TRACKS Magazine Place on Hiatus

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Sad news indeed. I just re-upped my subscription three weeks ago; I guess I shouldn't pay them?

http://www.tracksmusic.com/press.jsp?ID=36589

Press

For Immediate Release

Contact: Dean Turcol
World Publications/Tracks
407-405-0097
dean.turcol@worldpub.net

Frank Wood
Secret Communications
513-621-1600

Tracks Magazine Placed on Hiatus

New York, NY – Tracks magazine has been placed on hiatus, it was announced by CEO John Rollins and Editor-in-Chief Alan Light. The hiatus is effective immediately. The current issue of Tracks (April/May) featuring Lucinda Williams on the cover is currently on newsstands.

Launched in December 2003, Tracks was founded upon the premise of music for grownups, the population of music enthusiasts 30 and older who represent the majority of music purchasers.

"We executed on nearly all of our original vision points, including our editorial and advertising goals," Rollins says. "Tracks has attracted 380 pages of advertising, averaging nearly 50 pages per issue. This includes major consumer advertising from GM to Hewlett Packard to Columbia Sportswear. Additionally, the endemic advertising category of music demonstrated tremendous support of the publication by placing an average of 30 pages of advertising per issue."

"However, within our first year of operating, we recognized that the business would take longer to grow to the levels necessary to sustain profitability, which is a circulation of approximately 250,000," Rollins says. Currently the magazine's rate base is 150,000. "As a result of more time needed, our long term cash needs were greater than our original plan and therefore greater than our investor, Frank Wood, could support. So the cash resources required for significant circulation growth over a short period of time were not available. Simply, it is this limited total funding that has led to our decision to go on hiatus."

During the hiatus period, the management team of Tracks will continue to pursue new financing support with the goal of relaunching the magazine in the future.

Light believes that Tracks will find a way. "Being an independently funded, independently founded start-up has proved especially challenging," he says. "But with the single-greatest population of music purchasers being over the age of 30 and with no magazine, indeed no media, directed at this audience, we have always maintained – and still do – that there is a market to be served by Tracks."

Joseph McCombs (Joseph McCombs), Tuesday, 19 April 2005 20:34 (twenty years ago)

But with the single-greatest population of music purchasers being over the age of 30 and with no magazine, indeed no media, directed at this audience, we have always maintained – and still do – that there is a market to be served by Tracks."

guess he's never heard of mojo.

otherwise: yawn.

fact checking cuz (fcc), Tuesday, 19 April 2005 22:46 (twenty years ago)

uh, in America, dude. that's pretty obviously what's implied there.

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 19 April 2005 23:09 (twenty years ago)

Uh-oh. I was going to see about trying to pitch to them on a regular basis. (And I haven't gotten my check for the piece that showed up in the issue on stands now, which worries me.)

Stupornaut (natepatrin), Tuesday, 19 April 2005 23:14 (twenty years ago)

haha so BOTH people I know of who've written for them were under 30!

miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:15 (twenty years ago)

and you can so buy Mojo in the US

miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:15 (twenty years ago)

I see it more places than I've noticed Tracks!

miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:16 (twenty years ago)

I'm not under 30, dude. Anyway, you don't find Mojo in grocery and drug stores, which is probably closer to the nut of Light's statement. And yes, I did write for Tracks. (I'm not mad about anyone's assertions on this thread, either, just trying to clear up what I saw as a misunderstanding.)

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:32 (twenty years ago)

I mean, the mag was (and probably still is, if they find new financing) going for the less committed music-mag fan, the kind who doesn't hunt down Mojo.

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:33 (twenty years ago)

It was/possibly is a kind of Hear Music of music mags. Which makes me think that they should get Starbucks distro. (Seriously.)

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:34 (twenty years ago)

Well I never saw Tracks at the supermarket or the music snob hangouts. So there ya go.

ok so 2 of the 3 people I know who wrote for Tracks are over 30 (I didn't actually think the entire staff was under the focus audience age or anything). It's just funny.

miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:35 (twenty years ago)

Starbucks is a GREAT idea, btw

miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:35 (twenty years ago)

re: under 30--I know, I thought it was kind of funny too. no rulers-on-knuckles action intended or implied there.

Starbucks: For real!

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:38 (twenty years ago)

To me, Tracks was BORING. And I'm over 30. They had the same ol' writers lined up to write about their same ol' favorite bands. No question, some talented people were involved. But it was just so ... meh.

I'll be surprised if Tracks returns. If if does, Alan Light would be wise to open his ears to some outside perspective. The current mission statement was not alluring to enough potential readers. Plus, I'm convinced that trying to target music fans by age often is a useless endeavor. If you're just trying to sell ads to skateboard companies and get kids to buy glossy photos of their favorite crap bands, you can do that. Revolver and AP have proven that. But otherwise, it's becoming more complicated every day.

