Small rant: YM PLUS

Dear Yanita...Long reply to short rant

You seem to have held, for some time, the belief that Yachting Monthly is run for advertisers, with phrases like:
"Ideally: a sort of "WHICH" for the boatie world. A magazine editorially independent, a magazine on OUR side, not an industry mouthpiece"
"But I fear you are right: ads pay for the mag. And he who pays the piper calls the tune!"

We at Yachting Monthly Editoral are on the side of the reader...We also have a Subscription Department, a Classified Department, and yes, and Display Advertising Department...the key word here is "Department" while we all work under the Yachting Monthly name, all the departments are independent and in different parts of the building.

Yachting Monthly is not a charity, it's part of IPC, a magazine publisher in the busness to make money. The same way as the majority of publications out there today.

Who do you think pays for my flights/ferries/petrol/accomodation/cameras or RIB hire during boat tests? We might get A flight for the jounalist, and sometimes (me) the photographer, but a lot of the time we don't, the bill gets footed by the magazine.

Whether you like it or not, Yachting Monthly and other specialist titles have a small (sometimes 10 x less) circulation than Loaded, Marie Claire, Pick me up and Nuts, so the cover price alone will not pay for the the cost of the magazine. We get grief at the moment because the coverprice is too high, how many readers would we loose if the coverprice went up to £7 or £8?

Rather than letting the magazine go down the baby blake of publishing, it has adverts in it. Think how kind the advertisers are, they pay their money so you can read a magazine you want /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif....only joking, but think about it.

Do you read every thread on this forum?...if something doesn't interest you, do you still read it or do you skip to the next? Some ppl want to see ads, whether it's for new gear, a new boat or even a second hand boat. If something doesn't interest you, skip past it, we won't be offended:)

We're not producing a magazine for one person, we're producing a magazine that will appeal to a broad range of people who'll all find it interesting, entertaining and enjoyable.

While some would enjoy reading extras from the ARC, atlantic cruising isn't within everyones grasp and some people will no doubt skip past it. Likewise, not everyone likes to read "readers letters" but it's a part of the magazine that readers can follow up on YM Plus if they would like to. How would you feel it the ARC Feature was 12 pages instead of 6? You might enjoy it, so now put yourself in the deck shoes of someone that has no desire to cross the atlantic, and would rather read a 5 page article on how to make it enjoyable for their family to sail with them. So if the Arc was 12 pages, that would be 12% of the mag which is of no interest to him. Rather than alienate readers, with YM plus both readers cab be happy, and get something out of the magazine /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

YM Plus is for the additional information, which we hope to expand in the future, it gives readers an extra (and hopefully better) dimension to Yachting Monthly that you normally wouldn't see. /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

I dunno, We try to give you more free and you're still not happy! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Disclaimer: These are my views not the views of Yachting Monthly or IPC Media
 
Even longer reply to long reply

Graham,

Thank you for your reply - it's appreciated that someone of the Editorial Department is willing to reply to my "rant".

To coin a phrase: I'll start at the beginning.
Last WE I was having a pint (or several) with a friend/fellow sailor and YM reader. Slightly older than I am, and more set in his ways. He has no computer, and is not planning to get one anytime soon (if ever).
Why is he (and I suspect many other technophobes) denied the material found in YM Plus, simply because it would take up advertising space?

I understand that IPC is unlikely to axe adverts to make room for content, but would an extra 4/6 pages REALLY cost that much more? If so, might I suggest you axe the continuing Gipsy Moth saga? You've done well; but the time has come to stop blowing your own horn and to stop beating your own drum! It's been nice, time to move on! As it's a continuing saga it would be ideally suited to be posted on the website only.

