MRS Access

[Topgun 30-06]

Dont rush the good things in life TG

That's the first time I've ever heard of taking a dump described like that

 

[hoshour]

I don't understand the obsession with access to old PDFs of the MRS. People who get the two journals already have the print version of all the MRSs. Why do they need the PDFs?

I think it is because they used to be able to just subscribe to one journal and still get all the MRSs from both journals. IMO the company did not do the best job of thinking that deal though. I guess they were trying to be generous, but that setup was seriously flawed.

It really should have been set up so that EHJ subscribers had access to just EHJ MRSs and EBJ subscribers had access to EBJ MRSs. Here's Peter getting all the MRS content from EBJ by only subscribing to EHJ and there's Paul, the guy who pays for both journals. They both get the same MRS content. That's not rational pricing.

Second, producing the other journal costs money in terms of paying writers, design, printing, distribution and other costs. Why give away one of its most important features, in fact the main or even only reason some subscribers are on board? That's also irrational.

I know people don't like to give up what they already have. Whenever that happens, people are going to complain. And, complaining is easy, even over $10 or $15. Griping is especially easy on a forum. But if you think about it, the new setup makes much more sense.

The price for the digital version is extremely reasonable and what you get is already much more than just year-old PDFs. It will continue to see some dramatic improvements over the next couple of years.

As far as the print journals, Eastmans' gives a hefty discount to subscribe to the second journal and get the other half of the MRS. It adds a whopping $15/year, the price of a pizza, for a tremendous amount of information. Then you have all your MRS.

For what the MRS means to people in terms of planning expensive hunts into which they pour tons of effort and months of dreams, in terms of quality advice and information, the two-journal MRS is EXTREMELY cheap.

People pay hundreds or thousands of dollars a year in application fees, tag and license costs and grouse about whether it costs an extra $15 for the other journal or another $10 for the digital subscription?

That's my perspective. Understand that although I work for the company, I don't speak for the company.

Dave Hoshour
Research Editor
Eastmans' Publishing

 

[Musket Man]

I don't understand the obsession with access to old PDFs of the MRS. People who get the two journals already have the print version of all the MRSs. Why do they need the PDFs?

I think it is because they used to be able to just subscribe to one journal and still get all the MRSs from both journals. IMO the company did not do the best job of thinking that deal though. I guess they were trying to be generous, but that setup was seriously flawed.

It really should have been set up so that EHJ subscribers had access to just EHJ MRSs and EBJ subscribers had access to EBJ MRSs. Here's Peter getting all the MRS content from EBJ by only subscribing to EHJ and there's Paul, the guy who pays for both journals. They both get the same MRS content. That's not rational pricing.

Second, producing the other journal costs money in terms of paying writers, design, printing, distribution and other costs. Why give away one of its most important features, in fact the main or even only reason some subscribers are on board? That's also irrational.

I know people don't like to give up what they already have. Whenever that happens, people are going to complain. And, complaining is easy, even over $10 or $15. Griping is especially easy on a forum. But if you think about it, the new setup makes much more sense.

The price for the digital version is extremely reasonable and what you get is already much more than just year-old PDFs. It will continue to see some dramatic improvements over the next couple of years.

As far as the print journals, Eastmans' gives a hefty discount to subscribe to the second journal and get the other half of the MRS. It adds a whopping $15/year, the price of a pizza, for a tremendous amount of information. Then you have all your MRS.

For what the MRS means to people in terms of planning expensive hunts into which they pour tons of effort and months of dreams, in terms of quality advice and information, the two-journal MRS is EXTREMELY cheap.

People pay hundreds or thousands of dollars a year in application fees, tag and license costs and grouse about whether it costs an extra $15 for the other journal or another $10 for the digital subscription?

That's my perspective. Understand that although I work for the company, I don't speak for the company.

