False. Zoo is better. I got the first ever copy of Zoo when WHSmith handed them out for free. It was a good read. Bought Nuts a few weeks ago because they had Britney on the cover and promised pictures “they didn’t want you to see” inside. Those pics were useless. This week I see that Zoo is only 50p whereas Nuts is 60p. Ergo, vis a vis, Zoo is better.
No, you are wrong. Zoo is badly written, seemingly for unthinking ‘blokes’ whilst nuts has more humour in the writing. Weirdly Zoo comes from the same stable as fhm and nuts from the same house as loaded. Nuts has a way better tv guide.
their both exactly the same, they have exactly the same comical pictures, exactly the same features if not a week after the other. The only difference is one has a crossword! its a toss up as to which ones cheaper on the day, still a god damn good read!
You’re all morons!! They’re both desperate attempts to reassert masculinity, squeezing money out of idiots by recycling anything which can be labelled remotely interesting to men. Sub-FHM trash I wouldn’t wipe my ass with. (That doesn’t mean I like FHM.)
Better style of writing and puts in a true story each week. That said would like to see more on the story and news front. Can’t believe they try to flog a sub standard radio times at that price though and both must be suffering because recent price drop.
There is a market for a mans weekly and although these are a good try they are not it.
they are both the same! try this. Buy both nuts and zoo every week for a month. I bet about 95% of the articles are in both, and the ones that aren’t where in the issue the week before or will be in the week after.