Golf+Mag rant Update, the Editors response!!!!

I sent the editor an e-mail suggesting he looked at the thread and sent him a link here is hes response.

comments please.

Cheers Andy,
Thanks for sending the link through, always good to hear the opinions of the many. If I'm totally honest I agree with lots of what's being said on there, but it's very difficult to please all of the people all of the time. If we were to radically change direction and begin to feature very tastefully restored, unmodified Mk1's (which I absolutely adore!) the vast majority of our market would probably sod off elsewhere for their monthly fix and our magazine would wind up like the recently axed Retro Cars. I was also under the impression that VW Motoring was no longer published - apologies if I'm incorrect. Although we take the opinions on forums seriously and try to respond to and accommodate their wishes, we have to remember that 10 - 20 people moaning is a small percentage of our overall readership. By the sounds of it not many of your members buy our magazine anyway, so we get the impression that a couple of standard Mk1 features won't make them change their minds.  The argument for aspirational v obtainable feature cars will always exist, so how or where do we draw the line? When does obtainable become aspirational and vice versa. I bet equally as many people would complain If we were to feature 'very normal cars' as someone suggests in the thread, because they don't hold any interest for them. Making the compromise is almost difficult and in our opinion there aren't enough fully restored, original Mk1's to justify a commercially viable magazine that's devoted to them, certainly not based on what we see at the shows, anyway. But then again you never know when a stock Mk1 GTI that's had a full resto might crop up in GOLF+. I remember seeing an absolutely stunning Mars Red Mk1 on axle stands at Inters '07 and for me it was the car of the show.  The choice of the TT as a cover car was one that we hummed and argued over for ages, but in the end we thought we'd give it a shot. It's only our second ever none Golf cover car and the feedback - both positive and negative - has been welcomed with open arms. Watch this space is all I can say as you may have altered the future of Golf+ magazine.  Take it steady and keep enjoying your Mk1's. My Mk1 is nearly ready, but something tells me it might not be your cup of tea. Cheers and bests James Wallace - 020 8726 8352Deputy EditorGOLF+

decent of him to reply and in such detail, i.e. not "we love what you have to say but we don't care" standard letter.

I think it fair to say though, that what he's really saying is, the way it is, makes money.  dumbed down, with girls = money.  It's important to remember he's an editor of a magazine, not jesus christ, and making money, by increasing popularity, is his job.

Fair play, I'm gonna go buy Golf+ and have a wee swatch at that audi.

WeeTony said

decent of him to reply and in such detail, i.e. not "we love what you have to say but we don't care" standard letter.

well, it kind of is. it is done quite in a well civilised manner though.

you are right when you say, it has to make money.

 at least he said that they were not sure about the Audi as the cover car……and he is right I don't think that we will like his Golf….18"s and a Cosy engine with a small trip to Ripspeed thrown in for good measure I bet…..and we are all driven by money so I can't think bad of him.

He is like the bloke that left The Peoples Jewdian Front "SPLITER" he is now in the Peoples Front of Jewdier…sorry if that is spelt wrong :dontknow:

He's pretty much hit the nail on the head when he said "commercially viable". Fact is, a lot of people out there want to see cars pimped up "to-the-max", WE are the minority in the VW Scene these days…..

Wouldn't hurt to have a page (or two) within the mag devoted to standard golf's tho…. :dontknow:

The remaining pages could then be 'blinged up to the max'  :mrgreen:

I use to buy 'the golf', (as it was known then), and it was a good mag. wish I'd never gave them away to my mate….

i think he makes some fair comments as well, after all the magazine has to make money, and like paul says, it is only a small gathering in the interest of the mk1

Just a few points. I agree that it is decent of him to reply as he has, rather than just brush us off. Im not too sure that i appreciate being classed as a 'moaner' though. Since when did expressing a valid opinon on a forum about a product that would not survive without at least some members of that forum buying it, become moaning? I dont think anybody would seriousley expect GOLF+ to totally abandon its current output, but as has been said, the odd feature on a nicely restored or relatively stock 'survivor' surely has a place in the mag. They are out there. The magazine, i feel, is in danger of becoming too blinkered and presuming that all that we want is lavish, air bagged, show queens. Surely a couple less pages devoted to arse licking around their 'scene mates' could be used to feature a stocker or two. Theres plenty of 'fill'' in some of the features that could be clipped. I guess we will have to wait and see if our comments have really been taken on board, or if the reply was just a public relations exercise.

