Disney Magazine Ceases Publication

[longfamily]

realize that we are not all trapped in some conspiracy theory to purchase another magazine publication. :lookaroun

If it were the case that the Disney magazine was now defunct (which it is not) and they were offering their customers the opportunity to switch over to another company magazine or to recieve a refund if they were not interested in a different magazine then they would not lie to you to trick you into purchasing a subsciption for a magazine that is no longer available. Right then they would give you the alternatives that they have to offer.

This is not currently the case. If the magazine were gone, customer service would try to talk you into subscribing to a different publication and they would not accept new subscriptions, which they are. They are also still accepting entries for the classified section.

I find it humorous that after so many people have talked to reps and have heard that the magazine has no intention of shutting down that some of you continue to believe this absurd rumor. no worries

 

[Captain Chaos]

I will agree with you on most of your post... However, if the official has not come down yet to the public, then the customer service reps have to still do their job and try to sell the magazine.. Once the official word comes down, the reps will then walk you through the process.. If the official word has already been delivered, then the reps have no business now to sell the magazine... Disney management may be holding out until the mass mailings start going out, then the reps will be telling people the situation. Until then, the reps will keep selling the magazine to those who call.

I used to work customer service. There were rumors my company was going to get bought out. Of course, we were never told the situation. Customers would call asking us, and we would have to give them the line NO IT IS NOT TRUE. Then, the day came when the firm announced the buyout. When customers called and asked we had to admit it but refer them to another department with questions regarding their accounts.

We can only hope this is a rumor and not true.

 

[Captain Hank]

On a rather unrelated note: This relatively short thread has managed to get over 5,000 hits in a little over a day. Behold the power of the Internet!

 

[thimblekisses]

sorry if this is a repeat, but. . .

I don't know if this has been referenced, but this came to me courtesy of LaughingPlace. Take it for what it's worth :

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=txt_BodyHeadline align=left width="100%">"Stop the presses! "Disney" Magazine is no more!</TD></TR><TR><TD class=txt_BodyNormal align=left width="100%">After more than a 40 year run, "Disney" Magazine suddenly ceased publication last week. Jim Hill talks with a veteran staffer about what happened. More importantly, what happens next. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=txt_BodyNormal align=left width="100%">by Jim Hill
<HR color=#cccccc noShade SIZE=1></TD></TR><TR><TD class=txt_Body width="100%">There's a song by the Buggles that says: "Video killed the radio star."

Well, it would appear that the Internet -- particularly sites like this one -- may have unintentionally played a part in the demise of "Disney" Magazine last week.

Though the publication's high printing costs and continually sinking subscription rates were cited as the main causes for DM's death, staffers there reportedly consider the Web to be the real reason that "Disney" Magazine suddenly ceased publication.

Said one unnamed DM vet that I spoke with earlier this afternoon:

"We were a quarterly with a very long lead time. We used to be where Disneyana fans would turn if they wanted detailed information about what was happening within the company. But then the Internet came along and really began cutting in on our turf.

And then the company shut down the Magic Kingdom Club and the Disney Club. Which robbed us of a lot of internal financial support, not to mention significantly cutting in to our subscriber base.

"Disney" Magazine were never what you'd call financially successful. By that I mean: We never had decent newstand sales. And for years now, our circulation rates have been artificially bolstered by all of those complimentary subscriptions that the company gave away to Disneyland & Disney World annual passholders.

But as long as the magazine was thought to be an effective marketing tool, management kept us alive. But now that the Net allows Disney to get the word out that much quicker to many more people at a far lower price point ... It's easy to see why they finally decided to shut us down.

So -- no -- to answer your question: What happened last week wasn't really a surprise. It's still very sad. But not really a surprise."

​

West Coast "Disney" Magazine staffers were told about this unfortunate decision early last week. These folks were then told to keep quiet for a couple of days. So that representatives from Disney Company management could then fly East and break the bad news out there in person.

Over 80 people (who work for the publication in various ways) will be effected by this decision. While I was talking with my source this afternoon, editors in their office are still in the process of trying to reach various freelancers that "Disney" Magazine uses (Many of whom were already at work on stories for the Fall & Winter issues) to let them know that DM is no more.

As to what happens next ... I'm told that a mass mailing is currently being prepared. Which will then be sent out to all "Disney" Magazine subscribers, explaining that DM has ceased publication. These folks will then be offered two choices. Disney will A) agree to refund any monies still owed for the issues that are left on that reader's subscription OR B) offer to transfer their "Disney" Magazine subscription over to "Family Fun" magazine for the remainder of their subscription.

