UKC

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

I never subscribed to Alpinist (I've had too many problems with subscriptions to other US magazines with issues getting lost in the post, taking months to arrive, etc and decided it wasn't worthwhile) although I did buy occasional copies when I was in the UK. I never found anywhere in Paris where I could buy it, and never saw it on sale when in the Alps (although I rarely go to Chamonix, maybe Snells or similar sold it), and the Paris based specialist bookshop 'Librarie des Alpes' which sells many non French magazines & journals (eg Alpine Club Journal, American Alpine Club Journal, Climbing, etc) had never heard of Alpinist until I showed them a copy. If a magazine is going to be aimed at a niche market, surely it needs to have a very good distribution network, not just in the UK & the USA.

In reply to Doug:

Last week I saw the latest and last issue for sale in the newsagents in Stockholm airport and both our local climbing shops here in small town Finland stock it.

Dave

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:
It's hard to disagree with what he says - the survival of 'Rock and Ice' and 'Climbing' in the US; and 'Trail', 'Climber' and 'Climb/High' in the UK testify to that - as it is based on the brutal reality of magazine sales, subscriptions, advertising and most important of all:- profit.

A number of posters have commented on the fact that they will spend good money to buy a magazine in which the majority of the articles have no interest to them whatsoever.

The current issue of 'Alpinist' is an interesting area to explore. The main interests to me were the El Cap feature and the Torre Traverse. I spent a little time on the Patagonia website in the Tin Shack and there were the pictures of the traverse accompanied by a commentary by Rolando Garibotti - the Patagonia catalogue contains a concise account of Rolando's motivation. I consumed the same words three times, more or less.

The role of sponsors in providing space for accounts on websites appears to be one way forward, like Patagonia - as long as the company doesn't fold - and Grivel North America springs to mind here.

In print media, the AJ and other Alpine journals will continue to thrive based on the solid base of membership subscriptions (with all the benefits of membership that a club offers) - unlike 'Alpinist' which was subscription and sales-based.

UKC is helping to define the internet-based climbing media but seems, as far as I can tell, to rely on the print form of Rockfax to sustain it. The quality of articles is good, some have been outstanding - at least on a par with those published elsewhere. I'm not certain that long articles on the computer are as accessible to readers scanning them on a screen as the print form - you have to print them, or is that just me, again?

In reply to Dee:


Not so at all. We are completely self-financing, and proud of it.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Sorry, Mick, my lack of clarity:- I was thinking that UKC was built upon the foundation of Rockfax - a known brand.

In reply to Dee:

I don't think the branding had anything to do with it - most users are probably unaware of the connection anyway, and we have been very careful to keep the companies as separate as we possibly can.

It is true that the early days of UKC were supported by Rockfax and Rock and Run, however UKC has been self-financing for around 6 years now. Rockfax now just pay the market rate for advertising on UKC, as everyone else does.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - UKC:

>most users are probably unaware of the connection anyway, and we have been very careful to keep the companies as separate as we possibly can.


Well I have always thought of them as two arms of the same business, each helping the other. Mick Ryan's comments from Bishop linking the two may have had something to do with it, and this;

http://www.ukclimbing.com/general/about.html

In reply to sutty:

Well they have separate accounts and I run them separately, however they are both run from the same office.

For the purposes of this thread discussion though, Rockfax cannot be considered as the print arm of UKC, essentially supporting it, as happens with most other climbing web sites. UKC funds itself and does return a small profit however there are a few hidden costs (like my time) which aren't appearing in the accounts yet. In that sense I suppose there is an element of support in that I wouldn't be able to give my time freely if I didn't have an income from another business.

Alan

In reply to Dave: but I guess its common to see English language publications on sale in Sweden & Finland, as you know, its not so common in France. Even in Paris, its rare to see much other than newspapers, the Economist & a handful of magazines on sale in English.

