>I also cannot believe you got 6-8 climbers to volunteer to edit that magazine.
>There is no way any small magazine has anything close to that.
The point you are missing is that everyone who contributes is passionate about climbing. This is why they contribute. As you pointed out earlier, climbing is a "hobby"(!?). All the contributors have full time jobs already, and they only contribute for love/prestige etc. Of course money is a bonus...
People nurture their contributions like children, and then send them off. They are not churning them out, simply to make a dollar.
The NZAC Climber magazine is excellent. Far superior to Rock in my opinion. Contributors are paid a token amount for articles, and everyone invests in a great product. One editor who sends final copy to contributors before going to print. People are proud of the magazine, and rightly so. Works very well (from a consumers perspective, interested to know Kester's thoughts as editor).
As you said, "... the motivation to send stuff in shouldn't be to get paid a token amount of money, but to be part of an awesome magazine that is better for your contribution."
If the magazine is awesome, the contributions will come. If it appears to be a hashed together generic, by a corporation with no interest or passion in climbing, then up to date, relevant and informed contributions might dry up. Although as the only climbing mag, Rock is in a good commercial position.
Lastly, your comment "I can't afford to fly to America for a climbing holiday" seems wrong to me, but probably demonstrates a difference in commitment. How can a climber NOT go to the US! Priorities all wrong! :)
|