Rick, Not sure if there is anything a magazine can do that the net can't do better. All forms of publishing are going through declining circulation. Basically, why pay for something you can get for free on the net? They might go the way of some magazines and provide in depth articles that are harder to read on the net. But the MR special issues seemed to have dissapointed many, moi included in their depth. They could focus on more layout tours, as you suggest, but soon, someone on the net will provide free video tours which will eclipse the printed page and be a much better product. Maybe their best option is to forget print and to an ezine, but with the aging MRR population, maybe they are scared of losing their best customers. Its a pickle alright.
Rick, I really liked some of your ideas. Communication with other modelers? I used to love to read letters, but they've really been cut down. The student section is long gone, and this last month I think there were all of two letters to the editor. Some gossip about new trends or items BEYOND the really huge manufacturers connected with Kalmbach in one way or another. The little guys and upstarts. How about reaching out to modelers whose work is admired and asking them to write a how-to article? Someone who makes great trees, for example--instead of just the same staff articles over and over again. How about Rod Stewart, a true master of big-city buildings? Or at least publicly beg for articles and make it clear that people have a chance at publication for once. But stop demanding perfect series of photos for how-to articles! It's really unnecessary. Unfinished layouts for sure--and show us the unfinished parts, too. If MR sends out a photographer for an article, take a photo of whatever structure or scene or feature the author is especially fond of. It really doesn't matter if it isn't up to the MR staff's exacting standards: I want to see what he is fond of or proud of and I'm always disappointed when the photographer chooses instead to just take another photo of some scenery. I would love more history concerning operations, yard layout, etc.. They have some already, of course. Definitely do more to expand the magazine worldwide: we are an integrated planet, now. And scalewide, too. Why no more O-scale or Z-scale layouts or articles? Sure I model N but that doesn't mean I'm not interested in other scales. Scratchbuilding plans for sure. They used to provide those: structures and locos. As far as content goes, the old MR used to have alot more pages. They could do that because their pages were thinner and of poorer quality. I want more text, not less! I like to sit and read, or I would not buy magazines. Do we HAVE to read about DCC in every single issue? How to do all of this while not breaking the bank? How about: 1. Improve content (see above). 2. Widen appeal worldwide and scalewide. 3. Decrease paper quality. 4. Stop demanding perfection in photos, and stop using so MANY for the how-to articles. 5. Don't pay more for articles: pay the same or less. The money isn't the reward, because it's negligible. The reward is the publication--and MR has done all it could over the past 10 years or so to drive away potential contributors with their high standards. 6. Cut staff a little or put them to work in more productive pursuits. This can be done if MR starts getting more content from outside its offices. I'll probably always subscribe to MR. I just wish they would take it back to its old winning formula.
Since most of the previous posts deal with the worth of the subscription (I quit MR when the cost went to $42.95) I find it surprising that no one has mentioned the new e-zine that Joe Fugate is publishing called Model Railroad Hobbyist (http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/). It is totally supported by advertisers and is free to the subscriber. This is the first year of publication and the issues came out quarterly. However starting next year the issues will be bi-monthly because subscriptions have increased that much. Not every article appeals to me just like the print media but it is another avenue to share information (did I mention that it is free). The e-zine does pay for articles and you don't have to invest $800-$1000 for a camera to shoot pics the size that MR wants. Just my 2 cents. Check it out if you haven't already.
1.) I think the content is fine, they've just cut back on staff, which happens when circulation drops (see number 7). 2.) Do agree there, more O scale, N scale, Z scale, etc, would be nice. BUT what if there aren't that many out there? At least not enough that want MR to show them? 3.) Paper quality feels the same to me over the last ten years. Not sure it makes much difference to me. 4.) It's not perfection in photos, it's megapixel count that's a killer. That needs to be dropped, as you're cutting out a great percentage of modeler's that might be able to provide content. High standards, you want. Then all the MR bashing would be on how crappy the content is. 5.) Again, high standards, equals better payment. 6.) As in number one, staff was cut a few years ago. Outside content is a major portion of how MR, RMC, NSR, etc. are run. I'm not sure some of you realize how this whole thing works.
Of course there aren't "that many out there." The point I was trying to make was to broaden the subscription base, not narrow it to the biggest scale or country. I said the paper quality has been the same for ten years. I suggested it be lowered back to where it originally was. Why? Not for esthetics. To save money. My "high standards" remark had to do with perfect photos and also with perfect layouts. Nowhere did I suggest "crappy" content. In your mind, are most of the layouts done by members of this forum "crappy"? Outside content is not a major portion of MR content. Otherwise we would not all be complaining that most of the articles are written by the MR staff. But apparently you "realize how this whole thing works" and I don't, so perhaps I should keep my silly ideas to myself.
Except that you can't broaden the subscription base if there aren't the layouts to show. That's what I was getting at. If there's no O, N, Z, layouts out there, what do you do? There have been plenty of layout tours without "perfect layouts. Heck, the Reid brothers layout was unfinished when it was shown, as were a lot of the "great layouts" we recall from the eighties. I think MR has a tendancy to just not focus on those parts. My good firend Bill Boyd's article was on nothing but new building techniques. Not sure why you're getting personal, I never said anything about forum member's layouts being crappy if they we're unfinished. Model Railroading is full of different skill levels and sets, I find great joy in seeing everyone's creations. Do I like all of them as much as others? No. I don't think you'll find one person that wouldn't say that. I was refering to how if MR started publishing nothing unfinished layouts and projects, I think we'd all start complaining that we never see high quality finished products. Really, Pelle, Lou Sassi, etc. are all on staff? I don't recall them in the staff listings. As someone that used to write for Model Retailer, lots of content is from outside sources, so to proclaim that it isn't is a misnomer. And I never pointed "you" out individually. It's a general opinion that seems to come across on a lot of forums. Besides, sometimes silly ideas are the best ones.
All this arguing about MR, I'm waiting for the next issue of the British magazine Model Rail to hit the newstands, it has no US content whatsoever but it lasts me for three or four lunch breaks at work and model railroading is model railroading. There are three of four British prototype magazines I regularly buy as well that leave Trains for dead if you're not particular about which country the trains come from.
