Many thanks to readers who have responded so far to our invitation to comment on the new design of Tribune. The majority have been encouragingly favourable to the new concept, or, as some have pointed out, the old concept of a paper rather than a magazine. Where the change has attracted criticism, it has been sharp and direct and, at least, justifiable in those areas where we didn’t at first get it quite right. We hope to have eliminated these teething problems so that all readers can better embrace and enjoy what is intended to be a new, more distinctive Tribune. Some readers have asked whether the redesign was cost-driven. It was. Increases in the cost of newsprint and other ongoing costs were becoming prohibitive. But that is only part of the story. “Needs must” presented an opportunity, an exciting opportunity to take a bold step. The new format allows more content, even though there are fewer pages than in the old magazine format, as well as greater freedom in the production and design process which we hope will allow for a less rigid and more attractive presentation of articles of a greater variety of length and subject matter. We thank the majority who shared our enthusiasm for the change and hope it will grow on those who didn’t. Above all and in all the 75 years of Tribune, it is the purpose and content that counts.