QUOTE: Originally posted by Allan Miller My guess (and it's just a guess) is that from a bottom line perspective, MTH is probably doing better than any of its competitors are at the present time. In addition to O gauge, MTH also has a corner on the market in Standard Gauge and a growing market share in Large Scale, And they seem to be selling DCS components about as fast as they can produce them, based on reports on various forums from prospective customers and some dealers. Plus, they still have a nice $40M due-bill from Lionel in their hands which, even if the final amount is reduced, puts them in a fairly enviable position.
QUOTE: Originally posted by nblum I received my May issue of CTT, which is only 106 pages, an indication of decreasing advertising revenues.
Bob Keller
QUOTE: Originally posted by trigtrax For some reason folks seem to think these numbers don't matter but they do.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Ogaugeoverlord Gee, its been well over a year since Lionel sent us anything for product review - imagine the impact of our readers could actually see more Lionel products reviewed in CTT, and not just read about those products in ads .... Oh, well.Well I can sure understand why a company in Chapter 11 would want to avoid free placement of their product in a magazine reaching the largest segment of the toy train hobby for what, 15 months? Makes sense to me.
QUOTE: Yep. I've spoken to [Jerry Calabrese's] personal assistant twice. Etc. etc etc. As I've said when this topic has come up in the forum previously, I don't think we're a priority for Lionel - their attention is elsewhere. Speaking as the guy who does the product departments, thank goodness for Atlas O, MTH, Weaver, Williams, and everyone else who does have a product to sell.
QUOTE: Oh, well.Well I can sure understand why a company in Chapter 11 would want to avoid free placement of their product in a magazine reaching the largest segment of the toy train hobby for what, 15 months?
QUOTE: Originally posted by Allan Miller Interesting to see how some folks try so hard to make Lionel's lack of advertising and refusal, or perhaps inability, to send products for review look like it's all the publisher's fault. Talk about feeble attempts at spin!
QUOTE: Posted by Ogaugeoverlord: I know you're trying to make this our fault, but all we can do is offer the coverage to the manufacturer. It is up to them to participate, especially since it doesn't cost them anything. You're wrong. I'm not trying to delegate blame. I'm trying to get someone to take responsibility. There's a big difference between "offering coverage" and creating salient editorial content, which is the main function of any editorial staff. Reporters don't sit in the office with a catcher's mitt, just in case a story comes by. Reporters go out and dig for the news. Whether it costs the manufacturer anything isn't the issue here, and since you can purchase the products (maybe at a discount) from one of your advertisers, it is not up to Lionel to participate. That's a very cheesy excuse. As for news photos, I know I like plunking down good money for a magazine, just to see the same photos in their products news sections as I'll discover in the train-maker's catalog. Yessiree, I know that buying the same photo twice is money well used. For the last decade I have sparingly used provided images mainly because the images manufacturers provide, are photos from catalogs or ads. I prefer to shoot a unique product photo as an extra value for our readers. This allows them to see the photo in the catalog or advertisement and compare it with the image in our magazine. Great! Then hire a freelance professional photographer once in awhile and make an appointment for them to visit the manufacturer to take a product photo! What's so difficult about that?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month