Subscribing to MMM

[paulmold]

At the Northern show two years ago, I subscribed for 2 years and paid in a lump sum. My subscription has now expired. I paid in a lump sum. On enquiring at the show this weekend, that option is not available, they want my bank details for direct debit, presumably hoping that I will never remember to cancel the direct debit and they will keep me for years to come. OK thats marketing for you but what about changing the free gift when you subscribe.

I for one don'y need any more polishes, I don't need any more spanners (by the time you get to my age you have accumulated enough of them) and I'm not interested in a picnic rucksack (I've got a motorhome, thats where I make the tea/coffee when I'm out and about). Come on MMM be a bit more imaginative, these gifts have been the same for yonks.

At the show, I suggested that they offer a free weekend including entertainment tickets at one of their shows (the subscriber to choose which one). This would in effect cost MMM nothing at all. The young lady I spoke to said she would 'put it to the management'. What do others think would be suitable free gifts.

[mike 202]

Free Gifts are as you have suggested a sales ploy to up the circulation, however I think that any future or current subscriber needs to ask the question " do i want to read MMM on a regular basis" and not what gift do I get. The gift can then be treated as a bonus. I do think that your idea for a free weekend at a show is a good one.

 

I for one do subscribe and often find that parts of the MMM are of no real interest to me at the time, I do keep back issues and often find that what was not relavent - now is. It also eliminates the - I wish I had bought issue ??? because it contains onfo that I want. Yes back issues and reports are available, but at what cost and inconvienience to obtain them.

 

You paid by lump sum so you could not change your mind for 12 months. D/D simplifies payment for all and although I take your point re cancellation, you can change your mind at almost any time. With computers and online banking or a visit to your branch cancellation is simples.

 

mike

[paulmold]

I agree entirely, thats one reason I haven't renewed my subscription with MMM and will buy it at the newsagent if I feel I want it. I have recently subscribed to MMM's opposition mag lured by the offer of 3 issues for £1 with the option to subscribe afterwards by direct debit and of course that is up to me to remember to cancel after the 3 months. If MMM can come up with some offer of interest to me then I'll cancel the opposition and subscribe to MMM again. I can really only justify one mag or the other.

[AliB]

I subscribe to MMM because I want to read the magazine, it is cheaper by subscription and as a working lad I have little time to visit a newagent.

The choice of free gift has nothing to do with my decision. The free gift will long be forget while the articles of interest that I keep will be there for sometime to come.

As to a free visit to a show, that would rate about zero on my scale. I like to spend my leisure time in the country, walking, cycling, exploring new places. That is why I bought a motorhome to help pursue my interests. Even if offered a free show visit I would not use it. But each to his own as they say.

[Dave and Verity]

The most useful thing to most of us would be a voucher for a free night on one of the big clubs site. Can't think that anybody could refuse that.

 

Dave

[Petra]

We've been subscribing to MMM for several years now but are about to cancel it as we feel that it is more of an outdoor magazine rather than a motorhome magazine. These days it is more about hiking, biking or catching the bus into town. As I am in a wheelchair I can do none of these and whilst I dont want the magazine to cater especially for wheelchairs I would like it to have a bit of everything as it used to. We like to use our motorhome for touring, one or two nights on site at most and move on, whereas most of the writers seem to be using their motorhomes as a caravan and stay at a site for a week or more and just use it as a base for their outdoor pursuits. In future we will just buy an issue if there is anything of interest to us.

[crinklystarfish]

Don't give a rat's behind about freebies, only interested in content. That's why I personally never have subscribed, and only ever rarely buy a copy. I find it all a bit banal and twee with only the occasional article worth the column inches dedicated. 

In producing the mag, there's a real opportunity to genuinely hold the industry to account by constructive criticism of products. Instead, time and again, we are treated to pointless descriptions of upholstery and furniture colour when the photos clearly illustrate this anyway, spurious warnings about habitation doors being on the 'wrong' side, detailed descriptions of how 5 seats can unsurprisingly seat 5 people for a drinks and nibbles evening, and the blatantly obvious observation of how one double transverse bed might mean one might have to climb over the other for a night-time wee visit. The list goes on but I'm boring myself even writing about it.

I'd prefer to be reading tests where testers really have a good poke about and tell us about things like the neatness of wiring and plumbing runs, the engineering behind appliance installation, any obvious design flaws, and just how carefully sealant and adhesive has been applied. From this we can start to draw some conclusions on the quality of product.

