Waterways world

[Richard Bustens]

I have just bought this months copy £3.25 170 pages of which 111 are adverts.

 

I wont be buying it again.

[DHutch]

It crasy isnt it!

- Just finding some editorial is hard!!

 

Although i guess some people are actually looking to buy stuff and want the adds?

 

 

Daniel

[Richard Fairhurst]

This is an interesting one.

 

Out of our total pagination, we usually run 71pp-77pp editorial every issue. I've just recounted the (current) January issue and it was 71pp (plus the year-planner), so Richard, you've seriously miscounted if you think it's 59pp.

 

This is by far the most of any magazine I've worked on in the past 15 years - when I was at Canal Boat, a couple of years ago, it typically had 56pp editorial each month. If you don't believe me, count up the editorial pages every month over the past 20 years of WW, and see if there are more or fewer now.

 

The price is effectively the same it's always been. It's £3.25 now; it was £3.10 for the last 18 months; the costs of printing, paper and distribution go up just like anything else, so we have to have an inflation-rate increase now and then. I wish we didn't... but we do have to pay for paper.

 

So a serious question: what would you like us to do?

 

We could run fewer adverts. That wouldn't mean any more editorial - in fact, since the adverts subsidise the cover price, we'd either have to put the price up or run fewer editorial pages.

 

We could change the way we lay the magazine out. At the moment, we put a bunch of ads (about 40pp worth) at the start, then run the editorial without any ads, then finish with the rest of the ads. Some magazines have fewer ads at the start (say, 20pp), but then the editorial pages are interleaved with ads... and then there's always the suspicion that the advertiser has paid to be "opposite" a particular article.

 

What would you prefer we do?

 

Richard Fairhurst

editor, Waterways World

[DHutch]

Its a trick one, and have to admit, i do like that fact that all the editoral is in the middle, makes it easy to ignore the adds!!

[Moley]

Thanks for your valid comments Richard.

 

Gary did a poll a couple of months back on who reads what and how often, I've searched but can't find it (ThreadFinder General - where's it gone?)

 

Thought it might be interesting to see his final figures for those who objected to the advertising content, didn't mind, or bought the mags for the ads.

 

Personally, I buy the mags for the editorial, but read the ads first.

 

Ade.

[Gary Peacock]

It's show time folks that's why!

 

It's the advertising sales teams favourite time, don't be too hard on WW all magazines in all interests play this game adverts make money these days the editorial some say exists only to get the adverts aired!

[Paula]

I would agree that there appears to be far more adverts than there used to be, but the rest of the mag has remained pretty much the same.

 

I quite enjoy looking through the adverts, even its just to mutter " I can't believe how many people are setting up as boat builders these days"

 

Its a good magazine and I've subscribed for years

 

Paula XXX

Edited January 7, 2006 by Paula

[dor]

Keep it as it is Richard.

 

I know that you have to carry a substantial quantity of ads to maintain the quality of the mag, especially with the amount of colour pages.

 

I would rather see it as it is than have the first page of an article, then "continued on page xxx, and have to hunt out the rest of the article hidden amonst a load of ads.

[ChrisPy]

I have bought technical and hobby magazines (boating, modelling, motoring, photography) on an occasional basis for many years. I can honestly say that I have never been impressed too much by the editorial content, except the occasional in-depth reports.

 

I only buy them for information, most of which I find in the advertising sections.

 

I can imagine that if I subscribed regularly I would get fed up with the same ads every month, and I would expect more and better editorial content, and would be disappointed like Richard. I do believe that all forms of media suffer from trying to find quality content to fill the time and space available. For example, look how mainstream television has deteriorated since the number of channels increased.

[Richard Bustens]

Hi Richard F

 

I dont know what you mean by the numbers you quote but pages 1-41 are all adverts as is pages 111- to the end 187 + back cover that to me adds upto slightly more than i said 118 pages of adds out of 188. this does give you your 70 pages of editorial

now i Do like, and buy for the adds as well, but i feel that the ratio has changed, and i do get annoyed when the adds are more than half of the mag .

 

WWW is the only one i buy every month but this month, and i accept that it may be a strange month but there is also contents in the news editorial that the other mags printed last month.

 

All in all i thought this months mag was a wast of time.

 

Best thing about it was the cover pic but i would lik to then see inside someware a write up about that pic not just a bit saying it was taken by ....at....

 

All that said it is still USUALY the best of the three by far.

 

Chris has probably hit the nail on the head there, but that means i should only buy it every 4-6 months not every month and im's sure that is not what you want.

Edited January 7, 2006 by Richard Bustens

[Richard Fairhurst]

Editorial is 71 pages (OFC, 1-3, 42-110 with two exceptions).

Advertising is 101 pages (IFC, 4-41, 111-168, IBC, OBC, plus the two exceptions).

That's 71 editorial, 101 advertising, 172 total.

You'd originally said 170 total, 111 ads, therefore 59 editorial. Quite a difference!

