Whether you read Popular Science magazine or not, this is a story you need to study.
The publishing industry is STILL under siege. That’s no surprise. But how the different long-time players are reacting and responding to this makes for very interesting reading.
Take Popular Science magazine, for example. They’ve made some pretty big changes recently to improve circulation and ensure their future success.
But have they really? The fact is the most recent changes sound a lot like, well, changes made just two years ago.
Watch this week’s UNCOPYABLE Business episode #95 and decide for yourself. Will PopSci survive? Will it survive two more years?
What do you think? Comment below!
Are you getting all my marketing tips, videos, and offers? CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP!
Sounds like they’re going down. Thicker paper makes it appear to contain more content than it does. Fewer issues to cut costs, spend less because they are making less. Keep cutting costs and making less, seems like a downward trend.
I think the real question they need to address is whether the content they provide is better than content provided by competitors. Doesn’t matter if the content is delivered by paper or electronically. They could survive without the paper version if they provide good, unique content. It’s a challenge though because people are used to getting free content online. They may have to provide free content and rely on ad revenue without subscription revenue.
I think they may not survive.
Thanks for the topic Steve!
Jeff Meland, Minnesota
Out of sight – out of mind. I have been a Popular Science subscriber for over 35 years and have always looked forward to reading their magazine. It was a great way to see what new innovations were being created in many different industries. Reading the monthly magazine provided me with a quick and easy way to keep up with all of the new technologies that were heading our way. I liked the “Cliff Note” format of the articles. It was an exciting, quick and easy way to read the magazine. When the magazine moved to a bi-monthly format, I found myself missing it at first but then I found myself forgetting all about it. Now that they are moving to a quarterly magazine I feel that they are doomed. I guess I shouldn’t have paid for the 3 year subscription up front.
Thanks, Michael! I’m not a subscriber, but I buy every issue for my trips. I’ve always enjoyed the PopSci style and learned something cool in every issue. The one I’m referring to in my vid seems to be trying too hard to sound interesting. That’s very different from BEING interesting. I’m with you.
Hi, Steve Great vid and you have sold at least one more copy of Pop Sci. Will report back after I read the issue.
Fyi, I was a print magazine publisher and editor for nearly 15 years (20 plus in the industry).
Historically, magazines test markets and launches by the graduated 4x, 6x, 12x frequency strategy. It works for books (as mags are called in the biz) on the way UP.
Rarely does it work on the way down. Perhaps a few fine art or coffee table magazines might get away with decreasing frequency, but for a how-to book to go to 4x AND retain its monthly readership is a huge stretch.
Is it still the how-to mag I read as a kid (now 67). I suspect it’s not AND I need to see how many recent owners it has gone thru…
Bill Gleason
As I have seen with many of my trade journals, the print media is dying. I myself sometimes prefer print especially when traveling because I can still read when all electronics needs to be turned off, so there is something to be said about that.
It is sad to see this media platform go the way of the dial telephone, but progress is progress. I am not sure Popular Science will survive. I for one would hate to see it go, but I am not sure it can be saved.
I still miss having newsprint on my fingers from newspapers, but that is also changing.
I applaud the new editor, but I am not sure he has a finger on the pulse of social media and the need for instant information. The printed magazine just cannot keep up with this need. I hope it continues, but I am not optimistic.
Best Regards.
Ed Nachel, Utah
P.S. Keep up the good work, Steve. Good subject and worth discussing.
Thanks, Ed. It seems to me there should still be a place for print magazines. But like Einstein once said, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
The editor is trying to get the reading public to think they are getting more from less. A very hard sell. As the generation ages the print medium is slowly moving over to web based content. From early on this content has been mostly free, however I thing that the time is coming when the free content will be greatly reduced and subscriptions will be the norm.
Popular Science by going from 12 to 6 to 4 is reducing their public profile thereby lessening their impact on the print minded public. This is a way of slowing dying one less edition at a time. As I am stating this does not appear to be a good strategy for long term success.
I give the magazine five (5) more years in print form before going totally digital with a subscription format.
I have dropped all of my print subscriptions, with the except of one, that changed to bi-monthly. When you stretch out your mailings that far you get over taken by on-line digests. I have also dropped daily and weekly news publications. The news they carry is not current enough for my taste. However I do use their online sites and push notifications.
I agree with you, when travelling it is nice to have a magazine or book to read. No worries about a dead or prohibited eReader device.
Going quarterly with a deeper dive in a specific subject won’t work. A single subject publication is only read by those interested in that single subject. Hardly a way to gain wider market share.
I hate to see Popular Science go. In a different era I used to look forward to reading each and every of its monthly issues.
MY VISIT TO THE NEWSSTAND: Hi, Steve – this is Bill G. reporting back in… I could not find the current issue of Popular Science on the Barnes & Noble website. If this wasn’t a glitch (or the mag was sold out), this is a clear sign things are trending down. Deep down.
The newsstand has traditionally been an expensive and risky place to do business. BUT – the payoff was it was always the best subscription sales mechanism, bar none. As long as you had good content and subscribers stuck with you for a couple of years, the newsstand could become a goldmine (altho a fickle and dangerous one).
I did find two special editions of Popular Science (we call them one-shots) dedicated to special activities and published by the book division of Time, and perhaps co-branded by Bonnier (the publisher of record for the monthly, 6x, now quarterly print magazine).