Comments like 'well screwed together' mean nothing and indicate to me the tester is waffling. I bought one of the 'well screwed together' vans once reported upon, and it wasn't. Many motorhomes are poorly designed and clearly built at speed and to a budget. I personally consider that the motorhome press have a responsibility to report honestly in this regard. It seems to me that there is more interest in protecting advertising revenue than offering such checks and balances to the industry. 

The most informative bits are often from readers themselves who contribute to the letters and interchange features. At least their views are born out of actual experience and they don't have to worry about upsetting any of the advertisers.

Freebies? Keep 'em, just get some concise journalism going!

[Guest Tracker]

Dave and Verity - 2011-07-19 3:10 PM

 

The most useful thing to most of us would be a voucher for a free night on one of the big clubs site. Can't think that anybody could refuse that.

 

Dave

 

Non members might refuse that unless they were allowed to stay as non members sometimes are?

 

Personally speaking that would be even less of an incentive for us than a bottle of polish which would at least get used eventually - if I live long enough!

[Guest Tracker]

crinklystarfish - 2011-07-19 6:18 PM

Don't give a rat's behind about freebies, only interested in content. That's why I personally never have subscribed, and only ever rarely buy a copy. I find it all a bit banal and twee with only the occasional article worth the column inches dedicated. 

In producing the mag, there's a real opportunity to genuinely hold the industry to account by constructive criticism of products. Instead, time and again, we are treated to pointless descriptions of upholstery and furniture colour when the photos clearly illustrate this anyway, spurious warnings about habitation doors being on the 'wrong' side, detailed descriptions of how 5 seats can unsurprisingly seat 5 people for a drinks and nibbles evening, and the blatantly obvious observation of how one double transverse bed might mean one might have to climb over the other for a night-time wee visit. The list goes on but I'm boring myself even writing about it.

I'd prefer to be reading tests where testers really have a good poke about and tell us about things like the neatness of wiring and plumbing runs, the engineering behind appliance installation, any obvious design flaws, and just how carefully sealant and adhesive has been applied. From this we can start to draw some conclusions on the quality of product.

Comments like 'well screwed together' mean nothing and indicate to me the tester is waffling. I bought one of the 'well screwed together' vans once reported upon, and it wasn't. Many motorhomes are poorly designed and clearly built at speed and to a budget. I personally consider that the motorhome press have a responsibility to report honestly in this regard. It seems to me that there is more interest in protecting advertising revenue than offering such checks and balances to the industry. 

The most informative bits are often from readers themselves who contribute to the letters and interchange features. At least their views are born out of actual experience and they don't have to worry about upsetting any of the advertisers.

Freebies? Keep 'em, just get some concise journalism going!

ABSOLUTELY!

[MandyAndy]

We are also going to cancel payments, just not reading them any more, did have time in the bathroom but eating more fruit these days so don't even get time there *-) *-)

 

Some things are interesting but the tedious buying guide that it in every month along with adverts for the same old same old just get to be a bit of a bore in the end.

 

Has been useful over the years but get more use out the forums these days.

 

Mandy

[CISCO]

For some years now I’ve only kept the previous year and even wondered why I do that because revisiting past issues does not happen very often. It’s becoming so easy (and quick) to find information on line and you have the added bonus that it can be a two-way exchange.

 

This site is a particularly favourite of mine. (ideal opportunity to say thank you to those who contribute) Comparing MMM month by month the repeat bits usually account for half the magazine and in a year that’s well over a 1200 pages that don’t even get looked at. I appreciated funding has to be found but bulky magazines are slipping down my popularity pole. For what it’s worth I would rather have the option of having the entire magazine on line. Failing that the previous year on a disc, sent out in Jan or Feb, to those that have subscribed for the last complete year.

 

Had my little rant off to polish something. – Rgds to all.

 

[Derek Uzzell]

Dave and Verity - 2011-07-19 3:10 PM

 

The most useful thing to most of us would be a voucher for a free night on one of the big clubs site. Can't think that anybody could refuse that.

 

Dave

 

No interest whatsoever for me.

 

I chose the Auto-Glym 'freebie' when I renewed recently as at least some of the products will be useful.

 

I did seriously consider whether I'd renew my previous 3-year MMM subscription as I've no interest in the travel/campsite articles in the magazine and much of the rest is nowadays (dare I say it!) primary-school stuff as far as I'm concerned personally. Nevertheless, the quarterly £9.49 ain't devastating and, as the magazine gets delivered to my door, I decided to go ahead.

[bolero boy]

Took advantage of an offer that included, not only 'the autoglym package' (I have found this useful) but also 12 editions of Which Motorhome at a very competitive price (12 per qtr).

