Author Topic: Blechman puts on offer for Flex Magazine??? (Read 19637 times)

240 is Back · « **Reply #75 on:** June 16, 2006, 04:20:05 PM »

Quote from: timfogarty on June 16, 2006, 03:49:50 PM

this industry needs new blood.

I'm here man. Fear not.

best · « **Reply #76 on:** June 16, 2006, 05:47:41 PM »

paper, printing, salaries, postal, photo shoots, writers, payment to be on the newsstand, etc. etc. etc. most magazines launched don't even make it past the first year, let alone see a profit until year 4 or 5. publishing is no cheap endeavor and when you're printing and shipping hundreds of thousands of magazines every month, multiple titles etc. the cost to do business adds up very fast.

ad prices in the category are actually not much higher than they were 5 years ago. the difference now is that there is a higher volume of ads being sold than before (MDs case, thus the 400 plus page magazines). to sit here and proclaim that any magazine is out of line for trying to make a profit (this is a business they are in after all) is completely ASSinine. if you're upset with any publication having too many ads, then you obviously do not understand how they run their business. the goal is a 50/50 ad to edit split for most magazines. count the ad pages in md, flex, whatever and then compare that number to their edit pages. you will find that most of the time you are looking at 50/50 or close.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #77 on:** June 16, 2006, 06:02:22 PM »

Quote from: G o a t b o y on June 16, 2006, 05:24:47 PM

Ron could sell ads on Getbig and make a fortune. I really don't know why he doesn't... he deserves to make some coin off this after all the time and money he's put in.

maybe he'll permit shawn to run getbig.com into the ground like shawn did to did his own.

240 is Back · « **Reply #78 on:** June 16, 2006, 06:11:12 PM »

ads here would be great. It's when you give the sponsors creative control over content (read: moderator powers) that the neighborhood goes to the dogs.

Adam Empire · « **Reply #79 on:** June 16, 2006, 07:07:08 PM »

Quote from: G o a t b o y on June 16, 2006, 02:18:31 PM

Budgets mean nothing unless the money's already been spent.

If a company is in trouble and needs to cut costs, do you thing they wait for next year when a new budget is out? Hell no... the CEO tells his departments heads their current budgets are being slashed X%, and to find the money somewhere.

This is what I fear and why I am not going to the O this year (I have in the past). I have been in large companies that have orders to cut the budget NOW. I have seen canceled travel, layoffs, all the way down to less office supplies. Trust me here, if they had to cut 10% out of the budget - the order would come from so high up that anybody planning the show/expo would be out of luck and need to make changes. It's business. Hell, even if the $ is comitted, I have seen companies sacrifice their deposits to save $ overall.

In all, too much money for me to go to Vegas for an unknown quality experience. Especially knowing that AMI is looking to get out.

Van_Bilderass · « **Reply #80 on:** June 17, 2006, 02:21:06 AM »

Quote from: Pazuzu on June 15, 2006, 04:15:34 PM

I've never had anything against Flex mag - I've been reading it since later 1987, for God's sakes. I did have a problem with the whole 'burying your head in the sand' policy when it came to discussing steroids.

You can argue that MD has too much steroid info and discussion, but what's worse. ignoring it, or giving the facts so that at least people who are going to use them anyway can be a little smarter and safer about it?

Did you have a problem with MD when they went "all natural" in the late 90s? Were you writing for them then? Can't remember if you did.
IMO what MD did then was worse than the 'burying your head in the sand' policy Flex has. They were promoting juiced athletes as natural!

MD, and same goes for any other magazine, is trying to find a market for their stuff. The 'natural' route didn't work apparently so they went back to discussing juice. Had they been able to sell that crap you can bet they would have continued with it! It ain't about "truth", it's about $.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #81 on:** June 17, 2006, 02:38:05 AM »

it's about sales

Crusher · « **Reply #82 on:** June 17, 2006, 07:06:05 AM »

Quote from: best on June 16, 2006, 05:47:41 PM

paper, printing, salaries, postal, photo shoots, writers, payment to be on the newsstand, etc. etc. etc. most magazines launched don't even make it past the first year, let alone see a profit until year 4 or 5. publishing is no cheap endeavor and when you're printing and shipping hundreds of thousands of magazines every month, multiple titles etc. the cost to do business adds up very fast.

ad prices in the category are actually not much higher than they were 5 years ago. the difference now is that there is a higher volume of ads being sold than before (MDs case, thus the 400 plus page magazines). to sit here and proclaim that any magazine is out of line for trying to make a profit (this is a business they are in after all) is completely ASSinine. if you're upset with any publication having too many ads, then you obviously do not understand how they run their business. the goal is a 50/50 ad to edit split for most magazines. count the ad pages in md, flex, whatever and then compare that number to their edit pages. you will find that most of the time you are looking at 50/50 or close.

