Charlie Cook, The Cook Political Report, reaches publisher's nirvana: revenues up 15 percent with no marketing.

Is it possible to get "too much media exposure" for a newsletter editor? Publisher Allie Ash once ascribed the enormous success of the Louis Rukeyser newsletters to "finding an editor who millions see on TV every week and putting his picture on the marketing package envelope and on every page of the sales letter."

If, like me, you are a political talk show and C-Span junkie, over the past election campaign it may have seemed that Charlie Cook, publisher of the non-partisan Cook Political Report, was on TV as often as Jennifer Anniston in "Friends" reruns.

But you don't have to be a political junkie to see Charlie's name all over the place. He's regularly quoted--along with his top reporters, Jennifer Duffy and Amy Winters--in the mass media when it's election season. The Cook Political Report is considered the best odds-maker on candidates in the U.S.

For more background on Charlie and his newsletter, see NL/NL 10/17/05, in which he is profiled.

And not only was Cook all over the media, but his website gives away a lot of interesting stuff, including his regular National Journal columns on a delayed basis. (You can sign up to receive those in your e-mail at www.Cookpolitical.com.)

Does media exposure translate into subscriptions?

So, following the recent U.S. mid-term elections, we wanted to ask Charlie several questions beyond the most obvious, "Did it bring in any new business?"

His first answer? "Absolutely. Business on the newsletter is up about 15 percent this year with absolutely no new marketing effort whatever."

To follow up, we asked if new marketing efforts are planned. After all, Charlie pretty much got it right: His final pre-election count called for the Democrats to gain 20 to 35 House seats and 4 to 6 in the Senate.

"Yes," he answered. "First, we're going to revamp the website, but then we will be doing additional new marketing.

"One thing we have in our favor," Cook explained, "is our price. It hasn't changed since 1994, more than 12 years, so effectively it's considerably 'lower' than it once was. A large part of the reason we have been able to do this has been the change from print to online delivery. Paper is expensive. Online is practically free and some of our issues, pre-election editions, ran 150-160 pages."

Today the price is $295 (plus sales tax in D.C., where they have lots of subscribers). If you assume an average annual inflation rate of 4 percent, $295 in 1994 is "equivalent" to only $181 this year.

Any limit to his universe?

Finally, we asked Charlie if he worried, having published for 22 years and being very well known in his industry, that there might be a ceiling on the number of subscribers he could get, a limit to the number of people who want the sort of detailed political intelligence he publishes.

"No" was his short answer. "Going back to price, when we began, our subs were almost entirely lobbyists and political action committees. Today with our 'lower' price we have a broader reach. There are individuals who subscribe. Years ago if I didn't know almost all of the subs personally, I at least knew who they were. Today I often don't have the faintest idea."

The Idea of "Annual-ality"

Many newsletters have seasonality in their marketing programs, such as those targeted to CPAs and the academic community. The Cook Political Report is the first I've known that has what might be called "annual-ality." For them over time, the even years were good, presidential years better than mid-terms, and the odd off-years less so (of course to the people who read Charlie, it is always election season--the '08 campaign began weeks ago).

"Actually," Charlie said, "what really drives us is anticipation of change. The best year we ever had, to that point, was 1995 after the GOP captured both Houses. The worst? 1997. Bill Clinton was re-elected easily, the Congress remained safely Republican, and not much controversial was in sight.

"For us, 2006 was an especially strong year. These mid-terms were as good for us as a presidential year with the anticipation of change in control of Congress. The year 2007 should be a good one. The first year after a change in control of Congress is always good and it is also the 'year before' a Presidential election. Then comes 2008 and the Presidential election and, who knows, 2009 may well be another year for change. I'm happy."

Cook's Political Report, The Watergate, 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20037, 202-739-8525, www.cookpolitical.com