Should I subscribe to SCD again?

[ALR-bishop]

I get it. It will never be what it was. One reason it is smaller is there is much less advertising. Like print media in general the internet in undermining it. I get it because they sometimes have good articles on Topps sets and general hobby updates. I am glad I get it but do not highly recommend it

[mmcgruff]

Thanks a lot Al! I may end up getting it again after all.

[Cardboard Junkie]

I don't recommend subscribing. It is very poorly written and full of empty articles.

[RobertGT]

I canceled about five years ago while SCD was still carrying 10-page spreads for the Coaches Corner auction house, which somehow managed to come up with a Babe Ruth/Lou Gehrig autographed baseball for sale every month. Those balls would sell for about $350.

Beyond that, I found the magazine to be way too cozy with advertisers in the industry it purportedly covered. The magazine portrayed Bill Mastro (now facing jail) as a God among Gods and every third "news" article was a puff piece about No. 1 advertiser Mr. Mint Alan Rosen.

Made me want to retch.

[mmcgruff]

I appreciate all the comments guys. Seems there has been no improvement.
Rick

[jerrys]

Yes the Internet is the main cause for the near collapse of the SCD but other collectibles such as coin collecting publications faced the same fate. However, Coin World seems to be doing quite well. It was changed to a full color magazine and has about 200 pages of interesting news, articles, columns, advertisements and price and show guides monthly.

As with any business - good management is the difference.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Several years ago I was a subscriber. I had gotten married and let the subscription lapse since I had no money at that point anyway. About a year ago, I signed up for it again. When the first issue arrived, I thought the other half must surely be arriving the next day! It was/is a shell of what it once was. Other posters have already explained how digital and web based opportunities have diminished it. Honestly, there isn't much in there these days outside of numerous advertisements. The auctions they advertise are often for crazy high dollar stuff. Every now and then, there might be an article that interests me but not very often. I have known for a while that I need to cancel, but I just haven't yet. This is partly because I have some good memories associated with receiving SCD and tearing through it and enjoying it. I also remember a buddy of mine spending a bunch of dough on Coaches Corner auctions...not exactly a solid investment. . Anyway, I will most likely cancel. I can't recommend it to anyone.

[xplainer]

Originally Posted by RobertGT

I canceled about five years ago while SCD was still carrying 10-page spreads for the Coaches Corner auction house, which somehow managed to come up with a Babe Ruth/Lou Gehrig autographed baseball for sale every month. Those balls would sell for about $350.

Beyond that, I found the magazine to be way too cozy with advertisers in the industry it purportedly covered. The magazine portrayed Bill Mastro (now facing jail) as a God among Gods and every third "news" article was a puff piece about No. 1 advertiser Mr. Mint Alan Rosen.

Made me want to retch.

Overall, I have to agree with the above.

I got it until about four years ago. Then I woke up to how the articles were interwoven. Much to the concern of their advertisers.

No, not for me.

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by xplainer

Overall, I have to agree with the above.

I got it until about four years ago. Then I woke up to how the articles were interwoven. Much to the concern of their advertisers.

No, not for me.

Much has changed in the hobby and SPORTS COLLECTORS DIGEST since four years ago. All Coaches Corner advertising is long gone. T. S. O'Connell is long gone. Alan Rosen is now gone from SCD. The magazine never shied away from reporting the investigation and conviction of Bill Mastro. It is not illegal nor unethical to try to back your advertisers, though I do not recall that SCD ran articles lauding Coaches Corner. When it finally became known they were selling bogus memorabilia, they were dropped, period.

SPORTS COLLECTORS DIGEST has essentially had to reinvent themselves almost several times in this swiftly changing hobby world. As under-staffed as they are, they are doing rather well, and the free-lance articles keep coming, with many of them being pertinent and very worthwhile reading.

If you choose not to forgive them for past transgressions, that's your choice. I hope you're as tough on yourself as you are on them. If you won't give them another chance, maybe that's just as well---for you and them.

Me? I'm sticking by them! I like what I'm seeing and reading! ---Brian Powell

[ALR-bishop]

I posted when this thread started that I still get it and enjoy some of the articles, particularly by Lemke and Vrechek.

But a couple issues back they ran a rather long article by some guy ( do not remember name) who gave a lengthy opinion about why two bats thought in the hobby to be genuine, the bat used by Ruth to hit the first home run in Yankee stadium and a bat used by DiMaggio during the hitting streak, were likely not genuine. I know nothing about bats other than what I learned at the Louisville Slugger bat museum, and do not collect them. But I found the article interesting

In the next issue Bartsch had a very short note saying he had failed to adequately fact check the article and author. Nothing more about what he had discovered wrong with the multi page article/analysis. Pretty disappointing. In his defense I think his resources are slim there these days.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by brian1961

When it finally became known they were selling bogus memorabilia, they were dropped, period.

While I am a big fan of yours, Brian, I believe this statement to be factually untrue. SCD took Coaches Corner's money for years AFter they had been exposed as a fraudulent business. It was years.....A lot of people really got turned off by that. We talked about their ads for YEARS on this board and nothing was done about not letting them advertise.