Volume 49 Issue 8 - May 2022

[David Weber]

The separate newsletter idea does make sense in theory, but according to old threads, the idea is always rejected on the reasonable grounds that as the magazine is monthly, a separate sheet has no functional benefit over a couple of pages in the magazine itself.

However, I personally would support the provision of a separate newsletter if that is what the majority want. The advantages have been well stated. Of course there would need to be clear agreement over the responsibilities of each publication, to ensure that neither is seen to be stealing the other's content.

While I do not have previous experience of editing a publication, in the interests of putting words into action, if the members choose to go down this path then I would like to be considered as a candidate for the editor of said newsletter.

[JulienW]

All very good ideas Christopher.

Just needs someone to volunteer to look into the logistics of a 'secondary stuffing', any additional costs involved and act as editor for the thing, etc., etc.

(I notice that David Weber has not been quick enough to take the traditional step backwards with everyone else when there's a call for volunteers to step forward - you may come to regret that, but well done that man!)

[Hugh Norwood]

I agree that no one should be denied news and reports because they do not have Internet access.

As I understand it, the current NEWS comes in just below the postage limit - adding extra pages either as a separate newsletter, or extra pages to the NEWS would be a big cost increase. (although the Society is well-off apparently, if I recall the AGM correctly...)

Needs a lot of thought....

[Hobby]

I feel the current (new) format to be an improvement. The main reason many of us didn't particularly like Branchlines is that they all seemed to be the same...

"We met at Joe Bloggs house, 234 people came, it was a bit crowded, we discussed many things (too many to mention here), some NG but lots of other things as well"

You get the idea, and there also still seems to be some sort of "competition" going on to who has the best attended meeting, though for the life of me I can't see why this has to be the case, it seems like the other competition to see who had the biggest NG show we had a few years ago, quite frankly who cares!

Hence many of us felt it was a waste of space. Hopefully the new format will be less on that and more concentrating on the modelling and some photos!

I don't think Branchlines is dead just yet, though it did need a major rethink.

[Stuart Taylor]

Everyone

Please keep the comments coming, I really want to understand what people care about with reagrds to 009 News.

Let me pick up on a couple of the points mentioned. Julien has the reason for the change correct. Due to the increasing number of groups reporting, which I personally think is fantastic, we were having to cut down the number of words drastically every time. It was effort for the reporters and effort for myself and I ran a big risk of cutting important information. Something needed to change to ensure a better flow of the right information.

Space is the problem. We are able to put 24 pages into an A4 envelope and stay within the 100g postal rate. Any more and we risk going over into the 250g postal rate with the attendant increase in cost.

The way the magazine is printed is that the magazine must always be printed in groups of 4 pages (think about how a double sided A3 sheet folds over to become part of the magazine). In fact, the most cost effective way of printing is effectively an A2 sheet so a group of 8 pages per sheet. This is actually how the News is printed, 3 groups of 8 pages that are cut and folded.

I have looked at a bi-monthly magazine that made use of the 250g limit. Printing 48 pages was no cheaper on a cost per page but there would be a saving on annual postage costs. Going this route would simply have the advantage of space to expand and, potentially, move the groups to a separate sheet(s) but, from talking to members, the monthly nature of the magazine is one of the things that members really do like. Those of you, like me, who are members of other groups such as 2mm, 3mm, 7mm or 16mm societies, know there is a very different feel to magazines that are produced less frequently.

Branchlines is staying. The groups are important. The question is how best to use the limited space to convey the activities and ethos of the groups. On a personal note, my modelling would not be where it is today, nor would it be so enjoyable, without the support and friendship of the Oxford and Wiltshire groups.

The change to the May issue was a good start to try something different. I am sure it is going to evolve over the coming months and we'll find the sweet spot for the ever growing groups and members. I'm not sure there are many groups that can claim the steady growth that the 009 Society has!

Stuart

[Graeme Dunbar]

On the size/cost/weight/frequency issue I do like the monthly format. I think changing to say publishing six times a year, even it if meant being able to receive more than double the content for the same cost would be less satisfactory. I also think the nature of the content fits a slimmer more frequent format. However it is also interesting to see more in-depth articles and I think publishing them in two, three or more parts works well.

I also receive a model flying magazine that is published every two months and it is a lot thicker and has lengthier articles. I don't think it is just old age or a general modern lack of attention span thing but I feel there is rather more of a need to fill the space and while there are some fascinating and well researched articles it can also be four months or more between something that is really satisfying.

If we are on the cusp of having more material than fits the constraints of publishing and distribution or there is desire to say publish some weightier in-depth articles then would having occasional 'bumper issues' be a possibility, either on an ad hoc or regular basis?

[Stan Williams]

Picking up on a thread,
Many of us felt it was a waste of space !

