A Letter From Mr. Saltas

This e-mail from City Weekly honcho John Saltas to MediaOne (Newspaper Agency Corp, which publishes fake SLC weekly In This Week) CEO Brent Low was intercepted earlier today. The impetus? A stunningly loose-with-the-facts ad in The Salt Lake Tribune about In's "exploding" numbers. Please to enjoy ...

Hi Brent,

I meant to do this a while back and of course got busy, but my sincere thanks for meeting me at breakfast at Market Street. Breaking bread with the head of MediaOne/NAC is a great opportunity and I'm happy our mutual friend was able to finally get us together. I had a nice time and hope you did as well. Perhaps it was the start of a great relationship between MediaOne and City Weekly.

I am wondering though, if you feel you got to know me well enough to give me a good deal on advertising in the Tribune (I'd prefer in this case to purchase just the Tribune, basically fearing the Deseret News might balk at my money the same way they supposedly balk at nudie ads in In).

Yesterday I saw the ad for In Utah This Week (page C2, March 27, Tribune Money Section) stating that in just 5 months In Utah has eroded the readership of City Weekly by 20%. The ad says In Utah has already attained over half of City Weekly readership and backs up that statement with several targeted Media Audit claims. Among those claims is that In Utah has more readers than City Weekly who intend to buy a bed/mattress in the next 12 months.

Well, numbers don't lie, and I certainly understand the relevancy of that category! Particularly for a lively entertainment publication claiming 82,000 young bodies ready to get up and GO! But, I know when I'm licked and concede that In Utah has more sleepers than City Weekly. Not to mention it scares me to death to wonder where those folks are sleeping currently.

Here's what I'm asking: How about you sell us a 1/4 page space in that same Money section so we can have an opportunity to retort? It's only fair. I've looked at Media Audit up and down. Therefore, I also think it would be, correct of you to base our rate on the readership claims of Media Audit comparing City Weekly to the weekday Tribune. We come out on a weekday.

What I'd like to say in the ad is basically (stealing from the NAC riff--damn, why didn't we think of that!), that in just 15 years, City Weekly has surpassed every section of the 136-year-old Salt Lake Tribune in CUME readership except for Section One. That's worthy of an ad, don't you agree? I mean, 121-year head start and we passed them up! You can check these numbers yourself, but according to the same Media Audit cited in yesterday's ad, City Weekly has 154,000 CUME readers. Meanwhile the section breakdowns of the Tribune are as follows for CUME readership: Section One, 220,000; Sports, 123,300; Food, 105,000; Business, 103,900, Life, 83,000 and Movies, 80,600.

CUME numbers mostly impress young reps and rookie managers and are a crock when used to purposely mislead as the In Utah folks did in yesterday's ad. But, since they put those CUME numbers on the table (rather than the more honest "Most Often" ratings), we'll go with them. This studying has done me some good, because now I've also come to better understand from these Media Audit numbers that most people don't read each section of the morning paper. Who knew? But Tribune rates don't reflect that. Why?

My proposition:

I think we can both agree that the Tribune full rate is not a good value. I don't know your rates exactly. But, I know our own rates. For example, a quarter page in City Weekly is going to set me back around $500 or so, with a friendly discount, like the one I hope you offer me. And why wouldn't you? City Weekly has more reach than the Money section of the Tribune (are the Money Section and the Business Section one and the same? If so, that puts it at 103,900 CUME readership, or around 30% less than City Weekly). Given the readership disparity using the CUME numbers the folks at In seem to prefer, I don't feel I should pay full Tribune rate since I can't reach the full Tribune readership with just an ad in the Money section.

How about you let me into the Tribune for at least 30% off the City Weekly rate, or around $300 or so for a 1/4 page Black and White ad, and we call it a day? If you'd rather, we can also use the Most Often Ratings to find a fair value--didn't those In folks even check them? I mean, sheez, according to that very same Media Audit, they're generating only 26,000 readers per week with 65,000 papers on the street! Unreal!! City Weekly has over 95,000 weekly readers with "only" 60,000 papers on the street according to that very same Media Audit btw. I guess that more truthful statistic wouldn't have made for such a dramatic ad, eh?

What say we meet again for breakfast and finalize this number? I can cut Dean a check as soon as you give the go-ahead. If you can provide the specs, I'd also prefer that our own production staff design and build that ad.

Looking forward to our next meeting and of course, looking forward to hearing back on this offer.

Best and Happy Easter,
John Saltas