CTT Changes Over The Last 12 Years

[IDM1991]

I received my September 2015 issue of Classic Toy Trains in the mail a few days ago and, as always, have been perusing it with great interest.

I tend to read and re-read back issues if CTT by month, so between late July and late August will be reading and re-reading the September issues dating back to when I first started subscribing in 2003 (the January 2003 issue being my first, though both my father and I were reading CTT as early as December 1999).

Over the last twelve years, I've noticed some changes have taken place, and was curious about the rationale behind them.

1) The Disappearance of a "News" page.  When I started subscribing, the "News" and "Product News" departments were distinctly separate.  I generally skimmed over the latter (because I couldn't afford most of the stuff), but I always enjoyed reading the "News" columns: the 'A Few Minutes With...' interviews; photos of unique prototype locomotion that would make for an interesting O Gauge model; inspiring little stories about public layout outreach initiatives; "Point of View" guest commentary, and so forth. 

Within the past five or six years, though, "News" and "Product News" merged, and one rarely sees actual hobby news items anymore.  What happened?

2) Product Reviews.  I remember getting a kick out of Bob Keller's "pros" and "cons" model of doing reviews.  However, this vanished some years ago, and was replaced with "Staff Comments."  This too, has since been succeeded with a plain list of "Features."  Did this have something to do with the number of reviews per issue being reduced from sometimes four or six twelve years ago to two or three in the last few years?

3) Track Plans.  I regularly read over the "Track Plan of the Month" feature, and always enjoyed it.  Yet, I have not seen one for some time now?  Are folks losing creativity, or are old plans just not being published/redrawn anymore?

4) Page Number.  Remember when every second issue of CTT seemed to stretch between 110-130 pages?  The current issue clocks in at about 66 pages.  (Coincidentally, the dealer listings at the back have also shrunk from four pages to two.)

I love CTT.  Its articles are always extremely well-written, informative, and entertaining.  However, I will admit that the first thing I look at when a new issue arrives is the "Next Issue" herald on the back page, secretly worrying deep down inside that the "next issue" might be the last.

These are not criticisms, just curious musings.

Ian D. McKechnie, Lindsay, ON (Canada)

    

[fifedog]

I'm just concerned that my wife might pitch my CTT out with the supermarket/discount furniture/replacement window circulars

 

[Bob Keller]

 Good comments, Ian.

 

News & Notes: Over the history of CTT, departments have come and gone depending on their subject matter and reader reaction. Does anyone remember Scrap Box or Marshall Poindexter’s “On the Web?” The News & Notes section was a fun, if challenging, department to put together.

 

 Over the department’s two-year (I believe) run, we received very little reader comment about it and in our surveys (we surveyed each issue), the department always received so-so ratings from readers. Neil decided to re-allocate the three pages it used to the feature well. I edited the department and I’m sad to say that when it vanished, I don’t recall a single phone call, letter, or e-mail about it.

 

 Most real news today is delivered these days, via the internet, anywhere from 30 to 60 days before we could get it into print in the magazine. Hence, our increased use of Social media (Facebook), and our recent introduction of Blogs. This speeds up the flow of information.

 

Reviews. In sort of reverse order, the number of reviews dropped because the number of new, new locomotives being made (and samples shipped to us for review) hit a plateau then began to decline. “New” became new paint schemes or internal electronics or levels of detail.

 

About the pro/con, I never heard a manufacturer complain about it, but boy, readers did. Nobody liked a loco they bought receiving a “Con.” MTH guys didn’t like a Lionel product NOT getting a “Con.” Lionel guys didn’t like MTH products NOT getting a “Con.” MTH and LIONEL guys didn’t like K-Line products NOT getting a “Con.”

 

In some other internet forums there was mild anger over some brands (depending on which was the poster’s favorite) getting a “Pro” in our reviews. The only feedback we had on it from readers, was largely negative so we phased it out.

 

We do pay attention to what readers comment about – and what they don’t comment about.

 

Track plans: We welcome reader submissions for O and S gauge track plans. The more well-done track plans we receive, the more we’ll run.

 

Page count: Totally related to advertising, not that there are fewer tales to tell. As for the reason, take your pick: The economy, the internet, decline in the number of hobby shops, people buying less, manufacturers making less – or having issues getting product to the US from Asia. There are also fewer non-hobby shop outlets for the magazine, in which  to be seen and draw in returning newcomers as customers for the ads.

