Read PBO? We would like your opinion.

[EuanMcKenzie]

I'm going to roll with the thread drift...as I can't be at Southampton.

I filled in the survey last night and found I came over as a negative person in respect of the magazine. Most of us practical boat owners want to do projects on our older boats and keep them running. we don't generally buy new boats, obviously some do.

Advertisers want to sell new boats and new gear and I guess partially fund the magazine.

Also you need to attract new folk to hit targets and expand your readership so at times, have to keep some things at a simple level for newbys and those articles wash over the old hands. Thus your already serving a diverse readership.

we're often avid internet searchers these days always looking for the latest new or second hand bargains.

It would be interesting to undertstand what percentage of readers actually attend boat shows these days and therefor how representative your focus group actually is and whether they will actually help you with this one.

Personally I want to read articles on second hand boats of all ages, how to fix them, big and small projects, peoples cruises, writers columns, rebuilding an ebay bargain!,where to get a bargain outwith the marine trade etc. non of which raises revenue from advertisers who want to sell services or new products.

You need to confront the dilemma that used to diferentiate PBO from YM as non of the practical stuff I suspect is as revenue raising as say a new boat revue.

Not sure this focus group will confront that issue but you might find that's what they want to read too. (I speculate) Not sure therfore what its doing for you.

Won't be at Southhampton, may see you at Kip

 

[MASH]

If they paid a reasonable rate for contributions instead of utterly derisory ones, and did not demand owning total and irrevocable global copyright on contributions instead of the normal (and morally acceptable) first publication - one time rights" I'd buy it.

As it is clearly run on a "screw the contributors" basis I'll do without, thanks. And not waste my time contributing again. I hope all others thinking of contributing will do the same.

Bunch of unprincipled thieves.

 

[Richard Shead]

If they paid a reasonable rate for contributions instead of utterly derisory ones, and did not demand owning total and irrevocable global copyright on contributions instead of the normal (and morally acceptable) first publication - one time rights" I'd buy it.

As it is clearly run on a "screw the contributors" basis I'll do without, thanks. And not waste my time contributing again. I hope all others thinking of contributing will do the same.

Bunch of unprincipled thieves.

that's your point of view and thank you.

 

[rbcoomer]

As far as I'm aware, copyright on contributions is pretty commonplace - otherwise what's to stop someone selling their article to multiple publications and thus being paid x number of times? I used to write technical articles for trade publications around 15 years ago and it was certainly the case then. Otherwise it dilutes the value of the content and thereby the magazine. If you don't agree to the terms, then why contribute? Most publications are reasonable when it comes to reproduction of articles if they are for your own marketing purposes and provided you reference where published - this benefits both parties.

I'd agree with Euan's take - and suggestions too for that matter.

 

[paulingreece]

I'm going to roll with the thread drift...as I can't be at Southampton.

I filled in the survey last night and found I came over as a negative person in respect of the magazine. Most of us practical boat owners want to do projects on our older boats and keep them running. we don't generally buy new boats, obviously some do.

Advertisers want to sell new boats and new gear and I guess partially fund the magazine.

Also you need to attract new folk to hit targets and expand your readership so at times, have to keep some things at a simple level for newbys and those articles wash over the old hands. Thus your already serving a diverse readership.

we're often avid internet searchers these days always looking for the latest new or second hand bargains.

It would be interesting to undertstand what percentage of readers actually attend boat shows these days and therefor how representative your focus group actually is and whether they will actually help you with this one.

Personally I want to read articles on second hand boats of all ages, how to fix them, big and small projects, peoples cruises, writers columns, rebuilding an ebay bargain!,where to get a bargain outwith the marine trade etc. non of which raises revenue from advertisers who want to sell services or new products.

You need to confront the dilemma that used to diferentiate PBO from YM as non of the practical stuff I suspect is as revenue raising as say a new boat revue.

Not sure this focus group will confront that issue but you might find that's what they want to read too. (I speculate) Not sure therfore what its doing for you.

