Our Melting Pot
Thank you very much for your recent special section, â€œDiversity in Americaâ€? (November 2002), which provided information on the income and buying power of racial and ethnic groups in the U.S. The graphics are fabulous and easily tell the story of our changing America.
I'm glad you continue to tell your readers about the untapped minority markets. I loved your cover story on black Baby Boomers (February 2001), â€œThe Forgotten Baby Boom.â€? You were also one of the early folks to write about how Latinas have money and that they are shopping. This was before Latina magazine got so heavy you could barely lift it. I also enjoyed your recent â€œMedia Channelsâ€? story on the popularity of Latino radio (October 2002), â€œLook Who's Tuned In.â€?
Keep up the great work.
Diversity Director, ASNE
Let Your Fingers Do the Walking
As a former employee of Dow Jones when it owned American Demographics, I've always had a great deal of respect for your excellent publication. However, there is an error in the November 2002 edition.
My concern is with your article â€œThe Reach of the Yellow Pages.â€? While this article, in general, is very thorough, accurate and well-written, one sentence is inaccurate and inappropriately skews the potential for print Yellow Pages over the next five years.
On page 26, the story mentions my belief that Internet directories will take market share away from the print Yellow Pages over the next five years, as many homes gain quicker Web access. It continues: â€œToday, online lookups make up just 10 percent of all YP references and account for only 2 percent of revenue, he says. But assuming print usage remains flat and Internet searches continue to rise by at least 25 percent a year, by 2006 the Internet's market share of revenues could be as high as 35 percent, says Kelsey.â€?
You should have replaced the phrase â€œrevenues could be as high as 35 percentâ€? with the following: â€œusage could be as high as 30.5 percent.â€? If you take â€œ10 percent of all Yellow Pages references,â€? as it says in the paragraph, and compound this number by 25 percent a year from 2001 to 2006, the total comes to 30.5 percent. I was referring to usage â€” not revenues, as the article states.
This is not an insignificant change, in that revenues will
almost certainly continue to trail usage by a considerable
President and CEO
The Kelsey Group
Editor's Note: We regret the error. The sentence should have read: But assuming print usage remains flat and Internet searches continue to rise by at least 25 percent a year, by 2006 the Internet's market share of usage could be as high as 30.5 percent.