Whats up with major MTB magazines?

[Reserverockhopper]

Is it me or has anyone else noticed a major problem with all the MTB porn magazines?

The problem? All the stories are about fantasy epic trail rides in all the same and familiar places, Moab, Whistler or British Columbia. Now I know these may be likely the best places in North America to ride a mountain bike, but of all the MTB riders, every day riders like you and me, how many days a week do you ride Moab or BC?

Why don’t any of the magazines focus or include features of different local, accessible trails by the average rider?

I am willing to bet that 90% of their readers, never have visited Moab or BC but ride loyally locally and are the primary consumer of 99% of MTB products and 99% of the primary purchasers of Mountain Bike Action, Bike and Dirt Rag.

Yet, every issue, when you open the bike porn, they rehash great rides in places most of us will maybe visit once, if ever.

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed and been frustrated by this? ????

[Bombardier]

I’ve become really disillusioned with almost all of the mags out there. But the ones that still impress me are the UK publications like Singletrack & Mountain Bike Rider. They include a lot of information about trails all over the UK, and not just the major, popular ones. MBR even includes folding trail map tear-outs in each issue, with a short overview of each trail. MBUK is sort-of the UK equivalent to MBA here, but its still not nearly as watered down. The UK mags are certainly more expensive, but they’re well worth it for the reading.

For the US mags, I used to thoroughly enjoy reading all of them; but now it’s mostly out of necessity that I still pick ’em up. MBA has pretty much stayed the same, but there’s a few that have taken a decided turn downhill. One used to be one of my favorites, but for some reason they changed the layout, editor, and content. Where it content used to be rather varied, it’s become almost completely dedicated to slopestyle & freeride/DH. The contributed articles read like a 10th grader’s essay assignment, with gratuitious usage of vocabulary including (but not limited to) words like "gnar", & "stoke"; involving bad syntax & common misuse of adverbs. Profanity is also quite common in these articles, often inserted for no reason other than that the editors allow it, or because the writers just do not care.

This may be just my opinion, but I feel that print articles should show a bit of refinement; if not from the writer’s hand, then from the proofreading staff. It is completely unnecessary to inject colorful language into an article in a manner that is distracting. I’m not complaining due to any delicate sensibilities on my part; but only because I feel that most readers appreciate well-written and thought-out stories, and do not connect with colloquialisms or street verbage being used for its’ own sake.

Beyond that, if a piece of equipment is going to be reviewed, it needs to go further than just a rehash of the manufacturer’s description. I’ve also noticed in certain publications, particular manufacturers can do no wrong; or they get an inordinate amount of lip-service when comparable products may have distinct advantages in terms of price/performance. I’m sure a lot of this is a result of advertising requirements & demo product availability. Small companies may not be able to afford to disperse demo bikes/gear to all of the major bike magazines, and so they get passed up for reviews. Regrettable, but understandable.

And there’s the saturation of coverage on massively well-known trails/resorts to contend with as well. When counting a particular region’s being mentioned/featured over others; the west coast, northwest, and BC are on a 20:1 ratio. Certain other famous trails get print space too, but usually only in context with event coverage or other topic. Trails in the midwest & east coast are almost never reviewed in depth on their own merits. But again, advertising has a lot to do with this. Places like Whistler have a huge budget for gaining attention, and when the preponderance of major mountainbike events happen there, it’s inevitable.

But on a whole, that most of the US mountainbike mags are completely top-heavy with reviews further increases their yawn factor. Granted, I enjoy bike porn; but some other publications have done well at balancing the eye-candy with informative & entertaining written articles, without having to rely on filler (action photos with no context).
Bike is an excellent example of a MTB magazine that has found this balance. There have been some issues that have slipped downwards, but on a whole, it’s by far the most readable & informative of the bunch. Dirt Rag is a nice alternative as well, but I’ve found that it’s not nearly as consistent. But taken together, Bike & Dirt Rag are most adept at covering in-depth the many facets of our sport.
I’ve not mentioned publications like Dirt & Decline, as they are almost completely devoted to a single discipline in mountainbiking. However, they’re good at it; and I’m sure that their target audience enjoys their issues as being relevant & entertaining. On occasion, I’ll snag an issue or two of these mags, and they’re fun for what they are.

