SAMI woes

[HartDeco]

24 minutes ago, Paul Bradley said:

Personally, the statement that most intrigues me here is, "I have sold millions of books in the last 40 years..."  @WarthogMKL how old are Mark and Sophie, the owners/directors of SAM Publications? 

 

I think it's Steve Elliott who's still running the show there. Mark and Sophie are just his puppets

 

[Paul Bradley]

Which is interesting given the history of the various companies he has been involved with over the years and their fate. 

 

And I originally quit writing for SAM Publications because of him. When the ownership was changed, I was asked to re-join. I said I would only do so if it was categorically stated that he was no longer involved with the company in any way. I was given that assurance, which is why I rejoined. However, I did have my suspicions going forward which is one of the reasons why I left again for good. 

 

 

[stalal]

What a horrible way of doing business. Any idea why they are like this? I had one publication back in Jan 2020. I m still waiting for the payment after two years. The payment they promised by sending me invoice. 

[HartDeco]

15 minutes ago, stalal said:

What a horrible way of doing business. Any idea why they are like this? I had one publication back in Jan 2020. I m still waiting for the payment after two years. The payment they promised by sending me invoice. 

Yep, the same story with dozens of contributors.

Thankfully, most, if not all other magazines will pay and on time. So, don't let the actions of one fool stop you from sending your work to one of the magazines to get published.

 

[Selwyn]

22 hours ago, ckw said:

Agreed, but look carefully at any contract/agreement that may apply. I stopped working for a certain publishing group because their terms said effectively "we own everything you submit to us and can do what we like with it". Of course regardless of this you should certainly have been paid for the initial use of the article.

 

Cheers

 

Colin

The contract says that they pay you for your work. They have not paid, therefore they are in breach of contract, so any caveat saying they own the material  is void.

 

Selwyn

[Selwyn]

Another step  possible is to discover which printer is producing the magazine for them  (should be marked somewhere in the magazine)  and let them know that any future edition they print with any of your work in it signed or otherwise is a breach of your copyright, Same for the organisation who supply electronic versions over the net. That will cut off the  income stream!

Selwyn

[ckw]

2 minutes ago, Selwyn said:

The contract says that they pay you for your work. They have not paid, therefore they are in breach of contract, so any caveat saying they own the material  is void.

If that's what the contract says. In my particular experience payment and use were separate issues. In the case of use, anything submitted to **** was deemed their property. I don't think this is so unusual anymore as people often contribute material FOC, esp images, just to get their name in print. In my case, I was expected to sign a general waiver regarding ownership and usage as well as individually contracted assignments.

 

There is no question that if work was contracted for and not paid, this is a breach of contract - possibly an admin error. The repeated use is a separate matter ( in the good old days I would get paid every time an image was used - I think those days are gone).

 

The bit that really annoyed me was that the publisher claimed the right to sell on any images without me getting a penny! As a side issue, people should check the fine print on their social media and photo hosting sites - you may be surprised. 

 

Cheers

 

Colin

 

[Selwyn]

9 minutes ago, ckw said:

If that's what the contract says. In my particular experience payment and use were separate issues. In the case of use, anything submitted to **** was deemed their property. I don't think this is so unusual anymore as people often contribute material FOC, esp images, just to get their name in print. In my case, I was expected to sign a general waiver regarding ownership and usage as well as individually contracted assignments.

 

There is no question that if work was contracted for and not paid, this is a breach of contract - possibly an admin error. The repeated use is a separate matter ( in the good old days I would get paid every time an image was used - I think those days are gone).

 

The bit that really annoyed me was that the publisher claimed the right to sell on any images without me getting a penny! As a side issue, people should check the fine print on their social media and photo hosting sites - you may be surprised. 

 

Cheers

 

Colin

 

But the point is that they did not pay you, so they don't own them, so they don't have the right to sell on images they don't own.

 

Selwyn

[Des]

1 hour ago, HartDeco said:

Thankfully, most, if not all other magazines will pay and on time. So, don't let the actions of one fool stop you from sending your work to one of the magazines to get published.

 

 

Although aircraft modelling like many print magazine subjects is a niche market few would thrive if they all behaved like this and my experiences of the last few years writing occasionally for a different magazine with a different publisher is and has been completely different from my early experience like others in this and similar threads.     

 

For example and on a more positive note , got an email at lunchtime today inviting me to submit my invoice for an article due out at the end of the month for settlement due on or about publication date but as I normally take payment as goods in lieu (reckon I am now around three-quarters of the way through the catalogue) may well have had this before the next issue actually reaches the shops.

 

Advice has been offered about contacting printers etc. but if it is still the case as was explained to me several years ago by the editor of a Wedding Industry publication that shop sales cover the cost of most if not all magazine print runs but advertising brings in the profit then anyone hoping to provoke a response might wish to let the major advertisers know about the practices their products are unwittingly being associated with (making sure that you are actually looking at the magazine concerned and not similarly named but entirely innocent titles).       On the other hand looking back over recent copies it might well be that one regular full-page back-cover advertiser has perhaps bigger problems than reputation at the moment.

