New-look BRM!

[The Stationmaster]

Cant see that happening really, cos there would be a lot of "post deletion" going on if they did

Exactly so Mickey - it's basically a hare that is never going to run because I'm sure everybody involved is more than bright enough to realise that it could/would do this forum major damage and lead to exactly what you have said.  And Andy has repeatedly made it clear that is not going to happen - which is good enough for me.

 

As far as talking about it now - why not?  We have been let into some detail of the up coming revamp and gradually we will, it seems, be introduced to more of it and we've been given the opportunity to comment which is quite novel in some respects as far as model railway publishing is concerned because we are here before the event.  Warners have in various ways put quite a lot into the model railway hobby - starting with BRM itself which certainly broke some publishing moulds and we have been given the chance to comment about recent changes in a very open and instant sort of way.  All of that suggests to me that `Warners remain pretty committed to railway modelling publishing and a decent quality web presence and to drawing the mag out of the rut it had got into: I'm not really sure how there can be anything wrong with that?

[PLD]

First impression given by the new masthead - low-brow tabloid...

 

Impression given by this thread - another muddled PR strategy in the MR industry...

 

All the first post really gives us is a poorly explained cosmetic change. It says nothing of substance of any material change to the content. Most modellers are more likely to be attracted by the content of the magazine than fancy stylised covers - hence I think, the negative bias of feedback received so far.

 

It may well be that the refresh really is a big step-change for the better, but the way it has been presented by Warners so far in this thread comes across to me initially as 'window dressing' or 'Style over Substance', then followed by desperate scrambling to add in the missing details in response to valid criticism based on the lack of substance given. Perhaps also giving a mock-up of the full cover or a new format inside page would have given more substance and enabled  better impression of what the whole mag will look like?

 

Until we see the finished product, no-one can make a fully informed judgement on whether it is change for the better, but for me there is nothing in this thread so far that makes me look forward to the big relaunch...

[Natalie]

How the cover looks is of no interest to me as long as I can recognise/identify that it is the magazine I am after. What I am interested in is what is inside- what articles there are, their presentation, standard of presentation etc. I would urge the publishers/ Brand Editor (what a corporate sounding title- yuck!) to not change things for change sake or 'because you can'. For me making it look like a 'lad's mag' means it stands no chance of getting into my much recycled WHSmith A4-sized bag (other retail outlets are available...) and too many colours, panels,graphics etc detract from the text. I am a fan of KISS ("Keep It Simple Stupid") and am quite happy with things how they are- and the likes of MRJ. I wonder if this is a consequence of my increasing fall into middle-age or simply not being good with change.

 

But let's wait until it appears and see how it look and how the content (the most important part) is presented before we can make a full judgement. Fill the mag full of the articles I like then for all I care it can have brown paper or newspaper on it for me. :-)

[Trainshed Terry]

Don't worry, the background colour won't always be red. British Racing Green would look pretty good!

Why not use Brunswick Green.

 

Terry.

[terrysoham]

I've downloaded the BRM Live app onto my iPad.

 

The blurb was ecstatic about looking at the scrapyard through 360 degrees. It might have a "wow factor" for my 5 year old grandson but, frankly, I am underwhelmed!

 

I would need to see a lot more content than is available in the free download before I am able to judge whether I would be prepared to buy it. Based on the content in the free download, I do not feel inclined to spend £3.99 downloading the first edition. Thus, a good marketing strategy would mean that the first edition be a free download.

 

BRM staff please take note. I am afraid that otherwise this could well be a failure. This would be a shame for the sake of a little loss of income.

[BromsMods]

My opinion was that the existing masthead looks dated (20 years old in fact) and was in need of a lift. All Most of the other mags have made changes to their masthead in that period.

 

Can't agree more, Andy, and if that's the case all that is needed is a change of font to bring the title up to date with a more modern version - one that is commonly used on websites would seem sensible (but definitely NOT italics!!).  The magazine content and layout has already changed/improved in recent months so I'm not sure why a downmarket move to a somewhat tacky looking "BRM" is necessary.

[pwr]

I can't help harking back to the earliest issues of British Railway Modelling and feeling that we have been dumbed down over the years. The articles seemed to be in far greater depth and more of the how to make it or how to build it. There was also much more content than there is now an it took longer to read.

