Forums >
General Industry >
FHM to cease publishing U.S. edition (Thoughts?)
By: Matthew Flamm Published: December 13, 2006 - 1:40 pm Newsstand operators in Grand Central Terminal are breathing a little easier following British-based Emap 's announcement Wednesday that it would stop publishing the American edition of FHM, the laddie magazine with the sometimes too provocative covers. In the last year, as FHM attempted to pump up its newsstand sales, it was frequently forced to put blinders on its covers in Grand Central in the wake of complaints that photos of its models were too revealing. And the attention-grabbing covers didn't help. "With conditions in the U.S. worsening, we have decided to suspend publication to focus resources elsewhere on faster growth platforms," said Paul Keenan, chief executive of Emap Consumer Media, in a statement. The March issue of FHM will be its last. The chief culprit in the magazine's downfall was the escalating shift in advertising dollars from print to the Web. Like other publishers that have shuttered magazines in the last year, Emap will keep the magazine's Web site in operation. The British edition and around 30 others around the world will also continue to publish. FHM, originally titled For Him Magazine, was a latecomer to the U.S., arriving here in 1999 on the heels of the wildly successful Dennis Publishing title Maxim. The Emap title took a more down market approach than its competitors, which made it harder for the magazine to attract advertisers. FHM found it particularly tough going in recent years as the market cooled for beer-and-babes titles. Single copy newsstand sales were down 7% in the six month period that ended June 30, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Ad pages plunged 20% through November, according to Publishers Information Bureau, and ad revenue fell 15%, to $65 million. Dec 15 06 07:11 pm Link For all except the lead dog the view is pretty much the same. Studio36 Dec 15 06 08:18 pm Link Glad I got in before they got shut down! Sucks for them though- I like the magazine. Dec 15 06 09:31 pm Link * moved to General Mayhem, this is industry-related Dec 15 06 09:35 pm Link Even less work for me. I tell you, EMAP are getting worse and worse to work for. Dec 15 06 09:36 pm Link Good riddance, IMHO. Maybe with one fewer mainstream influence, more would-be models would be inspired by fine art and fashion than by "tease" glamour. I'm not against tasteful glamour, but I tire of the oodles of model profiles all looking for that plastic-skin-Barbie look and the association of that look with all Internet-based modeling. Dec 16 06 11:35 am Link Alex Davenport wrote: same here.....I just made it in the December issue. It's kind of sad to see it go. Dec 16 06 11:39 am Link That mag was a turd and EVERYONE I know with it, got it for free. They sold so few mags, it was a loss...they gave out way too many comp subs. Dec 16 06 11:55 am Link I'm not sure if I've even looked at one of their issues. I know I've never bought one. Maybe I should go down to the newstand, and take a look at what I won't be missing in the future? Dec 16 06 01:47 pm Link One less magazine that GWC's can say they are testing for....lol Dec 16 06 01:48 pm Link I'm not sure why some photogs are so hateful about glam images/models/photogs/mags. Just because it's not your thing doesn't mean it's the worst thing that ever happened to photography. I'm not sure why everyone can't just be respectful of different forms of photography and those involved. Dec 16 06 01:53 pm Link From what I understand of this situation, the magazine will still be published....Just not in paper form. It will be a totally online magazine, subscriptions will be for online content. Dec 16 06 01:53 pm Link Cardillo Photography wrote: I think the UK will still have a print format, but I'm not positive. Dec 16 06 01:56 pm Link Cat Platz wrote: I think the style of photography is beautiful...but jst like music I love everything and all styles. I think FHM/Maxim style shots are hot! I wish I could shoot them as well as some of people on this site......I agree with you....people put it down because it's not there thing.....I think every style has it's place and market. Dec 16 06 01:56 pm Link Cat Platz wrote: You are right....UK will still have the print form Dec 16 06 01:57 pm Link Cat Platz wrote: I agree totally. Dec 16 06 01:58 pm Link Thomas B wrote: precisely! That's exactly my though.....everyone excels and enjoys something different, and there is no reason not to be respectful of different forms of