As to content and editorial independence:
1. A while ago there was a boat test for "starter boats". A Legend and a Bavaria. BOTH Opal boats. I gather Opal is a big advertiser, but still.... I was not the only one to comment on this at the time. James Jermain replied on this forum that other boats were due to be tested but pulled out. The question who they were and why they pulled out was never answered. Also, would it not have been better to wait and publish the article once these other boats had been tested, rather than publish such an obviously one-sided article?
2. A gear test for new combined/integrated plotters-radars. When it came to the Raymarine item the first phrase was "The moment we opened the box, we knew that this was going to be good" or something along those lines. Surprise, surprise: Raymarine got the best score. Raymarine is also a big advertiser. Credible?
3. A colleague of mine has written a nice bit of software for me to take care of a lot of tidal calculations, celestial navigation and loads more. I've used it for many years, and I am very pleased about it. I passed it to several friends who found it equally useful. One of them contacted "the writer" to congratulate him and suggested that he should market it. Before committing himself he contacted YM to find out if they would be interesting in reviewing his work. The second thing the lady who answered the phone was if he would be taking out an advert in the magazine. "Not at this time" he replied. "Ah, we'll get back to you". Last I heard he had not heard from YM again.
No advert - no review. This also leads me to the conclusion - the bigger the advert, the better the review.
4. Last summer our autopilot broke down. Over a coffee I mentioned this to James Jermain. He said he had had the same one on a previous boat - it had never worked properly. I know of six other unfortunate souls who also have this POS on their boat - no one was without (major) problems. Yet, according to YM this is "a useful bit of kit". It isn't, and at least one member of your editorial staff knows it to be. Again: credibility?
5. Last summer I wrote an on-line blog for PBO - I know it's not YM, but since you both belong to the IPC group I will tar you with the same brush.
Whenever I made comments about certain organisations / boats / equipment that was "less than favourable" these were edited out. Best not ruffle too many feathers?
It was my point of view/experience - could IPC not he published it as submitted and just added: These are the views of the author not the views of Yachting Monthly or IPC Media. Really THAT scared of upsetting anyone?

Choice of content and blatant commercialism:
1. Why is every bit gear that gets reviewed an item that can be classed as "small chandlery"? You know what I mean: knife, HH VHF, lifejacket, shoes, lights, clothing, etc... . Stupid question really, nearly 30% of each mag is taken up by chandleries.
How refreshing it would be to read a review/test of a new engines, comparison of different sailing rigs on a boat, which sailcloth would be right for which boat/type of sailing, etc...
2. Whilst the magazine got marginally involved in the "red diesel" scare, not a word about rising marina charges, other ridiculous charges (cruising the Hamble), and my pet peeve: overnight berthing fee -> electricity extra! In a hotel they don't charge you extra if you turn on the light! Several missed opportunities for the mag to demonstrate that it is indeed on "our" side.
3. Would it be possible to publish from time to time a blue water letter, cruising report or any Tom Cunliffe article that does not turn into a plug for a book/DVD or TV programme?
4. On the same note: there are other charter companies apart from the Moorings & Sunsail. Even though they do not advertise in YM it would be nice to hear from them. Three years ago booked a cruise through a St Martin (French) charter company - very nice!

Though I have been subscribing for years, I will not be renewing. At the moment I consider YM to be nothing more than "boat porn". Flashy, lots of pictures,... but I find it hard to believe that anyone buys it for the articles.

Through an American friend I stumbled across CRUISING WORLD, to which I now subscribe. I do not begrudge our transatlantic cousins much, but YM would do well to take a leaf out of their book. It also carries adverts, but is altogether editorially more balanced and seemingly more independent.
I know the magazine must be good; as it is obvious from Libby Purvis' last editorial that she reads it too.

Over to you.

Regards
 
Re: Even longer reply to long reply

Well said.

I've been a reader of both pbo @ ym for over 30yrs and over the last few years i have been getting steadily more disilliusioned with the content to the extent that I no longer buy them as religiosly as I once did. and from this month I probably won't bother at all anymore. sad really.
 
Well it\'s late at night.....

[ QUOTE ]
Graham,

Thank you for your reply - it's appreciated that someone of the Editorial Department is willing to reply to my "rant".