 

The trend to push the digital version is concerning to those who don't want it. As a subscriber to the paper edition I feel I am paying more and getting less. Yes I accept that paper costs more and the digital version is undoubtedly a PDF copy of the original DTP files with added content which costs less to produce but I feel that as a paper subscriber, I should be able to get the digital copy for free. How about it BRM. 

 

The further complication with a digital edition is that you can't use the scale drawings unless you print them - if you are using a tablet this may well be nigh on impossible for some people. I suspect it won't be too long before there is either a totally digital model railway magazine out there (there may be one already) or one of the mainstream titles stops producing paper copies. 

 

As to the masthead - I prefer the old one I am afraid.

 

 

Paul R

[john flann]

I'm not a regular BRM reader (the cost of UK mags in the USA is prohibitive) but have been a contributor with an article on my Hintock so I feel entitled to comment.

 

The original post said nothing, it was an exercise in verbosity. Nothing but. Just get on with whatever is intended-and clearly already decided.

 

Then like Rob in post #42 , I run decorated r-t-r on toy track. That's OK if it's done well and a lot of others do similarly. In my case, as of now, my Hintock thread has had in less than 12 months 20,724 views, which seems to indicate r-t-r and toy track is favourably received.

 

There is a big market in r-t-r and toy track and obviously magazine editors and publishers pay heed to it.

 

If others wish to do something else well that's alright by me, but let's respect each others choices.

[Xerces Fobe2]

Thinking a little outside the box most magazines (not just railway ones) revamp themselves periodically and the competition in whatever field  of the magazine tend to follow each other then clone mags appear on the shelves/on line  when this is achieved  the cycle starts all over again

 

The hard copy magazine will continue to be less prominent and the on-line will ascend ( hypocrisy alert her I still purchase a printed copy) however if I could purchase an on-line copy on a monthly basis as and when I am interested in the content this would give me a similar user experience when deciding to purchase a the hard copy magazine which I  would be happy to pay a premium for. Other opportunities exist for on-liine subscribers of the future; how about a 3D drawing that you can print our a model at home on you soon to be 3D home printer?

 

Changing the colour magazine cover or the new "trendy" name just turns me cold. Come on guys put your colour pallets away and be bold, exciting and different!

 

Nigel

[Neilgue]

I hope the stuff-up with the pagination of the September on-line edition is not a sign of things to come. The problem has been caused by the inclusion of a whole page insert trumpeting the upcoming change to the abbreviated masthead. To make it worse, there are obtrusive panels all through the magazine, just in case we missed the full page spread.

 

I think that this encapsulates what a lot of commentators fear: that content will lose out to presentation. It certainly has here. That the designer could pepper the mag with drivel and not notice that the pagination is all wrong is a real concern.

 

I agree with what a lot of people have said: The change of name is pointless - the content is what matters.

[robert17649]

The past few years have,in my view generally demonstrated the triumph of presentation over content. Look for example at the awful coverage of the Jubilee celebrations, and the dire chats at the Olympics, every athlete or whatever being cornered by a microphone weilding idiot after the event. So this is not confined to magazines, more a feature of the dimming down of society and the media as a whole.

It is noticeable that there is a sameness about the currently available  model railway magazines, with the possible exeption of MRJ, so much so that I for one now only buy one or two every so often.

So I suppose that the revamping of this title could simply be just that,and we can look forward to a monthly dose of same old same old, with a nice new cover, or is this genuinely a new look with a different approach. Somehow I,m not too sure, being cautious about anything heralded with a blast of noise and verbosity ( I know) but ultimately delivering rather little.

[pwr]

The other thing I find frustrating is that the digital edition is published before the paper copy hits the doormat. Why can't they both come out on the same day. Neilgue above refers to a pagination issue with the September copy. I can't see what he means until I get mine on Thursday!

 

I am not wishing to appear to be a Luddite and woud not stand in the way of progress but I can't help feeling paper subscribers are seen as less important although I appreciate that probably is not the intention

 

Paul R

[pwr]

The past few years have,in my view generally demonstrated the triumph of presentation over content. Look for example at the awful coverage of the Jubilee celebrations, and the dire chats at the Olympics, every athlete or whatever being cornered by a microphone weilding idiot after the event. So this is not confined to magazines, more a feature of the dimming down of society and the media as a whole.

It is noticeable that there is a sameness about the currently available  model railway magazines, with the possible exeption of MRJ, so much so that I for one now only buy one or two every so often.