Who are the many ?  and what constitutes many ?

Is it a handful,  several or hundreds ?  or just the normal vocal minority ?

Stan.

[Hobby]

I suppose that I was one, Stan, and was prepared to say so, hence the comment "vocal" (i.e. I was prepared to say something wasn't right whilst others thought it but kept quiet) though I'd dispute the "minority" bit as there's never been any investigation into numbers so that's purely an assumption by you.

However what we were saying is that we felt that BL had run it's course in it's present format (see my early post about it's content and take a look at entries over the past few years). I was as guilty as others when I did the reports for the early days of the W Mids group, numbers, whose house we were in and a very thin report of what was discussed - quite honestly I look back and feel it was a waste of space other than showing the group met up regularly. However (for example) Julien's recent reports which I get by email are a world away for those early days, including much more detail and even photos of what people brought along.

I'd suggest reports such as that, rather than attendance counts, are much more likely to encourage people to attend and this is what I hope happens to BL.

[Graeme Dunbar]

As the author of one of the entries I did find the old format somewhat repetitive to write and very probably to read too. Given a limited number of words to work with I am not sure there was a sensible way of keeping the content fresh and informative without resorting to repeating basic information about a group or saying anything in any meaningful context.

I think a serious consideration is what the purpose of Branchlines is. What I think this is includes:

1. Letting members, particularly new Society members know of the existence of Area Groups in general.
2. Indicate where Area Groups have been set up.
3. Inform prospective Area Group members where and how they operate (including longer term members who have moved location).
4. Provide information on specific interests or activities within a particular Area Group, perhaps including whether they have links to local model railway clubs or form part of a wider scale/gauge group of NG modellers.
5. Inform other Area Groups of their existence for the purpose of arranging things like joint activities, invitations to each others meetings, member days and exhibitions.
6. Inform groups of members thinking of setting up an Area Group.

There are probably many other things too.

In a way, Branchlines is a victim of its own success. When few Area Groups existed and reported their activities it was quite probably an inspiration to others, perhaps even engendering a bit of envy. (I remember in another society someone posting "when will they start an area group near me?"... No, it doesn't work like that.) There might have been a bit vicarious enjoyment of the activity of other members by reading about their exploits. With the success of Area groups, doing similar things in many cases, there is danger of reporting what is going on seeming a bit hackneyed.

So I guess the question is how to promote Area Groups and keep members informed in an enjoyable way?

[Stan Williams]

Perhaps its a chance to ask all the society membership, which way they wish to proceed with the newsletter by having a vote.
ie
Monthly or bi monthly.
Should the old format for branchlines be discontinued.
Should we carry on with branchlines as its always been.
Would the editor benefit from having an assistant and they could put the branchlines together from the details sent in, but have restrictions
on the amount of wording for each group.

Stuart is doing a great job as editor, but at some point he will move on, so by having an assistant, that may help when there is a change
of editor.

What also concerns me, is, that the vast number of society members prefer to be on the 009 railway modellers facebook rather than on
any 009 society formats.
Yes, its instant gratification, but the vast amount of those articles, photos, write ups will not see the light of day on these pages, the
newsletter or the 009 society facebook page.

Stan.

[Hobby]

What also concerns me, is, that the vast number of society members prefer to be on the 009 railway modellers facebook rather than on any 009 society formats.
Yes, its instant gratification, but the vast amount of those articles, photos, write ups will not see the light of day on these pages, the
newsletter or the 009 society facebook page.

You've rather answered you're own question, there, Stan, "instant gratification"! Also that one and the other 009/H0e FB pages are nothing to do with the Society and so have lots of non members on them. I'm not a massive fan of FB as useful information is far too easily lost, unlike a Forum where it's easier to find if you need it. However it's much easier to post on and, because the two are not Society only it will have greater membership and so more posts. I'm a member of several foreign forums as well as foreign FB that cover H0e and it tends to be the FB pages that generate the interesting stuff.

I tend to think of Society only forums and FB pages as being more for finding out about that Society rather than for general NG discussion and use them accordingly, I suspect others do the same. If I want information on NG in general I'm more likely to look at NGRM or one of the non Society FB pages rather than ours simply because I'm more likely to come across someone with that information. I'm not sure it's something the Society should be concerned about unless the discussion becomes personal against a Society, but from what I've seen the Forum and FB page owners tend to clamp down on that quite quickly. Not everyone wants to join a Society!

Horses for courses?

[cp.409067]

Everyone

Please keep the comments coming, I really want to understand what people care about with reagrds to 009 News.

.....

Space is the problem. We are able to put 24 pages into an A4 envelope and stay within the 100g postal rate. Any more and we risk going over into the 250g postal rate with the attendant increase in cost.

.....

