What comes first? Chicken or the Egg?

Take a walk down to your local hobby shop and do a quick survey. Count the models available in the various categories. You'll find that the largest two categores are airplanes and autos which are about evenly matched. Next, you'll find military vehicles and related stuff, followed by a dozen ships and finally you'll see the odd sci-fi kit.

I think you'll find FSM reflects this mix pretty closely except for autos and thats because their companion magazine, Scale Auto Enthusiast, takes up the slack in this category.

As to WWII swamping most other subjects. Since entering the airplane and tank era about a hundred years ago, the vast majority of airplanes and tanks designed came from this block of history. How many new airplanes or AFV's have entered service since 1945? How about 1965? How about since 1985? My point is that the variety of subject matter for both airplanes and tanks peaks between 1939 and 1945.

This business of WWII popularity has been going on as long as I can remember, and it may be a baby boom phenominon. I can remember model magazines from the late 50's and early 60's with the same WWII slant. This would be an interesting study for some marketing bubba. I submit that the plastic model hobby is itself directly linked to the baby boomers and will be for at least another 15 years until we boomers get too shaky to build and start to die off in large quantities. Do an age survey at your next club meeting. Scary!

Thanks, Wayne.

Nice to know that my friends stand behind me, even if it's WAY behind me!

Fade to Black...

Complicated you say? Nuclear Engineering is complicated, Space travel is complicated, getting the almond INSIDE the Hershey's kiss is complicated. Your sense of humor is out there like Pluto !

No problemo. Not your bad, my humor is, shall we say... complicated? Okay, "complicated"...

Fade to Black...

Clearly I wasn't getting the joke... my bad. All is cool. Take care.

Like Buckaroo Banzai said, "Wherever you go, there you are".

Schoolmaster MUD,

AH! Someone really doesn't get it after all! See the "Humor Sense" thingamajigger at the end of my posts? That says it all, ie; 'twas a joke. (There is humor present in your neck of the woods, no?)

Please don't be so quick to judge, if I'm actually blasting someone, you'll know it.

Fade to Black...

Blackwolfscd... why you gotta be like that? We were having a goodnatured discussion, and you gotta throw crap around like that. Not cool, dude.

Clue Train's comin' to your town this weekend! Tickets are free, if you can find 'em!

Train kept a rollin', all night long...

Fade to Black...

Once again, I feel that the content of FSM is a reflection of what they are being sent. If no one sends auto articles ,or sci-fi, or even aircraft articles, how can they print them? They print what they get. They have no bias in any direction, the readership does.
Lee

I just enjoy the good natured debate and your post was interesting. I love sci-fi and cars by the way. I do support diversity, I just don't want FSM to become the next New Coke.

I agree... it is wishful thinking. But no one has any idea about what that ratio really is. Definitely can't measure it by posts. Do you know how many Gundam models Bandai is selling (personally, I think they are silly)? Annecdotal data suggests this is the growth area for the model industry.

As the editorial article suggested... the military focus is a result of the Baby Boom Generation. I'm 30 years old and I remember my first B-52 I built with fond memories. But I also was 7 years old when Star Wars came out. As anyone in publishing knows, the sweet spot for advertisers is the 18-35 age range. Focus too much on one segment and the growth potential fades.

Please don't take these posts personally, Woody. This is just some constructive criticism for the editors. That's what this Feedback Forum is all about. Best regards.

I'm not trying to be negative, but if FSM changed the mix in any meaningful way, I don't think there would be a FSM in the future. When there is a change in the ratio of who builds what, then and only then will FSM make a change. I support all modelling, but why would FSM want to alienate the many to placate a few? I do see your point, but I think it is wishful thinking. This is IMHO Best regards Woody

QUOTE: Originally posted by Woody The chicken and egg is a useless comparison. I am not going to start car modelling because FSM changes its focus to cars, as an example. I chose FSM because it represents the type of modelling I enjoy. The modelling topic mix is a fair cross section of the hobby, just look at any model forum and you will see more than 1/2 the posts are for AC. About 1/4 is armour and the market shares narrow from there. Mark Thompson's editorial was spot on.

I disagree with you totally... it is a chicken and the egg comparison. We're suggesting that if the content were offered more broadly, then a broader group of people may buy the magazine and post to the website. Moreover, we're not talking about the current subscribership (read the earlier posts), we are talking about the future subscribership.

The chicken and egg is a useless comparison. I am not going to start car modelling because FSM changes its focus to cars, as an example. I chose FSM because it represents the type of modelling I enjoy. The modelling topic mix is a fair cross section of the hobby, just look at any model forum and you will see more than 1/2 the posts are for AC. About 1/4 is armour and the market shares narrow from there. Mark Thompson's editorial was spot on.

