Has Mac Home Magazine Just Walked Out?

Shawn King wrote:
> On 8/15/06 1:33 AM, "Bob Binder" <rbinder2mac.com> wrote:
>
>> I hope you are wrong, as I like their magazine
>> best out of all that I subscribe to.
>
> Really? Why is it the best in your opinion? I ask because, to be honest,
> I've found their editorial policies suspect, their copyrighting terrible at
> times and their fact checking even worse.
>
As someone who's been involved with computers, well working ones, since
the summer after high school in 72, I have a hard time understanding how
any magazine like a MacHome can exist today. It's almost like a magazine
for high end microwave ovens. Those who need technical information know
how to get it via the web. Those who don't know how to find such
information are very likely to feel lost reading either MacHome or a KB
article from Apple. The market is almost undefinable.

On Tuesday, August 15, 2006, at 04:42PM, Shawn King <shawnyourmaclife.com> wrote:

>Really? Why is it the best in your opinion? I ask because, to be honest,
>I've found their editorial policies suspect, their copyrighting terrible at
>times and their fact checking even worse.

I'm surprised by your response about MacHome. I always thought they were a "comfortable" magazine. I didn't buy every issue, but got quite a few of them. I don't ever remember seeing any glaring errors. Can you give some examples?

As to which one is best, I love MacDirectory. Even though it's a quarterly, it's crammed with excellent, useful information. I've found something in every issue I could use.

My all time favorite was MacUser, but I won't go into a trip down memory lane.

I dropped my subscription to MacWorld last year. They did a review of the database program Panorama (I've used it since 1990) that was terrible and non-factual. I, along with many others found out that the guy that wrote the review was a Filemaker expert and had written a Filemaker book. I wrote a letter which MacWorld didn't respond to. There were other protests, but they never did address the issue.

Frank Pearsall
Brevard, N.C.
Less than 60 days until NarrowTrak 06 (October 13, 14)

On Aug 16, 2006, at 7:13 PM, David Ross wrote:

> As someone who's been involved with computers, well working ones,
> since
> the summer after high school in 72, I have a hard time
> understanding how
> any magazine like a MacHome can exist today. It's almost like a
> magazine
> for high end microwave ovens. Those who need technical information
> know
> how to get it via the web. Those who don't know how to find such
> information are very likely to feel lost reading either MacHome or
> a KB
> article from Apple. The market is almost undefinable.

Then why is a mag like iCreate so popular in _every_ market around
the world where it is published?


Kirk

              Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
           Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more

Friends:

        Appreciate ongoing discussion-dialog re Mac-magazine departing scene,
whether voluntarily or otherwise...

        DO believe allayougeeks out there, well versed and experienced in ways
of world re computers, somehow do not understand the similar
complexitieis and unavoidable dimensions of the magazine production
world...where I got to play for some years, mostly as naive beginnner,
and with many bruises to show for same.

        The complexities of production are only starting-point for any
magazine, and most are highly vulnerable to rapid shifts in the
field-served, as well as mostly far-from-financially solid, often run
on the side for specialty mags by someone working for
larger-organization publisher or service group.
        These "entrepreneurs" often see small-niche advantage and drive home
whatever they can use as rapidly as possible, hoping to extract
whatever dollars may reign down, then departing for next-shot.

        Dunno if this applies here, but it surely does across the board in
most small-mag situations, and every magazine has to start-there...then
build up for some years...to become anything worth reader-renewals and
further capital-at-risk for someone.

        Still learning re own older eMac, and surely do appreciate open dialog
made possible only by Engst et al....

yrfriendhank

>My all time favorite was MacUser, but I won't go into a trip down memory lane.

As a former MacUser editor, I wouldn't object. ;-)

>I dropped my subscription to MacWorld last year. They did a review
>of the database program Panorama (I've used it since 1990) that was
>terrible and non-factual. I, along with many others found out that
>the guy that wrote the review was a Filemaker expert and had written
>a Filemaker book. I wrote a letter which MacWorld didn't respond to.
>There were other protests, but they never did address the issue.

