SAGA not run by senior citizens anymore?

Why are they ‘bone heads’? I guess they have considered the viability of a printed magazine and decided that most readers are likely to have internet access.

And was it ever run just by ‘senior citizens’? I wouldn’t think so. (How I hate that expression.)

What expression do you prefer to seniors GSM?

I hate "pensioners" because it implies we are some kind of scrounger on the state. Many seniors are still working and paying ripoff taxes.

I don’t like ‘pensioners’ either. In fact I don’t like being pigeonholed in any way. The only description I find remotely acceptable is ‘retired’.

I bought a lifetime subscription to Saga many years ago which entailed hard copy of the magazine.
They have been in touch to say the subscription would now be digital only. I really don't like reading digital magazines.
They did offer hard copy if I started a paid subscription.
I did feel a bit miffed but decided as I'd had it free for many years I would go with it. Not sure how long that will last!

Less overheads and a wider audience makes sense not something boneheads would do.

When was Saga run by senior citizens? and how old is a senior citizen?

It costs money to produce a magazine and print it out. This is why all sorts of groups and companies are now offering digital versions for free and asking for payment for print copies.

Saga is a commercial company set up by a man called
^ Sidney De Haan in 1951 and was passed to his son Roger De Haan who took over in 1984 after his father's retirement. Saga was acquired by staff (20%) backed by the private equity firm Charterhouse in October 2004. Saga merged with The AA (owned by CVC and Permira) to form Acromas Holdings.^ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saga_plc

Saga has never been owned by Older people. Staff ownership means aalmost entirely people under retirement age, even as young as 18.

I don’t know why the OP thought it was run by old people!

Saga was founded in 1951 by a 32 year old. He retired in 1984 aged 65, and the business passed to one of his sons, who was aged 36 at the time.

He sold the business in his mid-50s.

Or what Monica said!

I used to subscribe to Saga mag, but found the articles getting more for women with time on their hands. Was insured with them for my car and motorhome (thinking they would surely offer the best deal for us pensioneers) until Covid exposed them as unsympathetic when we were told to stay at home and not travel. Told me I had to get a SORN cert off the uncontactable DVLA. Saga now in the past.

I enjoy receiving and reading my saga magazine. If I am contacted and told it will be online they will loose a customer!!

They’ve only recently increased their annual subscription I believe

Of course it was never owned by oldies.

Was it ever?
Nothing wrong with online publications, saves paper, postage, waste, clutter.
I read my daily newspaper online and wouldn’t change.
Who are these “bone heads” ?
(Aren’t our skulls made of bone anyway)

Shelflife

I enjoy receiving and reading my saga magazine. If I am contacted and told it will be online they will loose a customer!!

Totally agree. I find digital magazines are not for me at all. Being a library member I have access to many many magazines on line but I never look at them. I will stop the Saga Magazine if it is digital only.

I read a lot of digital info because the latest research material is always online. However I still have a very large collection of referennce books on costume, jewellery and applied arts in general which I like to consult.

Ive never been on a Saga holiday because I got the impression they were for groups. I am not and have never been someone for doing things in groups. Much to the chagrin of tour reps who try to coax/cajole people into going on organized tours.

Glad you agree Oldbat. I enjoy settling down with a coffee and my magazine. I see quite enough stuff online, nothing beats having the mag. in my hands.

That’s interesting - they’d set up a new website last year that was designed to be separate to the magazine and then closed it after a few months for financial reasons, laying everyone off. I think the company is in quite a bit of financial trouble by the sounds of it.

But bizarre to think a media company would be solely run by ‘senior citizens’ in this day and age!

I had the magazine a while ago and found it quite interesting, it was a good deal, £5 for a year I think.

I suspect they will lose an awful lot of their customers if they go digital only.

Even homeless people find a way to afford a smart phone. Unless an older person actually has dementia (in which case they probably wouldn't understand the articles anyway) everyone can learn to use digital content. Why would you want trees destroyed to make paper unnecessarily? Just because we're old doesn't give us an excuse to get funky about learning useful new habits.

We live in a development of 37 homes. Less than half of these have internet access. I refuse to label people who for many reasons don’t or can’t access the web or read digitally, they are quietly being marginalised in so many ways. I’m not sure if I’m more saddened or more angry.

That’s a lot of people without internet access. What sort of development is it?

We too had the printed issue as part of a lifelong membership but once we were told several months ago that in future we could either pay for it or just read it free online we cancelled. Neither of us gets on with reading articles etc online. Shame as we had found the magazine had improved over the previous year or so.