MR Mag on the Newstand - retread bonus booklet?

What's your point?

It's a non-Bonus in my opinion. Are they just clearing out the attic? Can't they come up with anything new?

---john.

MR touts itself as the largest circulation model railroad magazine in the world, which it may well be, but when it comes to content it's nowhere near as large as the UK magazine, "Railway Modeller" which has at least twice as many article pages.

MR has shrunk to half the number of pages it had ten years ago.

a) All those bonus booklets are retreads. b) "New" depends on your experience in the hobby.

And a higher proportion than ever is staff written. That means Ordinary Modellers aren't writing articles the way they used to. The mag can't publish what nobody writes.

Compare Railroad Model Craftsman: longer articles, but fewer of them.

Not sure the latter half of that statement is entirely applicable.

MR has gone from being a hands on "how to" magazine to one were articles are mainly photos, the "People Magazine" style of photo journalism and buy this buy that "construction" articles. This may discourage many people from submitting articles.

Agreed. "Craftsman" still has craftsman articles whereas MR as moved away from them.

If you pick up a copy of the UK's "Railway Modeller" you still see craftsman type articles.

In the past year, I've been starting to feel like many of the articles are just re-hashing what has already been done over and over again. The odd article has something new, but it seems like one is reading the same stuff all over again.

As for nobody writing anything, I have my doubts about that. I wrote an article on an occupancy detector that was rejected because they "don't require a story on this particular subject at the moment."

I can recall when there was a good article about a circuit at least once every two or three months. The last circuit article they published was in the November 2011 issue, and it had an error that required a correction a couple of months later.

Their rejection letter stated that "more material is submitted to Model Railroader than we can possibly use in the magazine" but given that so much is staff written (or written by the same contributors over and over again), one really wonders.

I no longer subscribe to MR for the same reason, but in their defense it may just be that we've progressed beyond the novice stage. They do seem to be focused on the newbie and the "buy not build" modeler. I suspect they're still helpful to the beginner.

I do subscribe to RMC and read the online MRH.

That rag is slowly dying. Go subscribe to a digital one for free with videos in some of the articles. There is also a great forum.

Download to your PC or wireless device. For those who have missed it, we are in the digital age.

R

I was just pondering earlier that I have subscribed to and downloaded and saved every issue of MRH, but I have only read about halfway through the very first issue. Never got around to finishing it or reading any of the others over the years. My MO for all of the paper mags has been to read them while lying on the sofa watching TV (multitasking). Can't hold the computer monitor on my lap or belly the way I can with paperbacks. Even the laptop would not work as well, and getting a tablet is not in the budget for the foreseeable future.

Plus, with none of the above, you can't soak in the bath nor the hot tub while reading the magazine.

And reading on a monitor is more tiring than reading paper.

Not to mention being able to read it in "the reading room" - you know, the one with the chair with a round seat with an opening in it. ;-)

Though, E-readers can be purchased for as little as $70 (here in Canada). I was thinking it might be nice to try the e-format of MR, but they charge $12 on top of your subsription. For some reason, I feel it should be included if one already has the paper subscription.

If you want the e-format only, the price is the same as the paper version, which also seems odd given that there are no printing and distribution charges. The one benefit is for non-US subscribers, as the e-format version costs the US price for everyone.

Many magazine publishers have still not grasped that consumers know how cheap digital distribution is. OTOH, consumers don't realise that the sub price for the paper mag pays for the paperwork of tracking the subscription, and only a part of the mailing cost. The sub price is a loss leader. The actual cost of producing each issue is paid by the advertisers, who are of course paying for your eyeballs.

Data point 1: New Scientist offers a "Print & Web" sub for $1.94CAD per issue (51 issues). That's really a paper sub with the web added for free. Smartphone/tablet adds another 61 cents, which I suspect is largely the carrier's fee. So it should be possible for Kalmbach to offer the e-sub as a free add-on to the paper sub, and for a good deal les for an e-only sub.

Data point 2: Some years ago, I was edited a very small circulation, 8 page fan mag, per copy cost was $1.53 (63 cents for postage, 10 cents for the envelope, and 80 cents copying). If I'd charged minimum wage for my work, it would have added about $100 per issue, or about $5 per copy. If we'd paid going rates for articles, that would have been about another $100. Total cost per copy: $11.53. Double to triple that at today's prices. No advertising. So you can see that print media are expensive.

I used to get several magazines free merely by signing up for them at conventions. These magazines apparently were sufficiently supported by advertising as to not need subscriptions. They were mainly trade magazines and included Information Week, A/V Video, and Game Developer as well as a few others that I have forgotten since I failed to renew them years ago. I have often wondered if they can publish with merely advertiser support, why can't more magazines?

The trade mags have a higher value audience.

True, and the key is that last line.

The customer of magazines, radio stations, and television stations is not the reader/listener/viewer. The reader/listener/viewer are the PRODUCT that they are selling to their advertisers.

Those eyeballs tend to disappear if the subscription price and the quality of content does not fall into an "acceptable" area. Either you find a way to improve your content or you find a way to be able to offer it for a lower cost, or even do both.

Getting back to MR specifically, I don't have a great issue with the digital version being priced at a similar level as the print edition. My issue is with not providing digital access FREE with the print edition. I'm not about to suddenly switch versions, but am interested in 'test driving' the digital version while I am a print subscriber.

Unlike other types of magazines, I like to keep back issues for reference purposes. Unfortunately, having been a subscriber for over

30 years, space to keep them is getting scarce. Buying the first 75 years on DVD ROM is a good step for the old issues, but going forward I'm beginning to think the content may not be worth the shelf space.

Being able to try out the digital format is becoming a serious consideration for my next renewal.