BCA Bugle magazine--glossy or plain paper?

[Guest]

This is an opportunity for all Buick Club members to make known their preference for the slick, glossy paper which has been used in the Bugle magazine for the past 16-18 months, OR for uncoated paper which was used previously. The BCA Board is preparing the specifications to go out for bids for the printing and editing of the magazine, beginning next July. Presently, there is some disagreement among Board members, as to which type of paper should be specified (or whether to bid both types).

Arguments in favor of the glossy paper are that it "jazzes up" the magazine and perhaps appeals to new and younger members, which the club needs to attract; and that the current display advertisers in the magazine should not have to put up with a change (which might be perceived as a decrease) in quality or style, if we go to a less expensive, non-glossy paper.

Arguments in favor of the non-coated or non-glossy paper are: It is cheaper and we need to do all we can to keep costs and dues down; It is lighter weight than the coated paper, and therefore costs a little less in postage to send out the magazines--this can really add up fast; It is easier to read because it does not glare; and resources ought to be put into giving the magazine more and better content--not flash.

As you can probably tell, I favor the non-coated paper, but I am in the distinct minority on the Board on this issue. I (and I am sure, other BCA Board members) would like to hear the opinions of other club members on this issue, because the choice that is eventually made will impact every Buick Club member. So, please respond if you have an opinion on this.

Pete Phillips, BCA #7338

BCA Board member

Ector, Texas

[Guest COMPACTBC]

I'm with you Pete, for all of the reasons you mentioned, especially the EASIER READING. Frequently I have to move to a different place to read the Bugle in order to stop the glare. Who knows what the USPS is going to do with rates and when, one thing for sure they are not going to go down! The club does need to be very careful on how they spend our dues. A dues increase could keep younger people from joining or staying in the club.

[Guest]

Pete,

I personally prefer the glossy paper for MANY reasons. Virtually every top shelf publication out there uses glossy. Why? Because it dramatically improves the overall appearance of the magazine and makes color photos much more eye catching. I would bet the October National Meet photos of the Kokomo winners would not have been as dramatic on dull paper. If you doubt that statement, pull out a copy of the Bugle from the previous regime and take a look!

As for cost, our BCA members expect SOMETHING for their $35, not a regression in magazine quality!

You asked for our opinions, so here it is.

Bob Leets

Past BCA Board Member

Flint, MI

[jerryacheson]

Pete,

Tough decision. I receive quality magazines with both types of paper and I enjoy both. You may want to talk to the editor of Auto Restorer. They went from glossy to paper a couple of years ago so they should be able to tell you how that impacted subscription counts.

When faced with a decision such as this, I like to use a decision matrix to reduce the emotion from the decision. You should be able to find internet sites that explain how they work.

(The pictures sure do look great in a glossy format.) Good luck.

Jerry

[Matt Harwood]

I get magazines that are both glossy and non-glossy, and I have to say that I truly prefer the glossy paper. It just feels better in your hands and really makes the colors rich. I also have some involvement with printing, and I have faced the same problem--and unless it is some catalog or other low-quality publication, we always choose the glossy paper. I think the Bugle is a great publication and look forward to it as much as any other magazine I get. It's head and shoulders better than any other club publication I've ever received, and the quality paper is part of that perception. I think if the Buick Club wants to continue as one of the best clubs to be a part of, then a top-flight publication is mandatory. I don't mind the club dues as they are or even a little more--for what you get, it's a bargain in my opinion. People who gripe about $35-40 a year to be a member of a club ($3.50 a month is a lot of money?!?) are probably in the minority.

Just my two cents.

[gungeey]

Just a suggestion...why not use the offset paper for articles in the beginning of your magazine, continuations at the end. In the center spread insert a single signature (say, a 16 page) of glossy stock for your photo shoots. Most of your readers likely enjoy the coated papers because it adds realism to the color photos. Combine this with the plain paper for type along with a glossy cover and you'de have the best of both worlds...high quality artwork displays with decreased printing (offset paper is substantially cheaper and lighter)and mailing costs. Steve

[The Old Guy]

If the two paper system is workable, I believe that would be the sensible solution. If it is not feasible, then I prefer the glossy paper,as the others have stated, it makes the whole product seem richer.

[Guest]

I've been a subscriber to Auto Restorer for quite some time. They changed a few years ago from glossy color to plain black and white. It made no difference to me, because the quality of the content remained the same or improved.

