Tweet
Sorry, the original thread on this topic disappeared while I was giving my .02 cents . . . . ???
-----------------------------------
There is no doubt that circulation has declined in real numbers and as a percentage of the overall population (1/3 more Americans and 1/3 fewer paying customers).
There's no doubt that the revenue streams are more difficult now (fewer ads from automakers; tobacco ad ban, etc.).
There's also no doubt that the tortured ownership history of the SIM magazines in the post-Petersen era hasn't helped. It created huge debt. It lead to increased reliance on freelancers (often with close ties to advertising) and greatly reduced staffs. It has caused oversolicitation for subscriptions.
Undoubtedly the rise in the internet has poached sales from magazines of all types, including car magazines.
But while current magazine content may be properly criticized for being (1) too advertiser-driven and (2) sometimes lacking in technical substance, that ignores the fundamental problem in the business: not enough potential customers. The half-century war against home auto mechanics and grassroots high-performance has taken its toll. Blame the insurance companies, the OEMs, the schools, the manufacturing sector, the lawyers, the environmentalists and a host of others for the decline.
Don't believe me? Let's compare then with now:
During the "salad days" of auto magazine publishing, thousands of youngsters were trained by the U.S. military and/or the public schools in mechanical trades. Now only a small percentage receive such training.
Back then, millions of U.S. jobs were in the manufacturing sector or farming, many of which helped develop skills transferrable to hot rodding. Now, we're a nation of importers with only small factions of the population still involved in manufacturing or agriculture.
Back then, nearly every car was RWD and V8s were everywhere. Now, the number of affordable RWD V8 automobile models being build can be counted on one hand (with a few missing fingers).
Back then, most automotive systems were mechanical and intuitive. Now, most systems are far more complex and require expensive tools and training to troubleshoot and effectively modify.
Back then, just about anyone with a dream and a few hundred dollars could go into the speed equipment business. Now, it takes hundreds of thousands of dollars, a room full of EPA and/or foreign trade experts, an "intellectural property" expert, and probably a products liability lawyer on retainer.
Back then, some hard-core racers could literally run somewhere every night of the week. All this action led to a "trickle down" in interest and parts development. Now its hard to find places and sponsorship to run more than once or twice a week and the number of active racers continues to decline.
I could go on, but by now you should see the point: Readership declines are the function of long-term changes in the market, not just whether or not some DF clone is publishing outrageous JY build stories.
-----------------------------------
There is no doubt that circulation has declined in real numbers and as a percentage of the overall population (1/3 more Americans and 1/3 fewer paying customers).
There's no doubt that the revenue streams are more difficult now (fewer ads from automakers; tobacco ad ban, etc.).
There's also no doubt that the tortured ownership history of the SIM magazines in the post-Petersen era hasn't helped. It created huge debt. It lead to increased reliance on freelancers (often with close ties to advertising) and greatly reduced staffs. It has caused oversolicitation for subscriptions.
Undoubtedly the rise in the internet has poached sales from magazines of all types, including car magazines.
But while current magazine content may be properly criticized for being (1) too advertiser-driven and (2) sometimes lacking in technical substance, that ignores the fundamental problem in the business: not enough potential customers. The half-century war against home auto mechanics and grassroots high-performance has taken its toll. Blame the insurance companies, the OEMs, the schools, the manufacturing sector, the lawyers, the environmentalists and a host of others for the decline.
Don't believe me? Let's compare then with now:
During the "salad days" of auto magazine publishing, thousands of youngsters were trained by the U.S. military and/or the public schools in mechanical trades. Now only a small percentage receive such training.
Back then, millions of U.S. jobs were in the manufacturing sector or farming, many of which helped develop skills transferrable to hot rodding. Now, we're a nation of importers with only small factions of the population still involved in manufacturing or agriculture.
Back then, nearly every car was RWD and V8s were everywhere. Now, the number of affordable RWD V8 automobile models being build can be counted on one hand (with a few missing fingers).
Back then, most automotive systems were mechanical and intuitive. Now, most systems are far more complex and require expensive tools and training to troubleshoot and effectively modify.
Back then, just about anyone with a dream and a few hundred dollars could go into the speed equipment business. Now, it takes hundreds of thousands of dollars, a room full of EPA and/or foreign trade experts, an "intellectural property" expert, and probably a products liability lawyer on retainer.
Back then, some hard-core racers could literally run somewhere every night of the week. All this action led to a "trickle down" in interest and parts development. Now its hard to find places and sponsorship to run more than once or twice a week and the number of active racers continues to decline.
I could go on, but by now you should see the point: Readership declines are the function of long-term changes in the market, not just whether or not some DF clone is publishing outrageous JY build stories.
Comment