BoxRec

Jeff Thomas wrote:I get fighting fit, boxing monthly and boxing news every month; I think they are all pretty fantastic. They could all be better, but obviously anything could've more suited to the individual reading.

For example I personally would like a lot more details from boxing news' local reports- some of them are terribly short and vague, I'd like records to ALWAYS be included.

The problem is space. I've done reports for BN where there's been seven fights but the magazine only has enough space for, say 300 words. It's impossible to write about 14 boxers, include the weights, hometown and records in such little space. If you give the main event 200 of your alloted amount, that only leaves 100 for six other fights. It's a problem all publications have. If the fight reports were longer then something else would have to be chopped.

King Geedorah wrote:Can't believe Macho, Andy, Final Round & The Saxton are into dance music!

This is them on a secret night out.

Here's a bit of dance music trivia for you, Martin Williams (trainer of Carl Johanneson and Patrick Maxwell) was DJ Martin in the Leeds techno group LFO.

Wake up call wrote:

King Geedorah wrote:Can't believe Macho, Andy, Final Round & The Saxton are into dance music!

This is them on a secret night out.

Here's a bit of dance music trivia for you, Martin Williams (trainer of Carl Johanneson and Patrick Maxwell) was DJ Martin in the Leeds techno group LFO.

Aye, now he's heading up KTFO.

Wake up call wrote:

King Geedorah wrote:Can't believe Macho, Andy, Final Round & The Saxton are into dance music!

This is them on a secret night out.

Here's a bit of dance music trivia for you, Martin Williams (trainer of Carl Johanneson and Patrick Maxwell) was DJ Martin in the Leeds techno group LFO.

Really! With Mark Bell and Gez Varley

Just had a gander at this weeks BN when I was in Tesco. There is now a full page allocated to the upcoming fight diary for the month!

There is no excuse for not providing more room for undercard fights. Get rid of all of that filler, i.e. twitter and facebook nonsense and the outdated filler that we have all read ten times on the net. 60 seconds interview is a waste of space too.

gasman wrote:Just had a gander at this weeks BN when I was in Tesco. There is now a full page allocated to the upcoming fight diary for the month!

There is no excuse for not providing more room for undercard fights. Get rid of all of that filler, i.e. twitter and facebook nonsense and the outdated filler that we have all read ten times on the net. 60 seconds interview is a waste of space too.

Fight Diary has been a full page for years and tends to be pretty well received. Ditching 60 secs would save precisely one page. It's like anything - you increase in one area you must cut in another. And as already discussed there is no clear fan/reader consensus on what their priorities are.

gasman wrote:Just had a gander at this weeks BN when I was in Tesco. There is now a full page allocated to the upcoming fight diary for the month!

There is no excuse for not providing more room for undercard fights. Get rid of all of that filler, i.e. twitter and facebook nonsense and the outdated filler that we have all read ten times on the net. 60 seconds interview is a waste of space too.

.. and 5 pages devoted on Hopkins .. and only enough text to fill 2pages at best ...
But 11 different photos of Bernard...

Couldn`t you have just asked Bernard another 14 questions Danny?
You could have saved some expense on buying the photos .. Hopkins was on the cover this week, so I kinda knew how he looks nowadays

tonyevs wrote:

gasman wrote:Just had a gander at this weeks BN when I was in Tesco. There is now a full page allocated to the upcoming fight diary for the month!

There is no excuse for not providing more room for undercard fights. Get rid of all of that filler, i.e. twitter and facebook nonsense and the outdated filler that we have all read ten times on the net. 60 seconds interview is a waste of space too.

.. and 5 pages devoted on Hopkins .. and only enough text to fill 2pages at best ...
But 11 different photos of Bernard...

Couldn`t you have just asked Bernard another 14 questions Danny?
You could have saved some expense on buying the photos .. Hopkins was on the cover this week, so I kinda knew how he looks nowadays

mate you're just constantly reiterating the same complaint and I have yet to infer and indication that a majority of people agree with you on it. I'd wager BN's images-text ratio is comparable to most other sports publications

dbflex wrote:

tonyevs wrote:

gasman wrote:Just had a gander at this weeks BN when I was in Tesco. There is now a full page allocated to the upcoming fight diary for the month!

There is no excuse for not providing more room for undercard fights. Get rid of all of that filler, i.e. twitter and facebook nonsense and the outdated filler that we have all read ten times on the net. 60 seconds interview is a waste of space too.

.. and 5 pages devoted on Hopkins .. and only enough text to fill 2pages at best ...
But 11 different photos of Bernard...