Dave Hoshour
Research Editor
Eastmans' Publishing

I can understand that guys that just subscribed to 1 journal used to get access to the MRS in both and I can see where maybe they should have just had access to the MRS's in the 1 they subscribed too. But now us guys that subscribe to the paper copy dont have access to any MRS online. I subscribe to both journals in hard copy, so I wasnt getting something for nothing before. It was nice to be able to look at past MRS's online, but most of why I am unhappy about this is because some issues arrive in the mail very close to the draw entry deadline and I used to be able to look at what was not in my mail box yet online and now I cant do that without paying for a separate digital subscription. So I feel like I am having to pay for my subscription to both journals 2X just to see an MRS or 2 a week or 2 ahead of when it would arrive in my mail box.

 

[OregonJim]

I'm a little late to this thread but I have more questions than answers.
The least of which is how I can get the Last 5 MRS files that I don't have saved.

I'll attempt to answer that question Dave, and I think some folks earlier in the thread answered that one as well.
(everything after your first paragraph makes sense)
I have saved all (most) the MRS to my laptop.
I like having them with me when I travel and I don't take a bookcase full of old mags with me in the RV when I tow it out to Wyoming.
Sure I have the print copies...... and I guess I can scan the ones until I figure out if I want to switch to pay the extra to get a digital in a couple of years when my subscription runs out.

In my humble opinion it would have made sense to offer a digital subscription of one year to all current subscribers.
You develop a following then offer it for a fee.
I'm feeling much like others.....(unless I am missing something) I have renewed my (EHJ & EBHJ) subscriptions with the previous access to a web based MRS that I can't get anymore without paying more.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

Very simple answer to your question for me Dave! I don't want to save a ton of printed magazines year after year just to have access to the MRS information. Usually I keep the magazines for a year and then they go in the recycle bin. It was very simple going onto the site and logging into the MRS on the computer to get whatever I wanted to look at with no worry about storing magazines somewhere. Now with no warning whatsoever that was taken away from me and what I was paying when I went in the other day and it was gone! Say what you want about the good deals and prices, but when you treat customers like that and take away something they had and now want more for it, that might seem like good business strategy to those who changed it, but it obviously won't make a lot of customers happy and without us the Eastmans wouldn't be in business! Normally when you get one person complaining about something the odds are that there are at least another ten with the same feeling that might not say anything, but will vote with their wallet! All the company would need to do is continue the feature with existing subscribers and then have a reasonable fee for ones like myself to add on to the price we're already paying to continue getting access to the digital version when our subscription expires if we want it. That seems very simple to me and I'm very surprised that wasn't included in the changes that were made with no warning. That's my take on it.

 

[hoshour]

MM, it does take time to get the magazine to the printer and for them to get it to you so it is nice to have the digitial version that doesn't have to go that route.

We try to get subscribers the print magazine a month before the application deadlines but we are at the states' mercy over when the state gets us the information we need for the MRS. No state info - big hole in the MRS.

Some states can be very frustrating to deal with on that score. We are working with them to get the information earlier and have made some significant progress on that front this year in some states.

Going back to rational pricing, it costs money to put out the digital version. It's not like we just post what we had for the print version. There's a lot of additional content and staff to work with it. That has to be paid for, so there is a subscription cost.

I understand your frustration, but again, we are not talking about major dollars here for the digital subscription. It is a small additional cost, but it also additional benefits in terms of what all the digital does and will have to offer.

 

[hoshour]

There are very simple solutions to clearing the space the print versions take up - 1) scan the old MRSs - my scanner will scan an MRS in color in about 60 seconds and today I don't know how people get along without one, 2) tear out the MRS from the old mags, 3) pay a small amount of money for the digital version.

Besides, why do you want to keep more than the last year's MRS anyway? The PDFs that were on the website were all over a year old.

