The UK Babe Channels Forum

(13-08-2017 13:30 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]Can we get beyond the double-edged word "unique" and address why posters think that 66 think they are on to a winner with this thing?

They're not, IMO.
However people want to dress this up, it has been tried and tested, and is dead in the water.
Perhaps their digital sales will help, and possibly enhance this honeymoon period, but I don't believe it will be enough.
And by the way, for anybody who is unsure, I will take no pleasure in seeing this project fail. In fact I could tip my hat to these guys for trying to keep glamour alive
But it won't last, and I'll stand by my words.

They've launched a new magazine into a shrinking market. It's either very brave or extremely stupid.

Time will tell.

(12-08-2017 05:24 )bigglesworth Wrote: [ -> ]Your reasoning would surely not apply in this particular case. The Sixty6 magazine uses existing studio premises and existing company staff. The only costs would seem to be the costs of producing each issue and some ongoing PR costs, so if it did turn out that sales were good I don't see why a profit couldn't be made almost immediately.

I'm not convinced the potentially twitchy investors you speak of even exist, because as business ventures go this appears to be a very low cost one with minimal start up capital required, so it doesn't seem likely that any huge investment would ever have been needed. I'd be surprised if Studio 66 had to bring in outside investors.

Don't see the cost benefit of the existing setup. No kit is reusable (film vs photography), the girls they have used in the mag from the channels are not staff and are paid as contractors (so they would be paid for the shoots and travel expenses), they would need to employ printers and marketers seperate from the channels, plus photographers and make up artists (both would be contracted). I could maybe see some savings on back office functions (payment processing and invoices) but apart from that its all unique and new costs.

Add to that the 1990s approach to PR/marketing (lets throw parties and get a load of Z list c**ts to show up because its free) which lacks any innovation whatever and all I see is a looming crash.

You may be right about investors but S66 accounts show they have minimal cash balance so the money either came from banks or other investers all of whom will seek a return. Having seen photos of Mr_S66 house its a pretty modest place so I suspect he#s not rolling in it.

So my view is still they are making an operational loss.

I can see the tweet now quietly announcing the end of the mag, thanking everyone, using the words "family" and "journey" liberally and blaming all the haters

(13-08-2017 23:55 )hairbald Wrote: [ -> ]You may be right about investors

Yes I may be right about investors, but if I'm wrong it raises an interesting point - that there are people out there who see Sixty6 magazine as a worthwhile project to invest in and give them a good return for their money.

There are people out there who thought that it was a good idea to give mortgages to people who had no hope of repaying them. We all know how that turned out.

(13-08-2017 22:23 )Tumble_Drier Wrote: [ -> ]They've launched a new magazine into a shrinking market. It's either very brave or extremely stupid.

Time will tell.

They're a bunch of Canutes?

Someone else will have done that joke, I'm sure...

^I can only assume that was Autocorrected

(14-08-2017 02:10 )bigglesworth Wrote: [ -> ]Yes I may be right about investors, but if I'm wrong it raises an interesting point - that there are people out there who see Sixty6 magazine as a worthwhile project to invest in and give them a good return for their money.

To quote Dilbert "the stupid rich" quadrant

New issue, new price.