Small-magazine publishers roundtable

Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, June, 1986 by Barbara Love

Small-magazine publishers roundtable "Saving six-tenths of 1 percent on something means a lot to Time, but it doesn't mean diddly to me," Sam Pennington, publisher of Maine Antique Digest, said at the FOLIO: Small-magazine publishers roundtable.

This comment reflects the feeling of difference that characterizes publishers of small magazines who have small staffs and relatively small positive cash flow. The publishers participating in the roundtable stated the importance of sharing experiences and opinions with their peers--other publishers "on the same wavelength" or "on the same scale" who could "easily identify" with their situations.

They want answers to questions that publishers who operate on a larger scale don't have to deal with. Do I really need to computerize? If I do, where should I start? How can I secure national advertising? Do we (small-magazine publishers) need our own association? What ancillary activities can I pursue profitably? How can I pay salespeople the compensation they are accustomed to at larger publications?

The following publishers shared ideas on these and many more questions at the FOLIO: Small-magazine publishers roundtable: Sam Pennington, publisher, Maine Antique Digest; Reed Phillips, associate publisher, The New Republic; Robert J. Dowling, publisher, High-Tech Marketing; Terrence Driscoll, who was publisher of Horticulture when the roundtable was conducted: Jeff Schaeffer, publisher, Supermarket Business; R. Michael McCormick, publisher, Association Management; Adam J. Landis, vice president, Living History/Military History; Jerry Goldstein, publisher, In Business and Biocycle; David Parker, associate publisher, The Nation; and Richard J. Royer, publisher, Chesapeake Bay Magazine.

Joseph Hanson, publisher and editor in chief of FOLIO:, was moderator.

The cost and value of computers

Hanson: I've a number of questions that you have submitted, and some are very perceptive. Let's start with one on computers. How can we computerize most of our operation without breaking the bank? Have any of you gone heavily into computerization in-house?

Parker: Heavily is probably premature. We have three or four PCs, which we're using primarily on the business side. We're exploring the idea of moving computers into editorial. We're very excited about that because we are a weekly and do all our typesetting in-house. We make many changes at the last minute. At this point, manuscripts are being retyped and retyped and retyped as they get edited.

Looking back on my decision to bring computers into The Nation, I think the biggest mistake I made was to do too much research at first and look at a large system--a multiuser system with a big price tag. The suggestion I would have for other publishers interested in computers is to go out tomorrow and buy a small PC. All the research in the world is not going to teach you as much as a hands-on trial.

Pennington: We're there. Our accounting is on one computer. I've got a PC for myself that's hooked up to the text editing machine. We've got another computer to keep this on track. We're fragmented--like everybody, I guess, who got their computers piecemeal. The dream, of course, is to have one big computer that will do it all.

Schaeffer: I was told yesterday by one of our people that the networking of PCs is really becoming a reality.

Phillips: We have all of our editors' PCs networked together. That's about 12 PCs networked onto a central computer--not a minicomputer, but a hard disc microcomputer.

Pennington: So each guy can call up a story and change it?

Phillips: Right. Exactly.

Hanson: Was this developed for you or is it a package system?

Phillips: We went outside. A company came in and created a package for us. It's not something off the shelf. Anybody can call up an article. In the final stages, the production people send the articles over to our typesetter. Then the articles are run out in type and pasted up. It's a very simple process.

Royer: I don't think there's anything wrong with having independent systems. We created our own system. We did advertising billing and circulation on it. But when that computer was down, we couldn't send the bills out. Just last week I bought three new PCs. I have one for the circulation person, one for the ad billing person and one for the editorial staff. When a computer goes down, I don't want the whole place to be at a standstill.

Pennington: That's one great advantage to having a lot of little ones.

Schaeffer: Back to the question of whether or not we can afford computers. We're a five-year-old company. We have a certain amount of debt service, with which we have done very well. We're looking at the prospect of growth and saying, "We'll pay off this debt and then we'll finance the start of a new book or buy a new book."

Then PCs come in from this corner and we're looking at buying them for $1,400 and a printer for another $500 or $1,000. Then you get a request for a dozen of them and you're looking at, God knows, $25,000. We're frankly a bit ambivalent right now about computers. We are buying them, but we're not a cash rich company. How important are computers to you?