To be fair, you did find a copy at the airport, so I am praying it was sold out and they are not turning their back on the newsstand and new readers.
There is a strong position for print (with adjunct paid web presences), but print publishers struggle with it. Just like newspaper publishers couldn’t accept lower than astronomical profits (33 – 37 %) so they just kept killing the editorial that created it.
I fear Pop Sci in print is headed to oblivion. I already see it focusing on shorter stories, more generalized content, and trying to be cool journalists to nerd readers. Ain’t gonna work.
Bill
PS The comments from other readers quite insightful and well thought out. Kudos to all, and you.
Thanks, Bill, I appreciate your investigative effort,
I’m glad that you’re asking this question, Steve. Here are a few things I’ve learned over the years that could help them.
When I was overseeing trade shows and you were giving me advice and making me look smart, you said that trade shows that trimmed their schedule (say, from being a four day show to a three day show) because they thought they could cut costs and eliminate the least profitable day of the show weren’t successful – that they still ended up having a ‘last day’ of the show (imagine that!) and it was many times a downward spiral. I think the same can be said for cutting the number of issues that a magazine publisher publishes.
While I appreciate that they’re trying to do something (special theme issues), I think quarterly specialized issues won’t work. First, as previously said, if you’re not interested in that topic, you’re not buying. Second, because if you’re only on someone’s radar screen every three months, you really aren’t on their radar screen.
The key is, they need to do something that is uncopyable. My suggestion (stolen from things I’ve heard you say over the years), is not only to be uncopyable, understand who their moose is, go back to publishing monthly and put a premium price on their content. If the value is clear, the decision is easy.
They may not have an easy road, but the path their on will not lead to success. I’d recommend getting an honest grip on who they are and who their audience is, going hard after that market, and staying top of mind so they are THE source for that audience. If they do that, they have a shot.
Obviously, most of the advice is from my teacher of many years. A really bright guy 🙂
Good thinking, Jim! You’re a great student!
I enjoy reading magazines verses electronically in a leisurely setting. When I want or need information then it Hi-Ho Hi Ho, its to the computer I go.
I’m a baby boomer so they may have a shot a my age group. The younger generations needs and desires will be a challenge for them
I don’t know enough about that industry, but if I had to bet, it would be that the magazine is headed for a downhill slide. Unless they more innovative they are likely to hit a wall.
I read paper and on line PS mag. On line got horrid with huge pop up in lower right quarter of screen that cannot be closed.
PopSci was to me, the “Reader’s Digest” of technology stuff. A little bit of this, a little bit of that, a DIY article, and when I was in grade school, too many years ago, it started me on my path to technology, engineering, and even computers.
When they went from 12 to 6 issues, I figured it was just costs going up, ads going down, but the content was still there.
I didn’t realize what they did till the Spring “How We’ll Move” issue arrived. It used to be that when PopSci came, I’d stop what I was doing and read it for a couple of hours for starters. Today I looked at it, went “ho-hum” and maybe I’ll look at it closer some time. I didn’t like the selection of articles, the style of the articles, or the layout. The non-gloss paper was nice.
I think they shot themselves in the foot. 2 years, maybe.
I want to read the articles in Popular Science magazine – the subject matter is interesting but the presentation is not useful.
I find it difficult to read Popular Science.
The type size is too too small, far less than recommended for normal publishing
And then in descriptions within the story the text are printed in color on a colored background that affords very little contrast – making reading even more difficult
I use reading eyeglasses to correct my reading vision. But even with the glasses i have difficulty reading this magazine – I can read many other publications, newspapers, magazines, electronics, etc. None of the other publications are as difficult for me to read.
I recognize that smaller text allows placing more text on each page, and the “artistic” presentations could be interesting and helpful in understanding the article. But not useful if they make reading more difficult.
I don’t know how much longer I will put up with these reading difficulties – much as I enjoy the content it may not be worth the effort to read the text.
PLEASE MAKE YOUR TEXT MORE READABLE
Well, I read all the recent reviews. I recently subscribed to Popular Science. I put my order in March of 2020. Now it appears that they are in trouble. I should have read this all first. I hope they are in business long enough to get my copies of the next future copies. I love the science world and find this is a sad time.
Hate to hear that, George! I love Popular Science, but I buy it at the store.
I sent in an order, they had a year for $10. I am waiting for my first issue. After that, if it is in the store I will buy it. No more subscriptions.
Well, crap. Like I said, hate to hear that.
Since I was about 8 years old, I have been a big fan of Popular Science Magazine. Here I am now 58 years later and I am still a big fan. I believe it would be criminal to even think of discontinuing Popular Science. I first became interested in science through P.S. I pray that P.S. does not stop publishing its irreplaceable magazine. I’m sure the P.S. is how most pre-teens are introduced to science. Somebody, please help save this very valuable institution.
I have a 7 year old son who likes to take things apart and rebuild them in his own special way. Made me think of my dad and the P.S. DIY articles my father and I couldn’t wait to read in each issue when I was a child. So I set out to order a subscription and carry on the tradition. Instead of a subscription (which I couldn’t locate) I found your video. I fear that soon nostalgia will be be their only subscribers and they will not find that new box. I will be sorry to see them go. Now I need to do a search for DIY projects for a 7 year old.