Time Magazine Validates the Year of the App Subscription

We predicted that 2011 would be the year of the app-based subscription -- and in just a few weeks, we're seeing evidence that validates our prediction published in "Birnbach Communications' Top Predictions for 2011, Part I."

The New York Times reported "Time Inc. has begun selling subscription bundles that include apps that run on the Android tablet software from Google." Time still wants to sell subscriptions through iTunes, too, but negotiations have been slow.

Meanwhile, the Times reported online today a breakthrough we've said is necessary for magazine publishers and subscription platforms: "Apple Offers Subscriptions for All iPad Publications."

Here are key points about the new service, according to the Times:

• Revenue from subscriptions sold through the App Store will be shared. Apple will keep 30 percent, and publishers will keep 70 percent. That is the same revenue-sharing split that applies when apps of single-copy publications are sold through the App Store.
• Apple said it would not restrict publishers to selling their apps solely through Apple. And when publishers do sell apps outside Apple’s store, they will keep 100 percent of the revenue.

Also check out Forbes' coverage, "Apple Introduces Subscriptions — But There’s a Catch."

Why Forbes Publishes Its Annual Forbes Celebrity 100 List & The Lessons It Teaches PR

I don't think I need to explain why Sports Illustrated runs its annual swimsuit issue in Feb., when much of the country is buried in snow, when the Super Bowl is over, when basketball and hockey seasons seem endless, and when it's too soon (and too cold) to think about spring training.

But the reason for the annual Forbes Celebrity 100 may not be so obvious.

The annual Forbes Celebrity 100 is designed to be "a power ranking based on earnings and fame but also on social media rank such as Facebook friends and fans, Twitter followers, overall print and broadcast coverage, number of blog hits, and appearances on covers of 25 consumer magazines.

Sounds like a good set of metrics. But those metrics, other than earning power, make the list subjective rather than objective.

They're trying to quantify fame, much the way Q Score have done for celebrities for years.

Adding the element of "power ranking" makes it okay for Forbes to cover celebrities because Forbes gets to treat them as business people, not just as eye candy.

How else could Forbes justifying placing Sandra Bullock, Kobe Bryant, Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart and Taylor Swift on its cover?

Forbes can always put Oprah on its cover (as the current hit, "I Want to be a Billionaire," points out), but it would take a stretch to imagine Miley Cyrus, Beyonce, Anglina (do I have to provide her last name?) and others.

The value of its annual Forbes Celebrity 100 is to act like the always popular People Magazine for one issue during mid-summer -- the equivalent slow period for business as Feb. is for sports fans.

It's fun beach reading. It gives you the opportunity to debate whether Beyonce, who claimed the Number 2 spot and earned $87 million, should out rank James Cameron, Number 3 who earned $210. Or to try to figure out how boxer Floyd Mayweather (number 31 with $65 million) out-ranked producer Jerry Bruckheimer (number 47 with $100 million)?

The answer, of course, is besides the point.

For Forbes, the point is to generate interest and boost readership at a time when its readers may be on vacation, trying to unwind a bit. (They never truly unplug.)

The lesson for PR functions: look at your industry for any slow period, and think of developing a fun stunt that's accessible but relevant to generate attention when your competitors may have checked out. Swimsuits in Feb. have a tangential connection at best with sports just as teen celebrities have a tangential connection with business. And SI and Forbes have been doing a good job filling their respective magazines during slow periods.