[bolero boy]

Tracker - 2011-07-19 7:25 PM

crinklystarfish - 2011-07-19 6:18 PM

Don't give a rat's behind about freebies, only interested in content. That's why I personally never have subscribed, and only ever rarely buy a copy. I find it all a bit banal and twee with only the occasional article worth the column inches dedicated. 

In producing the mag, there's a real opportunity to genuinely hold the industry to account by constructive criticism of products. Instead, time and again, we are treated to pointless descriptions of upholstery and furniture colour when the photos clearly illustrate this anyway, spurious warnings about habitation doors being on the 'wrong' side, detailed descriptions of how 5 seats can unsurprisingly seat 5 people for a drinks and nibbles evening, and the blatantly obvious observation of how one double transverse bed might mean one might have to climb over the other for a night-time wee visit. The list goes on but I'm boring myself even writing about it.

I'd prefer to be reading tests where testers really have a good poke about and tell us about things like the neatness of wiring and plumbing runs, the engineering behind appliance installation, any obvious design flaws, and just how carefully sealant and adhesive has been applied. From this we can start to draw some conclusions on the quality of product.

Comments like 'well screwed together' mean nothing and indicate to me the tester is waffling. I bought one of the 'well screwed together' vans once reported upon, and it wasn't. Many motorhomes are poorly designed and clearly built at speed and to a budget. I personally consider that the motorhome press have a responsibility to report honestly in this regard. It seems to me that there is more interest in protecting advertising revenue than offering such checks and balances to the industry. 

The most informative bits are often from readers themselves who contribute to the letters and interchange features. At least their views are born out of actual experience and they don't have to worry about upsetting any of the advertisers.

Freebies? Keep 'em, just get some concise journalism going!

ABSOLUTELY!

Have to support this view, reprting now very 'samey' and not objective enough.

[arthur49]

Agree. I'm sick of reading reviews with no substance. Seems every review has a pile of positives but nobody dares to highlight the fact that the build quality on many vans is questionable - next step is converters will flat pack at Ikea since there are so many (at least in my van) minor irritations eg water joints not properly connected, knobs/handles drop off.....mostly fairly minor but quality control appalling. Why do I notice this in my last two vans but magazine reviewers don't? You don't have to use a van for an extended period to find the faults. Better shut up I'm depressing myself......

 

Arthur

 

 

crinklystarfish - 2011-07-19 6:18 PM

 

.........>In producing the mag, there's a real opportunity to genuinely hold the industry to account by constructive criticism of products. Instead, time and again, we are treated to pointless descriptions of upholstery and furniture colour when the photos clearly illustrate this anyway, spurious warnings about habitation doors being on the 'wrong' side, detailed descriptions of how 5 seats can unsurprisingly seat 5 people for a drinks and nibbles evening, and the blatantly obvious observation of how one double transverse bed might mean one might have to climb over the other for a night-time wee visit. The list goes on but I'm boring myself even writing about it.

I'd prefer to be reading tests where testers really have a good poke about and tell us about things like the neatness of wiring and plumbing runs, the engineering behind appliance installation, any obvious design flaws, and just how carefully sealant and adhesive has been applied. From this we can start to draw some conclusions on the quality of product.

[Guest Tracker]

After many years of subscribing and not having read that last few mags I have cancelled the direct debit and will no longer bother with and magazines for a while.

 

I was going to a while ago but we were threatened with a new look so I waited - I don't see any new look - do you?

 

Might try one of the others when we see one - which are the more useful ones in your views folks?

[paulmold]

Tracker - 2011-07-20 2:05 PM

 

Might try one of the others when we see one - which are the more useful ones in your views folks?

 

I did reply to this question but having named the mag that I mentioned in my opening post, the reply has been removed - you can criticize MMM but you cannot name a competitor apparently.

[Guest Tracker]

paulmold - 2011-07-21 12:29 PM

 

Tracker - 2011-07-20 2:05 PM

 

Might try one of the others when we see one - which are the more useful ones in your views folks?

 

I did reply to this question but having named the mag that I mentioned in my opening post, the reply has been removed - you can criticize MMM but you cannot name a competitor apparently.

 

Thanks Paul - yes I did see it - the one where a certain degree of practicality for your motorhome was suggested, I believe!

 

Let's see if this survives - although to be fair you can hardly blame them for removing any plug for the competion!

[Brian Kirby]

Is the answer just that the longer we use motorhomes, the more we get to know about them, and so become as knowledgeable as many of the writers? Then, when we read what they write, instead of being grateful for their insights, we begin to argue with them based on our own knowledge - much of which will have been gathered earlier in our motorhome education from similar writings.

 

When we were planning to buy our first van, I used to pick up copies of MMM, and devour them, because I had no idea what was available, or what the merits and de-merits of the various options were. Starting from scratch, there is much to learn, and I learnt a huge amount from the letters, the reviews, and from Interchange. That knowledge, gleaned almost exclusively from MMM, and later from this forum, was absolutely invaluable for a beginner.

 

But, if the teaching is good, the pupil's knowledge outgrows that of the teacher. That seems to be where many of us have now arrived, so we find MMM a bit "juvenile" for our needs. However, I don't think we should knock it for that - in essence, it has done its job. Whether we shall ever see an "advanced" level motorhome magazine I somehow doubt. It seems many buy a motorhome, just to try it. Out of them, a relatively few seem to get bitten and keep going, the rest just fall by the wayside. If this is correct, the number in the advanced category will always be fairly small, with differing interests, so attempting to serve them with a commercially viable mag, a near impossibility. On the other hand, if MMM itself were to lean too far towards the "advanced" motorhomer, it would risk alienating the beginners.

 

It is noticeable that many of its critics want a magazine that caters just for them and their interests. Some are impatient with the continental touring articles, some with the campsite reviews, some because the van reviews don't lay bare all the flaws in vans, as they see them - but then read on here the arguments about the merits of any given van, and imagine trying to satisfy all those conflicting demands! :-) Having said that, I do agree that the reviews are light on useful technical insights, and rather too long on describing what the pictures already, far more succinctly, show.

[crinklystarfish]

That's all fair enough Mr K. My beef is not with the fact that they rightly cater for newcomers, but the fact that in the position that they hold, they have a responsibility to review 'vans critically rather than fill articles with fluff. I could stomach the fluff if the reviewers also had a roll about underneath and had a dig about in the corners where converters hope we'll never see, but they don't. When reviewers do stumble upon a glaring fault they often lose it in the gushing fluff with some generalisation like 'but I'm sure the dealer will put that right before delivery'. Hang on, if the bloomin' rooflight leaks just what rubbish is the manufacturer unleashing on the market? They should be stamping their feet and trumpeting such failure, not moving quietly on to telling us that a 5 foot long bed will sleep a 4 foot 6 inch grandchild. 

After all, thousands of readers will have been, and continue to be, influenced by their reviews. Some readers will undoubtedly dump their life savings into 'vans having read that all appeared well during test / impression.

Of course, as we read time and again on here, once people get said 'van home they discover all sorts of faults that are directly caused by slap-dash builds. Little consolation at that point that the upholstery blends beautifully with the dark wooden interior that may or may not depress some people on a rainy day whilst they sip their favourite tipple!

I accept they have a tough job catering for widely different needs but the lack of genuine constructively critical review is unforgivable.

[Brian Kirby]

I agree. Faults should be highlighted where they can reasonably be identified. I have discussed this on the odd occasion with those "close to the motorhome press" and the point is not lost on them. They are obviously constrained by legal issues, but there is no reason why careful wording cannot allow a fault to be pointed out without straying into defamation of builder or supplier.

 

Vehicle supply for review is, apparently, the real problem, with some of the continental manufacturers (named, in confidence) seeking to exercise tight control over when reviewers have access, and to what. Since the UK (RHD) market is relatively small compared to the LHD market, and since there are a few UK magazines serving motorhomers, they tend to feel they need only feed the hand that is nice to them. UK manufacturers indulge in less control-freakery, but are still reluctant to let the press loose on their vans, if they have previously been critical.

 

So, Warners want to maintain their circulation, and their advertising revenues, and to do that they need to be able to keep publishing the reviews. It becomes a kind of game of chicken, if the reviews (which I was told emphatically are never submitted to manufacturers before publication - although some manufacturers demand this and will not advertise if the copy is not submitted for their sanction prior to publication) are felt to have been too critical, the supply of test vehicles is withdrawn. That gives them the ability to pull their advertising and place it elsewhere, and feed vehicles for review accordingly. So, one publisher gets starved, and another gets rewarded. It is a kind of blackmail, and the money talks. Since the release of any vehicle for review (except the reviews of used vans) is sanctioned by manufacturers, and for long term tests part financed by them, both sides end up in an uncomfortable embrace.

