Re: MCM - Digest V1 #143

[Dave Gomberg <gomberg@wcf.com>]

At 01:47 PM 9/16/1999 -0400, Neil Frank wrote:
>>Yes, but it won't fit in a 40-48 page mag (60% text/figures). Maybe that is
>the list for the year? <g> We can still benefit from a description for the
>typical issu(to make sure it doesn't include too many collecting trips <g>.
>Do you want to include certain topics in each issue? 

I guess I would like my shopping list to be a list of articles for the
first two issues (six months).  Maybe a beginner article in each issue.
Something like that.    I should mention that Neil has generously offered
to write an article comparing "chain" swords.  I consider that a junior
review of the genus.   Junior only because Neil is not holding himself out
as a professional taxonomist and is  not  proposing to formally review the
genus.

>
>And what is the expected number of INITIAL issues per year: n=12? =6? or =4?

Sorry, should have answered this long ago.   Four.

>How does AGA's contribution change as a function of "n".

The cost would likely go up slightly with n.  N=4, $12; N=6, $15; N=12
(just writing that frightens me) $=18 (maybe).   I would be concerned that
we have top quality articles.

>And I was planning to take my compensation
>>in stock (I would expect to earn about $20 per hour for editing PAM).
>what is stock (issues of PAM?)

No, ownership shares.   What the angels get and what AGA gets if it decides
it wants to buy some.   You might get issues as a bonus  ;^)>

>would AGA get issues as return for investment, if so how many? Is this what
>will happen to unsold issues?

AGA would get issues mailed to its members for $12 per year each member.

There are no projected surplus issues.   

Investors could buy stock issues at cost if they want.   But I want to make
sure we have them to sell too.

>[To everyone: if AGA gets these issues, what will be do with them? Who will
>be entitled to sell back issues.]

AGA should not be thinking about back issues as a big deal.   PAM will sell
back issues.

>DaveG: As majority stock holder, can AGA become the official source of back
>issues?

If the minority stockholders have no objection, I can't see why not.   But
why would it want to bother?   As a fundraiser?   To keep volunteers busy?

>>I would start with 40-48 pages TOTAL, 60% editorial, 40%  ads.
>this sounds good to me. It essentially matches the current TAG for
>text/figures.
>> As to whether AGA gives a membership to a contributor to the AGA pages
>>that is purely an AGA question and has nothing to do with PAM.
>seems reasonable.

Thank you for your support.

--
Dave Gomberg, San Francisco            mailto:gomberg@wcf.com
For low cost CO2 systems that work:  http://www.wcf.com/co2iron 
Tropica MasterGrow in the USA:      http://www.wcf.com/tropica 
-----------------------------------------------------------------