I continue to subscribe to Shooting Sportsman as it helps me keep up with the trends of shooting in America. I noticed several years ago that the magazine and its chief editor were focusing upon what younger shooters were doing and their choice of guns for whatever shooting that they are doing. From a business perspective that probably is prudent for Shooting Sportsman. I will also keep subscribing to their magazine as it still keeps me informed although the content is not focused upon things that interest the technical minded shooters---which is what I enjoy reading.
What is wrong at Shooting Sportsman and why are they loosing subscribers? One problem is technical content, and another is a "star" writer who produces monthly articles of significant interest each issue that the subscribers await eagerly.
America does not have a Michael McIntosh now and that absence still is discussed throughout the entire spectrum of shooters of classic shotguns and is demonstrated in the "black holes" of content in publications that these shooters read. That said, the influence of Diggory Hadoke in the shooting press of the UK has grown over the last 10 years and at the same time Hadoke's knowledge and writing skills about classic shotguns has gotten better substantially. I see no other writer in America that is forming in the background to be another McIntosh or a Hadoke. The younger shooters that Shooting Sportsman magazine wants to attract do not know who McIntosh was, but such a writer would have similar strong influence on them as McIntosh did on his generation of readers; and importantly for Shooting Sportsman produce additional revenue.
The majority of shooters are interested in learning more about the technical issues of the guns they like and it seems to me that Shooting Sportsman Senior Editor Vic Venters has more gun technical knowledge than did McIntosh and I think you can see that demostrated as McIntosh relied on his Purdey trained "stocker" British friend and colleague from his workshop in Maine to fill in all the areas that McIntosh needed technical reinforcement---this was a superb duo of writing talent and gun making skills.
Years ago when Michael McIntosh exited the role he had of writing about guns each month at Shooting Sportsman, a void was never filled by the subsequent writers who attempted to take up the baton and run with it. That void has not been filled even today after all these years. From time to time an article will appear about some task at gunmaking that is written by a gunsmith; and although the content is interesting these article do not go into the details of the particular task the way that David Trevallian would show us and tell us in the words written by his colleague Michael McIntosh. You will remember that the articles that McIntosh and Trevallian jointly produced were combined into the outstanding book 'Shotgun Technicana" of gun work on classic shotguns----- the price of buying a copy of it shows it worth today.
I just do not see that Shooting Sportsman magazine has a vision of what it want to be in the market place and for what that matters a vision of what the market place is or is going to be. To my mind and way of thinking it seems to me that the influence of Senior Editor Vic Venters is needed more at Shooting Sportsman if it is going to survive and more importantly thrive.
If you need to understand more of the knowledge and skills of Vic Venters purchase his two books and you will understand.
