Legend
-
Posts
7,089 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Posts posted by Legend
-
-
4 hours ago, bmb5dnp1 said:
Hello,
I've never understand why people have problems with shareholders (which may include your pension scheme) making money as without them there'd be no investment or jobs anyway. Looking at the plan (and assuming I understand it) the plans are almost exactly the same as the present government is working towards. I believe that the ROSCOs and freight companies will remain in private hands ? I thought that the ROSCOs were the main thing that needed reform due to leasing costs etc. It does appear that we haven't learnt the lessons of the past that when the railways are dependent on government spending they will inevitably go to the end of the queue. For instance I don't believe the developments carried out by Chiltern (with private money), eg the Oxford link, redoubling of Bicester-Anyho, introduction of extra rolling stock would have occurred in public hands. I suppose I'm a bit cynical but the plan looks to me to be virtually identical to the present trajectory but it will allow the left wing media to have "Railways Renationalised" headlines which will appeal to Labour's potential voters.
Dave
Becsuse it extracts money from the railways . Yes as a pensioner with investments I take your pension scheme points. But surely for the benefit of railways and the travelling public as a whole it’s better to plough profits back into the railways . Benefits for the many not just those privileged enough to be shareholders , whether that’s direct or through pension funds . I’d also say Water , Gas and Electricity but that’s probably trampling into politics-
1
-
-
Someone has tooled a 313 . It must turn up soon surely !
-
17 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:
One thing which has changed over the years is the time of payment. in many cases in the apast payment was not made ion Chinese produced model railway items until they had been received at the UK shipping agent's port premises. But. certain behaviours by various -but particularly one person - in the UK market has meant that final payment is now often raised at factory gate. Thus although the goods are not taken into stock at that point money is being paid out.
However Hornby's mountain of unsold stuff has, I'm sure, very little to do with that change of payment arrangement and is largely, if not entirely, down to past mismanagement and very poor to non-existent marketing decisions. For years a retailer friend f mine was loud in his complaint that if Hornby repeted a model in many cases they couldn't even be bothered to offer a different running number. If you don't make what folk will buy then you aren't going to sell it.
Factory payment arrangements also vary with some folk repotedly still being able to get end-loaded payment where various stages of work aren't paid for until tooling starts or - I have heard in one case, -until end production starts. The time of paying out during development thus varies although hopefully it will all be ciming out of a development budgeting process which takes account of the way payments are invoiced by the factory.
But whatever happens, and presumably exacerbated by the Red Sea shipping route debacle, money is now usually having to be paid out a much longer time before it can begin to be recovered as sales revenue. But budgeting and cash flow management should, I hope, recognise that problem
Just a bit of accounting here Mike . Goods can’t disappear between paying out money for it and receipt in stock . As soon as you pay for it it’s out of cash in your balance sheet , so the asset needs to be accounted for as “goods in transit” which will form part of their stock figure .
-
3
-
-
It would be interesting to find out exactly what this slow moving inventory is , remembering it could be Corgi/Airfix/Scalextric as well as Hornby .
Standard accounting practice is that it should be valued at the lower of cost or Net Realisable Value (ie what you can get for it) - surely we must be on verge of some large write offs ?
Agree with maximisation of tooling and getting as many liveries out as possible . The lack of blue/grey Mk1s this year and more liveries on the 50 (eg Banger blue) is an example . Also by having blue/grey mk1s they could have stopped valuable tooling costs of mk2e/fs as there would be something for blue diesels to run with .Introduce mk2s later when scale has settled in . Also , while it is early days , according to their 2024 TT120 catalogue they only intend launching Class 37s initially as era 6 (green?) and era 9 (EWS) . Surely if you want to maximise cash flow you would also go for standard and large logo blue ones . TT120 needs critical mass .They seemed to have figured this into their tooling yet won’t get the benefit of it till later . This is a company that needs cash !
it looks like they’ve decided to make too much of the wrong stuff in the past . But I still think a significant issue is lack of manufacturing capacity which is stopping the maximisation of their tools . They just can’t get the manufacturing slots .
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:
They should come to Switzerland, here you can open the entire coach window halfway down and fall out to your heart's content!
I suspect the Swiss take vegetation removal much more seriously than the UK. Much tidier railway over there .
-
5
-
-
Wow . Learn something everyday . I assumed that drivers went round when train was stopped not when not was in motion . That would have given the ORR something to think about .
-
Yep , these box tops take me right back to my childhood . They could excite a person even before opening the box
Happy Birthday Roy Cross
-
1
-
-
On 10/04/2024 at 22:06, Knapdale said:
Just ordered one of these from TMC via their eBay store. I’ve been waiting for Bachmann to release an SPT 101, as the Hornby one has traction tyres and no lights. However, TMC have reduced the price to £102 making it too attractive to resist!
