{{ searchResult.published_at | date:'d MMMM yyyy' }}

Loading ...
Loading ...

Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.


That’s not only a poor Scrabble score but we also couldn’t find any results matching “”.
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.


Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.

Revenue starved publishers are getting excited about the iPad. Even before Apple's latest product had a name, magazine conglomerates were discussing their plans to deploy tablet-friendly versions of their publications on the device. This week, we're learning some of the details of Condé Nast's plans for the iPad.

And while it's great to see traditional publishers taking some initiative in a burgeoning digital space, there are more than a few reasons to think that many of them are jumping the gun at the chance to charge for content on a new device. Here are five.

1. Apple and Adobe do not play well together.

Condé Nast developed an ambitious iPad friendly version of Wired magazine (complete with integrated videos, interactive ads and special iPad only features). But it won't be implemented on other properties because it was developed with Adobe Flash and Apple still isn't supporting Flash on its mobile products. Similar integration problems are likely to arise again, and Apple has made no indication that it is willing to bury the hatchet with Adobe to help publishers deliver a great product on the iPad.

2. Consumers don't want to pay for content on different screens. They want new content. 

Due to the Adobe problem, Condé will have “two parallel development tracks going until the relationship between Apple and Adobe is clear,” according to MediaMemo. That means that unlike the Wired prototype, the publishers' magazines will have simpler iPad specific apps that are pretty similar to what Condé already offers iPhone users. While Condé has seen a lot of success with that model — the publisher sold 15,000 copies of the January issue of GQ and almost 7,000 of the December issue on the iPhone — consumers aren't likely to pay for the same product on a different screen.

3. Apple holds onto consumer data for all applications sold through the iTunes store.

Aside from the additional revenue stream they're hoping to get from iPad-friendly apps, Condé Nast has the most to gain from culling consumer data from its mobile offerings to better serve advertising to its audience (and charge more money for that advertising). But Apple does not share consumer data for products sold through the iTunes store. Meaning that publishers are still in a pretty weak position with Apple partnerships. Condé Nast is hoping to get around this by asking consumers to register for content on the iPad and communicating with them directly. That's after already registering and purchasing these media products in the iTunes store. Which could easily leave consumers feeling like marketing guineau pigs.

4. Being first to market doesn't matter.

The iPhone may have transformed the mobile market, creating a revenue stream for many companies that had previously had trouble charging for digital content. But it's not clear where the iPad will fit in the current marketplace. One of the many concerns involving the product is that it does not replace a digital device, but rather adds another device for people to use to connect to the internet. If that is the case, it will be a long time before the iPad sees the sort of adoption rates that have made the iPhone so popular, making it a much less impressive revenue stream than many publishers are expecting. Condé Nast CEO Charles H. Townsend tells The New York Times his company wants to “take a leadership position” in regards to the iPad, but they could be setting themselves up as a case study for other publishers to learn from. Many publishers sat back and watched as smaller, more nimble companies launched iPhone apps in their area of expertise, but getting on the iPad first isn't as important as getting the delivery right.

5. First generation Apple products never work.

Granted, magazine publishers are in dire straights right now. But there are too many unknown variables involving the iPad. Sinking large quantities of money into iPad product development could be premature. Townsend tells The Times, “We feel confident enough that consumers will want our content in this new format that we are committing the resources necessary to be there. How large a revenue stream digitized content represents is an answer we hope to learn through this process.”

But while Townsend is confident, the iPad isn't shipping until April, and production delays are rumored to push that date back even further. Consumers haven't yet had a chance to prove that they want to own an iPad, let alone purchase new products for the device. Especially when the interface is similar enough to make sharing apps between the iPhone and the iPad seem like the easiest thing to do, iPad specific products are going to be a hard sell.

Image: Condé Nast

Meghan Keane

Published 1 March, 2010 by Meghan Keane

Based in New York, Meghan Keane is US Editor of Econsultancy. You can follow her on Twitter: @keanesian.

721 more posts from this author

Comments (5)


Damian Kimmelman

repurposing the same content on different devices on closed platforms which reject the current mass adoption technology doesn't sound logical. Regardless of the problems with flash, it will be a long time before it gets dethroned as it has 95+% market penetration. Look how long IE6 has stuck around. These publishers are looking for a short term solution, yet it is nowhere near a short term answer to their woes. More likely than not it will sidetrack their longterm objectives of adding value to their proposition.

over 6 years ago



I think people are seriously underestimating the market of those 27-35 year old urbanites who are successful and have cash to burn who cant be bothered to read articles that are longer than a few paragraphs on something as small as an iPhone. Many of them are already carrying around a book or magazine, if not one or two of each, so this does in fact replace a device, its just not an electronic one. Reading on a boring black and white Kindle isnt the answer either. I can already think of 4-5 different magazine subscriptions I will get as soon as this comes out, that I wouldnt have before because I couldnt be bothered to carry all of them with me.

This will sell quite well. Better than people are thinking.

over 6 years ago


Robin G

Damned if you do / damned if you don't. International publishers can afford to try multiple platforms & technologies to get their product to market - they would be crazy not to try to get it onto the ipad (and all the other ebook platforms). 

It may not be a huge success - but it may well be & given recent years, Apple is a good bet to make. If all they do is move forward their thinking & understanding on the topic the investment will be worthwhile. If publishers did nothing they would no doubt get grief as well! 

over 6 years ago



Just thought I would leave a rather random comment, but just to say you are doing an extremely good job of keeping a nice and informative blog which a rather enjoy reading when I have few moments of peace in the day. Thanks

over 6 years ago


Steven Duque

Thoughts from the co-founder and former publisher of The Harvard Voice on the iPad's e-magazine pricing model and what publishers must do to get people in the mood to pay: http://stevenduque.com/2010/03/new-frontiers-ipad-e-magazine-pricing/

over 6 years ago

Save or Cancel

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Daily Pulse newsletter. Each weekday, you ll receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.