Well, that was it – the last print edition of Pensions Week. Don't worry, we'll be back in print every week from January 13 in our new guise, and you'll have heard plenty about that by now.
But this seems to be a fitting time to look back at some of the past incarnations of this respected title over the last more than fifteen years.
I picked the 198th issue, published as the last magazine of the year 2000.
One of the frontpage headlines described the Association of British Insurers' "mission to deliver stakeholder from evil". Yes, it appears we used to write headlines like that.
One of the areas of focus for the ABI in the story – pressure for increased flexibility in the "structure and use" of annuities – differed little from much of the debate had in the industry over the past week and before.
It is, depressingly, an area of the industry that does not work well for savers, has not for a long time, and there's not much prospect of it being fixed any time soon. Ba humbug.
But while some challenges do not change, others do. See our previews of next year's investment, administrative and legal challenges.
It is fitting that we are running a case study today on Royal Mail scheme members' communication preferences.
Surprisingly, desire for print rather than digital communication is highest among active members, but unsurprisingly, levels of understanding are low. The bottom line: print is not going away, but it needs to get better at what it does.
Just as pensions information is useless unless it is broken down for the reader, so news is useless without context and analysis. We've done our best over the past year to bring both to bear in our reporting.
Our relaunched magazine and website will provide readers with more practically useful information in a more compelling format, without losing Pensions Week's distinctive story-led approach. Merry Christmas.
Ian Smith is editor of Pensions Week. You can follow him on Twitter @iankmsmith and the team @pensionsweek.