As for those folks who were actually on the "Disney" Magazine payroll ... They're supposedly spending the next two weeks packing up their offices as well as brushing up their resumes. I'm told that some staffers were told by Disney Company management that that the corporation would try to find them positions at Disney's other publications. But no real promises of future employment were actually made.

Given that there are numerous staffers at this publication who have worked at "Disney" Magazine (Or as this magazine was known under its earlier name, the "Disney News") for 10 - 15 years now ... Obviously this news came as a shock. And people -- for the moment, anyway -- don't know quite what to do with themselves.

Which perhaps explains this very odd event earlier today. Given that some of the "Disney" Magazine staffers are now supposedly talking about setting up their very own website where they can post Disney-related stories, suddenly I went from being the interviewer to the interviewee. As in: People were suddenly quizzing me about what it took to run a website, how often you should update, etc.

Given the obvious expertise on the staff of "Disney" Magazine ... If I had the dough and/or if JHM were actually a money-making operation, I'd hire every damn one of them. It just break my heart to think that Disney's letting all this talented people walk right out the door.

I and the rest of the JimHillMedia.com staff wish to extend our sympathies to the staff of "Disney" Magazine. As well as mourn the passing of a publication that I personally have been reading for 34 years now.

Here's hoping that everyone who was employed by DM soon lands on their feet and finds another steady gig. You were a class act, people. It's just too bad that Mouse House management didn't really understand or appreciate what they had.

Your thoughts?"


I read references in here to Jim Hill, but I do not know if it was this particular article. If so, then this is for those who have not read it (I apologize for taking up so much space).
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=txt_BodyNormal width="100%">This is the website where it was found: http://www.jimhillmedia.com/mb/articles/showarticle.php?ID=1385</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

How worthy do we think this is?

 

[Captain Hank]

That's one major concern I have about this. It's a highly illogical decision. Yet, it's supported by two sources. HOWEVER, do we know whether the two are independent or not? If they aren't, and the OP is reporting this after reading the article, then Jim Hill is...well...Jim Hill (let's not turn this into a Hill-bashing thread, please). The Disney Magazine people are denying the cessation of publication, but would customer service be told immediately?

So, now, who do we believe? It certainly seems like one of Hill's more credible articles on the surface, but who knows? The one major thing that is bugging me, though, is that the magazine is the PERFECT advertising tool for the 50th. Why would they throw it away right before the start of the largest event in Parks history?

So what is the truth? I think we'll only know with time, unfortunately.

 

[Disney_dude]

What?????

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

They should keep it, and just charge more

IMO it wasn't worth the money they charged. I canceled mine a while ago.

 

[imamouse]

That's one major concern I have about this. It's a highly illogical decision. Yet, it's supported by two sources. HOWEVER, do we know whether the two are independent or not? If they aren't, and the OP is reporting this after reading the article, then Jim Hill is...well...Jim Hill (let's not turn this into a Hill-bashing thread, please). The Disney Magazine people are denying the cessation of publication, but would customer service be told immediately?

So, now, who do we believe? It certainly seems like one of Hill's more credible articles on the surface, but who knows? The one major thing that is bugging me, though, is that the magazine is the PERFECT advertising tool for the 50th. Why would they throw it away right before the start of the largest event in Parks history?

So what is the truth? I think we'll only know with time, unfortunately.

I am not associated with Jim Hill in any way. As to the possibility that perhaps I may have picked up this information from the Jim Hill article, please note that I began this thread on April 10, while Jim Hill's article is dated April 11.

 

[Dj Corona]

Well first off, we just re-subscribed I think last week, so this is veeerrry dissapointing.
Secondly, while I agree in the internet can be a blessing, there's nothing wrong with getting information from a magazine, if it's somewhat dated info, so what? I watch Sportscenter all the time, I still subscribe to ESPN magazine. You have to remember there's probably many casual Disney fans, not to mention ones without the internet, that get their info from that magazine and not the net.
(Not ranting, just making a point)

 

[Woody13]

I am not associated with Jim Hill in any way. As to the possibility that perhaps I may have picked up this information from the Jim Hill article, please note that I began this thread on April 10, while Jim Hill's article is dated April 11.

A lot of members on this site don't like facts to get in the way of their fantasy.

 

[thimblekisses]

A lot of members on this site don't like facts to get in the way of their fantasy.

Oooh, a low blow.
Just want you to know, imamouse, and others, that I'm not implying that you got your info from jim hill. Rather, I'm supporting what you said with additional evidence that happens to come from him. now, I don't always believe what I read in his articles, but in this case his believability seems likely.

