January CMV

[ArtistsRifles]

OK - how about:

 

• Minimal advertising.
  
• A nice balance between the era's.
  
• A "readers vehicles" section.
  
• Comprehensive event calendar.
  
• Comprehensive club register - free of charge to have an entry in.
  
• Good event reviews.
  
• A "Buyers Guide" every issue (what to look for, what to walk away from sort of thing) for the differing vehicles.
  
• Articles on related topics -such as accumulating CES etc.
  
• "How to" articles for the (would be) home restorer.
  

 

 

for starters....

[Marmite!!]

OK - how about:

 

• Minimal advertising.

• A nice balance between the era's.

• A "readers vehicles" section.

• Comprehensive event calendar.

• Comprehensive club register - free of charge to have an entry in.

• Good event reviews.

• A "Buyers Guide" every issue (what to look for, what to walk away from sort of thing) for the differing vehicles.

• Articles on related topics -such as accumulating CES etc.

• "How to" articles for the (would be) home restorer.

 

for starters....

 

I think you would need as much adverting revenue as possible Neil, the rest of the above sounds pretty much like CMV

[Snapper]

I don't pretend to knowing the exactitudes of the costs involved beyond the bleedin' obvious that they are prohibitive. Publishers need advertising revenue to offset costs and to increase profits. But this often applies to companies producing more than one title. So, if you were only intending to publish Fantasy MV Mag then you would need to be able to bankroll it.

 

The key aspect is distribution. You will need a place for it to be sold over the counter and to do this you will need John Menzies and/or WH Smith in the UK. Either/or will determine where your magazine is sold. I am under the impression you would need Menzies to reach independent newsagents and small chains as opposed to just the big artillery. If you rely solely on mail order you will be charging a lot per copy and then your content will have to be superior beyond all dreams to make it viable.

 

Advertising revenue has to come from within the MV generic trade, though obviously there is an element of crossover from the likes of (common) major components and tool suppliers. Thereafter you will need the militaria, kit, toys people we rely on to make our MVs look pretty and event advertising. Is there real money in it? Dunno.

 

Content is the nightmare thorny sixty four thousand dollar conundrum. I personally do not find flat pages of text on Land Rover trunions to be very interesting. I found W&T had reached a point where the vehicles covered were becoming increasingly obscure and I couldn't relate to it. However, in my mind, Bart is unimpeachable. I am fairly sure that there was no one prepared to step into his shoes, which is partly why W&T folded. This should put the potential candidates in a good light as far as I can tell. They were honest.

 

I like CMV and MMI in parts. I don't like generalised features on battles and campaigns which use generic pix to fill holes. However, this is often the cause of publishing costs. Picture budgets can soon run out. I totally agree with Catweazle the Ship matches magnate that a bad pic of the right MV is better than a pretty generic. It is a question of balance.

 

Balance is the art. I think Pat Ware, John Blackman and Ian Young all have to work jolly hard to achieve it. Keeping the publisher happy is the mother of all nightmares. I think it is fair to say that whether you are talking tanks or budgerigars, they all want profit. The wrong snap or the odd miTsake are of no interest while the revenue rolls in. So, you will have to self-publish to get what you want. Get the money together, dictate what you want and I'll edit it for you and make it look nice and proper. A fair offer...

 

Meantime - stick with the two commercial mags doing their best. Letters to the editor still work. They listen. They need your money.

 

M

[Guest catweazle (Banned Member)]

I think CMV/MMI are comercial exercises to raise funds from advertising.and i supose why not.My gripe has been the content ,allthough mostly ok its not allways accurate.My carrawagon was reported to be a recent restoration,it had been sandblasted so there wasnt a straight panel on it,it was the wrong colour,and it had never been restored.i removed the proper mirrors and fitted 110 mirrors,put modern h/lamps in it etc .The point is someone new to the hobby may of believed all that was correct.

But i was never asked by the person telling people in the mag all about it .

In this case pics ok but if you dont know dont tell.

I have to admit a certain conflict with photographers,no offence meant to snap or others who make it there living,this stems from a famous boat photographic company,after 5 yrs of hard work restoring Horatia to the

point we are at now it was photographed at speed in the solent whilst on trialls.I received a call from the owner of the company,his first words were ,this is just a courtesy call,we are going to sell pics of your boat to a boat mag who want to include it in an article,i wont tell you what i said.He was amazed at my attitude,and said in a hundred years of the company i was only the second person to complain.I told him i was deeply distressed not to be the first.I think if you get the product you sell for free,the least you can do is ask if its ok where possible,and get the facts correct.

