BoxRec

Posted: **13 Sep 2007, 07:51**

steve689 wrote:I see BN has gone up 5p in price.

But The Sun has gone down to 20p so we're actually in credit when buying our essential boxing reads (BN, BM and allegedly's column).

Posted: **13 Sep 2007, 10:16**

I did hear Bob Mee complaining, back in about 2000, that his fight reports were being edited without consent and published in BN, Claude was editor then.

Posted: **13 Sep 2007, 10:35**

Coco wrote:I did hear Bob Mee complaining, back in about 2000, that his fight reports were being edited without consent and published in BN, Claude was editor then.

Unless there is some kind of prior agreement, all editors reserve the right to edit any submitted article. That's the nature of the business. I do it all day in my job and I'm surprised somebody as experienced as Mee would be precious enough to complain about it.

Posted: **13 Sep 2007, 11:25**

Terry D wrote:
Autobarn wrote:Which DIRTY HARRY film was this - was it SUDDEN IMPACT?
'Magnum Force', after he blows his nemesis up.

'Magnum Force' is an underrated gem. After being accused of being a fascist for, the horror, playing a cop who cares about the victims Clint returned for the sequel and displayed a more rounded Harry (although we assume he was coaxed out of retirement, plus had to dig his badge out of the lake, along with the dead sniper). This Harry encounters a group of cops who kill indiscriminately without the 'perp being brought before the law in any way. They also kill Harry's pal and beat him in a shooting contest (although Harry cunningly lets them win).

Harry kills and tortures criminals only after the law messes things up. In this film he also condemns the death squads of Brazil.

Anyway, claims of the sadomasochistic, therefore fascist, nature of his big magnum in the first film were ridiculed by this film. The opening credits show the gun lovingly displayed before the films switchblade finale sees Harry beat the bad guys, who all have magnums, without his own magnum. Who'd have thought it? It is indeed a big magnum.

The slogan of the next film, 'Delta Squad', was 'Marvelous' and the film 'Sudden Impact', a sterling work of feminist film making with Harry cast in the role of Jesus, had the slogan of 'Go ahead, make my day' (which, incredibly, does not appear in the first film as some think).

EDIT: He also has a black partner, in the cop sense, and sleeps with a Chinese bird, proving he is not racist.

I remember it now. It's got Hutch in it as a corrupt motorcycle cop.

Posted: **13 Sep 2007, 17:34**

I would be genuinely interested in seeing BN's accounts, it can't be that expensive to buy.

Posted: **14 Sep 2007, 13:51**

I believe someone once offered a million quid for it a few years ago and was knocked back...

Posted: **14 Sep 2007, 17:52**

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:I believe someone once offered a million quid for it a few years ago and was knocked back...

Its P&L may not be seperated from the parent co. It may be hard to value. I would say it has very little fixed assets and, its overheads may be hard to gauge if it is housed by its parent co.

Anyone know its circulations and advertising revenue?

Posted: **15 Sep 2007, 05:49**

KO Artist wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:I believe someone once offered a million quid for it a few years ago and was knocked back...
Its P&L may not be seperated from the parent co. It may be hard to value. I would say it has very little fixed assets and, its overheads may be hard to gauge if it is housed by its parent co.

Anyone know its circulations and advertising revenue?

It'll definitely have a separate p&l. Current newstand circ is consistently around 10-11,000 from the competitive data I've seen (reasonably accurate). Somewhat surprisingly it hasn't changed that much in the past 3-4 year which implies the web hasn't impacted on it too much so presumably its hardcore following is buying it as a complement to any web activity, rather than abandoning it.
However, I would imagine it also has a healthy subs base and probably generates some additional revenue through export sales.
In terms of ads it'll be little more than pocket money compared to copy sales revenue as it will only ever attract 'core' advertisers who'll never a great level of spend.
The contribution it generates will be peanuts compared to Newsquest's papers (which is presumably why they haven't invested in a significant web presence) but my guestimate is that it ticks over and delivers a healthy enough profit.
It's feasible Newsquest could sell as the last few years and operating climate has seen a number of media companies consolidate and lose those elements of their portfolio that aren't considered a good strategic fit.
However, it's worth bearing in mind that trying to run a mag like this as an independent is a far tougher gig in the current climate - Newsquest will be able to get far better print and paper deals and will have a far stronger bargaining position with retailers when trying to secure listings...

Posted: **15 Sep 2007, 06:26**

Actually while the point of editing and articles etc is raised. I enjoy writing for fun on the Boxing Tribune website, i'm not a pro, most of my stuff is rubbish but still....flip me talk about editing. It's edited to fornicate so much it's practically not my own work anymore.

http://www.boxingtribune.com/index.php? ... le&id=1692

I wouldn't mind but it has been edited so that some things are now factually incorrect. In my original draft i stated Veit won the EU title against Guerrero. The editor in his wisdom has decided to upgrade it to the European crown proper. Making me appear a buffoon!! Not that it matters really but i had to moan somewhere.

