NEW PRODUCTS FOR 2016/7?

[TomE]

I guess the big question is how to design in lower cost without compromising quality significantly. 

 

 

Regards

 

Roy

 

I think us modellers have to shoulder a small portion of the blame when it comes to increasing prices. We have, for the most part, being demanding ever more detailed models and Bachmann, Dapol etc have responded to that demand. Now we are being asked to pay the going rate for such a model, there are howls of protest and sharp intakes of breath. When manufacturers then look at ways to reduce cost, such as moulding details which previously might have been separate or dropping some altogether, the same again.

 

The modelling community needs to decide what it wants. Do we want ever more detailed models with the associated price tag, or do we want cheaper models but with a return to the days of 'approximate' being good enough? 

 

Perhaps the slow down in releases we have seen over the last couple of years is the best solution to giving us the first option. Higher prices, but fewer models. Whereas before I might have bought 3 engines for £80 each, instead I'll buy 2 for £120 each. The quality is maintained and my budget hasn't changed.  

 

Tom. 

Edited January 25, 2016 by TomE

[Revolution Ben]

...(snipped)

The modelling community needs to decide what it wants. Do we want ever more detailed models with the associated price tag, or do we want cheaper models but with a return to the days of 'approximate' being good enough? 

...(snipped)

 

Tom. 

 

Hi Tom,

 

I think we already did.

 

Hornby's "design clever" attempt to reintroduce moulded handrails etc to keep prices down was a disaster, as they themselves (on Simon Kohler's blog) now concede.

 

And it's not as if we are in isolation; we all see models by Fleischmann and Kato aimed at the German or US markets.  

 

I don't want to feel I am getting a poor second best.  I would rather have one loco that is on a par with the best than two that are not.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[grahame]

I think many have a flawed understanding if they think a few extra details have caused the recent price increases. It is far more complex than that as has previously been explained, in depth, by Bachmann. And, although there may be some impact where people simply purchase less quantity (but still spend the same), total demand obviously hasn't fallen off a cliff so it is not particularly price elastic.

 

In general, as Ben indicates, the market wants and demands improving quality and part of that is increased levels of detailing. And, in general, it appears that the market is currently prepared to pay for it. Scaling back on details won't mean reduced prices and only encourages moans about reduced finesse and VFM.

 

However I do think that the loco sector is now quite saturated (for the N gauge market size) and new ones are competing in ever smaller sectors which means that the freight stock and multiple unit sectors, which are currently comparitively less saturated and quite underdeveloped, are ripe for exploitation and offer the best opportunity for manufacturers, especially once the backlog of promises has been cleared.

 

A quick look at the recent straw poll of N gauge modellers (here on RMweb) shows a majority modelling the post steam era (rather than the steam era) which would help indicate a larger potential market for MUs. And, if you add in the transition period modellers (although now no longer the largest sector) it makes the potential MU market (as they were around in that period) quite a decent opportunity.

 

G.

[bmthtrains - David]

The gradual progression of the most modelled era (presumably due to the peak age at which people indulge in the hobby and look back to reflect the railways of their youth) is great news for me, as it means given I am in my mid thirties now, by the time I'm retired (if such a thing exists by then) the 2000's will be very much in favour and locomotion models will have just released their 'heritage' model of the class 800! Plenty of today's contemporary prototypes to look forward to when they are themselves historical.

 

David

[ThaneofFife]

The SLW Class 24 has proven that we can have the best of both worlds (good prices and high detail). 

 

So hopefully more UK made models will follow. 

Edited January 26, 2016 by ThaneofFife

[grahame]

The SLW Class 24 has proven that we can have the best of both worlds (good prices and high detail). 

 

So hopefully more UK made models will follow.

I'm not so sure everyone would agree that the SWL class 24 price is particularly cheap - it's basically a step change up on other manufacturers prices (certainly on Bachmann's class 24) but it is for a significantly improved quality spec. Again the market is demanding increased details and demonstrating that it is prepared to pay for it.

 

Also I doubt that the SLW class 24 is fully UK manufactured - maybe some final assembly/finishing like Dapol, but I guess much (like motor, chassis castings, lights, speakers, main mouldings, wheels, etc.,) is sourced from abroad.