Good point. But you could argue the opposite as well... in other words, it doesn't matter what the topic is as long as the techniques are transferable. Why not use a Ferrari now and then rather than a Sherman Tank?

Still doesn't change my opinion that the subject matter for a general title like "Finescale Modeler" is grossly tilted towards one subject... military aircraft and armor. I concede that if there are not contributors that are contributing about figures, autos, sci-fi, buildings, etc... then my point is moot. But then maybe they should consider calling it what it is "Military Finescale Modeler". Just and opinion.

What to do with sci-fi modelers. Well, first off, I've gotta say I'm quite surprised that there are sci-fi modelers who are interested in general modeling or a general modeling magazine. Please, take no offense, I myself take great pleasure in making a gundam here and there, or an Enterprise every now and then, but I view it as a side-note to my real pleasure, military aviation. Most of the sci-fi modelers I have known in the past(including my stepfather, who actually helped addict me to RPGs and PC Games and Sci-Fi models!), have always seemd to be rather, aloof in the pursuit of "their" hobby. They tended to have the same arrogance often seen in train modelers, they tend to view "their" hobby as superior, or truer, in some manner. And, they're a real tight-knit group(at least here in Florida)! They're almost a culture all in their own(bear in mind, most sci-fi modelers here in Florida are also RPG lovers, which could explain the community spirit.)! But hey, if sci-fi modelers finally want to go mainstream, I'm all for it! I'm just sorta surprised!
As for FSM being rather WWII related... Yeah, I've noticed that too! But, I really don't see the problem with it. Since most of the article is devoted to tips and tricks, does it really matter if they're teaching you how to weather a BF-109 or a Piper Cub? It's all pretty much the same. I do agree, though, that there needs to be more variety in FSM. I'm gettin' a little tired of seeing review after review of yet another WWII model. For instance, one of the more recent releases was the Academy 1/72 scale OV-10D Bronco. It was even listed in the "New Releases" Section. But did they cover it? NO! They just keep on covering t-34s, and MarderIIIs, and Grumman Whatever-Cats(Grumman made so many different cats in WWII, it's hard to keep up with it!)! I'd like to see a few more reviews of modern kits, and maybe even a tip that uses an A-6E or M1A1 as an example!

WWII is a dead horse! Please stop beating it! Forward... MARCH!!

QUOTE: Originally posted by heylonghair There's no doubt that the content does determine the people buying the magazine but if you don't have any content to put in, no matter how much you would like to or your readers want it, that won't conjure up content out of thin air.

Point taken. I guess I was under the impression that the magazine had writers that wrote the content as opposed to modelers just sending in their submissions. (Could someone from FSM clarify this point?)

And if you are wondering if there is any content regarding Sci-Fi... I ask you simply to browse the forums of Starshipmodeler.com or Macrossworld.com. An impressive level of content exists... but I admit, I don't know how to get them to submit.

Thanks for the feedback on this issue. I think we all have good points.

Check the section at this site for article submission requirements. Anybody can submit. I looked it over and I think I'll give it a try. Could be fun to go throught the process even if it does not get published. Maybe It'll give me experience to try again. I'm thinking of using a Hasegawa YF-19 kit.

They can't publish what they don't have. Plain and simple. It seems that a good majority of article submissions lay within the area of WWII subjects. Whether that's due to the majority of the readership being WWII modelers, or just the simple fact that there seem to be more WWII modelers in general, I dunno.

So, I forget who said it, but I echo the plea to do something about it. If you are a sci-fi guy, and think you have something of interest to the modeling community, contact the FSM staff and see if you can't get sumthin' published in the rag.

Fade to Black...

My feeling is that whatever it is that leads to an overage of one thing and a shortage of another in a generalized modeling publication such as FSM is, its a problem.

Generalization is just that, a general overview of the goings on in the hobby. This hobby, like so many others, can be covered from as many different angles as modelers approach it from. If I said, for example, "I want a modeling magazine limited to post war British Commonwealth military aviation and military aviation of post Socialist Central and Eastern European countries" that would be a real long shot at ever seeing the light of day just because of its over specialization.

I'll model other things for a change of pace every now and again, but post war aviation is still the big drive for me in the hobby. I much prefer the articles FSM creates to what is in the aviation modeling only mags. FSM can sum up a conversion in a few pages thats easy to follow, the specialist ones can go on for 7 or 8 pages on the same sort of conversion and get so complicated in their explanation that its not worth the trouble of trying.

I'm a post Baby Boomer myself, I too could complain about the WWII heavy content of FSM, particularly German armour, What is the fascination?! If you want a Tiger tank or Panzer, fine, but do we really need repeated articles of someone trying to model the entire line of these things from genesis to the last of the breed?