[Reserverockhopper]

Well said Bombardier. You touched on several points that I’ve heard before and felt the same myself.

I’ve noticed a direct connection with the reviews and the marketing revenue matching very closely. Being in the print marketing business myself, I recognize that ad revenue is the core revenue for a magazine over retail purchase price and that the mountain biking publications are limited to selling to a limited, small target ad customer base. Over the counter revenue usually only off sets distribution expense for the magazine.

To entice those full page or half page ads on a contractual bases likely requires written agreements to do "x" number of reviews each issue. I get that and can live with it if that is what it takes to help keep MTB magazines in business for us readers. We have few options.

What continues to escape me is that it appears to me that without good articles and content, readership can become tired and bored. Without strong, loyal readership and circulation among active MTB consumers, there is no return on investment for the core ad buyers.

Based on my observations (and guesstimates) I am willing to argue that there are not many teenagers or professional riders that make up the majority of mtb product purchases nationwide. We want young riders on the trails, but it’s dad who writes the check for the gear. It is likely 30-50 somethings, that have the personal financial resources to maintain their hobby.

Bikes are expensive, and so it is to maintain a full suspension rig when it needs a new fork or shock. My guess at what a mtb reader profile is; 30-50, has a job/career, rides after work and on weekends, takes 1-2 annual road trips not more that 100 miles from home to do a ride.

Our sport is a multifaceted sport and the rider goes through many fazes. When I first got the jones for mtb, I was buying every magazine off the shelf every month. I would go to the store and pick up Mountain Bike Action, Bike, Dirt Rag and others. Me and my fellow riders would sit around at a campsite and just engross ourselves in the pages. Now over time, all of us have slowed down on our purchases because each issue begins to feel like any issue, any issue this year or last.

If core riders of the sport grow tired of the magazines as we have, then the mtb magazine industry is dependent on only reaching and tapping into new riders to the sport ever year or so. I don’t think this is what major mtb manufacturers would have in mind as an optimal way to maximize their limited marketing dollars or marketing strategy.

If magazines would only mix it up and satisfy the seasoned, everyday rider, they could ensure loyal readership and give advertisers a more satisfying business experience. MTB riders need our industry to strive and flourish. We want good magazines, we want healthy manufacturers that continue to focus a substantial portion of their business to mountain bikes with their road bikes.

To do that, magazines need to target a wider consumer base and target their content to satisfy those readers so that they secure lifelong readers. As it is now, they will only keep their attention until they go through what the rest of us have, about a year.

[bonkedagain]

I wish I had more to add to this, but you guys have pretty much covered it from my perspective — you guys are pretty sharp. But, here I am babbling away anyway…

I haven’t bought a bike mag in years. As you say, after awhile you have heard it all, so what sounds new is usually just bs or the same old wisdom repackaged with different buzzwords and slang. On the other hand, how do you come up with something new in a world that really doesn’t change [i:1lld0eu2]that[/i:1lld0eu2] much from one year to the next?

I remember one mag I used to have a subscription to (MountainBike?) that took pride in being "honest" in their reviews. Well, I seem to remember one issue where they beat the crap out of some bike (might have been a Specialized or Trek). I thought the comments were overly harsh, but didn’t think much of it. Well, it seems in the next issue the editor’s page made some passing reference to how they had pissed-off that advertiser, but were going to stick to being honest in their reviews. Sure’nuff, no more full page ads from that company ever again. It seems that within a year the mag folded and was picked up by Bike or Bicycling or one of those… (Somebody out there probably remembers this.)

Anyway, when that mag went away and I found most of the rest where advertiser love-fests and I decided there really wasn’t much to read that was worth my time and money so I just quit reading them. Instead, I just peruse the web and read forums like this one, just to see if somebody has come up with some interesting perspective on the biking world. So, keep it up guys, I’m reading it. 😃

[Author]

Posts