[Magazines] I've done it - I've cancelled Autosport

[bella]

just picking up on something you mention there about magazines being under the impression that print is doomed, i think autosport have done a good job of covering both bases. their internet and paper services do compliment each other very well, but at the same time you can read either alone and not come out feeling like you've missed out a piece from the jigsaw.

[old man]

Must admit I have never read the web version of AS, is it more than just the magazine on the web? Being from Yorkshire I don't want to pay twice for the same stuff!

[Suze]

it depends and varies....some bits you need to subscribe to or be a mag subscriber in order to read on the web. but as bella says, the mag and web bits compliment each other well.

[bella]

for example, me and my mum share a copy of autosport magazine, and we both read the website. my favourite function is the mobile facility - i can check results and qualifying times when i'm not near the internet and at an event, or keep up on f1 results while i'm watching real racing she, on the other hand, likes the reports and news.

generally, i find the website and the magazine don't cross paths too much.

[nycuk]

I haven't missed a copy of Autosport since I was 9 years old in 1978. I stopped subscribing though recently as it kept arriving on Friday instead of Thursday... no good.
For all it's faults it's still an essential read - but what other choices are there? There is no other weekly that covers international and national motorsport other than Motorsport News.

[old man]

OK so they claim loss of sales and only 32k copies but how many who now look at the web version would otherwise buy the magazine. Have they lost the enthusiast not so much as a customer but as a hard copy customer? If they have many thousands of subscribers to their web coverage they are not really losing at all unless they are undercharging on the web due to competition.

Copies "sold" should include internet sales because the same people write that and Haymarket do not have printing and distribution costs.

Perhaps I should try it?

[Born Racer]

Secondly, I am truely amazed that they only sell 32k copies and that this is so dependent on the casual F1 buyer.

This is what I don't grasp. I would have thought that it is only people you might consider big fans or even anoraks who would buy a motor racing magazine anyway.

They do need to improve the depth of specialist reporting as I think I said earlier, if they are to get the enthusiasts on side again

I agree that this makes much sense, as alienating hardcore fans is surely eliminating a large potential readership. We're the ones who if we're happy with the content are more likely to buy it on a regular basis (I myself do buy it every week as it goes.)

[Dutton]

If you keep buying it every week then don't expect things to change to what you want.

[ensign14]

Originally Posted by old man

Right, let's start a debate on class prestige, would be interesting to have other opinions on that forum

Well, the working classes are uneducated, middle classes twee and upper classes inbred.

[JAG]

I bought Autosport this weekas DSC talked about a good article on the new Le Mans coupes.

If a number of similar articles were in every issue, I'd start buying again.

If they're only selling 32k copies a week, surely that tells them they're missing out on at least 20k-30k 'motorosport' fans who can no longer stand the saturation F1 coverage?

[Dutton]

I guess we have to stop to ask ourselves if it is as bad as we think it is, or is a fair part of it simply going to be that we are truly a niche (thus whiney buggers)? This means that we are less likely than the "masses" to shift with changing times and attitudes of what is expected. We have such a hyper-intensive focus on motorsport (compared to most people) that if something related to motorsport does not very specifically meet our desires, we form a disproportionate criticism of any weaknesses? The other side of this situation being we are slow to recognise the good?

I am personally less than convinced by the proposition of the above paragraph, but is it something worth thinking about?

[Knowlesy]

No.

Well, actually, it is quite possible. But I am sure that personally this is not the case for me. I do recognise the good stuff that sometimes surfaces.

[Dutton]

As, I think, most of us do. This is one of the reasons that I doubt the theory as some ultimate truth.

The general behavioural traits will be there to a point, though (I am sure of that): with specialisation comes increasing sophistication and expectation. So, with regards the masses, we are all the things proposed. We are, basically, "fussy". I am not saying there is anything wrong with this, but it is the case.

The part I take particular exception to is the "slow to recognise the good" aspect. I think we do recognise the good just fine - it is just what we see as the good is being less represented. This brings us to a very related issue: it would be a pretty impossible task to satisfy us at large (all the competing interests).

It is easier to satisfy the simplistic, thus that is what occurs.

[Knowlesy]

Loyal customers, customers who basically support whatever it is they are buying are always fussy customers.

As they have a right to be really.

[old man]

Originally Posted by Dutton

As, I think, most of us do. This is one of the reasons that I doubt the theory as some ultimate truth.

The general behavioural traits will be there to a point, though (I am sure of that): with specialisation comes increasing sophistication and expectation. So, with regards the masses, we are all the things proposed. We are, basically, "fussy". I am not saying there is anything wrong with this, but it is the case.

The part I take particular exception to is the "slow to recognise the good" aspect. I think we do recognise the good just fine - it is just what we see as the good is being less represented. This brings us to a very related issue: it would be a pretty impossible task to satisfy us at large (all the competing interests).

It is easier to satisfy the simplistic, thus that is what occurs.

