I know it is kind of industry practice, but it drives me nuts. It makes it hard to read the issue until I cut out the offending ads. In the Feb. issue I had to fight the Simpson ad several times to be able to read the articles near it, since the magazine wants to always open to the ad or flip to it when I try to turn pages.
Is this something the advertisers request?
I just wanted to vent. Carry on.
Agreed.... usually the first thing I do is rip them out as carefgully as I can to not destroy the mag.
You know, I was going to post about this last week, but I didn't want to say anything that might hurt the magazine.
That Simpson thing was the biggest offender in magazine history, and that's the only reason that I noticed who the advertiser was. Normally, inserts hit the trash between the mailbox and the garage.
I hate anything that interferes with page flippability.
It stinks because Simpson makes good stuff, and this ad has slightly biased me against them. Instead of "Oh, Simpson makes good stuff" right now I'm thinking "#$@! Simpson and their crappy ad!"
It boils down to getting my attention vs. annoying me, and I admit that is a razor thin line to walk.
That's exactly the way I feel.
I have to agree, the card inserts are a pain and the first thing I remove from any mag.
chicken stock be moar betta
Yes, Joe, I noticed it, but it was a bit obtuse.
I understand the appeal to publishers (I guess - I don't know the actual justification), but I'm also in the camp that removes all card stock inserts prior to reading any magazine. I don't even look at 'em, I just terminate with extreme prejudice.
Me too - but you know what? They work. That's the problem. Both the stiff card inserts and the "blow-in" cards. If they didn't work, advertisers wouldn't spend the extra money on them.
Those loose subscription cards basically are produced for nearly nothing. I heard years ago those cards, you would normally have 3-4 an issue, cost about 1 penny to print, cut, insert in a magazine. So their ROI is awesomely huge.....
On the other hand, the blow-in cards make good bookmarks and thus don't bother me at all.
I just don't like when they're glued in. I don't mind if they're the fall out kind.
Woody wrote:You know, I was going to post about this last week, but I didn't want to say anything that might hurt the magazine.
That Simpson thing was the biggest offender in magazine history, and that's the only reason that I noticed who the advertiser was. Normally, inserts hit the trash between the mailbox and the garage.
I hate anything that interferes with page flippability.
Well if you noticed it, it sounds like the advertising did its job then. 
Well if you noticed it, it sounds like the advertising did its job then.
That is exactly what the bosses at Rohm & Haas told us years ago when we told them the farmers were raising hell over the expensive and stupid TV we were running when our product was priced like gold.
spitfirebill wrote:Well if you noticed it, it sounds like the advertising did its job then.
That is exactly what the bosses at Rohm & Haas told us years ago when we told them the farmers were raising hell over the expensive and stupid TV we were running when our product was priced like gold.
True, but noticed in a bad way. I know i'm a strange, strange person, but I have a list on my computer of products with really intrusive, annoying ads for the purpose of making sure I never buy them. For example, Verizon will never get my money because there was an annoying internet ad with non-mutable sound. They may have a fine product, I just don't know, but they have plenty of competitors that didn't annoy me while trying to get my business. It might be in the best interest of these businesses not to annoy customers.
Rufledt wrote:True, but noticed in a bad way. I know i'm a strange, strange person, but I have a list on my computer of products with really intrusive, annoying ads for the purpose of making sure I never buy them. For example, Verizon will never get my money because there was an annoying internet ad with non-mutable sound. They may have a fine product, I just don't know, but they have plenty of competitors that didn't annoy me while trying to get my business. It might be in the best interest of these businesses not to annoy customers.
If they gain 100 customers so what if they piss 10 people off. They still gained 100 new customers. That is the way capitalism works.
you guys are nuts, the free bookmarks are awesome
In all the time I've spent in advertising, I've never understood how ready and willing advertisers are to piss off potential customers.
I think they have the opposite effect on me to what the advertisers had in mind...