I have looked at a bi-monthly magazine that made use of the 250g limit. Printing 48 pages was no cheaper on a cost per page but there would be a saving on annual postage costs. Going this route would simply have the advantage of space to expand and, potentially, move the groups to a separate sheet(s) but, from talking to members, the monthly nature of the magazine is one of the things that members really do like. Those of you, like me, who are members of other groups such as 2mm, 3mm, 7mm or 16mm societies, know there is a very different feel to magazines that are produced less frequently.

....
Stuart

*

Stuart and all

Perhaps a slightly more radical approach to size (number of pages) and frequency of publication could be considered.

Am I right in thinking that at the moment we are using the Royal Mail MAILMARK system? If so then I calculate as follows. I apologise in advance if I have made any mathematical errors.

[1]   The cost if posting each issue up to 100g is £0.93 = £11.16 a year.

[2]   The cost of posting larger issues (and say including a separate "NEWSLETTER") up to 250g would be £1.31 each = £15.72 a year. This would be an increase of £4.56.

[3]   If a larger issue as above were only published 6 times a year the cost would drop to £7.86 - a saving vs 12 smaller issues of £3.30.

[4]   Now consider splitting the difference - are monthly or bi-monthly the only options? Say there were to be published 9 issues a year exploiting the up to 250g size and allowing for a separate "NEWSLETTER". The cost of that in postage terms would be £11.79 - an annual increase of only £0.63 per member.

[5]   Could that sum be found from existing subscription funds?

[6]   And would members find publication every 5.77 weeks unbearable?


Christopher Payne   

[Graeme Dunbar]

Another model railway group I'm a member of tried producing a separate 'journal' and 'newsletter' for a while and went back to distributing a single publication.

If the periodical published output is split into separate parts covering different types of material there is the question of how to divide it and where to put material that straddles the boundary. It could get really interesting if the content of a named section could be thought to oscillate between the two parts on different occasions.

There is material that is sporadic and quite a lot of that might be said to be 'news' rather than 'articles': trade matters, Society sales, product releases, Society news. It could be feast or famine between months. With an all-in-one publication if there really is a shortage of material then I'm sure there are all sorts of editorial tricks such as retrospectives or showing additional photographs from an earlier article to help fill it. (Been there, done that, written extended editorials to make up space. *)

If news is short and there is a separate newsletter it could mean searching for the proverbial dead donkey but if there there are major announcements then it might mean trimming them to an extent that diminishes their importance.

With a single volume some items could be fitted in or held over if particular content is time critical. There are some items that could perhaps be published in abbreviated form and more in-depth in the next issue so as not to have to cut down a significant article.

Further more, are items such as notification of a new loco and a basic review 'news' but something more in-depth, especially if it includes dimensions and disassembly that is of interest to loco builders an 'article'? With Society matters, is a factual report, 'news' but a discussion document on future direction an 'article'?

On top of that, there are double the number of front covers, contents pages/sections, possibly double the editorials or equivalent introductions, essential contact information, disclaimers and other legal or publication type stuff, possibly a certain amount of cross referencing or sign-posting between the parts, where do the adverts go (no doubt some readers won't want them 'polluting' the serious articles but advertisers will expect them where they have best impact), and so on.


* I was tickled to read a piece in a German equivalent of a computing SIG newsletter I once edited. It was a reference to a Mrs Trellis of North Wales (translated into German). The two sister magazines regularly contained summaries of activities in each other's national SIG groups. In one issue I published there was only one letter from the UK members so I couldn't resist the 'Clue' reference about the 'overflowing postbag'. This was duly translated into German and published in their newsletter. I guess it was a slow month for them too.  :)

[clayliner]

Is Mrs Trellis a Society member? If so, her views on this topic would be invaluable...  :)

David.

[Frank]

Following on from CP's suggestion, there is a well known NG mag that does put out 9 issues a year as it is monthly in the summer but every two months in the winter as this is a quiet time for the heritage businesses.  I myself find it confusing but I could I expect get use to it.  The 009 publication(s) could be similar but monthly in the winter when the modelling activity is high and every two months in the summer when people tend to be out and about doing other things (like going to exhibitions).

Or just go to every six weeks.

I know a few modelling societies which do a separate news and articles publications, both mailed out together.  The one with the articles is generally high quality with good presentation values, high resolution photos, etc. but obviously takes more time to prepare.   The news one has no photos, is just text and just monochrome, but can be put together more quickly and so has later deadlines, so the news pieces are more topical and the info is more up to date.   Its also cheaper to print.

It's easy to split the items between the two, the news one generally has news items, updates on society sales, info on society meetings (AGMs etc.), contact details, and the equivalent of our Branchlines.  These need no photos and benefit from the shorter deadline.  The articles are glossy, losts of photos, well produced, but not time critical.

Frank