Go Back  RCU Forums > Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more > The Clubhouse
Reload this Page >

let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Notices
The Clubhouse If it doesn't fit in any other category and is about general RC stuff then post it here at the Clubhouse.

let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Old 01-27-2004, 10:14 AM
  #1  
dr_wogz
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Pointe Claire, QC, CANADA
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Recently, thetre have been a rash of 'which magazine is better' posts. (I know, I started one!!)

We all seem to be bashing one or another, for various reasons.. It seems the mags on teh shelf are trying to direct the hobbie towards ARFs and electric 'park flyers' (Fly RC's latest issue?!?!), and provide glowing reviews of all planes tested. Granted, money has to be made, and a profit shown to 'the board' but, shouldn' this money come from us, or does it really come from the corporate world?!

I would like to think, that the editors of teh various mags do surf this site, and that they do listen to us, and if so, why don't they write what we want.

So, in a [vain] attempt, can we all list three things we reaqlly, really want to see in the mags, above all else?! What we feel is imprtant? three things that will make us pick up the magazine, and say 'Yeah!!'

I vote for:
-building articles both kits and scratching
-tips and tricks, general how to's
-new product showcase

(reviews would be nice, but I doubt that'll change!!)
Old 01-27-2004, 10:54 AM
  #2  
P-51B
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
P-51B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Posts: 6,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

I would like to see some technical articles on some applicable modeling theory. For example, I was looking through some old MAN the other day, and there were articles by Andy Lennon on various aircraft designs, such as canards, float planes, etc. I also found articles on scale markings placement, how to fiberglass a model that wasn't just bullets-but an actual multi-page article!

It was interesting to compare the old magazines to the new ones.
Old 01-27-2004, 11:03 AM
  #3  
Dig it
Senior Member
 
Dig it's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kitscoty, AB, CANADA
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

All I would really like to see is no bull sh?t reviews. I understand that the companies pay for advertising in these mags but if the put out crap then it should be reviewed as such.

Other than that, I like reviews on all types of planes from park to jet. I love how-to's and tips and trick. How about interviews with guys like Dave Platt etc.
Old 01-27-2004, 11:21 AM
  #4  
Roll On 60
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: southeast
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Reviews that are really just that, not fluff. I mean more than 1-2-3 flights and structural review to include retracts, glue used, quality of wood, fit and finish for ARF's, material used in covering etc, etc.
When a plane is covered in shelf paper, say so. Currently it would read, The plane is beautifully covered. That doesn't tell us anything. I want details.
Old 01-27-2004, 11:41 AM
  #5  
pettit
My Feedback: (23)
 
pettit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 2,769
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

OK, I'm listening.

As far as reviews of true kits, if the manufacturers are not making any new KITS, ( one that have not been reviewed in the past 3 years), how can we write a review on one?

But, for the most part, the major manufacturers are not doing many true kits these days. Yes, they are available, but they have probably been done before, either in our magazine, or one of the others.

Short kits, ones that give just plans and some formers, are just scratch built models that someone cut out a few parts for the builder. See "scratch building" below. I'd rather not do one of those, but others may want to try one.

As far as scratch built models, writing a Product review on such a project would lead to basically an article about "How good a builder I am" and "how good the plans are". Nice to read, but not much substance. It might be good for giving out hints and tips. They also take a long time to complete and would tie up a reviewer for a long time. Then you'd not get any other projects done during that time.

If the manufacturer is a REAL business and not just a "garage shop" operation, we'll be glad to write a review of their product.

Another thing, I do not do Reviews for free. I get paid for what I do. That means that, for the most part, kits are supplied by the manufacturer to us for review. Basically, they're paying for advertising. My "pay check" for writing a review is selling the plane to another modeler when I'm done. If I have to purchase everything for a review, how can I get paid? I do buy engines, servos, accessories, etc, but the kit itself is usually provided to the reviewer.

All we can do is provide the reader with an honest review. If there is a problem, we'll tell everyone. If there are no problems (and some planes really don't have any real problems), we'll tell that too. A mis-spelled word in the manual is really not a problem, but a missing part, or a safety related issue is a problem.

I will not write a 100% negative review. I would rather send the kit back to the manufacturer with an explanation, rather than yell and scream in a negative manner in the pages of our magazine. I have done this several times and never heard back from those companies. They were not, however, "major" manufacturers.

Personally, I usually only review what I call Giant Size models. I have done smaller ones, but I like to do the larger ones. Others on our staff do smaller planes, electrics, jets, etc. Thsy'll have to answer for themselves.



Give us a list of what you'd like to have reviewed, and some of us will try to do something about it.