Won't be at Southhampton, may see you at Kip

+1, very well put, i used to read pbo all the time, even paying 8€ for it, but theres not that much practical about it now, shame really.

 

[Me_has_a_Boat]

I am an occassional PBO reader - I don't hate it, just don't find it that interesting. and I have learnt a damned sight more from the Internet than I ever could have from any number of magazines. The internet is my no.1 go to resource. My back copies of any Boat magazines went years ago.

But PBO is better in recent years than it was (back in the 90's?).

BTW my readership dates back to day 1 (1968?), albeit I only started reading those copies a few years later! Therefore I do (did?) have a great deal of affection of PBO.....but I guess life moves on - for all of us..........


.....of course PBO in print could follow the example of PBO online and make the content 90% rants and rightwing ravings. Wouldn't even need an editor or writers - just a straight cut and paste from the Lounge. Maybe even rebrand the mag as "PBO - the BNP Afloat".........and include a free copy of the Daily Heil ..........IPC make the lounge compulsory online, why not also in print - if they think that is where the market is .

 

[late-night-lochin]

Practical Boat Owner????

This issue has been discussed before.

Let's look at the title:

Practical: This (at least in my opinion) means people who alrady have reasonable aptitude and would like to develop skills even further.

Boat: Something that floats and reasonably supports the weight of one or more people without getting unduely wet. As for propulsion, man power with oars, motor or wind, they're all boats.

Owner: In a moment of madness, I was stupid enough to buy this thing, now I have to keep it maintained and seaworthy.

If I were a rich man, somebody else would be maintaining imy boat and I would probably red magazines like "Motorboat and Yachting"

I would not have renewed my annual subscription for PBO had my mother not done it for me as part of my birthdy present.

In my mnd, PBO has totally lost the plot and just become a "YM lite".

I only occasionally buy MBM because it seems aimed mainly at new or relatively new boats.

Probably 90% of maintenance and restoration jobs are common irrespective of methods of propulsion but motor boats just don't figure in PBO.

PBO used to carry a subtitle something like "Britain's best selling yachting magazine sail and power". Now it is just "Britain's best selling Yachting Magazine" so the owners had a change of heart.

Us "practical" boaters have got old boats because we can't afford nice shiny new boats so why do we want to read about them? IPC are probably missing a trick because of PBO just carried a page or so with an overview of new boats that the IPC team had reviewed, they could cross reference to which magazine contained the full review (YM or MBM) and people may then go out and buy a second magazine.

PBO should also concentrate on articles about general navigation and seamanship so that the readers can hone their skills. Articles about Med cruising would be better included in YM.

As I previously said, PBO has lost the plot and presently, I have no confidence in the plot being re-established.

 

[Me_has_a_Boat]

In my mnd, PBO has totally lost the plot and just become a "YM lite".

Yeah, I think they are basically going for the same market - just folks with a bit less money (or less willingness to sign a HP form?).

But to be fair, it is a conundrum for IPC. If I ruled the world (or just PBO ) I would be tempted to try out a radical approach - both to try and move PBO forward (and make some more money ) and also as a guinea pig for other print titles.

I would go for PBO being printed on paper.........quarterly - and maybe also an annual edition......both with far less adverts.

But online would continue monthly, PBO lite for free - PBO full (including the archives - why would you hide copy that could be selling 24/7 online, long after it has been bought and paid for ) plus the print copy by subscription......and bring in the readers for some of the copy, even at the price of less polished writing - it's the content that sells.......and to be totally radical I would embed the whole of PBO online into a shop (don't have to stuff the envelopes yerself - don't even have to tie up with only one company....but capturing a few percent on actual sales does add up) - the trick would be good editorial control so don't end up writing blatant Advertorial copy - but nonetheless an online article on how to rebed Stanchions or whatever, that include links to suppliers of bits and pieces needed (including the dull stuff) would be welcomed (gives a head start on a Google, even if the reader does not buy via PBO, but if I trust you, you can supply it and you make buying easy then likely I will) - and they don't all have to be own brand suppliers (indeed IMO better if not), just some of them The idea is that rather than using the Advert space to sell other people's products you are primarily using the space to sell yourself (if that advert space actually is worth money then why sell it to others to make more money?).