To coin a phrase: I'll start at the beginning.
Last WE I was having a pint (or several) with a friend/fellow sailor and YM reader. Slightly older than I am, and more set in his ways. He has no computer, and is not planning to get one anytime soon (if ever).
Why is he (and I suspect many other technophobes) denied the material found in YM Plus, simply because it would take up advertising space?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a case that it would simply take up advertising space, it would loose money, and in the magazine world, loosing money is BAD! Basically there are a set number of pages in the magazine, set by publishers/accounts/market trend, out of those 200 odd pages 50% are editorial and the other 50% are ads, whether that be classified, brokerage or big display adverts. Don't forget it's not just the cost of the paper and printing that goes to the magazine, it's the wages of the staff, all the travel, the marketing, the cost of features, the cost of photographs, insurance, computers, distribution, software etc etc etc. All these things mount up. If you were to loose 6 pages of full page ads, you'd loose over a couple of hundred thousand pounds in ad revenue over the year

YM Plus is extra to the magazine, the same way this forum and website are, they are free to use if you have the facilities. We are, after all a magazine, and try to fit as much into it as possible into the magazine format, We could cover every article in depth, but it would mean we only produce 1 magazine a year!!! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
I understand that IPC is unlikely to axe adverts to make room for content, but would an extra 4/6 pages REALLY cost that much more? If so, might I suggest you axe the continuing Gipsy Moth saga? You've done well; but the time has come to stop blowing your own horn and to stop beating your own drum! It's been nice, time to move on! As it's a continuing saga it would be ideally suited to be posted on the website only.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's your opinion, we get letters of support each week about Gipsy Moth, and her ongoing voyage round the world. Whist it might not be in everyones interest, there are still enough readers that find the next chapter of Gipsy Moth's life interesting. These are readers that might not have access to the internet, so their view wouldn't appear here on scuttlebutt, much like your drinking partner.

It's not just a case of 4-6 pieces of paper, it's all about the way the magazine is put together, from the extra time laying out the pages to the extra time at the printers etc, etc

[ QUOTE ]
As to content and editorial independence:
1. A while ago there was a boat test for "starter boats". A Legend and a Bavaria. BOTH Opal boats. I gather Opal is a big advertiser, but still.... I was not the only one to comment on this at the time. James Jermain replied on this forum that other boats were due to be tested but pulled out. The question who they were and why they pulled out was never answered. Also, would it not have been better to wait and publish the article once these other boats had been tested, rather than publish such an obviously one-sided article?

[/ QUOTE ]

Rather than name and shame, we ran the article before the boatshow when new readers who would be new to yachting might be on the lookout for starter boats, if we left it longer we would have missed the boatshow boat. As I mentioned before Xmas it was no fault of YM that both boats came from the Opal stable

[ QUOTE ]
2. A gear test for new combined/integrated plotters-radars. When it came to the Raymarine item the first phrase was "The moment we opened the box, we knew that this was going to be good" or something along those lines. Surprise, surprise: Raymarine got the best score. Raymarine is also a big advertiser. Credible?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, here's a thought, maybe the company with the big bucks make good quality equipment /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif Maybe they do make good equipment, and use the sale profits to advertise more, increasing profits and the quality of their goods....you'll also find that Raymarine produce some of the more expensive equipment, so it should be good quality...where is the surprise?

[ QUOTE ]
3. A colleague of mine has written a nice bit of software for me to take care of a lot of tidal calculations, celestial navigation and loads more. I've used it for many years, and I am very pleased about it. I passed it to several friends who found it equally useful. One of them contacted "the writer" to congratulate him and suggested that he should market it. Before committing himself he contacted YM to find out if they would be interesting in reviewing his work. The second thing the lady who answered the phone was if he would be taking out an advert in the magazine. "Not at this time" he replied. "Ah, we'll get back to you". Last I heard he had not heard from YM again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, this is a hard one to comment on...but the only ladies we have in the office are Holly our Art Editor and our editorial assistant. Neither of which would give such a reply...I suggest your friend looks in the front of the magazine for the contact details of our Technical Editor Toby Hodges. Contact Toby, he'll decide where to go from there

[ QUOTE ]
No advert - no review. This also leads me to the conclusion - the bigger the advert, the better the review.

[/ QUOTE ]

What utter tosh...it would be similar to me saying "people who sail unsinkable boats don't need to know how to navigate"...Utter nonsense I think you'll agree

[ QUOTE ]
4. Last summer our autopilot broke down. Over a coffee I mentioned this to James Jermain. He said he had had the same one on a previous boat - it had never worked properly. I know of six other unfortunate souls who also have this POS on their boat - no one was without (major) problems. Yet, according to YM this is "a useful bit of kit". It isn't, and at least one member of your editorial staff knows it to be. Again: credibility?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure more people have problems with thier cars, that have been recommended by the motoring magazines, but do you see them going on about it? When we test something, how are we to know what will happen in 12, 24, 48 months time? Are we still recommending it? if so PM me and I'll look into the matter

[ QUOTE ]
5. Last summer I wrote an on-line blog for PBO - I know it's not YM, but since you both belong to the IPC group I will tar you with the same brush.
Whenever I made comments about certain organisations / boats / equipment that was "less than favourable" these were edited out. Best not ruffle too many feathers?

