Dauphin Media leaves town and leaves subscribers to Holmes magazine dangling
It would appear that Dauphin Media has left Canada and that people who subscribed to its Holmes magazine -- which it suspended in November -- have been stiffed. A story in the Toronto Star says that the company has vacated its Toronto offices, leaving behind an outstanding $5,000 rent bill.
A spokesman for the Holmes Group, which oversaw the editorial content, but not the business side, of the magazine said that some subscribers had paid $60.50 for three-year subs (30 issues) for the magazine and that there could be as many as 40,000 individuals owed a total of $500,000 in prepaid subscriptions.
Meanwhile Dauphin has opened a New York office and launched a magazine on behalf of the National Football League.
A notice on the Dauphin website continues to say what it has for months -- that it "fully intends on fulfilling its subscriber obligations". Calls by The Star to Dauphin and its public relations group went unanswered. There is no sign of the men's magazine The Male Perspective which Dauphin said in 2010 it was about to launch.
Labels: closures, subscriptions
posted by D. B. Scott at
12:09 pm
6 Comments:
Doesn't look good on Mr. Mike "Integrity" Holmes now, does it?
I think the Holmes Group is maintaining that it was responsible for the editorial content, but not the business or publishing operation.
Although Holmes' spokesperson says, "Mike didn't see any of that money" (speaking of sub revenues). That sounds like a convenient dodge. Although Holmes' may not have personally cashed the subscribers's cheques, one would assume he didn't lend his name to the mag for free.
Good point.
Speaking as someone who worked there for the briefest of moments (like so many other publishing professionals who were chewed up and spit out), that was a dodgy outfit from the outset. (I won't go into details lest I be accused of slander.)
The magazine was an extension of the "Make It Right" brand to go along with the television shows and books. He outsourced it to DMG for a royalty/profit share, and beyond final approval of the editorial and the cover photo shoots, he certainly was not hands-on in the revenue side of the business (ad sales and subs).
I honestly believe Mike Holmes is not the bad guy in this, but with his name across the magazine, he's the one left holding the bag.
Anonymous #1 here: Exactly, he is left holding the bag (especially when his brand name is nameplated to the biz model/failure.) I don't doubt the guy's a decent chap and chastened by this flop. It'll be a lesson to other big-deal types who extend into publishing without total control. .
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home