So I suppose that the revamping of this title could simply be just that,and we can look forward to a monthly dose of same old same old, with a nice new cover, or is this genuinely a new look with a different approach. Somehow I,m not too sure, being cautious about anything heralded with a blast of noise and verbosity ( I know) but ultimately delivering rather little.

 

I agree with this. All of the mainstream titles have over recent times changed the emphasis to providing more topics to beginners or those with fewer skills. That's to be encouraged but the more serious articles are being seen less and less. We need more balance not a circulation war.

 

The one thing that has improved however out of all recognition is the standard of model photography which I am very pleased to acknowledge is seen in all titles

 

Paul R

[Xerces Fobe2]

The other thing I find frustrating is that the digital edition is published before the paper copy hits the doormat. Why can't they both come out on the same day. Neilgue above refers to a pagination issue with the September copy. I can't see what he means until I get mine on Thursday!

I am not wishing to appear to be a Luddite and woud not stand in the way of progress but I can't help feeling paper subscribers are seen as less important although I appreciate that probably is not the intention

Paul R

The Digital edition is delivered almost immediately and the paper copy has to come via snail mail or via van to you local shop.

 

Whilst there are occasionally issues with on-line publications it is worth remembering that quite often the person which is complaining either has a very old operating system, does not bother to apply updates to their PC or even worse believes that all updates cause problems to their PC and refuse to install them!

 

XF

[trisonic]

Anyone getting the "Back Track" digital version? Not so OT I see Warners are doing the distribution.

Chronic costs in the USA and late delivery will force me to go the electronic route straight to my IMac (which I suppose is possible)...

 

Best, Pete.

[tomstaf]

 

 

British Railway Modelling will be changing!

 

A new logo (above!), fresh new design and updated editorial strategy...

 

The BRM Team

 

Hi Steve,

 

The updated strategy is good news for me. Currently I occasionally buy BRM if it has a feature I'm interested in, otherwise it stays on the shelf. Why? Because as a younger reader it looks dated, confused, and aimed at an older generation. Using a times new roman type font for the title, numerous other fonts in different colours on the cover creates a head explosion. It leaves me searching rather than enticing me straight away. I appreciate a larger proportion of readers are older but you've always got to attract and keep the younger audience too. I would also think that everyone wants clarity. So will the "fresh" look and strategy sharpen BRM's cohesion and clarity?

 

Cheers

 

Tom

[pwr]

The Digital edition is delivered almost immediately and the paper copy has to come via snail mail or via van to you local shop.

Whilst there are occasionally issues with on-line publications it is worth remembering that quite often the person which is complaining either has a very old operating system, does not bother to apply updates to their PC or even worse believes that all updates cause problems to their PC and refuse to install them!

XF

But there is no reason why the digital issue could not be delayed until the printed publication date!

 

Paul R

[Jim Martin]

Honestly, I don't much care for the new masthead. Having said that, I didn't much care for every version of the MRJ (a magazine which rebranded itself several times in the period when I bought it regularly) cover. Another favourite magazine of mine, the late, lamented Constructor, went through several rebrandings, too. Nobody asked me about any of those changes; and I dare say nobody asked any other readers either: that was the way of things back then. I suspect that the new masthead, seen in the context of a whole cover design, with a big cover photo, several smaller photos and a range of headlines, is going to look a lot less stark than a humungous red oblong plonked at the top of a message board thread like this one. Ultimately, it'll be all about content, just like it usually is.

 

Jim

[Kenton]

Reading this thread rather late - (been away) - I thought I would throw in my 2d worth.

 

Firstly the only folk who like change are those at the top of corporations who think it a way of improving things. The steadfast customers like the comfortable same reliable service/product. People in general don't like big changes they like slow well paced development.

 

Absolutely right Andy and it's certainly not just the logo that's developing; again based on reader input and a lot of work from the management and design of the mag.

developing is the wrong word there degenerating would be more appropriate. Others have expressed the many reasons why and I'm in full agreement. The logo rebranding should be the last thing that "a lot of work from management" should have been wasted on. Nothing better to do with their time?

 

I'm not a regular reader (probably only buy 2-3 issues a year. Probably a perfect example of someone who could be persuaded to buy more. I couldn't participate in the survey, but I certainly would not have put the logo/name change anywhere up there as a requirement. In fact I see it as a waste of effort and will have no impact. It is that waste of effort time and money that is the problem, especially when there is MI languishing for want of that effort and a far more worthy contender.