 

Anyway... Chris and Richard - disregarding the amount of ads, what would you like to see in the editorial?

 

Moley, dor, Paula, Gary - thanks.

[Gary Peacock]

Editorial is 71 pages (OFC, 1-3, 42-110 with two exceptions).

Advertising is 101 pages (IFC, 4-41, 111-168, IBC, OBC, plus the two exceptions).

That's 71 editorial, 101 advertising, 172 total.

You'd originally said 170 total, 111 ads, therefore 59 editorial. Quite a difference!

 

Anyway... Chris and Richard - disregarding the amount of ads, what would you like to see in the editorial?

 

Moley, dor, Paula, Gary - thanks.

 

I would like to see WW take a long hard look at the RCD. What it is on paper and law, What it is in reality and what should be done now to make it work properly and protect customers who pay good money for boats that claim to comply but clearly don't.

[tony collins]

.....but then the editorial pages are interleaved with ads... and then there's always the suspicion that the advertiser has paid to be "opposite" a particular article.

 

What would you prefer we do?

 

Richard Fairhurst

editor, Waterways World

 

 

As someone who used to buy a lot of advertising space (in industrial publications), one stipluation that I always made that the space bought should be "facing copy" This means that the opposite page always had an editorial or feature article contained in it. An advertisment facing other ads was considered "dead" space. The situation with leisure magazines is slightly different. The industrial buyer is always short of time and unless looking for something specific will only read the editorial parts of the magazine. As a subscriber for several years to WW I think they have got it about right. I enjoy browsing the ads when I have time, but I always read the articles first.

 

At least with WW they actually number every page. The ommission of page numbers in some mags I find very irritating.

 

Tony

[John Orentas]

I would like to see WW take a long hard look at the RCD. What it is on paper and law, What it is in reality and what should be done now to make it work properly and protect customers who pay good money for boats that claim to comply but clearly don't.

 

 

Yes it has become very bland in recent years, afraid of upsetting readers, bureaucracy or advertisers, sits on the fence in every controversy or avoids them completely. There is room for a good campaigning publication, if WW ever was such it certainly isn't now.

[Gary Peacock]

Yes it has become very bland in recent years, afraid of upsetting readers, bureaucracy or advertisers, sits on the fence in every controversy or avoids them completely. There is room for a good campaigning publication, if WW ever was such it certainly isn't now.

 

Another well known mag backed off on an article because a party concerned had just negotiated 12months worth of advertising, it upset the journalist involved but you can understand why.

Edited January 7, 2006 by Gary Peacock

[Keeping Up]

What would you prefer we do?

I like it the way it is. I just hate having to wade through adverts amongst the articles, almost as much as I hate it when the last bit of an article is buried several pages away. I always read most of the articles first, then the ads at the back, and then the ads at the front.

 

As for content, I'd like to see some of the more contentious issues addressed, and I'd like to be able to hear both sides of the argument at the same time rather than just a statement by a single extremist. How about some open debates; for example, half a page written by a supporter of each of two opposed viewpoints, and the following month a round-up of readers' comments on both sides (plus the opening 2 statements on the next issue)

[tony collins]

Another well known mag backed off on an article because a party concerned had just negotiated 12months worth of advertising, it upset the journalist involved but you can understand why.

 

 

Gary,

 

This didn't have anything to do with a certain residential boat did it?

 

Tony.

[John Wood]

Editorial is 71 pages (OFC, 1-3, 42-110 with two exceptions).

Advertising is 101 pages (IFC, 4-41, 111-168, IBC, OBC, plus the two exceptions).

That's 71 editorial, 101 advertising, 172 total.

You'd originally said 170 total, 111 ads, therefore 59 editorial. Quite a difference!

 

Anyway... Chris and Richard - disregarding the amount of ads, what would you like to see in the editorial?

 

Moley, dor, Paula, Gary - thanks.

I would like to see a more informed debate about:-

 

1The RCD and its shortcomings.

 

2.Dodgy and substandard Boat Builders. There was'nt one mention of the Anthony M fiasco in your magazine. I thought this might be because WW was a creditor, but as no one turned up for the Anthony M creditors meeting from your magazine, then I can only assume he did not owe you anything. If this is the case then why didnt you print a full article on what was one of the most significant stories regarding the boat building industry last year.

 

Perhaps you are afraid of upsetting other boat builders who advertise in your magazine. If so, your magazine is for boat builders and not the Canal enthusiast who needs articles on the shortcomings of the Waterways as well as the articles on readers cruises, history of the canal and techical issues.

I must say, I now rely more and more on this forum for information, and read Waterways world less and less.

 

John Wood

[Khayamanzi]

Personally I like the ads and drool regularly over various bits for the boat!! (Perhaps I'm just sad!) I buy both WW and Canal boat every month for different reasons. I like the topical issues and adverts in WW but my favourate articles of all are the in depth nosey inside new boats being built that Canal boat does every month together with the light hearted articles which I enjoy as they get me away from all the bickering and arguing that goes on in the canal world so often, (that's the generic canal world not this forum!) Personally if WW did both of these things I would stop buying the other one completely and just buy WW.

