January Edition Of Model Rail

Did he say if it's a permanent change? I seem to recall there being a supply problem with quality paper a few months ago but would have expected it to be fixed by now.

MBQ

Keith Lanham said the following on 07/12/2005 11:17:

To be honest, I really didn't notice it was different. On that basis, if the alternative is a higher cover price for good quality paper, I'll take what we've got. So long as they don't go as far as the CTC magazine has (printed on something like Izal), I don't mind.

No it's here to stay (Unless something changes), it's purely down to cost. I for one would sooner pay an extra couple of pence and get it on reasonable paper, than have something that will fall apart after a few months.

Keith

The paper does seem to have the look & feel of chip paper, but to be honest it still seems to reproduce photos quite well, so I can live with it. As for the content, well, maybe it's just me, but this month both BRM & MR seem to have been cobbled together with odds & ends laying around the editorial office . Most unimpressed. :-(

snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com said the following on 08/12/2005 08:38:

Hmmmm..... I don't get BRM because it always feels that way, but I too thought MR was a bit un-inspiring this month. I tend to look at it overall as you can't always get something of interest every month, but there seem to be too many consecutive months like that with MR at the moment. What happened to Chris Leigh's Aster "Lion" series? Did he ever get it finished?

I also get the much-maligned RM, and I still think it is the best "mass-market" model railway magazine around, and I have been buying it for 24 years, from school days. MRJ is the best model rail magazine of the lot though!

In message , snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com writes

I find that it reflects the light too easily, which means you may have to move it around a bit to avoid reflections when trying to study some of the photographs.

As for the adverts, whoever thought that 4-point type (18 lines to the inch) was adequate wants his or her head examining. To me it is totally unreadable, in some cases even with a magnifying glass. (The main editorial pages are printed in 8-point type, i.e. 9 lines to the inch.)

I stopped subscribing to RM about 3 years ago, I was fed up with the narrow gauge predominance; however I've now bought 3 of the last 4 issues & found them more interesting than BRM for sure, as you say I don't expect every issue to be brimming with useful, relevant articles.

I've probably bought about 20% of the MRJs issued over the years, without doubt it features the best quality modelling, I just find it rather 'dry' to read. OTOH Model Rail's layout is so 'busy' it gives me a headache...

wrote

Yes, when RM get away from self-indulging in narrow gauge they can produce a good magazine. I can't understand why they have this narrow-gauge fetish - it's always been a minority interest, whether prototype or model.

John.

John Turner said the following on 08/12/2005 12:09:

Fortunately for me, narrow gauge is an interest of mine, and I do like a lot of the narrow gauge layouts and industrial layouts they feature, of any scale except the identikit OO9 layouts that often show up. Personally, I work in what has been called S4n2 - see my website!

narrow-gauge fetish -

feature, of

The other thing to remember is that a lot of modelling techniques are common across the gauges and scales, so unless the article is just a list of models owned with a track plane and pictures (or that is what the reader wants), there could well be much of interest to someone even though the scale / gauge is not.

Whilst I'm in a "be nice to the boys from Beer" frame of mind I suppose I should point out that they were producing their magazine on an annual CD-ROM years before anyone else bothered, roughly half the price Model Rail want for their incomplete one as well. Pity about the proprietary file format :-/.

I'm almost tempted to re-subscribe, even if they don't do any offers (I'm aware of) on annual subscriptions, unlike BRM's half price offers or MR's substantial discounts.

":::Jerry::::" wrote

No-one is suggesting otherwise Jerry, but the tedium of identikit locos and stock (which Paul so eloquently identified) is tedious to say the least.

John.

wrote

You only need to heavily discount a product which doesn't sell readily.

John.

I wouldn't call MRs current offers substantial or heavily discounted. The best I can find is first three months half price as offered in the MR International supplement. Otherwise it's full price with a "free" Draper measuring set or a few quid off with an acrylic weathering paint set.

If there's anything better, please post a pointer!

MBQ

That's a long standing bugbear of mine especially as most the publications I read are aimed at 50+ readers whose eyesight isn't what it used to be. Quite often the small type has enormous white space in between the lnes.

(kim)

wrote

I was quoting snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com who said:-

John.

To help sell Peco narrow-gauge track?

(kim)

"kim" wrote

Try reading the price list which accompanies the current (2005) Hornby trains catalogue. I'm just waiting for one of the disabled rights organisations to have a go - I can only read it when wearing glasses, and can imagine that some partially sighted people wouldn't be able manage it at all.

John.

To be honest folks I can't recall how much I'm paying for Model Rail at the moment, when my susbscription is close to running out they send a letter saying ' add another 6 months to your subscription and save 30%' or something like that.

I've never seen BRM offer 50% off in the public domain, but this seems to be normal to entice ex subscribers back. It worked on me, even if I am regretting it :-/.

John, I agree in principle that you don't need to discount a product thats sells well, but I think both MR and BRM have audited circulations of around 30,000 : not sure about RM.