June's MR magazine

[Bergie]

Before I lock this, I would like to encourage everyone to find my old post that responds to the notion that there's more advertising in MR than ever before. Since I used to be the ad sales manager for MR, I can speak as an authority when I say it's simply not true.

[MRTerry]

I'd like to clarify a few of the topics that have come up here.
First, while we need to adjust the amount of editorial content (i.e. stories, reviews, photos, etc.) slightly from month to month because there are only some magazine sizes that are possible, the amount of editorial content doesn't change much from issue to issue. The ad volume (which is less than half the magazine) does, and that's the fundamental reason why you'll see the page counts change through the year.

Second, we have not taken stories out of MR to put them in the special issues. The content that goes into the specials is created especially for those issues.

Thanks for reading MR,
Terry

[mikebonellisr]

I had'nt noticed the lack of content.Almost every issue has something that I find useful in my modeling.I also look foward to the ads as it keeps me updated on whats new or available.Each issue usually sparks 1 or 2 sales from me.I find the photos a great help in my modeling..no matter which scale they are in.Be patient,maybe every issue can't be a gem,but I"m sure that some of us got something out of it.

[MisterBeasley]

When I pick up most magazines, I don't even see the ads. Most of them are for products I have no use for, anyway, like fingernail polish, denture adhesive or diet beer. In model train magazines, though, the ads are generally pretty interesting. These are products I care about, even if it's just to say "Oooh" at them because the era is wrong for my layout, or the price is wrong for my credit card. Kalmbach and other model railroad magazine publishers should get premium ad rates, because their advertisers get a very well-selected audience, specifically targeted for their products. Does it work this way? I dunno.

If MR didn't have any ads, I would get through it a lot quicker. I may be in the minority on this one, but I really get a lot out of MR's advertising pages.

As a side note, our public library subscribes to Model Railroader. Check your library out if you're in the habit of "previewing" MR before you buy a copy.

[richhotrain]

I haven't received the June issue yet, but I generally agree with the other posts.

Someone mentioned a great idea and that would be to cover beginners layouts, what I will call "non-professional" layouts, so we can all see what a lot of our peer group is building.

Also, having been in the hobby for only 3 to 4 years, I have learned so much, as I am sure that so many of you have too, that there should be a section of each issue devoted to practical ideas picked up by the vast majority of modellers about such things as wiring, landscaping, layout configurations, etc.

[jfugate]

If a picture is truly worth a thousand words, then more pictures compared to years past in MR is an improvement.

Based on learning styles research among adults, about half to three quarters of the population will appreciate having more pictures -- and the rest would prefer more text. So it all depends on learning styles.

I'm a visual learner, so photos with meaty captions are an improvement to me.

Plus, I like to read the ads just to keep up on what's going on in the hobby and to see if there's something new I need to look into. Even though I've been in the hobby 40 years now, I still enjoy MR a lot.

[Anonymous]

[V] <----- havn't seen mine yet.

However, Terry, Andy, I know you read the forum, what say you???

[Anonymous]

I think you are right. they are milking the cow dry, but they are putting the " milk "in too many buckets. It looks as if the other half of the June issue will be comming out on May 23,according to the ad on the bottom of page 9. It's called" How to Build Realistic Layouts" & will cost an additional $7.95. I thought that was what my subscription was supposed to show me. Oh well. jerry

[dknelson]

I thought the June issue was fine, no drop off from the usual standard. Still there is not an infine supply of good articles and good layouts to visit so between the 12 yearly issues of MR and the annuals of Great Model Railroads, Model Railroad Planning, and the various other "one time only" issues that are not reprints (such as the newly announced Realistic Layouts issue) maybe they are milking the cow dry.
Dave Nelson

[Bob grech]

I agree. It seems that every month we are treated with more of the same. I liked it better when they ran articles that featured club, home, and then beginner level layouts. I still miss the old "Student Fare" section they used to run. Some of the skills I learned as a beginner, were based on those articles.

[Anonymous]

Just skimmed thru the June issue. May read 1 or 2 articles. Would not have bought this issue. The probkem is that if I visit the local train shop to look thru the new mags. I end up spending a lot more than I would have on a subscription, not to mention gas. I agree we are getting less for more.....like most everything else. Jerry

[Anonymous]

I think cnj hit the nail so to speak, Kalmbach wants you to buy there latest whatever,and MRR gets" skinnier",my subscription runs out next month and I won't renew, I think most of the editors are more businessmen with a hint of model railroading thrown in.Terry Thompson's latest editorial steers you that way. The only modeling you ever see is David Popps. This magazine has dropped the ball.......

[Budliner]

I too feel that the mr is getting smaller
just seems like its a stretch for them to get the mag out
sounds like its time to bounce a few writers


heads are going to roll

[RedGrey62]

This is a very timely topic for me.

My wife sends me a box every month, usually with some goodies, a few pictures and the latest copy of my MR subscription. I just got my box today with the May issue. I also asked her to pick up a copy of RailModel Journal (she sent two issues) and I received a copy of Model Railroading that I sent off for today as well. I took a quick look at them before I came on duty and I have to say I was extremely disappointed. The MR and Model Railroading appear to have the most useful articles, but the RMJs were virtually worthless. I model the CB&Q and both had articles I thought I could use. One on modify a Walthers RPO had absolutely no details on how the guy did it, just a picture and some words to the effect of what he did, not how he did it. The other was building the Afternoon Zephyr from Walthers, Con-Cor, and Broadway Limited passenger cars, again, no details, what cars to actually use. It had some cheesy gif images of the various cars with "representative" colors. While MR may be getting thinner with more advertising, at least it walks you through the steps on how to complete a project.