Whatever the case, best of luck to Tracks. I appreciate what it was trying to do. It just wasn't very appealing.

Mr Deeds (Mr Deeds), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:40 (twenty years ago)

x-post

oh yeah where I say over I mean 2 under 30.

miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 00:42 (twenty years ago)

Isn't Harp for people over 30? They've got Meltzer. He's over 30.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:07 (twenty years ago)

"But with the single-greatest population of music purchasers being over the age of 30 and with no magazine, indeed no media, directed at this audience, we have always maintained – and still do – that there is a market to be served by Tracks."

wait, what about rolling stone? is the average age of the rolling stone reader 20-something even though they have 50-something content?

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:10 (twenty years ago)

I think RS's Ashlee covers sorta disqualify it on those terms.

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:13 (twenty years ago)

oh like men over 30 don't jack off

miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:16 (twenty years ago)

50-somethings are 20-somethings at heart when it comes to leering though. they don't have to read the interview. they can leer and then they can skip to the 50 most memorable dylan haircuts section.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:16 (twenty years ago)

well, I write for both, but I'm not a marketing guy for both, so I'm not gonna pretend to have any answers there.

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:20 (twenty years ago)

Matos, you could write for anybody. And sometimes I think you do! Does Catfancy have a reviews section? Not a dig, by the way. you are good at it.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:25 (twenty years ago)

when i was trying to make more pin money as a stay-at-home mom i sent my stuff to a bunch of people who probably should have had nothing to do with me. and they didn't! i think Tracks was one of them, but it was almost two years ago. I forget. It might have been Blender. Or both! And Hit Parader or Circus. Which ever one still exists. I think I would be perfect for Circus. Maybe an advice column.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:30 (twenty years ago)

Paste is doing very well in this space.

Chris Dahlen (Chris Dahlen), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:32 (twenty years ago)

(Can a mod. please correct my typo in the title of this thread? [s/b "placed"] I'm a bit embarrassed. Thx)

Joseph McCombs (Joseph McCombs), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:34 (twenty years ago)

starbucks is indeed a great idea.

but it doesn't address the issues of how boring tracks is/was. and how utterly lacking a sense of humor it is/was. they had some damn good writers who wrote some very readable pieces on some blindingly obvious topics. except for the monthly photo essay, which was often great, there was nothing entertaining about that magazine, ever. reverent, yes. entertaining, no.

also they sent me waaaaay too many pieces of mail trying to get me to resubscribe after my first year sub ran out. they could've saved themselves some money, and some trees, right there.

fact checking cuz (fcc), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:36 (twenty years ago)

isn't the future success of almost any new magazine all about how much money they are willing to lose in the first, like, five years? unless you start really really small and inch your way forward of a long period of time. or you have a batty billionare to back you.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:42 (twenty years ago)

Paste I bet has a much smaller subscription base(and less ads and less staff and less expenses). It is even more bland.

Steve-k (Steve K), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 01:52 (twenty years ago)

I've definitely found it interesting that Paste and Harp are still around when Tracks isn't--though their predating it probably helps, I think their more modest aims (and, I think it's safe to assume, budget) probably has as much to do with it.

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 02:07 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, but Tracks was trying to position itself as a Spin/ Rolling Stone competitor, in terms of circulation and distribution. Paste and Harp were/are on a completely different scale; you'd never find either of 'em in an airport newstand, for instance.

ng, Wednesday, 20 April 2005 02:14 (twenty years ago)

I've found issues of Tracks in airport newsstands in other countries -- England, Belgium, Germany, etc. It was totally weird to be 5,000 miles away from home and pick it up. It certainly seemed like a magazine with a pretty ambitious plan for wide-scale readership.

geeta (geeta), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 04:05 (twenty years ago)

Tracks lacked personality. It's that simple. The same goes for a lot of music magazines. They rarely take any new angle on stories. Many of them use the same freelancers. To me, a lot of glossies just feel so homogenous. Zero personality. Zero reason to read them.

Mr Deeds (Mr Deeds), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 04:36 (twenty years ago)

I was going to mention writers I knew that wrote for Tracks, then I realized I was thinking of Paste. (And actually, Chris Dahlen, you were one of them.) (Julianne Shepherd was another.)

