Popular Woodworking Mag losing 3 of their best

In article <[email protected]>, woodchucker
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On 10/9/2014 10:05 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> > Megan Fitzpatrick's announcement that Robert Lang, Glen Huey and Chuck
> > Bender
> > are leaving PW on Oct 15:
> > http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/wish-well
> >
> >
> >
> > http://woodworkersedge.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/what-happened-at-popular-woo
> > dworking/
> >
> >
> not in my mind. Glen Huey is like baby Huey.. I can't stand his methods.
> Many of which are very dangerous. and he teaches this.
>
> Rob Lang is pretty good.
>
> I think the magazines are useless these days. More advertising and
> little good content. I have not subscribed for years now. I miss having
> reading material for the throne, but it's just not that good anymore.
>
> What I miss is the valuable tips, but I think most everything is
> retreads these days... Most of the magazines are geared for beginners.

+1

On 10/09/2014 04:54 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 10/9/2014 10:05 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
>> Megan Fitzpatrick's announcement that Robert Lang, Glen Huey and Chuck
>> Bender
>> are leaving PW on Oct 15:
>> http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/wish-well
>>
>>
>>
>> http://woodworkersedge.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/what-happened-at-popular-woodworking/
>>
>>
>>
> not in my mind. Glen Huey is like baby Huey.. I can't stand his methods.
> Many of which are very dangerous. and he teaches this.
>
> Rob Lang is pretty good.
>
> I think the magazines are useless these days. More advertising and
> little good content. I have not subscribed for years now. I miss having
> reading material for the throne, but it's just not that good anymore.
>
> What I miss is the valuable tips, but I think most everything is
> retreads these days... Most of the magazines are geared for beginners.
>
>
>
I think PW is looking more and more like Fine Woodworking of old. Most
projects are beyond the average WW.



--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill

On 10/9/2014 9:05 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> Megan Fitzpatrick's announcement that Robert Lang, Glen Huey and Chuck Bender
> are leaving PW on Oct 15:
> http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/wish-well
>
>
> http://woodworkersedge.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/what-happened-at-popular-woodworking/
>
>

Popular Woodworking lost ME, ;~), when their content became boring. I
was tempted to cancel the subscription but I just let it run out.

On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 19:00:29 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:

>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:39:59 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>>>>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>>>>
>>>>> -BR
>>>> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
>>>> Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even
>>>> 8 a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50
>>>> years During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice
>>>> and again have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>>>>
>>>> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
>>>> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
>>>> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
>>>> gone and it goes.
>>>>
>>> I may be noteworthy that the price of a single issue of USA Today is $2.
>> Has anyone actually paid that?
>I think of it as "showing them a little encouragement".. ; ) The
>subscription rate is much lower.

Not sure what you mean but basically, it's the same thing as putting a
sign saying $25 on the sofa you just pulled out to the street. If the
sign said "free", no one would take it because it's worthless.

>> It's given away in every "business
>> class" hotel in the country (and half those of the Motel-6 category,
>> it seems).

On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 21:22:58 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:

>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 19:00:29 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:39:59 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>>>>>>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -BR
>>>>>> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
>>>>>> Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even
>>>>>> 8 a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50
>>>>>> years During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice
>>>>>> and again have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
>>>>>> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
>>>>>> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
>>>>>> gone and it goes.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I may be noteworthy that the price of a single issue of USA Today is $2.
>>>> Has anyone actually paid that?
>>> I think of it as "showing them a little encouragement".. ; ) The
>>> subscription rate is much lower.
>> Not sure what you mean but basically, it's the same thing as putting a
>> sign saying $25 on the sofa you just pulled out to the street. If the
>> sign said "free", no one would take it because it's worthless.
>
>Aww.. It's not such a bad newspaper. If they took it off of the market
>I would feel a sense of loss. I have
>been acquainted with it for over 30 years.

It's a rag, like any other. I throw them away, or leave them on the
floor where they slipped it under the door. Not worth picking up.
>
>>
>>>> It's given away in every "business
>>>> class" hotel in the country (and half those of the Motel-6 category,
>>>> it seems).

On 10/11/2014 6:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 10/11/2014 4:23 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>
>>
>> As far as magazines, they made their own bed.. They catered to the
>> advertisers, and not the clients buying the magazines. It works for the
>> women, as they like buying things, it doesn't work for the men as well.
>
> The Consumer Advocate columnist at the Hartford Courant left over a
> dispute. He wanted to run a column about a mattress chain that is one
> of the Courant's biggest advertisers. He lost a lot of sleep (and a
> job) over Sleepys
>

Yep, that's OLD News. Money talks ...

