Bachmann announce Class 117 and Class 121 at Collectors Club event

[Legend]

But is that just Hattons estimate?.Remember the issue over the Marsh Atlantic

[The Stationmaster]

But is that just Hattons estimate?.Remember the issue over the Marsh Atlantic

They make it clear that it is their 'estimate'  (an improvement on some of their past performance where they did not do that) and that the price will may change but it is basically a 'come on' approach to marketing because it could well encourage some people to place orders (that's obviously its intention).  But then we come to a problem - firstly the price at time of delivery might well be significantly different and a lot more (inevitable if you pitch the 'estimate' low) which will lead to complaints and moans - which will, with sorry inevitability, be directed against Bachmann and not the retailer.

 

The other problem is of course that while Bachmann might well have a ball park idea of what these units are potentially going to cost at today's prices and rates of exchange etc, etc they really haven't got any better idea than the rest of us what the situation will be when the models are actually delivered - hence they very sensibly do not notify prices at an early stage in the process; it would amount to commercial suicide to do so in a world undergoing rapid economic changes.  Thus overall I think 'guessing' retail prices at this stage is both pointless and potentially very misleading.  It is telling that Kernow, who seem quite close to the Bachmann project with special limited edition liveries already publicised are saying nothing at this stage about prices.  If they can't make a properly informed estimate how on earth can any other retailer?

[Gwiwer]

But is that just Hattons estimate?.Remember the issue over the Marsh Atlantic

 

Hattons state it is an estimate.

 

Kernow MRC also list "prices" but in this case it's 1p per unit.  Anyone who thinks they're going to get a 3-car DMU for a penny needs to read the full disclosure which is readily available (i.e. it's not tucked into small print on another page).  Their site requires that a price be given in order to list an item for sale; they do not give estimates (my emphasis) because they may change so list the items at 1p each as they do with all other up-coming items for which prices have not been announced.

Edited September 15, 2015 by Gwiwer

[brushman47544]

They make it clear that it is their 'estimate'  (an improvement on some of their past performance where they did not do that) and that the price will may change but it is basically a 'come on' approach to marketing because it could well encourage some people to place orders (that's obviously its intention).  But then we come to a problem - firstly the price at time of delivery might well be significantly different and a lot more (inevitable if you pitch the 'estimate' low) which will lead to complaints and moans - which will, with sorry inevitability, be directed against Bachmann and not the retailer.

 

The other problem is of course that while Bachmann might well have a ball park idea of what these units are potentially going to cost at today's prices and rates of exchange etc, etc they really haven't got any better idea than the rest of us what the situation will be when the models are actually delivered - hence they very sensibly do not notify prices at an early stage in the process; it would amount to commercial suicide to do so in a world undergoing rapid economic changes.  Thus overall I think 'guessing' retail prices at this stage is both pointless and potentially very misleading.  It is telling that Kernow, who seem quite close to the Bachmann project with special limited edition liveries already publicised are saying nothing at this stage about prices.  If they can't make a properly informed estimate how on earth can any other retailer?

 

I wonder how much comes down to how Hattons' website is set up to take pre-orders, compared to others such as Invicta which shows a price of £0.00 until the item is actually in stock.

 

More generally though I'm getting pretty fed up with Bachmann and its approach to pricing. Of course if they're going to announce something so far in advance that they don't know how much the retail price should be, then better to say nothing than provide a price they know will be wide of the mark. But once they are ready to announce a price, why should it increase each year? Hornby manages to announce a price and if the model slips into the following year the price doesn't immediately increase in the new catalogue, whereas we've even had cases with Bachmann where some liveries have appeared before the annual announcement so kept the original price, but other liveries have been one shipment later from China, but by arriving after the annual announcement the price goes up. If Hornby can do it, why can't Bachmann build into their prices an allowance for the time a model is expected to take to reach retailers.

 

The fact Bachmann cannot yet give a price does make me wonder how much work they really had done on the 117 and 121. If they had already done lots of research why did they need KMRC's scans; they should have been past that point. And they really are a very odd choice as a first go at a longer wheelbase DMU when Hornby does a perflectly acceptable 121, and when Dapol had already announced it and a 122 and there's been a 117 before however outdated it is now. Logic would dictate something else unless....