Of course tomorrow, when I actually get to read them, I might feel better!

Okay, off of my [soapbox] now

Rick

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 1train1

For some strange reason - I was blessed with the arrival of the June MR.

115 total pages
44 pages of 'full page' advertising - (including classifieds and manufacturers addies) and that's not including numerous side bar adverts which I did not count .

If you can't tell - I'm a little disappointed with the meat and potatoes here folks. I think it's the thinnest edition ever !
I really think the editors have spread the good stuff to other 'specialty' Model Railroader magazines that they want you to buy; and have forgotten what got them here in the first place.
Okay, I admit I'm a little cranky about it - but this is the only magazine I subscribe to and it took less than an hour to read front to back.

As I've pointed out in the past, I was told by an MR staffer, some years ago now, that they tried to mantain a 40:60 balance between ads and articles. Although your listed 44 full pages of ads would be in line with that earlier policy, I can definitely assure you that the latest issue doesn't have anything like 70 pages of modeling material. In fact, since the inception in recent years of more photos, larger type face, reduced column size, and more unused white space surrounding everything, I'd honestly be surprised if the "meat" of the latest magazine amounts to 35-40 actual pages (even less if you only count text).

And I concur in the belief that much useful material that formerly would have been incorporated into MR is now going to the many Kalmbach specialty/annual magazine issues.

CNJ831

[tcf511]

I guess it depends on what you are modeling and your experience level. The article on modeling a steam locomotive complex was very useful to me and I'll use it as a reference. I don't mind the ads especially those of the smaller companies with more unique product lines. Anything with good layout photos that I might use as ideas for my layout is fine with me regardless of scale.

[bryanbell]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 1train1

I understand the ol' advertising pays the bill....but...I was trying to stir up some opinion on the lack of content and size of the issue.

At this rate it'll be the size and content of a flyer before my subscription runs out.[:(!]

I think it all goes hand in hand, there is less content cause that cost money and ads bring in money. Its more cost effective to have less content and more ads than to increase the page size to keep content level high. That would require a lot more pages of ads.
There was a thread several months ago about this and several people compared today's MR with ones from the 1980's at least I know and today's issues have fewer ads according to those who took a look at it. There were a lot more pages to each issue back then but there was also a lot more ads.
Its all relative I think.

Bryan

[3railguy]

I don't mind the ads. They are where I find good deals who's savings more than pay for the magazine. The manufacturer ads show me all the stuff that's available. The ads combined with reviews and layout spreads featuring these products aid me in making wise choices when I shop. I think a lot of us are programed this way and don't even know it. Remove the ads and you may have a half dry magazine.

[eridani]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Blind Bruce

As with eveythng else today, it all falls to the bottom line....[snip]
I do agree, however, that there are a LOT of Canadian builders up here that need to be recognized. It is up to them to see that they are published. It is not the purvue of the magazine to recruit them.
BB

This probably doesn't apply too much this hobby, but it does elsewhere in the magazine world so it is worth mentioning. Kalmbach like most magazine publishers these days insists that the writer grant the company all rights for an article. This impacts on a professional writer's bottom line, especially if they want to resell in different markets (again I realize the model railroad market is very small). And many pros ,myself included, refuse, on principle, to deal with companies that have that kind of policy... (Of course if the magazine really wants you, then the rights are negotiable) . Since I also have a staff job as a writer and photographer (in Toronto) I can afford to be choosy. Some freelancers grit their teeth and comply. But it leaves one wondering if MRR is missing out on some great stuff because of that policy.

If we ever see "Celebrity Model Railroads" on a cover, then we will know that the corporate beancounters have really taken over (or the company has been sold to a multinational with a policy of putting celebs on every cover)

Rob

[accord1959]

I had the same thought, I couldn't believe the ads, some page after page, and as you mentioned all the sidebars. I don't mind all this but don't cut back on the content just to make room for the ads. If I get more issues like this I will not renew my subscription and instead will check them out at my LHS for content before purchasing them. Bad one MR.

[1train1]

I understand the ol' advertising pays the bill....but...I was trying to stir up some opinion on the lack of content and size of the issue.

At this rate it'll be the size and content of a flyer before my subscription runs out.[:(!]

[bryanbell]

Take a look at any magazine on the newstand these days. They are all full of ads. As mentioned above that is the only way to make money. The subscription/ retail revenue probably barely covers the mailing costs.

Bryan

[Blind Bruce]

As with eveythng else today, it all falls to the bottom line. It takes money to put out a magazine and the only way to get that money is advertisers. The small amount charged for buying/subscribing to the mag is a drop in the bucket. As I said in a previous post, I found the "content" to be very good.
I do agree, however, that there are a LOT of Canadian builders up here that need to be recognized. It is up to them to see that they are published. It is not the purvue of the magazine to recruit them.
BB

[1train1]

For some strange reason - I was blessed with the arrival of the June MR.

115 total pages
44 pages of 'full page' advertising - (including classifieds and manufacturers addies) and that's not including numerous side bar adverts which I did not count .

If you can't tell - I'm a little disappointed with the meat and potatoes here folks. I think it's the thinnest edition ever !
I really think the editors have spread the good stuff to other 'specialty' Model Railroader magazines that they want you to buy; and have forgotten what got them here in the first place.
Okay, I admit I'm a little cranky about it - but this is the only magazine I subscribe to and it took less than an hour to read front to back.

Thank goodness for the Model Railroad forums I read and the information shared by their respective members.
I'll be spending more time there and here (unless I'm banished for speaking my mind)

And while I'm on my soap box - we've got some great RR modellers in Canada - get some of these guys in your mag - I for one would like to see them represented.
Any volunteers out there ?