<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://s2.wp.com/wp-content/themes/vip/newyorkobserver/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Observer &#187; But in Good News: Conde Nast&#8217;s Ad Pages Ticking Up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://observer.com/2010/07/but-in-good-news-conde-nasts-ad-pages-ticking-up/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://observer.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 20:05:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='observer.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://observer.com/osd.xml" title="Observer" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://observer.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
				
		<title>But in Good News: Conde Nast&#8217;s Ad Pages Ticking Up</title>

		<comments>http://observer.com/2010/07/but-in-good-news-conde-nasts-ad-pages-ticking-up/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:11:12 -0400</pubDate>
					<link>http://observer.com/2010/07/but-in-good-news-conde-nasts-ad-pages-ticking-up/</link>
			<dc:creator>Esther Zuckerman</dc:creator>
				
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.observer.com/2010/07/but-in-good-news-conde-nasts-ad-pages-ticking-up/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>So, yes, publishing veteran <a href="/2010/media/william-li-leaving-conde-nast">William Li is leaving,</a> the <a href="/2010/media/david-carey-his-new-job-heast-its-taylor-made-me">business side appears to be in</a> transition, but we took a detailed look at how Conde Nast fared in the second quarter now that the Publishers Information Bureau has released second quarter ad page numbers.</p>
<p>The news, like for the entire industry, is good! Ad pages went up 6.6 percent for all of Conde Nast's titles in the second quarter versus&nbsp;results from last year&nbsp;(or, from&nbsp;4,516&nbsp;ad pages in 2009 to&nbsp;4,814.31 in the second quarter this year).</p>
<p>The biggest winner for Conde Nast is Vanity Fair with a 30.3 percent increase; the bigger loser is Lucky, with a decrease of 7.3.</p>
<p>Here are all the Conde Nast titles:</p>
<p><em>Vanity Fair: up 30.3 percent <br />Wired: up 26.2 percent <br />GQ: up 21.5 percent <br />Vogue: up 20.1 percent <br />Allure: up 12.6 percent <br />Teen Vogue: up 10.1 percent <br />Parade: up 9.9 percent <br />Golf World: up 9.3 percent <br />The New Yorker: up 5.4 percent <br />Glamour: up 4.2 percent. <br />Bon App&eacute;tit: up 2.7 percent&nbsp; <br />W: up 0.7 percent <br />Cond&eacute; Nast Traveler: up 0.2 percent <br />Architectural Digest: down 3.0 percent<br />Details: down 4.8 percent<br />Golf Digest: down 6.2 percent<br />Self: down 6.3 percent<br />Lucky: down 7.3 percent</em></p>
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, yes, publishing veteran <a href="/2010/media/william-li-leaving-conde-nast">William Li is leaving,</a> the <a href="/2010/media/david-carey-his-new-job-heast-its-taylor-made-me">business side appears to be in</a> transition, but we took a detailed look at how Conde Nast fared in the second quarter now that the Publishers Information Bureau has released second quarter ad page numbers.</p>
<p>The news, like for the entire industry, is good! Ad pages went up 6.6 percent for all of Conde Nast's titles in the second quarter versus&nbsp;results from last year&nbsp;(or, from&nbsp;4,516&nbsp;ad pages in 2009 to&nbsp;4,814.31 in the second quarter this year).</p>
<p>The biggest winner for Conde Nast is Vanity Fair with a 30.3 percent increase; the bigger loser is Lucky, with a decrease of 7.3.</p>
<p>Here are all the Conde Nast titles:</p>
<p><em>Vanity Fair: up 30.3 percent <br />Wired: up 26.2 percent <br />GQ: up 21.5 percent <br />Vogue: up 20.1 percent <br />Allure: up 12.6 percent <br />Teen Vogue: up 10.1 percent <br />Parade: up 9.9 percent <br />Golf World: up 9.3 percent <br />The New Yorker: up 5.4 percent <br />Glamour: up 4.2 percent. <br />Bon App&eacute;tit: up 2.7 percent&nbsp; <br />W: up 0.7 percent <br />Cond&eacute; Nast Traveler: up 0.2 percent <br />Architectural Digest: down 3.0 percent<br />Details: down 4.8 percent<br />Golf Digest: down 6.2 percent<br />Self: down 6.3 percent<br />Lucky: down 7.3 percent</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://observer.com/2010/07/but-in-good-news-conde-nasts-ad-pages-ticking-up/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/becf95fa833b8aeb13f7720732bd6dc6?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">jhanasobserver</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
