the future of 'Television' magazine
 

I'm told that the editor is on three months notice and that the future of
the magazine is uncertain. This is only a an unsubstantiated rumour.

Bill

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Bill Wright wrote:
|| I'm told that the editor is on three months notice and that the
|| future of the magazine is uncertain. This is only a an
|| unsubstantiated rumour.
||

Let's face it Bill the servicing side of the domestic electronics trade (and
to a large extent even retail sales for small family run businesses) has now
'totally' dried-up .

I've seen so many old friends I've known for years in the trade finally have
to admit defeat and shut up shop.

In fact only this morning a colleague who's business was ticking over
reasonably well just a few months ago, telephoned me and said 'things have
been so quiet lately I'm only ringing you to find out if my phone is still
working!'


|| Bill

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

"Ivan" wrote in message
...
Bill Wright wrote:
|| I'm told that the editor is on three months notice and that the
|| future of the magazine is uncertain. This is only a an
|| unsubstantiated rumour.
||

Let's face it Bill the servicing side of the domestic electronics trade
(and
to a large extent even retail sales for small family run businesses) has
now
'totally' dried-up .

I've seen so many old friends I've known for years in the trade finally
have
to admit defeat and shut up shop.

In fact only this morning a colleague who's business was ticking over
reasonably well just a few months ago, telephoned me and said 'things have
been so quiet lately I'm only ringing you to find out if my phone is still
working!'

That of course is the reason for Television's circulation decline. But it's
a shame if the new owners chose to let it die instead of broadening its
appeal.

Bill

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

I'm told that the editor is on three months notice and that the future of
the magazine is uncertain. This is only a an unsubstantiated rumour.

Bill
************************************************** ****

I hope this is true, as long as the new mag continues that is! Admittedly
the new editor had a very difficult remit - to publish a magazine to a
diminishing trade, with the content costing next to nothing - but I can't
agree with the way that he went about it.

I have been reading the mag and have every copy since 1955 and worked for
many years with one of the major contributors (in the "test case" workshop)
and have even appeared on the cover. This kind of makes me an established
reader!

As soon as I heard of the way that the previous editor had been dismissed
and of his replacement I wrote a long email to the new editor, wishing him
well and offering my not inconsiderable experience of how the trade and his
tenure as editor might pan out. I also pointed out that the readership were
a tight community who wouldn't put up with being bullsh*tted.

I got a two sentence reply saying "I know what I am doing, and if you don't
like it, so long" Not exactly these words, but certainly these sentiments!

Now he had every right to disagree with me, but to suggest that I might like
to cancel my subscription was inexcusable and just shows his inexperience. I
really miss the special component offer adverts and when these went so did
my last reason for subscribing.

It doesn't matter anyway, even though my subscription has expired, they keep
sending me the mag to read!

--
Rob.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

"Ivan" wrote in message
...
Bill Wright wrote:
|| I'm told that the editor is on three months notice and that the
|| future of the magazine is uncertain. This is only a an
|| unsubstantiated rumour.
||

Let's face it Bill the servicing side of the domestic electronics trade
(and
to a large extent even retail sales for small family run businesses) has
now
'totally' dried-up .

I've seen so many old friends I've known for years in the trade finally
have
to admit defeat and shut up shop.

In fact only this morning a colleague who's business was ticking over
reasonably well just a few months ago, telephoned me and said 'things
have
been so quiet lately I'm only ringing you to find out if my phone is
still
working!'

That of course is the reason for Television's circulation decline. But
it's a shame if the new owners chose to let it die instead of broadening
its appeal.

Bill
I'm not in the trade but read the magazine. I had an article published a
couple of years ago and they wrote to me recently with a circular to say
they were cutting the rates they pay for submitted articles. I get the
feeling that the new owners have given the editor virtually zero budget. In
this month's editorial they admit that they are dropping the "What a life
column" simply because they can no longer afford to keep it.

They have been "broadening the appeal" for sometime now with other repair
articles, nostalgia sections, even a road test for a van last month!

I get the feeling the end is not far away.

Chris, G4VFK

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

In article , Chris wrote:
I'm not in the trade but read the magazine. I had an article published a
couple of years ago and they wrote to me recently with a circular to say
they were cutting the rates they pay for submitted articles.

That seems equivalent to cutting their own throats, as it will surely
reduce the incentive for anyone with any expertise worth reading about to
bother writing for them.

