FLEX vs MD: The battle gets dirty

[kmhphoto]

Hey Kev, honestly I have seen you post a lot and you obviously know your stuff.  But according to you there is absolutely nothing wrong with Flex, cannot be harmed.  BULLSHIT.  Why is AMI trying to dump it?

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB115024380467179519-_I4qiGDM2hxz8fmORwRJH1JE__Y_20060621.html

Simple. It's not a case of "dumping" them. They need to raise cash so they are selling off some profitable titles to reduce their debt burden. If they had no debt and were still wanting to sell them., I'd consider that a "dump".

[getfast81]

Simple. It's not a case of "dumping" them. They need to raise cash so they are selling off some profitable titles to reduce their debt burden. If they had no debt and were still wanting to sell them., I'd consider that a "dump".

Okay then.  If something is making you a profit in the first why would you SELL it?  Why are they in debt in the 1st place?  The O sucked two years in a row maybe?

[kmhphoto]

you didn't answer my question.

I don't have any of the shots at hand but I'll check to see what he was using.

[sarcasm]

I don't have any of the shots at hand but I'll check to see what he was using.

do you believe he BARBELL shoulder presses 405 for 10 seated like he claims in the latest issue?

[kmhphoto]

Okay then.  If something is making you a profit in the first why would you SELL it?  Why are they in debt in the 1st place?  The O sucked two years in a row maybe?

Cash flow. Have another look at the article. They have approz. $900million of debt. They need to reduce that as quickly as possible so they have to sell off some titles. Any buyer is only going to be interested in profitable titles, hence the sale.

[kmhphoto]

do you believe he BARBELL shoulder presses 405 for 10 seated like he claims in the latest issue?

Why not?
Can't you do it

Seriously, I believe until I see otherwise.

[sarcasm]

Why not?
Can't you do it

Seriously, I believe until I see otherwise.

so basically you're saying that this 5'6" 235lb. guy is stronger than Paul Anderson or Bill Kazmaier then.

[Joe Roark]

The part of this debate that interests me, and may in fact be the only proveable part based on facts, not opinions (about magazine quality and worthiness), is magazine circulation numbers.

If FLEX was not audited for circulation, then both it and MD could spout off any number and proof would be difficult for anyone not privy to the real numbers to prove- that would be most of us. In this situation, the numbers for FLEX are available, and proveable, but the numbers for MD, because it is not audited, are not.

I suspect, were the situation reversed, and the numbers for MD available, but those for FLEX not, many here would be screaming for FLEX to reveal that figure and wondering in various manners just what the big secret is. I also suspect MD would be printing articles summoning that information from FLEX.

Surely both magazines must give some sort of reassurance to advertisers that the per-unit/reader cost is based on reality, not on hype. FLEX, by being audited, can provide those numbers. If the cost of a page for MD is double that for a page of FLEX, then obviously MD has twice the circulation of FLEX. Or, the reverse. This is not as good a guideline as is being audited.

[kmhphoto]

so basically you're saying that this 5'6" 235lb. guy is stronger than Paul Anderson or Bill Kazmaier then.

If he claims those lifts I have no reason to disbelieve him until I see him in the gym doing much less.
I did see him do 805 deadlift and those dumbells were around 200

[dearth]

I'm sure that nobody at FLEX is naive enough to believe that "supplements" don't play a part in the sport, so maybe they've chosen to take a more responsible approach by not encouraging their useage?

so by portraying  drugs as having no role whatsoever, flex is "more responsible"?

[bbinsider]

I have no problem with McGough's response there. I think the MD article warranted it. Obviously, everyone's stuck with deciding who's telling the truth, but if Kevin Hyson is correct in his retelling, then Blechman's a jerk and a shifty businessman (and had NO real intention of buying Flex magazine like he's claimed if he really did act that way).

I said the samething thing.

[amoney86]

MD for the win!

[Alex23]

Tough one.. who do you want writting articles (maybe fake but still) in your magazine....

[dearth]

Well they could always sue?
Then they could go to court and prove otherwise. Problem is, they can't

so then you agree, your pal McGough is full of crap for fabricating a MS circulation number

[kmhphoto]

so then you agree, your pal McGough is full of crap for fabricating a MS circulation number

No I said they can't prove they sell more than 30k.
They can prove they sell less though, that's why they won't sue

[dknole]

The part of this debate that interests me, and may in fact be the only proveable part based on facts, not opinions (about magazine quality and worthiness), is magazine circulation numbers.

If FLEX was not audited for circulation, then both it and MD could spout off any number and proof would be difficult for anyone not privy to the real numbers to prove- that would be most of us. In this situation, the numbers for FLEX are available, and proveable, but the numbers for MD, because it is not audited, are not.

I suspect, were the situation reversed, and the numbers for MD available, but those for FLEX not, many here would be screaming for FLEX to reveal that figure and wondering in various manners just what the big secret is. I also suspect MD would be printing articles summoning that information from FLEX.


Surely both magazines must give some sort of reassurance to advertisers that the per-unit/reader cost is based on reality, not on hype. FLEX, by being audited, can provide those numbers. If the cost of a page for MD is double that for a page of FLEX, then obviously MD has twice the circulation of FLEX. Or, the reverse. This is not as good a guideline as is being audited.