--
Jeff

On 10/9/2014 10:05 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> Megan Fitzpatrick's announcement that Robert Lang, Glen Huey and Chuck Bender
> are leaving PW on Oct 15:
> http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/wish-well
>
>
> http://woodworkersedge.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/what-happened-at-popular-woodworking/
>
>
not in my mind. Glen Huey is like baby Huey.. I can't stand his methods.
Many of which are very dangerous. and he teaches this.

Rob Lang is pretty good.

I think the magazines are useless these days. More advertising and
little good content. I have not subscribed for years now. I miss having
reading material for the throne, but it's just not that good anymore.

What I miss is the valuable tips, but I think most everything is
retreads these days... Most of the magazines are geared for beginners.



--
Jeff

woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I think the magazines are useless these days. More advertising and
> little good content. I have not subscribed for years now. I miss
> having reading material for the throne, but it's just not that good
> anymore.
>
> What I miss is the valuable tips, but I think most everything is
> retreads these days... Most of the magazines are geared for
> beginners.

I agree with you on this. I've been re-reading some old
American Woodworker mags from the early 90's (and noting
a whole bunch of projects I "meant to do someday"). There
doesn't seem to be anything like that today - it's either
entry level stuff like Wood or Woodsmith, or Fine Woodworking
style "we're not going to give you the details because
you're a pro and already know it". There's not much for
the guy(*) who knows the basics and needs guidance to expand
his skills.

John

(* or gal)

Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> According to my new Shop Notes, They printed 149,782 copies on
> average over the last year, 105,489 for paid circulation
> (subscription, if I understand correctly).

Paid circulation is subscriptions and single-copy (e.g. newsstand)
sales. Typically those are broken down on following lines.
Usually there'll also be lines for non-paid circulation (i.e.
copies given away at shows, etc), for returns from vendors,
and for "not distributed".

I think the thing you were looking at is the post office
statement (required to mail magazines at magazine rate). More
useful for the question you have is the ABC audited circulation
numbers (which is what advertisers look at). I don't know of
anywhere you can just look that up (without paying for an ABC
membership), but Wood magazine claims an audited circulation
of something like 550,000.

John

Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> It also indicates 32,075 copies not distributed. Where would those go
> (the figure seems excessive)?

Into the trash. I'm sure they'd like that number to be smaller,
but it doesn't seem out of line. Magazines are printed way in
advance of the issue date, they have to print some extra for any
new subscriptions that come in, plus there's always a fair amount
of damaged copies.

> Can someone validate the 550,000 figures for Wood. My idea is that we
> would collectively make a table.

That's a typo on my part, should have been 450,000. Look here:
http://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/files/mediakit/PDF/Circulation-page.pdf

John

On 10/11/2014 4:23 PM, woodchucker wrote:

>
> As far as magazines, they made their own bed.. They catered to the
> advertisers, and not the clients buying the magazines. It works for the
> women, as they like buying things, it doesn't work for the men as well.

The Consumer Advocate columnist at the Hartford Courant left over a
dispute. He wanted to run a column about a mattress chain that is one
of the Courant's biggest advertisers. He lost a lot of sleep (and a
job) over Sleepys

On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 16:23:29 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On 10/11/2014 12:13 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>>
>>> -BR
>>
>> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent. Used
>> to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even 8 a
>> year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50 years
>> During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice and again
>> have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>>
>> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
>> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
>> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
>> gone and it goes.
>>
>
>We stopped our newspaper as they hardly delivered it. I could not
>believe they didn't try to correct it. After we cancelled we kept
>getting calls to re-subscribe... for what.. you have to deliver it.

The last time we "got" a paper it was the opposite. They kept
throwing it in our driveway and wouldn't stop. A few months later
they tried to collect the bill. "Show me the signature authorizing
the billing." Crooks.

>The thing about news print is that you get a better less sensationalized
>story vs TV. I still do not like internet news.. it's not as practical
>to read. Scanninig is a pain...

Printed newspapers are just as much dreck, if not more so. I find
scanning easier since I can search. I'd rather scan documents on a
computer (or the Internet) but would rather read the printed word. At
work I both use both printed and "live" PDFs of specifications. I
usually have both open when I'm studying a new part.

>As far as magazines, they made their own bed.. They catered to the
>advertisers, and not the clients buying the magazines. It works for the
>women, as they like buying things, it doesn't work for the men as well.

So did newspapers. May they die a painful death. From the ashes,
something might grow.

