IT decision-makers in demand
IT Market: With its “IT Business” media analysis, WEMF demonstrated how to reach IT decision-makers. It is unclear whether there will be a third issue.
IT market With the IT Business media analysis (2000 and 2003), Wemf showed how IT managers can be reached. It is unclear whether there will be a third edition. 30 billion Swiss francs are invested in information and telecommunications technology in Switzerland every year. The products are advertised accordingly. But where is the best place to do this? The MA IT Business 2000 and 2003 media analyses by Wemf have so far provided an answer for the print sector. These studies examined which daily newspapers, weekly titles and trade journals were used by IT managers in Swiss companies to keep up to date with the latest developments. However, Wemf, which only acts on behalf of others, has not yet been commissioned to conduct a new study. This is also confirmed by the publisher IDG Communications, publisher of the IT titles Computerworld and PC-Tipp. IDG alone paid for the last study in 2003. IDG advertising manager Urs Flückiger: "We have a strong interest in another reach study, but we are no longer doing it on our own. Otherwise people will say it's just a commissioned study again."
Flückiger is thus addressing a conflict that caused bad blood in the industry three years ago. However, Flückiger did make contact with some other IT publishers at the Orbit iEx trade fair in May. The first "loose contacts" are encouraging, he says, the industry is also interested in data, but the study needs to be significantly cheaper. He will therefore try to find a common denominator with the publishers Neue Mediengesellschaft Ulm (Online PC Zeitung), Compress (Infoweek) and Netzmedien (Netzwoche).
He would also like to include the daily, Sunday and business titles. He considers the chances of a study supported by the industry to be "very good". "Because if we don't succeed, there will hardly be another study," he says. However, it will not be ready before the fall; Flückiger sees spring 2007 as the time horizon.
And how are the other publishers reacting? Ingo Rausch from Online PC Zeitung is "definitely open to discussions". But whether his publishing house would participate would depend primarily on the costs. "This is a financial question for us, because unlike most other IT titles, we are already involved in Mach Basic," he says. Compress is more cautious. Publisher Michael von Babo would also welcome a joint study. "The IT trade magazine industry could only benefit from this," he says. However, its realization would depend on whether a suitable sponsor could be found. "Based on previous experience, this will not be easy, but we are definitely ready for talks," he says. Heinrich Meyer, publisher of Netzwoche, adds: "If the study is modified and also covers our target audience, we will be happy to talk."
Conflict remainsThis makes it clear that the old conflict has not been forgotten. Meyer and von Babo therefore set further conditions: They want a say in the study design, specifically, for example, in defining who should be interviewed and how these people should be located. "It is no longer enough to simply ask who is responsible for computers in the company during telephone interviews in order to reach the person responsible for investments," says Meyer. But he also wants to have a say in the individual questions. Meyer: "The previous questionnaire was too focused on technology and hardware." Von Babo could also imagine an annual study, provided the concept of the survey was significantly streamlined - also in terms of costs. He also calls for "a fair funding formula".
Would they consider Wemf as a research institute again? "Yes, but also other institutes," says von Babo. "We would be in favor of an open tender." Meyer agrees: "If the costs and study quality are right, yes. Whether the MA IT Business label should continue to be used is another matter. Two incorrect executions, two disputes after the data was published - that's not a good track record."
IT stocks lack market dataApart from the three years
In addition to the old and disputed data from MA IT Business 2003, most IT titles have no official reach data. In the case of Mach Basic, only the high-circulation titles Online PC Zeitung and PC-Tipp can be identified - they currently have 125,000 and 313,000 readers respectively. In contrast, the MA Leader does not include any IT titles. Until recently, the industry therefore relied on a survey of 300 Orbit visitors conducted by trade fair organizer Reed. The survey also asked about the trade, business and daily titles they regularly read. But that is now a thing of the past. This question was dropped this year because the questionnaire was too long, the trade fair management announced on request. "This situation is disadvantageous for the industry," says Othmar Fischlin, Head of the Media and Research department at Publimedia. "From a media planning perspective, I feel something is missing today." Every effort to achieve greater transparency is therefore desirable - provided that the industry can agree on a regular study that is as comprehensive as possible. "In any case, the main titles should not be missing," says Fischlin.
