For Some Magazine Publishers, Web Still Isn’t That Important

Although magazine publishers have embraced mobile platforms, particularly the iPad, the web is still not all that important, executives at Conde Nast and Meredith Corp. indicated on stage at a paidContent conference in New York Wednesday.

“We see websites as gateway into the brand,” said Bob Sauberg, president of Conde Nast. Liz Schimel, evp and chief digital officer at Meredith, echoed his statement, calling websites “entry points” through which visitors can discover publishers’ other — namely, paid — products.

The statements suggest that neither company is interested in erecting paywalls around their magazine websites. Apparently, neither thinks the web will ever become a significant revenue stream, despite the proliferation of profitable, web-based media companies over the past decade (The Huffington Post, Gawker Media, etc.)

Instead, both publishers showed a desire to adhere to legacy business models, i.e. packaging content in print (and print-like) monthly editions supported largely by advertising, and supplemented by low-cost monthly subscriptions and single-copy newsstand sales.

“Consumers still prefer print, so we aim for print-like digital products,” he said, adding that other forms of digital content may eventually be bundled into subscriptions in the future.

Though Conde Nast’s approach to the magazine business may remain traditional, Sauerberg did indicate that the company is diversifying its revenue stream in other areas. The company has a chance “to build a big business through high-quality video content” under the direction of CW network founder Dawn Ostroff, who wasappointed head of Conde Nast Entertainment in October, he said. Sauerberg added that a more formal plan would be announced later this year.

He also disclosed some stats about Conde Nast’s tablet business, which he says has generated $20 million in revenue over the last two years — chump change for a company estimated to bring in north of $1 billion in advertising revenue per year. (Conde Nast is a private company that does not report quarterly revenue.)

Indeed, user numbers are still small: Conde’s 12 digital editions have attracted roughly 500,000 subscribers collectively; 1.5 million subscriptions have been initiated in total. These numbers are similar to what other magazine publishers, such as Hearst, have reported. Numbers for newspaper-based tablets aren’t much better:The Daily claims about 100,000 subscribers. The New York Times has 472,000 subscribers to its various digital editions, but doesn’t break out numbers for tablet subscriptions.