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?

Bullshare,

Shares was a magazine that featured small cap stocks, and had a niche market there.

Now it's large caps and waffle about markets and the economy, the sort of thing thrown out daily by the mainstream media in large quantities, and for free.

I wonder who were the people you consulted for your research, and why you didn't ask your own readers and subscribers!, rather than in independent group!

I have cancelled, as the content change leaves me with virtually nothing to read, and I have received the mag for years, and enjoyed the content and editorial.

If you take out the FX middle section today, there is not much left, IMO.

You are putting Telegraph content in a magazine that was more the Sun, and you are at the very least risking losing your existing readership in an effort to gain the IC and Economist's readers, and I just wonder what the point is, you had the small cap market to yourselves!

Fair play Andy ..Well said.

I will second Andy`s question to Bullshare about why didnt you ask your existing subscribers about their views ???? You have many loyal readers but you prefer to ask a totally different group.

The Shares Magazine has 1 week to sort itself out in my book. If not, I pull my subscription and head over to the IC camp.

WOODIE who are MSM magazines? Circulation of 15412 shown on contents page in this weeks edition is for year ended June 07, don't suppose the owners and advertisers are very impressed.

dont know who there are,the figs are the reason for the re-vamp imho, my guess is that mam is the bread winner of the 2.

Advertisement on page 62 suggests mam not doing so well either, advertising seems to be declining which does not bode well for the future.

OK, at the risk of sounding like a football pundit, to give credit where credit is due there has been an improvement this week!

For:- Company Index now easy to read.
Against:- Still too much grey background for my liking.

For:- More content.
Against:- I miss the old content!

For:- Am I in the minority? I like the new look!
Against:- No Results Focus, can't understand why such a useful 'look-up' tool has been binned. Please reconsider!

trust someone to spoil the party lol, on a serious note i have had my post no mag so cant comment on this weeks issue.the index page last week was hard on my eyes any change must be an improvement.

Woodie,

It is in bold type this week!


Kim,

Sadly no small caps and no prospector column!

Half a magazine of FX though!

andy great was it easy to read for you?

Not much better the index needs moving to the front from inside back page liked as it was still a lot of rubbish inside this issue (thers no mining page lost thatone, but who want to know about Belusconni get enough on the News without getting more but having to pay for this one (No plays of the week or if there are nothing of the 10/20p or less) I could go on but no one seems to listen let someone else have a dig

Mmm, as I say, I do miss the old content and would like to see the new content as an addition to the old, not a replacement. That would double the price of the mag though I suppose!

I agree with some of the above.

I think one of the problems is that the paper is a light grey rather than white. (Recycled paper?)

I find like other reading light and small founts against a coloured background slightly difficult and a little off puting.

Also it makes scanning in of the information and OCR a bit more difficult. I know and sometimes use the online facillity.

I would personally like a slightly larger fount and intense black. Due to age I find the present format a little more difficult with I would think many others.

I will watch with interest further editions.

Good Luck

PARKIN

Someone ought to listen, 72 posts so far about how rubbish the new format is in just 3 days.

I normally enjoy a good read of Shares magazine - and to me - it filled a hole in the market and was an easy to read and informative mag for us small PI's.

I hate the new format. Ok I know change will always evoke a few cries from those that do not like change - but I have little interest in the new content and certainly do not like the style nor its new format.

I shall be cancelling my subscription

Just settled down to read this weeks mag, chucked it in the bin after 10 minutes.
Used to look forward to Foremost, Prospector, Winners and Losers, Results with their trading views and One Week Calender but now all gone. Small caps do not seem to have any coverage anymore. Alot of small oilers are doing well at the moment but not a mention of them in Shares mag. Please change back before you lose alot of your loyal readers.

Just read this weeks issue -

Sections

Opinion - ok
Agenda - Too much large cap talk and its really hard to read the font - feels like im reading War & Peace!

Paper Talk - pointless, if i want to read that i buy a paper

Plays - ok

Main article - ok i guess, but felt hard going.

In the city - Hmmmm an 'expert'

Inside spin - Intel - huge company and US.....

Feature - Ok

Griller - so-so

Green - ok, although i see that you never publish how far down overall the portfolio is...... i wonder why?

Directors - at least 1 page too much

Forex bit in middle is basically an advert

Sector report - worthwhile

Floats - ok

Analysts in action - 6 pages completely wasted with the 2 pages of brokers views particularly so.


Whats missing?

Results analysis - surely should be the basis of the mag and dedicated towards small caps.

Prospector

One week calendar.

Basically, seems to be a load of waffle and padding, with stuff pinched from papers and analysts.

Certainly not worth 3.75 and hardly justifies my subscription at this point.



You wont get a new audience because most people wont touch the stock market at the moment, certainly not new blood anyway.

Alienate old readers, no new readers coming in = shut down in 3-6 months......

Have been reading Shares mag since it started, hate the new look. Not a good place to put the index (took me ages to find it, was wondering how I kept missing it at the front of the mag...). I like IC's index this new index seems something they are embarrassed about and need to hide it away.

If Shares mag was a company...

SELL, under performing, no growth.

Have 90% of all the old Shares mags but won't be adding the revamped editions to them, have a more secure place for them - Biffa....

Suppose will have to look at Moneyweek.

Oh also very surprised there was no editiorial comment before the change and after the change saying what they were going to do and why..

5 mins for me. Biffa is right could you ask them to take the sodden glassbottles away prior to 8pm at night and post 8am.

That is one thing that always baffled me, as Stegrego says, with the Green Portfolio, even in the old style mag, that all that was ever shown was the ticker & the current sp. No %age loss or gain, or movement comparison over any period of time. A bit pointless imo.
Also, just as a matter of interest, why did some of you chose SHARES mag over MONEYWEEK? I've not seen the latter, so can't comment, but I presume it must be second best to the old style SHARES mag???

I bought a copy of MoneyWeek after it was mentioned further back in the thread. It's cheap, pretty easy to read and fairly informative, but I wouldn't say it was a direct replacement for the old style Shares magazine. Certainly worth thumbing through at the newsagents though. I might subscribe depending on the articles over the next month or so. For now I'll "browse and buy" MoneyWeek, IC, maybe Shares, or nothing at all depending on the content for that weeks publication.

Strawbs.