Actually, we addressed it numerous times. In our letters column. On
our web site
(http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2005/04/reviewbios/index.php).
In a lengthy personal meeting with Jim Rea of Provue. And in a
correction for the one factual error in the column.

Many Panorama users wrote us angry letters (as a part of a campaign
organized on a mailing list, I believe) about our review. We can
debate whether the review was "non-factual" or just disappointing to
Panorama fans, and the letter-writers were happy to use William
Porter's status as a FileMaker expert against us.

Porter's actually a _database_ expert who has spent time using
Panorama as well as FileMaker, and I don't think his review was
biased or slanted because of his history as a FileMaker developer. (I
will also point out that it was a 3.5-mouse review, meaning it was a
_positive_ review.)

However, based on this incident we instituted a policy that now
clearly discloses the backgrounds of our product reviewers, so that
readers can make up their own minds about the human beings behind the
reviews we publish.

Nobody's forcing anyone to subscribe to Macworld, but if the reason
you dropped the magazine because we never did address the issue, you
are quite mistaken.

-jason

--
Jason Snell / VP and Editorial Director, Macworld / jsnellmacworld.com
415-243-3565 / AIM/iChat: MW jsnell

I emailed MacHome customer service on July 27th (CServiceILkable.com) complaining that I had not received my July or August issues of their magazine. I received a reply that my email had been assigned to one of their e-commerce team members and would be handled in a timely fashion. Signed Customer Care Department. I have not heard from them since!

Craig

On 8/16/06 12:13 PM, "Frank A. Pearsall" <narrowtrakmac.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, August 15, 2006, at 04:42PM, Shawn King <shawnyourmaclife.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Really? Why is it the best in your opinion? I ask because, to be honest,
>> I've found their editorial policies suspect, their copyrighting terrible at
>> times and their fact checking even worse.
>
> I'm surprised by your response about MacHome.

I'm surprised at your surprise. :)

> I always thought they were a "comfortable" magazine.

I'm not sure I know what that means in this context. How is that defined?

> I didn't buy every issue, but got quite a few of
> them. I don't ever remember seeing any glaring errors. Can you give some
> examples?

Not off the top of my head. You'll have to take my word for it.

> As to which one is best, I love MacDirectory. Even though it's a quarterly,
> it's crammed with excellent, useful information. I've found something in every
> issue I could use.

That may be true (and I really like the *physical* style of MacDirectory) I
find their writing equally as bad. I *can* give you examples of that. :)

MacDirectory interviewed me about 10 months ago (maybe longer). The
interviewer was "green" to say the least. I literally had to walk her
through what questions to ask and, when she showed me her first draft, it
was *awful* writing - let alone factually incorrect on *many* things I said.

I offered to "edit" it for her and she took me up on it.

But the original made it into print. That is just one of *many* similar
errors in editing, writing and facts found in MacDirectory.

> My all time favorite was MacUser

MacWeek for me. :)

--
Shawn King
Host/Executive Producer
Your Mac Life
http://www.yourmaclife.com

At 10:13 on 16-08-2006, Frank A. Pearsall wrote:
> My all time favorite was MacUser, but I won't go into a trip down
> memory lane.

I've found that MacUser UK (which was always separate from MacUser
US) is one of the best all-time Mac magazines because of its depth
and quality of coverage. It comes out every two weeks, so is always
fairly current. They've recently introduced an electronic
subscription for the US which is only $50 for 25 issues (i.e.
$2/issue). I personally prefer paper versions of magazines, but if
you're living in the US, you might not want to pay £122 (approx.
$231) for the print subscription (on the other hand, you might!).

<http://www.macuser.co.uk/>
<https://secure.widearea.co.uk/dennis/campaigns/3631/USA.html>

_________________
=> Jolin Warren, Edinburgh, Scotland

On Aug 17, 2006, at 3:52 PM, Shawn King wrote:

>
>> My all time favorite was MacUser
>
> MacWeek for me. :)
>

I miss "MacLeak" :)

Of course that was before the web. In those days We anxiously awaited
the next issue and grabbed it as soon as it was delivered. Now we get
the news online long before we see it in print. By the time the
magazine arrives, we've seen everything in it long ago. Now I very
rarely read the printed editions of most magazines, since I've
already read most of it months ago.