IMO the internet probably ain't going anywhere for a while - paper does have it's place, but it is not everything.

Anyway, if I ruled the world my first step would be to invade Poland. As Grandad did .

 

[MASH]

Mr Head, an incisive observation if I may say so.

That does not change the fact that the rates paid for contributions are well below what I and other journalists call reasonable were they for first publication one time rights. But they're not, they're for total irrevocable global permanent copyright which would usually be somewhere double to three times the first pub rates.

Thus they pay something like 30% of the expected rate and I call that unreasonable. And to save you the effort of pointing it out, that is my opinion. As well as that of the NUJ who publish detailed guidance on rates and is probably the authority on this sort of thing.

And no I won't be contributing, it isn't worth the effort unless you're into vanity publishing which is really what this is all about.

 

[Me_has_a_Boat]

Mr Head, an incisive observation if I may say so.

Lol

But nonetheless, given you put the effort into a response you get to hear my ramblings in return

and as this is not the Lounge I won't use rude words .

That does not change the fact that the rates paid for contributions are well below what I and other journalists call reasonable were they for first publication one time rights. But they're not, they're for total irrevocable global permanent copyright which would usually be somewhere double to three times the first pub rates.

Thus they pay something like 30% of the expected rate and I call that unreasonable. And to save you the effort of pointing it out, that is my opinion. As well as that of the NUJ who publish detailed guidance on rates and is probably the authority on this sort of thing.

You have a very valid point of view with which I do not disagree. But your point of view is totally irrelevent.

The old paper based business model simply won't work in the future commercially - therefore if "you" are paid what you consider to be fair (I won't get into the concept of "fair") the business won't be around long term. If you are not paid what you consider fair you won't be around long term (for them) either. A conundrum for sure .

In practice I suspect a lot (more) print titles will simply wither and die as unable or unwilling to adapt. and Journalists will either adapt, accept the new norms or move onto other things - just like folks in all manner of trades have had to do from the march of progress / the market / technology over the past several centuries, and will have to do in centuries to come.

Ironically I am a great supporter of Trade Unions (the folks who brought everyone dull stuff like the Weekend. and not being worked to death at an early age), although not blind to their faults (including the NUJ). I say ironically because by nature I am firmly on the freemarketeer end of capitalism - to be blunt, I would put your Granny on E-bay if I thought I could a) make some money and b) could get away with it. Including if you had nailed her down .

But, the print business is like any other business - change always brings opportunity. The question is how to identify that change and then exploit it.

If lower cost suppliers are in "your" market then you either try and outcompete them or find a way to use them for your own gain, and to do that likely have to move up the food chain.

With the publishing world I suspect that the value (for individuals) will come not from creating the content (at least not on the scale once required) but at the Editorial level by ensuring the quality of content. Not by tidying up copy written by the semi-literate (like moi ) but principally by ensuring that the content is good (a decent story, honestly told).

The good news with publishing is that (as far as I can tell) that the entry level barriers have never been lower - a good product always sells, all the challenge really is is (is is looks odd ) to replace the money historically generated from the cover price and by flogging adverts. To my mind (in the future) would make more sense for a company like Mailspeed to print PBO than IPC , even if they outsourced 99% of it to IPC - the key being maintaining editorial integrity around the mag being a platform to sell existing products from.....although IMO the ideal platform would be PBO owned by IPC (or the Editor?!) and having Mailspeed, plus a number of other retailers embedded into the online mag - plus some for whom PBO were clearly not making money from but who were simply included as being the best. Well, at least as one option . If someone is selling me a plastic widget I know that others are making money from doing so. I truly don't care who that is (Mailspeed, PBO or a Chinaman - or all 3), as long as the product is competitively priced and does the job. Folks buy from people they trust - the trick (with the model I suggested) is not to abuse that trust for short term gain by overstepping the mark on self interested advertorials.

