I have two suggestions to start with:

1--Delete the current Letters section and try to print letters with some information or value. Currently, it's just column after column (sometimes pages) of people saying, "Wow, your magazine is the best!" and "Wow, your magazine is really great!" and "Wow, I loved your fabulous article on frayed hems!" and "Wow, your amazing magazine reminds me of a dress I sewed in 1921." As a reader, I learn NOTHING from such self-congratulatory content. It's a waste of paper.

Also, corrections (often a discontinued pattern number) could be taken care of in a sentence or two. Instead, the Letters section prints an entire letter (sometimes two) describing how the reader couldn't find the pattern number given in a previous issue, blah blah blah. Column inches are wasted on this. Just print a small box in the front pages of the magazine titled "Corrections" and give the information. Stop wasting paper on this also.

2--I agree with MacRoseMagBob: I want to see articles by experts, teaching sophisticated, advanced techniques. Leave the simple stuff for SewStylish. The low point in the history of Threads magazine was the dreadful Brook DeLorme article. Please, no more of that. She can't sew! Teach us at an advanced level. It's so hard to find high-level sewing instruction--we need Threads for that! The Ralph Rucci article was priceless.

I love the Up Close feature. How about some articles on techniques used in sewing historic costumes (that is, museum-quality vintage garments)? We can learn so much from the past, when garments were made "the hard way."

Good luck, Deana, and congratulations!

Soignee