Quote : general magazine bashing exercise
Actually no it isn't. It is turning into an exercise in the bashing of one particular magazine - and why not?. Any magazine which ignores the needs of the readership base deserves to be bashed.
FLYER does not get bashed. TP does not get bashed.
The broad concensus of this thread, and of this forum, is clear PILOT is XXXX and PPRUNE probably provides better content.
Being involved in the magazine world I know that a magazine editor and publisher lives by his last circulation figures. Circulation going down when competitor circulation is increasing usually means reaching for the C/V. Circulation increasing usually means a bonus.
Every magazine needs to find its place in the market. It is not just raw numbers but who the people are behind the numbers that matters.
Those who participate in this thread have made their own decision and they have every right to do so.
Personally I read them all and find certain elements of each to be good and certain elements of each to be poor. Offering me a watch will make no difference to my reading habits (nor probably my flying skills). Presumably to some people it swings the balance between subscribing to one mag and another and as the newstrade mags exit for profit one can only assume that there is some long term positive effect from offers of this nature.
Ultimately though the newstrade mags will stand or fall on achieving the right audience for their advertisers. The posters on PPRUNE are obviously going to do little to line the pockets of PILOT. The evidence here is that FLYER is tops, TP inoffensive, and PILOT is crap (the AOPA mag stands apart as a non newstrade mag). Evidence from other sources might suggest a different pattern.
Surely this rich tapestry of opinions and evidence is something which makes the world a better place. If not we would all be flying similar aircraft having travelled to the airfield in similar cars.
I'm with the Wolf in looking for better and more varied content. F3Greens is right this is all feedback. Whether some of the publishers will regard it as valuable and free (assuming that criticism dents sales and therefore costs) it remains to be seen.