The free readers of Blick
Op-Ed: Rolf Bollmann, CEO of 20 Minuten, kicks off the next round in the war of words between his commuter newspaper and Ringier’s paid newspapers.
Guest commentary 20 Minuten boss Rolf Bollmann heralds the next round in the exchange of blows between his commuter paper and Ringier's newsstand newspapers. Instead of just in his own paper, the Ringier newspaper boss now also explains to the world via Werbewoche that Blick has quality and 20 Minuten does not. But of course it's understandable to look for explanations when you're demoted from the daily newspaper with the highest readership to number two, but I can reassure you, Mr. Weissberg. We would never allow ourselves to compare 20 Minuten with Blick. Because, as you know, you have to buy your quality paper. Which at least 250,000 people still do.
However, another 480000 people read Blick every day for free! Which amazes me. After all, you write that quality has to cost something. Conversely, this means that almost two thirds of Blick readers have no awareness of quality because they pay nothing. So the Blick readership is a two-tier society.
According to your model, the 78,000 readers of 20 Minuten also belong to the lower class. They receive their newspaper free of charge. Since your Werbewoche article, I finally know what you mean by quality. With your editorial background, you see Blick's high-quality journalism as the strongest argument for advertisers. And as the biggest differentiation from the cheap journalism of 20 Minuten. Your tabloid stands for warmth, emotion and passion. 20 Minuten, on the other hand, stands for nothing.
I'm in tears, Mr. Weissberg! How am I supposed to explain to my soon to be 100 employees that they produce a cold, heartless and consequently worthless newspaper? And how to the advertising customers? But as a marketer, I know that reader quality is of central importance to the latter. And that the Wemf figures provide orientation.
But you bring a whole new dimension into play. I would probably do the same if I were you. Because the hard facts speak less and less in favor of the view. At least if you accept the quality characteristics of the Mach study. But they no longer apply to you since 20 Minuten has been in the fast lane.
But even you cannot deny that the level of education is an undisputed quality feature of the readership. The question remains as to why 20 Minuten has more than twice as many highly educated readers as Blick. And why our readers have a much higher purchasing power than those of Blick. So your formula of quality journalism = quality readers does not work. In other words, price is not a sign of quality. This will also be confirmed by "the biggest Swiss columnist" (SonntagsBlick) from your corporate headquarters.
Oh, I almost forgot! Blick has twice as many readers aged 65 and over as 20 Minuten. That's also a quality indicator - for reader loyalty well into old age.
> Rolf Bollmann is Managing Director of 20 Minuten (Schweiz) AG.
However, another 480000 people read Blick every day for free! Which amazes me. After all, you write that quality has to cost something. Conversely, this means that almost two thirds of Blick readers have no awareness of quality because they pay nothing. So the Blick readership is a two-tier society.
According to your model, the 78,000 readers of 20 Minuten also belong to the lower class. They receive their newspaper free of charge. Since your Werbewoche article, I finally know what you mean by quality. With your editorial background, you see Blick's high-quality journalism as the strongest argument for advertisers. And as the biggest differentiation from the cheap journalism of 20 Minuten. Your tabloid stands for warmth, emotion and passion. 20 Minuten, on the other hand, stands for nothing.
I'm in tears, Mr. Weissberg! How am I supposed to explain to my soon to be 100 employees that they produce a cold, heartless and consequently worthless newspaper? And how to the advertising customers? But as a marketer, I know that reader quality is of central importance to the latter. And that the Wemf figures provide orientation.
But you bring a whole new dimension into play. I would probably do the same if I were you. Because the hard facts speak less and less in favor of the view. At least if you accept the quality characteristics of the Mach study. But they no longer apply to you since 20 Minuten has been in the fast lane.
But even you cannot deny that the level of education is an undisputed quality feature of the readership. The question remains as to why 20 Minuten has more than twice as many highly educated readers as Blick. And why our readers have a much higher purchasing power than those of Blick. So your formula of quality journalism = quality readers does not work. In other words, price is not a sign of quality. This will also be confirmed by "the biggest Swiss columnist" (SonntagsBlick) from your corporate headquarters.
Oh, I almost forgot! Blick has twice as many readers aged 65 and over as 20 Minuten. That's also a quality indicator - for reader loyalty well into old age.
> Rolf Bollmann is Managing Director of 20 Minuten (Schweiz) AG.
