Is PBO heading inland?

Gubbo

Gubbo

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 Jun 2001
Messages
106
Location
Woodbridge
www.sailpast.co.uk
Now this may seem a bit snotty yotty, but I'm a tad concerned to see that the latest issue of PBO has 4 pieces on narrow boats or inland waterways (pages 17, 87, 146-148, 186).

For a magazine that prides itself in being "Britain's best selling yachting magazine", I can only presume that page-filling is so much cheaper if you can duplicate articles from sister magazines designed for the inland waterways market.

I guess next month they'll run a practical series in painting flowers on buckets and the best way to arrange your flower tubs on the foredeck /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
Yep, I've owned river boats as well and thoroughly enjoyed trips along the canals.... but a narrow boat on a narrow beam canal is a very different form of boating to that on the coasts and estuaries.

It is well covered by specialist magazines already.

As to the PBO title, I would submit that the practical demands upon the seaworthyness of a steel narrowboat designed to travel at 4 mph on flat water are very different to those required of a sea-going sailboat or motor-cruiser.
 
Having just had a look at PBO,it would seem that this month's issue is pretty sparse.They seem to be struggling to find enough interesting articles .Take away the adverts and you would have a very thin magazine!!
 
Having recently relieved a fellow forum member of a large quantity of PBO and YM dating back to the early 90s, I am having a thoroughly enjoyable time reading them all. Back then, both mags were full of cruising yarns, and reams of practical advice from readers and staff. Todays efforts, at £1+ more per copy are not a patch on them. However, boats are boats, narrow or otherwise and worth the odd mention.
 
I'm thinking about that. Seems to be very little of real interest for me these days. The odd kit update and such, the odd practical project. Otherwise?.. Selby, Simpson and Llewellyn are good, but after that I just seem to get advertised at.
 
I don't want to be provocative but there are two things to consider:
1st: the lack or difficulty in finding and providing original info, and
2nd: the life style change.

Let me explain:
About the first: Nowadays information about everything is very easily obtained through internet. Do you remember the era before net? In order to learn or just be informed about something, you had to buy (hard to find or expensive) books, specialized magazines, to go to the library or join a club. Now you just have the difficulty of separating the trash from the useful info that most people somehow manage to overpass.

About the second: How often you were at your boat ten years ago and how much time did you spend each time against now. Personally five years ago I used to go to the boat everyday for two hours. Now only for about an hour every two weeks. What I mean is that times change and lifestyle too. Bad or not DIY is not popular any more as the means and the time are not available as there used to be.

I write all these to point that yes I agree that the content of the magazine is not what it used to be but nevertheless is better (in practical aspects) of others. Consider also how many times have you anyhow contributed in order to help the content of the magazine become you want it to be. I haven't, because I can't spare the time or effort to do so. Things were different in the past, and the magazine has to provide equilibrium of what is desired with what is achievable. Some times this is easy, some times not and that's why other times the issue is good, interesting or whatever you may call it, and other times uninteresting, empty or even bad. Don't forget that the company that owns the magazine is a corporation looking for profit by gaining as much as possible with spending as little as possible. So some times even this little article that caught your eye is the outcome of a heroic battle of some of the editors...

Just food for thought.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to be provocative but there are two things to consider:
1st: the lack or difficulty in finding and providing original info, and
2nd: the life style change.

Let me explain:
About the first: Nowadays information about everything is very easily obtained through internet. Do you remember the era before net? In order to learn or just be informed about something, you had to buy (hard to find or expensive) books, specialized magazines, to go to the library or join a club. Now you just have the difficulty of separating the trash from the useful info that most people somehow manage to overpass.

About the second: How often you were at your boat ten years ago and how much time did you spend each time against now. Personally five years ago I used to go to the boat everyday for two hours. Now only for about an hour every two weeks. What I mean is that times change and lifestyle too. Bad or not DIY is not popular any more as the means and the time are not available as there used to be.

I write all these to point that yes I agree that the content of the magazine is not what it used to be but nevertheless is better (in practical aspects) of others. Consider also how many times have you anyhow contributed in order to help the content of the magazine become you want it to be. I haven't, because I can't spare the time or effort to do so. Things were different in the past, and the magazine has to provide equilibrium of what is desired with what is achievable. Some times this is easy, some times not and that's why other times the issue is good, interesting or whatever you may call it, and other times uninteresting, empty or even bad. Don't forget that the company that owns the magazine is a corporation looking for profit by gaining as much as possible with spending as little as possible. So some times even this little article that caught your eye is the outcome of a heroic battle of some of the editors...

Just food for thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but what a lot of S*IT. /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif
 
I'l start to get worried when Rosy and Jim get a column in PBO
(anyone unfamiliar with childrens TV will not understand)

Tim
 
I'm glad it's not just me who's dissatisfied with the content of PBO. After a few months of reading very little of interest in the magazine I've stopped buying it in favour of Sailing Today. So far I haven't regretted it.
 
I'm afraid I don't find Sailing Today to be much better.Haven't read it recently though,so will have a look.
Anyway I am glad that it's not just me who thinks that there is buggger all worth reading in PBO these days
 
Same here as regards PBO, flicked through the new one this morning and decided that's it, I'm cancelling the sub at the next opportunity.
Disagree about S.T. , which I also subscribe to - I think that pretty well every issue has enough of interest in it for me to look forward to reading it.
It is also very refreshingly non-IPC !!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top