Not obvious to me.  Is it the missing bullet before “Beginner’s Workshop:”  or the abbreviation MEW rather than ME&W?   Does the mistake matter – I’ve never proof-read a magazines front cover, it’s the pretty pictures and contents list that get me going.

To me, the “New Look” is still very traditional, but no harm in that – I like steam engines!   Pleased, because it shows Neil and Diane are building on strengths rather than starting a revolution!   Will steam attract makers into the hobby though? I doubt it.

Wonder if we ought to run a front cover competition? As with all design work, far easier to spot mistakes made by others than it is to get it right oneself.

Can’t wait to read Neil/Diane’s first editorial.   Will it be ‘strap in, everything is changing’, or ‘relax, you are in safe hands’, or ‘expect some mild turbulence whilst we find out what works’?

Dave

It’s very fussy.

Why the two slogans Get more out & The leading magazine? Pick one and stick with it. It doesn’t need to be in it’s own block of colour either.

Milling in the lathe appears twice. Removing the top banner would help with the clutter.

Different fonts for the title is ugly. So are the dull colours. Why are there so many?

Only designers care about new looks. I doubt anyone else has ever bought a magazine just because of that.

Where else would the content be, but inside?

If the purpose of the cover is to attract new readers by standing out on the news stand, then this is just “more of the same” that made the likes of WHS bury ME and MEW in amongst nostalgia steam and railway modelling magazines – only real change from Model Engineer appears to be adding “& Workshop” to the title.

I guess ME subscribers will be happy to see miniature locos featuring prominently & maybe re-assured that such content will still be a prominent feature. MEW subscribers maybe less inclined to continue, if the new combined title appears to be going more “model”.

Won’t make any difference to me – I “consume” the content via Readly.

Nigel B.

In addition to comments above:

Far too cluttered.   The ‘content banner’ ‘Milling in your lathe’ at very top is easy to miss as one’s eye is attracted by the far-larger magazine title area immediately below.   The subject itself in this banner is not inspiring: it is by its’ own admission ‘traditional'(!!) and has been covered many times.  Might have been relevant to a wide range of ‘model engineers’ many years ago but far less-so nowadays.  Get rid of this banner to clean-up the front cover.  What are the two gears in the top-left corner there for??  Rod Jenkins didn’t ‘mill those in the lathe’!  Tho’ nota: If he did, then suddenly I am very interested in his article.  Article mentioned in the ‘Inside this packed Issue’ listing at bottom left of cover too; why is this article unique in getting mentioned twice on the cover?

‘The leading magazine … etc.’ banner (yellow background) immediately below title:  Will anyone buy the mag simply because of it being ‘the leading mag’??  Take banner at bottom of page ‘Get more out of your workshop… etc.’ and move up replacing the ‘The Leading Mag …. etc.’ with words to the effect:

‘Get more out of your model engineering & workshop’.  Or ‘Get the most … etc.’

Far more positive a message.

Lose the yellow banner at bottom of cover.

The red tag hanging-down from title banner at left, reads ‘New Look’:   People will not buy the  mag simply because of a ‘new look’ (??).  Might attract a few ‘browsers’ to have a leaf through the magazine in WH Smith etc., so I can see that it may have a role to play; but how many are they? Suggest, if you must have ‘a message’ here then something like: ‘New Look, New approaches’.  Nota: only true if  you actually have some new aspirational articles to offer!  We don’t know the actual content of any of the articles listed on the cover.

Main cover picture and subject chosen to focus on far too dull.  So! Two locos have been brought together: nice (I guess).  And I am a committed ‘loco-man’.  But what about something focussing on the supposed subject of the magazine as the lead i.e. (model engineering) construction and workshop processes.  At first glance the chosen main subject is hardly ‘aspirational’.

‘Inside this packed issue’ at bottom left beneath main pic’ looks like a listing of the articles in the order that they will appear in the mag’ (??) .   Too-many topics – list some of the ‘big attractions’ if  you must have something here, but you have already listed ‘Casting Polyurethane’ and ‘Make a Gear Depthing Tool’ elsewhere ‘dotted about’ on the cover with pics.  Why distract from those if they are your big attractions to readers?   With all the clutter is is actually easy to miss the ‘featured’ attractions.   I would suggest that  you loose this ‘Inside this packed issue’ altogether.  A couple of items that will attract customers on cover with pics far better.  If you do retain it then strongly suggest that you change the ‘heading’ to ‘Also Inside this Issue:’ and at the very least shift the Harold Hall ‘obituary’ to the end,  I would not list it at all on the cover – politely suggest this is an article unlikely to attract many readers and unlikely to contribute to the stated topics of the mag’.

On a side-issue:

Who is ‘sohara’??  What is their role in this??   What is their actual influence??  Presumably works for Mortons’, but unless I have missed it there is no explanation nor introduction anywhere.    Profile is blank.

Phil

Regarding the band at the to about Rod’s gear cutting (on the lathe)

The cover is mostly going to attract the casual buyer in Smiths etc and the way mags are stacked you are only likely to see that and the title, possibly some of the main photo if you are lucky.

So that is what needs to make someone pick it up and then they can read what else is inside from what is listed lower down or as most of us do ignore that and just thumb through the pages.

Harold Hall ‘obituary’ to the end,  I would not list it at all on the cover – politely suggest this is an article unlikely to attract many readers and unlikely to contribute to the stated topics of the mag’.

Though I did see mention of his passing as an excuse to reprint one of his old articles from the archive. Suppose it costs nothing. Might be better to show a few items of his as part of the obituary and suggest a digital sub will give you access to them all.

He answered that question earlier

On 17 January 2025 at 14:06 Nicholas Farr Said:

Hi, it looks a bit blingy to me,

Compared to the racks of mags in Smiths this afternoon it looks old-fashioned and boring.

Compared to MEW from twenty years ago, it looks old-fashioned, amateurish and boring.