John McCoy wrote:
> woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> I think the magazines are useless these days. More advertising and
>> little good content. I have not subscribed for years now. I miss
>> having reading material for the throne, but it's just not that good
>> anymore.
>>
>> What I miss is the valuable tips, but I think most everything is
>> retreads these days... Most of the magazines are geared for
>> beginners.
> I agree with you on this. I've been re-reading some old
> American Woodworker mags from the early 90's (and noting
> a whole bunch of projects I "meant to do someday"). There
> doesn't seem to be anything like that today - it's either
> entry level stuff like Wood or Woodsmith, or Fine Woodworking
> style "we're not going to give you the details because
> you're a pro and already know it". There's not much for
> the guy(*) who knows the basics and needs guidance to expand
> his skills.
>
> John


I'm sure many of the magazine publishers would agree that they are in
the "info-tainment" business.
They also apparently need to try to run on a shoestring budget. To my
mind, every article which is a poorly-veiled advertisement
earns a -1, and yes I have started screening for them. My expectations
and my subscriptions have already been adjusted accordingly.

Bill

>
> (* or gal)

Bill wrote:
> John McCoy wrote:
>> woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> I think the magazines are useless these days. More advertising and
>>> little good content. I have not subscribed for years now. I miss
>>> having reading material for the throne, but it's just not that good
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> What I miss is the valuable tips, but I think most everything is
>>> retreads these days... Most of the magazines are geared for
>>> beginners.
>> I agree with you on this. I've been re-reading some old
>> American Woodworker mags from the early 90's (and noting
>> a whole bunch of projects I "meant to do someday"). There
>> doesn't seem to be anything like that today - it's either
>> entry level stuff like Wood or Woodsmith, or Fine Woodworking
>> style "we're not going to give you the details because
>> you're a pro and already know it". There's not much for
>> the guy(*) who knows the basics and needs guidance to expand
>> his skills.
>>
>> John
>
>
> I'm sure many of the magazine publishers would agree that they are in
> the "info-tainment" business.
> They also apparently need to try to run on a shoestring budget. To my
> mind, every article which is a poorly-veiled advertisement
> earns a -1, and yes I have started screening for them. My
> expectations and my subscriptions have already been adjusted accordingly.
>
> Bill

Maybe it would be interesting for us to compare the circulation figures
of the various woodworking magazines.

According to my new Shop Notes, They printed 149,782 copies on average
over the last year, 105,489 for paid circulation (subscription, if I
understand correctly).
The figures for the present issue were several percentage points lower
than these averages.



>
>>
>> (* or gal)
>

On 10/9/14, 5:57 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:
> On 10/09/2014 04:54 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 10/9/2014 10:05 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
>>> Megan Fitzpatrick's announcement that Robert Lang, Glen Huey and Chuck
>>> Bender
>>> are leaving PW on Oct 15:
>>> http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/wish-well
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://woodworkersedge.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/what-happened-at-popular-woodworking/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> not in my mind. Glen Huey is like baby Huey.. I can't stand his methods.
>> Many of which are very dangerous. and he teaches this.
>>
>> Rob Lang is pretty good.
>>
>> I think the magazines are useless these days. More advertising and
>> little good content. I have not subscribed for years now. I miss having
>> reading material for the throne, but it's just not that good anymore.
>>
>> What I miss is the valuable tips, but I think most everything is
>> retreads these days... Most of the magazines are geared for beginners.
>>
>>
>>
> I think PW is looking more and more like Fine Woodworking of old. Most
> projects are beyond the average WW.
>
>
>
I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
getting thinner and thinner.

-BR


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: [email protected] ---

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>
>>>
>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>
>> -BR
>
> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
> Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even
> 8 a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50
> years During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice
> and again have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>
> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
> gone and it goes.
>
I may be noteworthy that the price of a single issue of USA Today is $2.

John McCoy wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> According to my new Shop Notes, They printed 149,782 copies on
>> average over the last year, 105,489 for paid circulation
>> (subscription, if I understand correctly).
> Paid circulation is subscriptions and single-copy (e.g. newsstand)
> sales. Typically those are broken down on following lines.
> Usually there'll also be lines for non-paid circulation (i.e.
> copies given away at shows, etc), for returns from vendors,
> and for "not distributed".


Yes, it indicates 12,022 of the 105,489 were "over the counter sales", etc..

It also indicates 32,075 copies not distributed. Where would those go
(the figure seems excessive)?
Can someone validate the 550,000 figures for Wood. My idea is that we
would collectively make a table.
I could go get an old copy of Wood from the next room, but this supposed
to be a group project! ; )
On a related note, gas dropped to $2.83/gal. this week in central Indiana.

Bill




>
> I think the thing you were looking at is the post office
> statement (required to mail magazines at magazine rate). More
> useful for the question you have is the ABC audited circulation
> numbers (which is what advertisers look at). I don't know of
> anywhere you can just look that up (without paying for an ABC
> membership), but Wood magazine claims an audited circulation
> of something like 550,000.
>
> John

[email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:39:59 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>>>
>>>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>>>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>>>
>>>> -BR
>>> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
>>> Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even
>>> 8 a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50
>>> years During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice
>>> and again have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>>>
>>> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
>>> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
>>> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
>>> gone and it goes.
>>>
>> I may be noteworthy that the price of a single issue of USA Today is $2.
> Has anyone actually paid that?
I think of it as "showing them a little encouragement".. ; ) The
subscription rate is much lower.