I’ll be back on RM Web in the near future to ask how traction tyre wheels are replaced and how to fit lights to Hornby Railroad model…
argh you know how to make a Scotsman cry . I paid £121 for mine . Quite happy though , it is a lovely smooth runner but at £102 it’s even better ! -
A nice interview. I really enjoy your chats . It’s like talking model railways down the pub .
-
3
-
-
I think a lot of people just need to “chill “ Take a “Helicopter view” and “run the flag up the pole and see who salutes” . Let’s see how it “feeds through to the bottom line” “at the end of the day”
Recently retired and don’t miss the corporate spiel at all .
-
1
-
2
-
4
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Widnes Model Centre said:
We are regaining confidence. It grows every week.
An unscheduled visit from the Sales Director who spent a considerable amount of time listening to the difficulties we had to try and deal with. Straight talking as opposed to the masquerade we had been subjected to.The abolition of the Tier System, how ridiculous was that? We wanted to spend and weren’t allowed to.
Sadly this came too late for one particular retailer. Hornby had rebuilt bridges and had made a confidence building approach. This is very much appreciated and hopefully will continue.
TT120 rolled out to any retailers who wanted to stock the product.
Our Airfix orders and preorders are the highest they have been for many, many years.On a personal note, the Sales Staff, Accounts, etc, all seem happier, that’s got to be good.
One thing hasn’t changed, their After Sales Service. It’s way, way above any other suppliers. Problem? Resolved with the minimum of contact. As a small retailer that’s always a big confidence booster.
Good to know the transformation at the coal face . It just might take awhile to feed through to their figures-
1
-
3
-
-
43 minutes ago, BoD said:
That is fair enough if it were only you involved and happy to take the risk. Others (the majority?) might prefer to have mitigations put in place to reduce that risk. I know you were speaking in more general terms, but I wouldn’t like to be the one hit by a moving open door because someone else found fitting CDL ‘obnoxious’.But I'll bet you are a sensible guy that doesn't stand at the edge of a platform when a train comes in . We seem to be designing rules that compensate for lack of common sense , whether that is the guy standing on the platform , who shouldn't be close to edge or the guy on the train that shouldn't be opening the door .
Now don't get me wrong .There are rules in place and WCRC seem to be doing everything possible to circumvent them . Is this the type of organisation we want on our railway ?
I also remember people falling out of trains , but from memory these were people in high speed trains and inter city trains before CDL where doors could appear to be shut but were on the latch . So yes these trains obviously needed them . I think that's different from mk1s puttering up and down to Mallaig . it's difficult to distinguish between rules on a heritage railway and the Jacobite . Yes I know one runs at 25mph and the other at 40mph . is that 15mph so significant? As I've said before , more people die going up Ben Nevis than are injured on the Jacobite , should we stop them going up the mountain , maybe put railings up ?
There surely got to be a place for common sense somewhere . You can't legislate all lunacy out
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, Fireline said:
The previous regime authorised a lot of investment in tooling. That results in higher costs, but those costs are spread over 3-4 years. What that means is that your tooling never pays for itself in year 1. A big increase in tooling in year 1 means carrying higher tooling costs through years 2-4, with no "new" models to show for it.
Yes but revenue should follow costs . If you amortise something over 4 years it's because there is a value to it ie you are utilising that tooling in years 2/3/4 . So there should be revenue from using that tooling in these years . If you don't expect to use tooling again then you have to write it off as soon as you realise that . That is built into accounting principles . So maybe they are writing off tooling they don't expect to use again . Steampunk yes , but I can't imagine the cost of tooling that was huge .
-
3
-
-
I think the lack of 0-6-0s in bargain basement is that no one really has been releasing them recently . What was the last one J36? I know Rails still have the LMS Caley 812 available at £179 , so not exactly a bargain and it was a limited edition .
You have to wonder how may CEPs TMC ordered as they are still there heavily discounted . Unless Bachmann use them as a sales channel to dispose slow moving stock . TMC rapidly becoming my go to supplier as they do seem to have some good bargains .
To be honest the new Black 5 does look good , but I already have 3 . One dating from 1985 and the other two from the 2000s . They are good enough for me , so unless the price comes down I really don't have a lot of interest. And there are other models I'm similarly waiting to see if price drops ahead of any consideration of a Black 5 .
-
7
-
-
On immediate reading , doesn't look good . However, they do explain that sales are only 2% up because some high value containers that would have resulted in sales in March (and included in years figures) were delayed until April and therefore in new financial year .