 

[OregonJim]

Very simple answer to your question for me Dave! I don't want to save a ton of printed magazines year after year just to have access to the MRS information. Usually I keep the magazines for a year and then they go in the recycle bin. It was very simple going onto the site and logging into the MRS on the computer to get whatever I wanted to look at with no worry about storing magazines somewhere. Now with no warning whatsoever that was taken away from me and what I was paying when I went in the other day and it was gone! Say what you want about the good deals and prices, but when you treat customers like that and take away something they had and now want more for it, that might make good business strategy to make money for the ones who changed it, but it obviously won't make a lot of people happy. Normally when you get one person complaining about something the odds are that there are at least another ten with the same feeling that might not say anything, but will vote with their wallet! All the company would need to do is have a reasonable fee for ones like myself to add on to the price we're already paying to continue getting access to the digital version. That seems very simple to me and I'm very surprised that wasn't included in the changes that were made with no warning. That's my take on it.

I guess thats the point I was trying to make.
Would I pay a bit more since I would now get full digital editions, in addition to MRS which I had before....yes.
That would be superior marketing! Show me the advantage!

I honestly haven't checked how much more it will cost me, but a good marketing effort would be punching me in the face with the benefit rather than making me convince myself that I should buy the whole enchilada.

 

[OregonJim]

There are very simple solutions to clearing the space the print versions take up - 1) scan the old MRSs - my scanner will scan an MRS in color in about 60 seconds and today I don't know how people get along without one, 2) tear out the MRS from the old mags, 3) pay a small amount of money for the digital version.

Besides, why do you want to keep more than the last year's MRS anyway? The PDFs that were on the website were all over a year old.

REALLY Dave?
Ok maybe I'm the only one who looks at what a unit (and state) looked like two or three years ago.
Funny, I recall this really great article in the MRS on how draws worked but I can't seem to find my magazine that contained it (who wrote that darn thing?) Thats right I loaned it to a hunting buddy because I planned to download it.
Terrible luck, I can't get into the MRS now to save it to the laptop.

 

[hoshour]

OJ, so what you're saying is that you don't like the way the digital version was rolled out? How would you have done it differently?

 

[hoshour]

REALLY Dave?
Ok maybe I'm the only one who looks at what a unit (and state) looked like two or three years ago.

The new MRS setup now shows three years of harvest results and a 3-year average and also shows the tags for the last two years. We also now show the trend for the unit. What else would you like to see historical data on? We alkso now show past trophy quality and predicted trophy quality. Maybe it is something that can be incorporated.

 

[hoshour]

I'm a little late to this thread but I have more questions than answers.
The least of which is how I can get the Last 5 MRS files that I don't have saved.

I'll attempt to answer that question Dave, and I think some folks earlier in the thread answered that one as well.
(everything after your first paragraph makes sense)
I have saved all (most) the MRS to my laptop.
I like having them with me when I travel and I don't take a bookcase full of old mags with me in the RV when I tow it out to Wyoming.
Sure I have the print copies...... and I guess I can scan the ones until I figure out if I want to switch to pay the extra to get a digital in a couple of years when my subscription runs out.

In my humble opinion it would have made sense to offer a digital subscription of one year to all current subscribers.
You develop a following then offer it for a fee.
I'm feeling much like others.....(unless I am missing something) I have renewed my (EHJ & EBHJ) subscriptions with the previous access to a web based MRS that I can't get anymore without paying more.

A free year is one way to do it. Don't you think we still would have had people complaining that what they used to get for free they now have to pay for? It seems like it would have only put off the complaints I'm hearing now to a year later.

 

[OregonJim]

I would have liked to have found out about it some other way than on here.
My bad I've been spending more time researching hunts than researching magazine delivery.
I honestly don't know how it was rolled out.... did I get a subscriber email?
I guess I just was shocked to learn that I don't still have a computer version of MRS.

I honestly don't have room to complain.
I've been paying full renewal when I could have Digital and Print for the same price by using a military discount.
I guess I'll see if I can retro!!!!

 

[hoshour]

TG, just so I get what you're saying, you are bugged that there was no preannouncement? I'm doing my best to listen to you guys and understand where you're coming from.

 

[OregonJim]

A free year is one way to do it. Don't you think we still would have had people complaining that what they used to get for free they now have to pay for? It seems like it would have only put off the complaints I'm hearing now to a year later.

YES you would..... my point is that (IMO) you get folks used to reading the digital version with a free period.
It sounds like that folks could get a free trial..... again I just missed it!