On a different note, I would prefer seeing an internet based Bugle. It would be easy to assume that this would be less expensive, but that may not be the case, and of course many people don't have access to the internet.

Given the choice of glossy or plain, my vote is for plain paper. Maybe it's possible to compliment the plain paper Bugle by providing an internet edition to go with it. It's just a thought.

Pat

[BigFella]

My opinion (one from a "younger" member at 33 years of age) is that I don't mind the dues (they all go up eventually and these are cheap compared to every other club that you get nothing out of...), and I really like the glossy paper. The first bugle I received was glossy and I was hooked right away. The pictures were great. The only thing I was not impressed by was the short articles...I wanted more!

I don't think the publication will do much in getting younger members by itself, but the pictures of the variety of Buicks and the luv stories from Buick owners have allowed me to understand more of the passion for Buicks than I knew existed, AND I am seeing alot of really nice cars that I would not even have thought about before. Now I want a 50's Buick where before in my mind they were just lumped in with all the 50's cars. It's a good educational tool for sure, especially for those of us well below the current Buick age range.

I feel the bugle accurately represents the Buick club. Class, Style, WOW value! Something you fall in love with. I know I have.

My vote is to keep the glossy.

[Guest]

Being an old guy,with glasses,the non-glossy is easier to read.I dont know if this is connected or not ,but the issues I am comparing ,the older one has 50 pages & the new one has 42 pages.If this is to save money,I prefer the non -glossy. Norb Burwell BCA 7839

[Guest]

Post deleted by BUICK RACER

[Guest]

"I feel the bugle accurately represents the Buick club. Class, Style, WOW value!"

That says it all!

Why regress to the dull, lifeless Buick Bugle that used to be?

[Centurion]

I've been a BCA member since I was 22 years old in 1975. I've seen the Bugle come a long ways. I agree with the comments that it's a great publication, and it would seem like a real step backwards to me if we returned to plain paper.

I also agree that more and better content would be a great improvement, but this is unlikely to change given the reliance upon the membership to provide the articles.

[Guest John Chapman]

Glossy. No question.

And now for the heresey... If it's a real budget problem, then maybe it's time to consider raising the membership dues.

Or...

Provide the Bugle from the web in PDF and have a surcharge for members that want a hard copy.

Cheers,

JMC

[Guest brh]

Peter

I am in the printing business and everyone can have what they want! Why not have the Bugle printed on uncoated stock (not glossy) and have it coated with a glossy varnish. This way you get the economics of the paper without the expence. You also may want to consider printing it with a lighter wieght paper. This helps on mailing costs, however the post office has more of an opportunity to fold , spindle and mutilate our publication. The cover is probably printed in a seperate run so you don't have to do everything as a whole. You can change one aspect of the publication without worrying about affecting the entire book. Hope this helps. I am very pleased with our

publication. If I can be of any help let me know. I don't print this type of work but I do know my way around a press.

Bruce #10386

[Guest scott mich bca # 6619]

Pete,

My vote is for non-glossy paper. The glossy reflects too much,

especialy under fluorescent lights.

I do agree that the pictures look better on the glossy paper,

however, I think a hybrid of paper is in order.

Perhaps the cover can be thicker and glossy, with the next few

pages, and the rest plain, not glossy. This way the cover is first

class and thicker to handle mailing, you would still have say 8

pages glossy, (2 dbl.sheets) plus the covers, and then the rest

can be plain & thinner.

Scott Mich BCA # 6619, OCA #3947

[Guest Skyking]

Pete, stick with the glossy stock.......look back at any old Bugle that used offset paper...the halftones were trash! Forget varnishing over offset, it will look worst. Right now the Bugle is a class magazine, anything less and it won't spell Buick!

[NTX5467]

I vote for the glossy-type paper for the whole publication. I makes everything appear much more lively and accurate in all respects and has allowed the expansion of all pages to be picture pages if need be. It will also allow easier setups and formats as those producing the publication will not have to worry about what type of paper will be on what page of the publication. What might be saved in decreased paper cost would possibly be taken away in added time spent in getting things laid out for production.

I concur that glossy paper (of the type which has recently been used) can have more reflectivity than some might like, so I might suggest more of a semi-gloss paper but not the totally uncoated paper of the previous times.

