QUOTE (Doug @ 29 Apr 2008, 07:32) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>The manufacturers dislike the Internet forums because they can't control the content. They believe that they are run by part-time geeks and populated by opinionated computer junkies. I have heard with my own ears one of the big UK bosses slate forums as a worthless fad.
I only buy OO product if it is a decent model. Usually I find that out on the internet. Nine times out of ten the purchase will be a Bachmann product.
QUOTE (mos-ki-toe @ 29 Apr 2008, 08:33) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Surely the worst offender for reviews is the Railway Modeller. They seem to mention the obvious....Its in blue....I remember this class.... very nice etc.
I only buy a mag when there is some useful content inside. Usually I find that out on the internet. Nine times out of ten it will be Model Rail, although that is biased by MRJ's absence from high street retail premises.
My regular purchase of a railway modelling magazine ceased in the early 1970's, when the extent of the editorial weakness dawned on me. With family living in both continental Europe and the USA I could see the better and still improving product quality in HO, compared to UK OO. The magazines were part of a consensus that all the UK RTR model railway market required were crude toys: real modelling meant making it yourself. It took an enterprising manufacturer to kick off the progress we are now enjoying in UK RTR, the magazines have followed this progress rather than lead it would be my perception.
Confining 'what magazines could do better' to reviewing, there is scope to beat the internet, by consistent reviewing against a standard. Rate each model in categories like dimensional fidelity, detail application, appearance and finish, constructional quality, mechanical performance, provision for DCC. Maintain a 'league table' of progress for the industry and the manufacturer, to assess on a release by release basis where they are moving forward, marking time, slipping backwards. I have yet to meet anyone in selling who didn't like a league table.
I only buy OO product if it is a decent model. Usually I find that out on the internet. Nine times out of ten the purchase will be a Bachmann product.
QUOTE (mos-ki-toe @ 29 Apr 2008, 08:33) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Surely the worst offender for reviews is the Railway Modeller. They seem to mention the obvious....Its in blue....I remember this class.... very nice etc.
I only buy a mag when there is some useful content inside. Usually I find that out on the internet. Nine times out of ten it will be Model Rail, although that is biased by MRJ's absence from high street retail premises.
My regular purchase of a railway modelling magazine ceased in the early 1970's, when the extent of the editorial weakness dawned on me. With family living in both continental Europe and the USA I could see the better and still improving product quality in HO, compared to UK OO. The magazines were part of a consensus that all the UK RTR model railway market required were crude toys: real modelling meant making it yourself. It took an enterprising manufacturer to kick off the progress we are now enjoying in UK RTR, the magazines have followed this progress rather than lead it would be my perception.
Confining 'what magazines could do better' to reviewing, there is scope to beat the internet, by consistent reviewing against a standard. Rate each model in categories like dimensional fidelity, detail application, appearance and finish, constructional quality, mechanical performance, provision for DCC. Maintain a 'league table' of progress for the industry and the manufacturer, to assess on a release by release basis where they are moving forward, marking time, slipping backwards. I have yet to meet anyone in selling who didn't like a league table.
