"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...
On May 22, 5:33 pm, samsloan wrote:

Websites are free. Nobody pays to view them.

a) They could put Chess Life on a protected page where you would need
a USCF member password to see it.

Which wouldn't encourage potential members

b) If the website costs a fraction of what printing costs (and
*editorial* costs are also small) then there would be a net savings to
members, even if anyone could read the site.

If editorial costs are NOT small - as is usually the case with a
quality magazine - the extra overhead of printing the magazine on
paper is indeed still the only way to recover the costs in a practical
manner, both through the sale of the magazine and by advertising.

The trouble is that there is an assumption here that 'the market' is somehow
homogeneous. The fact is that half the membership is rated less than 1000.
Adult lub players average about 1350-1600. Can you write the same material
for both? And this is not even to address those above 1600 who presumably
are the active tournament players who get CL to look for tournaments!

Even when the printing costs are several times the printing costs.

If the USCF is dying for lack of membership, and there _is_ no way to
fix that - because, while all the standard measures to reach out to
the public are not bringing in enough new members, and it's purely
wishful thinking to suppose it could be otherwise if we just tried
harder - then it may be impossible to avoid all sorts of cutbacks and
paring down, even though these measures may make the problem even
worse.

The issue of 'membership' and 'chess readers' is quite distinct.

Every week Chessville produces about 5 times as much chess material as CL
does per month. It addresses every level of play, and is timely. CL can't
compete with that.

OTOH, if 'membership organization' is insisted upon, then as someone has
said, its essential to put a piece of paper into the members hands on a
frequent basis.

Thereby print magazines for chess have two main problems: One is to write to
a distinct market segment, and the other to do something e-zine's cannot,
which is provide useful chess information to people that can be used away
from the computer.

One option for CL is to become a quarterly, perfect bound [at least a marked
spine], well-indexed record of the preceeding quarter's chess activity, and
to address specific markets.

It also needs to select which market segments it intends to address in each
of its variantss - since essentially those players below 1350 are still
learners, and those above that rating level require deeper analysis suitable
for tournament play, not just glosses.

What are we to make of the adult membership anyway?
Half of themn play no rated games.
Half of those who do play, don't achieve more than a provisional rating.
Which leaves just 7,500 adult members playing more than 10 games per year.

We must presume that those who 'sign up just for the magazine' are therefore
not principally interested int he depth of its chessic analysis, and
therefore might be surveyed for what they do want to read.

There are a variety of strategies for engaging both e-zines and print-zines.
There is a paucity of experience, imagination and will, to actually do so.
In terms of a print vehicle, there is even the cooperative model idea of
working with other chess publishers to produce the best articles from their
e-publishing - representing the quarter-year in question.

If Dr. Brady has made objection to acting on insufficient research in reader
habits and preferences - good for him! If he has objected to an
insufficiently strategised business lurch by Mr. Goichberg and Friends, even
better for him!

Phil Innes

A smaller organization that can pay its bills can survive, but a
bankrupt one cannot.

John Savard