On 8/17/06 14:52, "Shawn King" <shawnyourmaclife.com> wrote:

>> My all time favorite was MacUser
>
> MacWeek for me. :)

me too...especially when they were paying me. But I'm easy like that

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

On Aug 17, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Shawn King wrote:

> MacWeek for me. :)

I liked MacWeek, too. But with the rise of the Internet to a status
of mattering, it was doomed, since it was trying to present things
quickly--and doing a good job of it.

Personally, I prefer getting news in weekly or monthly magazine
form. But our culture wants it NOW. If not yesterday.

   --John

On Aug 15, 2006, at 3:30 PM, David Ross wrote:

> Bob Binder wrote:
>> On Aug 14, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Jason Snell wrote:
>>
>>> I can confirm that they're gone. They laid off their staff a few
>>> months back. Never say never -- MacHome has risen from the dead on
>>> more than one occasion -- but it seems like this is the end.
>>
>> I got a June issue of MacHome and I went to MacHome.com today and it
>> is an active site. I hope you are wrong, as I like their magazine
>> best out of all that I subscribe to.
>
> The date on a magazine cover is the "pull" date. (I'm sure the
> trade has
> a name for it.)
> It's when the magazine will be replaced with another and
> should be pulled form the shelf. Makes sense. Easy to train almost
> anyone.

This isn't the case - the date on the cover is the "cover date."

Cover dates are typically earlier than the month in which they are on
the newsstand or received by subscription in home because it makes
the material seem more timely.

Magazines are usually released to newsstands sooner then they are
sent to subscribers to help achieve maximum sales by the Audit Bureau
Of Circulations reporting dates, as well as to front load chances of
bringing in revenue from new sources (subscribers, who pay in
advance, are a steadier source of income).

However, as the number and frontage of newsstand outlets continues to
decrease rapidly over the years, the % of subscriptions to newsstand
sales continues to shift. For a magazine like MacHome, which would
have what would be considered a small audience and appeal to a niche
market, single copy sales are probably not a big portion of their
circulation.

>
> So a June MacHome would have been sold starting in May (monthly?) and
> thus the editorial work done by April 1 or earlier.

For a monthly magazine, editorial close is usually 8-12 weeks in
advance of the on sale date (the date the issues is on the
newsstands). It takes a long time to print, bind and ship.

Marilyn

[Might I suggest that we wrap up this thread? I think it's veered pretty far from the original topic. -Joe]

At 1:10 PM -0700 8/18/06, johnbaxterlistsmac.com wrote:
>On Aug 17, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Shawn King wrote:
>
>>MacWeek for me. :)
>
>I liked MacWeek, too.

Same here, and it is too bad that it's gone. But some of the good
writers and editors appear to still be around. I don't remember many
of the names, but it seems like some have gone on to illustrious
career paths and still produce good work that occasionally (or
frequently) include a view to the Macintosh.

--
It's aloha Friday - no work till Monday!

>Magazines are usually released to newsstands sooner then they are
>sent to subscribers to help achieve maximum sales by the Audit Bureau
>Of Circulations reporting dates, as well as to front load chances of
>bringing in revenue from new sources (subscribers, who pay in
>advance, are a steadier source of income).

I've never, ever experienced this. And I've subscribed to, worked
for, and been around a bunch of different publishing companies.
Generally the subscribers get copies first because magazines go
through the mail quickly, and the newsstand distribution mechanism is
painfully slow.

>However, as the number and frontage of newsstand outlets continues to
>decrease rapidly over the years, the % of subscriptions to newsstand
>sales continues to shift. For a magazine like MacHome, which would
>have what would be considered a small audience and appeal to a niche
>market, single copy sales are probably not a big portion of their
>circulation.

Absolutely true. The newsstand is a terrible place to be and it's
only getting worse.

>or a monthly magazine, editorial close is usually 8-12 weeks in
>advance of the on sale date (the date the issues is on the
>newsstands). It takes a long time to print, bind and ship.

We just shipped the last pages of the October issue of Macworld
today. It will ship in the mail to subscribers one week from today,
and hit newsstands a little over three weeks from today. So the lead
times aren't nearly as long as this, at least for my particular
monthly.

