It's great to see the enthusiasm, but there is a BIG problem here that no-one seems too concerned to address, and perhaps it may be because there is an assumption that no-one will object when the issue arises: who owns CS and who would grant the committee the right to use the CS name / logo on the magazine? Certainly not the members: simple membership (esp. since it's non-paying) doesn't confer any ownership (and I would argue that in the T&C of membership, everyone who posts grants an unlimited license to CS to display whatever you type, with the caveat that the poster is liable for any subsequently arising legal issues such as defamation, libel, etc.).
This enthusiasm for a CS magazine is potentially worthless unless someone can answer how the publisher (and is this CS publishing the magazine?) can proceed with a business plan and project income / expenses over a 3-year period using the CS banner. There are independent publishers, including MediaCorp and SPH, who have deals with some well-known overseas magazines and print a local edition - TopGear, FHM, Harper's Bazaar, etc. - but they do so by having an iron-clad deal with whoever owns the brand.
As for who works on this magazine, be it electronic (my preference; have a look at gpweek.com, which uses realview software to present an electronic magazine that cannot be downloaded, and which therefore also provides an accurate readership, which is the absolute backbone of advertising sales) or hardcopy (wherein you immediately say sayonara to 55% of income to your distributor as well as a large number of other issues when dealing with a distribution network: the immediacy of online for me is surely the way forward for all magazines, and once Apple announces their iSlate / iTablet on the 26th, getting your magazine on the go will be the way forward), they have to have relevant experience - the quality of the team will determine the outcome of this magazine far far over any other issue, except perhaps cash reserves and cash flow.
FYI, I own and run my own company that works on creating content: primarily we have been focussed on audio content (TV / documentaries / audiobooks) but for over a year now, we have been working with some photographers who want to expand their portfolios in Singapore, a quasi agency / management role in such that we do the boring backbone muck work, while they do the creative stuff; a Singapore-based photographic magazine that is driven by all that is (apologies to STB) uniquely Singapore could be something that we'd invest in, but as mentioned above, without a clear-cut deal to use the CS name / branding, we would instead look at a magazine that we can brand ourselves and own the intellectual copyright as related to the branding.
Sorry if this is getting to dollars & cents / business plans and stuff, but it's been my experience that the fun stuff (taking the photos, writing the articles) is easy to get excited about, but unless the base foundation (i.e. the boring stuff) is solid, you're building a castle on sand that gets swept away at the first big wave.
Thoughts?
....... and pro/con, please keep it open and friendly