Joe - this arguement would only be true if the business model was solely based on a correlation between ad prices and circulation. It is not. I wrote for one of the magazines and have written for the other.

Kevin, people do not dump profitable titles, they dumb non-profitable titles (books) that are not central to the business. Profitable is Men's Journal and M&F, not Flex or the Spanish version of Shape. I hope you are smarter in your own business than what you write here!

Doug Kalman

[scribbler]

Joe - this arguement would only be true if the business model was solely based on a correlation between ad prices and circulation. It is not. I wrote for one of the magazines and have written for the other.

Kevin, people do not dump profitable titles, they dumb non-profitable titles (books) that are not central to the business. Profitable is Men's Journal and M&F, not Flex or the Spanish version of Shape. I hope you are smarter in your own business than what you write here!

Doug Kalman

First off...we don't own Men's Journal, we own Men's Fitness. Secondly, FLEX and M&F are both very profitable, and no you don't sell off bad titles, you shut them down as AMI did earlier this year with several non-profitable titles, that is what REAL media companies do. The magazines being sold are all strong performers in their respective niche as far as newsstand sales and ads go and thus the high asking prices,. What you said about not being central to the business however, is correct, in that AMI has said publicly that they are looking to concentrate more on the original core product, which is the tabloids and the more consumer titles-which requires a larger cash flow to be obtained by selling off some of the stronger, more specialised titles.

Circulation is the MAIN factor in controlling ad prices, in that companies are paying a rate based on the number of people the page will be exposed to-if less people will see the ad-then obviously the page should sell for less...which means that if MD is selling more copies then FLEX as they claim, then thier ad cost/page would be higher than FLEX...which it isn't-and you can confirm that with any company that advertises in both.

This is just truth, no slam, no lies-actual truth

C

[kmhphoto]

Kevin, people do not dump profitable titles, they dumb non-profitable titles (books) that are not central to the business. Profitable is Men's Journal and M&F, not Flex or the Spanish version of Shape. I hope you are smarter in your own business than what you write here!

Doug Kalman

Insults are never the best way to continue a debate but feel free to conitnue but be prepared if I respond in the same manner

One thing you may want to do before offering an opinion is to avail yourself of some facts. M&F is for sale!.

The reason they have to sell the titles is because they need a large amount of money as fast as possible to reduce their debt. To do that, they need to sell PROFITABLE titles because they attract interest. If they put up a portfolio of magazines that are losing money, they'd be hard pressed to find a buyer! And as Chris points out in the above post, AMI would close them down.

Some investment companies look for short term returns, others invest for the long haul. AMI bought the Weider group to widen their portfolio with the intention of going public - IPO in the US?. They have incurred huge debts while at the same time seen a downturn in the revenues from their other titles.

[Adam Empire]

Insults are never the best way to continue a debate but feel free to conitnue but be prepared if I respond in the same manner

One thing you may want to do before offering an opinion is to avail yourself of some facts. M&F is for sale!.

The reason they have to sell the titles is because they need a large amount of money as fast as possible to reduce their debt. To do that, they need to sell PROFITABLE titles because they attract interest. If they put up a portfolio of magazines that are losing money, they'd be hard pressed to find a buyer! And as Chris points out in the above post, AMI would close them down.

Some investment companies look for short term returns, others invest for the long haul. AMI bought the Weider group to widen their portfolio with the intention of going public - IPO in the US?. They have incurred huge debts while at the same time seen a downturn in the revenues from their other titles.

It looks to me like they are selling off titles with declining circulation (still profitable, but the profits are certainly going the wrong way).  With the possibility of the government stepping up the roid investigations even more and/or more regulations on supplements - there is even greater need to rid these titles while they still can get something for them.

BBing news has moved to the Internet (this isn't like Time magazine which Grandmas without Internet connections stilll buy).  What is going to drive sales back up?  Another roided up gut - nope.

[G o a t b o y]

The fact that Flex would bother to put this childish feud into print as though it were news is yet another reason why bodybuilding will never be taken seriously.

What do you expect from a company that also puts out such rags as the National Enquirer? 

[Crusher]

One could say the same about you John when you decided to insult the guy who owns the show?

John?  Funny how the publisher of a tabloid has such thibn skin.

[kmhphoto]

John?  Funny how the publisher of a tabloid has such thibn skin.

Yes, John. Have you bought your tickets yet

[MADMAX6]

How about this?  Why not make GetBig, the official website of the PDI/MD?  LOL!!!

[kmhphoto]

How about this?  Why not make GetBig, the official website of the PDI/MD?  LOL!!!

 

[Hedgehog]

do you believe he BARBELL shoulder presses 405 for 10 seated like he claims in the latest issue?

Not the same lift, but saw a JOJ lift - 405 lbs for 7 or 8 reps, and it ain't no walk in the park.

It's a bodybuildingdungeon.com clip, saw it on youtube.

No fcuking way he does 10 reps with 405 lbs BB shoulder presses.

FLEX are letting these guys getting away with murder.

YIP
Zack