MEW, would less be more?

Advert

New Replies

Report Bug

Help/FAQs

MEW, would less be more?

This topic has 58 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 13 December 2011 at 11:35 by David Clark 13.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 59 total)

1 2 3 →

Author

Posts
6 November 2011 at 11:04 #77366
JouniP
Participant
@jounip
First, I like to say that David Clark has made great job as a editor of Model Engineer’s Workshop magazine.

However, there is one thing I personally don’t like and I like to start discussion about that. When I startated my subscription a few years ago there were eight issues each year and weeks between two numbers were long. Later, number of issues were increased to ten and then twelve and thirteen, if I remember correctly.

In my opinion thirteen number per year is too much. I have another activities than just read MEW, I have to find to be in workshop also. Sometimes I have two or three issues I have not read yet. I know thats partly becouse english is not my mother language, and I am a little bit slow reader. But I also feel that nowadays magazine is not as interesting as it used to be. Sometimes I find myself thinking that are some articles just to fill those several pages? Some articles seems to be quite empty, I would say.

I know that reason for thirteen issues is schelude of ME and MEW is easier to maintain.

Week 1: ME

Week 2: MEW

Week 3: ME

Week:4: to be rest

then start again from week 1

But should there allways be a week 2? What if two or three times per year week 2 does not exist at all?

If there would be just 10 to 11 MEW issues each year, would they be thicker and better. Would Mr Clark find time and force make those numbers even better than they are now? Would Mr Clark find time to do something just for himself and his family? Would we all be more satisfied to MEW magazine?

Yours

Jouni
Advert

6 November 2011 at 11:04 #38084
JouniP
Participant
@jounip
6 November 2011 at 11:51 #77371
John Coates
Participant
@johncoates48577
As someone who only gets MEW I wouldn’t want any less issues. I can see what you mean when you include ME into the equation but I think you just need to lobby for fewer ME’s or read quicker
6 November 2011 at 12:28 #77375
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
For Christs sake don’t upset everything, we have only just got over decimalisation and having to put the clocks forward………….

John S.
6 November 2011 at 13:32 #77377
keithmart
Participant
@keithmart
Hi

I would rather see more magazine and less adverts.

Yes I know they are supposed to cut the cost of publication, but do they just contribute to the profit???

keith

Leeds UK
6 November 2011 at 15:18 #77382
Peter G. Shaw
Participant
@peterg-shaw75338
To an extent I agree with Jouni in that it does take some time to read and consider the contents, followed by adding relevant entries into my home-made database of articles of possible future interest. And yes, I often have the last two, or even three issues on my desk awaiting entry into my database. And I do not take Model Engineer!

When the idea of moving to 13 issues was being considered, the editor asked what we, the readers, thought. The eventual result of the survey, if it can be called that, was that one person, me as it happens, was against it for various reasons, and so the change went ahead. It also transpired that the reason for 13 issues was so that it would fit in with the ME schedule. Here are the comments I made then:

1. It takes time to read and digest.

2. The extra issue will involve extra payments to writers.

3. Would advertisers be willing to pay for the extra issue?

4. Direct debit payments are taken quarterly. This means that one of the quarters has an extra magazine, hence the average cost per issue is lower in that particular quarter.

5. Individual purchasers from, eg WHSmiths, have to remember that in one month there will be two issues.

6. There is increased storage requirements.

I think it is possibly too late now to have a change, but if a change was to be forthcoming, I would be happy to see it reduced to 12 issues per annum, similar to other (non-engineering) magazines. At least then I wouldn’t be taken by surprise when the latest issue is designated Autumn 2011 rather than October 2011 – ok, ok, I know there has already been an October issue, but I am sure you know what I mean.

Would it result in more articles per issue and less advertising? Somehow I doubt it.

Would it result in a lower subscription cost? Again I doubt it, but it might just defer that inevitable day when the cost does indeed increase.

Regards,

Peter G. Shaw
6 November 2011 at 16:03 #77383
mgnbuk
Participant
@mgnbuk
I agree. The current 13 issue arrangement provides no more “content” than the old 8 issue arrangement, but includes far more advertisements – most of which are of no interest & of little relevance to me.

I have not not happy with the current content/advert ratio for some time now and, as I see no chance of any change for my idea of better, I cancelled my DD subscription a couple of issues ago.

I guess you can’t please all of the people all of the time though, as I have subscribed since very early on (and have all bar a couple of early issues), it is a shame non the less. I stopped getting ME many years ago, as I have no interest in steam models or railways – maybe time to have another look at HSM ?

£0.02

Nigel B.
6 November 2011 at 17:23 #77387
Billy Mills
Participant
@billymills
I agree with Sir John, stick with 13 per year if DC1 can keep it up. I cannot understand how you can get a new issue and not read it the same day. How do you explain that the adverts help pay for the printing costs, without the ads the cover price rise would make MEW unaffordable for many retired people [which is possibly the majority of readers].

Very much hope that DC1 is better now.

Billy.
6 November 2011 at 19:08 #77391
Steve Garnett
Participant
@stevegarnett62550
If this wasn’t an economical/sensible way to run the editing of multiple mags, then I’m sure that the management wouldn’t do it this way. It wouldn’t worry me whether it was 12 or 13, but I don’t think that going back to 8 or whatever would be very helpful. If it were to go down that route, then probably 4 a year (quarterly) would be the way to go, but it would inevitably get more expensive…

As it is, it’s not ludicrously expensive, but I think that it probably would be if the advert to content ratio went up in favour of content, which is what would inevitably happen in the quarterly scenario. And nobody is obliged to read all of the adverts, are they? I certainly don’t. (Oops, perhaps I shouldn’t admit that just in case any of the advertisers are reading this!)
6 November 2011 at 19:15 #77393
NJH
Participant
@njh
Well Guys

Wish for what you like but I suspect the number of issues per year of the magazines is purely a commercial judgement by the magazine owners. If they could sell a copy of each every week and make a greater profit (after allowing for the extra costs) or if they could only make a profit by printing ME one month and MEW the next they would do so. And why not – they are surely in business to make money. Advertising is necessary – the price of the publications would be prohibitive without it .