I'm not afraid to model the odd WWII subject, but it really has to appeal to me. The Cold War and the after effects of the fall of Socialism in the 1990s is what gets me going. Different things for different generations. All a 30 year old guy like me has to relate to WWII is talking with veterans, looking at history books and T.V. specials and museums. I have no first hand personal connection to the actual fighting of it. The Cold War on the other hand, I have memories of watching Canadian Armed Forces Voodoos or Hornets forming up on Bears on the nightly news, I never thought I'd see a MiG-29 up close, then in the early 1990s, the Soviet Union fell apart and the newly founded Ukrainian airforce took a couple of their Fulcrums on a North American tour and I got a chance to see them. Things tend to move us more when we experience them first hand in a more tangible way, they stay with us longer, shape our individual intrests.

With respect to the WWII modeler and the angle from which they approach the hobby, it is by far not the only angle to come at it from. Sci-fi, post war, civil aviation, automotive, ships.... all have their place in a generalized publication such as FSM and should be seen without having to seek out specialist publications that are far too involved for the average modeler, not to mention often cost an arm and a leg.

I have an ongoing thread in the General Modeling Discussion forum called "I want something else, how about you?" It was spawned by my constantly going into hobby shops and seeing walls of redundant subjects (Me-109s as an example) while modelers still wait for a favorite subject to hit the shelves. FSM's Most Wanted Kit Survey has proven year in and year out that a 1/48 North American A-5 Vigilante has been right near the top of the aircraft survey results for a significant length of time and yet can't fly its way out of the high priced resin and multimedia kits into injection. The demand is there, and obviously has been for some time, yet what are the manufacturers giving us? More me-109s, more Tiger tanks. They may be a sure sell, but they wear real thin real quick for a non WWII focused modeler like me and if the survey results say anything, its that a 1/48 A-5 Vigilante stands a better than average chance at being a real hit with post war modelers (of which there are many)

Do the manufacturers make so much WWII stuff because there is that much demand for it, or did they create the demand by overloading the market with it? In turn, does FSM have an overage of WWII articles because there's that many people building such things that the sheer amount of article submissions will bury an article about something else on an editor's desk?

You have to push a few kits around on a shelf to see what might be lurking behind them, I found my 1/48 Cessna 172 hidden behind two 1/48 ME-109 kits from different manufacturers.

Do articles about things outside WWII get buried so easily under the latest Tiger tank or Messerschmidt conversion article submission on an editor's desk?

QUOTE: Originally posted by My_name_1s_MUD [br Not sure if you get the point of this post... the point is FSM will perpetuate a WW2 fan base if all it does is WW2. Chicken or the egg? If you want to attract a new generation of modelers, then it would seem to me that it would be in FSM's best interest to broaden its scope.

I agree with you completely, but this is where the chicken or the egg question comes up again. Are there enough/any Sci-Fi articles out there that FSM has a pool to select from? That's what I was trying to get at. If more of the Sci-Fi modelers would put some articles together and send them in we would maybe start to see a few more articles in the magazine. How many Sci-Fi articles or even auto articles do they get as compared to WW2 articles?
There's no doubt that the content does determine the people buying the magazine but if you don't have any content to put in, no matter how much you would like to or your readers want it, that won't conjure up content out of thin air.

Ray

QUOTE: Originally posted by heylonghair but...complaining about the lack of Sci-Fi content is not going to solve anything. You've got to get out there and do something about it. Ray

Not sure if you get the point of this post... the point is FSM will perpetuate a WW2 fan base if all it does is WW2. Chicken or the egg? If you want to attract a new generation of modelers, then it would seem to me that it would be in FSM's best interest to broaden its scope. I have never built a sci-fi model before, but Gundam, Star Wars, and Star Trek modeling is growing at a substantial pace (much more so than armor and aircraft) according to annecdotal data from local hobby stores. Can't ignore the youngsters.

This is not necessarily a complaint, but rather constructive criticism... that's why FSM set up this specific Forum Category. I still love FSM (I'll keep my subscription).

By the way... Look around... there are no good Sci-Fi modeling magazines.

Some good points here. And as mentioned in other threads, if more of the Sci-Fi modelers would subscribe to FSM and support the hobby by becoming IPMS members there would be more articles available as well. As an almost exclusively automotive modeler I find the auto-specific content sometimes lacking myself, but the methods and tips can always be adapted to any subject. The arguments for both sides are good, and both have a lot of substance to them, but...complaining about the lack of Sci-Fi content is not going to solve anything. You've got to get out there and do something about it.

Ray

I know a lot of Sci-Fi modelers who don't get FSM (and aren't in IPMS) for the same reason... their aspect of the hobby is given little attention.

I know they have some of their own publications... but there should be more coverage of Sci-Fi, Figures, and all things Modern in your magazine.

As a mostly auto modeler (but also Sci-Fi and Aircraft) I like FSM because there are always good tips even in articles about something I have no interest in... But perhaps FSN should devote some space every issue to these other areas...