The pics were not sold as a result of my complaint.If i had been aproached in the correct manner the mag could of had an opportunity to print a really worthwhile article.I was told everone wants to see there boat/car/bike whotever in the mag.

So i think there is scope for a Mag,maybe incorporating whot was good in the old combined with new,correct facts gathered from the owners,maybe involve the owners more,rather than just fred said this,

i think as owners who have spent bundles of cash and thousands of hours

on these vehicles we need to be treated with a bit more respect.

Is it just me or does any one else feel like this.

Snap i fell about laughing when i finally cottoned on to your comment,it took me ages tho.:rofl:

[Marmite!!]

correct facts gathered from the owners,maybe involve the owners more,rather than just fred said this,

 

 

 

But that can be just as bad... just look at the Ferret on the front of CMV, it's got a bit of everything bolted on it (including a footstep off a routemaster) & the owners think that's fine... plenty more out there like that too...

[Guest catweazle (Banned Member)]

But that can be just as bad... just look at the Ferret on the front of CMV, it's got a bit of everything bolted on it (including a footstep off a routemaster) & the owners think that's fine... plenty more out there like that too...

Thats true Lee and you pick the one i think was proberbly the worst i have seen.There would of course have to be people who could advise,and this is sort of the point i am making the picture was used without any consideration,There are enough people who know there subjects.Such as yourself on the Fox and mobat.Clive on Pigs etc.Richard on a wide area of ww2 vehicles and more.There is no reason why there couldnt be consutants,and i think most of us would do it for the hobby rather than cash just to see it done right.Or am i living in a dream world?CW.

[Jack]

Interesting points CW.

[Marmite!!]

The problem is CW we know it's wrong but when you try to point this out & offer advise the owners think it is us that are wrong... :argh:

[Richard Farrant]

The problem is CW we know it's wrong but when you try to point this out & offer advise the owners think it is us that are wrong... :argh:

 

I think the point that is being made, Lee, is that some of these blatantly incorrect vehicles should not be portrayed in periodicals. The fact that they are, brings in to question whether those compiling magazines, writing articles, etc, actually know what is right or wrong. There is a tendency for people to think that if something is seen in a book or magazine, then it has to be correct, that is sometimes far from the truth.

[Guest catweazle (Banned Member)]

The problem is CW we know it's wrong but when you try to point this out & offer advise the owners think it is us that are wrong... :argh:

This is true,thats why i have a brown water can on the back of the champ.It starts a good few conversations,I really meant not for us to talk to owners but to advise who ever collected the imfo/pics they thought they would like to use.It is of course difficult to get everthing right,i find

a lot of ex servicemens memorys are of course not what they used to be,they do of course have a good exscuse.CW.

[Jack]

Keep this going folks. History is often blurred out for the sake of lack of knowledge or experience.

 

For the record, my deep profound and pretty instant knowledge is from our rural past. It is something that is very natural to me - like the knowledge that is here from you folks on HMVF. It is indeed heart breaking when the basics are blatantly obvious - the problem is is when the basic are forgotten and someone fills in the blanks.

 

I have often been called upon by the BBC to consult on certain facts and fixtures and the one thing that used to drive me crazy was when the presenter (in this case a house hold name) when try and ring fence the advice (or more to the point the facts) as it challenged (his lack of) his stand point/understanding.

 

The vanity of these people. Even Mrs Beckett fell out with one of them.

 

Keep it real. Keep it accurate. Keep history alive.

[Degsy]

Well done Mrs B I say:thumbsup:

[Brooky]

Keep this going folks. History is often blurred out for the sake of lack of knowledge or experience.

 

I quite agree!!!

There are many instances where vehicles are portrayed as something they are not.

My favorite hobby horses are post war vehicles at WW2 events. Who is there to explain to the public that a Land Rover did not carry Patton ashore on D Day.

(Before everybody starts I am equally enthusiastic about war time and post war, but everything in their corrct place)

The second is the number of Austin K2's that are portrayed as WW2 canteen vans when the majority were converted post war for the AFS. Again distorting history.

[mcspool]

Who is there to explain to the public that a Land Rover did not carry Patton ashore on D Day.

 

It doesn´t really matter, as he did not come ashore on D-Day ....

 

Hanno

[gritineye]

Keep this going folks. History is often blurred out for the sake of lack of knowledge or experience.

