MediaFreak: Why are the smallest magazines the ones using the best recycled paper?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Adam Trull on September 17, 2009 at 1:29pm

I'd bet part of the reason is that paper is less of an impactful cost for lower-volume magazines. For short-run magazines, paper only represents 15% - 25% of the total cost (postage/distribution, manufacturing, paper, pre-press, production/writing/photography/etc.). For larger pubs, that percentage can swing radically (e.g. 40% - 60%). This makes it cost-prohibitive for up-charges on recycled-stock (or environmentally certified stocks).

-Adam Trull
Quad/Graphics

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Frank Locantore on September 17, 2009 at 2:27pm

That's an interesting point, Adam. I assumed that the paper cost as a percentage of overall expenses is roughly the same because with smaller magazines it is often the case that the same staffer has multiple responsibilities for paper-printing-distribution, or advertising-marketing/promotions, etc. In a larger publication the staffing is more numerous and specialized. It would be interesting to see a study of the cost percentages between different size publications. As a printer, I imagine you've seen that already.

Another consideration is the economies of scale - larger publications can perhaps get better prices on their paper because of their volume purchase that smaller publications cannot get.

Anyone want to weigh in on their percentage cost that goes to paper purchases?

-Frank Locantore
Green America's Better Paper Project

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by George W Slowik Jr. on October 7, 2009 at 9:14pm

Adam,
Paper is no more or less important to smaller publications relative to overall cost. As a nonprofit those costs may be even more critical. Ironically, the big pubs buy their own paper and have more control yet do less to affect better practices. Smaller publishers rely on printer-supplied options and most printers aren't making a market in recycled sheets. The difference for us was our politics and the serendipity of knowing folks who cared enough to get it done. We believe in a better ecological outcome and worked with the Better Paper folks to define a stewardship policy. Our Art Director certainly scrutinized the aesthetics and our business manager the costs but they also believed in the goal. Our friends at Publishing Experts had led Mansueto to better practices and we were able to coattail on that knowledge. Once printers get behind facilitating the effort or once consumers demand it, the tipping point will occur. In the meantime, if a tree isn't felled in the forest does anyone hear it? Why not get Quad to lead the way?

George Slowik The American Prospect

▶ Reply to This