maybe thats the answer then………if the mags did carry at least one or two retro, restored and/or standard model features in it every month then it would appeal more, there are many originals still about and loads of restored mk1 mk2 and so on

as i have said i do like modded cars aswell but unlike some i dont aspire to what people do to them!!! and yeah with the money spent on them a lot are unobtainable (usualy belong to companys who "scene tax" ya to pay for them) but some are just too far removed from vw`s ethos or concept for me

if the mags were more balanced and they can cover both "codes", as im sure the modders still love and appreciate the originals of the modded version? even if they dont :dontknow:  it keeps the original alive and at the fore front of peoples minds along side the sacrificed ones built in the name of trophys or "scene cred" at the end of the day the more original cars are a living history lesson and a blueprint for future dub restorers to use as reference and inspiration

at least he was willing to reply to some of our "rants"

I think that we are all getting old.  A lot of the guys who I work with are 15 year younger than me and they love all that crap they put on cars.
The mags just think that, tat plus tart equals money. and unfortunatly it does!  :cry:

In case yuo missed this post in another thread:

I read mini magazine, and it's great….no semi-naked bimbos, no ridiculous parts or accessories, lots of resto advice and articles etc. etc.

Mods, if someone from the site brought you a protomag, using lots of info and photos from the forum and site, would you endorse it/help to advertise….I see this as solution to both problems(no mag, no time)

I reckon a lot of people on here could help put it together, with marsred our photographer, mk1john the photoshopper, topoftherange our inhouse copper with "tasty donut of the week" article, and then 100 others to talk about there cars, restos, etc. etc.

I'd be keen to help out.

thoughts?

Hes got a fair argument, its all about making money isnt it. If he doesnt feel featuring standard mk1's will improve the profit any they arent gonna feature them are they  :dontknow:

MK1_Arron said

Hes got a fair argument, its all about making money isnt it. If he doesnt feel featuring standard mk1's will improve the profit any they arent gonna feature them are they  :dontknow:

Flip this argument over though. How many people dont buy the mag because it doesnt cater for the stock crowd? How many more would buy the mag if it featured a stock or restoration car? Would a couple of pages devoted to stock cars realy alienate the majority of readers, i doubt it. But would it entice a few more readers to the fold, probably. I think he's missed the point slightly to be honest. I dont think anybody was saying that all features should be about stock or resto cars, but to have absolutely none in the mag means that he's only covering a very small spectrum of probably one of the most diverse and tollerent scenes around. I dont buy Practical Classic, but if it had a MK1 or even a MK2 resto or original featured, id buy it. Thats the point. If Golf+ and even PVW just took the blinkers off for a minute they would see that.

yeah i see what you mean but maybe the effort to get some more nice mk1's in would be too much.

you know what a mean they might not project much increase in profits, for the effort

cant explain but do ya get me?

We have to look here at the big picture that is Golf+ mag, it should cater for All golfs mk1,mk2,m3,mk4,m5 when you look at this list who would be interested in looking at a stock mk3,mk4,m5 these models to now be interesting have to be different from stock, ie modded to hell
the mk1,mk2 more the mk1 are now classic cars and the interest now is ones that are unmolested
the point here is yes there should be a place for the stock mk1,mk2 in the mag but when you look at the percentage of golf owners  of all mks we
 are prob 10-15% at best with mK3-4 at about 40-60% hope this makes sense? that why the mag contains the types of cars that cheese most of us off but what started all this was my rant about the feature car being a Audi TT modded to death and not a Golf at all.

A5OPY said

 when you look at the percentage of golf owners  of all mks we
 are prob 10-15% at best with mK3-4 at about 40-60% hope this makes

My rough estimate is something more like 5%.

what about those of us that have (and still got :wink: ) a variety of models  inc a mk1 and a mk3, i love em all for differetn reasons, so they arent catering for everyone!!

having read all the above i reckon its time for a mk1 inspired magazine

you lot pay me lots of money and ill write you a mag on lined A4 paper with the odd photo of a mk1 with a 30 stone munter draped on the bonnet :wink:

joking honest

but would a club magazine not be a bad idea????????????????? how vw clubs produce a magazine ok it would only be available to paid members as theres a cost involved but what a good idea

thank me all later

dont forget its not just what the readership of the mag want, its also about getting advertising revenue. There are lots of suppliers and stores for that extra bit of bling for your car at grosely over inflated prices. Sometimes in this sector its exclusivity ie high prices that drive demand. A proportion of which go back into advertising which mean money for the mag.

I think the advertising revenue from suppliers to do a stock restore is going to be much smaller and more nuts,bolts and welders and have access to a lot less advertising revenue.

rant over..

I remember the first non golf cover car in golf+ which was Dan Krebbs' mk3 polo G40. I have bought many copies of the magazine over the last 7 years of dubbing.

I dont think that the magazine should ever cater just for standard cars just would be nice to see a few less seat's an audi's sneaking in.

I totally agree with A5OPY the audi tt is a nice car and done very well (if you're not a purist) but isnt a golf so shouldnt really have warranted the cover. At least Dan's mk3 polo g40 cover car is a VW.

So a slight shift in mag focus. If you compare one from a few years ago before the editors got involved with all this westside rubbish you can noticeable see the difference.