[ckw]

9 minutes ago, Des said:

Advice has been offered about contacting printers etc. but if it is still the case as was explained to me several years ago by the editor of a Wedding Industry publication that shop sales cover the cost of most if not all magazine print runs but advertising brings in the profit then anyone hoping to provoke a response might wish to let the major advertisers know about the practices their products are unwittingly being associated with

Exactly - many print magazines exist primarily as a vehicle for advertising. One editor told me that he calculated that without advertising the cover price of one issue would need to be £30 - £50 and that was some years ago. Whether or not an advertiser would be put off by bad practice is another matter but certainly getting advertising revenue is an uphill struggle so perhaps a whiff of scandal would be enough to turn some away.

 

Cheers

 

Colin

[DamnFockes]

21 hours ago, Paul Bradley said:

Wow, they really are pushing the bounds of legality with that page! At least three of the people listed deny any knowledge of working for SAM Publications. 

 

On top of it all, the grammar, punctuation and spelling are all atrocious! Hardly a good look for a print magazine!

 

Here's the page Rene speaks of:

 

 

 

That's absolutely hilarious. Ken Jones looks well ... 

[thepureness]

I used to build for SAMI for about 3/4 years from 2016/17 to 2020.

 

My only issue was some of my builds never got published and some times I worked extremely hard on the builds. I only stopped building for them because of the pandemic and being a front line key worker.

I don't recognise any of the names though, have they changed hands in the last two years?

 

[Paul Bradley]

2 hours ago, DamnFockes said:

That's absolutely hilarious. Ken Jones looks well ... 

 

Isn't it? 

 

I'm also told by a reliable source that one of the ladies only worked for SAM Pubs for 2 weeks (and her photo grabbed from Facebook), Jay Laverty told them in no uncertain terms where to stick their job last year, and the Ken Jones mentioned is actually a different Jones who works for a competitor and the photo was grabbed from Twitter! So lots of strangeness all round. 

[John B (Sc)]

43 minutes ago, thepureness said:

I don't recognise any of the names though, have they changed hands in the last two years?

 

 

In nominal terms, the 'ownership' of the magazines has changed - but a check via Companies House shows each successive company seems to have the same people listed as acting as Directors.

 

The editorial team has changed too over the period when you mention contributing.

Depending on exactly when you were working for them in that time period - I'm not sure of exact dates  -  you might have been briefly dealing with someone who now edits another well known, long running & reputable magazine,  or you may have been dealing with the more recent editorial team who all left last year (I believe) and are now working together to run a rather fine new venture, which is discussed in other threads in Britmodeller.

 

The 'team' listed above is all new. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by John B (Sc)

[Moggy]

This is incredible.

 

All this chicanery, this bonfire of all possible goodwill accrued over the years... The silly lies and misrepresentations.

 

All this over an (almost) defunct scale modelling magazine?!? There surely must be a more profitable field of enterprise for this range of dubious business practices.

 

RIP SAMi. Remember it and its former team(s) when they were at their zenith... and write off the dregs left at its nadir.

 

Moggy, (who feels that people that kills the joy of our hobby should be lapidated with coproliths)

[John Laidlaw]

4 minutes ago, Moggy said:

lapidated with coproliths

Had to look those up, but now wholeheartedly agree.

[John B (Sc)]

A fine geological, or perhaps palaeontological, curse ! 

 

My compliments, Moggy.

 

 

[MikeC]

On 3/3/2022 at 2:37 PM, HartDeco said:

But what was made aware of today and realy stings me is that they removed my name from the article in the latest release. Why? Do they hate me that much?  Or is there more behind their actions?

As far as I'm concerned, if they do republish anything I've written over the past few years - and that includes one or two articles that have never been published for various reasons - I hope they do omit my name.  I have no wish to be associated with SAMi any more, thank you very much.

[dipaoj]

Jumping in here a bit late with my own subscription issues … er, problems. My digital subscription to SAMI through Pocketmags renewed successfully last November, but I have yet to receive any issues for 2022. Last week I received an email from SAMI informing me that my subscription had expired. Huh? I’m pursuing the renewal and possible refund through Pocketmags but have no intention of renewing directly through SAMI. My condolences to the authors who haven’t been compensated for their work. 
The problems with SAMI follow in the wake of a falloff in content and quality of FineScale Modeler.

[Mike]

I'm leaving this open so that the message goes wide afield, but please try to keep your epithets generic and esoteric, sticking purely to the facts.  There are libel laws afterall, and it's a well-known fact that people of dubious motive will use any means if it suits their purposes, and even if it's a spurious threat, a letter from a lawyer is enough to tighten your sphincter.  Don't get hooked, or you'll end up something that rhymes.

[MikeC]

Aren't we due to see the next issue around now?  Or possibly overdue?

 

[mutleyp]

I am wondering what recycled issue will be released this month? (If any… 🤔😂)

[Wee Beastie]

5 hours ago, MikeC said:

Aren't we due to see the next issue around now?  Or possibly overdue?

 

Overdue. March’s issue would have hit the shelves at the end of February. 

[Whofan]

FWIW I think the earliest the April issiue will be on sale is next thursday.

[HartDeco]

43 minutes ago, Whofan said:

FWIW I think the earliest the April issiue will be on sale is next thursday.

March (re) issue hasn't been released yet, let alone April's.