In reply to Alan James - UKC: Sutty made the point for me; I'd always assumed (never good on UKC, I know!) that the success of the Rockfax brand (Bikefax et al - perhaps company is too finite a term?) - allowed UKC the time and support to grow as a venture when in its infancy. I congratulate you on your success in making UKC self-funding - essentially.

To my mind, the success that is Rockfax is linked to the success of UKC, they have the same owner, share a common identity (a corporate 'identity'?) - they have a form of interdependence rather than independence - and I don't believe there is anything wrong with that. You're providing the sort of services that users (climbers and others) want - and you pretty much have the field to yourself, at present. I feel that the success of UKC will spawn (further) imitators but unless they can offer something that you can't (and there isn't much UKC doesn't offer), they will lack the credibility and success that you have.

The future? 'Alpfax - Chamonix'? Downloading crag topos, in the same way we download music?

In reply to Dee:

Thanks for your compliments. One of the reasons we are keen to keep the sites as separate as possible is because it is important that UKC is seen as independent. Although there aren't many commercial players in the Guidebook world, there are a few and we do have advertising from the likes of The Climbers' Club and Ground Up so I suppose we are being successful in that respect.

We do already do download topos - http://www.rockfax.com/publications/miniguides/general_info.html - although I suspect you mean something more handheld.

Bikefax is (surprisingly) nothing to do with me.

Alan

A minor technical question, but I was wondering if the database that sits behind the Rockfax databases and the logbooks at UKC is one and the same as the descriptions and FA details are identical?

In reply to slacky:

The Rockfax database was built in 2000 and is fed with data taken directly out of our guidebooks. When we built the Logbook system we filled a lot of it by dumping the Rockfax data into the system to give us somewhere to start from. Since then though the systems have been kept separate and the voting doesn't link in. If a route gets a new description/grade/star in a Rockfax, then that won't automatically appear on the UKC system, however we do now keep the Rockfax DB up dated with the latest route information each time we publish a new book.

So the answer is no, but they did come from the same root.

Alan

Back to the point, Alpinist is a superb publication I thought of it as a journal rather than a magazine, working in a climbing shop I have seen times when we could easily sell 10+ copies a month but things dried up recently to less than 3 per month, it is shame more people did not jump on the alpinist wagon. I will miss it sorely but at least i have issue 25

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC: As someone with a 4000 word essay due to appear in the next issue of Alpinist, a piece that took two weeks' work, I can empathise with Dougald's final remarks. Hey ho. Sad to see a class act go belly up.

It's worth pointing out, because there are endless threads on UKC saying how shit British climbing magazines are, that journalism, photos, writing etc costs money. Publishers don't like giving journalists money because that cuts down on their profit. Amazingly, we don't like having our profits cut down either.

Nevertheless, in real terms, I earn less as a journalist now than I did five years ago. That's partly because I'm not that motivated by loot, but partly because all publications pay less. They're all on their uppers but the problem is most acute in specialist magazines. I love long magazine features. I read A LOT of them. Mostly in the bath. I would LOVE to spend two weeks on a climbing article. Because it's fun!

But if I did I'd be making substantially less than the minimum wage.

So they're you go. We all get news and gossip and useful info on t'internet now. But a long well-crafted read? Great photography? That takes investment. MONEY.

You can argue that budgets could be used differently, but I'm not going to get into that wormy can. I would say tho' that the British climbing scene is full of feisty, quirky people with a story to tell. But it ain't being told!

Sniff. Boo hoo. Back to work.

In reply to Ed Douglas:

Well yours was one of the first articles I would turn to to read, then look at the rest so keep trying to entertain from time to time, even though I no longer buy the mags. Others will enjoy them.

In reply to Alan James - UKC:


Alan, you have noticed that your name and website appear as

" by - Alan James - UKC ? on - 21 Oct 2008 - www.rockfax.com"

haven't you?

In reply to Ed Douglas:
I'd have to back Ed up on this, whilst just about all costs have risen hugely in the last 10 years (fuel, accommodation, food etc etc), only one of the publications that I have worked for during that time has given me a pay rise.