[/ QUOTE ]

See the reply to the same coment I gave before xmas....feather ruffling and court cases are two totally different things...as Yachting World found out /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[ QUOTE ]
It was my point of view/experience - could IPC not he published it as submitted and just added: These are the views of the author not the views of Yachting Monthly or IPC Media. Really THAT scared of upsetting anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

Once bitten, twice shy?

[ QUOTE ]

Choice of content and blatant commercialism:
1. Why is every bit gear that gets reviewed an item that can be classed as "small chandlery"? You know what I mean: knife, HH VHF, lifejacket, shoes, lights, clothing, etc... . Stupid question really, nearly 30% of each mag is taken up by chandleries.
How refreshing it would be to read a review/test of a new engines, comparison of different sailing rigs on a boat, which sailcloth would be right for which boat/type of sailing, etc...

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you noticed that the smaller items that we review are the items more likely to be replaced on a yacht? How easy would it be to test an engine? Not only that, but who would be interested in it? The person that happens to be replacing their engine with the exact model we're testing?...what are the odds of that? Look out next month (March 06) for a test on different rigs (or June 2005 for mainsail reefing, rigs I think?) and if you go back to June 2004 you'll see an article about sail coth...anything else?

[ QUOTE ]

2. Whilst the magazine got marginally involved in the "red diesel" scare, not a word about rising marina charges, other ridiculous charges (cruising the Hamble), and my pet peeve: overnight berthing fee -> electricity extra! In a hotel they don't charge you extra if you turn on the light! Several missed opportunities for the mag to demonstrate that it is indeed on "our" side.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must have missed the features we did on Britains cheapest marina in May 2002...We can't run that sort of feature each year otherwise we'll be accused of repeating features and we wouldn't want that now would we? /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Personally I dislike staying in marinas while cruising, more like a package holidays than sailing /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]

3. Would it be possible to publish from time to time a blue water letter, cruising report or any Tom Cunliffe article that does not turn into a plug for a book/DVD or TV programme?

[/ QUOTE ]

No /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
4. On the same note: there are other charter companies apart from the Moorings & Sunsail. Even though they do not advertise in YM it would be nice to hear from them. Three years ago booked a cruise through a St Martin (French) charter company - very nice!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm personally offended you didn't read my entertaining, witty and very well written piece about chartering round the south west coast of Ireland last year (june 2005). Not with Sunsail or Moorings, but with Sail Ireland...who don't advertise with Yachting Monthly...Strange that, seeing that the only companies we mention are those who advertise with us! Hey maybe I should get ad sales onto them...ah well we've missed a trick there /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I'm all in favor of trying different destinations when it comes to chartering, where's the challenge of sailing round a well trodden salt-water lake, give me open sea any day /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Though I have been subscribing for years, I will not be renewing. At the moment I consider YM to be nothing more than "boat porn". Flashy, lots of pictures,... but I find it hard to believe that anyone buys it for the articles.

Through an American friend I stumbled across CRUISING WORLD, to which I now subscribe. I do not begrudge our transatlantic cousins much, but YM would do well to take a leaf out of their book. It also carries adverts, but is altogether editorially more balanced and seemingly more independent.


[/ QUOTE ]

Please tell me this is a wind up...American Mags seeming to be independent. You think YM isn't critical, the ad managers of the US mags practically go into shock if the writers say anything bad about new boats in the magazine. Although I admit Cruising World is a good magazine, it all depends on what you want, we're UK based so will provide you with more home waters sailing.