Margin explanation seems to be in increased amortisation of tooling , not sure I quite understand this one . Have they changed their policy ?
To me this is a company still in turnaround . I know its always cream tomorrow , but hopefully in this case their policies will start paying off
-
1
-
-
There was a version after this , the S&DJR blue version that appeared in 1976 and I think ran through to 1977 . It was discontinued after this . It’s replacement was the GWR 101 Pocket Rocket that appeared in 1978 and the Caley pug that appeared in 1980, the last of which went onto be “Smokey Joe”
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, Sir TophamHatt said:
Guess there hasn't been any further updates for this?
I do wish Hornby would have some sort of projects page with each project a link to news about it and it's progress.
I think there are just too many variables at the moment , manufacturing capacity, longer transit times because of the Red Sea issues . It’s just difficult to predict when things will arrive -
Surprised more people haven’t commented on the hour long Q&A session on TT120 with Martyn and Carl over on Peachys YouTube channel . Refreshingly open about some of the challenges and a couple of hints about what’s ahead , it really is very good .
If you want more info on TT120 then it’s very informative
-
1
-
3
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Peachy said:
Absolutely, I can only assume that Hornby have made a conscious decision to subsidise the set prices as they are an excellent attractor to the scale. Having ordered both (the loco packs & the set) I personally don’t feel aggrieved or “ripped off”
I wanted a full HST train now and am quite happy to wait for November to receive a more economical costed set, which I’ll likely re-number or use the chassis to fit a 3d printed class 91 or some such.
The track will likely go in the spares box, the transformer likewise. The box will end up as coach box storage whilst doubling as workshop decoration.
Oh and the extra coaches and the dummy will be thrown to my hungry pack of 08’s to play with.
Yeah I’m looking at the sound fitted set perhaps as a way of kicking off a layout in this scale . My loft layout has lots of old OO locos which I enjoy running . As well as my first dabble in TT120 it would get me into DCC sound .-
1
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, GenericRMWebUsername said:
To be fair, he entitled the video:
Hornby's Horribly Faulty New Black 5
This suggests that the product is somehow inherently faulty. Others have had the product, and have not found any issues. That title is misleading and damaging. It's making a claim that is untrue. If he had labeled it "The Faults with my Hornby Black 5," it would have been accurate. But instead, he suggests the entire product is "horribly faulty." Who is going to buy a "horribly faulty" locomotive?
Criticism of Hornby is totally fine, but I think it's unfair to label an entire product "horribly faulty" when you have a single data point.
But it was true of his which didn’t work ! I’m fed up with people apologising for manufacturers . If you spend £200 + on something you expect it to work . Good on Sam for calling Hornby out . Only by doing so might they consider upping their QC . We have all been there . Testing a new loco that doesn’t work or runs like a croc . It happens more times than it should-
2
-
9
-
-
2 hours ago, adb968008 said:
So.. locos
modern image modellers.. weve got it all, the only road is duplication.
steam modellers.. the 1960’s generation the good ones have all been done, whats left is risky 0-6-0’s.
Where next ?Units… pricey, lots of toolings.. solve this you solve world hunger… but I feel post privatisation era demand exists, but only up a certain price point… Electrostar, 185, 442,455, PEP has interest.
Steam.. pricey a tender engine is still multiple toolings, for a market where the prototypes left are increasingly niche.
wagons… only so many before it becomes just another wagon.
coaches… well tbh theres room here.. I didnt think the mk2b would hit the like it has, but theres no getting away from it, its very good. The Bachmann mk2f is good too.
so the obvious one is a new mk1. (I dont believe that class 41 powercar will come alone)… Bachmann has 90’s and 47’s also needing a coach, so maybe a mk3 here too ?
track ? Literally bedrock of the hobby hasnt had much evolution since the 1990’s.. could this be improved ?
The industrial window is closing, still think a hudswell clarke canal tank is a miss, maybe an rsh ugly too, as well as a crane tank.
Pre 1923… this I think is a hunting ground, some here have done quite well… lswr t3, Gordan Highlander, Caley 0-4-4T, but if appropriate pre 1923 coaches came about things like a Prince of Wales, Dreadnought have a place.. the GWR still has gaps with a Saint and a new County 4-6-0.
enough for the hobby to feast on for a few years.
