For me, the content is more important than the cover. There's currently rather a lot of evidence that more resources should be applied to editing, rather than fiddling with packaging.

It's a mess:

too many horizontal lines breaking up the page.

that's made even worse by the captions and pictures that aren't horizontal

far too many extra words in tiny fonts that repeat the captions

what is the picture supposed to show? It looks like I took it, and my photography is almost as bad as my singing

english wheels are great machines, but why is he wearing one as a cod piece?

If you are trying to make it "the best source for hobby engineers, makers and modellers in the business" then reduce the Model Engineer and increase the other bit in size

Neil,

Most of the Comments above kinda hit the nail on the head….the cover is way too fussy, and there is no clear Content message(s).

Very few magazines get this right. Have a go at Google'ling 'magazines' and look at the 'Images' results … only a few of the Covers catch the eye and makes one curious about what is inside….the rest look like a bit of a dog's breakfast.

And as Jason has neatly pointed out, the word 'Workshop' is way too dominant on the cover…it should be pushed back, a bit.

All the above is meant as constructive … I really appreciate the work you and the team do in readying the magazine.

Ches

Nice to see white writing on a black background.

Red and Green writing over a photograph is not seen by me, and it plays havoc with my eyes, not to mention the Migraine this combination induces.

Regards

Gray,

I think that on the whole it is too messy especially with the white lines separating the sections.

The Issue Number looks too small compared with previous issues, possibly making it more difficult to read when quickly glancing through looking for a particular issue. I’m not sure that moving the Issue Date adjacent to the Issue Number is particularly helpful, but then if I’m searching for an article I always go by the Issue Number as this is how my home database is organised.

I’m not sure that changing the relative sizes of “Model Engineer’s” and “Workshop” is really necessary. When all said and done, the magazine is not an alternative to “Model Engineer” and I think that having “Workshop” writ large helps to emphasize that point. Sorry Jason.

On the same lines, I think the top line, (Strap Line?) was fine as it was as it helps to differentiate MEW from ME. Plus the actual text used emphasizes who it’s aimed at.

To be honest, I’m a bit like Kiwi Bloke – I generally don’t look at the cover, other than the Issue Number, so it could theoretically be blank for me. As regards the young lady on Issue 317, well, is she young? How can you tell? But anyway, what’s wrong with it? I know historically the hobby has been the province of mainly elderly gentlemen, and we all know the reasons why, but why not have a few photos of the fairer sex? (Am I now in hot water for that phrase? Don’t care anyway.) Let’s show that workshop engineering is NOT the province of elderly men in dirty greasy overalls smelling of suds, or smoke, or whatever.

On the other hand, maybe I’m just an old fuddy-duddy.

Peter G. Shaw

I am happy with the size of "workshop" it's who it is aimed at that I felt needed changing as "Model Engineers" dominates yet Neil said he is aiming at "hobby engineers, makers and modellers" so that should be larger

I suspect I’m not alone in buying the magazine for the workshop/machine tool aspects and certainly prefer illustrations of such – I realise that young women in completely inappropriate costume ‘draped’ over motor bikes was the norm in the past but making even middle aged men the focal point of the cover detracts from my interest – just concentrate on the machine or the workshop.

I now get MEW on subscription so this suggestion no longer applies to me but the magazine is usually on the bottom shelf at the back in those High St newsagents who stock it. Thus the title can't be at the top of the page or so low down so as to be hidden so it is good in the present position – but if one casts caution to the winds and kneels down, hoping that getting up again is a possibility, the headline above the title is about a chainsaw tool. i don't have a chainsaw so this would not persuade me to buy – and perhaps not even take the magazine out to read the rest of the front page as the only other visible item is that shows are back – and I knew that already.

Whereas the Stan Bray obit, the competition or even 'In this issue' would all draw me in to read further so they would be good above the title.

But as I say – I have a subscription now.

…bottom shelf …I have a subscription now.

Good points.

If 90% of sales are via subscription then, to some extent, the cover could be brown paper and it wouldn't affect sales too much

But, if sales are 50:50 (ie subscription:magazine shops/airports etc) then the magazine cover becomes an important selling tool for irregular and newcomer buyers.

I have a subscription.

I think it is right of Neil to ask for feedback.

Ches

And – at last a chance that someone might listen – NOT SLIPPERY. The last thing we need in our cluttered workshops as we follow an article is the magazine slipping from the bench into a pile of oily swarf on the floor. Ditto when reading in bed what we intend to try tomorrow.

Someone will say 'Oh, it wipes clean' but I remind you it should not get itself dirty.

There is one thing which is better on the example shown – no locomotives to be seen. Makes a welcome change.

Cheers, Tim