 

UK manufacturing doesn't exactly equate with low prices - most manufacturing has chased around the world for cheap labour (even if since much of those costs have risen) - and currently I can't see more UK model manufacturing happening quickly however nice it would be. We live in a global market place these days and that includes model manufacturing and labour markets.

 

G.

[south_tyne]

I tend to agree with the view that there won't be a huge amount of genuinely new stuff but from memory it's only the 40 and the J72 amongst the locos that we've yet to see an EP for so I live in hope for a few bits and pieces.

 

 

Just out of interest, is anyone aware where anything further has been mentioned by Bachmann/Farish about the progress of the J72 since the initial announcement?

[TomE]

Just out of interest, is anyone aware where anything further has been mentioned by Bachmann/Farish about the progress of the J72 since the initial announcement?

 

There has been nothing official since. There is usually an update on the status of planned models issued along with the new product announcement, so there could be news on 1st March.

 

Tom.  

[John M Upton]

Surely the Class 25/3 is a simple option needing just a new body shell as they now have a top spec chassis to go under it already from the Class 24 and 25/2.

 

Or is this the point that the QI claxon goes off???

Edited January 26, 2016 by John M Upton

[Roy L S]

Grahame

 

It is interesting that you again say here that steam/diesel transition is no longer the most popular era for N modellers. As far as I was aware it still is (and I do not say this simply because I model in that era - I have an interest in British N generally). Where is the representative data that confirms this shift away?

 

I do not buy the idea that the era people model is simply what they remember, it is far more complex than that. They model a slice of history set at a pre-determined time, this for a variety of reasons. Transition still remains (according to retailers I know) the best seller. According to them it is not green DMUs and diesels that remain on the shelves but more modern stuff!

 

Has the British N market reached saturation in terms of new  loco releases? Here I think there is certainly an argument that the volume of releases over recent years has grown faster than the British N market has expanded so there are more models chasing the cash.

 

However I do not see the solution as being to tool a range of MUs, if that were the solution, based on their own knowledge of their Markets manufacturers would have done so already. They know better than any of us where to invest. Maybe we will see a 117, it ticks a lot of boxes, covers the best selling transition period and through various liveries all the way to preservation. I think I'm right in saying that would have to be a three car unit? RRP £170 plus??

 I'd buy one to run on Rugby Central (closest we're ever likely get to a 115).

 

The RevolutioN Pendo may well encourage growth in 25kv OHLE models, or alternatively, like the Kato Eurostar it may be just as popular in it's own right as a superb "Rule 1" model. Time will tell there. What it may do is give manufacturers confidence to try something else (Class 85 anyone?).

 

What I am convinced of is that in our comparatively small (compared to 00) British N market some 00 models will not be viable. Amongst these (and Grahame I do not say this to be controversial I know 3rd Rail is an era you are passionate about) would be a range of 3rd rail EMUs. Maybe we will see the 416/2EPB go through the "shrink ray" sometime, but beyond that I think those modellers of 3rd rail will have to do what they always have (and very successfully might I add) - make their own. The test for popularity may be to try a "Kickstarter" (Who knows what Ben and Mike may have by way of ideas) and I would be delighted to be proved wrong.

 

So, back to 2015/16 product announcements, I will leave it at: -

 

- Hughes Fowler "Crab".

- 94xx Pannier

- Thompson coaches

- Maybe more modern incarnations of Class 31.

 

Roy

[grahame]

It is interesting that you again say here that steam/diesel transition is no longer the most popular era for N modellers. As far as I was aware it still is (and I do not say this simply because I model in that era - I have an interest in British N generally). Where is the representative data that confirms this shift away?

You seem to be denying and ignoring the evidence all around and that which I have already mentioned such as David Haarhaus's comments, the Wish List Poll results, the recent RMweb straw poll, and the shift in balance of submissions being made to the NGS Journal. You also have to understand that I'm only talking about the N gauge market (not the total model railway market) and that there are also confidential things I've been told by manufacturers.

 

The transition era may have been usurped but it is still relatively big (compared with say the 'big four' or pre-grouping eras) and manufacturers will still need to service it - and potentially get in quick before it further dwindles away over time (see David post #79).

 

G.

[Karhedron]

It is interesting that you again say here that steam/diesel transition is no longer the most popular era for N modellers. As far as I was aware it still is (and I do not say this simply because I model in that era - I have an interest in British N generally). Where is the representative data that confirms this shift away?

