Menu toggle

Porsche Post - yet again!

chrishak

New member
Porsche Post arrived this morning and I was was pleasantly surprised to see Canford Classics' stunning Coppa Florio blue Impact Bumper 911 on the cover. Unfortunately, my joy was short lived, turning sour when I read the tag line:-

G WHIZZ Falling for the unloved 911

UNLOVED??? Who writes this garbage???

 
I think its fairly well agreed that the impact bumper 911 isn’t the prettiest of the bunch. Just look at all the backdates being done, Singers, Paul Stephens etc. I own an impact bumper 911 and I’m looking for some lightweight fibreglass bumpers at the moment. Having said that they’re still great cars, I’ll never part with it!
 
It must be the season, this month's 911 & Porsche World news article for replacement headlights - "In most ways, the appeal of an air-cooled 911 is because it's old and, well objectively a bit crap"

You really couldn't make this stuff up.


 
I sometimes think that with the huge range of print and online publications that exist in the present day pretty much everything that can be written about a 30+ year old car has now been written. Thus writers (and I use that term loosely) have to revert to creating clickbait to get our attention.

It's certainly true in the mass media arena. A friend with an economics and journalism degree works for a major UK tabloid newspaper. Highest on the list of objectives is achieving his "click" quote for the month. Given the tabloid in question and its readership there's no way that target will be reached with objective journalism so he and his colleagues resort to creating stories that have just enough truth to keep the legal department happy but the remainder is juicy conjecture and dog whistling in order to get those clicks.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story!
 
Someone at Cornbury House should get hold of the Ferrari Owners Club , or HSCC magazine. Both PROPER club publications written for the members .
 
I've no idea if anyone at the Club office reads these Forum posts, or whether the editor (?) realises the damage such ill informed articles can do, but the magazine is going from bad to worse. It's degeneration into a Porsche promo/lifestyle magazine that offers very little for the real enthusiast. This poorly written and inaccurate article is the latest in a line of articles that would be better placed in our local free magazine's rubbish motoring column.
I can't believe that Alan at Canford Classics would be too happy either; his fine restorations take lots of hours and ££ to achieve and command respect and people pay accordingly.
Given the admiring looks and positive comments my 3.2 invariably receives when I'm out and about, 'unloved' doesn't spring to mind, and we all know why some of them appear to be cheap.
Come on Porsche Club - commission some decent articles and drop some of this lifestyle garbage.
 
KEVS500 said:
I've no idea if anyone at the Club office reads these Forum posts, or whether the editor (?) realises the damage such ill informed articles can do, but the magazine is going from bad to worse. It's degeneration into a Porsche promo/lifestyle magazine that offers very little for the real enthusiast. This poorly written and inaccurate article is the latest in a line of articles that would be better placed in our local free magazine's rubbish motoring column.
I can't believe that Alan at Canford Classics would be too happy either; his fine restorations take lots of hours and ££ to achieve and command respect and people pay accordingly.
Given the admiring looks and positive comments my 3.2 invariably receives when I'm out and about, 'unloved' doesn't spring to mind, and we all know why some of them appear to be cheap.
Come on Porsche Club - commission some decent articles and drop some of this lifestyle garbage.

There's an ongoing thread in the 964 section of the forum entitled 'Porsche Post - 964 missing again' which is of interest to the greater club community, not just 964 owners. In it, members and contributors to Porsche Post (myself and the 964 Register Secretary included) express their frustrations regarding the content, restrictions and editing of 'our' magazine. I won't go into detail here, but I will say it's well worth a read if you care about the direction Porsche Post seems to be headed.
What is really telling is the fact that despite facing considerable criticism, neither the editor nor the publishers feel the need to defend the magazine on the forum. If I didn't know better, I'd say that it demonstrates utter comptempt for the club membership and in particular, the contributors to Porsche Post.

Regarding the crass 'unloved' moniker, I don't feel the need to defend my purchase of my Carrera 3.2 but what I will say is that I bought it because it offered the perfect combination of performance, usability and looks, is powered by an air-cooled engine and sits on a traditional 911 chassis - not because it was cheap!




 
My 1st. Porsche was an impact bumper 911S (1975) and it was a great car.
When I joined the Club there wasn't a register for 911s between the early 911 and the SC. I complained and offered to start a Register. I was told that if I could get 20 members interested I had permission to start the Register. 4 weeks later I had registered 73 members.
 
geoff Ives said:
My 1st. Porsche was an impact bumper 911S (1975) and it was a great car.
When I joined the Club there wasn't a register for 911s between the early 911 and the SC. I complained and offered to start a Register. I was told that if I could get 20 members interested I had permission to start the Register. 4 weeks later I had registered 73 members.
So much for 'unloved', eh Geoff?
 
supersport said:
It must be the season, this month's 911 & Porsche World news article for replacement headlights - "In most ways, the appeal of an air-cooled 911 is because it's old and, well objectively a bit crap"

You really couldn't make this stuff up.


Presumably their statement also applies to models like the 2.7 Carrera RS...
 
"Someone at Cornbury House should get hold of the Ferrari Owners Club , or HSCC magazine. Both PROPER club publications written for the members.”