Undervaluing engineering expertise is a regrettable modern trend not just
confined to magazine publishers of course. If you can make more money
shuffling paper than learning how real things really work, then there is no
incentive for anyone even to *acquire* any expertise. Then how do you run
the broadcasting industry itself, never mind the magazines?

Rod.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

In article , Rob wrote:
As soon as I heard of the way that the previous editor had been dismissed
and of his replacement I wrote a long email to the new editor, wishing him
well and offering my not inconsiderable experience of how the trade and his
tenure as editor might pan out. I also pointed out that the readership were
a tight community who wouldn't put up with being bullsh*tted.

I got a two sentence reply saying "I know what I am doing, and if you don't
like it, so long" Not exactly these words, but certainly these sentiments!

If they're in self-destruct mode. There's probably nothing anyone can do.

Rod.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Roderick Stewart wrote:

In article , Rob wrote:
As soon as I heard of the way that the previous editor had been dismissed
and of his replacement I wrote a long email to the new editor, wishing him
well and offering my not inconsiderable experience of how the trade and his
tenure as editor might pan out. I also pointed out that the readership were
a tight community who wouldn't put up with being bullsh*tted.

I got a two sentence reply saying "I know what I am doing, and if you don't
like it, so long" Not exactly these words, but certainly these sentiments!

If they're in self-destruct mode. There's probably nothing anyone can do.

Rod.

I just re-subscribed for 3 years !

Wonder if I can get a refund...

Colin.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:56:01 +0100, Roderick Stewart
wrote:

If you can make more money
shuffling paper than learning how real things really work, then there is no
incentive for anyone even to *acquire* any expertise. Then how do you run
the broadcasting industry itself, never mind the magazines?

But nobody needs to know anything these days, that's why. You just get 'em
off the streets, turn the handle and out comes a TV signal. It's all so
simple.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Colin wrote in
:

Roderick Stewart wrote:

In article , Rob
wrote:
As soon as I heard of the way that the previous editor had been
dismissed and of his replacement I wrote a long email to the new
editor, wishing him well and offering my not inconsiderable
experience of how the trade and his tenure as editor might pan out.
I also pointed out that the readership were a tight community who
wouldn't put up with being bullsh*tted.

I got a two sentence reply saying "I know what I am doing, and if
you don't like it, so long" Not exactly these words, but certainly
these sentiments!

If they're in self-destruct mode. There's probably nothing anyone can
do.

Rod.

I just re-subscribed for 3 years !

Wonder if I can get a refund...

Colin.


I was just thinking the same thing, I think I have a couple of years to
go. When "Classic CD" closed, they transferred my sub to "BBC Music
Magazine". What are the likely options for "Television"?


Alan S.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
om...
In article , Chris wrote:
I'm not in the trade but read the magazine. I had an article published a
couple of years ago and they wrote to me recently with a circular to say
they were cutting the rates they pay for submitted articles.

That seems equivalent to cutting their own throats, as it will surely
reduce the incentive for anyone with any expertise worth reading about to
bother writing for them.
Hence I've gone. As have almost all the others.

Bill

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

"Alan S." wrote in message
.145...
Colin wrote in
:
I was just thinking the same thing, I think I have a couple of years to
go. When "Classic CD" closed, they transferred my sub to "BBC Music
Magazine". What are the likely options for "Television"?

Electronics and Wireless World, apparently.

Bill

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Alan S. wrote:
I was just thinking the same thing, I think I have a couple of years
to go. When "Classic CD" closed, they transferred my sub to "BBC Music
Magazine". What are the likely options for "Television"?

Best value subscription I ever took out was a five pound trial
subscription to "Business 2.0" (or some similar title). After the
dot.con bust, the magazine folded and they transferred me to "Fortune"
magazine for a year or so, and then after that they started sending me
"Time" magazine. I must have been getting that for a couple of years
now. Long may it continue!

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Alleged developments in the saga about the present editor of Television
mag...

For details look at
http://www.vintage-radio.net/forum/s...?t=5645&page=2

(Bottom of the page!) ...this is NOT April 1st.

--
Rob.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:56:01 +0100, Roderick Stewart
wrote:

If you can make more money
shuffling paper than learning how real things really work, then there is
no incentive for anyone even to *acquire* any expertise. Then how do you
run the broadcasting industry itself, never mind the magazines?