Yes but I do think Bachmann/Kader have an issue here . The Accurascale Mk2bs are very successful , but as well as being a superb coach they are also good value for money . The Bachmann Mk2s are much more expensive by comparison . And in general this is the issue for Bachmann . Accurascale 37s £169.95 , Bachmann I think were £220. Yes I know with discounts they are reaching parity , but I think Bachmann are struggling to make the return required by kader in OO and possibly N . What to do ? Well I think we are already seeing that with their 009 models , where although there is some competition it's not really significant , so they can achieve that higher margin . And now NG-7 will have a similar affect . For OO I think you will still see models from Bachmann/Kader where that margin can be maintained eg Class 69 where there is no competition price and margin can be maintained . It maybe that we see more EFE models too , which miss out Kader manufacturing . Kader can use the capacity for something else and I'm sure EFE adds something to margins if not as good as Bachmann (the Southern Booster was pretty well priced)
Interesting times . Must admit was surprised Kader made losses . As other have pointed out though there were some substantial write downs and finance charges . Still a loss if not an operating one .
-
5 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:
Just that exactly in my case. My first train set was a Hornby HST, 1st time I saw a real one was at Edinburgh Waverly, the same year, 1978.
New & exciting then, but when I realised they were killing off the Deltics I soon hated them!! But now years later, I contend that original blue/yellow livery was THE best they ever carried, bar none.
I'd prefer the TT120 blue/grey HST if it had the later cover over the roof front & exhausts & modified rear compartment - I would find it hard to resist that HST train set in that case, mostly for the pure nostalgia!!
As it is, I can resist... just about.
Exactly the same here F-UnitMad except in my case it was 2 HSTs sitting at Berwick Upon Tweed 1979. They were reversing there because of the tragic Penmanshiel tunnel collapse . But I was instantly struck by how modern they were with their sleek Mk3s and the paxman whine was something different . So I’d set up a layout to capture that . But like you hoping they release a blue/yellow one with roof baffles . Also when the 37 (and 47) come out , there will be enough depth of range to build a good 70/80s blue layout
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:
A quick synopsis of their comments, based upon the limited information available to them:
- WCRC is operating Mk1s without a reg 5 exemption and with the doors locked out of use.
- Doors locked out of use are still doors, and appear to be deemed 'defective doors' rather than them no longer being doors
- Under the RSSB regs a train with defective doors should not leave the depot unless there is some form of pre-existing RSSB derogation/exemption
- Does not appear to derogation or exemption in place
This leaves the question as to whether it is legal to have the Mk1's in a train on the network at all........
I’m sure the ORR will be having a close look . Why do they not just run the 3 mk2s (with CDL) and the mk1 maintenance coach . I’m puzzled why they need the RMB . And surely they can find/buy/hire further mk2s that would extend train to 5 coaches ?
Overall given the antics , I’m still forming the opinion that this is a company not running within the spirit of the rules and seeking to find loopholes . Still not convinced with that attitude it’s fit to be on the railway at all
-
5
-
12
-
1
-
I thought it was a great interview Peachy and I’ve subscribed for your and Mactrains channels . Kudos to the Hornby team for taking the time to enguage with the modelling fraternity . I think we need more of this . I thought they were very open , particularly with tractive effort on some of the early Pacific’s and the issues you brought up on the oil tanks and the Stanier BG . Good they recognised the issues and seem to be working on rectifying them - bad luck if you bought the originals though ! While I get the point about how they were ok on test but tolerances in TT120 are so tight that a slight deviation in manufacturing made these wagons/coaches a little stiff to run , shouldn’t they have been tested more thoroughly first . And surely tolerances in N would be even tighter or is it that TT120 is true to scale with very little space between side frames and wheels ?
But generally very informative video . I liked the dis ussion on coreless motors , which hinted they are looking at a couple of really small locos in the future .
Good point on the 08 . I get why that and the OO version are not particularly cheap to produce .they never answered the point on the blue 08 disappearing from catalogue . I suspect it’s just sold out and they are not remaking within the time frame of new catalogue
The HST is superb and I’m keeping an eye on “That Model Railway Guys “ new layout which he is building in 8ft by 2.5 ft to see if I might try something similar . While most people are looking at TT as minimal space layouts , I’m looking for something with a bit more operational interest . Interesting comment from Martyn that the HST had sold particularly well and I think he made comment that they might look at re phasing things - instead off steam maybe big diesels leaping the queue . To me TT120 would be ideal for multiple unit trains . Maybe a Met Camm 101 ? But I’m wondering now if things like the 801 might accelerate in development and maybe even things like electro stars appear .
Great video . People interested in TT120 should certainly have a look .
-
1
-
1
-
Labour's plans for the railways
in UK Prototype Discussions (not questions!)
Posted · Edited by Legend
Not saying they’ve done it in past, although the much maligned BR did give us a pretty good Inter-City Railway . At one stage I think we had more 125mph trains than anywhere else . But I’m thinking not for profit co that plough any gains back into the business