As a subscriber, I find it unfortunate that this issue has been dragging along for the past year or more. This is not the first time we're hearing about it. But it doesn't appear that there has been any material change in the situation.
I've stopped receiving my print copies of the magazine. I mind, but I haven't raised the issue because I want the publication to survive and assumed they might be focussing their efforts on more existential threats. As an otherwise happy subscriber, I'd rather miss a couple of paper copies now and let some sort of fundamental business restructuring happen in order to allow for the publication to survive. But I suspect this isn't happening now, at least in an effective way.
I have first-hand knowledge of how similar publications operate. They're kept alive by a publisher who lacks the business expertise needed to do more than keep their baby on chronic life support. It will never thrive on its own, and consequently, never realizes its full potential either.
As a publisher, if it gets to the point where you're so in debt to people who have otherwise contributed in good faith to the business, your livelihood and baby, you owe it to them to admit that you need help. Not help in the sense of asking customers for donations or by having fire sales on subscriptions, as Nautilus has. This is just a way of chasing future debt obligations. Rather, you owe it to them to get help with fundamentally restructuring the business itself.
I'd prefer to avoid speculating too much on why that hasn't happened yet. But I suspect this all boils down to good old publisher control and/or equity. For the publication to have a future, all options should be on the table no matter how undesirable they might be for the publisher.
I've stopped receiving my print copies of the magazine. I mind, but I haven't raised the issue because I want the publication to survive and assumed they might be focussing their efforts on more existential threats. As an otherwise happy subscriber, I'd rather miss a couple of paper copies now and let some sort of fundamental business restructuring happen in order to allow for the publication to survive. But I suspect this isn't happening now, at least in an effective way.
I have first-hand knowledge of how similar publications operate. They're kept alive by a publisher who lacks the business expertise needed to do more than keep their baby on chronic life support. It will never thrive on its own, and consequently, never realizes its full potential either.
As a publisher, if it gets to the point where you're so in debt to people who have otherwise contributed in good faith to the business, your livelihood and baby, you owe it to them to admit that you need help. Not help in the sense of asking customers for donations or by having fire sales on subscriptions, as Nautilus has. This is just a way of chasing future debt obligations. Rather, you owe it to them to get help with fundamentally restructuring the business itself.
I'd prefer to avoid speculating too much on why that hasn't happened yet. But I suspect this all boils down to good old publisher control and/or equity. For the publication to have a future, all options should be on the table no matter how undesirable they might be for the publisher.