Magazines

[carlt]

No Carl.

Perhaps if you were a bigger advertiser you may have the same confidence, that my ex-employer had, that every new build that arrived in the yard was going to get reviewed and he was never worried that it would be unfavourable.

[Ally]

we are indeed but a small advertiser....infact, not running one in the mag just now.

 

MJG....hasty lol?

[Guest]

Post not required as the discussion moved to the chat room last night where it was actually nice to 'talk' to Ally and some of the others (on a virtual basis only of course)

 

....

Edited December 12, 2010 by MJG

[starman]

the implication being these are somehow superior to the majority of boats people actually have built or buy....

Don't be absurd. This was said in reply to this earlier comment..

"I suppose I'm fed up with wood-lined coffins fitted out with 200 acre open saloons with two Captain's chairs a tiny flat screen telly and a squirrel stove, a "galley" with curvy granite worksurfaces stuffed full of appliances, four poster beds, and poorly built cupboards stuffed full of electrical control equipment in blue boxes. See one, seen them all"

...which implied that too many boats reviewed in mags were too similar. Therefore I merely pointed out the wide variety of boats I personally had reviewed. And how, as an editor and a review writer I had looked for boats to review which were interesting and different.

For example I found and reviewed Ally's boat by keeping in touch with her over the 3-4 years since we'd previously reviewed a Beacon boat until she told me they were building a relatively unusual 47-footer. I thought it worth a review and so did the editor.

It's worth remembering that a large number of new boats are 'bespoke'and a big part of boat reviews is to give readers ideas that they can incorporate in their own plans or projects whoever they may be built by.

[Guest]

Don't be absurd. This was said in reply to this earlier comment..

 

I wasn't being absurd - that was simply how I interpreted the post you made.

[carlt]

There always seemed to be a huge contrast between the boatfitter I worked for, skipping round the workshop, in eager anticipation of the review of the boat on the dock, and the stress and worry my employer, whilst I was at college, went through, when he served a national paper restaurant reviewer.

 

I have never seen an inland waterways magazine criticise the mediocre woodworking that is so common, even on bespoke boats yet quality is often criticised in the reviews of sea boats.

 

There is a stark difference between the reviews of inland boats and pretty much anything else.

 

Regardless of how much magazines defend their sycophantic sops, to potential advertisers, I have yet to see the comment "This is the worst boat I have ever reviewed" written, unlike car, bike, restaurant, sea boat or anything else that is written about, in special interest mags.

 

The only exception to this is Land Rover Owner International which always read like a company brochure, compared to the other LR rags.

[starman]

Perhaps if you were a bigger advertiser you may have the same confidence, that my ex-employer had, that every new build that arrived in the yard was going to get reviewed and he was never worried that it would be unfavourable.

Every new build got reviewed? When I was an editor a boatfitting firm would be lucky to get a boat reviewed more than once every two or three years. Who was this "ex-employer" if I can ask?

[Guest]

Every new build got reviewed? When I was an editor a boatfitting firm would be lucky to get a boat reviewed more than once every two or three years. Who was this "ex-employer" if I can ask?

 

Interesting choice of words - lucky indeed (or am I being absurd again)

[starman]

I wasn't being absurd - that was simply how I interpreted the post you made.

Well I did say this in the same post "When I've chosen boats to review I have looked for ones that have an interesting story - a different layout, alternative power system etc."

As I said, a big point of a boat test is to give readers ideas. A stream of similar boats be they 57-ft semi-trads or Kelvin powered tugs wouldn't do that.

[starman]

I have never seen an inland waterways magazine criticise the mediocre woodworking that is so common, even on bespoke boats yet quality is often criticised in the reviews of sea boats.

 

There is a stark difference between the reviews of inland boats and pretty much anything else.

 

Regardless of how much magazines defend their sycophantic sops, to potential advertisers, I have yet to see the comment "This is the worst boat I have ever reviewed" written, unlike car, bike, restaurant, sea boat or anything else that is written about, in special interest mags.

 

Well Jonathan Wilson once threatened to punch me after I criticised a ripply roof on one of his shells if that counts.

But is mediocre wookworking "so common"? I don't think so. I don't know how many new boats you've seen recently but in my opinion all-round joinery quality has improved dramatically in the last 2-3 years. It has had to; there's plenty of competition out there for not many orders.

I know what is the worst boat I have ever reviewed but it wasn't the build quality that was at fault, it was the design and layout which the customer insisted on. And that's often the problem - these boats are bespoke. I'm not going to crucify a small firm who only build 3-4 boats a year on the grounds that the boat's design is rubbish. All readers will take in is "worst boat ever" and they won't remember why. I'll say - I have said - that the layout is poor but that's it.

[carlt]

Tell you what, why not do a review using a tried and trusted method, employed throughout the special interest media (with the exception of the canal mags).

 

Go and inspect 4 boats and write one big comparison review, marking each one out of 10 on a wide variety of criteria then, in the last paragraph say which one is crap, which two are mediocre and which one you would "take home with you."

 

Nobody else seems afraid of this format yet you would never see such a review in any of the inland waterways publications.

