Night Sky Euthanized - S&T Next?

On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 20:11:14 -0500, O. Dam Itall
wrote:

It is probably only a matter of time before S&T becomes a shadow of
its former greatness. The new owners are determined, it seems, to
wring out every last dollar from the company, even at the expense of
its employees. How caring could they be - sacking five people just a
few weeks before Christmas? Couldn't it wait until January?

When my subscription is up, I may not renew. After so many years of
reading and buying S&T and the books they published, I feel betrayed
somehow. Maybe if they cut the price in half I'll consider it. But
with the recent departure of Stephen O'Meara to Astronomy and the many
firings, I think the writing is on the wall.

Well, you'll certainly help speed it on its way if you stop subscribing
because "the writing is on the wall".

IMO, the quality of the magazine's content is as good as it has ever
been, better than some times (and I've been a subscriber for over 30
years). I'm not going to worry too much about the internal operations of
the publisher; if the quality declines, I'll stop subscribing. But not
until.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 20:11:14 -0500, O. Dam Itall
wrote:


It is probably only a matter of time before S&T becomes a shadow of
its former greatness. The new owners are determined, it seems, to
wring out every last dollar from the company, even at the expense of
its employees. How caring could they be - sacking five people just a
few weeks before Christmas? Couldn't it wait until January?

When my subscription is up, I may not renew. After so many years of
reading and buying S&T and the books they published, I feel betrayed
somehow. Maybe if they cut the price in half I'll consider it. But
with the recent departure of Stephen O'Meara to Astronomy and the many
firings, I think the writing is on the wall.

S&T is a cash cow, Night Sky was not. There is already a magazine for
beginners named Astronomy and advertisers (who provide the greatest
share of the revenue) probably saw no reason to support a clone,
especially if S&T could not show an audience that did not overlap with
Astronomy. My guess would be that subscription and newsstand sales were
pretty weak.

The decision to drop Night Sky is no more than a business decision, just
the same as the dropping of CCD Astronomy. S&T can't seem to find
another niche market that pays--and don't kid yourself, if a magazine
doesn't pay, NO publisher will keep it.

Also, don't forget that several people who once wrote for Astronomy now
do so for S&T. It's a free market for freelancers.

The same sort of gloom-and-doom followed Astronomy's firing of Richard
Berry and Tom Hunt, and later Robert Burnham (twice, IIRC). IMHO it is a
better magazine with Dave Eicher at the helm than it would have been
with the others.

Bob