Model Railroader magazine survey

Model Railroader magazine sent me a survey by email on Tuesday night (I'm a subscriber to the magazine). Did anyone else receive it? Your thoughts on
the questions?
I thought the questions were adequate... mostly they asked for ranking of the various articles in the October issue on a scale of 1 through 5.
The final questions were a little more directly addressed to computer usage and on-line resources, with regard to prototype railfanning and model railroading (i.e. what features of Trains.com is most useful, what sort of railroad-related activities you do on-line)...
... I wish they would have asked about interest in seeing back issues of MR on CD or DVD!
__________ Mark Mathu The Green Bay Route: http://www.greenbayroute.com / "I started out with nothing and I still have most of it."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No particular thoughts on the question other than the usual ones regarding surveys. They're slanted to get the answers they want.
"Do you find the reviews useful?" Select 1 to 5. One for last five for most.
How do you answer that when you know the reviews in MR are always positive and they never trash a product?
Yes, the reviews are useful as they tell me what new products are on the market.
No, they're useless, or next to useless in telling me how reliable they are, how they track, how much they honestly pull, and how well they are made.
-- Cheers
Roger T.
Home of the Great Eastern Railway http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well it's *obvious* that the answer depends upon how interested you are in the reviews.
If you don't have an interest in it, give it a "1". If you are very interested in the reviews give it a "5".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually, the second question about "News & Products, pg. 8" is more directly about that -- instead of the reviews.
It seems pretty rare that MR reviews a product that hasn't already been announced in an earlier "News & Products" column.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But doesn't that make sense? Given the time from writing to distribution, I'd guess at the minimum, there is about 6-8 weeks. By the time that MR would get a product to review, it's already sitting on the hobby shop shelves. And given the (probably) short production run and the relative short period of manufacture time, it would just make sense that MR wouldn't have something six months before its release.
My only problem with MR is their perceived lack of independence. Given all of the money that some advertisers spend with them, do you really think that they are going to say "This product doesn't meet expectations and you should save your money until obvious problems are fixed."? Perhaps one can read between the lines by what they don't review... but even then, there is only so much space available for product reviews.
dlm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It sure makes sense to me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Typical, it's like preaching to the choir ask current readers/subscribers to the magazine how they like it. If they didn't they probably wouldn't subscribe. I subscribe, at times, when they have deals, example they just sent me another one ($28) for a year. But I turned this one down. What they need to do is ask the questions to people who dropped the magazine or those who don't subscribe.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 10:45:48 -0700, Jon Miller posted in article

They did. I dropped my subscription about 5 years ago, after 25+ years. I'm registered for their forums, though, so they have my addy.
As posed ("Please base your responses on the October issue of Model Railroader"), the magazine- and "Online Extra"-related questions are meaningless.
--
OvC

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why do you say that the questions are meaningless?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Never mind replying... I can see how the questions are meaningless to *you*, since you don't have the October issue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 04:01:52 GMT, Mark Mathu posted in article

Yes, and perhaps other former subscribers. Presumptive of them, innit?
Expanding the last part of the survey on "Web Sites" might help them understand why their presumption is incorrect. But that would be a different survey.
--
OvC

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah, that's wrong of them. If they want to guage the changes in the October issue, they should restrict who they send the survey to. Or if they want to get a broader range of opinions, then they shouldn't limit it to the October issue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I wonder if they think that by sending it to former subscribers they will want to buy the October issue and find it so fantastically great that they will want to re subscribe.
--

Frank Rosenbaum
Please support the following train meets if you can
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 07:23:00 -0400, Frank A. Rosenbaum posted in

That would cost them a few more $$ to filter their mailing list or collect information they may not have had, although I don't think their marketing department has any budget worries. A checkbox for 'Didn't read the October issue' would have been useful, though. That's different from the 'Did not purchase' that was an option on the survey.

I don't think they're all that concerned about a broader range of opinions. They have a formula that works for them. Occasional tweaking based on input from the avid readership is part of the formula.

Yes, putting the table of contents in front of potential readers is a good strategy. Or not, if it includes yet another basic scenery or scrapyard article. But that's part of the formula.
They didn't target former subscribers. They got the email addy from their forum's registration form. IIRC, requested registration info didn't include a 'former subscriber' checkbox; it may have had a checkbox to permit sending surveys and other marketing materials as part of the 'preferences'. This survey was part of their electronic 'newsletter' mailings.
--
OvC

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes I did also recive it by email and filled it out and sent it.
I was a subcriber last year and currently buy my issues at the local railways store or magazine store.
Brock R Bailey Victoria BC Canada

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark Mathu wrote:

```````` Yes, I got it. I also got a multipage one via snail mail to fill out and mail back, both in the past week, and I'm not currently a subscriber, either.
Anyway, I can't fill the online one out yet until I read the Oct. issue. Just started last night.
I mailed the other one yesterday. Did anyone else get it?
"Paul - The CB&Q Guy" (Modeling the 1960's In HO.) "I reject your view of reality and substitute my own." -- [Adam Savage, MythBusters]
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.