Another can of worms? Well, you asked for it.....
Old 01-27-2004, 12:01 PM
  #6  
balsa4cat
Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange, CA
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Hallo Dr. Wogs:
Unless the kit reviewer is a known Aerospace engineer like Zirolli, Uravitch, Hunt, Violet, etc. the test reports are suspect. we have no idea how qualified the builder and flyer of the 'reviewed kit ' is. Another problem of suspect kit reviewers is their lack of financial investment in the project, i.e. the kit and ancillary items are given to them and not bought out of their own pocket.
Therefore to restore credibility, and in the true American Fashion, all kit reviews should be done with at least three builder/flyers(that have bought the kit with their own money) and then compare results in a fly/crash/off.
Their should be no beholding to the manufacturer.
Regional fly-in/offs should offer a neutral and open forum for this event, for all to see and hear called "The Reviewers event". The Public Relations buzz should be more honest and not under the control of the manufacturer. The manufactureres should only dare to offer the best and not schlock stuff.
Old 01-27-2004, 12:14 PM
  #7  
balsa4cat
Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange, CA
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Hi fellas;
Time to get the cliche police and posse together and make the editors print the following declaimers on each and every 'kit review';
"The more time worn cliches used the more the Builder/flyer does not know what he is talking about or doing"
Old 01-27-2004, 01:30 PM
  #8  
dr_wogz
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Pointe Claire, QC, CANADA
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Balsa4cat:

That is teh truth!!! If only, but we live in a cheapie cheapie world, and I doubt we could get that kind of colaberation.


Except for Petit (don't think soo little of yourself!!), I doubt very much that the other editors actually are involved with the subject they publish.. Therefore, are easily influnced by the "our company will make a contribution in return for..." line.

Like how beauty magazines are filling girls heads with unrealistic ideals of what is considred beautiful, and we end up with hollow, low confidence, rake-thin, girls who aspireto a hopeless cause, almost killing themselves, to emulate what the designers insist is beautiful, and anything but is ugly...

At least, that's what I'm lead to beleive...
Old 01-27-2004, 02:24 PM
  #9  
GSNut
My Feedback: (8)
 
GSNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Thornton, CO
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

[:-]
ORIGINAL: balsa4cat

Hi fellas;
Time to get the cliche police and posse together and make the editors print the following declaimers on each and every 'kit review';
[&o]

Sorry Guys and Gals !

A Lesson in Life..

But the Bottom Line is Dollars (that's spelled Profit) as you all should know by now!

The last magazine that I know of was RCM that offered any kind of reliable review or product report when they first started publishing. Then of course
as a short period of time passed, (about may a year or so into it) RCM had to trash their product rating system. Now one of the biggest Catologs called a Magazine that you can buy.

Oh how the mighty have fallen!!

How it worked for those that are of a younger than dirt age..

The manufacturing concerns that cared enough to try the system..was as follows:

1. Send your product in and have it evaluated.
2. If it was no go then it was sent back to you and you had the chance to fix, redesign or
do the corrective action that was necessary to come up to RCM's standards.
3. If the product was approved it then was awarded the RCM Seal of Approval and would be
featured in the New Products Section and you could purchase advertising space in the
magazine with their seal of approval contained in your ad.

It was a matter of pride that the manufacturer could even put the Seal of Approval on the product..even on the box, plans, letter head and etc. I know as an employee of such a company we spent many hours to make sure that the product was approved the first go-round.

Anybody remember MPI (Midland Products Inc.) We were Very Proud of those Seals !!

But even the Mighty RCM had to surrender to the power of the advertisement dollar.

LOL with the crusade to get em to listen, in fact I hope they will and do something about it but the money's on the other side of the table, and your subscription "ain't worth a toot in the wind" when it comes to DADDY BIG BUCKS ..

If enough people withdraw from their subscription lists then you may have a chance, like a snowball in hell if you don't though.

Ever hear the Term Money Talks.....Bull S#$t Walks.. if you doubt it just ask any CEO !!

Wha's that you Say....?? R/C Reports has a policy that almost parallels that mentioned above.. Hummmm, that is interesting.

OK, will have to check it out, though I still think a Seal of Approval System would more than weed out the garbage products that seem to be proliferating at a rate that is beyond reason.

The end user in this Hobby/Sport is YOU/Me and in this case not generaly the Advertiser though
at some point in time they may have been or are involved in R/C. It's hard to tell without Good Hard Nosed Product Reviews that we the consumer need to justify spending our hard earned scheckles (Dollars) for.

Sorry bout that but a YEA or NAY is what we want and need so for now RCU fits the bill for me.
Old 01-27-2004, 05:59 PM
  #10  
Mike in DC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

To be honest, I'd settle for an R/C magazine that has writers (or editors, but I think they're extinct) that know the difference between "its" and "it's".
Old 01-27-2004, 08:50 PM
  #11  
tailskid
My Feedback: (34)
 
tailskid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tolleson, AZ
Posts: 9,552
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default RE: let's tell the mag editors what we really want!

Fact you may or may not know.....RCM will do a review of any product - but does NOT request any! And the manufacturer does NOT have to advertise to have their product reviewed. Not the same with other mags.....

Now if a manufacturer wants to (?) send a half-dozen of the same planes to be reviewed by a 'committee', they may !

Jerry

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.