5/19/2010 12:08:55 PM , Rating: 3
Apple is a company tailored to homosexuals and metrosexuals... real men don't buy apple products, drive around in wimpy hybrid cars, wear black turtlenecks, sit in startbucks and look important typing away or any of that weinie crap. Apple = gay




Hilarious.
By xpax on 5/18/2010 10:30:01 AM , Rating: 2
These companies are so out of it. They all thought that the iPad would be their savior, and all they had to do was hype it. Like Wired and Ars Technica posting about 20 articles a day about iPad. Everything was iPad for a while.

In the end though, you can offer consumers a new route to consume your media -- thing is -- people weren't bored with the medium. They were tired of paying for your content twice -- once for the magazine itself, and then again by being subjected to page after page of ads.

Moving it to another platform isn't going to magically change that. The sales numbers show it.




Market research?
By consumerwhore on 5/18/2010 12:36:29 PM , Rating: 2
Er... Did none of geniuses at GQ ever heard of market research? e.g. How many iPad owners are also GQ readers?

The most hilarious thing is that probably more than half of the buyers just did it for the novelty. They won't be repeat buyers!




bikini
By xinxiong on 5/18/10, Rating: -1
"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki