If Burda Magazine is going to continue featuring digital patterns for an additional price, why bother wasting printing space on the instructions. There are 20 patterns included in the magazine. There are 23 patterns’ worht of instructions which the subscribers do not have access to or own. By my reckoning that is over half the magazine that is content that subscribers are paying for which does nothing for us.
I mean, I don’t care for the fashion and make-up tips, but I realize other people may enjoy that. That’s a matter of personal preference. But printing a large amount of material with no benefit to consumers strikes me as a waste of resources. When you buy the pattern online you also recieve the instructions, so they are effectively being printed twice, once at the magazine’s cost, and once at the consumer’s cost. If the pattern instructions for paid downloadable designs weren’t included, wouln’t it be possible to print the included patterns on more pages to make it easier for consumers to trace?if there are going to be fashion shoots of downloadable designs, then why not simply post “find online at (URL) for x amount.” This will make it obvious that these patterns are not free, as subscribers had been led to believe. I believe this choice in the spring issue of the US magazine is alienating a lot of consumers. When I compare my US magazines to my European magazines published at news stads, it’s a very glaring discrepancy. The European issues may cost a bit more in the US, but they have 10-20 more patterns and less fluff. I’m seriously considering canceling my US subscription if the content continues to be so frivolous.