 

Sure the magazine could be improved and maybe some of those improvements will be to my liking - I will give them a chance. Perhaps it would have been better to announce some of them rather than the silly logo change. We are interested in content after-all. Perhaps focusing this topic on the wasteful rebranding says it all - got it wrong again!

[Roy P]

"A new logo, fresh new design and updated editorial strategy".

​Editorial Strategy? I will be more interested in how this manifests itself than any new logo.

With most of the current mags, it's often the editorial that raises the blood pressure. Which of the printed monthlies recent stated (paraphrased) Everyone has the same amount of hours in a day and if you can't spend every minute of your free time on it you may have chosen the wrong hobby. 

An editorial strategy that differs from that one would be appreciated.

RP

[Dunsignalling]

I regret to say that the whole thing has frequently lacked class in my opinion for most of the last two and and half years. It needs a traditional name and cover, not big bold letters like the aforementioned Currant Bun, plus content that concentrates on the best and most ambitious techniques, individual models, layouts etc. There are plenty of lightweight magazines competing to sell copy by repeatedly covering basic methods that appeal to those who only buy, decorate and weather RTR trains and run them on toy track from Beer. The hobby needs a magazine for the more serious finescale modeller, prepared by an up to date organisation and published on regular dates.

I also have come to the conclusion that the market for 'mainstream' railway modelling magazines has become a little crowded.

 

There is evidently insufficient good material available to avoid repetition, resulting in a level of 'sameness' that sometimes even extends to a layout appearing in more than one magazine only a month or two apart.

 

I used to subscribe to BRM and consistently buy Railway Modeller and Hornby but have realised that I have not purchased every issue of any mainstream mag for the last two years.

 

Where I formerly picked up my favoured magazines without a thought, I now always browse before buying to identify items of interest - publishers please note that anything in a plastic bag without a comprehensive contents listing visible is automatically ignored.

 

Maybe the solution is to stick with one title and ignore the rest on the basis that everything will (eventually) come to he who waits.

 

This situation is bound to inspire attempts by publishers to grab the potential reader's attention through novel presentation, but are they addressing the right problem?

 

John

[Colin_McLeod]

I don't like the new logo it reminds me of lad mags or red top news paper both which I avoid, .......

David

 

The BRM Lads Mag approach:

 

 

 

 

OK I know its not a British locomotive!!

[Xerces Fobe2]

A plastic bag sealing a magazine is a lost sale to me too and a potential warning sign of a poor content in that issue. If you have to bag the mag why not have an unbagged showroom copy in the store. Would you purchase a new car if it was hermetically sealed in the Showroom? Anyway are we not supposed be be cutting down on the use of plastic bags? Off to hug a model tree now!

 

XF

[marc smith]

A plastic bag sealing a magazine is a lost sale to me too and a potential warning sign of a poor content in that issue. If you have to bag the mag why not have an unbagged showroom copy in the store. Would you purchase a new car if it was hermetically sealed in the Showroom? Anyway are we not supposed be be cutting down on the use of plastic bags? Off to hug a model tree now!

 

XF

It's an odd thing I know,

But I do tend to avoid mags that I can't flick through...

 

Although it isn't in itself a marker for poor content,

I have been bitten, by buying several mags where I can't see the content

or the content is not reflected by the few shots on the cover

 

Although publishers may not like the public treating the magazines as if they were in a library,

I do tend to buy magazines that I've flicked through first,

where I can be assured of the content and its' relevance..

 

In fact, I haven't bought a railway or modelling mag in a sealed bag for a few years...

... unless some other "helpful" customer had opened the bag for a browse....

Perhaps indicating others feel the same way?

 

So publishers, please don't place your mags in sealed packets....

 

Marc

[Andy Y]

publishers please note that anything in a plastic bag without a comprehensive contents listing visible is automatically ignored.

 

 

Not picking on Dun here (just that it was the first mention) I'd like to respond by saying that the number of occasions that BRM has been bagged in the last year is minimal (so can we leave that well-trodden point of disagreement alone), normally only if there's a supplement that falls out on Smith's carpet.

 

Anyway; it's dispiriting to see the elements of negativity being aired by people assuming that a change of logo will mean nothing more than that (there's a lot of half-empty glasses in this hobby), perhaps they should pause and think that a change in logo is there to signify there are more substantial changes than just that afoot. I could turn the argument around and ask if people don't want better articles, better illustration, fresh design, more complementary (as in 'themed') content, more projects and better integration across our media of carefully chosen material? By reading some comments on here I could easily jump to alternative premature conclusions.