Oops, and all I did was mention that an article on Dick Hampton had failed to appear on
that other thread .....................
I've got to agree with TC and the others who say that the new stuff in
Classic Plant just detracts from the magazine. There was discussion about this on the ACMOC board in the past too.
I too started at issue one, but no longer subscribe as the content is diluted with dross, and I now 'review' in a shop before deciding to purchase or not.
Earthmovers is good at times too, but I find it too similar from month to month - I think they featured more unusual plant in the early days rather than yet another article on a reduced tail-swing 360 degree etc, etc.
One of the problems in specialist magazines is attracting advertisers, as it is the adverts that usually keep it afloat as opposed to subscribers alone, and the vintage tractor mags attract a lot of ads from restoration companies and suppliers whereas there isn't much to compare in vintage plant - you'll realise that from the quite low numbers of earthmoving machines in preservation compared to the hundreds of tractors.
I'm amazed by magazines like
Vintage Roadscene, which is as the title suggests, is packed full of period articles, and very little advertising. This month (I bought it as it has an article on the the first motorways and the Ford Thames based 'Powertruc' self-propelled compressor) it has 68 pages with only eight pages of advertising.
Another benefit that some specialist magazines have is access to specialist transport photo collections of trucks, trains etc, which seem lacking in construction except for the collections of enthusiasts as post here (thanks to all of you who do
). But the bigger companies in the industry, both plant makers and contractors, must have photo collections which are yet virtually untapped.
I'm begining to sound like a publications consultant. Oh, wait a minute, I am ........
Dave.