Has anyone seen the revamped Shares magazine? Ross Greenwood, the original editor, had the energy to build the magazine up and knock it into a workable format, and Rodney Hobson, the recent editor had the sense to progress through evolution, not revolution. Now we have a new editor, Jeremy Lacey, who impressed no-one last week in his first editorial by describing how inept he'd been in his share-buying, surviving largely through luck. He's now (assuming he's had something to do with the changes) redesigned everything seemingly by throwing everything up in the air and picking the parts up in the random order in which they fell. It now looks drab and lacklustre - the component parts are still there but in an order which makes no sense at all and which becomes a difficult read. Share tables and stats, which naturally, in my view, should fall at the end of the magazine, for ready access, are now scattered throughout. The natural progression, from headline short-pieces (news and tips) at the start of the magazine, through longer features, advertorial, and finally company reports and stats, has been lost.

I buy Investors' Chronicle for its sober emphasis on fundamentals, and Shares Magazine for its tabloidy freshness and emphasis on TA, with plenty of graphs and graphics. There may be some merits in extending the small-cap coverage, with the longer textual reports (although I preferred it as it was) but the loss of graphs make them look like a poor version of IC. It's the visual look and quick-read qualities that have suffered. It now looks dull and disorganised.

I'd recently been thinking of cancelling Investor's Chronicle in favour of Shares, but now I'm beginning to think I had it the wrong way around.

Thoughts anyone?

brianboru - Shares doesn't fall into the penny share tipsheet category that you're alluding to, by any stretch of the imagination. True, it has good regular coverage of small companies but, like IC, covers the whole gamut of companies, from large to small.

My only gripe, which is why I started this thread, was about the dreadful reorganisation of the magazine from something which made sense to one which does not. The more they try to emulate IC, the more they'll lose the individuality that makes the magazine worth buying, in my view. And can anyone tell me what the new page heading 'Mogul' is supposed to mean?

(No, nothing to do with the Sixties TV series starring Ray Barrett, later renamed 'The Troubleshooters', which was based in an oil company called Mogul. Mind you, a troubleshooter is perhaps what Shares needs.)

Still waiting for this week's issue, which I guess must be languishing in a sorting office somewhere, assuming Shares hasn't folded.

Apologies to Shares journos, by the way, who I know must struggle to get anything out at all. A thankless task.

Recently made my worst ever Investment. Soon after joining MoneyAm, I took up the "Shares Magazine" offer(1 Years subscription @99 + Premier level free on MoneyAm). I think, having seen the "RUBBISH" of content,layout etc., of recent "Shares" output, that I would have been wiser to opt for a higher level on MA. Don,t know why the magazine has strayed from the previous format but I hope that my copy for this and future weeks is "RESTING IN A SEALED-UP MAIL BOX" Whilst they persist with the"new look", this is one ex-reader who has been "conned". Are they trying to cover-up a problem????

Stonyb/jnknill,

I have to agree they've ruined the format.

I strongly suggest they change it back ASAP!

I hope someone relays our opinions to the powers that be before readership drops to a new low, it's hard to buy in my area now, outside the WH Smith type town centre shops.

I agree the journo's do well, and I also agree that they should keep their own style, and not copy IC, which I personally find a bit dry.

I wonder if anyone who works for MoneyAM/Shares Mag has been told about or has noticed this thread.

Will they just ignore it anyway?

Probably and continue to plague us with popups, despite it being so well known as a turn off for visitors.

get popup stopper from http://www.panicware.com

Just want to say that I have always liked Shares Mag more than the IC, I for one find it more user freindly, but I have to say the new format is putting me right of the magazine. Ok I can understand the contributors wanting more space on the companys they cover in the Buy Sell and Add section, but I for one only look at the Buys in that section and Im sure theres a lot more like me, so on that basis theres a load of space wasted. I also miss the forward profits item, as this gone or is it me that as missed it????.

Can we please go back to the old format??

cheers GF.

so why dont someone from this thread cut a cut and paste this thread and send to shares mag editor

HT.

Hightone, yes your right and as you have mentioned it get stuck in mate and do it. I for one will back you up I feel others will do aswell. Well done for taking the responsibility on, its much appreciated.

regards GF

The aim of Shares is to provide an informative, entertaining and useful package for readers and we are continually looking for ways to improve the magazine. It is an ongoing process we have made some changes to the magazine and more will no doubt be made in the future as we come up with new ideas. We are always responsive to suggestions or criticisms and readers are encouraged to air their views via a letter to the editor: these can also be emailed to editorial@shares.msm.co.uk

Jeremy Lacey, Editor, Shares

Jeremy,

Very nice of you to post here and acknowledge the thread!