FINALLY!!!!! Someone who gets it.

Manninen dude · « **Reply #83 on:** June 17, 2006, 07:16:48 AM »

Quote from: Van_Bilderass on June 17, 2006, 02:21:06 AM

Did you have a problem with MD when they went "all natural" in the late 90s? Were you writing for them then? Can't remember if you did.
IMO what MD did then was worse than the 'burying your head in the sand' policy Flex has.

As far as I know, the "all natural" format had more to do with TWINLAB PR policies. You see, when a big comporation in the health care-related field starts to look extra $$$ from the investors, they hardly want to discuss drug abuse in their publication.

YoMamaBeenLurking · « **Reply #84 on:** June 17, 2006, 08:00:53 AM »

Quote from: Manninen dude on June 17, 2006, 07:16:48 AM

As far as I know, the "all natural" format had more to do with TWINLAB PR policies. You see, when a big comporation in the health care-related field starts to look extra $$$ from the investors, they hardly want to discuss drug abuse in their publication.

Quote from: Crusher on June 17, 2006, 07:06:05 AM

FINALLY!!!!! Someone who gets it.

MADMAX6 · « **Reply #85 on:** June 17, 2006, 10:03:18 AM »

Kev, please do not give these guys the satisfaction of even responding to their comments. Most of the people here just wish they had your life, I do. Get to go to all the BB shows full expenses paid, make a good living doing something you really enjoy, have front row center to every events there is to see in bodybuilding. It's not even worth your time.
What many people do not realize is that Kevin is not depending on bodybuilding photography as he does plenty of other kinds of photography in England including shooting lingerie models (lucky bastard!!!!).
Sometimes he jokes about retiring early and drive a bus for a living on a island. I hope not!!! LOL!!
One thing is for sure, I'm certain he knows a lot more inside informations than any of us combined but because of his position cannot or is not at liberty to tell any of it.
Anyway Kevin is a good guy with a great attitude, he's always ready to laugh and you tell he really enjoys what he does and it shows when you meet the guy. I do not know since very long but already he's one of my favorite people.
I'm sure you guys will have a lot of fun with this post and you'll probably call me a fag and such but that's expected...
Thank you.

And Kev, I better see you next time you are in town.

Max/D.

Crusher · « **Reply #86 on:** June 17, 2006, 02:45:33 PM »

But at other times, MD does sellout.

FYI, anyone who promotes natural bodybuilding while showing pics of juicers is being dishonest, whether it be FLEX or MD, or any other mag.
[/quote]

Dude, that was so last century. Get over it.

timfogarty · « **Reply #87 on:** June 17, 2006, 03:01:56 PM »

Quote from: Crusher on June 17, 2006, 02:45:33 PM

Dude, that was so last century. Get over it.

what about their softcore porn phase from early 2002 to early 2003?

Grimek must have been spinning in his grave.

Lift Studios · « **Reply #88 on:** June 17, 2006, 03:20:14 PM »

Upong looking through some of my old mags... I say bring back the glory days of the mid 90s with Lorenzo "Reno Raines" Lamas.

240 is Back · « **Reply #89 on:** June 17, 2006, 03:21:43 PM »

hard to believe the sport was more popular/mainstream/acceptable back then.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #90 on:** June 17, 2006, 04:26:27 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on June 17, 2006, 03:21:43 PM

hard to believe the sport was more popular/mainstream/acceptable back then.

it wasnt actually..

Pazuzu · « **Reply #91 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:16:09 AM »

I started writing for MD in early 2002, long after the all-natural days of the mag.

Hedgehog · « **Reply #92 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:20:08 AM »

Quote from: Pazuzu on June 19, 2006, 08:16:09 AM

I started writing for MD in early 2002, long after the all-natural days of the mag.

What's your opinion on http://www.ronharris.com?

YIP
Zack

Gordon_Gekko · « **Reply #93 on:** June 19, 2006, 10:55:41 AM »

Quote from: Lift Studios on June 17, 2006, 03:20:14 PM

Upong looking through some of my old mags... I say bring back the glory days of the mid 90s with Lorenzo "Reno Raines" Lamas.