Regards

Norman
7 November 2011 at 10:08 #77410
Lawrie Alush-Jaggs
Participant
@lawriealush-jaggs50843
Personally I rather like thirteen issues. It doesn’t take long to digest, two hours to read from cover to cover. I would not go so far as to want more issues a year but I would prefer not to go back to eight.

Lawrie
7 November 2011 at 12:31 #77415
Eddie
Participant
@eddie
I agree with Lawrie. Got my issue on friday and will finish it by tonight. Read through it a couple of times and made the mental notes about the content.

Eddie
1 December 2011 at 09:39 #78986
martin perman 1
Participant
@martinperman1
Gentlemen,

I enjoy MEW and dont find a problem with the number each year and I find all of the articles interesting even though I may not use them.

As to reading the magazine it does not take me very long at all particularly as I also have Practical Classics, stationary Engine and Steam Railway to read each month as I have interests in these and run a classic car and collect Stationary engines.

Martin P
1 December 2011 at 10:25 #78990
colin hawes
Participant
@colinhawes85982
Never be negative about things. I am happy to read more than one mag. a day ,it,s just a case of prioritising things.Read the bits of immediate interest for motivation ,get out to the workshop if you can afford to heat it, but read the mags. when you have just scrapped the latest part or lost that tiny bit that you have just parted off.Above all, try to get something done each day. The longest journey and little steps!

Colin
1 December 2011 at 10:48 #78994
steamdave
Participant
@steamdave
Talking of advertising. Remember the days in ME when the adverts were all grouped at the front and back of the magazine and you could read the contents Without distraction?

Dave

The Emerald Isle
1 December 2011 at 10:55 #78995
David Clark 13
Participant
@davidclark13
Hi Dave

The adverts still are at the front and back of ME.

Does this mean that you don’t buy it anymore?

regards David
1 December 2011 at 12:25 #78998
John Coates
Participant
@johncoates48577
Having been collecting back issues of MEW for the past six months it strikes me that we got more content back in the 90’s when it started. I think this is because a lot of the content was about making things which we now find it easier/more convenient to buy. Many an article started off with “I then looked into the price of one of these things and decided it was too high for me so I made one and here’s how to do the same yourself”

They are a rich mine of material and ideas which I now thoroughly enjoy perusing at my leisure. Particularly so since I have an old lathe (1947) and mill/drill (90’s) which do not possess DRO’s or anything CNC.

It is surprising how well equipped the workshops of some contributors to MEW and on here are, way beyond what the writers of those early MEW’s could ever hope for. In the absence of finance they made do and mended.

Looking over recent issues I feel that there is less and less for me so when the renewal comes round in Feb next year I might not take it up. I’m not interested in new technology (beyond DRO’s which I have plenty of articles in the back issues about how to fit) and CNC leaves me cold.

Anyway just some lunchtime musings so don’t flame me too hard!

PS. I am only missing MEW’s 2,3 and 16 if anyone can help me out

John
1 December 2011 at 12:43 #79000
martin perman 1
Participant
@martinperman1
I have only been getting MEW for the last couple of years as I find it useful to help me with ideas i.e. how people go about setting up or overcoming a problem. I would love in the future to obtain back no’s to read.

I must say I do enjoy ” making do and mending ” also as its an acheivement to get something back up and running again and it does save money as well ) hence running a classic car and restoring old stationary engines.

Martin P
2 December 2011 at 11:42 #79074
Billy Mills
Participant
@billymills
Martin, If you subscribe to MEW then you do have access to all of the MEW’s ever published. Scroll to the green tab bar at the top of this page, click on “EXTRA” then go down until you see “go to digital archive” then click on that.

Billy.
2 December 2011 at 13:21 #79076
martin perman 1
Participant
@martinperman1
Billy,

Thanks for that, I do subscribe, I’m accused by my wife of spending to much time on my computers, what with writing articles for another magazine and editing a club newsletter, she will have a fit when I show her MEW from No 1 to read

An excellent Data Base.

Martin P
2 December 2011 at 18:20 #79094
Robert Dodds
Participant
@robertdodds43397
David Clark 1

I realize you have been under the weather recently and sincerely hope you will be back to normal duties soon.but don’t be too hard on Dave from the Emerald Isle.

Whilst your eye was off MEW 184 14 whole pages of adverts snucked into the middle of my mag so he does have a point

Bob D
2 December 2011 at 19:03 #79099
DMB
Participant
@dmb
Billy,

I think that your last post on this thread about if you subscribe you have access to all of the MEWs ever published, is misleading. I have been a subscriber ever since 1st issue, but only to the “hard copy,” NOT the digital form. I followed your instructions but it says digital subscribers only.

John.
2 December 2011 at 19:12 #79101
martin perman 1
Participant
@martinperman1
I too subscribe to the hard copy and followed the instructions and it worked ok.

Martin P
2 December 2011 at 19:38 #79104
David Clark 13
Participant
@davidclark13
He said ME not MEW

regards David
2 December 2011 at 19:52 #79106
martin perman 1
Participant
@martinperman1
David,

Unless I’ve miss read John Coleman’s post it certainly refers to MEW.

Martin P
Author

Posts