Backtrack Question

[Guest Ashie Smashy]

Have you ever considered creating a purchasable PDF download of the magazine?. I would happy and rather pay to receive a copy electronically via email rather postal copy.

[Bee 1]

Have you ever considered creating a purchasable PDF download of the magazine?. I would happy and rather pay to receive a copy electronically via email rather postal copy.

 

 

Me too

[TonyMac 720]

Have you ever considered creating a purchasable PDF download of the magazine?. I would happy and rather pay to receive a copy electronically via email rather postal copy.

 

It's not something we've considered but it's an interesting question.

 

How much (max) per issue would you be prepared to pay for this service?

[Dave67 15]

It's not something we've considered but it's an interesting question.

 

How much (max) per issue would you be prepared to pay for this service?

 

Something I'd be interested in. I used to subscribe, but I would prefer to pick & choose the magazines I purchase.

 

Not sure about cost, how much is the magazine in posted form?

[JC! 142]

Something I'd be interested in. I used to subscribe, but I would prefer to pick & choose the magazines I purchase.

 

Not sure about cost, how much is the magazine in posted form?

 

I agree, my renewal has come through but I will not be renewing, I expect. I think it is £3-50 a mag these days.

[Guest Ashie Smashy]

It's not something we've considered but it's an interesting question.

 

How much (max) per issue would you be prepared to pay for this service?

 

 

Hi TMC,

 

Well I know that with online payments you are charged 20-50p per transaction sometimes, so I guess you need to cover your costs too. What about selling them at the same price, minus printing/postage costs for each magazine. I don't know how many you print, but again when I print our magazines we only print about 500 so it costs almost £1.50 per magazine sometimes if we go full colour.

 

I would certainly pay £1.99 to access a PDF, maybe even consider £2.50.

 

Again if you choose to do this, what I do rather than emailing the PDF to buyers which takes bandwidth, we create a webpage with the PDF embedded. We then simply email buyers the link to that webpage which changes for each magazine, that works if you only have a few buyers each magazine. A more automated option is to use online shop software like ecommerce where you add the PDF as a Zip file and it creates a 3 day / 3 download limit option for the shopper to download that zipped file containing the PDF. Nothing to stop people then forwarding the PDF to others, but hopefully most fans will respect you enough not to do that.

 

 

[Dave67 15]

Hi TMC,

 

Well I know that with online payments you are charged 20-50p per transaction sometimes, so I guess you need to cover your costs too. What about selling them at the same price, minus printing/postage costs for each magazine. I don't know how many you print, but again when I print our magazines we only print about 500 so it costs almost £1.50 per magazine sometimes if we go full colour.

 

I would certainly pay £1.99 to access a PDF, maybe even consider £2.50.

 

Again if you choose to do this, what I do rather than emailing the PDF to buyers which takes bandwidth, we create a webpage with the PDF embedded. We then simply email buyers the link to that webpage which changes for each magazine, that works if you only have a few buyers each magazine. A more automated option is to use online shop software like ecommerce where you add the PDF as a Zip file and it creates a 3 day / 3 download limit option for the shopper to download that zipped file containing the PDF. Nothing to stop people then forwarding the PDF to others, but hopefully most fans will respect you enough not to do that.

 

Wow, I think

 

 

First paragraph I got then you went into some foreign tongue, hope TMC speaks it too :lol:

 

ps, £2 doesn't sound bad

[TonyMac 720]

I agree, my renewal has come through but I will not be renewing, I expect. I think it is £3-50 a mag these days.

 

Respect your decision, but that's very, very disappointing to hear.

 

What, may I ask, has made you reach this decision? Mag not worthy of the price? If so, then please tell us where we're going wrong. Or is it for cost-saving reasons?

 

It's not easy making a speedway magazine work (ask all of those who've tried over the years and failed through lack of support), especially in the current economic climate, so we can ill-afford to lose any readers.

 

Meanwhile, I'm pondering the PDF option question and will investigate in due course. I guess it's the PC world we live in today, with more and more people chossing to browse the online version of national newspapers and media news outlets for all they need to know.

 

What happened to those days when we would all take to our favourite armchair, not worry about the dross served up on TV, and sit back and read our favourite mags from cover to cover, as they were meant to look?

 

God help us if the day comes when computer generated PDFs replace the look and feel of good, old fashioned ink and print!