To pay the bills I need to do more work in the same amount of time. This is bound to affect quality.

In reply to Tom Hutton: Just write any old crap like me Tom, they never spot the difference

In reply to Ed Douglas:



Takes a lot more than MONEY Ed.

Advertising revenue for the print media has dropped dramatically. Why? Two reasons. Firstly companies have diversified their marketing budgets and use it more creatively, there is less available for print.

Second, the big questions about print advertising have been: Does it work? How many people see it? Is it value for money? Answers: maybe, don't know and no. In the climbing world most print adverts are placed to give the perception of retailer support!

Ad rates and spend have gone down, hence less MONEY for content and in answer to this in a mad scramble to please advertisers much content has the look of Advitorial and every page has a company logo, which the reader quite rightly questions; Is this magazine I've just paid for or a gear catalogue?

Reduction in ad revenue, plus less readers = NO MONEY to pay Ed to create a long well-crafted read for us.

But there is a solution.

Mick

In reply to Ed Douglas:

> Great photography? That takes investment. MONEY.

Take a look

http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/top10s.html

http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/top200.html

And I know you like alpine...

http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/author.html?id=15737

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I'm wondering if you mean online, and if so did you see the article 'Is Google Making Us Stupid?'.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google

CLIMB mag Sept 08 published my letter as LOM which was partly on this subject. It started as merely my personal reaction to the changed delivery of Mountain INFO, in an email to Lindsay. It continued into a bit of a discussion with some of those others involved (JH, DMD, KC) about the online future of climbing writing - of all kinds. Will the AAJ become totally online? etc etc

But it goes much deeper and beyond climbing in that presentation of information seems to change how we perceive and understand the content. It seems we're less and less able to sit through reading large tracts of text because we're getting used to flitting across bullet points, forum posts and headline links - short, sharp instant info. We shy away from big dense paragraphs, we just can't seem to concentrate for long enough.

It actually changes how we think about everything and seemingly, how our brains work and develop. The inability to stick with large tracts of continuous, coherent text degrades our ability to speak in continuous coherent sentences and thus speak effectively about complex issues. A future of only media soundbites ?

Journalists on mainstream online 'newspaper' sites are already having their work/careers affected by having to make their headlines jump out off the screen at surfers speeding by. Your story attracts less hits = you get less work. Will we no longer read news unless something sensational grabs our eye? MILLIONAIRE BIKINI MASSACRE WIN FREE SEX NOW

I'm sure something will rise from the ashes of Alpinist before too long, in some form or another. Just screen-refresh to watch this flickering LCD Java enabled space.

D

In reply to Damo:

No, not just online, but print as well, and as Ed said... long, well researched and well written articles.

For a small enthusiast media, that combines print and online, you have to have a diverse revenue stream that dovetails with today's financial challenges.

You can't rely on bringing in £30K a print issue anymore unless you have completely gone over to the dark side and are well versed in 'smoke and mirrors' ad selling.

In reply to Damo:

Damo - it isn't an either or - it's web and print together if we are to have a decent climbing media - including journals and fine quality publications like Alpinist.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

No doubt. I'm not arguing with you (really!

But "like Alpinist"? Alpinist had no/few ads, so made no money, nor was the pre-paid market for their 'quality' seemingly big enough. The challenge to make real money from (non-porn) websites is still a big hurdle. So neither are making real money. Problem.

So how does the synergy of the two become more profitable* than either individual media has proven/is proving to be in the 21C?

Interesting times.

D

*not meaning loadsamoney-cruise-thru-Bishop-in-your-Ferrari profitable, just profitable enough to sustain itself for more than 5 years. Or is expecting a business to last more than 5 yrs soooo 1999? Do we need a single long-running climbing media? Longevity is no guarantee of quality. And vice versa.

In reply to Ed Douglas: i only read climbing mags in the foundary cafe or similar, cause they are old ones, with writing in them, lots of it and often of a high quality.