Posted: **16 Sep 2007, 04:20**

steve689 wrote:Actually while the point of editing and articles etc is raised. I enjoy writing for fun on the Boxing Tribune website, i'm not a pro, most of my stuff is rubbish but still....flip me talk about editing. It's edited to eff so much it's practically not my own work anymore.

http://www.boxingtribune.com/index.php? ... le&id=1692

I wouldn't mind but it has been edited so that some things are now factually incorrect. In my original draft i stated Veit won the EU title against Guerrero. The editor in his wisdom has decided to upgrade it to the European crown proper. Making me appear a buffoon!! Not that it matters really but i had to moan somewhere.

Well more fool you for putting up with it...come over to BBN where you'll have a decent editor

When I very briefly worked for a local rag I did a film review which was about global warming. The sub-editor was a raging right-winger who completely changed the piece to suit his own purposes and turned my mild piece into a complete hippie-bashing tirade - the opposite of what I'd said. When I confronted the tosser, he rattled on about it being 'his page'...well, take my name off then, ringpiece. It is very frustrating.

I just tend to edit for libel purposes, house style and facts, of course. Everyone has their own opinions and that's what it's all about.

Posted: **16 Sep 2007, 04:24**

Thats not very fair is it - editing something to actually change the meaning of what has been said, rather than just altering the tone or swapping out words

Posted: **16 Sep 2007, 09:21**

The news of TC's demise has been greatly exaggerated.
However, it would be a massive loss to BN if he were to go.

Claude is more technically correct but TC has the colour. It's an essential mix that shouldn't be disturbed.

Long live TC

Posted: **16 Sep 2007, 09:36**

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Well more fool you for putting up with it...come over to BBN where you'll have a decent editor

True enough...to be fair to Kev when BBN started up he sent me a username and stuff to submit articles but i was busy at the time and never bothered. I don't mind spelling and general grammatical changes of the flow and stuff but changing actual facts makes me look even more incompetent than i actually am!! If that's possible

Posted: **17 Sep 2007, 09:28**

steve689 wrote:Actually while the point of editing and articles etc is raised. I enjoy writing for fun on the Boxing Tribune website, i'm not a pro, most of my stuff is rubbish but still....flip me talk about editing. It's edited to eff so much it's practically not my own work anymore.

http://www.boxingtribune.com/index.php? ... le&id=1692

I wouldn't mind but it has been edited so that some things are now factually incorrect. In my original draft i stated Veit won the EU title against Guerrero. The editor in his wisdom has decided to upgrade it to the European crown proper. Making me appear a buffoon!! Not that it matters really but i had to moan somewhere.

I'm surprised there's a website that does actually edit - sometimes I swear the "editors" don't even give their submissions a cursory proof-read.

As for your gripe, just get in touch with the editor in question; I'm sure it will be rectified.

Posted: **17 Sep 2007, 09:31**

steve689 wrote:http://www.boxingtribune.com/index.php? ... le&id=1692

Who's responsible for this little gem:

This time, there is a world title on the line; Braehmer's WBO Intercontinental strap.

Posted: **17 Sep 2007, 09:51**

Terry D wrote:
steve689 wrote:Actually while the point of editing and articles etc is raised. I enjoy writing for fun on the Boxing Tribune website, i'm not a pro, most of my stuff is rubbish but still....flip me talk about editing. It's edited to eff so much it's practically not my own work anymore.

http://www.boxingtribune.com/index.php? ... le&id=1692

I wouldn't mind but it has been edited so that some things are now factually incorrect. In my original draft i stated Veit won the EU title against Guerrero. The editor in his wisdom has decided to upgrade it to the European crown proper. Making me appear a buffoon!! Not that it matters really but i had to moan somewhere.
I had the same problem with a US site. I was asked to cut down on use of comma's as the readership would not be able to understand them.

I was asked to cut down on the use of the words 'but' and 'yet' to make things run smoothly.

I preferred not to do this, my grammatical grasp is pretty pedestrian (alliteration on the other hand...) but I have used comma's in this way for more important stuff and it has been Ok, plus it is a stylistic thing, so I left things the way they were.

I don't like to read over stuff once its up, aside from a log on to see it is up, so my girlfriend pointed out to me that there was something odd gong on. After each 'but' or 'yet' there would be a comma even if there was no need for one. Sentences would be cut in half, usually in the middle of the main proposition of the sentence. Or a comma would be placed into a random spot and turn a subclause into a sub-subclause.