[ QUOTE ]

I know the magazine must be good; as it is obvious from Libby Purvis' last editorial that she reads it too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep Libby, and around 171,999 other people read Yachting Monthly, so we're not really that bad....are we? /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I think that's everything covered, if not, it's late and I'm going to bed. Now that it's the 14th of Jan it's offically my birthday, so if I'm not around until monday you know why /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Usual disclaimer: These are my opinions, not the views of Yachting Monthly or IPC media....It was also done in my own time on a Friday night/Saturday morning...I'm sticking up for the company I work for and I'm not getting paid for it...It must mean I believe what I'm saying...good night
 
Re: Well it\'s late at night.....

Hi Graham,

Hope you enjoyed your birthday.

Your mail has, I feel, not been able to counter any of my arguments. In fact, it has confirmed most of them.

1. Ok, so you can't cut advertising space. Why not put in 6 MORE pages of content? That was my question. Would six extra pages of content (e.g. the stuff now found in YM Plus) also cost hundreds of thousands of £££?

2. As to Gipsy Moth - granted, I feel it's been done to death. If others are interested - no skin of my nose.

3. As to the "starter boat" review. First/ why not name and shame the ones that (allegedly) pulled out? Stupid question really - they might not advertise in future.
The reason for publishing the article with only Opal boats is also a pure commercial one -> Boat Show.

4. As to Gear Test and the seemingly bias towards Raymarine. I am prepared to believe that there are loads of people about very happy with their Raymarine kit. However, the fact that by just opening the box your testers could tell that the stuff was very somehow, IMHO, does your credibility no good at all.

5. In reference to the autopilot bit - you might want to look again at the Simrad WP30. Though I'm not holding my breath.
Come to think of it: when are we going to find out how all these copper based anti foulings did that seem to appear every couple of months?

6. Choice of content: an engine article last year, a sails one the year before, a non Moorings/Sunsail charter last year, one on rigs this year... You are right - you could make only one mag a year. Yachting Yearly anyone?

7. Editorial independence: don't know what happened to YW a couple of years ago. Did someone take IPC to the cleaners? If so, that would explain the current attitude towards the industry. Sit, beg, roll over, and play dead.
Or to quote Nixon's henchmen: If you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

8. Marina charges, fuel, etc... It's pointless to say "Don't use them". I too prefer an anchorage over a marina; but marinas are a fact of life. We all need a place to park our boat, unless you're lucky enough to find a good mooring.
We all need fuel - even us raggies.

In short, I'm still left with the distinct impression that there is no-one who speaks for US - the average boatowner with a mortgage and a couple of kids in tow. Who like their sailing and are being squeezed to within an inch.

Also to mind comes the half yearly industry tirade - faithfully copied by YM - against "grey" imports from the US. I've refitted my entire boat (apart from the VHF) with equipment I bought in the US, saving me a bundle. I've ignored statements about warranty, no after sales etc... I'll get back to you should I ever have to put it to the test. So far, none of the (Furuno) gear has broken down, and I don't expect it to in the near future.

From what's been posted on here and from the e-mails I have received on this subject I feel that a large amount of good will still exists towards YM - no-one is happy to see it go downhill. But many fear it has been goodbye for ever. Shame really.

I hope that sometime in the future YM editorial staff will see fit to have a (constructive) debate with it's readership about the "soul" of the magazine. At the moment it's just a castrated shadow of it's former self.

Yanita
"The Lone Nutter"
(Balls still intact!)
 
Hi again,

I had a great birthday thanks for asking, at the moment, everyone else in the office is working hard putting together the next (March's) magazine. I, on the other hand have sorted out all the boat test photos, expert on board pics and the boatshow photos, thus you get to enjoy my company for a little (or a lot) longer...I'm not one to sit, beg, roll over, and play dead! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Sorry for the wait, I emailed our production manager so I could reply with some rough figures

1, The rough cost for 6 extra pages, That would have to be printed as an eight page section would be £2,250, per issue or £27,000 over the year. or to put it another way we'd have to loose a member of staff to cover the cost. Ah but that's just the printing costs. You've now increased the Art editors work by 8%, and she won't be happy with you. Neither will the subs or production editors. If there is a map or graphic in there, Max will have to do that in her limited time. Not to mention the people who actually have to write the extra material. If there are any extra photographs, that have to be taken or researched I'll be wanting more money as well....So if you then have to add 8% on to 5 (for example) of the staff's wages to cover the extra work involved, plus expenses of proofs, photos and travel etc you'll be looking at around £120,000, plus the £2,250 printing costs, so to add 8 pages with no ads it could cost £122,250...or 30p more an issue making YM the most expensive yachting title on the the news stands (and increasing the price of subs by £3.60)...OR you could have the same information for free on the internet, and not pay one penny extra for it. Which is why YM Plus was invented.

