Tamar,

I'm impressed. I thought you blew the post off...


The relevant years are as follows:

1995 84.00
1996 80.00
1997 78.00
1998 75.33
1999 61.33

These by the way - are the very same years that I used as being the best for FoxTalk as well - so I am being 100% consistient on that point.

The average page count for these years is 76 (75.732). If you take 1999 out - the avergate jumps to just over 79 pages.

Indeed...the page count is not exactly half of what it once was. But what difference does that really make? Instead of saying that the page count is 50% of what it once was - it is more correct to say that the pagecount is 58% of what it once was.

Theses are relevant years because they cover when VFP 3,5, and 6 were released. And yes - for the most part - the magazine is at or very close to being 50% of the size it once was. Conversely, while FPA has not lost 50% of its page count - it has lost 42% of its page count. Is that really better?

Once we got past VFP 6 - the page count drops at a fairly consistient rate for 4 years. At that point, the page count dropped to an all-time low of 44 pages. I suspect this is the absolute minimum the page count can go in order to keep the magazine around.

In sum, in FPA's best years - the average was just about 80 pages. Today, the average is just over 40 pages. In all material respects, FPA's page count is roughly half of what it once was in its heyday.

How can you say that it is a stretch to say that FPA is half the magazine it used to be? At the very least - you data does not refute my point.

About the only thing you proved was that FPA's page count is not exactly half of what it was in its best days. I am more than happy to concede that - but nonetheless, that was not the primary part of my point. Based on your data - it is nowhere near a stretch to say that FPA is half the size it used to be.


How about the subscription numbers?


< JVP >




>>Count them up and report back the results. Compare the first five years with the last five years....
>>
>
>Okay, I got some time and threw all the data for FPA into a table. (What else? <g>) Most interesting to me was that even within a small chunk of time, the page count tended to vary--up one month, down the next. Here are the yearly averages:
>
>

>1993       49.82
>1994       56.67
>1995       84.00
>1996       80.00
>1997       78.00
>1998       75.33
>1999       61.33
>2000       52.00
>2001       46.00
>2002       44.67
>2003       44.00
>

>
>Average page count for the first 5 years (1993-1997): 69.79
>Average page count for the last 5 years (1999-2003): 49.69
>Largest issue: Oct. '95, 108 pages (includes a conference brochure in that count)
>
>Thought this data would be interesting, too. Here's the number of issues of each size:
>
>

># of pages    # of issues
>44            36
>52            32
>60             7
>68             8
>76            29
>84            14
>92             2
>108            1
>

>
>So yeah, as well all knew, the magazine is thinner than it once was. However, your premise that it's half the size it was then is something of a stretch.
>
>Tamar