Ian and Kevin don't fook me about like this and I can send something off knowing what gets sent will, aside from what needs to be cut, go up intact. For that I'm grateful.

Terry - hate to nit pick, but if you want to write, you need to know the difference between an s at the end of the word to indicate a plural; and an 's (preceded by an apostrophe) which indicates ownership.

Thus, in the quotation above, the you are referring to more than one comma; thus "commas" would be the appropriate spelling.

Sorry about this. I don't mean to be patronising, but this is one of my personal irritants....."the grocer's apostrophe".....

Ahem....on a similar line, in the above sentence "I don't like to read over stuff once its up" - it should read "I don't like to read over stuff once it's up"

I'm sorry...no offence intended - it is a personal obsession of mine...and I guess if there are any errors in my own post I have to expect a hammering in a follow up post!

Posted: **17 Sep 2007, 11:05**

Terry D wrote:
steve689 wrote:Actually while the point of editing and articles etc is raised. I enjoy writing for fun on the Boxing Tribune website, i'm not a pro, most of my stuff is rubbish but still....flip me talk about editing. It's edited to eff so much it's practically not my own work anymore.

http://www.boxingtribune.com/index.php? ... le&id=1692

I wouldn't mind but it has been edited so that some things are now factually incorrect. In my original draft i stated Veit won the EU title against Guerrero. The editor in his wisdom has decided to upgrade it to the European crown proper. Making me appear a buffoon!! Not that it matters really but i had to moan somewhere.
I had the same problem with a US site. I was asked to cut down on use of comma's as the readership would not be able to understand them.

I was asked to cut down on the use of the words 'but' and 'yet' to make things run smoothly.

I preferred not to do this, my grammatical grasp is pretty pedestrian (alliteration on the other hand...) but I have used comma's in this way for more important stuff and it has been Ok, plus it is a stylistic thing, so I left things the way they were.

I don't like to read over stuff once its up, aside from a log on to see it is up, so my girlfriend pointed out to me that there was something odd gong on. After each 'but' or 'yet' there would be a comma even if there was no need for one. Sentences would be cut in half, usually in the middle of the main proposition of the sentence. Or a comma would be placed into a random spot and turn a subclause into a sub-subclause.

Ian and Kevin don't fook me about like this and I can send something off knowing what gets sent will, aside from what needs to be cut, go up intact. For that I'm grateful.

Serious publications have their own styles which they must stick to for the sake of consistency, whatever you may think of the style. If everybody is writing in a different style, it looks like a scrapbook.

Strange tack, though, sending it back to you and asking you to make the edits. Surely it would have been easier and quicker for them just to make their own edits?

Posted: **17 Sep 2007, 11:08**

Terry D wrote:I do know the difference but it is becoming the case that differentiating between the two is fast disappearing from use

True, but it's the little things like this which you must get right every time if you seek credibility as a writer.

Posted: **17 Sep 2007, 11:09**

lowersmiths wrote:The news of TC's demise has been greatly exaggerated.

So what is the truth of the matter? And why/where did the rumour start if it is indeed untrue?

Posted: **18 Sep 2007, 08:46**

he has just been officially sacked.
it's a big blow to BN. TC added so much to the magazine I just can't see how it was the right thing to do.
i don't know the full facts but i'm really feeling for the guy right now. he has always been a top lad when i've spoken to him.

Posted: **18 Sep 2007, 08:48**

By Newsquest or by Claude?

Yeah, a great shame. He was my favourite writer of the three and also a good bloke too. What on earth happened??

Posted: **18 Sep 2007, 08:55**

Tony walked out weeks ago and is back subbing, like he did before. He went from the Daily Express to BN and found himself going from pros to amateurs.
He hasn't died or anything.

Posted: **18 Sep 2007, 09:00**

he hasnt died but he's in turmoil over this. BN was his life for a long time. He loves boxing, you can tell that from the way he writes.
He is also a top class sub with great headlines.
TC is a well-respected journalist and a top bloke and BN will be worse off without him.

Posted: **18 Sep 2007, 09:01**

bennie wrote:Tony walked out weeks ago and is back subbing, like he did before. He went from the Daily Express to BN and found himself going from pros to amateurs.
He hasn't died or anything.

Whats the story here then?

Posted: **18 Sep 2007, 09:01**

lowersmiths wrote:he hasnt died but he's in turmoil over this. BN was his life for a long time. He loves boxing, you can tell that from the way he writes.
He is also a top class sub with great headlines.
TC is a well-respected journalist and a top bloke and BN will be worse off without him.

Im sure bennie knows whats going on he is related to the man.

BoxRec

What's this about Tony Connolly leaving?