photography. Dec 16 06 01:59 pm Link Cat Platz wrote: I agree but these forums will always be like that....I think people who close their minds to different styles are the ones who suffer. I want to learn something about every style there is...and I can appreciate it all. Dec 16 06 02:05 pm Link If you read between the lines, they have been moving closer to actual nudity to be competitive but it was too racey for the grocery store shelf. What I am wondering is if this is the end of the great experiment in American glamour. Maxim/Stuff/FHM decided to go head-to-head with Playboy (which is big but doesn't make money) by offering a new kind of suggestive, but non-revealing glamour, AKA Maxim style. At least for FHM, it didn't work, although Maxim still does fine. I wonder if the American market is getting a little bit bored with Maxim style tameness. At elast for FHM, it wasn't enough and they have moved on. I, for one, am sorry to see them go. I was happy to see the market tame down. Dec 16 06 02:11 pm Link Ye ole double post. No nudity required. Dec 16 06 02:11 pm Link Thomas B wrote: well said! Dec 16 06 02:13 pm Link Alan from Aavian Prod wrote: This glam syle is a part of American culture, and it's really a shame to see FHM go. I hope it isn't the downfall of all glam work. Dec 16 06 02:14 pm Link Alan from Aavian Prod wrote: I dont think that the market is getting bored, but it has been harder for stores to keep a moral standard when magazines are pushing the envelope. Dec 16 06 02:29 pm Link studio36uk wrote: So are you saying the same thing that I am thinking? Dec 16 06 02:37 pm Link Alan from Aavian Prod wrote: Pooch that. Show the boobies or don't show the boobies, but the fake tease gets ridiculous, boring, and repetitous in short order. Dec 16 06 02:41 pm Link Thomas B wrote: haha that was funny Dec 16 06 02:47 pm Link Over the past years, hard copy magazines have been losing in store "stand" sales with publishers nearly giving away larger numbers of issues. Music CD sales have dropped too! The major music or "record" stores are going out of business while Amazon.com thrives! Even with adding magazines, DVD's, and other products to the racks of CD's, the great Tower Records went out of business. It's just too easy to point and click to get your music, news and other forms of entertainment. People will still buy magazines, books, CD's and DVD's, etc ... but just not nearly as often. Only those who have strong Internet presence will survive. Dec 16 06 02:49 pm Link Damn, looks like I'll have to be going to Britain now... Dec 16 06 02:51 pm Link Large bookstores carry some of them from the UK, the problem is that they charge an extra 6 bucks for the tax that we impose on import items Dec 16 06 02:54 pm Link Cat Platz wrote: I just want to clarify something. Earlier, I said that I won't miss FHM, but that's only because I never got aquainted with it in the first place. I have nothing against the glamour genre at all. Dec 16 06 02:54 pm Link Thomas B wrote: good point thomas. on the other hand there are still numnuts out there claiming they will get you in their own startup 'magazine'... Dec 16 06 02:56 pm Link Well, I won't be sorry to see it go, nothing against the general format, it just wasn't as good as the competition and never worth buying.... Still, I always loved the hyper-unreal sexuality of the photos in men's magazines, so I hope this isn't the start of a trend.... Dec 16 06 02:58 pm Link Cat Platz wrote: I suppose it's like comparing slick, overproduced top 40 pop music with classical symphonies. You can argue that there are talented, hard-working, innovative people in both areas. But the latter is considered higher brow, perhaps because the geniuses in mainstream music need to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Dec 16 06 03:03 pm Link they're just a knock off of maxim and guess what, maxim kicks their ass lol Dec 16 06 03:07 pm Link Serene Death wrote: Hyper-unreal? Dec 16 06 03:08 pm Link Cardillo Photography wrote: Very sad, very thoughtless. What better place for a frank discussion on a health problem than a pharmacy? Dec 16 06 03:08 pm Link Glen Berry wrote: I didn't mean you in particular......there have been a few threads on this topic, and some people have left some pretty harsh responses. Dec 16 06 04:01 pm Link I would be happy to see FHM gone Dec 16 06 04:08 pm Link Richard Tallent wrote: Highly agree Dec 16 06 04:36 pm Link AlloyOne wrote: I love it. There's something so harmonious about using FHM and "faster growth platform" in the same sentence. Dec 16 06 04:39 pm Link |