Topic: New AutoWeek Combustion Chamber is under development

[Ultra]

Subscribers only after the first 30 days.  First they cut off the general discussion.  Then they cut off the forums entirely.  All because they don't know how to run them.  I really do wonder where people like rushman turn up when these kinds of policies go down.   A sad end to a nobel beginning.


Combustion Chamber


As part of our on-going efforts to improve AutoWeek.com, we will be implementing a new Combustion Chamber in the form of an article-based review and commentary system. Starting in January, you will be able to open up a dialog with AutoWeek editors, industry experts and other AutoWeek fans by submitting your feedback, comments or criticism. The new Combustion Chamber will provide a much better experience for everyone.

We hope you will take the time to register with the site and start commenting on stories as soon as we add this exciting new feature. It will now be possible to comment on blogs and stories from the magazine. Our goal is to improve the interactivity of the site and also allow our subscribers to have open dialogues with our editors.

Reviews and comments will always be available for reading to all visitors of our site. There will be a 30-day period where any registered user can contribute comments or reviews. Registration is a free service and takes just a minute or two. After the 30 days are up, this feature will be packaged with a print subscription to AutoWeek. A magazine subscription puts AutoWeek in your mailbox 51 weeks a year and will give you access to premium content on our web site.

[Arthur Dent]

My first reaction is: who cares? CC has been dead to me for a long time. I wonder if they think it will help generate subscriptions (doubtful since the "meat" is free on the website). Autoweek is becoming more and more irrelavent.

[Ultra]

Autoweek is becoming more and more irrelavent.

Agreed.  The question is, how can their model be improved to fit todays age?  Follow up question, What from their model, new and old, can we learn to make this site better? 

 

[Arthur Dent]

With internet sites providing rapid news these days Autoweek traditional mail approuch is fast becoming out dated. I suspect they'd need to convert to being web only for long term surival. I also suspect their egos won't allow it. They could also change focus and become more like C&D, R&T, MT, etc but thirdly suspect we have enough of those and they don't have sufficent brand new power to succeed.

[Rich]

It's my understanding that the web content will be drastically reduced for non-subscribers/CC members, not unlike many of the mag sites already, FWIW.

[Boxer2500]

My first reaction is: who cares? CC has been dead to me for a long time. I wonder if they think it will help generate subscriptions (doubtful since the "meat" is free on the website). The publishing industry as a whole is becoming more and more irrelavent.

Fixed it for ya.

[Arthur Dent]

My first reaction is: who cares? CC has been dead to me for a long time. I wonder if they think it will help generate subscriptions (doubtful since the "meat" is free on the website). The publishing industry as a whole is becoming more and more irrelavent.

Fixed it for ya.

Indeed but those that specialize on delivering news will be the first to go. Those with more in depth articles instead of being news/press release repeaters will likely fare better.

[MG]

The new Combustion Chamber will provide a much better experience for everyone.

Self congratulatory confabulation of ego driven eccentricities.

Note to Combustion Chamber: Fuck off and die.   

[Stephen M]

The question is, how can their model be improved to fit todays age?

1) A subscription could grant you access to ALL previous issues, decades worth, in electronic form on their website. With high-res graphics suitable for printing your own mini-posters. The most valuable asset they have is the tremendous archives of photos, writing, and road test reviews.  Don't tell autoweek (or R&T, or hot rod, or any other such publication), but I'd pay a fortune for electronic access to back issues. Hell, I'd even read the ads and old race stories. I think the as-it-happened reports of key auto events would be more interesting than the gray-bearded reminisces they tend to publish.

2) They could also treat subscribers more as members of a club, and less as sources of income. Get the readers more involved, maybe look into negotiating discounts for carfax accounts, SCCA membership, classified listings, classic auto insurance, etc.

3) Leverage more user generated content. Get some slick, custom blog-like software to let people set up build logs of restorations and project cars, with easy updates and photo uploading. Solicit first hand reporting from the readership for races and auto shows, and abstract the best submissions on the front page.

Reality checks:

#1 Isn't going to happen. I've sent this suggestion to them multiple times over the years in various forms, and never got more than a "we're constantly exploring new options" -type non-response.

#2 The subscriber as $$$ mentality is too pervasive in magazine culture. The bulk subscription re-sellers continually offer me, a long-term subscriber, better rates than Autoweek themselves does. This is insulting.

#3 They can try, but they're a day late and a dollar short. I think Streetfire and Cardomain have already filled these needs.

So there you go. Lucky for them, I like having something physical to take with me into the "reading room", so they'll get my dollars for the time being.

[Ultra]

The new Combustion Chamber will provide a much better experience for everyone.

Self congratulatory confabulation of ego driven eccentricities.

Note to Combustion Chamber: Fuck off and die.   

 

[Jagman]

I've noticed that more and more the new car articles read as if written by the manufacturers, it's not just the pages of glowing praise for everything they test, but the way they gush just reads falsely to me.........

I'm getting tired of it, I used to look forward to my weekly dose, but there's not much appeal in it anymore...........