 

[CSUFSteve]

Well first off, we just re-subscribed I think last week, so this is veeerrry dissapointing.
Secondly, while I agree in the internet can be a blessing, there's nothing wrong with getting information from a magazine, if it's somewhat dated info, so what? I watch Sportscenter all the time, I still subscribe to ESPN magazine. You have to remember there's probably many casual Disney fans, not to mention ones without the internet, that get their info from that magazine and not the net.
(Not ranting, just making a point)

For me, Disney Magazine started out as a subscription as a little kid, as a gift from mom. My first issue was Fall 1982, "Epcot Center Opens". That magazine is pretty thrashed now, but I've been a subscriber ever since. It's purely a nostalgia thing.

Sure, the informational content was ancient for Disney fans, but the interviews were sometimes interesting and of course pictures are always fun to look at and reminisce. And looking back over it, it's an interesting collective history of Disney for when we all get hold and don't have a clue anymore

 

[longfamily]

A lot of members on this site don't like facts to get in the way of their fantasy.

LOL.

 

[prberk]

I will REALLY miss this magazine, especially the Ask Dave column. I was just thinking the other day that this was one of the last true vestiges of Disney aimed at adults and Disney fans. Sure, much of the info is available elsewhere, but not all, and certainly not packaged so conveniently.

This reminds me of problems that I had last year with Gaylord Entertainment (owner of Gaylord Palms resort), when they thought about ditching the format of WSM radio in Nashville. They said that the costs were still high running the station as the 50,000-watt clear-channel country station (and on the internet) with nationally-known DJs, etc. They seemed to forget that the station, whose antenna was copied for the main sculpture in the Country Music Hall of Fame, was the very reason that their Opryland Hotel (and the Grand Ole Opry itself on their station) existed. They said that the Grand Ole Opry was hugely successful, as was the hotel, but the station (whose commercials were accounted for separately from the Opry) was in the red...

Finally, more reasonable heads prevailed, and they realized that the station was Nashville's own heritage; and that each day and night it was a constant beacon (now even on the internet) to the world that itself was an ad for visiting Nashville and seeing the Grand Ole Opry, staying at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel. Does this show up in WSM's income statement? No. Does it help the hotel and Opry? Yep. It reaches their best audience, and keeps them enthused and returning.

While the Disney Magazine is not as important to the company as WSM is to Gaylord and Opryland, it does serve a similar purpose: it is a great way to keep the enthusiasm up and reach the adults, whose voices are more and more edged out by the company's constant marketing to kids only. If this keeps up, it will be like the '70s again, when the company was seen more as a kids' company, and I had to convnice people to give Disney World a try, because it was more than a kiddie-land.

Paul

 

[Captain Hank]

I am not associated with Jim Hill in any way. As to the possibility that perhaps I may have picked up this information from the Jim Hill article, please note that I began this thread on April 10, while Jim Hill's article is dated April 11.

I wasn't implying that you were associated with Jim Hill, I just wasn't sure if it was established whether or not you got yourl info from him. However, that appears to be impossible because of the dates.

 

[Captain Chaos]

From SaveDisney.Com:

Letter of the Week:
Disney Magazine to Stop the Presses?


TO: SaveDisney Editor
RE: Disney Magazine

Disney employees and fans were abuzz this week with the latest news from Disney, this time from the Publishing unit in Northampton, Massachusetts. The subject was the stalwart Disney Magazine. The buzz? The Disneyland 50th summer issue will be its last. Everyone on staff is to be laid off at the end of this month.

Fans and employees were staggered: of all the Disney "branded" businesses, this is one that appeared to be a no-brainer. It was a cross-generational tradition (dating back to the 1960's with Vacationland Magazine and later Disney News, the magazine of Walt Disney's defunct Magic Kingdom Club). Disney Magazine was geared toward a key core audience interested in the Company, it provided every Disney business prime access to that market, it provided outside advertisers with direct access to that market, and it provided Disney fans with the latest news on everything going on in the Company. In addition, the Company could control its image there, and strategically communicate with a readership already inclined to favor the Company and its products.

Why would the Company kill such a business? I'm sure your first reaction will be, "It probably lost money." Well, it didn't. In fact, Disney Magazine surprised everyone by becoming profitable as a consumer magazine EARLIER than predicted.

The pretzel logic at work here will not only surprise you, it may confuse you beyond belief: Although Disney Magazine made money, it was not considered a "growth" publication by the powers-that-be at Publishing. So, instead of letting it chug along being successful and turning a profit, however small, the potentially damaging and expensive decision to shut it down was reportedly made.