 

I would also add that print titles all over the hobby and subject matter spectrum are in the same boat.

 

When I was in Junior High, I had a great math teacher who liked to use the phrase “Numbers is numbers.” More advertising, simply put, pays for more editorial pages to be added to the magazine. Less advertising constricts what we can do. When your income declines, you do things differently.

 

I’m not especially gloomy and doomy over this, and I hope that the hobby business shakes this off, and we all move forward in fun together. But if that sounds too much like a slogan a politician might say, let me put it this way: I'm not selling my trains anytime soon.

[sir james I]

We all like CTT. Glad to have it. I just received Sept. 2015. Only 68 pages and that's counting the cover. Let's see what the fall issues have.

[LittleTommy]

Better Writing

Not to belabor a point I made before but the writing is so much better than what it used to be.  In particular, layout visit articles are light years better.  In the past the layout visit article stated that the owner had toy trains as a kid, but set them aside as he got older, then decided he wanted trains again and hired someone to build him a layout and he loved it, accompained by a bunch of photos.  Every layout visit followed that template.

Now the layout articles show the track plan, explain what the features of layout are, gives helpful hints to folks starting to build a new layout and suggestions on how one can improve their existing layouts.

I really enjoy the current CTT and the consistant high quality of the material published. 

LittleTommy

 

 

[Demay]

I have not been a subscriber as long as many on here, but I have thoroughly enjoyed every issue I have received over the past five years or so.  I always find plenty of useful and interesting information in each issue.  I have no idea how many pages are in any issue as I never count them; however, it might be easier for me to overlook the number of pages as I have been a digital subscriber since its inception.

Keep up the great work CTT!

Joe

[Penny Trains]

I've said it before and I'll say it again....the only thing I don't like about CTT is that it has a back cover!    Although....that "Summer Drought Thing" where it goes bi-monthly IS one of my pet peeves...

On a serious note, Mr. Keller, I recently discovered a bookstore in my neighborhood (which is quite a feat these days!) called "Books-A-Million".  Accross the rear wall of the giant store was an enourmous periodicals rack and it struck me as quite odd that I couldn't find any Kalmbach titles among the hundreds of magazines I saw there.  Seems like an untapped market if you ask me.

[jwse30]

I suppose another reason the content isn't what it used to be is that a lot of things have been covered already. How many times can a magazine get away with showing how to hook a crossing gate up? Sure they have to be revisited occasionally as not everyone is a charter subscriber, but if the magazine repeats itself too much, people will complain that it is just rehashing the same old info. (that seems like it would be a difficult balancing act for the publisher IMHO)

J White

 

 

[sir james I]

I just hope it doesn't become what grocery products have done. Same price smaller package.

[71835]

I was just noticing the number of pages in the last two issues was down to 66.  A trend I have been watching for a number of years now.  I have also noted the increase in "Special Issues" offered.  I have not done the math but I wonder if one totaled the number of pages "missing " from all the monthly issues over the last several years that have been covered by subscriptions and compaired it to the number of pages in all the separate sale issues that now cost extra what you would come up with. 

I understand that if you don't make money, there will be no CTT.  But when someone buys a 3 year subscription, one does so with the expectation that the publication will not be cut by 10, 15, or more pages a month over the life of the subscription.  As I understand the business, subscriber numbers are an important factor in advertising rates.  I think we need some more respct from those in the top policy making positions at the publisher level. 

[Bob Keller]

The special issues have no connection with the magazine. Their approval is based on projected sales of that issue. If we didn't do any special issues, that would not mean the material (or page count) would be in the magazine.

As I mentioned, the key to issue size is ad sales.

 

[Firelock76]

Penny Trains

I've said it before and I'll say it again....the only thing I don't like about CTT is that it has a back cover!    Although....that "Summer Drought Thing" where it goes bi-monthly IS one of my pet peeves...

On a serious note, Mr. Keller, I recently discovered a bookstore in my neighborhood (which is quite a feat these days!) called "Books-A-Million".  Accross the rear wall of the giant store was an enourmous periodicals rack and it struck me as quite odd that I couldn't find any Kalmbach titles among the hundreds of magazines I saw there.  Seems like an untapped market if you ask me.

 

That's odd, Becky.  I was in a "Books-a-Gazillion" several months ago and they had a pretty good selection of Kalmbach magazines, i.e. "Trains," "CTT", "Model Railroader", and so forth.

Maybe you were there between shipments? 