[Boxer2500]

As recently as last year, I would read Autoweek cover-to-virtual-cover on the webpage. Now, they're lucky if I stop by once a month, and I always feel like I'm reading a sales brochure. Same goes for the major monthly rags, although Motor Trend is on the upswing with their writing.

[Stephen M]

You know, just maybe consumer reports is on to something with that whole "don't accept advertising & buy our test cars off the lot" approach. It's just a shame they review cars like they review dishwashers and other appliances.

All credibility, no passion 

Then again, if you were lusting after, say, the new MX-5 or M3, would you really wait 18 months for an honest as-delivered road test article, or would you snap up all the "Exclusive sneak preview!" magazines. You know, the ones that qualify the driving impressions thusly:

"...although we were limited to 20 mph in our short, chaparoned parking lot test drive of the preliminary pre-preproduction prototype, it's clear that the new ______ sets new standards for....."

 

[Boxer2500]

Say what you will about CR, their car reviews are spot-on for 95% of the motoring public. You know the ones, folks who treat a car purchase just like a washing machine purchase. Whenever my mother or one of her ilk is car shopping, I point them in CR's direction.

[otto]

I dont really belong there anyway as my interests are not what they want. To bad they closed the first site as that was at critical mass and hot. No More.

otto

[Ming]

Hmmm - between being a Mod at GM Insidenews and visiting Suzuki-Forums.com regularly, I doubt I'd have time for the AutoWeek combustion chamber.

But this place just has too many personalities for me to ignore. 

[Ultra]

But this place just has too many personalities for me to ignore. 

 

[GRAYWOLF]

I've noticed that more and more the new car articles read as if written by the manufacturers, it's not just the pages of glowing praise for everything they test, but the way they gush just reads falsely to me.........

I'm getting tired of it, I used to look forward to my weekly dose, but there's not much appeal in it anymore...........

Kind of like when C&D does "truck tests" and all the winners are cars, except in the pick-up category?

[Otto Puzzell]

I was thinking the exact thing as I read that article.

[Stephen M]

1) A subscription could grant you access to ALL previous issues, decades worth, in electronic form on their website. <snip>

3) Leverage more user generated content. <snip>

Quoting myself for emphasis, since this thread is a few months old....

Anyway, just thought it worth mentioning that the latest issue of Autoweek talks about offering electronic access to the entire 50 year history of their publication, from competition press through the current issue. Looks like it's going to be a substantial fee, but we'll see. Also, in the last six months they've published full length columns from readers, begun a feature called "reader's garage" (unsurprisingly slanted towards those readers more well heeled than myself), and otherwise tried to bring their publication into the late 90's in terms of online content and reader involvement.

We'll see how it plays out. I kinda see it as steps in the right direction...ie, steps towards autoblog and other such sites that are running away from them. 

[Shay]

So they say they have learned the error of their ways................

I got this email today.......

Dear AutoWeek Combustion Chamber charter users,

AutoWeek's "Combustion Chamber" forum (2004-2006) was an extremely successful social network thanks to the loyalty and participation that you and your 20,000+ friends brought to the party.

At the time the decision was made to take down the Chamber, it was done so for what were believed to be solid reasons. Still, little did we realize how it would greatly affect our community of car enthusiasts -- you. In hindsight, removing all of us from digitally sharing experiences through the Combustion Chamber was the wrong thing to do.

Fortunately, we are not above admitting mistakes. It's time to make it right.

We just spend 6 months searching the latest technology in forum software that would best serve your needs. We think you will find the new "Car Life Community," powered by Pluck, to be superior in every way to other forums on the web. Why: It's fast, simple to use, and allows photo uploads, avatars... everything you need to make this a great place to hang out.

In addition, we have a new commitment here at AutoWeek. You will "see" editors in the forums contributing along with everyone else. This is not lip service but a mandate clearly stated to all.

We do this because we learn from you. And because we are all members of the community of the car clan.

We're pleased to announce the re-opening of the AutoWeek forums at this address: http://www.autoweek.com/section/carlife_forums

[Stephen M]

We think you will find the new "Car Life Community," powered by Pluck, to be superior in every way to other forums on the web. Why: It's fast, simple to use, and allows photo uploads, avatars... everything you need to make this a great place to hang out.

I got the same e-mail as Shay. The excerpt above, in which they assume their new forum is superior for offering features that EVERY OTHER FORUM has had SINCE THE DAWN OF TIME doesn't speak well of their perspective or prospects.

The old auto rags have their strengths, and they have their place. Running an internet forum isn't one of them.

[Bezor]

Ming the old GM shill is here?  wonderful!  I obviously don't read the GM boards, and so him here with his slanted viewpoints on the American automotive industry will be interesting enough for me.     

That is if Shay doesn't run out of town in his flagrantly overthe top Mustang

[Ultra]

Ming the old GM shill is here?  wonderful!  I obviously don't read the GM boards, and so him here with his slanted viewpoints on the American automotive industry will be interesting enough for me.     

That is if Shay doesn't run out of town in his flagrantly overthe top Mustang

Ming does drop by once in a while, usually when least expected.