> It's given away in every "business
> class" hotel in the country (and half those of the Motel-6 category,
> it seems).

[email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 19:00:29 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:39:59 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>>>>>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -BR
>>>>> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
>>>>> Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even
>>>>> 8 a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50
>>>>> years During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice
>>>>> and again have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
>>>>> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
>>>>> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
>>>>> gone and it goes.
>>>>>
>>>> I may be noteworthy that the price of a single issue of USA Today is $2.
>>> Has anyone actually paid that?
>> I think of it as "showing them a little encouragement".. ; ) The
>> subscription rate is much lower.
> Not sure what you mean but basically, it's the same thing as putting a
> sign saying $25 on the sofa you just pulled out to the street. If the
> sign said "free", no one would take it because it's worthless.

Aww.. It's not such a bad newspaper. If they took it off of the market
I would feel a sense of loss. I have
been acquainted with it for over 30 years.


>
>>> It's given away in every "business
>>> class" hotel in the country (and half those of the Motel-6 category,
>>> it seems).

[email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 21:22:58 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 19:00:29 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:39:59 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>>>>>>>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -BR
>>>>>>> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
>>>>>>> Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even
>>>>>>> 8 a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50
>>>>>>> years During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice
>>>>>>> and again have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
>>>>>>> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
>>>>>>> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
>>>>>>> gone and it goes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I may be noteworthy that the price of a single issue of USA Today is $2.
>>>>> Has anyone actually paid that?
>>>> I think of it as "showing them a little encouragement".. ; ) The
>>>> subscription rate is much lower.
>>> Not sure what you mean but basically, it's the same thing as putting a
>>> sign saying $25 on the sofa you just pulled out to the street. If the
>>> sign said "free", no one would take it because it's worthless.
>> Aww.. It's not such a bad newspaper. If they took it off of the market
>> I would feel a sense of loss. I have
>> been acquainted with it for over 30 years.
> It's a rag, like any other. I throw them away, or leave them on the
> floor where they slipped it under the door. Not worth picking up.

I bought a copy to read while I was eating lunch in a public place today.
What I didn't count on is that I had already read several of the
articles on the USA Today app I have on my TV.
And I left the paper on the table for the next person. I think for your
$2, you're not buying a "rag" as you
put it, you're buying some form of companionship. :) I'd rather buy
that than something from Starbucks
for twice the cost.


>>>>> It's given away in every "business
>>>>> class" hotel in the country (and half those of the Motel-6 category,
>>>>> it seems).

On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:39:59 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>>
>>> -BR
>>
>> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
>> Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even
>> 8 a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50
>> years During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice
>> and again have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>>
>> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
>> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
>> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
>> gone and it goes.
>>
>I may be noteworthy that the price of a single issue of USA Today is $2.

Has anyone actually paid that? It's given away in every "business
class" hotel in the country (and half those of the Motel-6 category,
it seems).

On 10/11/2014 12:13 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:
>
>>>
>> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
>> getting thinner and thinner.
>>
>> -BR
>
> As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent. Used
> to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even 8 a
> year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50 years
> During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice and again
> have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.
>
> Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
> fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
> still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
> gone and it goes.
>

We stopped our newspaper as they hardly delivered it. I could not
believe they didn't try to correct it. After we cancelled we kept
getting calls to re-subscribe... for what.. you have to deliver it.

The thing about news print is that you get a better less sensationalized
story vs TV. I still do not like internet news.. it's not as practical
to read. Scanninig is a pain...

As far as magazines, they made their own bed.. They catered to the
advertisers, and not the clients buying the magazines. It works for the
women, as they like buying things, it doesn't work for the men as well.


--
Jeff

On 10/11/2014 10:57 AM, Brewster wrote:

>>
> I dropped my subscription to PW several years ago. The magazine kept
> getting thinner and thinner.
>
> -BR

As are most magazines and newspapers. Thinner and not as frequent.
Used to be every magazine was 12 issues, but now many are 10, or even 8
a year. I've been a subscriber to Reader's Digest for about 50 years
During that recent 12 or so, they have filed bankruptcy twice and again
have gone back to 10 issues for a while to cut costs.

Between cable news 24 hours a day and internet sources, print media is
fading fast. It may never go away, but the competition is tough. I
still get the daily paper for $34 a month, but one more good columnist
gone and it goes.