-jason
--
Jason Snell / VP and Editorial Director, Macworld / jsnellmacworld.com
415-243-3565 / AIM/iChat: MW jsnell

On Aug 18, 2006, at 10:40 PM, Jason Snell wrote:
>> Magazines are usually released to newsstands sooner then they are
>> sent to subscribers to help achieve maximum sales by the Audit Bureau
>> Of Circulations reporting dates, as well as to front load chances of
>> bringing in revenue from new sources (subscribers, who pay in
>> advance, are a steadier source of income).
>
> I've never, ever experienced this. And I've subscribed to, worked
> for, and been around a bunch of different publishing companies.
> Generally the subscribers get copies first because magazines go
> through the mail quickly, and the newsstand distribution mechanism
> is painfully slow.

I spent over 25 years in the magazine publishing business, and worked
for large, small and non-profits. Because newsstand sales are
generally far more profitable than subscriptions, which typically are
sold at a loss, cover and on sale dates are set early to accommodate
the slowness of delivery.

Because subscribers have already purchased a number of issues, it is
naturally assumed that there is less need to push sales on an issue
by issue basis, and the issues are sent out by the cheapest rate that
is practical. This is especially true of long term subscribers, who
are assumed to be the most loyal, and generally get the slowest
delivery.

>> However, as the number and frontage of newsstand outlets continues to
>> decrease rapidly over the years, the % of subscriptions to newsstand
>> sales continues to shift. For a magazine like MacHome, which would
>> have what would be considered a small audience and appeal to a niche
>> market, single copy sales are probably not a big portion of their
>> circulation.
>
> Absolutely true. The newsstand is a terrible place to be and it's
> only getting worse.
>
>> or a monthly magazine, editorial close is usually 8-12 weeks in
>> advance of the on sale date (the date the issues is on the
>> newsstands). It takes a long time to print, bind and ship.
>
> We just shipped the last pages of the October issue of Macworld
> today. It will ship in the mail to subscribers one week from today,
> and hit newsstands a little over three weeks from today. So the
> lead times aren't nearly as long as this, at least for my
> particular monthly.

I checked the online media kit, and didn't find any mention of an ABC
or BPA circulation audit. From the information in the kit, it seems
that the majority of circulation comes from the "get six months free"
when you buy a Mac offer Macworld has established with Apple.

I'm assuming that newsstand sales make up a very small % of
Macworld's. In order to get good facings on a newsstand (and with the
decrease in the amount of shelf space accorded to publications at
retail outlets), publishers generally have to use either their clout
with a big selling publication (which People, Us, etc. will have more
of than Macworld, unfortunately for us Mac devotees), or pay for good
positioning. So newsstand sales are probably not a road Macworld
wishes to pursue.

BTW, we've been paid subscribers to Macworld for over 15 years.

Macworld's circulation is delivered regularly on a timely basis,
which is typical of a successful magazine company. The fact that
MacHome is not living up to its deal with its subscribers, and has
not offered the legally mandated alternative subscriptions demanded
of magazines that are ceasing publication, should be a cause of
concern to its subscribers and fans.

Marilyn

>I spent over 25 years in the magazine publishing business, and
>worked for large, small and non-profits. Because newsstand sales are
>generally far more profitable than subscriptions, which typically
>are sold at a loss, cover and on sale dates are set early to
>accommodate the slowness of delivery.

All I can tell you is that in my years at Ziff-Davis and IDG, I've
never seen a magazine pop on the newsstand in advance of most
subscribers getting it.

>Because subscribers have already purchased a number of issues, it is
>naturally assumed that there is less need to push sales on an issue
>by issue basis, and the issues are sent out by the cheapest rate
>that is practical. This is especially true of long term subscribers,
>who are assumed to be the most loyal, and generally get the slowest
>delivery.

I don't dispute your experience, but my own experience suggests that
your statements are a bit too broad and that different publishers
(with different circulation levels and different markets) treat this
stuff differently. There are always people who _do_ get their
subscriber copies very late, generally if you're trying to keep a
very small bonus above your rate base, but in my experience with
monthlies, the subscribers end up getting the issues a good two weeks
before it hits newsstands.