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 04:59 (twenty years ago)

I only read the first issue of Tracks and what put me off was the graphic design/art direction, or lack of same. Ugly and downright amateurish (esp. when you consider the professional pedigree of those involved.) Er, magazines are a visual medium, right? And as a full-fledged member of the Tracks demographic (I'm now closer to 50 than 40)the focus of its editorial content felt way too narrow. It's like the editors mistook Norah Jones'flukey success for a musical movement. Sometimes a hit is just a hit. Still it's amazing that Tracks got off the ground at all given the current climate in both the publishing and music business. I wouldn't hold my breath for a comeback, unless there's another FM radio mogul with deep pockets.

m coleman (lovebug starski), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 09:11 (twenty years ago)

Tracks was a bad magazine in so many ways--poorly conceived market, dismal layout, generic editorial. Paste (and Harp, to a degree) trump Tracks in all those key areas.

don weiner, Wednesday, 20 April 2005 09:20 (twenty years ago)

Paste I bet has a much smaller subscription base(and less ads and less staff and less expenses).

It's definitely a leaner operation with a smaller subscription base, and I actually prefer that. They've zeroed in on the growing AAA/Americana/"Hear Music"/adult alternative + compatible indie rock audience, and they seem more focused than Tracks was (though I haven't read much of Tracks). Paste is also showing growth, with the online store, the promo DVDs and CDs, and plans to go monthly soon.

It is even more bland.

I'll just leave that as "eye of the beholder" - I wouldn't normally have written for a magazine in that space, but the editors are terrific and they cover what they cover very well. I have some (30+ old) friends who love AAA radio and listen to stations like Phillie's WXPN, and when they flipped through a recent issue of Paste, they just kept saying, "These are all artists I love." Which suggests that they know what they're doing.

Chris Dahlen (Chris Dahlen), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 18:09 (twenty years ago)

Tracks paid its writers literally 10x more per word than Paste, so maybe that's why it went out of business.

anyanon, Wednesday, 20 April 2005 19:03 (twenty years ago)

How successful is Mojo in the US? I've never seen an American edition, other than some of the covers which were tailored to the US audience, e.g Stevie Ray Vaughan. Is the content the same as the UK edition or has it been tweaked (news/gig guide etc)?

If not could it expand to fill the gap which Tracks has left, taking a more American flavour to the brand? Much like Maxim did following the collapse in sales of the 'top shelf' magazines back in the 90's.

Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 19:22 (twenty years ago)

it's the same as U.K. except, yes, different covers. (plus no one buys the "Americanized" editions anyway since most of 'em jettison the free CDs, i.e. the major reason people like U.K. music mags to begin with!)

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 19:51 (twenty years ago)

I used to think Paste was alright but I think Mojo and Harp are far superior. I find Paste to somewhat pretentious and humorless. Boring. I’m not sure how they’re doing it either. There are so few ads in each issue. The industry just doesn’t seem to be behind them and I can see why. Not meaning to offend, just expressing my opinion.

I also recently found out they're a magazine writing about music from a "Christian" prospective. According to people I’ve talked to and information that's been going around, they've been known to turn down pieces on lesser known artists that have more “liberal” views. They also won’t print any profanity. Not that that’s a horrible thing – just goes along with the pretentious and humorless comment above. A large number of their writers also write for Christianity Today Magazine and Jeffrey Overstreet, one of their film reviewers, is another big contributor to Christianity Today and other online Christian mags. He's written articles about "cleaning up Hollywood" and "producing films from a more "Christian perspective". I met another writer of there's in San Francisco a couple weeks ago who boasted about how the staff is Christian and the magazine is written from that perspective. I really felt like the guy was a slime. The whole thing just doesn’t sit right with me.

BTW, I’ve picked up issues of No Depression and Harp in airports before. They are there, just not in big numbers like Tracks.

Mark

Mark Pfitzer, Wednesday, 20 April 2005 20:08 (twenty years ago)

I disagree with most of that - I ran some Bush-bashing and probably some swears in my Bright Eyes story (although my original lede, "'FUCK KARL ROVE,'" got cut), and I've read profiles of liberal and definitely secular artists. Also, the "all Christianity is bad" reaction is knee-jerk - writing about the religious angle of work by Marilynne Robinson or Sufjan Stevens isn't the same thing as writing about Tom DeLay.

Chris Dahlen (Chris Dahlen), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 20:24 (twenty years ago)

Most of what he said actually said is true. I guess how you feel about it depends on what your beliefs are or what what pisses you off. You probably disagree and have an affection for Paste because you write for them and obviously have a personal investment in the magazine.

This isn't really about having an "all Christianity is bad" reaction. I do know they have ties to some very controversial evangelists and Rev. Joe Kirk - one of the owners of the magazine is an outspoken christian pro-lifer. He claims he only wants to "save the children" but I think there's more to it than that.

