Controversial cover of Railway Modeller ?

[Phil Parker]

17 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

Or on occasion the sealed section?

 

Please don't start a rumour that mags are sealed in plastic in Smiffs because of their content unsuitable for children...  ;-)

[Oldddudders]

4 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

 

Please don't start a rumour that mags are sealed in plastic in Smiffs because of their content unsuitable for children...  ;-)

But it is! It can cost parents £zillions!

[fezza]

20 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

Maybe this is the future.

 

 

She's saying "Are you sure this shoot is for Vogue?"

[t-b-g]

As PMP says earlier, the cover design is all about attracting attention on a shelf in a newsagent. It is about getting somebody to choose that magazine to pick up. For a subscriber, it is less important as the sale has been made long before the cover was chosen.

 

I don't see the cover as controversial, just a bit dull. A mass produced model straight out of the box is never quite as interesting to me as one that a modeller has built or an improved and modified RTR. It makes the cover more about production and manufacturing and less about modelling, which is where my interest lies. The same cover with the loco weathered and with some of its shortcomings corrected would have interested me far more.

[Oldddudders]

4 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

As PMP says earlier, the cover design is all about attracting attention on a shelf in a newsagent. It is about getting somebody to choose that magazine to pick up. For a subscriber, it is less important as the sale has been made long before the cover was chosen.

 

I don't see the cover as controversial, just a bit dull. A mass produced model straight out of the box is never quite as interesting to me as one that a modeller has built or an improved and modified RTR. It makes the cover more about production and manufacturing and less about modelling, which is where my interest lies. The same cover with the loco weathered and with some of its shortcomings corrected would have interested me far more.

I tend to assume that MRJ caters for modellers with your sort of taste, rather than those mags at the bright and glossy end of the spectrum.

[ikcdab]

Is there more advertising then usual? Going just by the page numbers, advertising is around 73 pages.

Actual editorial content is 70 pages or so.

On one hand this is good, as it shows that the hobby is vibrant with lots of business support. But I wonder how up to date these adverts can be when do much is done on line.

I do like very much that the adverts and editorial are completely segregated.

Ian C

[Mike Bellamy]

23 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

It's not unique, there was a D Class cover in 2019.

 

31 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

A mass produced model straight out of the box is never quite as interesting to me . . . . . . 

 

The D Class quoted by Phil is hardly a mass produced model straight out of the box - it was in 7mm by Lee Marsh and only 60 were produced at a cost of £2850 each - information from Gauge O Guild Gazette - and the next advert three months later said they were sold out.

[grahame]

8 minutes ago, col.stephens said:

Is there a definition of 'mass produced'?  Sixty sounds rather a lot to me.

 

 

Yep, probably a lot more than one modeller would hand-make for themselves. It sounds more like a commercial business project in making a batch of them to be sold for profit.

 

[Titan]

After seeing the title I thought they might have had the Great Train Robbery Diorama featured on the cover, (actually thought of a different comparison first, but not time for Godwins law just yet) but no, it's just a picture of a model train on a model railway magazine!  Is there anything less controversial than that?

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, col.stephens said:

Is there a definition of 'mass produced'?  Sixty sounds rather a lot to me.

Perhaps mass market might have been a better description. Few of us consider shelling out nearly £3k for a loco. 

 

But compared to the 4-figure batches that often feature in smaller scales, 60 is pretty limited. 

[RJS1977]

57 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

Yep, probably a lot more than one modeller would hand-make for themselves. It sounds more like a commercial business project in making a batch of them to be sold for profit.

 

 

Or alternatively, someone making one (or more) for themselves, but realising that economies of scale mean it's cheaper to make 60 and sell the rest - which I think is how "Just Like the Real Thing" came about.

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, col.stephens said:

IMHO there is still a need for a magazine which falls somewhere between MRJ, (with its ten page articles on how I made a left-handed widget for a kit which hasn't been available for twenty years), and RM, (with yet another article on how I built a layout for my grandchildren).  There have been some good attempts over the years but sadly none lasted very long, for various reasons.  I live in hope that someone with the knowledge and ability steps forward to fill the gap.  Again, IMHO, the other mags do not fit the bill.

 

Terry

Whilst posting on a forum owned by one of the 'other' mags.

 

MRJ and RM know their markets as I think do Model Rail, Hornby Magazine and BRM which are all at the RM end of the scale but with more 'how to' content and suggestions for modelling elements.  Model Rail have got one step further than the other magazines in that they have commissioned locos which does set them apart.

[RJS1977]

RM used to have a lot more 'how to' content, which I think it is lacking now.

 

OTOH my father stopped getting Model Rail as a lot of it seemed to be 'How to fit a DCC chip to a particular loco' which was of no interest to him.

[grahame]

21 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Or alternatively, someone making one (or more) for themselves, but realising that economies of scale mean it's cheaper to make 60 and sell the rest - which I think is how "Just Like the Real Thing" came about.

 

I can't see that making 60 would be cheaper than making 1, not to mention the time to make them. I think you mean the marginal cost (i.e. per unit) but it would still mean you'd need to be time rich for the workload. And, of course, making them on a commercial basis (to sell) is effectively a business decision.

[RJS1977]

10 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

I can't see that making 60 would be cheaper than making 1, not to mention the time to make them. I think you mean the marginal cost (i.e. per unit) but it would still mean you'd need to be time rich for the workload. And, of course, making them on a commercial basis (to sell) is effectively a business decision.