 

For the record, my deep profound and pretty instant knowledge is from our rural past. It is something that is very natural to me - like the knowledge that is here from you folks on HMVF. It is indeed heart breaking when the basics are blatantly obvious - the problem is is when the basic are forgotten and someone fills in the blanks.

 

I have often been called upon by the BBC to consult on certain facts and fixtures and the one thing that used to drive me crazy was when the presenter (in this case a house hold name) when try and ring fence the advice (or more to the point the facts) as it challenged (his lack of) his stand point/understanding.

 

The vanity of these people. Even Mrs Beckett fell out with one of them.

 

Keep it real. Keep it accurate. Keep history alive.

 

Couldn't agree more Jack

 

My view of Journalists was formed at a very early age when a hack from the local paper came to our junior school (Selmeston 36 pupils) midweek and persuaded the teacher to allow us all to walk to the next village, (Alciston) to "pre-enact" a traditional skipping event.

 

http://toque.co.uk/blog/?p=794

 

There were no Morris dancers then, just a mob of locals who came over the downs from Newhaven

 

http://www.jstor.org/pss/1259177

 

He wanted a picture for his article in the next issue and that couldn't be done any other way as the paper came out on Saturday.

 

I thought this was very wrong at the time and my view of our teachers ethics and the ways of journalists was tarnished for ever, don't believe a word they say, film or write!

 

This has been reinforced over the years as I have written pieces that have been edited to appear ridiculous, and have had my words changed when doing a 'piece to camera' by the simple trick of briefly cutting away to another shot, say of a vehicle, and editing my speech while my mouth can't be seen! Only takes a couple of seconds no one notices!

 

In their defense I have to say that I have been told that my version of events in a club magazine was such rubbish that I must have been at a different one!

 

The thing that gets my blood boiling every time is when the camera is kept on the presenter who is pointing at and describing something, only to get a two second look at it before panning back to allow him to say goodbye! This makes sure you can't dispute his description. Arrogant self important S*ds :argh:

[Snapper]

My father was a journalist in the 1930s and then again post war. He was sports mad and specialised in the, then, huge interest in non-league football and speedway and wrote primarily for the News Chronicle. He was sacked from this because when covering a big match he failed to mention that a wall had collapsed injuring several people. His defence: "You sent me to cover the football". Perhaps he wasn't a natural. He had 26 jobs in his life and on my birth certificate he is listed as a metal merchants clerk.

 

I joined the Observer Foreign News Service in 1975 as an oik and did no formal journalistic training until 1980 when I attended IPC's highly respected inhouse course run by Farmer's Weekly. I learned to sub-edit, to write features and to do page layouts in the days of emms and column inches. I was working for the Melody Maker at the time compiling pop charts and being a librarian/messenger oik. I love writing and I am good at it. I am NOT a journalist.

 

To me magazines, whether mass commercial, specialist press or privately puiblished have to be all things to all men and cannot win. They have to please too many hearts and minds. So they go for what I descrived previously as BALANCE. It is a bit of an art not always achieved in every edition.

 

The issue of making money from pix is separate. You need to read the relevant sections of the 1988 Copyright Act and it's ammendments. I have. A photographer's rights are being impinged by plod and all manner of litigious muppetry these days. But when it comes to snapping tanks or anything I work with simple rules - courtesy, mutual respect and co-operation. I get lots of requests for my snaps. I always supply, however long it takes me. I expect and hope to make commercial money from companies and so on - but not from private individuals. Of course, there has to be trust that they will not rip me off. Though, in practise, I am not sure what I would do about it.

 

The final issue is vanity. I always assume my stuff is good enough - I don't offer up cr4p to my customers; but my head fits through the door.

Lose this notion and you lose it all. I always expect the tap on the shoulder when someone says "so long and thanks for all the fish". It should happen to everyone in due course...But please don't ask me about correct wing mirrors......

Edited December 23, 2008 by Snapper
typos

[Brooky]

 

It doesn´t really matter, as he did not come ashore on D-Day ....

 

Hanno

 

 

My point exactly!!!!!!

history distorted

[ArtistsRifles]

I think you would need as much adverting revenue as possible Neil, the rest of the above sounds pretty much like CMV

 

Be fair mate - I never said otherwise ; just my opinion of what would make a good mag. I know advertising is a necessary evil - but - sometimes the balance goes the wrong way and there is too much of it to the detriment of the other sections!!