Edited July 14, 2009 by tmc

[Guest Ashie Smashy]

I think the thing is TMC that we all have different preferences, and I guess with more choice, it may also help you make more sales. Plus you can offer an environmentally friendly version of your magazine, i.e. the PDF.

 

I don't buy every issue because sometimes I can't relate to the features, but sometimes you have features relevant to my speedway following, like this time I noticed something with Gary O'Hare so would love to read that. It struck me that I could place the order, but then have to wait for it to arrive, where an online order could be with me very quickly, automatic if your shop software allowed.

 

Up to you of course, but I know I would initially buy them as PDF's and maybe if I enjoyed would then place a more traditional subscription.

[JC! 142]

Respect your decision, but that's very, very disappointing to hear.

 

What, may I ask, has made you reach this decision? Mag not worthy of the price? If so, then please tell us where we're going wrong. Or is it for cost-saving reasons?

 

It's not easy making a speedway magazine work (ask all of those who've tried over the years and failed through lack of support), especially in the current economic climate, so we can ill-afford to lose any readers.

 

TMC

 

Sure, but please note that this is just my opinion, and I am sure that there will be many who will charge in to tell me I have it all wrong!!

 

Not cancelling as a result of cost, to be fair £17 seems ok for a publication like Backtrack. There are several areas where I feel that the interest to me of the magazine has sharply declined recently, these include:

 

1) Lack of a Main Man feature, the analysis of USA and England just seem to be re-hash of old magazines and dont really cover any new ground. Dont feel that Preben Eriksen etc really have any stand out value to be main article.

 

2) The time frame has reduced the subject matter available, Backtrack must have been going about 5 years and is only covering a 20 year period. It occurs to me that this means that the readership has aged by 5 years, and counting. I think a move to 1970-1995 would open up some new avenues for discussion, the decline of the sport pre Sky TV days, new riders for features etc etc.

 

3) Loss of articles that had interested me - the quizzes, what was in the news x years ago, amongst others. Whilst replacements do not grab my attention including Rod Haynes, who I had never heard of, and whose column feels to me to have lost impact, after initially being of interest.

 

As I say, just my opinion, I am certain that you (and, no doubt, the vast majority) will disagree, and I totally understand that. You will probably see that I have given positive comment in the past on various issues of Backtrack on this forum so I dont consider myself to be a type to whinge about everything and anything, and had not even realised that I had put that I was not going to renew, and certainly did not mean to discourage or criticise.

 

Regards

 

John

[Robbie B 262]

I'm pondering the PDF option question and will investigate in due course. I guess it's the PC world we live in today, with more and more people chossing to browse the online version of national newspapers and media news outlets for all they need to know.

 

What happened to those days when we would all take to our favourite armchair, not worry about the dross served up on TV, and sit back and read our favourite mags from cover to cover, as they were meant to look?

 

God help us if the day comes when computer generated PDFs replace the look and feel of good, old fashioned ink and print!

 

Totally agree with you Tony, you can't beat the look and feel of a proper book or magazine for reading. Reading on the internet for me is just for throw away items like news pages etc, something that I personally would not want to read over and over again. I would rather have a hard copy for my reading pleasure.

[jeff... 0]

TMC

 

Sure, but please note that this is just my opinion, and I am sure that there will be many who will charge in to tell me I have it all wrong!!

 

Not cancelling as a result of cost, to be fair £17 seems ok for a publication like Backtrack. There are several areas where I feel that the interest to me of the magazine has sharply declined recently, these include:

 

1) Lack of a Main Man feature, the analysis of USA and England just seem to be re-hash of old magazines and dont really cover any new ground. Dont feel that Preben Eriksen etc really have any stand out value to be main article.

 

 

2) The time frame has reduced the subject matter available, Backtrack must have been going about 5 years and is only covering a 20 year period. It occurs to me that this means that the readership has aged by 5 years, and counting. I think a move to 1970-1995 would open up some new avenues for discussion, the decline of the sport pre Sky TV days, new riders for features etc etc.

 

3) Loss of articles that had interested me - the quizzes, what was in the news x years ago, amongst others. Whilst replacements do not grab my attention including Rod Haynes, who I had never heard of, and whose column feels to me to have lost impact, after initially being of interest.

 

As I say, just my opinion, I am certain that you (and, no doubt, the vast majority) will disagree, and I totally understand that. You will probably see that I have given positive comment in the past on various issues of Backtrack on this forum so I dont consider myself to be a type to whinge about everything and anything, and had not even realised that I had put that I was not going to renew, and certainly did not mean to discourage or criticise.

