 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.publish.brickjournal, Allan Johansen wrote:
> The BrickJournal used to be a magazine written by fans for fans; and a
> fairly good one at that. Now, it's a magazine written by fans for money. And
> in my experience, that's where things usually go wrong. How much do you pay
> the writers? How much do you ask for the magazine? What happens when some of
> the writers suddenly decide that they want more money? Do you raise the
> price? Then the writers want more, the price must be raised again. It's a
> spiral that you're never getting out of again. Been there, done that.
When I look at the transition of BrickJournal from free to pay I always try to
keep in mind the disaster of Bricks magazine. In order to get to the point of a
printed magazine (1) Joe had no choice but to start off free. He had to get
people used to the idea that a LEGO hobby-related fan magazine could work, and
could work on a regular basis.
And I think he's done that. We're at issue 9 now, and it's so long it almost
could have been two issues. :)
But from the beginning people have been asking for a printed version of the
magazine... I know I'm certainly one of them. And printing a magazine is
expensive; no way around that.
My feeling is that if a person had been interested in BrickJournal from the very
beginning then they've probably already downloaded all of the free files. So
they already have many/most of the free versions. And if someone just discovers
the magazine as it's become a pay-to-read enterprise then they'll have to buy
back issues. That's not at all uncommon in the magazine industry. But to go
forward, to get to the level of a printed magazine, Joe had no choice but to
look at ways to raise funds.
I know that he's very much responding to a desire (for a printed magazine) that
has been raised over and over. He's trying to keep it reasonably priced and
trying to make sure it reaches as many people as possible. There will be
mistakes, there will be the need to change gears from time to time, there will
be decisions that aren't popular with 100% of the readership. But this is the
only magazine like this (2) available to LEGO fans (and potential fans) and I
personally feel it's worth supporting. I know that I have put a lot of hours
into copy editing articles for the last five issues of BrickJournal. But those
hours don't even come close to the HUGE number of hours that Joe has put into it
from the beginning. I think he deserves a lot of credit for the effort he's put
into making BrickJournal a sustainable entity.
> I'm not saying that it's going to happen to you. In fact, I hope it won't.
> But sadly, once you start mixing money into volunteer fan-based work,
> things, in my experience, tends to go wrong.
If you have experience you feel would help avoid pitfalls, maybe you and Joe
could talk privately. He might benefit from the knowledge you have and perhaps
that could be used to make BrickJournal as successful as possible. :)
All the best,
Allan B.
(1) The importance here, in my mind, is that the LEGO building hobby NEEDS a
printed magazine to be the document of record. There is so much going on and so
little being written about this hobby. I'm hopeful that many fans will see the
positive growth that BrickJournal is going through and will come along for the
ride! :)
(2) Meaning a magazine about the entire hobby. This statement is not in any way
meant to disregard RailBricks magazine.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> In lugnet.publish.brickjournal, Allan Bedford wrote:
**cut**
>
> All the best,
> Allan B.
**cut**
Thank you Allan, I don't think too many could put it better than that!
I totally agree with your statement, it is the side of the story as I see it
too. All good intentions!
For others, I am only the European side, and we too over here are trying to do
our best in making sure people are happy and trying to find ways to make it more
cost effective. We understand there are some glitches, it is being looked into.
An awful lot goes on behind the scenes to make this all happen, but many will
not understand this if they are not a part of it. And that is ok.
The community wants a printed BJ and we are trying our very best to make that
happen and now we have come to that, now we must take the good advice people
have suggested and go on and support the community by showing the world what
AFOLs and such are all about!
Many thanks to the folks over here who have shown BrickJournal and I their
support! (Also to many I know over in the US too :)) - It is you guys who keep
us going!
Btw, for anyone who wants to know, I first started with BJ (around a year ago)
for a few reasons, one was to promote what is happening in Europe (and in some
cases other parts of the world too) and another to promote what female fans all
over the world are doing. I have many ideas for the future and I plan to go
ahead with them. I am doing this for the love of it and to take advantage of my
position; in being able to show my support to those on this side of the world
and put them on the AFOL worldmap.