[starman]

Interesting choice of words - lucky indeed (or am I being absurd again)

No, merely pedantic. I'll re-phrase. I cannot recall an individual firm getting a new boat tested more frequently than once every couple of years. It would probably have been less often. Not for reasons of advertising or 'buggin's turn' but because of the number of potentially reviewable new boats.

 

Tell you what, why not do a review using a tried and trusted method, employed throughout the special interest media (with the exception of the canal mags).

 

Go and inspect 4 boats and write one big comparison review, marking each one out of 10 on a wide variety of criteria then, in the last paragraph say which one is crap, which two are mediocre and which one you would "take home with you."

 

Nobody else seems afraid of this format yet you would never see such a review in any of the inland waterways publications.

It's a good idea; I thought about it when I edited Canal Boat but the logistics of getting privately owned boats together at the same place and time are nigh on impossible and, even if we put that aside, the fact that they're all bespoke makes it tough to judge winners and losers. A bit like trying to pick a winner between Lotus Elise v Mondeo v Freelander v Golf.

But you organise it and I'll write it!

[Guest]

No, merely pedantic. I'll re-phrase. I cannot recall an individual firm getting a new boat tested more frequently than once every couple of years. It would probably have been less often. Not for reasons of advertising or 'buggin's turn' but because of the number of potentially reviewable new boats.

 

Post not needed - answered in post above...

Edited December 12, 2010 by MJG

[starman]

Out of curiosity who did you review boats for?? (I'm taking it from the thread that is what you did for a living at some point)

Canal Boat. And in a past life I tested cars for 30 years for Autocar, What Car?, Top Gear and a stack of other car mags. And edited WC and TG.

[Guest]

Canal Boat. And in a past life I tested cars for 30 years for Autocar, What Car?, Top Gear and a stack of other car mags. And edited WC and TG.

 

was just curious as I wondered if you where who wrote the review on our boat - but clearly not as it wasn't in CB.

 

 

typo edit

Edited December 12, 2010 by MJG

[Athy]

Speaking of 'Top Gear', I would like to see a Jeremy Clarkson review of a narrowboat - if he knows anything about them, that is.

[Guest]

Speaking of 'Top Gear', I would like to see a Jeremy Clarkson review of a narrowboat - if he knows anything about them, that is.

 

I would reckon he holds narrowboats in the same contempt as he does caravans....

[dor]

As JC has cropped up, it is interesting to compare his car reviews to the way boats are reviewed in the mags. Yes, they do tend to be pretty soft, but at least everyone gets the same attention, and often reading between the lines could give you sight of some veiled criticisms.

 

The car mag reviews (Starman excluded of course) did seem to be influenced by who the reviewer was in the pay of. Clarkson for quite some time was in the pay of Ford and took every opportunity to praise Ford and rubbish Vauxhall. It was so blatant as to be irritating or worse.

[ditchcrawler]

There always seemed to be a huge contrast between the boatfitter I worked for, skipping round the workshop, in eager anticipation of the review of the boat on the dock, and the stress and worry my employer, whilst I was at college, went through, when he served a national paper restaurant reviewer.

 

I have never seen an inland waterways magazine criticise the mediocre woodworking that is so common, even on bespoke boats yet quality is often criticised in the reviews of sea boats.

 

There is a stark difference between the reviews of inland boats and pretty much anything else.

 

Regardless of how much magazines defend their sycophantic sops, to potential advertisers, I have yet to see the comment "This is the worst boat I have ever reviewed" written, unlike car, bike, restaurant, sea boat or anything else that is written about, in special interest mags.

 

The only exception to this is Land Rover Owner International which always read like a company brochure, compared to the other LR rags.

Reads some blogs this weekend I read of one boater taking 4 hours to change a starter battery after stripping out loads of woodwork, Boats with heating that wont keep the boat warm, then of course the question of where to make holes to check the bilge for water.

[P R]

Well that sparked an interesting debate, not sure i want any of them now corect me if i'm wrong but i think it was 4 recomendations for WW and CB 3 for PBO and 2 each for NB and watercraft (WC?). Is the Steve H who writes for CB the same chap who wrote a couple of books of his canal travels? if so i will try CB first as i enjoyed his books. Thanks all

[Guest]

Is the Steve H who writes for CB the same chap who wrote a couple of books of his canal travels? if so i will try CB first as i enjoyed his books. Thanks all

 

Yes it's the same guy...

[P R]

Yes it's the same guy...

Thanks

[ditchcrawler]

Well that sparked an interesting debate, not sure i want any of them now corect me if i'm wrong but i think it was 4 recomendations for WW and CB 3 for PBO and 2 each for NB and watercraft (WC?). Is the Steve H who writes for CB the same chap who wrote a couple of books of his canal travels? if so i will try CB first as i enjoyed his books. Thanks all

Same Steve but its a bit pricy if you only want to read one page, but then again the great Bones is there as well so you will want to read her, that's just doubled the value for you

[P R]

Same Steve but its a bit pricy if you only want to read one page, but then again the great Bones is there as well so you will want to read her, that's just doubled the value for you

Obviously i would not buy for one page! my op states i want a subscription to one magazine and as CB and WW recived about the same reviews it may help me decide

[Heffalump]

The columnists were the swinger for me.