Mitch Alpern, Wednesday, 20 April 2005 21:14 (twenty years ago)

They've hired some Christian writers, and some may be kooks. And that's true about the owner, there's a transcript on the web somewhere where he talks about being pro-life. But I've seen no anti-liberal bias, and I've never gotten a note back from the editor saying, "Nice review, but could you add a little Jesus?"

Chris Dahlen (Chris Dahlen), Wednesday, 20 April 2005 22:06 (twenty years ago)

From http://www.matadorrecords.com/news/index.html

Finally, we'd like to offer a shout-out (ie. "fuck you") to the cowards and thought-cops in the Ad Dept at Paste Magazine who have deemed our proposed advertisement for 'Face The Truth' to be beyond the bounds of "good taste." God forbid that anything might challenge the sensibilities of Paste's Yep Roc-loving, Starbucks-guzzling, Wes Anderson-worshipping readership. Seriously, if there's anything we or SM have done that is a poor fit with Paste's Ad Dept's narrow worldview, that is the highest compliment we've been paid since the last time Spin refused to run one of our ads.

The precise ad is reproduced here (you saw an alternative version of it as a poster, in the last news update):

ihttp://www.matadorrecords.com/images/news/sm_paste_ad.jpg

asl, Tuesday, 3 May 2005 17:40 (twenty years ago)

yes, Matador's demographic is SO DIFFERENT than Yep Roc's these days.

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 3 May 2005 17:52 (twenty years ago)

No shit! Might even say Matador's to the right of YR lately.

asl, Tuesday, 3 May 2005 17:59 (twenty years ago)

"Move over, John Doe! Cat Power is the bleeding edge of 30-something post-alt indie angst!"

Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 3 May 2005 18:01 (twenty years ago)

Matos, that new Laura Cantrell CD says you're ... um ... well ... yeah.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 3 May 2005 18:03 (twenty years ago)

If, in some cosmic trade, Paste running that ad would've stopped the New Yorker from running that photo of Cat Powers' pubic hair, I'll bet they would've taken the hit.

save the robot (save the robot), Tuesday, 3 May 2005 18:04 (twenty years ago)

About that Malkmus graphic better when it was called L7's Smell the Magic.

Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 3 May 2005 21:44 (twenty years ago)

weird, a copy of this magazine just appeared in my inbox at work.

maria tessa sciarrino (theoreticalgirl), Tuesday, 3 May 2005 22:23 (twenty years ago)

one month passes...
Revived for news: PASTE has acquired TRACKS's subscription base:

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/print/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000962174

Paste Buys Tracks' Subs
June 15, 2005
By Stephanie D. Smith

Atlanta-based music magazine Paste announced today that it will acquire the subscriber base of the defunct Tracks. The move will triple Paste's subscriptions from 15,000 to 50,000, and will now guarantee advertisers a circulation of 120,000.

Paste's August/September issue will be the first to be received by Tracks subscribers. Tracks, launched by former Vibe/Spin Ventures executives John Rollins and Alan Light in December 2003, folded in April after the magazine ran out of funding.

“We’ve admired Tracks since they launched in 2003. Like Paste, Tracks focused on the music, rather than the over-the-top celebrity 'news' with which we are constantly inundated," said Nick Purdy, Paste publisher. "Our readership has a lot in common with Tracks'. They are selective taste-makers in tune with popular culture - they're fans of Coldplay, The White Stripes, and Aimee Mann, they own the Garden State DVD - but they also want to know what's just under the radar."

Paste is an independent bimonthly magazine that covers underground as well as mainstream music, films, and pop culture for 18- to 49-year-olds. The three-year-old title polybags a CD of new music with every issue and mails a DVD sampler with movie trailers and music videos to subscribers. Paste also has a weekly "Paste Picks" segment, where Paste's editors discuss new music and movies, that airs Tuesdays on CNN Headline News.

Joseph McCombs (Joseph McCombs), Friday, 17 June 2005 15:40 (twenty years ago)

mmmm. Paste. a pretty good magazine, methinks.

Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Friday, 17 June 2005 15:58 (twenty years ago)

Tracks was/is terrible.

La Monte (La Monte), Sunday, 19 June 2005 01:49 (twenty years ago)

"and pop culture for 18- to 49-year-olds."

in this month's Paste, members of Slipknot discuss various retirement fund options!

scott seward (scott seward), Sunday, 19 June 2005 02:16 (twenty years ago)

they're fans of Coldplay, The White Stripes, and Aimee Mann, they own the Garden State DVD

j blount (papa la bas), Sunday, 19 June 2005 03:48 (twenty years ago)

they are selective taste-makers

fact checking cuz (fcc), Sunday, 19 June 2005 03:52 (twenty years ago)

as opposed to random taste-makers?

m coleman (lovebug starski), Sunday, 19 June 2005 10:08 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.