More ads put more money in the hands of bodybuilding contests which goes directly to bodybuilders and gives us more editorial content. Ads support the magazines more than subscription sales. To be honest, I don't personally mind them. Just my opinion, and I know I will be in the minority here.
I bet Stark wouldn't complain it that was 200 pages of gay4pay ads
Trying to advertise your service here bluto?
Keep dreaming pal
I thought of that myself and I imagine if it was the case they would do it. I think at the very least they need to get back their production costs (printing for example), but otherwise, it is not necessary for them to charge much at all to still profit. The money is in the ads.
but that only works if people buy the products in the ads. if no one buys the products, the companies don't pay for the ads, the magazine goes ass-up and the athletes get canned.
Thank you, Stark!!! I rest my case.
gordiano - maybe Steve should have said it was the biggest supplement catalog ever?
Very good thread here. It is important to let these magazines know we aware of theircommercial assault on our sensibilities. To know that we are being fed 200 pages of ads in the space of a magazine is sheer commercial crassness. Do they think we are robotic consumers?. Stark, I think you are on to something here. Keep the ad counts coming each month. It would be interesting to know what they are getting away with.
200 Pages of pure informative ads... real hardcore and no bull!!!!!
If you can ignore the ads, the magazines aren't too bad today Tim. Granted, you can get all the information online, but I find it's nice to have magazines around to read. Buying some old mags is definitely on my to do list though.Here is a question: how does MD's ad content compare with the other major bodybuilding magazines today?
Would 260 pages of editorial content still be considered the biggest though?
Yes, I absolutely agree that MD was being misleading, but aside from that, would 260 pages still merit acclaim of any kind?
Win what "debate"? We're having a discussion here are we not? I already conceded your point and furthered the discussion by posing a separate question. You make it sound like this topic needs to be addressed in one narrow manner. The topic brings up other issues open for discussion.
The point of this thread is that the magazine misleads people. You seemed like you weren't seeing that. My apologiez sir.