The other issue, which I feel is a very important issue, is the fact that our club publication is how many in the outside world perceive our group and the marketing aspects of the publication cannot be discounted. The last thing we want the outside world to perceive is that the BCA is "chintzy" in how it does things. I feel that digressing to the uncoated papers of prior times might well be viewed as "being chintzy" when we should be using the expenses of the more expensive paper to invest in the future of the BCA from the marketing aspects of having a better looking publication. If a more semi-gloss coated paper might be found that will serve the readability and picture quality issues, that would be the best alternative.

It's one thing to spend the club funds effectively and responsibly for the best bang for the buck, but another to hold back all of the way and possibly sacrifice long term financial viability of the organization. Therefore, some expenses should be treated as investments in the future as opposed to day to day expenses. The club publication is a definite marketing tool for the club. Excellent content is very good to have, but you have to have the cosmetics to get people to look at it to start with. A nice cover with lack luster interior pages could be viewed as "looks good on the outside, but . . ." and that's how many might view the whole organization.

Thanks for this opportunity, Pete.

NTX5467

[GSPORT]

I vote glossy. I'm not sure how the BCA markets advertising in the Bugle, but it's possible a more premium paper would attract companies to advertise in the publication to help defray cost. As far as progressing, how many remember the red cover, black & white print "Cars & Parts" magazines of the 70's? When I compare those to the issues published today there's no question of which is more appealing.

[Guest]

Being a pressman for 29 years, there is no doubt that coated stock looks the best with photos, etc. A regular finish book sheet doesn't have the pizzazz that gloss stock has. A starbrite opaque or something really white would be a move up, or even a matte sheet. I like the gloss stock, but would read the BUGLE if it were 16 pound bond!

Lee B

BCA 2204

[Philippe Racicot]

I prefer glossy paper and I also like to receive my Bugle protected by an envelope. Unlike some other magasines that I receive the buggle arrives intact to my mailbox.

[NTX5467]

From what I found out this past Saturday, much of the glare problem might well be in the shade of white paper stock used in The Bugle instead of just the coated vs. uncoated paper issue. The Bugle seems to be on a paper stock that is toward the "blue white" part of the white color spectrum whereas magazines (Collectible Automobile, for example) use a paper stock which is more "eggshell" in color but still perceived as "white". Yet, when I read CA, it does not have the same glare issues as our BCA magazine tends to. Just as in automotive paints, there are a whole bunch of "shades of white" that look "white" until you put them up against a "white" that is a different shade of white. I also emailed Pete with a more detailed description of what I found.

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[Guest]

simply said "A FEW PENNYS MORE YOU CAN GO FIRST CLASS" stay gloss, JIM ROBERTSON ,NW PA CHAPTER, GO BUICK!

[Guest]

As A newer member of the Club( I joined in 1999) I vote for the Glossy paper. If you want younger members which will be the new life blood of the club you need to have a classy magazine which the Bugle now is. I love all the color pictures of the cars. Unless you're on a fixed income I don't think raising the dues $5or so a year is gonna hurt anyone and it keeps the club at the level one would expect for Buick. Bryan Burns Covina,CA

[Guest Skyking]

I think the majority of the people here vote to keep the Bugle as it is.......Why would you want to ruin a good thing?

[Guest]

Whoa, Dudes and Dudettes! It's like deja vu all over again. Just got back from riding the big one, and it's that glossy / non-glossy feud all over again. Glossy's totally awesome. Dull is like duh! For you older dudes, get some shades, man. When I retire my surfboard, maybe I'll dig the dull. But for now GLOSS IS BOSS!

Buick Dude

'49 Woody

Big Sur, MN

[Rawja]

I prefer the glossy as well.

[old-tank]

I like the glossy but I would also like more content. I looked at a 1997 Bugle: dull paper and no inside color pictures; the paper was still fairly thick. I also just looked at a Cars and Parts magazine with lots of color photos inside and outside that looked as good as the current Bugle. The paper is thinner and a little less glossy and the 130 pages was as thick as the 30 pages in the Bugle! The binding was also different...no staples. The current Time magazine has nice pictures, thinner paper and staples. I would not like to see the Bugle printed on paper like the bulk of Hemmings but there are satisfactory papers out there that would allow more content...even 10 to 20 extra pages would be a treat. The thick and slick paper in the Bugle is great for pictures but over-kill for text.

Willie

[Guest karlde]

I would recommend plain paper, with color photos of cars and people. Even the ads could be in color. This should make the magazine readable, colorful and enjoyable for all.

Thanks,