Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Clearwater last won the day on August 22 2017

Clearwater had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,659 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

889 profile views
  1. WOuldnt that viaduct and the attendant backscene view make one fantastic model railway??? I guess given north of York, it’d have fewer of the named expresses and streamliners to watch though!
  2. @Northmoor @mdvle eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-48527308 German efficiency? The notorious Berlin Airport. In contrast Heathrow has done a pretty good job in delivering big projects. https://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2015/12/29/years-later-did-big-dig-deliver/tSb8PIMS4QJUETsMpA7SpI/story.html Boston big dig always worth a look Not just a Uk phenomenon. These major major projects are complex. Even those that appear to go well may not necessarily either undertake things to the same exacting standards as the Uk and may not choose to report accurately. Are we really making apples for apples comparisons? I doubt it. David
  3. Veering alarmingly back towards topic, I’m surprised that the Hornby website still only shows the CADs of the model and not the samples that were on the stall at Warley. I also wonder the extent to which sales of the bow ended suburban stock have been impacted by the delay to the prairies.
  4. Hi where did the parcels rail cars such as no 17 operate between? Thanks David
  5. I suspect they are going for three different livery models to maximise a single use of the tooling /get up to a viable production number. I guess they have no real idea how well this will sell. I think the same logic applies on the rebuilt W1 with the same chassis under different moulded tops to allow sufficient economy of scale on the bespoke chassis.
  6. @The Stationmaster I agree with much of what you say and agree the reality is more complex than the fairly short comment I made in response to @Dunsignalling’s motor industry analogy to make a point that maximising absolute profit isn’t always the right thing to do. It’s no use having an item with more absolute profit per unit if you’ve not got the capital to pay for the tooling (or the working capital to fund the production). You also need to know the size of the market you are playing into - back to the Bentley point. Even if you can make an absolute higher profit, have the capital to invest in the product, if you can only sell a limited number it might not be as good a use of the production slot as another item with lower absolute profit. I’m also not 100% convinced that measuring return on capital relative to amortised tooling cost is the right thing to do. If tooling doesn’t comprise a large proportion of the cost of production of the item, then it may present a misleading figure. If the binding constraint on someone like Hornby is the amount of production capacity at the factory, the profit per production run might be a better measure than that on capital. As noted above, I might wish to look at a broader definition of capital than simply the tooling price. If I had access to the data, I’d be wanting to understand the variations in both net and absolute margin per item, the assumptions underpinning tooling cost amortisation (eg all on first run or does something like the lovely looking new rocket assume multiple runs over a number of years whereas does the W1 and it’s allied variants imply that there’s doing pretty much a single run hence why each model is being released simultaneously in multiple liveries?) and the stock velocity (ie how long it sits on H’s books) and hence how quickly the production is converted from cash out to cash back in. I suspect that there’s some value for them in really examining their pricing strategies. If making decisions, I’d want to be looking at a variety of different metrics. David
  7. maybe but it’s not all about absolute profit. It’s also about return on capital. Which is better? A 10% yield on £100 or a 2% yield on £1000?
  8. I’d wager that labour costs form a far higher proportion of the Hornby’s cost than the shipping cost from China. A single 40’ container will contain thousands of models. Take the shipping cost and divide through and the contribution will be small (possibly in the pennies). In contrast if the labour cost is 10% of the trade price (and I think it’s higher), then a double/tripling of that to move from chinese to uk wage levels will have a noticeable impact on trade price and hence rrp.
  9. I get the message in the 100 year video. It’s well put together but bluntly it’s a bit cliched/hackneyed. It lacks a bit of spark and imagination.
  10. Great effort by three kit manufacturers to get some product placement onto those coaches! Presumably DJH and Brassmasters weren’t up for it?
  11. looking on Hattons at the Glastonbury Abbey, that has the scalloped inside cylinder cover. david
  12. If not commented above, I’d expect a formal uk launch of their Thomas range.
  13. agreed - such a thing looks and sounds cool but once you’ve done it once becomes a bit so what and a bit of a gimmick. However, fully aware that the YouTube box opening community is completely different to this forum. What they think and whether those communities buy might be a completely different thing entirely.
  14. I don’t think the “someone else is doing it” argument holds. If that was the case, the other manufacturers wouldn’t be in or enter the OO market! If anything, it lowers the barrier to entry and reduces the risk on producing something for that market as you can see that others have successfully sold into that market and expanded it. The same duplication considerations that would apply to any OO loco will apply to an OO9 release. The stronger argument for not going into that scale is that they don’t have the same extent of n gauge expertise that Bachmann have through the Farish brand. Would OO9 be a wow moment? Probably not - will it sell? Probably but not game changingly so.
  15. Interesting that this has appeared in the ads on the page: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1164250/Model_Builder/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIz8qi-ozm5gIV1hIbCh3nogrUEAEYASAAEgIyBfD_BwE I’m somewhat struggling to see the point of pretending to paint, model, glue etc... What would be out of the box, would be an accessible software tool that allowed you to build models that could be 3D printed and painted by the manufacturer. Perhaps take a base model, pick the details you want, get it printed/produced for delivery to you. More like the way you order a new car with higher levels of consumer customisation. However, I can’t see that working with the extended supply chain.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.