The UK Babe Channels Forum

(09-08-2017 09:32 )Tractor boy Wrote: [ -> ]when similar magazines have been going out of business in recent years.

It depends what you mean by similar. I'm not aware of any magazines that have gone out of business in recent years which I would describe as similar to the Sixty6 magazine.

Unless by similar you just mean 'adult' in nature.

(09-08-2017 06:59 )The Silent Majority Wrote: [ -> ]If they're trying to market the shows and 'enhace' their brand, why call it Sixty6 instead of Studio 66 (or even just S66) Mag.

Google Sixty6 and you won't get a single hit that takes you to their website or even mentions the shows.
Even if you actually bought the mag and started googling the girls out of curiosity, how many of those would lead you to Studio66?

It's like the BBC launching a Doctor Who mag, and calling it Doctor Why.

Obviously you're right in everything you say here. They aren't trying to market the shows and they aren't trying to enhance their brand. They appear to have created the magazine as a separate project to the TV shows and it's barely connected to them.

(09-08-2017 22:57 )marlowe Wrote: [ -> ]Unless by similar you just mean 'adult' in nature.

That would be the only way you could call other publications similar I think, as I've not seen anything before that I'd compare to the Sixty6 magazine.

Sixty6 is unique I think, whether it's your thing or not.

(08-08-2017 16:24 )HannahsPet Wrote: [ -> ]Of course it matters how many copies are sold because if it makes a loss where do you think the money to recoup the losses will come from Callers will be paying for it. there a lot better methods of marketing than a magazine

HannahsPet, I don't believe they would run the magazine at a loss. There is simply no reason to do it. I see no marketing benefit from it whatsoever. I'm sure they would regard the idea of running at a loss as a wholly impractical proposition.

^ Et tu terence!

Look at it this way: When this magazine folds (can anyone see it running and running?) we will be left with two choices:

1. Either the 66 bosses are utterly stupid and thought they would have a big hit on their hands every quarter with a glossy titillation pictorial even though all mags aimed at that market have gone west.

Or

2. They were always prepared to shrug off the low sales for a WHILE because it allowed them, with some justification, to spend works money in work on fancy foreign location shots, lavish party juckets hob-nobbing with z list celebs and so forth, raising everyone associated with it's profile.

Which of these is actually more believable in the "real world"?

Would anyone risk buying an annual subscription for this magazine.

Based on witnessing the decline of Zoo and Nuts, this whole project seemed financially illogical from the start.
But it would appear they are very serious about this magazine, and believe it will be a success on its own merit.
I think the only reason people are looking for any potential ulterior motives here are because they find that hard to believe. And rightly so.

funnily enough i heard they were thinking about re-opening their local blockbuster as well. why not, it's the future and also somewhere extra to sell their 'mag'!

(11-08-2017 13:06 )Bandwagon Wrote: [ -> ]Based on witnessing the decline of Zoo and Nuts, this whole project seemed financially illogical from the start.
But it would appear they are very serious about this magazine, and believe it will be a success on its own merit.

Yes all the indications are that the magazine is a serious business proposition and is intended to make a profit.

I think you're wrong to cite Zoo and Nuts though, as the Sixty6 magazine is way different to those publications.

(11-08-2017 14:13 )mysterion Wrote: [ -> ]I think you're wrong to cite Zoo and Nuts though, as the Sixty6 magazine is way different to those publications.

Yes, people have heard of the first two