Couldn`t you have just asked Bernard another 14 questions Danny?
You could have saved some expense on buying the photos .. Hopkins was on the cover this week, so I kinda knew how he looks nowadays

mate you're just constantly reiterating the same complaint and I have yet to infer and indication that a majority of people agree with you on it. I'd wager BN's images-text ratio is comparable to most other sports publications

Maybe so - but I don`t subscribe to any of the others sports mags either
I`ll drop it now anyways. Its obviously falling on deaf ears. I guess I`ll have to wait untill my subscription runs out, and then decide if I set the direct debit up again.

tonyevs wrote:

dbflex wrote:

tonyevs wrote:
.. and 5 pages devoted on Hopkins .. and only enough text to fill 2pages at best ...
But 11 different photos of Bernard...

Couldn`t you have just asked Bernard another 14 questions Danny?
You could have saved some expense on buying the photos .. Hopkins was on the cover this week, so I kinda knew how he looks nowadays

mate you're just constantly reiterating the same complaint and I have yet to infer and indication that a majority of people agree with you on it. I'd wager BN's images-text ratio is comparable to most other sports publications

Maybe so - but I don`t subscribe to any of the others sports mags either
I`ll drop it now anyways. Its obviously falling on deaf ears. I guess I`ll have to wait untill my subscription runs out, and then decide if I set the direct debit up again.[/
quote]

thats up to you but they can hardly change the balance of the magazine for just one person.

dbflex wrote:

tonyevs wrote:

dbflex wrote:
mate you're just constantly reiterating the same complaint and I have yet to infer and indication that a majority of people agree with you on it. I'd wager BN's images-text ratio is comparable to most other sports publications

Maybe so - but I don`t subscribe to any of the others sports mags either
I`ll drop it now anyways. Its obviously falling on deaf ears. I guess I`ll have to wait untill my subscription runs out, and then decide if I set the direct debit up again.[/
quote]

thats up to you but they can hardly change the balance of the magazine for just one person.

To be fair the issue of filler and balance of text/images etc has been highlighted by more than one person, I have listened to quite a few subscribers state similar complaints on this forum and esb. It seems more pronounced since the new look was introduced.

How many people tops? 10, max 20? BN consistently sells thousands of copies. It's not necessarily representative

dbflex wrote:How many people tops? 10, max 20? BN consistently sells thousands of copies. It's not necessarily representative

Then again though. How many subscribers visit this site? And how many of those feel its worth commenting on??
I'm pretty sure if the readers were given the choice between more boxing news/boxing related articles or more boxing photographs, it would be a clear win for more news/articles..

tonyevs wrote:

dbflex wrote:How many people tops? 10, max 20? BN consistently sells thousands of copies. It's not necessarily representative

Then again though. How many subscribers visit this site? And how many of those feel its worth commenting on??
I'm pretty sure if the readers were given the choice between more boxing news/boxing related articles or more boxing photographs, it would be a clear win for more news/articles..

It wouldn't mean more articles, just slightly longer ones unless you are intent on binning photos altogether. Even if every subscriber visits this site, a minute amount have complained about the text-image balance. Maybe everyone hates it but there's no evidence of that. A popular magazine cannot base their decisions on a small minority of people one one or two forums. That's not a consensus. Any sensible mag would conduct a reader survey, put it in the mag AND online and link to it on forums so boxing fans who don't read can say why, and also contact any lapsed subscriber
from the last 2 years. Then the target market are reached plus you get far more of a consensus view.

dbflex wrote:How many people tops? 10, max 20? BN consistently sells thousands of copies. It's not necessarily representative

Well you have it all under control, it amazes me why you even bother to come on here to converse with us on it. To be honest, I couldnt give a monkeys if BN is wall to wall images as I no longer subscribe, it isnt a patch on Boxing Monthly.

gasman wrote:

dbflex wrote:How many people tops? 10, max 20? BN consistently sells thousands of copies. It's not necessarily representative

Well you have it all under control, it amazes me why you even bother to come on here to converse with us on it. To be honest, I couldnt give a monkeys if BN is wall to wall images as I no longer subscribe, it isnt a patch on Boxing Monthly.

Don't be churlish - your opinions matter but alone they are not enough to alter a magazine that has thousands of readers, many of whom may not even use this forum. That's pretty logical no? You guys should be PART of the conversation. That's fair and sensible. As for not being a patch on BM, if you no longer subscribe to BN how can you be sure? And have you tried Fighting Fit yet?

dbflex wrote:

gasman wrote:

dbflex wrote:How many people tops? 10, max 20? BN consistently sells thousands of copies. It's not necessarily representative

Well you have it all under control, it amazes me why you even bother to come on here to converse with us on it. To be honest, I couldnt give a monkeys if BN is wall to wall images as I no longer subscribe, it isnt a patch on Boxing Monthly.

Don't be churlish - your opinions matter but alone they are not enough to alter a magazine that has thousands of readers, many of whom may not even use this forum. That's pretty logical no? You guys should be PART of the conversation. That's fair and sensible. As for not being a patch on BM, if you no longer subscribe to BN how can you be sure? And have you tried Fighting Fit yet?