2, Your comments have been noted, and I'm sorry you feel that way.

3, Think of a boat around 30 ft long, made in the UK, that doesn't advertise with YM, it's not my position to name names. Yes I'm sure some the decision was commercial, the boatshow, where there would be a lot of new people looking to buy a boat, may be a small one. If we cater for that market at that time of year, maybe more people will buy the magazine....not only that, if it's their first time buying the magazine, maybe, just maybe they'll want to buy it again, leading to a whole new readership. From 1906 to present day YM has been sold for money and tried to increase circulation, the day we stop doing that, the day the magazine really does die. I understand you're views, and from the outside looking in, it might seem as if Opal had bought the boat test for that month, but they didn't, and no matter how many times you repeat your thoughts on the matter it won't change the facts.

They happened to have two new 30ft boats on the market which they allowed us to test for two days, something that the other manufacturer wasn't able to do. The test was scheduled for that issue and went in. If you'd ever had to arrange a boat test, you'd realise how frustrating it is to be put off and put off again, until you then get into a situation that have to organise another boat to go in place of the one that's fallen through.

Would you have waited for one less popular boat when you already have two popular marques available? Knowing that by waiting for the one boat, you run the risk of not getting the other two again, because they have to be delivered to their owners. Then you'll have to find another boat to test to fill in the gap you've just made in the boatshow issue of the magazine. Btw James had been trying to test this particular boat since September the year before.

4, How do you know when you get into a quality car? or buy and expensive watch? It's about first impressions. OK as an example two products arrive in the YM office to be tested

Product A: We have to spend 3 minutes trying to get into a thin cardboard box, wrestling with hidden bits of sticky tape and end up ripping the box to get at the product inside. Once into the Fort Knox of cardboard, the product is in polystyrene wotsits with the manuals in the box arranged in no logical order

Product B: In a box that slides open, or you just have to untuck one piece of card to gain access. Once inside everything is neatly laid out, the manual in a bag with the getting started bit at the top waiting for you, it's all well packaged it's personalise cardboard holder

Which would you think was the better quality product...Product A or B

So if the tester were to write something along the lines of: "when we first opened the box we knew this was a quality product" would this be biased towards product B or would this be a fair indication of the thought that goes into a product?

5, Ah the wheelpilot again /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif OK the wheelpilot tested in the magazine was tested over 2,400 miles (YM, September 1999, pg 53), not you're normal day out in the solent I'll think you'll agree. From those 2,400 miles the majority of the findings were written up by Peter Nielsen (now editor of Sail Magazine in the US) on the return 1,200 miles from the Azores to the UK. During which he found "it coped amazingly well in breezy down wind conditions that demanded a fair bit of concentration from a human helmsman" So it's pretty fair to say that he liked the bit of kit. This was on board James' boat Sweet Lucy. So maybe either James was incorrect in saying "It had never worked properly" Because according to Pete it had. Or you have mis-quoted him saying that. He still owns Sweet Lucy, so it wouldn't have been on a previous boat, even though he does own two boats at the moment. But who said what is neither here nor there, what matters is that YM tested the wheel pilot over 2,400 miles, advertisers or no advertisers. It's hardly fair to blame YM for the faults that developed on yours and 6 other people's wheel pilots.

The wheel pilot was also tested in Oct 2003, by Simon Jinks who "liked it for it's simplicity of design and ease of use"

Have you written a letter to YM and let us know your experiences?

We gave this equipment a thorough test. I'll ask again, how were we to know?

Antifoul wise, the copper on Dicks boat stood up well, unlike his topsides when his yachts was hit by a Burnham racer...the other anitfouls on James's boat threw up some interesting results, but you'll have to wait until March's issue to see the results /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

6, Not really fair, there's a whole host of articles in YM worth reading, not just the ones you mentioned....if we did go yearly, what would happen to around the coast, news and other news related features? Nope we'll remain a monthly for the future, like it or lump it we're here to stay /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif But as you said previously "I will not be renewing" your sub I doubt this will concern you

7, Do a little research along the lines of: biggest libel loss in publishing history....any more than that I'm not going into just in case...there was a thread about it here

Hence the once bitten bit..

