Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Richard Weston

Speedway Star in the winter

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Ghosty said:

I see nothing wrong with the Grasstrack section, both sports are closely related/connected. Grasstrack is currently in a sorry state (just like U.K. Speedway) it was always the feeding ground for young Speedway tallent. No reason half a page could not be none professional U.K. Speedway!!!!!!!       

I think the Grasstrack section has a huge number of subscribers considering the amount of content they get so would be a huge financial clanger to drop that couple of pages. I also agree that whilst the youth rounds get a degree of coverage there is generally a token column for the development leagues and nothing about the amateur meetings that occur throughout the season. Lets not forget that as a Speedway publication there should be coverage of all levels if the demand is there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2019 at 8:28 AM, blueherb777 said:

Believe its the 6/4 edition.

 

On 3/29/2019 at 11:42 AM, CottonOn said:

Agree entirely.   This is the way I read Speedway Star too, and I imagine the way most people read it.   Read the main news on the first 2 pages first, then straight to the back for the full match reports and scorers.

If we have to lose the match reports for financial reasons, and the scorer details will now be dotted randomly throughout, then I guess that's how it will have to be, but I don't think it's a good decision, and it may lose more subscribers.

Surely though it can't be expensive to get someone to organise the pages so that the Premiership clubs' news is all together, the Championship all together, and the NDL all together?  it's a terrible mess at the moment with everything all higgledy-piggledy and hard to read.

And only 96 pages this year 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, KEITH M said:

 

And only 96 pages this year 

and only £3 as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tsunami said:

and only £3 as well.

Which in past years used to  get you 128 pages in the season preview issue 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think today's issue is comprehensive, concise and to the point and a better read, IMO, than it has been in the past, because of that.

There might be 98 pages in this issue and 128 pages last year. Personally I would see that has being 30 pages of waffle removed with the quality remaining the same. Many articles in many papers use a mile and half of useless verbiage before getting to the point and it strikes me the SS has sacrificed that method and produced a better product, in the process. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KEITH M said:

Which in past years used to  get you 128 pages in the season preview issue 

Still cracking value Keith and hardly worth complaining about IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, KEITH M said:

Which in past years used to  get you 128 pages in the season preview issue 

BUT you only paid for 48 pages and still do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tsunami said:

Still cracking value Keith and hardly worth complaining about IMO.

I wasn’t complaining I was just stating a fact ... And yes the issue is a fantastic read 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumper edition always a great read

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2019 at 3:49 PM, Sings4Speedway said:

I think the Grasstrack section has a huge number of subscribers considering the amount of content they get so would be a huge financial clanger to drop that couple of pages. I also agree that whilst the youth rounds get a degree of coverage there is generally a token column for the development leagues and nothing about the amateur meetings that occur throughout the season . Lets not forget that as a Speedway publication there should be coverage of all levels if the demand is there.

2

Is there proof of the number of Grasstrack subscribers? I would rather see the two pages passed over to development leagues and amateur meetings that occur throughout the season, as you state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, moxey63 said:

Is there proof of the number of Grasstrack subscribers? I would rather see the two pages passed over to development leagues and amateur meetings that occur throughout the season, as you state.

Sadly im not aware of any subscriber numbers and suspect the only way to find out would be to remove the pages and see how many cancel? Its a difficult call as i definitely feel the development & amateur meetings deserve far more exposure & respect than they get but removing the grasstrack articles is a risk. Personally i would ditch the historical sections but i know that there is a strong following for these too so always a tricky area of what content to maintain or remove.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sings4Speedway said:

Sadly im not aware of any subscriber numbers and suspect the only way to find out would be to remove the pages and see how many cancel? Its a difficult call as i definitely feel the development & amateur meetings deserve far more exposure & respect than they get but removing the grasstrack articles is a risk. Personally i would ditch the historical sections but i know that there is a strong following for these too so always a tricky area of what content to maintain or remove.

Difficultey is the the removal of the grass track stuff would lose their sales, but more development material would not bring in the extra same number to replace them. Best solution would be to trim something down, and put a new development item in on a regular basis and then everyone would be happy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, we had 112 pages last year and the year before. With fewer tracks and riders this year a reduction in size was inevitable. While admitting I would have liked a bigger read, it is still excellent value at £3.00.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mr. Clemens said:

 

 

I think today's issue is comprehensive, concise and to the point and a better read, IMO, than it has been in the past, because of that.

There might be 98 pages in this issue and 128 pages last year. Personally I would see that has being 30 pages of waffle removed with the quality remaining the same. Many articles in many papers use a mile and half of useless verbiage before getting to the point and it strikes me the SS has sacrificed that method and produced a better product, in the process. 

 

 

Totally agree with you. I have complained before about verbiage in the SS, using ten words when two would do...so I really welcome what is a tight product this year.

I still have much to read and, of course, it is same price as usual = great value.

Thoroughly recommend, if you have not yet bought your copy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Richard Weston said:

Totally agree with you. I have complained before about verbiage in the SS, using ten words when two would do...so I really welcome what is a tight product this year.

I still have much to read and, of course, it is same price as usual = great value.

Thoroughly recommend, if you have not yet bought your copy.

THANKS for all the comments ... they are read and appreciated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy