O/T New Razzle

[Paul Garfield]

Hi everyone,

I thought I'd drop you a line to let you know about the new issue of Razzle (21/2) - in the shops this week. Alongside a selection of cracking readers' wives and stunning models, there are some seriously saucy sets of Suzi Jarman and Caroline Gault that are pretty much certain to get the juices flowing! Hope you enjoy it?

Paul Garfield
Razzle Ed

[Elton Dong]

I thought your mag went 'Shite' when it stoped having the 'Razzle romps' I guess i just missed Karen Partington and Shanine Linton in stockings and uniform covering each other
custard ,it was Kinky and Naughty and only one pound forty
and then it went all couples haveing 'fake sex' yawn.....

[Paul Garfield]

Hi Elton,

well, you can't please everyone all of the time - if we still had the romps and the custard sets, we'd doubtless get letters from people saying that they didn't like that. As far as I'm concerned, Razzle should be chock-full of gorgeous looking women getting all hot and bothered, plus the best selection of readers' wives we can find. Nothing too glammy and obviously posed, just sexy models who are obviously having a great time getting their togs off. Give it a go - you might find that you like it and, at only ?1.95, I think it's still great value for money.

Cheers,

Paul

[Elton Dong]

Fair point !
But how do you justify the price when so much porn can be enjoyed for free on the net ?
Their are a lot of free readers wives yahoo sites for example.
What i miss is the older girls ,yer new faces are always welcome
but over night you got rid of the 'old school'faces (and this is before the internet porn boom cut sales -think about it)where as before new girls were integrated into the format .
How long have you worked for 'Razzle' because i grew up on it !
It was'nt broken so why did you have to fix it?
sorry to moan on i know you only came here to 'Spam' the group so
maybe i should just invest in 'www.oldschoolRazzle.com as my website and revive what (i think)was a winning format.
cheers

[TopShelfBlue]

Elton Dong wrote:
"How do you justify the price when so much porn can be enjoyed on the net for free?"

Er, so what exactly are publishers supposed to do, give porn mags away for free?

Charging the price of a pint for 100 pages of naked girls is hardly a rip-off is it?

And anyway, this free porn on the net is not 'free'. Initial cost of your PC, your monthly subscription to an internet provider, cost of your phone line/calls??

[Elton Dong]

Charging the price of a pint for a pint is a rip off !
monthly subscription to an internet provider is as little as ?12-?15 , six of your mag's worth !! (you can down load a lot of porn in a month and chose the type of porn you want) but this is not my point,both of you spam this forum hoping to get punter's to part with their cash ..at least give them what they want ...in the case of the mag's you put out
it reminds me of good old 'D S'in the 80's with all the blobs obscureing the good stuff and in the case of 'Razzle' why did'nt they just change the name because it's a different product..

[Chris]

Hello

Going to show my age now but I remember when Razzle first came out and was ten bob sorry 50p. Also do you remember when it used to be issued every fortnight? Hope this doesn't give PG any ideas.

I used to buy Razzle every month but not now!! I started to go off it when all the fake sex sets started to appear and also most of the girls look really young. For some reason Razzle seeem to like the teenie look? How about some sets of ladies aged 30+? As for readers wives....no sorry you have to be joking!!! Most of the girls are models. I've seen Autumn and Sandy Caine in this section!

I used to love Razzle when it had regular girls...Debbie Ashby, Marie Harper, Mitzy May, Sammy Jane,gorgeous Lynn Armitage and my all time fav Sadie Foxx. THOSE WERE THE DAYS!!!

How about a new section called THOSE WERE THE DAYS in which you could feature some of the above?? Better still how about a Then and Now section?

Chris

[TopShelfBlue]

Okay Elton, if you really think a couple of quid for a magazine is a rip-off that's your point of view and good luck to you.

Yes, myself and other editors post on this forum from time to time to plug our mags (and also offer information about models/films/suppliers etc.) but it's NOT spamming.

You talk about 'giving the punters what they want'. As I've mentioned in a previous post, there's (at an educated guess) somewhere between 300,000 - 500,000 porn mags sold every month in the UK. There must be some punters out there getting what they want.

[Paul L]

Elton,

You may feel that the magazine is a rip-off as it is not to your particular tastes, but every product whether it be a porn mag or not, needs to change with the times, and experiment with new ideas.

I know nothing about the state of affairs with Razzle, but I can presume that they still have lots of regular readers who are happy with their content and style. There is absolutely nothing in this world that everyone will agree on, so although you do not like the style there are many others who do.

I know from experience of running an adult website that you cannot please everyone. I get the occassional email from a disgruntled member complaining that they want more hardcore on the site, or more stockings, or less stockings. We cannot cater for everyone, so we have to cater with what the majority like, and for me, the majority of our members like the style and format we have got.

Things do and will change and if I found that we made a change and loads of members emailed complaining we would scrap that idea and revert back to the original, but you cannot please them all.

There is now untold amounts of choice for your porn, both online and in print, and if you don't like their offering go elsewhere and try something different.

Cheers

Paul L

[Mayfair/MensWorld Editor]

Consumer choice. It's the very heart of capitalism. If you want it, buy it. If you don't, buy something else.

Or wait until it's been put in a white plastic bag and dumped on a golf course.

This is all very amusing, mind. Elton, aren't you really called David T.......? Thought so.