RSS

GQ reports extremely poor iPad app downloads

By Joshua Schnell Mon, May 17, 2010 @ 3:24 PM

gq ipad GQ reports extremely poor iPad app downloads

Just how poor were the GQ downloads on the iPad? 365 downloads to be exact. Talk about underwhelming, considering the hype surrounding digital magazine downloads and the potential a tablet device could have. A breath of fresh air came from Pete Hunsinger, GQ VP, who according to iPodNN claimed that they see the iPad becoming a “major component” of their circulation model. Condé Nast executives could have have easily thrown the device under the bus, but it was pretty wise of them to reserve judgement until they wrap their head around their own price models.

megan fox gq cover 385x500 GQ reports extremely poor iPad app downloads

Sure, the GQ iPad app comes in at $2.99, which is substantially less than the bookshelf price, but when Condé Nast offers up a GQ print subscription for a dollar per issue, we begin to wonder if they really get this whole thing.  Twelve dollars would get me an entire year worth of GQ delivered to my door, but the same privilege for the iPad version would cost me $35.88, and we don’t even get a sexy GQ bag. Okay, that last part was sarcasm, but the argument remains the same.

Hunsinger says that the iPad edition cost them nothing extra to create, and that all sales up until now have been entirely profit, so we have to wonder why there’s a premium on the iPad edition.

Do you think the sales would be better if they offered a flat rate price for the entire year, much like they do with magazine subscriptions? I’m leaning toward yes, but traditional print magazines still have a huge fight on their hands. Blogs get you the same news a lot quicker, and they’re starting to get their own iPad apps; most of the time these blog apps are free to use (see the Mashable application as a prime example). Comments on the iTunes App Store seem to be just as split on the issue as I am. The reviewers seem to either love or hate the application, which isn’t really anything new either, considering the state of comment systems on the the internet.

We don’t have the answers, but if you think you might, let us know in the comments.

Article Via iPodNN

GQ reports extremely poor iPad app downloads
  • http://www.thetechscoop.net James

    It’s a shame – I lost focus of the article when I saw the Megan Fox cover photo – everything went blurry after that.

    Outside of that – the app should be free with a premium offering for those that want less ads or more personalized content

    • http://macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      Maybe I should change it to Will Ferrall. ;)

      • http://www.JenniferLeePromotions.com Jen Butson

        Nooo, James Franco or LeBron James!

  • http://www.gazaro.com/iphone Will Robertson

    They should offer subscription costs similar to a print subscription as well as individual issue prices that are a bit less than a print copy. Seems the only solution that makes sense.

    • http://macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      You couldn’t have said it any better. If they’re going to be charging more than their print editions, many would expect to get more out of the iPad application. It’s not like that currently, and hopefully they have some more things in store for digital models.

      I’m really curious to see how Conde Naste transitions the Wired application from their concept, released earlier (it’s on youtube), to actualization. Something like that is value added and worth the premium in my opinion.

  • Darkfusion

    It fails because they end up charging more and it’s nothing but a digital PDF. They take no real use of the ipad hardware.

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      The iPad needs to be used for interactivity. There’s a real opportunity to redefine an industry, and so many people are dropping the ball.

  • http://Www.Sangsara.net Brandon Lee

    Find out how Esquire is doing on the iPhone. They began with $2.99 issues too, but recently started a subscription program to match print prices – you can get 12 issues for $9.99. I signed up immediately, and have been waiting for GQ to offer the same.

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      We’ll send out some emails and try to get a reply from them. Thanks for the heads up. :)

  • Bruno Ancona Lopes

    I think it should be priced at the same or lower price point than the print subscription, because 1) there’s no printing and delivery costs and 2) because the potential for generating engagement and proving roi out of the ads is greater on the iPad magazines. The ads served on the ipad could and should be way more interactive than mere print ads on a screen. Sending readers to External pages, providing immersive experiences and gathering data/email/leads or even closing a sale is way more valuable than a print ad, and thus, the ipad mags could be charged less, because the sponsors should be paying more per capita. Makes sense? Cheers!

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      It totally makes sense, and I completely agree. Some of these companies seem to be taking the easy road and porting static content to their iPad apps. If they don’t fix it soon they won’t see profits, and then they’ll be closing down development.

      Developers get one chance on the AppStore, and sadly, GQ may have already blown it.

  • Pingback: GQ iPad sells 365 copies « magCulture.com/blog

  • http://www.sefsar.com Youssef Sarhan

    And they are surprised?

    I read GQ when I want to get away from it all, when I am bored and want to see some nice clothes, gadgets or girls. I do not want to associate leisure with business. Merging it with the iPad just makes it too formal.

    I dont know what it is, but putting GQ on the ipad and expecting it to work is like cooking raw meat in a microwave, yeah sure you can do it, but to be honest, I’d prefer it the old fashioned way.

    Also, I don’t care how crap my analogy is.

    Btw, get rid of these tweet comments, they are all the same… just a tip.

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      You’re the first person I know to say that about a magazine on the iPad. It’s an interesting ideology. I’ve never really thought about separating leisure and work and defining it as time on and off the iPad. If anything, it’s been the complete opposite experience for me. I tend to gravitate towards my iPad for leisure time, so for me, having a favourite magazine on the device would be beneficial.

      It’s amazing how so many people use the device in different ways. :)

  • Tom

    I can’t see how the figure of 365 can be accurate when there are over 700 ratings in the US store and 300 ratings of the app in the UK store.

    Also the figure of $35.88 is wrong because once you have bought the app you can do in app purchases of extra issues for $1.99, so the actual price for 11 issues + app would be 24.88 (still expensive compared to print though)

    I did have a big problem with the app freezing on the loading screen making it unusable for weeks (it works now) and from reading the reviews many people seemed to have the same problem.

  • Aaron

    Nice touch with the social-media sidebar, how it floats on the left-hand edge of the page and obscures part of the content area as you scroll. I think I’m going to do my next three sites like that.

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      What resolution are you running at, and which browser are you using?

      • Aaron

        Firefox 3.5.9; 1280×800, and window.innerWidth/innerHeight reports 951×637. Screenshot of the misbehavior at http://aaron.acephalo.us/macgasm-screenshot.jpg .

        • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

          Thanks a bunch. We’re looking into fixing the bug. Currently the site seems to be working fine when the browser window is wider than 1050px. Glad you pointed it out.

  • JP Peterson

    I have 4 electronic edition subscriptions via Zinio. Macworld, PCworld, Car and Driver, and National Geographic. Pcworld and Car and Driver I bought on implies when each were running $5 aannual subscription specials a few weeks back. Macworld and National Geographic both cost the same as print subscriptions.

    Although similar to PDFs of the print versions, all include hyperlinks. All include the ability to view text only. Photo only galleries are included with varying degrees of success. National Geographic is going a bit farther with some links to video content on YouTube.

    It’s a new medium. I await the monthly issues almost as much to see how the format has been polished as for the content. I genuinely enjoy the iPad as the delivery device. That said, I much prefer the all in one library offered by wrapping multiple publications under a single app.

    I did pay the premium and got the initial iPad release of Popular Science. I enjoyed it and don’t resent the $4.99 the stand alone app cost. I was curiously and wanted to see what could be done, building issues from scratch like that. Am I willing to continue at that premium over print, for any publication, now or in the future. Absolutely not.

  • Hamranhansenhansen

    Sorry to be OT, but WPTouch is the worst thing to happen to the Web over the last 5 years. Look at how Digg does it, they ask me ONCE if I want a mobile-optimized site. I say no, I never see it again.