MR subscription

And the reason Kalmbach can't charge very high ad rates is that they would be passed on to us, and we would get even more whingeing about the High Cost Of The Hobby.

There ain't no free lunch, guys!

And if your work is worth a "comfortable" wage, so is the work of the people who provide you with your model railroading jollies.....

would be passed on to us, and we would get even more whingeing about the High Cost Of The Hobby.< I check the cost of an ad in MR and thought the cost was outrageous compared to the other mags. But then costs are based on circulation. That's why these _good deals_ are around even though Kalmbach doesn't want current subscribers to know. Helps get the circulation up and therefor the ad prices up.

I could see paying $1.99 per issue, but not 5 bucks.

Even if the price equivalent works to near equal in terms of inflation- the cost per magazine should be much less due to increased productivity and new technologies. If they can't provide more with their ~$5.00 newsstand price........they're done.

Tom H>

good time rock and roll liberal. Think the way China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Cuba and the old USSR!!! Business is for the good of the people!! Profits are evil!!!! Down with business! Let the government be involved in businesses, not the people!!!

Misplaced our medications, have we?

On Wed, 26 May 2004 07:31:16 UTC, "Tom Hannon" wrote: 2000

My problem is not the price, it is the content, or lack thereof. If there was content I would buy.

The productivity improvements are right there, for example in the colour pictures on every page. I remember when MR advertised that it had four - count 'em, four! - colour pages in an issue.... Etc.

Oh, I see, you mean _content_. I suppose you want more how-to articles, and such.

Well, if nobody writes 'em, the magazine can't publish 'em.

to

Hi Jon, I always thought that they paid at the time of publication. Or has this policy changed?

Second, they rewrite the article to fit their form and format.

Do the other publications not do any editing at all?

#$%

I always thought that they paid at the time of publication. Or has this policy changed?< MR pays when the article is accepted. This could be months or years before it is published. I think I even remember when an author was dead before his article was published.

On Thu, 27 May 2004 17:17:34 -0700, "Jon Miller" purred:

And what magazine doesn't rewrite you? I never met one. Even the top mystery and SC authors have been rewritten sometimes to the point of un recognizability. It is a fact of periodical publishing life, everyone gets rewritten. Some people think each golden word they type should be kept sacrosanct and enshrined forever but those egos have no clue as to what the magazine needs. One month they may not have as much room for an item and must trim it, Other months they will have too much space and it must be expanded or another article of more appropriate length substituted. Sometimes the photos are so good they cut text to include more images. It isn't personal, it is just the way things are. The biggest problem for a long time was MR had among the highest standards for photos in the magazine business and many writers simply were not equipped to take photos of the caliber MR demanded, so many articles were rejected on the basis of inferior photography. Recently they have loosened up a bit and even allow high end digital photos. Still you had better be a good photographer or have a friend who is one and willing to assist or even the best article will never see publication. Sadly publication is not as big a problem for photographers as writers since MR has published numerous articles which consisted almost solely of photos.

cat

I don't recognize "SC" - did you mean "SF"?

On Fri, 28 May 2004 15:03:11 GMT, Steve Caple purred:

Indeed. Clumsy paws strike again.

cat

...snip...

Doesn't surprise me. A lot of people don't realise how badly they write. Most people seem to believe that that if they understand what they've written, so will every other reader. That's just not so. The main reason is that speech and writing aren't processed and understood the same way

-- IOW, just because you can explain something clearly in speech doesn't mean that you can do so in writing.

Most amateur writers write as they speak, which is in fact the best way to create a first draft. But that first draft must be edited, sometimes more than a thoroughly. :-) (The other common error that amateur writers fall into is trying to produce a "literary" or "correct" style, which _always_ results in errors.)

Conversely, just because something reads well doesn't mean it will sound good or even clear when it's read aloud. (Not to mention that reading aloud is a skill very few people have mastered.)

Oh sure, editors everywhere obviously try to fix spelling and grammar, but standards are deteriorating (mostly because of so-called spell checkers.) For example, I'm getting more than a little tired of "low and behold," one of the stupidest spelling errors out there. I mean, low what? Or does the writer mean the reader should make a noise like a contented cow?

Ah, well, back to modelling - I have to adjst a pair of couplers.

to create a first draft. But that first draft must be edited, sometimes more than a thoroughly. :-) (The other common error that amateur writers fall into is trying to produce a "literary" or "correct" style, which _always_ results in errors.)<

Wolf, In most part I will agree with you. Here is the MR take. They rewrite everything even from accomplished writers, in fact they even would rewrite a language professor's work if he ever sent it to them. I could name names and articles for years but I won't as I think that carries the discussion to far. MR does keep typos from happening that most of the other mags don't. A prime example was my latest copy of RMJ. A performance review of a proto

2K 2-8-4 complete with pictures of a Burlington diesel. MR would never have this happen but then MR doesn't have performance reviews that have the same testing techniques that go back 20 years either. Reason for that, don't take a chance of pissing off your advertisers. The bottom line is that there is a growing group that will puts up with the typos and different style of writers for content. Something that MR is getting slimmer and slimmer on. In the old days (50 cents an issue days) there were basically two mags, MR and RMC. Current time there are many more and I subscribe to 4 of them (MR is not one of them). For me it has nothing to do with cost, it's content!

When I submitted a piece for "One Person's Opinion," they only changed one sentence, and that was to reflect information that I wasn't totally familiar with so it sounded unclear. But then again, that was an opinion piece, not a step by step construction article or something like that.

dlm

They should have renamed it Two People's Opionion!