Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Beckett Magazine Cheer! Review Results

The announcement of Beckett Media's newest magazine, Cheer!, created some strong reactions from readers of the blog post.

Tracy Hacker from Beckett Media responded to the reaction and offered everyone a free copy of the magazine. The following people accepted the free magazine: Rob at VOTC, CMW, Laloosh, Brian at Play at the Plate, and Daniel.

My role was to receive the magazines from Tracy, distribute them to who wanted them, and I decided to provide small survey.

So far I have received responses from 4 of the 5 people. Here are the questions in the survey and the results in their entirety:
After you receive the magazine and review it, answer the following questions using a 1-5 scale where:
1 = Strongly Disagree,
2 = Slightly Disagree,
3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree,
4 = Slightly Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

Survey Questions:
1. The articles were well written.
2. The photographs/images were well done.
3. You would like to see more cheer leading collectible information in the next issue.
4. You would buy the next issue.
5. Give me your take - additional comments.

Brian at Play at the Plate:
Q1. 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree
Q2. 4 Slightly Agree
Q3. 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree
Q4. 1 Strongly Disagree
Average score: 2.75

Q5. - The Pompoms and Circumstance article effectively covered the history of cheerleading, but the two interviews were just "so-so."
- The magazine was color throughout which was good. The magazine says it is a "photographic tribute to football's sideline sweethearts" and it is just that. It isn't really about collectibles.
- The magazine makes it fairly clear there isn't much collectible in this area.
- I don't have any interest in buying this product.

Rob at VOTC:
Q1. 4 Slightly Agree
Q2. 2 Slightly Disagree
Q3. 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree
Q4. 1 Strongly Disagree
Average Score: 2.5

Q5. The quality of writing by Beckett columnists is always, engaging and informative. However, to position this venture as anything but a "Chic Mag" for collectors is a serious stretch, and quite honestly an insult to my intelligence.

In addition, the photography was mediocre at best, most all of it was API footage and not near the quality of say Sports Illustrated's, week-by-week cheerleader galleries. (Oh. by the way, they are free.)http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0910/nfl.cheerleaders..week6/content.1.html#

To make a claim that there is a collectibles market for NFL cheerleaders, at all is a stretch. This was clearly evidenced by the team by team coverage, where every noted "collectible" were autographed photos and/or calendars.. These are commodities not collectibles. The only way an autographed photo of an NFL cheerleader is going to become collectible is if one of the following happens:
1) The cheerleader goes into a career in politics and becomes successful.
2) The cheerleader becomes a movie, music, or TV star.
3) The cheerleader later does a photoshoot for Playboy then, maybe, that autograph photo becomes collectible.

The only meaningful collectibles from this genre I can see would be very limited and regional in scope and that would be original full squad signed photos or posters of the original Dallas Cowboys, as well as there uniform.

Would I spend $7.00 on this magazine of my own money? No chance in hell - that's 2 packs of cards.

Laloosh
Q1. 2 Slightly Disagree: First reactions was - "There were articles?" Any middle schooler could write those articles.
Q2. 4 Slightly Agree: Nothing wrong with photography.
Q3. 1 Strongly Disagree: Not enough people collect this stuff and they are most likely perverts.
Q4. 1 Strongly Disagree: Rather give my $7 away to charity.
Average Score: 2.0

Q5 Does anyone really collect cheerleading collectibles? It was done to make a quick buck from perverts who get get their free porn off the internet. Nuff said.

EDIT 10/29:
CMW
Q1. 4 Slightly Agree
Q2. 5 Strongly Agree
Q3. 4 Slightly Agree
Q4. 2 Slightly Disagree
Average Score: 3.75

Q5 The articles are fine and the photography is excellent. I’m just not sure about the concept and who Beckett is targeting as an audience here. I don’t think this magazine would fare well with the serious sports collector or the 30+ crowd. Not sure it fits with the younger crowd either. Maybe the teenage market would purchase this type of thing but that seriously limits the audience. I honestly feel that this would be something men would pick up in the store, look through the photos for a minute or two, and put it back on the shelf.

I'll post the other two responses once I receive them. I sent an email to CMW and Daniel last night.

Tracy - Thank you for the free magazines to distribute. Please let me know if you'd like me to add your comments to the article or you can post your reply in the comments section.

8 comments:

Gellman said...

I think these reviewers were a little light on their feelings for the mag. But, considering that it got around a 2 average, people should get the point.

Brian said...

In fairness I did the review at about 4 AM. I failed to mention that in the "team" by "team" photo montage, Beckett mentions that many of the squads have little or no "collectibles" to purchase. That pretty much tells me that there wasn't any other reason for the magazine than the fact that good looking cheerleaders = money in Beckett's pocket.

LaLoosh said...

Brian. Excellent point. I think that was the whole reason - MONEY. There reaaly was not many "articles" at all. I have never seen cheerleading collectibles out there unless you consider calenders a collectible.

Rob- AKA "VOTC" said...

My beef has never been with the writing of Beckett columnists. I actually did learn a thing or two. Also Q2 is scored correctly but should be labeled as "slightly disagree".

I agreed to give it an honest review and have created and conducted plenty of the types of surveys in my marketing tenure, you have to align your answer within the confines of the given.

Q3 Would you like to see more "collectibles" coverage, is a loaded question that in my opinion didn't fit the survey because it assumes that their is anything collectible at all about cheerleading this the middle score of "Neither Agree or Disagree" in all honest it should be a ) score for Not Applicable would would have drig the weighted average score down considerably.

If you remove or rephrase that question with something like, "Was the collectibles information useful?" Then you could honestly answer 1.

This would have dropped the combines score significantly and the average score even more so to between 1.0 and 2.0

Just sayin

Rob- AKA "VOTC" said...

Sorry for the typos. At work rushing

James said...

Rob - My bad, sorry if I put Q2 on here incorrectly. I'll make the edit to the story.

Yes, Q3 wording could have been better. I didn't intend to sway opinion.

Thanks for answering and the comments.

I've emailed the other two people to get their responses. I'll add it to this once I receive it.

Tracy Hackler said...

Thanks to James for taking this on and to all the respondents for taking the time to read and critique the magazine. Clearly, it's not for everyone and certainly not for hardcore collectors.

Keep the comments coming.

Best regards,
Tracy

Tracy Hackler said...

Oh, and Gellman, the average was more like 2.41. But who's counting?