 

It depends whether the 'maker' is doing all the work himself, or commissioning someone else to do it.  If the work has been commissioned out, with the 'maker' merely doing the design and artwork, then the work involved for the 'maker' is the same for 60 as for 1. The commissioned manufacturer will also probably charge one-off fees for setting up the tooling etc. If the 'maker' is paying those costs out of his own pocket, then commissioning 60 to be made and selling the other 59 will cost him a lot less overall than paying all the costs himself.

[2750Papyrus]

1 hour ago, col.stephens said:

Is there a definition of 'mass produced'?  Sixty sounds rather a lot to me.

 

Terry

I would have thought 60 would constitute a batch. 

 

Collins' definition of mass production relates to a "standardized pattern on a large scale by means of extensive mechanization and division of labour".

[woodenhead]

2 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

I can't see that making 60 would be cheaper than making 1, not to mention the time to make them. I think you mean the marginal cost (i.e. per unit) but it would still mean you'd need to be time rich for the workload. And, of course, making them on a commercial basis (to sell) is effectively a business decision.

No, but the ones that you personally wanted have been paid for by the balance of the rest.  Ok, it is a risk but if you keep the volume low enough to be assured of selling them all and the price sweet enough to 

 

Taken from the book of 'How to get what I want and make others pay for it!"

[Oldddudders]

Can someone remind me, please - exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? 

[RichardT]

If you want to look at all the RM covers and decide which ones you think are controversial then the entire archive is now online for current RM subscribers - see the thread above.

 

Richard T

 

PS The fact that other magazines which fall between MRJ and RM in content style/complexity “haven’t lasted very long” perhaps shows that there *isn’t* much of a market for them?  OTOH I used to take the 1970s & early 1980s era “Model Railways”, which under Roy Dock & then Cyril Freezer was very much the middle-market suggested (complex how-to articles plus coverage of how to push the rtr envelope).  That died, as did “Model Railways Illustrated” under Iain Rice, which aimed at the same ground and which I also took.  Still have full sets of both and use them regularly for reference.

Edited October 15, 2021 by RichardT
Spelling & to add detail

[grahame]

2 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

It depends whether the 'maker' is doing all the work himself, or commissioning someone else to do it.  If the work has been commissioned out, with the 'maker' merely doing the design and artwork, then the work involved for the 'maker' is the same for 60 as for 1. 

 

 

Nope. There will still be more effort/work than making  just one - the financing, selecting a provider, receipt, storage, QC checks, merchandising, promoting, selling, packing, posting, etc. Even if all that was contracted out there is still tendering, drawing up contracts, dealing with customers and contractors, etc.

[Hibelroad]

I wish I could see this controversial cover, I think the postie is still reading my copy. However I did have a quick look at the digital copy and my reaction was that it looked like a Bachman’s advert. There may be past examples of this but I would much prefer a layout picture relevant to the main contents. 

[John Harris]

On 14/10/2021 at 11:33, Phil Parker said:

Maybe this is the future.

 

 

Meanwhile in Japan...

 

 

jch

[kevinlms]

On 15/10/2021 at 18:50, ikcdab said:

Is there more advertising then usual? Going just by the page numbers, advertising is around 73 pages.

Actual editorial content is 70 pages or so.

On one hand this is good, as it shows that the hobby is vibrant with lots of business support. But I wonder how up to date these adverts can be when do much is done on line.

I do like very much that the adverts and editorial are completely segregated.

Ian C

Much more advertising and editorial content than previously.

The conclusion to be drawn is that publishing costs in these days of computer generated content & printing is so much less.

Going to the early 1960s where I have a few copies, you'll find 24 pages of editorial stuff and 20 of advertising . Only the very largest manufacturers had full page ads, then only one. Not like today, where the likes of Hattons, Rails of Sheffield etc have multiple pages, or even supplements.

 

I remember reading of Ernest F. Carter assembling the first issue of Model Railway Constructor and he knocked it off the table, managing to catch it, just in time - no mean feat, because he only had one arm. Because of the lateness, if it had hit the ground and the text flew everywhere, there wouldn't have been time to redo it.

 

Edit to add.

 

The above came from Ernest F. Carter himself. He wrote it in the MRC 1976 January issue, the occasion of issue 500. His is amongst a few letters from the Mr. Bigs of the hobby of the time.

Edited October 18, 2021 by kevinlms
More info

[kevinlms]

On 14/10/2021 at 21:33, Phil Parker said:

Maybe this is the future.

 

Much better than the early days, where it would be father and son, with dad leaning across the layout and boy, with his pipe hanging out his mouth!

Same with exhibition photos.

[t-b-g]

5 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

I tend to assume that MRJ caters for modellers with your sort of taste, rather than those mags at the bright and glossy end of the spectrum.

 

It does indeed. Which is why it is the only one I purchase regularly nowadays unless one of the mainstream magazines carries something of particular interest to me, such as a layout I have an involvement with, or an article specifically related to my own rather narrow interests.

 

I get to see the other magazines because I visit the home of somebody who has subscriptions and he always offers me a read of his. I can't remember the last time one took me more than a couple of minutes to skim through and I can't recall the last time I read a whole article that wasn't in MRJ.

 

I was asked to write an article for one of the mainstream magazines a year or two ago and I was told "Don't write lots of words. Our readers are more interested in pictures rather than actually reading and they don't have enough attention span to read a long article."

 

As somebody who enjoys reading, I found that rather sad.

 

I am quite happy to accept that my interests are at one extreme of the modelling spectrum, so the fact that the main magazines don't cater much for me says more about me than it does about the magazines!