emd567 wrote: > It is pretty poor compared to the January 2000 issue of > TRAINS mag.with heaps of look backs and best of's and trains is not much > dearer. Compare the total readership (and advertising potential) of Trains to the total readership of Digest. Become enclued. > On the south Danny -- Robert Kearey Remote Access Group ITS University of Queensland My poor Krell! I don't speak for my employer