I feel that a lot of us are Shares Mag fans, and want to see the magazine prosper, and therefore our criticism is meant to be constructive.

I prefer Shares to IC because it's a lighter read, I personally find the IC a bit dry to be honest.

The new format of Shares certainly doesn't seem to have gone down that well with the readers, and maybe you could take a look at the previous format, and compare the two, maybe with a view to a compromise?

I like the charting sections, and in particular the chart breakout section is a personal favourite, which I hope is retained!

I hope you will peruse this thread from time to time, some people may prefer to post here rather than email directly, which is slightly more formal.

Best regards,

Andy Keen.

I will have to agree,That this weeks issue was not up two the normal quality

Hmmmmm....Rather strange that Bullshare or Shares Mag have
posted Eh!!!!

Jeff

you see a bit of direct action and the boss man post on this thread (-:

HT.

PS simple was it not.

I for one go along with Andy. I went into my local W H Smith yesterday to find that not was there only a pile of last weeks mags left on show, but also the weeks before. Even in the Bear Market I have not seen that.

Its fantastic to see Jeremy down here and getting stuck in and replying, well done sir. The fact is and you say you will listen, well then can I just please repeat that I think the old version was far superior to the new version.

Theres just too much space taken up with company results and lets face it we can all get that info on RNS. Can we please be more aggresive in going for company tips. Please remember investors love the next 'big thing' historical talk tends to be boring but does have a place.

Come on Jeremy give its some pasty as we say in Yorkshire.

regards Roger aka GF.

Goldfinger,

Agreed, results section is dry and boring, and available elsewhere.

The tips section should be agressive, and limited to one or two "hot" tips maybe, with a decent write up to justify the selection of that stock.

Andy

Interesting debate this. About a year ago I bought Shares mag in WHSmiths and returned it, so appalled I was by it's lack of substance. However, I have been buying a few copies recently and been much more impressed. Last week I bought IC & Shares, and I have to say, despite a few errors in the FTSE 350 tables, Shares was a much better proposition. IC is just rubbish, same old polemic baloney week in, week out. At least Shares takes a view and sticks with it, in IC you never get an opinion just: It could rise, then again, it could fall, or it could stay the same price! anyone can write polemically, it's a journo's trick to stay on the fence.

Hmmmmmm,

Did you notice that the email address given

"editorial@shares.msm.co.uk"

Was not related to the MoneyAm domain name.

msm.co.uk website does not mention MoneyAM

According to Nominet WhoIs
msm.co.uk

Is owned by MSM Ltd.

Search for them & you find

MSM Ltd
Business Consultants
Tel: 01858 432054 Address: Po Box 13, Market Harborough, Leicestershire. LE16 9ZN

Perhaps these Business Consultants are just gathering info for the launch of a rival mag.

Was this really the editor?

Despite trying to adjust I'm still struggling with the revamped layout of Shares. I can see how they've tried to separate the Large & Mid-Cap section from the Small Shares part (trying to copy IC?) but having the Share Tables section driven like a meat cleaver through the centre of the magazine has resulted in a loss of cohesion, in my view. Carving the editorial content into two seems to diminish it in some way, making it a more difficult read.

I've just looked back on some pre-revamp issues. Hard to believe that a relatively small reordering of content could have such a big impact, but the pre-change issues still look far fresher to me. The TA and chart content is a big plus for Shares, compared with IC, but there's now a concentration of graphs into the expanded Chartist section at the expense of the inclusion of graphs elsewhere. Probably easier in terms of production, but less easy on the eye for readers. Makes the small share report pages look less lively, for example.

As I said originally, the content is all there (although missing the sometimes useful/interesting Forward Profits section (following the loss of Michelle Balthazar?)) but the reordering and redesign of he magazine just doesn't work - for me at least. Why change what was working already, a design which had been arrived at through steady evolution?

-----

PS: Hadn't checked this thread for a while, so thanks to Jeremy Lacey for his contribution/comments.

Sorry folks
I think all of us barking at the wrong trees.
At the end of the day, it's hit or miss. wether it's Share or IC.
Since playing the market for the last 28 years, I taught myself to use my own instincts.
Happy to tell you all, I am still in money.
Use certain journilist in Share. And please don't be too greedy.
Happy investing.

Best wishes

Jaggie ( Newcomer)