A study with a bangThe MA IT Business
has been carried out twice so far, in 2000 and 2003, both times with strong background noise. The main criticism was that Wemf had not taken the different target groups of the titles into account, or had taken them into account too little. One example: The first study also included the IT Reseller title from Compress, which is not sold to users but exclusively to dealers. However, because no resellers were surveyed, IT Reseller scored poorly. In the 2003 study, IDG (with PC-Tipp and Computerworld), Compress (with Infoweek) and Netzmedien (Netzwoche) initially took part. However, the latter wanted to modify the study design and adapt it to the current industry situation. Apparently IDG and Wemf were not prepared to do this, which is why Compress and Netzmedien withdrew. The study was carried out with IDG as the sole client, with Wemf also publishing data from Netzwoche, although it had previously promised not to do so. It later apologized for this. However, the criticism from Compress and Netzmedien goes deeper: the fact that the study layout was not published and the results were only partially published is unacceptable in a media analysis.
Markus Knöpfli
Flückiger is thus addressing a conflict that caused bad blood in the industry three years ago. However, Flückiger did make contact with some other IT publishers at the Orbit iEx trade fair in May. The first "loose contacts" are encouraging, he says, the industry is also interested in data, but the study needs to be significantly cheaper. He will therefore try to find a common denominator with the publishers Neue Mediengesellschaft Ulm (Online PC Zeitung), Compress (Infoweek) and Netzmedien (Netzwoche).
He would also like to include the daily, Sunday and business titles. He considers the chances of a study supported by the industry to be "very good". "Because if we don't succeed, there will hardly be another study," he says. However, it will not be ready before the fall; Flückiger sees spring 2007 as the time horizon.
And how are the other publishers reacting? Ingo Rausch from Online PC Zeitung is "definitely open to discussions". But whether his publishing house would participate would depend primarily on the costs. "This is a financial question for us, because unlike most other IT titles, we are already involved in Mach Basic," he says. Compress is more cautious. Publisher Michael von Babo would also welcome a joint study. "The IT trade magazine industry could only benefit from this," he says. However, its realization would depend on whether a suitable sponsor could be found. "Based on previous experience, this will not be easy, but we are definitely ready for talks," he says. Heinrich Meyer, publisher of Netzwoche, adds: "If the study is modified and also covers our target audience, we will be happy to talk."
Conflict remainsThis makes it clear that the old conflict has not been forgotten. Meyer and von Babo therefore set further conditions: They want a say in the study design, specifically, for example, in defining who should be interviewed and how these people should be located. "It is no longer enough to simply ask who is responsible for computers in the company during telephone interviews in order to reach the person responsible for investments," says Meyer. But he also wants to have a say in the individual questions. Meyer: "The previous questionnaire was too focused on technology and hardware." Von Babo could also imagine an annual study, provided the concept of the survey was significantly streamlined - also in terms of costs. He also calls for "a fair funding formula".
Would they consider Wemf as a research institute again? "Yes, but also other institutes," says von Babo. "We would be in favor of an open tender." Meyer agrees: "If the costs and study quality are right, yes. Whether the MA IT Business label should continue to be used is another matter. Two incorrect executions, two disputes after the data was published - that's not a good track record."
IT stocks lack market dataApart from the three years
In addition to the old and disputed data from MA IT Business 2003, most IT titles have no official reach data. In the case of Mach Basic, only the high-circulation titles Online PC Zeitung and PC-Tipp can be identified - they currently have 125,000 and 313,000 readers respectively. In contrast, the MA Leader does not include any IT titles. Until recently, the industry therefore relied on a survey of 300 Orbit visitors conducted by trade fair organizer Reed. The survey also asked about the trade, business and daily titles they regularly read. But that is now a thing of the past. This question was dropped this year because the questionnaire was too long, the trade fair management announced on request. "This situation is disadvantageous for the industry," says Othmar Fischlin, Head of the Media and Research department at Publimedia. "From a media planning perspective, I feel something is missing today." Every effort to achieve greater transparency is therefore desirable - provided that the industry can agree on a regular study that is as comprehensive as possible. "In any case, the main titles should not be missing," says Fischlin.
A study with a bangThe MA IT Business
has been carried out twice so far, in 2000 and 2003, both times with strong background noise. The main criticism was that Wemf had not taken the different target groups of the titles into account, or had taken them into account too little. One example: The first study also included the IT Reseller title from Compress, which is not sold to users but exclusively to dealers. However, because no resellers were surveyed, IT Reseller scored poorly. In the 2003 study, IDG (with PC-Tipp and Computerworld), Compress (with Infoweek) and Netzmedien (Netzwoche) initially took part. However, the latter wanted to modify the study design and adapt it to the current industry situation. Apparently IDG and Wemf were not prepared to do this, which is why Compress and Netzmedien withdrew. The study was carried out with IDG as the sole client, with Wemf also publishing data from Netzwoche, although it had previously promised not to do so. It later apologized for this. However, the criticism from Compress and Netzmedien goes deeper: the fact that the study layout was not published and the results were only partially published is unacceptable in a media analysis.
Markus Knöpfli