[Gwiwer]

The Hornby 121 is only a reworked Lima model and is fundamentally as old as the generic suburban DMU that firm produced and which bore carriage numbers suggesting it was a 117.  

 

Read Kernow's and Bachmann's statements again.  Both appear to have initiated the project at similar times and became aware that they were working on the same thing.  Kernow states they have no wish to "take on" the major manufacturers and have offered Bachmann what amounts to a huge step up namely the scans and research.  

 

This has potentially accelerated the delivery of the project significantly from Bachmann's point of view.  I'm speculating that while Kernow clearly had some amount of work done and Bachmann were off the mark that had the two not worked co-operatively then we might have been presented with a DJM 117 a year from now at commission prices followed a year later by a Bachmann catalogue release of the same but somewhat cheaper.  The net result of that would be harm to both sides.

 

The argument over which class to produce can go on forever.  The fact is that we have one of the most oft-requested types now in development in all-new 21st Century tooling with running gear to match as opposed to the sometimes erratic and (by current standards) basic Lima pancake motor which can't get a three-car unit up any sort of gradient.

[Dunsignalling]

I wonder how much comes down to how Hattons' website is set up to take pre-orders, compared to others such as Invicta which shows a price of £0.00 until the item is actually in stock.

 

More generally though I'm getting pretty fed up with Bachmann and its approach to pricing. Of course if they're going to announce something so far in advance that they don't know how much the retail price should be, then better to say nothing than provide a price they know will be wide of the mark. But once they are ready to announce a price, why should it increase each year? Hornby manages to announce a price and if the model slips into the following year the price doesn't immediately increase in the new catalogue, whereas we've even had cases with Bachmann where some liveries have appeared before the annual announcement so kept the original price, but other liveries have been one shipment later from China, but by arriving after the annual announcement the price goes up. If Hornby can do it, why can't Bachmann build into their prices an allowance for the time a model is expected to take to reach retailers.

 

The fact Bachmann cannot yet give a price does make me wonder how much work they really had done on the 117 and 121. If they had already done lots of research why did they need KMRC's scans; they should have been past that point. And they really are a very odd choice as a first go at a longer wheelbase DMU when Hornby does a perflectly acceptable 121, and when Dapol had already announced it and a 122 and there's been a 117 before however outdated it is now. Logic would dictate something else unless....

No point getting our knickers in a twist over models that are still several years away if their progress runs the same course as all the other models we are still waiting for.

 

So long as Dapol don't take fright, there's no certainty that Bachmann's 121 will beat their own to market. A lack of publicity doesn't necessarily imply a lack of action.

 

Mind you, if too many people stop buying their stuff because of the prices, Bachmann could easily have quit the UK market by then..........

 

John  

[brushman47544]

The Hornby 121 is only a reworked Lima model and is fundamentally as old as the generic suburban DMU that firm produced and which bore carriage numbers suggesting it was a 117.  

 

Read Kernow's and Bachmann's statements again.  Both appear to have initiated the project at similar times and became aware that they were working on the same thing.  Kernow states they have no wish to "take on" the major manufacturers and have offered Bachmann what amounts to a huge step up namely the scans and research.  

 

This has potentially accelerated the delivery of the project significantly from Bachmann's point of view.  I'm speculating that while Kernow clearly had some amount of work done and Bachmann were off the mark that had the two not worked co-operatively then we might have been presented with a DJM 117 a year from now at commission prices followed a year later by a Bachmann catalogue release of the same but somewhat cheaper.  The net result of that would be harm to both sides.

 

The argument over which class to produce can go on forever.  The fact is that we have one of the most oft-requested types now in development in all-new 21st Century tooling with running gear to match as opposed to the sometimes erratic and (by current standards) basic Lima pancake motor which can't get a three-car unit up any sort of gradient.

 

Obviously we don't know all the details and like you I am in part speculating. But why I have speculated as I did was becuase Dapol announced their OO gauge 121/122 way back in December 2012. I cannot believe that Bachmann had already started work on its 117 and 121 before then and they were still in the drawing office. Why would Bachmann start work on something already announced by another manufacturer? Surely that would be a big financial risk particularly if yours was almost certain to come to market second. And there are plenty of other much requested longer wheelbase DMUs such as the Class 120 that Bachmann could do instead. Whilst I have no doubt Kernow's statements are a true reflection of their understanding of the position, I do wonder....

Edited September 16, 2015 by brushman47544

[Dogmatix]

I hope that the 117 will have similar internal coupling arrangements to the Blue Pullman - conducting and close coupled.

[Karhedron]

Obviously we don't know all the details and like you I am in part speculating. But why I have speculated as I did was becuase Dapol announced their OO gauge 121/122 way back in December 2012. I cannot believe that Bachmann had already started work on its 117 and 121 before then and they were still in the drawing office. Why would Bachmann start work on something already announced by another manufacturer? Surely that would be a big financial risk particularly if yours was almost certain to come to market second.

Maybe based on the lack of progress Dapol have shown so far on the 121, Bachmann have decided they have a reasonable shot at beating them to market. Dapol is a much smaller manufacturer than Bachmann and we already know they have several things in the pipeline which are probably ahead of the 121 for tooling. I think that after nearly 3 years of no significant progress, Bachmann can be forgiven for considering the 117/121 to be fair game.

[Fenman]

Obviously we don't know all the details and like you I am in part speculating. But why I have speculated as I did was becuase Dapol announced their OO gauge 121/122 way back in December 2012. I cannot believe that Bachmann had already started work on its 117 and 121 before then and they were still in the drawing office. ...

This is the same Bachmann that announced a brand new 158 back in 2011, which is apparently still in the design studio?

 

Yes, I can believe it!

 

Paul

[Andy Y]

Obviously we don't know all the details and like you I am in part speculating. But why I have speculated as I did was becuase Dapol announced their OO gauge 121/122 way back in December 2012. I cannot believe that Bachmann had already started work on its 117 and 121 before then and they were still in the drawing office. Why would Bachmann start work on something already announced by another manufacturer? Surely that would be a big financial risk particularly if yours was almost certain to come to market second. And there are plenty of other much requested longer wheelbase DMUs such as the Class 120 that Bachmann could do instead. Whilst I have no doubt Kernow's statements are a true reflection of their understanding of the position, I do wonder....

 

It may be worth someone asking the direct question of Dapol if they still intend to manufacture a Class 121 or 122.

[cromptonnut]

This is the same Bachmann that announced a brand new 158 back in 2011, which is apparently still in the design studio?

 

It was waiting for ages for the Bachmann 159 to come out (which, at the time, was my local line hence wanting one) then seeing the Farish one at my local model shop made me start dabbling in N all those years ago.

[wombatofludham]

To be honest, what's the problem if an announced model train doesn't arrive in the shops for three or more years?  It's not like you are waiting for a kidney or a life-saving operation for that length of time.  I do sometimes think a sense of proportion is needed amongst our fraternity.

 

In any case, I'd had my shed delivered and erected when Bachmann announced the 158, and it's yet to be insulated and electrified let alone baseboards built, so I'd be a tad hypocritical to criticise Bachmann's project management slippage!

[Budgie]

I'm wondering about all this criticism of manufacturers who seem to take "too long" to release previously announced models. If this sort of thing continues I can see said manufacturers not announcing anything until it is ready for release. Maybe that's what people want, but I'd rather know what's in the pipeline.

[No Decorum]

I'm wondering about all this criticism of manufacturers who seem to take "too long" to release previously announced models. If this sort of thing continues I can see said manufacturers not announcing anything until it is ready for release. Maybe that's what people want, but I'd rather know what's in the pipeline.

I'd agree with that. Manufacturers keeping quiet about what they're working on is one cause of the curse of duplication.

[Fenman]

I'd agree with that. Manufacturers keeping quiet about what they're working on is one cause of the curse of duplication.

