magazine restriction of a different nature


March 1, 2013, 09:38 AM
Have you guys seen this?

These turkeys are going to come from every direction

If you enjoyed reading about "magazine restriction of a different nature" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
March 1, 2013, 01:10 PM
Doesn't matter; let them do it. If you close down Guns and Ammo, another magazine will spring up to fill the void. This is just like the frenzied and groundless rumors about George Soros buying Marlin so he could shut it down. Whatever Soros is, he's not dumb and he realizes if he bought and shut down every gun company in the United States, more would spring up to take advantage of the void. It's called supply and demand capitalism.

I actually hope this guy buys every magazine and outdoor TV channel and shuts them down; he's just wasting money that would be donated to causes I don't want and other media would expand to fill in the void.

Tom from WNY
March 1, 2013, 05:13 PM
Time for all of us to seek allies in unexpected areas. Does anyone have a contact in Anynomous?

The Web has and is a PITA to the Progressives; we have managed to spread the word of thier pernicious acts as the ride of William Davis and Paul Revere.

March 1, 2013, 05:15 PM
He can try.

March 1, 2013, 05:30 PM
Where's the proof that someone would destroy investor value by wrecking valuable profit making businesses? That just doesn't make any sense for a business person that isn't in exclusive control to try to do.

March 1, 2013, 05:32 PM
If he pays for it, then he can do what he wants with it. Magazine business has been dead for a long time anyway. Publishing is stupid expensive and nobody is making money at it.

If there is a market, someone will fill the need. If not, we go online. Welcome to 2013.

March 1, 2013, 05:39 PM
Unfortunately if Intermedia Partners is planning on shuttering Guns & Ammo, it probably has more to do with with profit margin than anything else. Leo Hindery Jr is a business owner and business owners, regardless of their political affiliation, are in business to make money. If a business makes money they reap the profits, if it loses money they shutter it.

Magazine circulation in general has been losing ground ever since the internet became popular. Even newspapers have seen losses in readership. Production, material costs, and shipping costs have gone up while advertiser revenues have dwindled.

I am also an avid R/C Aircraft enthusiast and have seen several long time magazines go the wayside due to costs and the lack of readership and advertising revenue. The ones that still remain have become only a shell of what they once were.

Years ago Guns&Ammo used to be almost 200 pages and cost a couple bucks, now it is lucky to be 100 pages and the news stand price is $4.99. The same is true for Handguns Magazine.

The absolute worst thing that any enthusiast can do is put out the message that a business owner is interested in shuttering a business. It is a guaranteed way for that to actually happen.

Articles like the one that was posted could cause any magazine publishing company so see its revenues fall to the point that it is no longer profitable. Unfortunately far too many authors fail to consider the consequences of their actions prior to writing an article.

If you want Guns & Ammo, Handguns, or any other firearms related magazine to survive then subscribe, get your friends to subscribe, and tell your fellow firearms enthusiasts to subscribe.

No business owner will ever shutter a profitable venture but they won't hesitate to shutter it if it is losing money. Posting negative messages is the quickest for that to happen.


March 1, 2013, 05:50 PM
This is a pretty popular conspiracy theory: That wealthy investors opposed to our beliefs will sink their money into a business that promotes our rights and hobbies only to deliberately ruin and destroy them.

Wealthy investors didn't become that way because they do self-destructive things with ANY of their money. Even their philanthropic/charitable endeavors are constructed thoughtfully so as to cause them minimal harm and maximum benefit.

A company buying these publications to streamline them, make them leaner, or even to liquidate them is not unrealistic, but those are profit-driven ends to try and resurrect, or at least pull the last value out of, businesses that are circling the drain.

Why are they circling the drain? You're reading this at one of the causes of that, right now. I don't even remember when I last dropped my G&A subscription, but it was a LONG time ago. And I wouldn't read the American Rifleman if it didn't come with my NRA membership. There's so little in any of those that I haven't seen months or years earlier, here, or at the worst will hear about within days of their being published in print. And here at least we get to discuss issues, participate in or observe the give-and-take that presents a truly 3-dimensional view of a topic, rather than reading the paltry few hundred words some goober wrote to go along with the glossy photos.

March 1, 2013, 09:26 PM
I'll apologize again that I put this in the wrong forum, I'm new to THR, but not new to the shooting sports/industry.

I agree with all the points above, but wanted everyone to know about it. I certainly see that if a wealthy investor buys something, it's likely to make more money, but I see the Soros crowd taking all their investment proceeds and trying to defeat the folks that they don't agree with.

I certainly agree that the print media is not something that I invest in, If I have questions, tech info or otherwise that I'm looking for, I troll some of the sites like THR.

Regarding the NRA, I'd love to see them put a check box on their membership that you have to OPT into getting the magazines. If a member does not check that box, their magazine subscription costs go over to the ILA where the money makes more of a difference.

If you enjoyed reading about "magazine restriction of a different nature" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!