[alan_fincher]

I acknowledge that the advertisements subsidise the magazines, so accept that they have to be there. Given that they do, a wad at the front and another at the back is much less annoying than interspersing with real content, (so please don't change to that!).

 

What surprises me is, given that the advertisers must know these things have regular readerships, how little effort is made to vary many of the ads in any way at all from one month to the next. (I think I know by now, for example, the page I should not read if I've just purchased a 230 volt alternator.... etc, etc, etc...)

 

Hence I get very little from any of the advertising, because if you look at a six month old magazine and compare it to latest, my guess is that many of the ads will be identical, (or near as damn it....)

 

The one exception is probably in the area of second hand boats, but here the pitfall is the lead time between submitting an ad, and publication. One broker told me that although he dutifully pays for his spread in each months magazine, it's pretty pointless, as much of the information is obsolete before publication. It seems web-sites have largely taken over the magazines roles in these areas.

 

On content, I get sick of the assumption that everybody on the canals has the money to be looking for their next £80K to £120K boat, (I wish!). I'd like to see far more articles around less expensive boats, with emphasis on DIY tasks, improvements, maintenance, etc, (and yes, I know WW has just run an article like this, but they seem comparitively rare).

 

One of the competitor magazines that showed what you can buy at brokerages, (or retiring from hire fleets), at various price levels, seemed to me to be offering a service to those who can't afford (or don't want), floating penthouses.

 

I also like the historical articles, but appreciate that there are people these days who have little interest in the heritage underpinning the canals we have today....

[nigel carton]

I also like the historical articles, but appreciate that there are people these days who have little interest in the heritage underpinning the canals we have today....

 

That will be Gaggle then! sorry Gags, couldn't resist that one....

 

 

INCOMING...........................

Edited January 7, 2006 by nigel carton

[dor]

Richard:

 

Magazine content: I can only repeat what Alan has said above: i.e. a bit more realism about what the majority of boats are out there. Very few of the buyers of £90,000+ boats are real boaters, they are just looking for a status symbol because they can't afford a cottage in the cotswolds. Most boaters are on much more limited means, and are more interested in keeping their boat going, so more emphasis on diy and maintenance and mony-saving ideas would be a good idea.

 

I am staggered that the Athony M business has not received major coverage. This guy is an out&out crook who is preying on your readership and openly defrauding them. That should have been a major story. I don't think you will upset the legitimate builders - they will still want to advertise and they would like ot see the cowboys exposed.

 

Summaries of equipment wouldn't go amiss, with product reviews. E.g. there is so much discussion about inverters for instance - an article about a particular type of equipment, with honest reviews of some of the examples would be good.

 

A bit of more light-hearted content would make a pleasant change as well.

[DHutch]

Gary did a poll a couple of months back on who reads what and how often, I've searched but can't find it (ThreadFinder General - where's it gone?)

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2696&

 

 

 

 

Personaly I have to admit i have only read about 3 Waterways worlds in my intire life, and even these where only becuase i was on the boat, without anything much else to do of an evening.

 

The adverts are repetative, and although some of the articals make a very interesting read, the majority are dull to say the lease.

- I'd rather read 'funnel' 'Rc Racer' or a PC mag.

 

 

Danel

[Jon]

But they are not much good if you want a waterways mag Dan

 

Richard, thanks for joining in...

I've never really had a preference for which is the best waterways mag. I very rarely buy one now unless there is an article that particularly interests me. With most of the new being available on the internet first, i already know about most of the articles in the news section by the time it is published in a mag.

 

Advertising doesn't normally bother me. Quite often they are interesting to browse through...

 

 

Jon

[iteldoo4me]

I would like to see a more informed debate about:-

 

1The RCD and its shortcomings.

 

2.Dodgy and substandard Boat Builders. There was'nt one mention of the Anthony M fiasco in your magazine. I thought this might be because WW was a creditor, but as no one turned up for the Anthony M creditors meeting from your magazine, then I can only assume he did not owe you anything. If this is the case then why didnt you print a full article on what was one of the most significant stories regarding the boat building industry last year.

 

Perhaps you are afraid of upsetting other boat builders who advertise in your magazine. If so, your magazine is for boat builders and not the Canal enthusiast who needs articles on the shortcomings of the Waterways as well as the articles on readers cruises, history of the canal and techical issues.

I must say, I now rely more and more on this forum for information, and read Waterways world less and less.

 

John Wood

 

I totally agree with John Wood,its a case of WW taking sides on articles they would rather not print in fear of losing the advertisers .ie rogue boat builders,who give many(including me) a raw deal.More should be written for those that buy the magazine,more chance your sales would go up for being up front,be it good and bad news and information.When i contacted WW recently,regarding a shoddy boat build,I was informed that WW couldnt help,

Edited January 7, 2006 by iteldoo4me