 

True enough, but the other suspicion when so much is announced so far in advance is that some manufacturers are simply trying to grab a bigger share of a dwindling number of unmodelled prototypes. As someone else wrote, delays in delivery are not a matter of life or death. But I would have thought there was something a bit off about a manufacturer deciding to announce things when they have done no work whatsoever, such that four years later their model is still in the design studio.

 

Hattons' graphs - showing what each manufacturer has announced and the stage it is at - are instructive. For a healthy product flow I'd expect a roughly diagonal line from top right to bottom left. It's pretty much what Hornby now have after a pretty torrid few years. But then compare that with Bachmann - a couple of things well advanced, and almost everything else stuck in the first column. This suggests to me that there might be something else going on, perhaps equivalent to those supermarkets who excessively "land bank" - they have no intention of developing the land they're buying, but they want to stop the other supermarkets from getting their hands on it. Either that, or Bachmann UK are in even bigger trouble than we might have thought.

 

I'd suggest prototype grabbing is equally unhealthy for us consumers.

 

Paul

[brushman47544]

I'd agree with that. Manufacturers keeping quiet about what they're working on is one cause of the curse of duplication.

 

Quite, but in this case Dapol DID announce the 121/122 well in advance yet Bachmann decides to go head to head all the same.

 

True enough, but the other suspicion when so much is announced so far in advance is that some manufacturers are simply trying to grab a bigger share of a dwindling number of unmodelled prototypes. As someone else wrote, delays in delivery are not a matter of life or death. But I would have thought there was something a bit off about a manufacturer deciding to announce things when they have done no work whatsoever, such that four years later their model is still in the design studio.

 

Hattons' graphs - showing what each manufacturer has announced and the stage it is at - are instructive. For a healthy product flow I'd expect a roughly diagonal line from top right to bottom left. It's pretty much what Hornby now have after a pretty torrid few years. But then compare that with Bachmann - a couple of things well advanced, and almost everything else stuck in the first column. This suggests to me that there might be something else going on, perhaps equivalent to those supermarkets who excessively "land bank" - they have no intention of developing the land they're buying, but they want to stop the other supermarkets from getting their hands on it. Either that, or Bachmann UK are in even bigger trouble than we might have thought.

 

I'd suggest prototype grabbing is equally unhealthy for us consumers.

 

Paul

 

Exactly. If someone else has already announced a model, unless yours has already advanced quite a lot already (and in the case of the 117 & 121 it seems not if still at the early design stage) why take the risk of duplication? Better surely to go for something else - unless your motives are somewhat different.

[Fenman]

... Exactly. If someone else has already announced a model, unless yours has already advanced quite a lot already (and in the case of the 117 & 121 it seems not if still at the early design stage) why take the risk of duplication? Better surely to go for something else - unless your motives are somewhat different.

 

I'm not so sure that duplication is always a bad thing. I'm rather pleased to have a choice of Bachmann's delightful if a bit pricey Mk1s, and Hornby's not quite as good but cheaper version.

 

Or would that be A Bad Thing for you?

 

Paul

[brushman47544]

Or would that be A Bad Thing for you?

 

Paul

 

I don't care whether there's duplication or not. It's the motive behind it I'm talking about.

Edited September 17, 2015 by brushman47544

[Fenman]

I don't care whether there's duplication or not. It's the motive behind it I'm talking about.

 

Perhaps we are not disagreeing.

 

If a model is announced in 2011 but still hasn't even left the design studio by 2015, it might not be wrong to class that "model" as vapourware. That being the case, there is nothing to duplicate - except an announcement.

 

If manufacturers are going to get into the habit of announcing all their dreams and fantasies, I don't have a problem if another manufacturer who has more capacity later comes along and actually produces the model. I didn't much like "bagsies" when I was a kid, and I don't see how any adult manufacturer can expect their bagsies to be respected in the market-place.

 

Paul

[No Decorum]

I'm not so sure that duplication is always a bad thing. I'm rather pleased to have a choice of Bachmann's delightful if a bit pricey Mk1s, and Hornby's not quite as good but cheaper version.

 

Or would that be A Bad Thing for you?