8, What would you like to see us do about this one? Do motoring magazines put pressure on NCP for their car parking rates? I don't read motoring mags so I wouldn't know, just a thought /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif...no one is forcing you or any other boat owner to use a marina. We've highlighted time and time again that it's cheaper to keep your boat abroad, and the fact of the matter is that marinas CAN charge what they would like because there are too few berth for too many boats. Personally I don't feel that this is within YM's power, or all of the Marine Titles combined, to do anything about.

Fuel wise you could look here http://www.marinefuel.info/ to see if there are any places near you that you haven't found, but diesel prices are probably the least of your worries, you'd be better off finding a cheaper garage to fill your car up, over the space of a year your car petrol costs must out weight the boat 30-1?

100 litres at £0.48 for red diesel is only £48, I burn around £50 going to the solent and back twice in a week.

Whether you realise it or not we do take onboard comments from letters, this forums and anything anybody writes in our comment book at the boatshow. Although having read some of the comments this year it makes me wonder whether some of the authors have read the magazine in the past 6 months (there was a comment about "you should do a feature about trading down to smaller boats" which we covered in July and August this year, so we really can't win) We always try to improve the magazine where possible and will continue to do so

[ QUOTE ]
Your mail has, I feel, not been able to counter any of my arguments. In fact, it has confirmed most of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny that, I felt it did the opposite, I guess we're free to think what we like. Seeing that it's only the two of us discussing this and shergar 6ft under...I think we can stop flogging him now.....Well I can at least

Cheerie Byeeee........ /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Once again, the usual disclaimer, these are my thoughts and comments, not those of Yachting Monthly or IPC media
 
Re: Hi again,

[ QUOTE ]


Cheerie Byeeee........ /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif



[/ QUOTE ]


Byeee

Thanks for the reply - nearly thought you'd declared victory and buggered off /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Thanks for the link (libel) - explains a lot

Fully realise that most of my arguments were no more than "shouting at the sea" - but feel better for having vented them /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Who knows - something might stick.

Cheers

PS: I have NOT misquoted JJ with regards the autopilot.
 
Hi, while the bandwagon rolls

Interesting posts, may I just ask to help a bit of confusion. When asked how much it would cost to add the say 6 pages of content you stated £2250 for the basic paper and print costs.

You then started adding zero's to dissuade any thoughts of this ever being feasible. Such a wages to the writers etc. Well I am confused as the same material that is being requested to be included is free on the website.

Am I missing something here?

Also, to add to Yanitas woes about the magazine, I would like to request that we have the chartlets back please, these so called waypoint drawings are a total waste of space. I have a pocket on my 'free' PBO chart bag that is crammed with port of call articles, but for some reason does not have ONE of the new style YM charts.

I realise that the charts 'are for demonstration only' or whatever the disclaimer is, but the new ones IMO are not even worth looking at.

Why the change, was the admiralty charging too much. I would rather have an aerial photograph like Sailing Today than a pretty colour picture with supposed transits drawn all over it.

My subscription is coming up and I don't know what I am going to do yet. My YM was a birthday gift, I get all three mags and want to chop to one. I generally enjoy YM but still think it is catering for the wrong market. If you are a regular reader of the forum, you will see that most of us are pretty adventurous in our sailing but nearly all sail boats under 35ft, the majority under 30ft. YM seems to me to aim at 40ft upward, maybe just my impression.

The article that really bothered me, over a year ago was basic instrument tests as put on the cover. Something like over 30 instruments tested rar rar rar. When I tore the cellophane off it was 4 pages of pretty pictures of windex's, logs, depth etc. with the editorial lifted straight from the brochures. Not one of the units was even switched on. This was annoying as I was in the market for kit and was totally disappointed.

This is the way of much of the kit reviews since, I tend to skim them see that YM have not even tested them and move on.

I am not talking about the RADAR tests you did, I think it was you, where you take half a dozen 'sailors' out on a test boat and they each have a go of all the kit and you report what each thought, which is generally interesting as the older sailor and younger more gizmo savvy come back with totally different impressions of the gear.

