Let's see.. they probably get wined and dined by the boat or charter company, play on a new (unaffordable for most) boat for a day or week in a great sailing area, then write glowing articles and any negative items seem to be always very minor: "could use an extra handhold in the bilge". Then get advertising to ensure the process keeps going. What's not to like and where can we sign up?
Laugh
- Thread starter Rick D
- Start date
I liked my May issue of Sail. Nice article on last page with reflections on long sail passages.. well written.. A fine article on cruising Cuba by Jim Osborn.. Some buddies and I are contemplating sailing there from Lake Pontchartrain.. Article talks about the ambiance and what to expect..
A couple of months ago, however, they published an article with some really misleading observations, which were disguised as facts, concerning electric propulsion. I wrote to them pointing out the physics and engineering errors in the article, but saw no clarification in next issues nor did I receive any communication from them.. That particular article looked like a paid advertisement that was not noted as such.. I have been reading Sail pretty much continuously since 1974.. the past 12 issues have been the worst that I have seen to date. I probably will continue to read it because it does not hurt my nose like the I pad does when I go to sleep !
A couple of months ago, however, they published an article with some really misleading observations, which were disguised as facts, concerning electric propulsion. I wrote to them pointing out the physics and engineering errors in the article, but saw no clarification in next issues nor did I receive any communication from them.. That particular article looked like a paid advertisement that was not noted as such.. I have been reading Sail pretty much continuously since 1974.. the past 12 issues have been the worst that I have seen to date. I probably will continue to read it because it does not hurt my nose like the I pad does when I go to sleep !
I can get Sail for $10 per year. I gave it up when I realized it's overpriced. I did enjoy the articles on the last page but they weren't worth $10 per year. Sail always reminded me of Popular Photography Magazine. Way too much hype about "must-have" gear. Sail was good for the first 2 years or so. It was my first magazine about sailing. I sometimes think about spending the $10 again but then think about other things I'd rather spend the money on.
Good old boat, practical sailor with the online privileges, and cruising outpost. Those are the three you "need". I love good old boat. Good old boat being the how to magazine. Practical sailor being the consumer reports tight magazine. And cruising outpost being the "feel good about what you are doing" magazine with chicks' photos.
In defense of SAIL magazine I have noticed an upgrade of their photos and the graphic designers use of them. Some really nice material. So if the copy disappoints do as you do with PLAYBOY-look at the pix and dream!
Of course, when I look at that Oyster 75 I am happy only having to paint the bottom of the 26X.
Of course, when I look at that Oyster 75 I am happy only having to paint the bottom of the 26X.
70+% of SN members have a boat older than 30 years, not surprising they are not going to have anything good to say about new boats that get advertised. OTOH the goal of boat builders is to built boats people want, so it isn't surprising that reviews are generally good. If the reviews were bad it would reflect pretty poorly on boat builders meeting their basic goal in order to sell boats not wouldn't it?
Hmm, there just might be a logical disconnect here.
It's all about economics. Print magazines are having a tough time surviving these days. Printing costs are up and delivery costs (USPS) have skyrocketed. The difficult economics of the business have led to a lot of consolidation. There are far fewer publishers today than 20 years ago.
Subscription prices are only used to offset delivery costs. Your $11 subscription doesn't even come close to covering the cost of producing and delivering the magazine. Making money in publishing is all about selling advertising.
When you sell advertising, the advertisers are interested in two things: your target demographic and how many eyeballs you reach. This is why magazines give away subscriptions at boat shows (a loss leader to get more eyeballs). It's also why you see questions on reader surveys like "how many people in your household read your magazine?" (can we inflate the number of eyeballs?)
Now in this business model will you every see an article saying "boat X is junk?". It doesn't matter if it's Shutterbug, Motor Trend or Sail. It's just not going to happen. If editors review a product that's sooo bad they just can't overlook the stink they'll tank the article and ask the manufacturer for something else to review. When profit margins are this tight you simply don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Latts & Atts was one of the worst offenders. They would wax poetic about anything to get paid. Go back and look at some old issues and see if you can find a bad word about ANY product. If you want honest reviews pick up Practical Sailor or Consumer Reports. They don't take advertising.
And there's really no connection between million dollar boats and battery switch articles in the same issue. Showcasing a 57 Beneteau makes buyers look more favorably at the their 30 footers (that probably outsell the big boats 10:1). Simple "how-to" articles get recycled every few years -- sometimes word for word.
Again it's economics, showcase the big boats and they buy advertising in your magazine. Recycle old articles and you're not paying someone to write it. Both go to the bottom line.
It's all about economics. Print magazines are having a tough time surviving these days. Printing costs are up and delivery costs (USPS) have skyrocketed. The difficult economics of the business have led to a lot of consolidation. There are far fewer publishers today than 20 years ago.
Subscription prices are only used to offset delivery costs. Your $11 subscription doesn't even come close to covering the cost of producing and delivering the magazine. Making money in publishing is all about selling advertising.
When you sell advertising, the advertisers are interested in two things: your target demographic and how many eyeballs you reach. This is why magazines give away subscriptions at boat shows (a loss leader to get more eyeballs). It's also why you see questions on reader surveys like "how many people in your household read your magazine?" (can we inflate the number of eyeballs?)
Now in this business model will you every see an article saying "boat X is junk?". It doesn't matter if it's Shutterbug, Motor Trend or Sail. It's just not going to happen. If editors review a product that's sooo bad they just can't overlook the stink they'll tank the article and ask the manufacturer for something else to review. When profit margins are this tight you simply don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Latts & Atts was one of the worst offenders. They would wax poetic about anything to get paid. Go back and look at some old issues and see if you can find a bad word about ANY product. If you want honest reviews pick up Practical Sailor or Consumer Reports. They don't take advertising.
And there's really no connection between million dollar boats and battery switch articles in the same issue. Showcasing a 57 Beneteau makes buyers look more favorably at the their 30 footers (that probably outsell the big boats 10:1). Simple "how-to" articles get recycled every few years -- sometimes word for word.
Again it's economics, showcase the big boats and they buy advertising in your magazine. Recycle old articles and you're not paying someone to write it. Both go to the bottom line.
Oh come on Stu.. TRY harder!!! ;^)One of the unthinking moderators on this board removed a post I made last week about just this issue.
People buying 38+ foot boats and not knowing how to use a VHF and other basic things. Too bad, 'cuz I'd posted it without typing into a word processor first. Wish that moderator had a thicker skin. I opined that many of us grew, literally, in boat sizes and didn't have the Titanic as our first boats and didn't ask stupid "How Do I Use My Battery Switch" questions.
Ach, too bad it got lost to posterity. :neutral:
Beats gettin' banned, though.:dance::dance::dance:
Yes, in Marketing-speak we would say the the Boat Builders are trying to use technology to increase their TAM (Total Addressable Market) by lowering the BTE (Barrier To Entry) to the ANB (Aspirational New Buyer) segment.
The not-so funny part of this is that it is serious business.
This WHOLE industry/sport revolves around new boat sales. So anyone that is not honestly in the market (ever!) for a new boat just needs to sit down while the industry tries to sell new boats. The average new boat buyer is over 55 years old, and is going to spend $150K+ on a new sailboat. Or maybe a new powerboat. Or maybe that condo in FL. Thats deadly competition for dollars.
With the exception of great mags like TOB and PBO, the magazines have always existed to support this.
Is that magazine...
still being published?
I no longer even see it in my doctors' offices since I cancelled my subscription years ago.
:dance:
still being published?
I no longer even see it in my doctors' offices since I cancelled my subscription years ago.
:dance: