Sharesmagazine
 Home   Log In   Register   Our Services   My Account   Contact   Help 
 Stockwatch   Level 2   Portfolio   Charts   Share Price   Awards   Market Scan   Videos   Broker Notes   Director Deals   Traders' Room 
 Funds   Trades   Terminal   Alerts   Heatmaps   News   Indices   Forward Diary   Forex Prices   Shares Magazine   Investors' Room 
 CFDs   Shares   SIPPs   ISAs   Forex   ETFs   Comparison Tables   Spread Betting 
You are NOT currently logged in
 
Register now or login to post to this thread.

Shares Magazine revamp - Any thoughts?     

Andy - 21 Apr 2008 00:36

Shares Magazine was totally revamped this week.

Out has gone the tabloidy style, and aticles on small caps, in has come long articles by market 'experts' and large cap reporting.

The Prospector has been axed.

I am disppointed with the changes, and wondered if anyone else here subscribed or bought Shares, and had a view they wold like to share?

spitfire43 - 27 Aug 2008 21:13 - 139 of 184

Share magazine used to be something that I read cover to cover, now it just sits on the side unread. I have cancelled my subscription but I still receive a copy each week until next month. Having had last Thursday copy sitting unread by the computer I thought I would take look today to see if there was anything interesting in this issue.

Unfortunately the front page wasn't to encouraging, with a cover story on Analyst tips, and who had the best tips, very dull indeed and I flicked past with indecent haste. Maybe the analyst like to read about themselves, I can't imagine normal investors being that interested.

Then I noticed yet again shares giving themselves another pat on the back with there buy rating of HBOS last month, yes I think we have got the message now.

All in all a very dull read indeed, and I skipped through the issue in 30 minutes. I only managed to find one company worth looking into, Accsys Technologies AXS. It's a real shame because I really looked forward to the mag before the changes, I really can't imagine there are enough analyst buying this magazine to read article on themselves, and to see there faces in print to improve circulation figures. A small target readership indeed.

As I have cancelled subscription, this will be my last post on this blog, but good luck to others if this type of format floats your boat.

hangon - 27 Aug 2008 23:49 - 140 of 184

Maybe Queen1 set them thinking - we'll show you how OUR analysts are getting it right.
However, I note that when there is a BUY in any mag, you cannot buy at that price, for that was at least three days ago and if I take a subscription I have to wait until 12:30 - so i buy from the shop.

On the new format:
I guess it's marginally better now they've got rid of the grey text and reversed sections. What is wrong with plain black on white?, or a tint of no more than 5%.
I'm not keen on pretty photos I'd rather see a minimum of 5-years sp as it's very easy to forget what went on before.....and with so many co's it's not good.

What would I like? Something about the Execs - but not pages, please, the Good and Bad, perhaps? Then the Products - far too often news is all positive, with little regard to the inevitable disapointments. e.g. competitors, outstanding debts, etc.

It doesn't help that the Analysists managed to find a profit in Tanfield - yet this stock was a long-term "winner" for readers - so how come the Analysists failed to find the snags in this business? That the Boss (Stanley?) was involved in starting a competing business should have alerted them.....and even now the focus is on the "electric vehicles" yet this only represented 20% of the turnover....oh dear.

But what's undeniably daft is the Issue Number/Date in tiny reversed print on the cover - does no-one want to read this - so why not leave it OFF! If they think the Mag is attractive (by writing Shares in large letters), I think the date/issue is important enough to be maybe 10% of the size......or larger!

Snip - 28 Aug 2008 07:38 - 141 of 184

I cancelled during may and am STILL waiting for a refund

IanT(MoneyAM) - 28 Aug 2008 07:46 - 142 of 184

Snip,

Looks like your account was cancelled 1 year after your annual subscription was taken, therefore no refund would be due. I will e mail you with details.

Ian

Snip - 28 Aug 2008 15:07 - 143 of 184

I have returned a copy of an e mail from shares confirming cancellation in may. My 12 month sub was taken out in august

IanT(MoneyAM) - 28 Aug 2008 15:16 - 144 of 184

Snip,

I have replied to it earlier today.

Ian

Snip - 29 Aug 2008 06:09 - 145 of 184

thank you

queen1 - 29 Aug 2008 13:15 - 146 of 184

What are Shares doing now? Having re-instated the very useful Diary page I see that this week's issue has once more failed to include it. This is really amateurish and extremely frustrating for subscribers. Every week it seems that parts of the magazine are chopped and changed and this, in my opinion, is a huge step backwards. Utter rubbish.

required field - 29 Aug 2008 14:28 - 147 of 184

Well....I cannot even say anything...I have not received a copy of Shares magazine for 3 weeks now and I'm assured that there is nothing wrong with my subscription....possibly somebody nicking my copy ? :(

bjt1964 - 29 Aug 2008 22:15 - 148 of 184

I am a new subscriber to Shares also and have just read all the above comments.

I must admit I found it a hard read at first but have now got used to it which is why I subscribed.

I have not received a copy from the distributors for 3 weeks either now, I received all the trial issues on time and since my subscription kicked in they have not been arriving

Stan - 30 Aug 2008 10:24 - 149 of 184

As an aside bjt, I notice that you reside In Birmingham.

If you are interested we meet quite regularly In the centre roughly once a month (see the "Birmingham Pie & Pint" thread) for all details.

Andy - 30 Aug 2008 10:53 - 150 of 184

Required field,

"possibly somebody nicking my copy ? :( "

-----

Judging by the last edition I flicked through in Borders, if they had, they would have returned it PDQ!

Andy - 04 Sep 2008 23:24 - 151 of 184

I was in Smiths on Waterloo Tuesday evening, and thought I would buy a copy to see if there had been any improvements.

First thing that struck me was how thin the magazine is now, and, after a brief flick through, I couldn't bring myself to part with 3.75 for a mag that would have been read before Woking.

I guess there is a downturn in advertising, and then the mag has to lose pages to compensate, but it seems half the mag it was a year ago, literally.


edit

To be fair, I picked up the IC, and after a brief flick through that, didn't buy it either, for the same reason.

For the small cap investor there is nothing to read now it seems.

Guscavalier - 05 Sep 2008 09:44 - 152 of 184

Must agree with you Andy, it is not the read that it was and like you spent little time on the latest issue. I have a subscription with the FT for my core reading and cut out articles for future reference. For me the FT is a must and helps the mind reflect.

Fred1new - 05 Sep 2008 09:51 - 153 of 184

I didn't receive the mag for 3 weeks but now have received 2 by post in 2days.


My major grumble of is the quality of print, choice of founts and background page colour.

Before anybody says anything, I know I am old!



maddoctor - 05 Sep 2008 10:56 - 154 of 184

I,ve been taking the mag. for years and used to read every word , now a quick flick through and in the bin , can,t put my finger on exactly what has gone wrong but for one thing it is now borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring

Stegrego - 05 Sep 2008 12:49 - 155 of 184

Ive found it a bit improved over recent weeks, with some readable bits and stuff coming back.

However, the last 2 weeks seem to be going the other way again.

Sub is hanging by a thread now.

queen1 - 05 Sep 2008 13:49 - 156 of 184

No Diary section again this week.

Andy - 06 Sep 2008 10:22 - 157 of 184

queen1,

I wonder how the "new" and "old" circulation figures compare?

I cannot understand why they did this, the format is soooo boring now, IMO.

I much preferred the tabloidy feel of the old mag, and enjoyed reading it too, the small articles were simply an introduction to a stock, a starter for more research, whereas now there are limited articles, hence less introductions to new stocks.

someuwin - 06 Sep 2008 11:38 - 158 of 184

Unreadable mag now - complete waste of money.

Register now or login to post to this thread.