Mark Pasetsky's Cover Awards

Why Would You Spend $1.5 Million On The Christina Aguilera Pics Again - After the Issue Bombed on the Newsstand?

Dear Larry Hackett,

This morning’s New York Post reports that your cover featuring Christina Aguilera with her new baby did not sell well on the newsstand.

How much did you spend on those pictures?  Around $1.5 million, according to industry estimates.

Usually, you sell around 1.5 million copies on the newsstand and this week will be a HUGE disappointment with this issue tallying around 1.3 million newsstand copies.

Last week I mentioned that I could tell you were not confident in this cover.  Why?  You put the nursery on the cover instead of focusing solely on Xtina and her baby.

And now your response to the poor sales is “I’d do the deal again in a minute.”  Are you kidding me?

That’s like saying I lost $1.5 million dollars on RED and I’d do it again.  (This was the best gambling analogy I could come up with.)

You’re obviously under a lot of pressure and so is the entire category.  But, spending this type of money on this type of star is a BIG mistake.   It would be refreshing if you actually admitted that - but then we’d be living in a world based on reality and not perception.

I understand that you believe it’s important for People Magazine to buy these pictures so upstarts like OK Magazine and copycats like US Weekly don’t get their hands on them.     

Unfortunately, for People Magazine, this type of spending time and time again will ultimately lead to disaster! 

And now I hear that you’re thinking of spending between $4-6 million for J. Lo’s baby pics.   I advise that you step back for a minute and think about that before you do it.  

J. Lo is not the newsstand queen from two to three years ago.   This astronomical price would only be worth it if you have record breaking sales.  

And, I don’t see that happening.

xoxo
Mark

Yes, That was Bonnie!

Dear Candace,

I’ve been thinking a lot about what you said this morning in Keith Kelly’s column and how you really stuck it to Bonnie Fuller.

For those that didn’t read the story, Keith Kelly’s column said that “When Fuller took over the magazine a few years ago and moved it from newsprint to glossy stock, she (Bonnie) insisted that the magazine was going to differentiate itself from its tabloid sister publication The National Enquirer and stop paying for stories.”

And Candace, your response: “That was Bonnie.”

For those that need a reminder, Bonnie reinvented the celebrity weekly category with her innovations at US Weekly.  (Yes, Janice Min is keeping the US Weekly machine moving, but Bonnie is the one that got it going.)  She may not have had as much luck at Star because it is quite difficult to totally reinvent a brand.

So, Candace, you’re now making Star into a good old-fashioned tabloid magazine.   Sounds really innovative.   You may want to spend some time with the person who created a whole new category of celeb glossies.  You might learn a thing or two. 

However, if I was Bonnie, I’d let you continue doing what you’re doing - and creating covers like “Britney’s Married in Mexico!”

xoxo
Mark

Dear Janice,

I noticed that you once again caught one of your competitors “sensationalizing,” or as you say, “getting a story wrong.”   You then point out how others in the celebrity weekly category continue to do the same thing.

My question to you is this:  Why do you continuously obsess over the competition’s stories?  Is it because you are feeling threatened?

I have a theory!  If you simply focused on what your magazine is producing every week, you could start developing some new editorial innovations and possibly break some big stories for once. 

Wouldn’t that be better for your reader?

xoxo
Mark

Dear Janice, 

Why are you promoting Rolling Stone on your web site?

Especially when you have Britney on your cover this week!

This really doesn’t make any sense to me.   It must be important for you to sell a lot of magazines on the newsstand.   Will your bonus get affected by this type of decision if your sales don’t do well?

Are you getting pressure from Jann?   Is he upset about the Blender cover?

Just asking?

xoxo

Mark 

Dear Celebrity Weekly Editors,

It’s been another tough week for Britney.  She had a rocky reunion with her mom and she made yet another trip to the psychiatric ward, according to recent reports.  Both of these events would support your choice for her as either a main cover topic or an inset.

Ok, editors,  I’m throwing down the gauntlet.  I challenge you NOT to put Britney on your covers next week.  That’s it - a TOTAL BRITNEY BLACKOUT!  Can you do it?

I argue that this woman is clearly suffering from some type of mental illness — as has been reported by People and alluded to on the new Blender. 

If she had any other type of disease, you and the paparazzi would have much more sympathy for her and would provide her with privacy. 

For one second, put yourself in her flip flops.  She’s lost her kids, she’s lost her career, she’s lost her body.  What’s next - her life?  (Stop dreaming about rocket sales - this would be a horrific tragedy!)

Call me an optimist - but I believe giving this girl a break for one week could make a big difference.

Mark Pasetsky
CoverAwards.com