Well, my posting certainly changed the topic. A lot of good thoughts 
and speculation has been stated I thought that if would briefly 
respond:
Richard Karnes (posting below)
1. FYI +80% of 1:64MG subscribers have no email and rely on the 
magazine for there Product News. An e-zine website would not service 
them unless a supplement were made available to them.

2. Not exactly. Subscriptions have remained steady for the past two 
years, so to state that the 1:64MG is "tanking" is pure speculation. 
As for the name change, for the first year the subscriptions never 
rose above 290 and since the Sn3 subscribers were less than 5% and 
the "other gauges" were left out of the name we felt that the name 
change would create a sort of unity or brotherhood. The result, 
subscriptions dipped for a short time and now have exceeded the first 
year. I did get lost in the pig & chicken story but there is a 
website (I forget which one) that lists all the 1/64 vehicles by 
brand and a very small percent of them is exactly 1/64. Yes, some are 
close, but 1/60 isn't exactly 1/64 now is it.

As for asking subscriber "to support" me (and Debbie) or we "would 
fail", please understand that we were looking for folks to assist 
with the articles, editing, etc. If you want the whole story, just 
open up you 1:64MG back issue and you can read the exact words.

Yes, in terms of advice and articles Dick has been a staunch 
supporter of the 1:64 Modeling Guide especially with the Engineering 
column. But, I don't seem to find the stack of articles. Would it be 
possible for you to contact me off list with your list so that I can 
get them back to you?

I would like to make a side-bar statement here: Please let me make it 
quite clear, Debbie & I are NOT; let me repeat this: are NOT closing 
down the 1:64 Modeling Guide magazine. This business remains a source 
of revenue for us and we have new subscribers joining all the time. 
As I stated earlier, many of our subscribers do not belong to, nor do 
they know about the S-scale Yahoo Group let alone the Sn3 group, Sn2 
Group, Sn42 Group, S-trains group and all the others so they depend 
upon us for their 1/64 news. Any words without evidence stated or 
written to the affect of this publication tanking, folding, etc are 
slanderous and liable. The primary reason for my response to the 
original posting was to hopefully find someone who may be able to do 
a better job with this publication that I have done, that's all. 
We've been telling you guys for years now that we needed more help 
and finally it has gotten to the point of rather throwing in the 
towel and quitting; we thought that as we plug along there may be 
someone other there who would like to take a stab at publishing this 
scale magazine and perhaps do a better job than I have done. Oh, by 
the way, did anyone read the part that I still wanted to remain a 
supporter and contributor as Billy Wade as done with me and this 
magazine? 

Please don't misunderstand me, Debbie & I really like Dick Karnes. 
Dick has been a huge amount of information and advice. I am sorry 
that he feels that we would ask his advice only to do the opposite. 
In hopes of not to be confused with the pig and the chicken 
reference, it is very difficult for a person to sit in the back seat 
of a car and give directions. The best place for a navigator to sit 
is in the front passenger seat and Dick's advisor position did not 
afford him the luxury of sitting up front and that was not his fault. 

Finally, as for someone's posting of "what's there to own" by 
purchasing the "S/Sn3 Modeling Guide" (magazine)? Well to start, 
there is the established (as Dick states below) name S/Sn3 Modeling 
Guide which is copyright protected. We also own the copyright to : 
S/Sn3 Buyers' Guide" and the "1:64 Modeling Guide" as well as the 
websites (FYI the websites do not build themselves!). We also have 16 
years of back issues as well as the displays for all these issues 
from which to draw orders as they com in. We also have all the films 
from Billy's tenure and all of our issues on DVD. The software to 
publish a magazine such as this is over $1,000 and a Wal-Mart 
computer won't run it. The software requires CPU power and memory-
lots of memory. We also have databases of non-subscriber s and tons 
of files for articles, images and advertising. We purchased this 
publication for a modest $10,000 in 2002 and have added a great deal 
to it. Our offer to a new owner is the same generous offer Billy made 
to us with all the advice and assistance needed as well as article 
support and contributions. This may not look like much to some, but 
it can be a full-time job with many rewards.

Best regards, Richard E. Bendever, Editor
"1:64 Modeling Guide"
*********************************************************************
--- In [email protected], Richard Karnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> All --
> 
> Two things:
> 
> 1.  The proposed S scale e-zine website.  I am opposed to this 
idea.  Reason is that only about half of us do e-mail.  The entire S 
scale fraternity deserves a publication, not just us "techies."
> 
> 2.  1:64 Modeling Guide.  The reasons 1:64MG is tanking are not 
simply the health and the other businesses of Brother Bendever.  It 
is because of a series of judgment lapses on the part of Dr. Ben.  
Firstly, he changed the name of his well-respected magazine 
from "S/Sn3" to "1:64," and promptly lost most of his Sn3 
subscribers.  He had lost sight of the value of the name he bought.  
Then he made it known that he intended to sweep in vehicles, boats, 
and airplanes, figuring that he'd get a lot more readers.  But he 
forgot that the S scaler is committed (as the pig is regarding 
breakfast) -- Our entire layout  must be 1:64 scale, whereas the 
vehicle modeler is merely involved (like the chicken re breakfast) 
because he doesn't need to do all his modeling in the same scale.  So 
he lost more railroaders.  Then he told all his readers that he 
doesn't know much about model railroading.  Whether true or not, this 
is not the way to generate confidence.  Finally,
>  he told his readers that they needed to support him or he would 
fail.  When you actually print this sort of statement, it generally 
becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
> 
> Ben is not article-shy, at least from me.  He is sitting on several 
as-yet uncommitted articles.  Based on his now publicized effort to 
shed the magazine, I have asked for my unpublished articles to be 
returned.
> 
> Personally, I like Ben, and I had made it one of my missions to 
help him succeed, despite the fact that he and I had different ideas 
on what should be said and done.  I had advised him regarding every 
one of the episodes recounted above, but he had gone his own way 
anyway.  Sometimes I thought he asked me just so he could figure out 
what the exact opposite ought to be.
> 
> So why have I told you all of this "inside info?"  Well, it's 
because there's a lot more to this story than the seemingly simple 
explanation that S scalers can't support a magazine.  Maybe we can 
and maybe we can't, but Ben's mag is not an appropriate test case.  
Now that he's folding, anyone interested in taking up the challenge 
needs to know why he failed.
> 
> Dick Karnes
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       
______________________________________________________________________
______________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and 
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to