Will it mean that PBO will return to it's heyday of having company BMW's and long lunches for a staff of 100's?(I joke) - no. But it might make more money than it ever did, at least for some.

or it could got t#ts up in a fortnight .

 

[rbcoomer]

I have to agree (mostly) with David's post above, but not the benefit of Unions - IMHO they had their day in the 1st half of the 20th century and thereafter did more harm than good. In reply to MASH, I'd also add that just because a Union says something is worth X doesn't mean it is - it's worth whatever the market will pay.

I've been self-employed much of my working life so arguably have a much better handle of reality than any union - a product or service sells on it's quality and price so to sell more you have to be either cheaper or better than the competition - ideally both! I'm currently working in hospitality and yet the same is true - if a hotel can't sell accommodation at X then it can either reduce rates and break even (perhaps even make a loss), or it can remain empty and make a bigger loss. Like it or not that is the economic reality at the moment - you adapt or go under. MASH, you are perhaps lucky to be in a position that work can be so easily dismissed? I somehow doubt that IPC are short of contributions and if you don't contribute, how do you prove your worth or that of your service? Whilst I do understand the frustration of not achieving what you feel is sufficient reward, by not contributing, I wonder who loses the most?

With regards to the magazine content, I currently subscribe to 3 'marine' titles - one is MBM and the other two I won't name out of respect to the forum hosts, but suffice to say that the other two each have more relevant content for me and their combined cost is £10 less than MBM alone! One is a US title and the other UK - both just over £1 per issue. If the content of PBO was more along the practical lines suggested in various posts above, I would subscribe however - even at the higher cost. Cover price IMHO is about twice the 'worth' (to me) of the current content - however enjoyable.

 

[PCUK]

I don't want to drift the thread with a political argument but must say that as you have been self employed you have no idea of the importance of unions to the workers who have nothing else to protect them.

 

[MJ24]

Old news

Counts me out, then, a former subscriber who hardly ever reads it now.

As a keen sailor, subscribed for years.

alas It all got too boring, and have given up the written word years ago.

The Forum is only occaisionally intersting, but most of it has been well covered.

Of course, I (only) am fed up up with rediscovering the wheel, and respect that others are either doing the same or have a new angle on old...........probelms.

Good luck...

 

[oldbilbo]

It's remarkable how the sense in many of the above posts keeps recurring through the years. I've been buying PBO, with 'intermissions', through the years since it started. I've made the occasional paid contribution. I've also been treated to coffee ( two sugars ) and the occasional biscuit at PBO Towers down in Poole....

Every so often I get fed up with the bland repetitions and celebrations of 'stupid failures of seamanship', and wander off elsewhere for a while, then a really good edition with some interesting stuff brings me back... for a while. Not at all sycophantic, I happen to respect the team members for what they do well. Just for example, I used one of Dick Everitt's bright sketch-ideas on lowering a mast just last year. That saved me £150 at Dover. I know I've used others over the years.

I reckon PBO is a concept for thinking yotties, who are willing to share and exchange their ideas and experiments with the rest of us. There's a whole lot of trad seamanship withering away - 'RYA dumbing down', the push-button generaton - and the PBO community is very well placed to help retain it and build on it.

What is quite clear is that the ability to write well in a way that communicates easily with many others is a rare skill. Not everyone who knows how to do something is well capable of communicating that. Equally, not everyone who can communicate well in writing is capable of understanding the important nuances of how to do it. That is IMHO an important concern and responsibility of being the editor.

There is a huge spectrum of knowhow among PBO readers, including those on here. The issue they ( we? ) face is how to monetise that, sufficient to secure the future viability of the title. I'm well aware that marketing, management and others in the mix have tried in the past to ask 'what do we need to do?' Unfortunately, the consensus-comments from the client-base have not often enough been listened to.

Let me use a relevant example. Just a few years ago, YM Magazine invited a number of readers to 'focus group' sessions at SIBS where much the same questions were asked... 'What do we need to change to have you guys put your hands in your pocket every month?' These sessions were video-recorded, and a good number of sound ideas emerged. Unfortunately, they weren't necessarily the ideas that management had previously shortlisted.

Anyone who has studied anything, from the mid 20th Century on, about Management will recognise the syndrome... 'We need to make changes to our business model, or we're history. Here's the CEO's shortlist. Go out and get confirmation that his pet ideas resonate with our customers." ( subtext - 'don't come back with anything radical' )

The huge PBO archive on 'how to do it' is commercially valuable. Given a bit of work on 'Search' and a fairly reasonable subscription, I'd buy into that. That resource would save me many pounds each year - I can list savings made of ££-several hunded, with only a minute's recollection. How about a £60 annual fee, which includes an online copy of the current mag and good personal access to the archives.... including a built-in feature of 'Ask the Experts'....? The PBO Forum archive is worth thousands, and should be the basis of a resurgent business model. After all, it's the knowhow we, the paying public, want.

Is it not time for the young turks at PBO Towers to take their case to the High Panjandrums up in Blue Fin Building?

Or will a competitor do it instead...?

 

[Me_has_a_Boat]

The huge PBO archive on 'how to do it' is commercially valuable. Given a bit of work on 'Search' and a fairly reasonable subscription, I'd buy into that. That resource would save me many pounds each year - I can list savings made of ££-several hunded, with only a minute's recollection. How about a £60 annual fee, which includes an online copy of the current mag and good personal access to the archives.... including a built-in feature of 'Ask the Experts'....? The PBO Forum archive is worth thousands, and should be the basis of a resurgent business model. After all, it's the knowhow we, the paying public, want.

I think PBO (IPC) found themselves in a catch 22 situation with the archives - they were getting actual cash from selling old archives, both via post and then via the internet - which given their internet "strategy" (Lol!) was likely the only clear and unequivocal income stream that was generated from online......so could not bring themselves to give that up in favour of opening up the archives, even behind a pay wall wrapped in with other stuff (plus didn't know how to cheaply and sufficiently digitise the content. or couldn't be ar#ed ).

My guess is that with the archives the main seller was / is the old boat tests - but that surely must be a declining market as nowadays a quick Google will throw up far more info than a 10 (or 20!) year old Magazine article ever will - and likely also with a few current and / or former owners to ask questions to!....including via this forum. Of course the simple re-print model probably does still attract those who are not terribly computer literate - but those customers will litteraly be dying out.

IMO a searchable archive, plus an online mag would have value (plus for the first few years the paper mag by post - until PBO simply goes 100% online) - if done well (i.e. not simply photocopies ). I think would also need to embed the readership into the Magazine by drawing on it as a resource for at least part of the online content even at the price of reciprocal links out - rather than adopt the fortress mentality of a visit to PBO (YBW.com) is a dead end....embrace the internet, don't be scared of it. Every month the paper PBO has a couple of dozen(?) articles selling adverts for a few weeks or so. Online could have thousands of articles selling to squillions of people 24/7 - forever. The feedback alone (on which articles people are reading) should be invaluable.....

.....at present IPC have the option of doing online well along with the more traditional paper version (no reason why they have to be identical) - but that option won't be around forever as sooner or later the print based approach will go the same way as the boat advertising already has (people don't pay for a paper advert in PBO, with the online for free - they pay for the online advert with the paper advert for free.......or go somewhere that online is free and are not bothered about the paper advert!).

The sad thing is that (like many businesses) that the current model works well enough for folks to say it works, but by the time it no longer does it will no longer matter.

PBO etc are the filofax - you would have thought ideally placed to replicate the model digitally, even if they needed to use someone else to do the computer mumbo jumbo end.

 

[Richard Shead]

Hi

A quick thank you for all of your comments, opinions, moans, suggestions etc.

I can assure you they have all been read by both the editorial teams, the research co ordinators, marketing, publishing and "the management" as you say.

The groups are now oversubscribed and I am going to lock this thread now but keep it up for the time being so it can still be viewed by those that need to view it and this is by far the simplest way of doing that.

Once more thank you for your time and I look forward to seeing you in Southampton.

Richard.