Newspapers look at mail order ads differently

business.

Both The Sunday Telegraph and The Mail on Sunday had for a time shelved
their mail order revenue streams, in favour of concentrating on a more
upmarket clientele that would fit in with their relaunched supplements:
Stella, Seven, Live and, most recently, You.

Yet both had to face the harsh reality that, where the competition for
well designed beauty and fashion ads is intense, mail order advertisers
continue to be the reliable lifeblood of weekend newspaper supplements.
The Mail on Sunday also debuted its own ad supplement, Source It, in
January.

The about-turns were not a surprise to Lee-Anne Salisbury, the associate
director of magazines at MediaVest Manchester, which includes Plumbs, JD
Williams, and Bradford Exchange among its mail order clients. "I've been
in the business for 16 years and I always find that publishers have a
very tough stance initially and then they cave in. Sometimes it takes
two or three months to realise that they are losing revenue," she
says.

Efficient ads

Marcus Lewis, press buying director at MediaCom North, agrees: "There is
a perception by publishers that direct response advertising is fairly
ugly and in certain respects they are not far wrong, but these ads look
the way they do because they are efficient and they do work."

Carley Ayers, the Telegraph's magazine group head, denies Shop 24-7 was
a defensive move to protect revenue streams. She says: "People are
always going to be cynical, but essentially what we have done is opened
up the Sunday portfolio and we now have got something to offer the mail
order community, as well as having some amazing new advertisers that we
didn't have this time last year." Ayers says the rates for Shop 24-7 are
less than those in one of the Telegraph's editorial products.

Simon Davies, advertising director at The Mail on Sunday, admits that
while he considers mail order advertising to be commercially very
important, how it fits in with the MoS products can be an issue. "Some
of our advertisers complained that they didn't want their brand to be
associated with too much mail order advertising. So with Live, there is
not a lot of mail order advertising in it and with You, we have a policy
of not having any mail order advertising in the newsstand edition."

The policy is backed by Jerome O'Regan, head of buying at BLM-owned Red
Media, which specialises in luxury goods clients, the very ones that
"style" supplements are chasing. He says he avoids his ads being placed
next to the mail order sections at all costs.

So, from a luxury advertiser's perspective, keeping mail order out of
supplements is a positive move. But how do mail order companies feel
about being banished to an ad-only magazine full of ads from their
rivals?

Drawback factor

Scott Mitchell, planner/buyer of mail order advertising at WWAV, says
that, as with any new launch, he would need to be convinced of its worth
before investing.

While he appreciates the value that a newspaper-branded ad supplement
brings, there are drawbacks, namely that supplements catch everyone
going through the magazine, whereas back-to-back ad-magazines can be
ignored.

And, it seems that publishers cannot continue to rely on this valuable
revenue source, if they don't start treating their mail order customers
with a bit more respect. Clients are quick to point out that they are
not locked into national press and have a raft of other advertising
options available, including, women's weeklies, "grey market" titles and
home interest magazines.

Another popular option is inserted catalogues and offers that allow for
more creative freedom and have a good response rate. However, Lewis
points out that, with a higher cost per 1,000, they are usually used as
part of a larger marketing mix, rather than on their own.

The acid test for the Telegraph and MoS strategies is whether their new
ad-only supplements deliver a cost efficient response for their
advertisers.

Should these supplements be simply tipped straight into the bin along
with any other unwanted inserts, then clients and publishers may be
forced into a rethink.

TOP 10 MAIL ORDER SPENDERS

National press (Feb 2005 to January 2006)

Expenditure

JD Williams & Co Ltd £19,222,934

Shop Direct Ltd £8,958,939

Compton & Woodhouse Ltd £7,897,118

Dial a Phone £7,408,064

Brooks & Bentley £7,219,175

Bristol Group Ltd £6,730,175

Bradford Exchange Ltd £4,615,799

MBI Incorporated £3,642,731

Home Shopping Slections £2,477,484

Health & Home Shopping £2,476,685

Grand total (all mail order) £168,649,136

SOURCE: Nielsen Media Research.