I agree that as specialists we want detail that satisfies our particular specialiation, in my case Sports GT racing and if we do not get enough we are unhappy. Because of our specialist interests we know where to go for information and with the web making so much available AS will lose out unless it can pull the specialists back with detail and information that intersets us.

I am convinced that they have lost "us" and now sell a disproporionate proportion of the copies to the casual.

[Dutton]

Originally Posted by old man

Because of our specialist interests we know where to go for information and with the web making so much available AS will lose out unless it can pull the specialists back with detail and information that intersets us.

I am convinced that they have lost "us" and now sell a disproporionate proportion of the copies to the casual.

It makes one think that the website should focus on giving comprehensive results/data/stats/news, and leave the magazine to focus on detailed studies of technical/sporting issues/rules/theories, as well as in-depth interviews (even features, if very carefully approached).

This must be done with the utmost attention to integrity and quality. Just chucking it together, or giving the wrong emphasis, would be a totally pointless exercise.

A (small as possible) section, related to the cover, devoted to sensationalist nonsense, could be present: just let the bit that said "casual" would not be interested in to meet the higher expectations outlined above.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Loyal customers, customers who basically support whatever it is they are buying are always fussy customers.

As they have a right to be really.

Exactly.

And for me, the Le Mans guide farce was just one cavalier step too many.

I finally ended my 22 year subscription on Saturday.

[Craig]

Another long termer cancelling? The people at Autosport really should notice this and act on it. But they won't.

It's funny, I've not received Autosport through the post for several weeks but it was only when I saw this thread that I actually remembered. I haven't missed it one little bit.

I finally got round to reading the Evo Le Mans a couple of days ago. It was very good - reminded me of the one that Autosport used to do in years gone by. I remember reading it every year from the age of about eight or ten and thinking... oooh, Le Mans, eh? The guide made it sound soooo cool. I really want to go there! Can't imagine that feeling if I'd been bought up on recent editions.

[Thundersports]

After 20 odd years I cancelled Autosport last year as it has turned in to a cross between Hello magazine and News of the world, far to much F1 with glossy pictures etc, the only thing I miss is Nigel Roebuck and Marcus Pye.

[Thundersports]

On the subject of F1 if Autosport is intent on concentrating on that, maybe some promotion and race coverage of Historic F1, Masters and Euroboss?
Euroboss rarely gets a mention when for a small entrance fee the public can attend a meeting and see them in action and also get up close to the cars.
Maybe Autosport is only interested in the "celebrity" of F1 and not giving fans a chance to see PROPER F1 cars.............

[old man]

The Editor had the courage to comment early in this thread, now he doesn't care, heard it all before, he knows how to sell magazines, we don't, we only buy 'em Rather arrogant not to discuss it further IMO, are the customers getting in the way of running the business?

[Truckosaurus]

Originally Posted by old man

...are the customers getting in the way of running the business?

But we're no longer customers are we, perhaps we are not even in the target market anymore.

I've even given up browsing Autosprout in WHSmiths.

[Graz]

In fairness to Autosport, could some of the reason for us being disgruntled with them have something to do with the possible decline in variety and quality of racing worldwide, including F1? For instance, when I started reading Autosport in the mid 80's, F1 was far more entertaining than now, Group C was strong and the Champcar/Indycar series was top notch too. There were more characters around too, particularly in F1 compared to now. I haven't bought Autossport in a few years now simply because of the 'same 'ol' content but some of that is due to the fact that I preferred the cars/racing/drivers/more carefree approach that existed 15 - 20 years ago.

[AvdB]

I tell you what I've heard before: Carping on about how much coverage F1 gets. Why Le Mans isn't on the cover. How we don't care about sportscars. Why such and such minor club event isn't getting more coverage.

By their own admission, half the people posting on this thread don't read the mag anymore. How can I take seriously the opinion of someone who doesn't even know where the mag is at the moment?

The staff at Autosport bust a gut to create what I believe is the best motorsport weekly mag in the world. Where else will you get a feature like the one on women in motorsport that features in this week's mag? Where else will you get such an analysis of future FIA GT rules? A Robert Doornbos feature? A comprehensive report from a 750MC meeting? A Japanese GT report?

If you don't like modern F1 or the fact that we do, that's too bad. It's not the job of Autosport to don rose-tinted specs and bang on about how much better things used to be. By and large they weren't. You might not like that fact. Autosport may not be the mag for you.

That's your choice. But don't insult my integrity. That's just not on.

Andrew van de Burgt
Editor, Autosport

[Peter Mallett]

Hmm,

I shan't insult your integrity, but I have to say that when I arrived back to the UK on Saturday I saw the latest copy of the mag waiting for me in the kitchen, with my last six weeks mail. I read the mail and dealt with it. I'm now sitting on a beach in Greece and the mag is in my bin at home. I didn't even open it because the headline told me all I needed to know. I felt my intelligence was questioned.

I really do think you've lost something but you won't miss my irregular contribution so hey ho.