 

A quick swan around a van on a dealers forecourt is not judged adequate to fully explore how it works in practice. An extended, "live-in", test is only possible if the manufacturer agrees to finance the difference between the price of the van when new, and it price when registered and used, which is necessary for such a review. The magazine publishers are substantial companies, but they are far smaller than the motorhome manufacturers, especially the continental giants, and they are a long way short of being in the News International league. The writers are mainly motorhome enthusiasts who earn their keep by writing on motorhomes, rather than technical writers, or trained journalists, who have stumbled into motorhome writing. The exception is Daniel Attwood, who comes from a magazine background. In some respects, IMO, that is part of the charm of MMM, it is just that bit amateur, rather than high powered and over polished. However, that, clearly, is a matter of opinion, and I am sure others will disagree.

[arthur49]

crinklystarfish - 2011-07-22 9:10 AM

....... they have a responsibility to review 'vans critically rather than fill articles with fluff. I could stomach the fluff if the reviewers also had a roll about underneath and had a dig about in the corners where converters hope we'll never see, but they don't.

 

Agree again! Example - last two vans Adria and Autocruise - the Truma Combi heaters not installed in accordance with Truma's instructions. Why does it matter? Because according to Truma it is the cause of the stink on hot water only. In addition, in the first van, the heater had been installed in a position and in such a way that even replacing a fuse meant substantial dismantling.

 

I'm not interested in the curtains.............give me SUBSTANCE. If not I'm going to cancel when subscription due in December.

 

Arthur

[pkc]

I used to read MMM without fail every month from cover to cover, but having been ejected from W H Smiths several times I don't bother anymore :-(

[Brian Kirby]

arthur49 - 2011-07-22 2:11 PM

 

crinklystarfish - 2011-07-22 9:10 AM

....... they have a responsibility to review 'vans critically rather than fill articles with fluff. I could stomach the fluff if the reviewers also had a roll about underneath and had a dig about in the corners where converters hope we'll never see, but they don't.

 

Agree again! Example - last two vans Adria and Autocruise - the Truma Combi heaters not installed in accordance with Truma's instructions. Why does it matter? Because according to Truma it is the cause of the stink on hot water only. In addition, in the first van, the heater had been installed in a position and in such a way that even replacing a fuse meant substantial dismantling.

 

I'm not interested in the curtains.............give me SUBSTANCE. If not I'm going to cancel when subscription due in December.

 

Arthur

 

Not seeking to defend either manufacturer, but how would the average reviewer be able to spot that? Are you expecting these folks to be expert in Truma's heater installation instructions? It is very unlikely, unless the tests were carried out in winter, and even then only if it were a live-in test, that the heater would have been run during a test, so little chance the tester would notice any smell. From conversations I have had with Truma, they generally despair at how all the manufacturer's install the heaters, because when a major defect requires complete replacement, they all too often find they have to dismantle a substantial part of the van to effect the swap. Much the same applies to fridges, some of which cannot be removed because they are boxed in by items of furniture. Many seat swivels prevent access for maintenance of underseat installed batteries. None of this is satisfactory, but it is so commonplace I doubt there is any point in mentioning it in reviews, because the same comments would apply to pretty much all vans. It would be nice to see special praise for good installations, though, which might work by implication. However, it is asking a lot of reviewers to spot such design deficiencies given the level of access to the vans that they have.

 

The most productive answer, sadly, is probably for aggrieved buyers to take up the defects with the firms' QA managers, and threaten to pursue the point with their QA certifying body. Being threatened with the loss of their ISO9001 certification would probably be embarrassing enough to make the manufacturers sit up and think about a few properly sized and sited maintenance access doors.

[carolbtogo]

Hello all,

I have read what you have all said with much interest. Yes, money is at the root of it all. After all as a manufacturer you are not going to let a journalist loose on a new model motorhome whilst they criticise it to bits. So MMM does in that sense walk a thin line between pleasing the manufacturers and also being fair and honest with its readers.

But as a newbie motorhomer I have to say I love it all!

As for subscribing, well I have just done so, £14,49 a quarter for various publications and an autoglym freebie to boot! This will be interesting to me because I do not know what polishes to buy etc.

I would agree however that the reports seem to be using motorhomes like caravans, parking up for a week or more and going about. I would have bought a caravan if I wanted to do that!

I personally would like to see more touring, with notes about where to park and what to see within a reasonable (walking) distance, and not just the expensive touristy places but perhaps tucked away curious/quirky places. What shopping towns/supermarkets are motorhome friendly in the area. Maybe boring for you lot with experience, but nothing short of lifeblood to newbies like me.

Thanks to you all for making this forum so very interesting,

Carol :->