Ok, here's my problem. A magazine is a magazine, and you have to pay for them or a subscription to them. Got no problem with that. This site however seems to blur the line a bit between the forum and the magazine. If I want to read the magazine I'll pay for it, but I'm not going to pay for a forum when there are several others out there for free.

However, I have a hard time discerning what is and what is not a part of the free forum and the magazine. Especially with the recent changes, some parts of the forum are now only accessible to magazine subscribers, yet some magazine articles/trip reports are free to the public. I just think there should be a better distinction, as well as maybe a disclaimer "hey this is part of a series, future articles may not be available to the public"... Knowing that, some people(like me) wouldn't even start reading the article.

It's not that I think everything should be free. My whole family is involved in/own/started small businesses, I know you gotta make money. I'm sure your magazine is great, but I just don't see a value in it. And it seems others feel the same.

I see the article outlines on the main pages, and I have yet to see one that I just had to buy access to. Since the popularity of online forums, I just think magazine gear reviews have become obsolete. Let me explain:
Usually an article reviews gear that has been provided by the manufacturer, which means it may or may not be the latest/greatest, lightest/strongest, etc. And if it is, it is usually only a matter of weeks or months until the product is available for sale to the public, and as soon as that happens, the "free and unbiased" gear reviews will hit the forums. And, usually, reviews have already hit the web by beta testers, so the magazine gear review is simply one more persons point of view, not "the only info I can find on this product."

Also, it was brought up about advertisers pulling there dollars because of bad reviews. It would seem they would also stop giving away there gear for the same reasons. That is why I only read magazine reviews with a grain of salt. But, when I read someones opinion of a product they had to spend there hard earned money on, and they have no relations to the manufacture, that, now that is a review I take to heart, and it just happens to be free. See where I'm going with this?

In my personal opinion, what I see happening here, is a company trying to salvage an obsolete form of media, instead of embracing the future. And in an attempt to do so, is charging for things that were once free to entice more members. Unfortunately, taking away what is free elsewhere won't get people to pay for it. As long as it can be had free somewhere else, why pay for it? What you need to do is get together with all the other sites, that way we don't have any options, so we will pay for it, and just go on which company we like more, or provides better service. Most people will happily carry a free 2 lb. tent than spend $300 on a 1.5 lb. tent. See what I'm trying to say?

If you want to keep the magazine going strong, fine. It would just be nice if you wouldn't blur the line between payed for media and free media. And, regardless of what has become accepted sales practice, "teasing" without any form of disclaimer is still shady. Put out a preview, but don't play half the movie, then cut it off with "if you want to see how it ends, go to BLOCKBUSTER!" People wouldn't be running to the movie store, they'd be POed.

Like I said, business is business and I understand that. Nothing personal. However, by the backlash you've been getting, it looks like your doing it wrong. Remember Netflix? Might have been a good idea businesswize but look whats happened to there stock...

P.S. Sorry if my thoughts are a little jumbled or hard to read. I don't always have time to go back and proof read and rewrite long posts like this.

Edited by stingray4540 on 12/22/2011 01:34:02 MST.

Yup, we are 1% sane and 99% crazy. We would buy that 1.5lb tent, and cut it up to make it lighter. We would also study it's design and MYOG a 1 lb version and sell the cut up tent on gear swap.


Enjoy,

Dave

nick said, "...it is usually only a matter of weeks or months until the product is available for sale to the public, and as soon as that happens, the "free and unbiased" gear reviews will hit the forums."
I'm not sure about public reviews necessarily being free and unbiased. I think many people make an emotional investment in their gear and don't always see it objectively. There is an inbuilt bias to like what they have bought. This suspicion is backed up by many forum posts where the poster insists their particular choice is best for the job. There are many glowing reader reviews on this site of gear that later turned up on gear swap.
I also think this is exacerbated by people usually being moved to write reviews in the first flush of enthusiasm just after receiving their new gear. (Some have even yet to take it out on a hike.) Many posters promise to give more details after the gear has seen some good use, but few do.
I don't mean to put down user reviews - I love them, and some are excellent. But I don't think they are always better or less biased than a review from BPL.

I do think that the OP is right, the lines get blurred between what is magazine and what is not and having a hard and fast line would help me see more value in paying for a magazine.

Just to toss in some thought. Value doesn't exist in physical reality, it only exists within your intangible imagination. A subscription or a diamond just is. It isn't beautiful or ugly, worth or worthless, it just is. Then comes along this human consciousness,this deep pool of intangible imagination, self aware and free, it observes the diamond and ascribes value that is irrelevant outside its own subjective experience.

OP wrote:
"Anyways, just bummed I won't be able to finish the Sunny and Balls story. Lame."


David Ure wrote
"And it is amazing."

Meh, I didn't think so.

OP wrote:
"Anyways, just bummed I won't be able to finish the Sunny and Balls story. Lame."


David Ure wrote
"And it is amazing."

Chad (I hate that I have a membership) Miller said "Meh, I didn't think so."

Chad then asked BPL to transfer his membership to the OP as gesture of good will.

We all applauded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W-fIn2QZgg

Never said I hate having a membership, just that I don't know how much I'll get out of the 'paying' part of it.

Now David, I'm entitled to my own option. I know that you've stated that non members should either buy a membership or be quite but since some kind soul was generous enough to gift me a membership I guess I can speak, at least in your eyes.

Come to think of it that alone is worth having a membership. (eye roll)

Now why don't you be a kind person like some of us here have been and gift someone a membership. (Hint Hint, the OP would like one).

Edited by chadnsc on 12/31/2011 17:05:25 MST.

Hey Chad - I have already gifted someone else with a membership.

Your turn.

Already did so . . .

Now what?

Actually I'll answer that myself:

David, you don't like my option on membership and I don't like yours. It's clear you don't want me to post anymore but tough I'm going to.

Let's spare the site all this tripe. From this point on if you want to have this type conversation let's do it via PM.

Edited by chadnsc on 12/31/2011 17:21:19 MST.

I agree.

Edited by FamilyGuy on 12/31/2011 18:10:07 MST.