Howdy,
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002 GRMPer@aol.com wrote:
> In the past, Grassroots Motorsports has tried it both ways, covering some
> classes while trying to give an overview for our newsstand readers that
> haven't been to a Solo event. This year, we tried to cover all of the
> classes....and we strove to make it work for our potentials on the
> newsstands. I wound up with 11 pages of coverage, all in full color, with
> full results of the trophy winners....tough to fit in with our packed format.
>
> My question is...did it work? Team.net is the "tough crowd" as far as
> editorial coverage, so I'm curious as to how the collective will react to our
> extra-grande Topeka coverage.
IMHO, the standard GRM subscriber would (and should) expect detailed
coverage. Seems like GRM is marketed to the actual autoxer/club racer,
vs. the interested sportsman.
The autoweek piece, much as I liked it, had mistakes that would've pissed
me off had they been in GRM. I expect GRM to be like an industry
magazine, and thus to give me the more detailed info.
I'm not sure the two audiences will ever agree. I like the detailed
coverage, but also like the personal story side of the fence when it
applies to something I'm interested in. Seems like you could do both?
Mark
(Who subscribes to GRM, but not Autoweek, precisely because GRM tends to
be more detailed and less fluffy)
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|