I
should have waited two more minutes before hitting "send."
CQ's
most recent circulation statement is in the December 2003 issue, page
8.
Average circulation for the previous 12 months:
Mail
subscriptions 23,158
Sales
through dealers and news agents 12,806
Other
classes mailed 225
Total
paid 36,189
Free
distribution 341
Total
distribution 36,530
The
only figure that might be open to some question is sales through dealers and new
agents. To have that many actual sales they would have to have a sellthrough of
66%, which would be quite amazing. However, I
wouldn't challenge it in public.
These
figures coupled with the readex survey suggest that CQ's pass-along readership
might be slightly higher than ours, which would to stand to reason because they
have far fewer subscribers than we have members and therefore a larger potential
pass-along audience. Of course, they don't generate any direct
revenue.
But
Joel asked what time it was, and here I am explaining how to build a
watch....
Dave
Joel, we'll dig up CQ's most recent sworn circulation
statement.
In
addition to the sworn circulation statement, here are data points from the
1992 and 2003 readex surveys.
According to the two readex surveys, between 1992 and
2003 CQ readership went from 113,803 down to 51,950.
QST
readership during the same period went from 195,763 down to
189,551.
By
the way, in the same period Worldradio readership went UP from 40,506 to
44,145.
Readership includes pass-along and so is higher than
the actual circulation. The amateur radio magazine that is most widely read by
non-members of the ARRL is QST.
These figures imply a greater degree of precision
than the surveys actually possess, of course.
Dave
K1ZZ
Or that his
"subscriber" base is mucho mucho less than our
"membership".
Dave/Mark -
Just curious, what is CQ's current subscriber base?
Joel
While we may not
like to hear Moseson's comment, there is more
than a grain of truth in it. The challenge is re-casting
those perceptions. I
do wonder however, how Rich explains the continuing decline in CQ
subscribers.
Jay
-----Original
Message-----
From:
W3KD@aol.com [mailto:W3KD@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, March 26,
2004 7:10
AM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10306] Re: Fwd: A GREAT READ
The
American Radio Relay League's membership may have fallen sharply in the
past decade, but that has more to do with how the organization is
perceived by many hams than with the number or licensed or even active
hams.
Thanks,
Rich Moseson, that is very helpful.
Chris