But nobody needs to know anything these days, that's why. You just get 'em
off the streets, turn the handle and out comes a TV signal. It's all so
simple.


If only Les Lowry Johns was alive ....Now he was great entertainment.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

If only Les Lowry Johns was alive ....Now he was great entertainment
************************************************** ***

And now that he is long gone I think it fair to add that LLJ suffered all
his life from the same skin disease as Dennis Potter and the man in
"TheSinging Detective" i.e. psoriasis which could lay him low overnight.
Imagine keeping your spirits up (and writing) when suffering so badly. Yes,
a real character!

--
Rob.

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

pete wrote:

If only Les Lowry Johns was alive ....Now he was great entertainment.

Indeed he was. Someone should publish all his old articles - which
invariably had me rolling around with laughter - in a book.

--

rgds
LAurence

....This tagline not sponsored by any Corporation in any way.
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Laurence Taylor wrote:
pete wrote:

If only Les Lowry Johns was alive ....Now he was great entertainment.

That's how I first got into the Television magazine habit - used to
spend a merry saturday morning in WH Smith howling madly at LLJ antics.
Back then, a lot of folks used Smiths as a library service - we never
actually needed to buy the magazine on leaving the shop. Indeed they
where quite glad when *I* left the shop :-)


Indeed he was. Someone should publish all his old articles - which
invariably had me rolling around with laughter - in a book.

Agree!

--
Adrian C

the future of 'Television' magazine
 

Bill Wright wrote:
"Alan S." wrote in message
.145...

Electronics and Wireless World, apparently.

Which appears to have gone downhill in exactly the same way (IMHO,
naturally).

--
Andy

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

bobandcarole wrote:
Laurence Taylor wrote:
pete wrote:

If only Les Lowry Johns was alive ....Now he was great entertainment.

Indeed he was. Someone should publish all his old articles - which
invariably had me rolling around with laughter - in a book.

--

rgds
LAurence

...This tagline not sponsored by any Corporation in any way.
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org

did you tell then you're a confessed pedophile laurence?
this pervert lurks in alt.support.boy-lovers

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

On 19 May 2006 09:01:04 -0700, "bobandcarole"
wrote:

Its

Paedophile

--
Peter

please remove the invalid to reply

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

Peter wrote:
On 19 May 2006 09:01:04 -0700, "bobandcarole"
wrote:

Its

Paedophile

depends on where you're from....
In America, it's pedophile
Never the less..laurence taylor is a paedophile

--
Peter

please remove the invalid to reply

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

In message .com,
bobandcarole writes

Laurence Taylor wrote:
pete wrote:

If only Les Lowry Johns was alive ....Now he was great entertainment.

Indeed he was. Someone should publish all his old articles - which
invariably had me rolling around with laughter - in a book.

--

rgds
LAurence

...This tagline not sponsored by any Corporation in any way.
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org

did you tell then you're a confessed pedophile laurence?
this pervert lurks in alt.support.boy-lovers

To which you are also subscribed.
--
Ian

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

"Patrick Nethercot (ngs)" wrote in message
...
"bobandcarole" wrote:


In America, it's pedophile

someone who loves feet?

Actually the correct term for someone who makes love though their feet is a
bokonist.

Bill______

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

On Sat, 20 May 2006 01:30:14 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:

|
|"Patrick Nethercot (ngs)" wrote in message
.. .
| "bobandcarole" wrote:
|
|
| In America, it's pedophile
|
| someone who loves feet?
|
|Actually the correct term for someone who makes love though their feet is a
|bokonist.

I blame the schools who do not teach Ancient Greek any more :-(
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Google Groups is IME the *worst*
method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

"Patrick Nethercot (ngs)" wrote in message
...
"bobandcarole" wrote:


In America, it's pedophile

someone who loves feet?

Actually the correct term for someone who makes love though their feet is
a
bokonist.

We won't ask how you happen to know that Bill :o)

(kim)

PEDOPHILE ALERT
 

"kim" wrote in message
...
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

"Patrick Nethercot (ngs)" wrote in message
...
"bobandcarole" wrote:


In America, it's pedophile

someone who loves feet?

Actually the correct term for someone who makes love though their feet is
a
bokonist.

We won't ask how you happen to know that Bill :o)

I learnt it at college in 1970.

Bill