 

[Topgun 30-06]

OJ, so what you're saying is that you don't like the way the digital version was rolled out? How would you have done it differently?

Geez Dave! All three of us have responded and told you exactly how we would have handled it. I logged into the MRS the other day when I was trying to help UH with a problem he was having finding the digital stuff and that's how I found out I was locked out! How would you like it if that happened to you as a paying customer? You might have equipment to do all the steps you mentioned (scanning, etc.) and know how to use it. However, I'll be dipped if I would go through all of that even if I did when all the company needed to do was exactly what I mentioned in my last post. Giving no notice to loyal subscribers that this was coming and pulling the plug like that was just poor business IMHO! Then to top it off I go in and get the three month free trial offer and find out I can't even save it to a file without being a computer PHD! I deleted the whole dang thing and said the heck with it! Have a good evening as I'm going to bed!

 

[OregonJim]

Again, I think the rub is the loss of the on line MRS files for print subscribers.
I'm warming up to the idea of a digital version of both.
But again I'm convincing myself of the value!!!!!
Especially at the same price I've been paying!

 

[hoshour]

Let me put this another way.

Given that the pricing model for the past MRS PDFs wasn't the most rational, and given that there are costs to producing a digital version, tell me how you guys would have handled the rollout and pricing of the digital version. It's no good saying you'd just give it away for free.

Tell me in your opinion how the company should have handled it and not had you complaining.

From what I've heard, the only things the company could have done differently were to make a preannouncement or to give it away free. The first might have been do-able and since I'm not privy to everything, maybe there was something posted or said. The second, give away something that costs for free is not good business IMO.

 

[OregonJim]

OK Dave,
Not trying to be difficult but I'll try once more.

I would start by illustrating the advantage of the digital subscription.
For me.... I think having the ability to both download and store, as well as read online, is a great selling point.
Is it enough to articulate both print and digital; perhaps. Knowing that the MRS is now dynamic rather than static is a plus.
Having continued access to older MRS articles would help.

Again the big gripe is that online MRS is not available for both (either) print or digital.
You hit the nail on the head in some ways.... it was a service that was previously available and there is no way to completely aleviate the acid reflux of that. Does it make sense that print MRS comes with the mailed magazine and digital MRS comes with the digital subscription: YES.
In answer to the rollout question......Again, I found out here. So I suppose my answer is that there might have been better communication.

My suggestion is to convince me that it is better to have both!
Thats really all I can give you.

 

[Musket Man]

MM, it does take time to get the magazine to the printer and for them to get it to you so it is nice to have the digitial version that doesn't have to go that route.

We try to get subscribers the print magazine a month before the application deadlines but we are at the states' mercy over when the state gets us the information we need for the MRS. No state info - big hole in the MRS.

Some states can be very frustrating to deal with on that score. We are working with them to get the information earlier and have made some significant progress on that front this year in some states.

Going back to rational pricing, it costs money to put out the digital version. It's not like we just post what we had for the print version. There's a lot of additional content and staff to work with it. That has to be paid for, so there is a subscription cost.

I understand your frustration, but again, we are not talking about major dollars here for the digital subscription. It is a small additional cost, but it also additional benefits in terms of what all the digital does and will have to offer.

I understand it takes time to get it to the printer and I understand that some states regs (Nevada in particular) come out very close to app deadlines. I also understand it costs something to put the digital version out. What I dont understand is why us hard copy (paper) subscribers cant view the MRS online like we used to. Does that cost extra too? Also you say "its a small additional cost" (to get the digital version) yet I cant find anywhere on the Eastmans site where I can add digital to my current hard copy subscription without paying for a full separate digital subscription. Why should I have to pay for 2 separate subscriptions to 2 magazines (4 subscriptions total) when I used to pay for 2 (paper EHJ & EBJ) and get everything I wanted. Us paper only subscribers are now getting alot less then we used to get for the same price and I think that is where alot of us hard copy subscribers are coming from here. When a customer used to get something and all of a sudden he doesnt get it he wants to know why.