 

Granted it is hardly conclusive (only 60 votes) but this recent poll suggests the transition era has slipped into 2nd place for N gauge modellers.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/106828-do-you-collect-or-model-in-british-n-gauge/

 

Theer are some mitigating factors to take into account. The BR steam-era in the poll covers 20 years where as BR D&E period is almost 30 years. It also covers banger blue and sectorisation which were as different from one another as early crest steam was from late crest transition period.

 

Having said all that, I can see why N gauge suits D&E modelling better than some larger scales. Modern trains are often longer and are easier to represent in smaller scale. Fixed rakes were more common meaning that overscale couplers can be more easily worked around and shunting is infrequent. Lastly difficult working parts like valve gear and motions can be avoided. These are almost always somewhat overscale in N gauge as making them to scale makes them too fragile for a working model.

 

Given the quality of recent D&E releases, I can see why it is edging ahead in popularity. Many iconic trains such as the HST and Deltic are available as well as more work-a-day stuff like 37s, 47s and non-air conditioned coaches.

Edited January 26, 2016 by Karhedron

[Revolution Mike]

Roy

 

I don't think that I am breaking any confidences or giving away too much sensitive information in saying that the NGS sales over the past few years have certainly demonstrated that transition era models are still a substantial part of the market, but they are not too different in size to some other well supported eras (blue-grey and post-privatisation-current).  You are right that it does depend on the model, but I certainly think we are seeing a trend of moving from transition being the obvious market to a more "recent" set of eras (though BR blue is over 40 years old!).

 

Of course if you can find the right models spanning the transition era through to much more recent times then you stand a much better chance of being on to a winner!

 

On a side note I am amazed that Farish haven't shrunk the 2EPB and MLV - they are such obvious candidates to complement other Farish stock!

 

Cheers, Mike

[Roy L S]

Hi Mike and Matt

 

Thank you for your views (and Matt thank you for the link).

 

As to the straw poll, it is very small and undoubtedly skewed by the RM We demographic. I am the only one of 20 odd members of my Club who regularly frequents forums, five of them model N - all Transition and I have only just voted, I hadn't seen the poll before. In itself it is obviously not at all reliable as an indicator.

 

Mike's comments about NGS sales is more interesting and I would consider this much more representative and reliable.

 

Personally I am not surprised the MLV and 2EPB have not been "shrunk" if the 4CEP crashed and burned as badly as was apparently the case. Maybe it would have been better strategically if the 2EPB had come first? Looking at the price I can get a MLV for in 00 though, it doesn't look to have sold especially well in that scale so shrinking to N would not be remotely likely in my view.

 

I want to stress I am not overly "precious" about it, I just like to see representative and accurate information and will not rely on anecdote being held out as fact. The little layout I am currently planning will feature steam/diesel with potential to go through into the BR Blue era, this can be done as on many 1970s byways, equipment such as signalling did not change - it was patched up and kept going. I recall it well as a spotty youth, but it was in my recollection a depressing time of rationalisation under investment and decay.

 

Roy

[steve1023]

Come on Mike. Announce a SR 3rd rail unit. You know you want too. I know I want you too.

[Revolution Mike]

Personally I am not surprised the MLV and 2EPB have not been "shrunk" if the 4CEP crashed and burned as badly as was apparently the case. Maybe it would have been better strategically if the 2EPB had come first? Looking at the price I can get a MLV for in 00 though, it doesn't look to have sold especially well in that scale so shrinking to N would not be remotely likely in my view.

 

Hi Roy

 

To me that is one of the nubs of the matter - the lack of complementary stock.  The 350 is the same (as the CEP) - what else is there really to run it with? Hopefully the Pendolino (and potentially 321) will help sales of the 350.  Farish could do that sort of trick themselves with the CEP with things like an EPB and MLV.

 

I'm not sure that looking at retail prices is a reliable method to be honest as it depends on so many (unknown) variants - how many produced, who's margin has been cut, livery choices etc etc.

 

Cheers, Mike

[Karhedron]

Farish could do that sort of trick themselves with the CEP with things like an EPB and MLV.