In fact, this might again be Sailing Today, all my mags are downstairs and I am not going looking right now. Which ever, this is the type of review I find useful, real people playing or using the kit.

Have you considered asking on here occasionally, hey, anyone using kit xyz for the last 12 months how has it worked out in the real world. People are generally happy to share information gratis to help a fellow sailor, in fact people love reviewing their kit.

Oh, another one that bothered me, there were some glaring absentees from the DSCVHF reviews a few months back, please do not suggest availability from manufacturer as I am talking about models not makes.
 
Re: Hi again,

I have a WP10 that although is still working fine 3 years in, boy does it make a meal of it. It was replaced on insurance from an older unit that was robbed while she was laid up.

I remember sailing with the old one, drum and belt type and every so often you would hear a quiet bzzzt as the autopilot kept us on course.

The WP10 does keep a perfect course I can not complain about that, but bzzt bzzt bzzt. I have tried all the calibration setup and it is still no different. It is not the boat, if I turn it off but leave the clutch locked she will hold a pretty steady course, in fact sometimes I have to remember to turn the pilot back on again.

Sailing is supposed to be quiet and the WP10 is certainly not that, it can drive a normal man to insanity!

Just thought you might like to add another to your list....
 
Re: Hi, while the bandwagon rolls

[ QUOTE ]
Have you considered asking on here occasionally, hey, anyone using kit xyz for the last 12 months how has it worked out in the real world. People are generally happy to share information gratis to help a fellow sailor, in fact people love reviewing their kit.

[/ QUOTE ]
A guy from MBY tried doing this on MoboChat and got loads of flak about freeloading journos trying to get something for nothing, why didn't he do his own research etc. You can't win, can you? Mind you, us stinkies are a tight fisted, grumpy lot. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Autopilot

Graham has answered your points admirably in all ways except the autooilot saga, which, obviously, he can't.

You didn't misquote me though it was a throw away remark I have lived to regret. I must have been feeling particularly jaundiced at the time. It is true that I was never entirely happy with its performance and had Navico/Simrad down a couple of times to check it over. Basically, I felt it steered too broad a course and didn't learn Sweet Lucy's handling characteristics well enough. In this respect it was probably not much worse, or better, that the obvious competition which it replaced after it had broken down. Two years ago the clutch broke and I have not bothered to get it fixed because most of the time I don't use it anyway.

However, for most of the time it worked pretty well and certainly took us to and from the Azores without failing. Autopilot reliability on these long events is not good so this is a plus point.
 
Re: Hi, while the bandwagon rolls

[ QUOTE ]

Interesting posts, may I just ask to help a bit of confusion. When asked how much it would cost to add the say 6 pages of content you stated £2250 for the basic paper and print costs.

You then started adding zero's to dissuade any thoughts of this ever being feasible. Such a wages to the writers etc. Well I am confused as the same material that is being requested to be included is free on the website.

Am I missing something here?


[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly - would add 1 (ONE) penny on the cover price (2,250 devided by 171,999).
 
Shergar lives! :-D

OK, I've worked out my calculations again, and it looks like I've started working out how much it would be for a year and then added a monthly figure on to it and times the whole lot by 12, so I'll go through it again...Rough figures per month:

£2250 - Paper and Printing
£600 - Photographs
£1500 - Staff Fees 1.5 days over a month (5 staff around £300/person)
£1000 - Contributors
£100 - Proofing costs

Giving £5450 per month

or £65,400 making it 15p per magazine

This is probably why I'm behind a camera rather than in accounts...Maths was never my strong point!! /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Readership and circulation are two different things, according to IPC's media info, the circulation of YM is 36,000, and the readership 172,000

So paper and printing cost would be 6p per magazine, plus the cost I explained about above. Just because it's laid out in a form on the net, it doesn't translate onto the page in the same way.

The extra pages would have to be designed, subbed and be passed by our editor. Unless you'd like 8 pages of pure text we'd also need to spend time either buying in or researching photographs.

All of this would all be extra work for us....and unless the the days of the week or the hours in a day increase, we'd be hard pushed to fit it all in.

Sorry for my mis-calculations...let the bun fighting begin..../forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top