How do you know for a fact that my opinions and those expressed by a handful of others do not extrapolate to a wider sample of readers (past and present)? I cancelled my subs a couple of months ago and the girl who I spoke to on the phone efficiently cancelled it without inquiring why - not exactly seeking out an answer as to why they just lost a customer.

I think BN is trying to pander to new, younger demographics with the new design, look etc, but has taken their eye of their core business - the hard core boxing fan.

What do you think BN USP is right now? It is no longer a journal that covers every fight, every week. So what is now? How does it distinguish itself from the swathe of boxing news that is freely available on the net? I know what BM is, it is the quality of the features and the household names that write interesting columns and articles, which is why I read nearly every page. But, what about BN? I do not see the USP.

I have scanned through Fighting Fit, but for a fiver I am not going to buy it for the sake of a couple of interesting boxing articles, I have no interest in all of the other combat sports covered, so like BN before I cancelled it, I would perhaps read 50% of it at best. Some of the interesting training related articles would have been great to find in BN.

the concern about the pictures has been raised by a few, so maybe there is something in it.

case in point...there was a q and a with derry mathews the other week. there was one large photo and then another smaller one but they were both essentially the same (neither action just posed). it was a waste of space to have two of exactly the same photo not sure what the idea was.

The argument would seem to be that you're losing readers but so what, you're picking up new ones so it all balances out.

Reading between the lines, the paper is losing long term readers (like myself) who have either subscribed or been reading regularly for 20 years or so. Does that not bother you?

gasman wrote:I cancelled my subs a couple of months ago and the girl who I spoke to on the phone efficiently cancelled it without inquiring why - not exactly seeking out an answer as to why they just lost a customer.

In Danny's defence, virtually all publishers outsource to companies like Tower to handle subscriptions for unavoidable cost base reasons. Of course, one of the downsides of this is that you're reliant on a third-party whose employees don't care about your customers in the same way you do.
The other thing I'd add guys is that having worked in publishing in various roles for around 15 years, I can assure you that editorial teams are overwhelmingly dedicated, passionate and care about their readers. I've run dailies, weeklies and monthlies and can assure you that producing a weekly with a small team is ball-breaking work frequently. Of course you want feedback, but equally you're going to be proud of the product you produce so on occasion it's only natural to be defensive - try and think of an analogy in your own profession in a bid to relate.
The great irony is that the main reason this debate has become so heated is because we care about boxing and its coverage - ultimately that should be a source of solidarity rather than division.

tonyevs wrote:

gasman wrote:Just had a gander at this weeks BN when I was in Tesco. There is now a full page allocated to the upcoming fight diary for the month!

There is no excuse for not providing more room for undercard fights. Get rid of all of that filler, i.e. twitter and facebook nonsense and the outdated filler that we have all read ten times on the net. 60 seconds interview is a waste of space too.

.. and 5 pages devoted on Hopkins .. and only enough text to fill 2pages at best ...
But 11 different photos of Bernard...

Couldn`t you have just asked Bernard another 14 questions Danny?
You could have saved some expense on buying the photos .. Hopkins was on the cover this week, so I kinda knew how he looks nowadays

I agree, they had an opportunity to do a great interview with one of Boxings greatest champions and one of its best characters. Instead we get run of the mill questions and a load of photos. very poor and a wasted opportunity.


I read it in smiths.

They need to do a whole lot better if I am going to start buying it again.

the truth wrote:Abrams passion shone thru the mag. These new guys seem to think they k ow better then everyone else and are pompous. Not my cup of tea

I agree Trish Dixon is too self obsessed, big picture of himself and more and more giving his views on ringside, I mean what does he know ? he has never fought iin his life, sat alongside former world champions, the new mag does nothing for me, big coverage for subjects not worthy and not enough for interesting subjects, biased reports on local shows towards home fighters, they have local papers for that, I think trish needs to get real.

Gasman, I don't know that the views on here don't agree with the target audience as a whole - but I can't say for sure that they do either; thats my point. You need a broader evidence base before making changes.

Deserter is right re outsourcing subscriptions but an editorial team member could still call each lapsed subscriber to find out why they cancelled.

I'm sure this thread is being monitored and the views expressed considered.

English Wizard wrote:I agree Trish Dixon is too self obsessed, big picture of himself and more and more giving his views on ringside, I mean what does he know ? he has never fought iin his life, sat alongside former world champions.

English Wizard wrote:

the truth wrote:Abrams passion shone thru the mag. These new guys seem to think they k ow better then everyone else and are pompous. Not my cup of tea

I agree Trish Dixon is too self obsessed, big picture of himself and more and more giving his views on ringside, I mean what does he know ? he has never fought iin his life, sat alongside former world champions, the new mag does nothing for me, big coverage for subjects not worthy and not enough for interesting subjects, biased reports on local shows towards home fighters, they have local papers for that, I think trish needs to get real.

That's uncalled for. I actually think he has put across good interesting views when he has been on ringside. I am more interested in the content and focus of BN, especially now, with the proliferation of online boxing news sources, not least boxrec news.