It is true. Looking at their 00 portfolio they could produce a 2-EPB and a 2H Demu. They could even go one further and use the DTC from the 2H and the DMSO from the 2-EPB to create a 2-HAP. That would give a modest but decent fleet of inner-suburban, outer suburban and express units that could work across Kent and east sussex plus a DEMU to venture onto non-electrified lines.

[njee20]

As to the straw poll, it is very small and undoubtedly skewed by the RM We demographic. I am the only one of 20 odd members of my Club who regularly frequents forums, five of them model N - all Transition and I have only just voted, I hadn't seen the poll before. In itself it is obviously not at all reliable as an indicator.

 

With all due respect Roy, you seem to be using non-existent or at best anecdotal information to refute some (admittedly fairly patchy) data that is out there! You weren't aware of the poll. One presumes as many modern modellers weren't aware of it. It's proportional representation. To say "I didn't see it, ergo the chunk I model is under represented" misses the point somewhat!

[Roy L S]

Hi Njee

 

Sorry if I wasn't clear but that wasn't what I was saying.

 

That I had missed the "straw poll" and not therefore voted was one issue, but not the main one, and I agree that could equally apply to a D&E modeller (or Era 1 of 2 for that matter!). 

 

However, it is not anecdotal that most of my Club colleagues do not view RM Web, it is also not anecdotal that the N modellers amongst them model steam/diesel transition. What I was trying to say is that 60 people voting in this "straw poll" are from a Demographic that very possibly do not represent the modelling fraternity at large (Andy York will probably have an idea of the age profile of members) and is by dint of both this and the size of the sample not especially meaningful or anything to hang your hat on.

 

Regards

 

Roy.

[Les1952]

When we look at the comparative sizes of the markets we see N-gauge as 20% of the market and many instantly jump to an incorrect conclusion - that there are FIVE times as many modelling in OO.

 

WRONG!

 

OO is 60%, N 20% and all other scales combined 20%.

 

That makes the OO market THREE times the size of N, not five.

 

It still doesn't mean I get a K3 in r-t-r N-gauge (it doesn't sell well enough in OO to justify a higher place in the OO upgrade queue) but it does mean there is a little more room in the N-gauge market than we perhaps give credit for.

 

As for eras- Bingham MRC has 6 layouts being made- four transition, one banger blue and one present-day.  Members have four transition era, one post-transition and one Continental layout on the circuit.  That takes us up to a fifth of the sample size.  I'm not saying that it means that 66% of all layouts are transition- my sample is statistically too small- BUT so is the sample!

 

Just a thought.

Les

 

Waiting for my J72 and wondering if Farish will shrink the V1/V3 (or really surprise me with a "loose" 101 centre trailer or a Co-Bo.....)

[Two_sugars]

 

Just a thought.

Les

 

 wondering if Farish will shrink the V1/V3

 

According to a Bachmann person at Raiex NE. . . No Chance.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Two_sugars

[Jim Martin]

Hi Mike

 

(went to Senior school on a 115 every day)

 

OT, but quite a few people went to my senior school on a 115. I didn't (I lived quite close and walked up a big hill to get there) but I can't help wondering if we went to the same school.

 

Jim

[south_tyne]

There has been nothing official since. There is usually an update on the status of planned models issued along with the new product announcement, so there could be news on 1st March.

 

Tom.

Cheers!

Good call, with any luck there might be an update in March.

[south_tyne]

According to a Bachmann person at Raiex NE. . . No Chance.

That is a shame to hear with regard to the V1/V3. Although at least the J72 is on it's way at some point! I am not an active N Gauge modeller but the J72 is my favourite locomotive class so, if it is a little gem, i think I will be getting one as I won't be able to resist! :-)

Edited January 27, 2016 by south_tyne

[Padishar Creel]

Hallo,

I find it interesting that when discussing the EPB it is always a 2EPB. I remember them from the Sidcup line and I always remember trains on the lines to Dartford 1x 4coach, or 2x 4coach or 1x 2coach + 2x 4coach depending on the day and time of day

 

To me designing a 4EPB for N would be of more use and you can sell both versions from day 1 and the centre coaches fall in the bracket "design 1 sell 2", right? EPBs are for me the epitome of 70s commuterland and such trains were nearly always run in multiples.

I also expect most layouts wanting to incorporate these could easily run a 4 coach version

Please correct me if I am wrong

 

es grüßt

pc