 

Paul

A fair point. I think Hornby did a pretty good job on its Mk. Is. What I had more in mind was that I would rather have a Gresley K2 and a Thompson B1 than two Thompson B1s, a Standard 3 tender loco and a Standard 4 4-6-0 than two Standard 4-6-0s, an electric 70 and a 71 rather than two 71s and so on.

 

At the Bachmann Collectors' Club Members' Day, I asked a Bachmann rep., "Isn't Dapol doing the 121?" With a friendly smile, he replied, "Oh we don't pay any attention to what Dapol's doing."

 

Being a simple soul, I could take that at face value and think it's borne out by the fact that Bachmann isn't, or hasn't confessed to, doing a 122.

 

However, if I were paranoid (I can be both simple and paranoid), I would have thought that not paying any attention to what a rival is doing is not good business. Perhaps in reality, Bachmann is trying to sink Dapol (in 00) but then, that doesn't account for Bachmann not doing a 122 as well. For that matter, does Bachmann really think it can beat Dapol to market?

 

We haven't run out of prototypes yet. With all due respect to Southern fans, I would have thought that straight DC electric locomotives are a bit obscure, yet they seem to be generating a lot of interest. Anyone for a gas turbine electric or three? Any takers for more AC electrics? Where, oh where, is 10800? Shunters? Multiple units? As for steam, BR inherited 448 classes of locomotive, nearly all steam.

[Dunsignalling]

I'm not so sure that duplication is always a bad thing. I'm rather pleased to have a choice of Bachmann's delightful if a bit pricey Mk1s, and Hornby's not quite as good but cheaper version.

 

Or would that be A Bad Thing for you?

 

Paul

For most, it isn't a real choice. The Bachmann models have been around a long time and almost everyone I know had as many as they need long before Hornby brought their new ones out.

 

Hornby have offered Mk.1s since Tri-ang days (theirs being the first scale-length r-t-r Mk.1s to be produced r-t-r). They were greatly outclassed when the Bachmann range was launched, which also did (and does) cover a much greater variety of types.

 

Hornby's need to make Mk.1s because they 'fit' with all the locos they make that can carry BR livery. They couldn't really not have such iconic coaches in their portfolio. Much the same thinking that ensures Bachmann persist in making A4s despite superior competition from Hornby. Great for newcomers, not really relevant to established modellers.

 

I suspect the main reason for them being produced is that the moulds for the old ones were probably on their last legs.  

 

John

[Fenman]

... I suspect the main reason for them being produced is that the moulds for the old ones were probably on their last legs. ...

Maybe: however, I know I'd stopped buying Hornby train packs which included the old Mk1s because the clunky coaches were mismatched with the high quality locos. I had no place for them when the rest of my Mk1s were Bachmanns beside which they looked wrong. The new versions do (to my eyes) fit in.

 

Paul

[Dunsignalling]

We haven't run out of prototypes yet. With all due respect to Southern fans, I would have thought that straight DC electric locomotives are a bit obscure, yet they seem to be generating a lot of interest. Anyone for a gas turbine electric or three? Any takers for more AC electrics? Where, oh where, is 10800? Shunters? Multiple units? As for steam, BR inherited 448 classes of locomotive, nearly all steam.

The crucial difference, commercially and for modellers, between the Class 71 and the various LMR 25kv electrics is fairly obvious.

 

The SR locos ran alongside steam traction whereas the way the LMR Electrification was carried through meant that their Electrics didn't in most locations. 

 

The fact that it looks right at the head of a train of Pullman cars, of which there has been no shortage in Hornby's range for many years, probably didn't hurt either.

 

John  

[No Decorum]

The crucial difference, commercially and for modellers, between the Class 71 and the various LMR 25kv electrics is fairly obvious.

 

The SR locos ran alongside steam traction whereas the way the LMR Electrification was carried through meant that their Electrics didn't in most locations. 

 

The fact that it looks right at the head of a train of Pullman cars, of which there has been no shortage in Hornby's range for many years, probably didn't hurt either.

 

John  

OK, I'll settle for gas turbine electrics in the meantime.