Ted, I think that you’ve hit the nail on the head there. While not everyone in the Club will be a lifelong car club member like you and me, I suspect that there are many -crucially, including board members- who have little or no experience of car clubs and so are unfamiliar with how they work best. This is perhaps also the reason that the Club has latterly become more of a business than a club.

"What is really telling is the fact that despite facing considerable criticism, neither the editor nor the publishers feel the need to defend the magazine on the forum. If I didn't know better, I'd say that it demonstrates utter contempt for the club membership and in particular, the contributors to Porsche Post.

"Regarding the crass 'unloved' moniker, I don't feel the need to defend my purchase of my Carrera 3.2 but what I will say is that I bought it because it offered the perfect combination of performance, usability and looks, is powered by an air-cooled engine and sits on a traditional 911 chassis - not because it was cheap!”


Chris, I think it unlikely that anyone from PP (or the Board) will have seen any of what has been written here because they are simply not looking, bearing out my comments on this Forum in the other thread which you mention. I don’t think that there is any doubt that members can be held in contempt these days and there seem to have been a number of people in positions of authority over the past few years who think that they are somehow above the rest of us.

I can give you but one instance of this treatment from personal experience. For some time I took over the Vintage View feature in PP, but one month the column just stopped appearing. No-one had the courtesy to inform me that I was being dropped or to tell me to stop submitting material though! Still, by this time it had anyway become impossible to get any articles or photographs included so it was really no surprise.

The ‘unloved’ comment is another example -my own model has similarly suffered in PP- of the lack of understanding of how car clubs work, as mentioned above. It is an unwritten rule of clubs that while you may praise (or even over-praise!) your own model, the one thing that you should avoid is rubbishing the cars owned by fellow members. Common sense would dictate that this sort of behaviour is likely to alienate some of those paying for the privilege of membership, so why would anyone do it? Cheap and confrontational journalism is more prevalent than ever these days, but it does not sit well in this environment. I suppose that someone who hates convertibles will be given a new 911 cabriolet to test any day now ... oh yes; they did that recently, didn’t they!
 
MJB said:
I can give you but one instance of this treatment from personal experience. For some time I took over the Vintage View feature in PP, but one month the column just stopped appearing. No-one had the courtesy to inform me that I was being dropped or to tell me to stop submitting material though! Still, by this time it had anyway become impossible to get any articles or photographs included so it was really no surprise.


Vintage View was an excellent feature, appealing to all members with an interest in the history of the marque and often stimulating further discussion on the forum. I thought that perhaps it had run its natural course - not for a second would I have thought it had been dropped without the publishers even having the courtesy of informing you. If that's not an example of contempt (not to mention disrespect), I don't know what is.

I can't recal a single recent forum post defending the magazine in its current form and there are members who have no interest in PCGB events, trackdays etc. who have cited Porsche Post as being the one benefit they get from club membership. Unless the publishers start take notice of the opinions of grass roots members, I don't think it will be long before renewal numbers start to drop.

A sorry state of affairs indeed...
 
Like other contributors to this thread, I don't like what PP has become. Perhaps this may be because the content of the magazine is no longer compiled by club enthusiasts? In this respect I notice that in the latest January 2020 PP at page 50 under the heading "share your Porsche story" we are directed not to the club but to mary@archantdialogue.co.uk
 
I think its quite sad that that PP has become so commercially orientated.

I do understand that while Porsche contribute substantial funds to the club, they in return, are allocated a set number of pages FOC. This arrangement has been in place for many years and accepted by all members as a 'benefit' to the insights of Porsche itself, but even this is morphing into a great sales pitch. Unfortunately we can usually see these same 'stories' in other motoring publications, sometimes sooner than in PP.

Until recently we had editorial control within the club and now that it is left to the discretion on a commercial publisher (Archant) they have zero knowledge of the Club, the Porsche marque or the needs of our members. What matters to Archant is the how much profit they can make from each monthly magazine. This is quite evident by the number of life style and non motoring adverts.

What PP needs is an editor who is enthusiastic about Porsche cars, the Porsche Club and understands the needs of its members.

Above all it needs to be edited in Cornbury House.
 
Peter_Bull said:
I think its quite sad that that PP has become so commercially orientated.

I do understand that while Porsche contribute substantial funds to the club, they in return, are allocated a set number of pages FOC. This arrangement has been in place for many years and accepted by all members as a 'benefit' to the insights of Porsche itself, but even this is morphing into a great sales pitch. Unfortunately we can usually see these same 'stories' in other motoring publications, sometimes sooner than in PP.

Until recently we had editorial control within the club and now that it is left to the discretion on a commercial publisher (Archant) they have zero knowledge of the Club, the Porsche marque or the needs of our members. What matters to Archant is the how much profit they can make from each monthly magazine. This is quite evident by the number of life style and non motoring adverts.

What PP needs is an editor who is enthusiastic about Porsche cars, the Porsche Club and understands the needs of its members.

Above all it needs to be edited in Cornbury House.
For some time now I've had the feeling that the team at Cornbury House have very little editorial control over Porsche Post and you've pretty much confirmed it Peter. I sincerely hope something is done about this at the next club officials meeting...
 

Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

Back
Top