>I checked the online media kit, and didn't find any mention of an
>ABC or BPA circulation audit.

We're BPA.

>From the information in the kit, it seems that the majority of
>circulation comes from the "get six months free" when you buy a Mac
>offer Macworld has established with Apple.

Not the majority. Roughly 100,000. Our rate base is 350,000, and
newsstand is only about 30,000. So that's 220K paid, 100K qualified,
30K single-copy.

>In order to get good facings on a newsstand (and with the decrease
>in the amount of shelf space accorded to publication at retail
>outlets), publishers generally have to use either their clout with a
>big selling publication (which People, Us, etc. will have more of
>than MacWorld, unfortunately for us Mac devotees), or pay for good
>positioning. So newsstand sales are probably not a road Macworld
>wishes to pursue.

It's a lot more complicated than that, but for me to explain the ins
and outs of our circulation strategy is probably not worth going into
here. Suffice it to say that newsstand still makes us money, but it's
far less profitable than it used to be. We still do newsstand
promotions (where we pay for placement) on an ongoing basis, and it
generally is a good investment.

>Macworld's circulation is delivered regularly on a timely basis,
>which is typical of a successful magazine company. The fact that
>MacHome is not living up to its deal with its subscribers, and has
>not offered the legally mandated alternative subscriptions demanded
>of magazines that are ceasing publication, should be a cause of
>concern to its subscribers and fans.

As I said earlier in the thread, MacHome has definitely been dead
several times. I thought it was a goner many, many years ago, and yet
it has somehow stayed vaguely afloat. But it certainly has not been
in a stable place for a long time, as far as I can tell.

Losing a magazine's no fun. Take it from someone who was at MacUser
when it died. It hurts! The readers, the writers, the whole market.
It's always a sad situation.

-jason
--
Jason Snell / VP and Editorial Director, Macworld / jsnellmacworld.com
415-243-3565 / AIM/iChat: MW jsnell

On 8/22/06 10:14 AM, "Jason Snell" <jsnellmacworld.com> wrote:

> As I said earlier in the thread, MacHome has definitely been dead
> several times.

If MacHome *is* officially dead, it comes as a surprise to no one in the
industry.

(Full disclosure: I'm a former MacHome employee)
--
Shawn King
Host/Executive Producer
Your Mac Life
http://www.yourmaclife.com

On 22 Aug 2006, at 09:14 , Marilyn Matty wrote:
> Because subscribers have already purchased a number of issues, it is
> naturally assumed that there is less need to push sales on an issue
> by issue basis, and the issues are sent out by the cheapest rate that
> is practical. This is especially true of long term subscribers, who
> are assumed to be the most loyal, and generally get the slowest
> delivery.

This makes no sense. All magazines MUST be sent 2nd class mail (or
1st class if you want to spend lots of $$$ which basically no one
does. The Economist might send their magazines via First Class Mail.)

Tthere is no "cheaper/slower" way to get a magazine to a subscriber.

(I haven't worked in publishing, but I've done a lot of work in
mailing).

--
"I don't think the kind of friends I'd have would care."

On Aug 23, 2006, at 3:49 PM, Google Kreme wrote:

> On 22 Aug 2006, at 09:14 , Marilyn Matty wrote:
> This makes no sense. All magazines MUST be sent 2nd class mail (or
> 1st class if you want to spend lots of $$$ which basically no one
> does. The Economist might send their magazines via First Class Mail.)
>
> There is no "cheaper/slower" way to get a magazine to a subscriber.
>
> (I haven't worked in publishing, but I've done a lot of work in
> mailing).

Not all magazines go out second class - there are many other ways to
ship. And there's also special postal rates if you ship to certain
contiguous zip codes; I used to work for a local magazine that took
advantage of this.

Marilyn

Mac Home Journal sent me my renewal notice in JUNE and I sent in my check, but it has not been cashed as of Monday, September 18th. There isn't an answer at the Illinois subscription line, but the SF number's automated system still works until you try to leave a message, then the mailboxes are full.

Dennis B. Swaney