Every time The Mover lands on my desk, usually about 5 days before anyone else sees it, I wonder: has the digital revolution caught up with us yet?  I don’t know, but I would really appreciate your help in finding out.

Our beloved magazine is sent out in hard copy to anyone in the UK moving industry who wants it and to a few people overseas who prefer it that way.  Elsewhere in the world it’s read avidly online by thousands every month.  Recently I have had the opportunity of talking face-to-face with many of those online readers as I attended conferences.  All seem quite content to read it on their computers, tablets or even their phones.  It makes me wonder: for how long will the world want printed magazines?

We have no plans to drop the printed copy: many people still tell me that they prefer something real to hold on to.  But, if we did, would it make any difference to you?  Would you read The Mover online?  Maybe you prefer to do that already.

There are many benefits to the digital option.  You can read it at any time, even if you have left the hard copy on your desk or the 7:45am from Brighton; everyone in your company has access simultaneously; the links are live so it’s a much more interactive experience and better for advertisers; fewer trees lose their lives; and, for us, it doesn’t cost so much to produce.

On the down side, you do have to own a computer and be sitting in front it or have pretty good eyesight to be able to squint at the pages on an iPhone.  It’s not so easy to flick through and many people just like to have something to hold.  And the perceived value and quality of a printed piece is greater as people understand the precision that goes into its creation whereas online is seen as a much more throw-away medium.

But we have to keep up with the times and give our readers and advertisers what they want.  For that reason I would be really grateful for your comments.  Would you be just as happy to read your Mover online, or is it too early to let the printed word go? Please e-mail editor@themover.co.uk or, if you prefer, drop me a line at the address on page three. 

Thanks for your help.

I confess to being a little surprised that the proposal at the BAR conference for the launch of a new Federation of Removers (FOR) was accepted so enthusiastically by the membership.  Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s a bad idea; on the contrary, it seems a perfectly reasonable reaction from BAR to the new organisations that have emerged recently attempting to take its ground.  It’s just that, in my experience, the BAR membership is not usually quite that easy to please.  I expected a fight.

One might feel that the good people at AIM, the main pretender to the territory I would say, would be disheartened by the news.  But I suspect not.  I don’t think BAR would have launched the initiative if it did not see AIM as a threat to some degree, and it is entirely possible that AIM might see a spike in its membership as people rally to support the catalyst of change. Even if not, I do think AIM should be congratulated for its part in making things happen.

As far as FOR itself is concerned: I like it, in principle. Its formation, according to BAR, is an acknowledgement of its obligation to the industry as a whole and to help protect customers’ interests. I agree, that’s exactly what a trade association should do.  It seems a shame though that BAR only did it when pushed.

The rules state that FOR Associates may not claim or allude to being a part of BAR or have access to the BAR benefits. That seems fair to me but it is open to abuse; I suspect that this is a cornerstone of the argument for those who have reservations.  Also, it seems that FOR Associates will be allowed to attend the BAR conference and will be expected to attend Area meetings – this ability to network within BAR seems to me to be encroaching in one of, if not the key benefit of BAR membership.  How it will go down long term we’ll have to see.

I have other concerns: how the three-year rule will be received is one; BAR Board discretion on applications is another; but fundamentally I wish BAR well with the initiative and hope it will be embraced by the industry in the spirit I am sure it is intended.