I was reading the 2 "classic" UK collections of writind and Perrin says "Its amazing how much great writing there is to choose from to make another anthology only 5? years after the last one" I'd hate to try and do the same now....

In reply to Damo:

I think one of the problems with Alpinist is that although it got high subscription rates, it really didn't embrace the community aspects of the web that could have increased that subscription base even higher and brought it into the realms of sustainable profit, and hence existence.

I hope it rises from the ashes.


One we jump every day.

In reply to Damo:


And as the guys above are saying, where does all this leave the individual, the writer trying to earn a living, trying to pay the bills? As you said, D, the web doesn't pay in the same way, if at all, and I'm beginning to wonder if the only way to make a living out of writing in C21 is by setting up your own website - one that grabs the attention of the passing surfers, exactly like your headline above I expect - and spending your time raising your profile on the net and attracting advertisers. Writers still making a living out of hard copy talk about spending well over 50% of their working hours drumming up business - ie not writing at all; and the electronic version is set to be far worse.



Challenging times. I'm sure Shakespeare would have made a success of it (though undoubtedly he would have been less prolific), but where would it have left Dickens, Solzhenitsyn, Dostoevsky?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Yes, yes Mick, I know all that. Kuds to the range and depth of UKC's photography. But when GQ plans a cover, they don't phone their contributors and say, hey, does anyone have a decent photo of Russell Brand, now do they?

I worked up a dummy for a v prestigious mag pub house on the outdoors recently, and the cover was planned as Leo Houlding in a sharp suit with an ice axe with the cover line Everest: Strictly Business, or something like -- that shot doesn't exist on UKC, does it?

The mag won't happen, probably for the best.

And you're right, it's about a lot more than money, and again, you know perfectly well that I know that. My point is, Harry Redknapp won't save Spurs with magic beans...

It's good people are thinking about all this tho'.

In reply to Ed Douglas:


They are doing far more than thinking about it Ed. We are all participating in it.... thousands of us.

That really doesn't bode well with the handful of people who have a monopoly writing and photographing for the print media who somehow think they are owed a living by the climbing community - that would be all of us.

But of course you knew that as well.

Now about those magic beans..... we could lend Harry Redknapp some. (I had to google who he is).

In reply to dan bailey:

I thought you'd developed that style after studying my contributions?

In reply to Ed Douglas:

You're not still flogging that one are you Ed? I bailed out and dropped a few leagues a few seasons ago and don't regret it all!

In reply to Tom Hutton: Ironic isn't it? You've got a rich Arab buying you Robinho, while the yid army pays a few million quid to a sacked manager every season...

In reply to Ed Douglas:

It's a bit off topic really but I gave up with the whole lot after the Sinawatra takeover last season. I had been falling out of love with the premiership for some time but city, especially with Pearce at the helm, seemed to be one of the last bastions of what footie clubs used to be and I hung in there as long as possible (with hindsight I should have seen that it was only a matter of time as it really is for all top clubs now). Anyway, really pleased I baled as I'm now really enjoying my football in the middle echelons of the Welsh Premiership and actually feel quite sorry for all city fans (not to mention those of any other clubs that will sooner or later sell their souls to an ego or syndicate of egos with a lot of money.

Oh, and I think City are paying SGE for a few seasons yet too! And that's probably on top of his England severance!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Hey Mick, why was my reply to this pulled? You can't have a go at people and then pull their replies. Or maybe you can?!!

In reply to Ed Douglas:

Not me, no idea I'll check.

In reply to Tom Hutton: My sympathies. I haven't reached that stage, although I know you're right. I used to watch with my grandad. He used to watch Tottenham with HIS grandad. That's a lot of grandads.

In reply to Ed Douglas:

Nope, nothing deleted.

In reply to Ed Douglas:

You're right. That's what makes it really sad. Hope your season improves anyway (despite Ricky Villa!)