 

Regards

 

John

 

Agree entirely, in it's early days the mag was a superb read but quite simply, the subject matter has virtually been exhausted and to keep things going the likes of Preben Eriksen have to be featured.

 

Opening up to the nineties I doubt as being an option just yet, 1995 is simply not "nostalgic" enough yet and the same faces, by and large, were around in the eighties.

 

Have to agree about the Rod Haynes column, maybe as a one off it had merit but as an ongoing feature, no definately not

 

Personnally I like the articles on defunct tracks and stadia and there is still mileage in that (sadly)

 

I still buy it occassionally but the days of looking forward to the magazine have gone, I just buy it on an ad hoc basis now

Edited July 15, 2009 by jeff...

[martinmauger 584]

A good idea for Backtrack to be available in a .pdf format and "hard copy" to give readers a choice. I'd always want the mag in hard copy form though as I find it easier and more pleasant to read than on a monitor and easier to refer back to than having to boot up a PC every time. Also speaking personally as my work involves computers I already spend more than enough time staring into monitors. Allthough it could easily be printed off if so desired, though at some cost, I would still want the actual magazine....

[keepturningleft 588]

I can't think of anything worse than reading Backtrack, or any other mag, from a computer screen!

 

I do fear however in common with other comments, that Backtrack may be close to having 'run it's course', with just about all the main players from the 70's and 80's having now been interviewed.

 

Personally I would like to see lengthier coverage of the defunct track feature and expanded articles on individual meetings such as the world finals of the period.

[TonyMac 720]

I can't think of anything worse than reading Backtrack, or any other mag, from a computer screen!

 

I do fear however in common with other comments, that Backtrack may be close to having 'run it's course', with just about all the main players from the 70's and 80's having now been interviewed.

 

Personally I would like to see lengthier coverage of the defunct track feature and expanded articles on individual meetings such as the world finals of the period.

 

 

I intend to prove all doubters wrong and we're going to continue to take Backtrack forward. I'll be honest here - I'm disappointed with the apparent apathy of some and wonder what people expect in terms of value from a publication? Read back issues of Backtrack and tell me, hand on heart, that you've ever read such candid, honest opinions about our sport in days gone anywhere else other than the one-to-one exclusive interviews within our pages?

 

Like all very small, niche publications we rely on the support of a loyal band of readers and, without them, it makes it a real struggle, if not impossible, to make it commercially viable. Of course, I realise that the support of readers should never be unconditional but - and I know I'm biased - is it not good value at £17.50 per year for six issues?

 

As for features/interviews with certain riders or particular tracks, there will inevitably be aspects of any magazine that a reader will not be especially keen to read, or skip completely, for whatever reason. I look forward to reading Speedway Star every week, but never bother with the grass-track or foreign news. That's just my personal preference, but it doesn't mean the mag is not providing an excellent, value for money service for speedway fans in general.

 

To answer the Preben Eriksen case, he was not a solo cover man anyway, and shared front billing with Middlo in that particular issue. Many may not like Eriksen, but the fact remains that he was a BL1 No.1 and Danish World Cup winner, a character who made lots of headlines - for whatever reason - in his day and who had some interesting stuff to say. Ditto Middlo. It's surely not only about hearing what the superstars have to say?

 

I've come to the conclusion that offering a PDF version wil not solve anything or increase our readership. The people who are indifferent now about subscribing or buying every issue from their local track (spending £3.50 every two months) will almost certainly take the same view when considering whether to pay for a PDF download. And we certainly wouldn't offer a PDF version on a single copy, one-off only basis. It would have to be a full year sign-up option for it to even come close to being justifiable. Even then, and you may call this old fashioned, but I'm very much inclined to agree with those who say that a mag of Backtrack's type should be enjoyed in your favourite armchair, not hunched over a computer or from a print out.

 

I'll not allow the negative feedback of a few posters on here to dampen my enthusiasm for producing what clearly appeals to the thousands who do continue to support us.

 

There is still so much more to cover in Backtrack - two decades! - including big names worthy of front cover status.

 

Changes are planned for the next issue, we'll be introducing new regular features, and there could be surprises in store when we announce our ex-rider columnists...

 

Watch this space...

Edited August 3, 2009 by tmc