My intentions are good and I will try to be of help where I can.
Many thanks,
Mel
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.publish.brickjournal, Allan Bedford wrote:
>
> When I look at the transition of BrickJournal from free to pay I always try to
> keep in mind the disaster of Bricks magazine. In order to get to the point of a
> printed magazine (1) Joe had no choice but to start off free. He had to get
> people used to the idea that a LEGO hobby-related fan magazine could work, and
> could work on a regular basis.
But will it work now that people have to pay for it? Are people willing to pay
for it? Time will tell...
> My feeling is that if a person had been interested in BrickJournal from the very
> beginning then they've probably already downloaded all of the free files. So
> they already have many/most of the free versions. And if someone just discovers
> the magazine as it's become a pay-to-read enterprise then they'll have to buy
> back issues. That's not at all uncommon in the magazine industry. But to go
> forward, to get to the level of a printed magazine, Joe had no choice but to
> look at ways to raise funds.
I hadn’t, assuming that they would stay free. Thankfully, a friend had
downloaded them.
Having to pay for the old issues are something that I’m not too happy about.
They were released for free and should stay free. They should not be used as
fundraiser for the printed version.
Again, that’s just my opinion. Obviously, there are those who disagree with
me...
> But those hours don't even come close to the HUGE number of hours that Joe has put into it
> from the beginning. I think he deserves a lot of credit for the effort he's put
> into making BrickJournal a sustainable entity.
He certainly does (as do all who do volunteer work). I never said he didn’t...
> If you have experience you feel would help avoid pitfalls, maybe you and Joe
> could talk privately. He might benefit from the knowledge you have and perhaps
> that could be used to make BrickJournal as successful as possible. :)
I wish I could help, but I probably can’t. If I ever find a solution, I’ll write
a book about it and make millions. So far, the only thing I can say is: "don’t
do it".
Perhaps it’s just a symptom of our time. There aren’t many people who’re willing
to work for free.
> (1) The importance here, in my mind, is that the LEGO building hobby NEEDS a
> printed magazine to be the document of record. There is so much going on and so
> little being written about this hobby. I'm hopeful that many fans will see the
> positive growth that BrickJournal is going through and will come along for the
> ride! :)
I couldn’t agree more.
In the end, having to pay for a magazine is better than having no magazine at
all...
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish.brickjournal, Allan Johansen wrote:
> I wish I could help, but I probably can’t. If I ever find a solution, I’ll write
> a book about it and make millions.
Why wouldn't you just give the book away for free?
> Perhaps it’s just a symptom of our time. There aren’t many people who’re willing
> to work for free.
I'm pretty sure that "people not working for free" has been a constant through
out time, not just now days. I know that my boss would love it if I worked for
free but my mortgage company wouldn't be so hip to the idea.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.publish.brickjournal, James Trobaugh wrote:
> In lugnet.publish.brickjournal, Allan Johansen wrote:
> > I wish I could help, but I probably can’t. If I ever find a solution, I’ll write
> > a book about it and make millions.
>
> Why wouldn't you just give the book away for free?
I just knew that someone would ask that. Well, it’s because...
> > Perhaps it’s just a symptom of our time. There aren’t many people who’re willing
> > to work for free.
>
> I'm pretty sure that "people not working for free" has been a constant through
> out time, not just now days. I know that my boss would love it if I worked for
> free but my mortgage company wouldn't be so hip to the idea.
...there’s working for free and there’s working for free.
The big difference is that going to work isn’t volunteer work. I go to work
because I need the money. Otherwise I wouldn’t bother - it’s not that good a job
anyway.
However, if I ever were to write an article for the BrickJournal, I would do so
for free. Because it’s something I don’t have to do to make a living. Because
it’s something I do, voluntarily, for other AFOLs. Because it’s something that I
would be doing for fun...
| | | | | | |