Why would this be allowed to happen? Some intelligence sources say that key business unit heads (who utilize the magazine's powerful reach) had not been informed that the publication was being shuttered.

Is the decision perhaps a holdover of Peter Murphy's Strategic Planning group? Is it an initiative by the CFO, Tom Staggs, and his finance department? Or is it yet another mistake from the Publishing wing of Andy Mooney's Consumer Products division? (Hey, at least it hasn't been changed into Disney Princess Magazine!).

Perhaps this mistake can still be corrected by a higher source.

Sad Subscriber

 

[CRO-Magnum]

Sad to see it go but...

it could also be very frustrating to deal with the service group. In the past ten years I have gone completely without the magazine once for 6 issues, once for 7, because they lost my subscription information. Yes, lost it after receiving the first issue and paying. I've had many other issues arrive destroyed or months late. Still sad to see it go though.

I guess I'll now turn to my eTicket magazine which is actually more interesting to me anyway...goodbye Disney Magazine.

 

[pisco]

I suspect that this will be a growing trend in niche publiching over the next few years. As the internet "scoops" all the information these magazine publish it makes the magazines less and less relevant. So the logical step will be for these publications to go online only. It allows them to continue to publish their content, generate ad revenues from the content and saves them all the printing and distribution costs of traditional magazine publishing. I a speech in the late 90's the then president of AOL/TimeWarner was espousing the benefits of electronic readers and eBooks as the next great leap forward in their business. At the time of his speech, the company was spending over $1,000,000,000 (yes that's billion) just on printing and shipping their magazines. Magazine publishers will dump traditional print magazines in an instant as soon as there is a reasonable way to publish the information while maintaining subscription revenues. AOL/TW was even considering giving the eBook hardware away as a way to get people to adopt.

I can only hope that Disney decides to fight fire with fire and begins publishing the same quality of articles and photography online as the magazine currently has. This would make a great deal of sense as they could get information out to the public fast enough to put a dent in sites like Jim Hill Media (and probably this one) with the added benefit of the information being accurate and official. This would be a great tool for the marketing depertment (which is all Disney Magazine is anyway) and could probably generate enough in click through to profit generating parts of Disney.com to turn a profit. It's easy to envision an article on the Food & Wine Festival, or the Flower & Garden Festival, or Xmas celebration, etc. with links to the vacation planning site, discounts on event tickets, and the like as a way to use the content to directly drive sales.

Personally, I will be saddened if Disney cedes this ground to amatuerish sites like JimHillMedia, LaughingPlace and MousePlanet. This would only go further in diminishing the quality of the brand as far as I am concerned.

 

[CSUFSteve]

Bogus rumor

Feel free to clarify this issue for yourself. The number for subscription concerns is 1-800-333-8734.

Just got off the phone with them myself and the employee of Disney Magazine assured me that this was a false rumor. She said that the magazine had no intention of stopping production.

Hope this makes most of you feel better.
If not, there is the phone number for you to verify it for yourselves

Ditto. A friend of mine just got off the phone with the New York offices of Disney Magazine's advertising department and the woman assured him that this is a false rumor. Some woman is supposed to call him back to further assuage his concerns.

Most likely yet another Jim Hill rumor biting the dust, but we'll see I suppose.

 

[Captain Chaos]

Putting a dent in Jim Hill media is all well and good.. The only problem is, this rumor started BEFORE Jim Hill added his article to his site....

 

[DisneyPhD]

DIScustserv@cdsfulfillment.com

This is the e-mail for the Disney Magazine customer service.

Below are listed Phone #'s for all of their advertising offices. Call them all. You will keep hearing that nothing has changed with the publication cycle.

Detroit: 248-359-1171, linda Donaldson
Midwestern: 312-396-5216, Kathy Burke
New York: 212-633-4400, Donna Lindskog
Southeastern: 407-566-5832, Vanise Vann
Brown & Co.: 770-998-2889, Bryan Brown & Julie Kern
Southwestern: 469-232-9636, Dean Zeko
Western: 415-283-2410



Account Manager: Valri Jackson, 818-569-3116
Classmark (Classifieds Manager): Kathleen Gleason, 708-352-8832

Thanks for the info. I will be using it. I find it interesting that there is a Detoit number, and juding form the extention and area code it is rather near my house!

You know if this is just a romur, fans emailing, mailing and phoning them can help them to realize that fans vaule the DM.