Lorenzo Llama was an overrated cheeseball, but Ms Godreau was quite the Goddess. Do you have any other shots of her lying around?...

Pazuzu · « **Reply #94 on:** June 20, 2006, 07:37:27 AM »

My opinion on www.ronharris.com is that that other Ron Harris has made a gazillion dollars from porn - and I sure could use a gazillion dollars!

240 is Back · « **Reply #95 on:** June 20, 2006, 07:51:53 AM »

Quote from: Pazuzu on June 20, 2006, 07:37:27 AM

My opinion on www.ronharris.com is that that other Ron Harris has made a gazillion dollars from porn - and I sure could use a gazillion dollars!

Would you describe him as an illustrious ivory mountain of mass? Cause Hany R is still taking a beating for that line

MCWAY · « **Reply #96 on:** June 20, 2006, 08:10:14 AM »

Quote from: Van_Bilderass on June 17, 2006, 02:21:06 AM

Did you have a problem with MD when they went "all natural" in the late 90s? Were you writing for them then? Can't remember if you did.
IMO what MD did then was worse than the 'burying your head in the sand' policy Flex has. They were promoting juiced athletes as natural!

MD, and same goes for any other magazine, is trying to find a market for their stuff. The 'natural' route didn't work apparently so they went back to discussing juice. Had they been able to sell that crap you can bet they would have continued with it! It ain't about "truth", it's about $.

MD's lingering identity crisis, over the last 10 years, has been well documented.

It's not so much that they went natural (I actually liked that, as I felt it gave some guys some well-needed press). It's how they went about it. When Muscular Development morphed into Muscluar Development-Fitness-Health (and later into All-Natural Muscular Development), they spend FAR too much energy blasting the Weider pubs.

With Steve Blechman at the helm, MD's sole purpose in life is to be the anti-FLEX. If FLEX talks a bit more about anabolics, MD will blast it, even going so far as blaming Dorian Yates (and the judges that voted him Mr. O) as the reason for the hyper drug use and subsequent illnesses and deaths in pro bodybuilding.

When FLEX de-emphasizes anabolics and gets back to basics, MD (now in "hardcore" mode) can't stop talking about steroids. Now, Blechman and crew are "keeping it real", while criticizing FLEX the whole time.

I find it hilarious and ridiculous at the same time, especially when Blechman swore at one time that no steroid-using bodybuilder would ever grace the pages of MD again. Then MD almost completely abandoned bodybuilding coverage (natural and "not-so natural"), in favor of mainstream sports coverage, with football and tennis playes consistenly making the covers.

When MD went "hardcore" again, the explanation I heard was that Steve Blechman blamed his family members, who owned Twinlab at that time, for the "all-natural" spiel. Now that he solely owns the magazine and has no stake in Twinlab, he was going to go "hardcore" again.

What's even more ridiculous is, while FLEX was putting BODYBUILDERS on its covers, MD was in a fierce battle with MuscleMag International, trying to see who could plaster the most silicon-stuffed hoochies on its covers and between its pages.

When Jay Cutler won his first Arnold Classic, did he make the cover of MD? Well....technically the answer is "Yes". But, it was a small black-and-white pic of him in the corner. Meanwhile, MD's latest pin-up girl takes up most of the front, bold and in color.

YoMamaBeenLurking · « **Reply #97 on:** June 20, 2006, 10:23:44 AM »

Yet with all of the back and forth with MD, they are the profitable publication and Flex is the one on life support and on the auction block looking for a buyer. Wonders never cease eh MCWAY?

Pazuzu · « **Reply #98 on:** June 21, 2006, 12:38:19 PM »

Hany will never, ever live down the "Ebony Mountain of Muscle" comment, and he has me to thank for it. I assure you, he continues to get shit over that, even though I wrote it.

Hey, I thought it sounded better than "big black guy."

240 is Back · « **Reply #99 on:** June 21, 2006, 12:39:58 PM »

Quote from: Pazuzu on June 21, 2006, 12:38:19 PM

Hany will never, ever live down the "Ebony Mountain of Muscle" comment, and he has me to thank for it. I assure you, he continues to get shit over that, even though I wrote it.

Hey, I thought it sounded better than "big black guy."

hany is quite the chemist. I'd be careful leaving my lunch in the MD lunchroom fridge.