[Bob Keller]

That had been my impression, but I was going to check with the circulation dept next week.

 

[rogruth]

Penny, The Books-A-Million in our area have many model railroad and train mags. Maybe you should indicate your interest to the manager.

[Penny Trains]

Books-A-Million, 3230 Westgate to be specific.

No MR, no Trains, no Classic Trains, no nothing.  (No OGR either btw.)  No books on collecting trains or model railroading of any sort.  In fact, I saw only one book period outside the childrens section that had anything to do with railroading at any level, real or model.  I realize that new titles may be sparse these days, but considering how much the Border's had that was just down the road a bit I have to say I was surprised at the lack of titles.

[balidas]

 

Reviews.

 

About the pro/con, I never heard a manufacturer complain about it, but boy, readers did. Nobody liked a loco they bought receiving a “Con.” MTH guys didn’t like a Lionel product NOT getting a “Con.” Lionel guys didn’t like MTH products NOT getting a “Con.” MTH and LIONEL guys didn’t like K-Line products NOT getting a “Con.”

 

In some other internet forums there was mild anger over some brands (depending on which was the poster’s favorite) getting a “Pro” in our reviews. The only feedback we had on it from readers, was largely negative so we phased it out.

 

[/quote]

 

That's funny! Sad but funny.

[phrankenstign]

This seems very similar to the situation my video gamer son is always telling me about. Nintendo (Wii U,2-3DS,GameCube), Microsoft Xbox (One,360), and Sony (PlayStation1-4,Vita) all have their fan boys who act the same way. They love good reviews of their favorites and don't like to see any negative aspects being brought up. However they love to see criticisms of all non-favored systems.

 

It always seemed to me this kind of thing exists, because the favored systems are usually the ones that are owned by that brand's fan boys. The favored systems are almost thought of as reflecting the fan boys' own good judgment. They want to defend their systems similar to how parents defend their kids. They don't want anyone to tell them their baby is ugly, but they delight in other people's babies being ugly compared to theirs!

 

I was a big fan of Lionel for years, but I thought they got a bit complacent in the 90s. There were many times K-Line and MTH appeared to have better products at cheaper prices, but the Lionel fan boys would nitpick about their stuff. The people like me (who were on a very limited budget) had to sift through the unfair criticism to find which non-Lionel products were truly worthy to earn our patronage. I suspect there were quite a few people like me who often found ourselves buying K-Line and MTH products despite having been long-time Lionel fans ourselves. I suspect that's why both companies enjoyed tremendous growth back then. I'm sure I wasn't the only one who enjoyed reading the "Pros and Cons" of the items reviewed back then. I was disappointed when that was discontinued, because it seemed much more honest that way. After all, the prettiest baby may have some oddly shaped ears!

[brianel027]

Well, I was one of those people who strongly disliked the "pro" "con" stand-alone box. And I recall stating as much at the time.

There was a review of a semi-scale Alco FA locomotive in which it was given a "con" for not looking good with full-scale sized trains. Well, duh!

By that barometer, then all scale sized products should have equally received a "con" rating for not looking right with semi-scale, traditionally sized trains or not being able to run on 027 curves.

It's one thing within the text of the review to point out that, using the example above, that a traditionally sized Alco FA isn't going to look right with scale sized rolling stock. It's another thing entirely to give that product a "con." Despite the recently popularity of scale proportioned trains, there are still many folks who desire traditionally sized trains - and DO NOT view that as a con.

And I suspect there are far more traditionally sized train modelers than any internet forum would have you believe. If the scale products were really selling in droves, then none of those products would be "built to order." And that's not just Lionel... Atlas, MTH, 3RD Rail, and Weaver (when they were manufactuing) are quick to pull the plug on any scale product not receiving enough orders. Weaver dropped one item that failed to even get 300 orders.

So just because a product is semi-scale is hardly worthy of a "con" rating on that alone. 

[Bob Keller]

You make my point, Brian.

 

[fifedog]

brianel027 - I've enjoyed your take on the hobby in the past, and hope you stay around for awhile.

[cnw1995]

I remember Scrap Box and 'On the Web'!  These editorial adjustments occur in most printed and online mags these days - certainly in those that want to stay relevant to their readers. I continue to enjoy the changes - and frankly, I absolutely love perusing all the ads. As an aside, I pick up my copy of CTT in a Books-a-Million in Chicago's Loop. It has a gigantic train and modeling mag section, including all sorts of (to me) obscure European and Asian ones.