Jump to content
 

NEW OO gauge Crowdfunded Class 92 initiative


DJM Dave
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, James90012 said:

But DJ will presumably now have contracts set up to sell via Kernow, Hattons etc, so with that in mind perhaps it would be worth DJ converting from Crowdfunding and taking the risk again?

 

Basically, I've committed £30 to this - if I can guarantee that if I continue to fund I will get a model at the end I'm fine. However, what I feel uncomfortable with is investing more if it eventually fails and then being out of pocket and out of a model.

 

Dave Jones obviously had contracts in place with both Kernow and Hatton's. Quite what the current state of affairs is I wouldn't like to guess. Here on RMweb there has been a lot of disappointment over the Hattons 14xx, and I believe Chris Trerise had to spend a lot of money in what appeared to be a  model manufacturer "divorce".  Since then both companies seem to have started dealing direct with China.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Covkid said:

 

This leads me to wonder how the DJ method of crowd funding appears  to allow funders to walk away from the project with their deposit refunded. Has this happened, because it sounds like a very "safe" deal for the crowdfunder, but conversely not for Dave Jones ?

       

 

I don't think it's a case of funders being allowed to "walk away" and be refunded. At best it'll be that if the entire project is cancelled you might get a refund. Personally I wouldn't expect to, and would actually rather not get it (I took the risk), as it would obviously leave DJM nursing all the losses, which could take him out of the game. I'd rather lose the deposit and keep the builder going as they might deliver novel things that otherwise money (alone) cannot buy.

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not sure whether the chap has the worse luck I’ve ever seen, is a really poor project manager or is just a plain dreamer flying round the world on other people’s money hoping they’ll forget they’ve actually paid him to produce something?

 

Quotes of woe do read like a eastenders storyline !

 

Personally I think he’s seriously unlucky and a really poor PM, the latter you have to worry about your investment as a result.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sorabain said:

 

I don't think it's a case of funders being allowed to "walk away" and be refunded. At best it'll be that if the entire project is cancelled you might get a refund. Personally I wouldn't expect to, and would actually rather not get it (I took the risk), as it would obviously leave DJM nursing all the losses, which could take him out of the game. I'd rather lose the deposit and keep the builder going as they might deliver novel things that otherwise money (alone) cannot buy.

 

You’d rather lose your hard earned money than a DJM lose money ?!  You really do have a heart of gold, fancy funding scheme to build a 1:1 scale flying Scotsman ?! 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, njee20 said:

Hatton's are already a stockist with them on their website (plus others I'm sure). I presume the reason not to convert to a conventional 'manufacturer funded' offer would be quite simply a lack of capital.

 

We're not at the point that's relevant for now, I can't quite imagine a scenario where Dave says "too many people have dropped out, so I'm cancelling the project, here's your money back, it's now going to be funded through conventional means and still available through all the normal retail channels".  There will remain a market or there won't. I imagine the first to market will be at an advantage, even accounting for the fact most will be 'pre-orders', but 159220's summary is telling. There are a lot of firm deadlines in there which are now literally years ago. Lots of teasers too which seem never to have come to fruition as I'm aware, including one specifically about the N gauge one, due at Warley 2016.

Of course (and speaking generally rather than with reference to a specific project) were such a scenario to come to pass and sufficient people dropped out to take things below the required "critical mass" then the "here's your money back" part for the rest (and how much if any were to be paid back) will depend entirely on what of the collected funding has been spent on progressing the model already. There should in any such venture be no expectation that all money paid in will be returned if it doesn't proceed and there is certainly no guarantee, That is the inherent risk of any crowdfunding proposition, and in signing up the funders accept it.

 

What troubles me with what is being mooted by some in such a scenario is that if those who might cancel and forego their initial payment to go elsewhere, reaches such a significant number then a project is  brought down for everyone, even those who had no intention of "bailing". There is as I see it a need to recognise this, that a certain level of patience and integrity is required and that committing at the start means seeing it through.

 

Roy 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Great Western said:

 

You’d rather lose your hard earned money than a DJM lose money ?!  You really do have a heart of gold, fancy funding scheme to build a 1:1 scale flying Scotsman ?! 

 

Do you have any skin in this game? I wonder at the constant negativity, which seems like it can only serve to worry people into potentially not paying the 2nd invoice when it comes through and kill the project as a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

 

There seems to be a lot of bad blood and/or resentment around.

Edited by sorabain
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Skin ? 

 

Have i invested ? No, thank goodness! 

I dont want people to throw good money after bad as far as I can see and that logn quoted story illustrates the point well it’s a dead horse, but one that will limp on closer to the finish line before being put out of its misery by the vet.

 

I think the chap has traded on his previous job, if anyone else had rocked up with this lot they’d of been run out of town years ago !

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JSpencer said:

Lets say 100K development (the figure that seems to be thrown around) then £30 manufacture per unit. With 1000 corwdfunders, you are at £130 each before tax which will bring you close to £160.

 

Hornby do a typical 10,000 unit run. Which gives £40 for each then add their Margin, then retailer margin and finally VAT for an RRP of about £110.

 

I would keep pestering the wishlists (or find the 200K needed to run the project from A to Z).

 

 

 

With the level of detailing on modern locos and high wage costs, I would have thought £30 would barely cover the cost of labour to assemble and test each unit - let alone all the parts.

Unless you want a self assembly kit like a Vitrains model?

Edited by letterspider
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Great Western said:

Skin ? 

 

Have i invested ? No, thank goodness! 

I dont want people to throw good money after bad as far as I can see and that logn quoted story illustrates the point well it’s a dead horse, but one that will limp on closer to the finish line before being put out of its misery by the vet.

 

I think the chap has traded on his previous job, if anyone else had rocked up with this lot they’d of been run out of town years ago !

People are already committed to this project, there has been money spent too so someone will lose out if it fails, so now is not the time to be talking it down more.

 

Dave has delivered crowdfunded locos - the class 71 as well as his commission work for Kernow.

 

Mechanically his motors/drives on the Austerity and the 14xx are not everyone's cup of tea and i am sure he can learn from that.

 

I agree with the Accurascale model now in development the pressure is on Dave to get his EP funded and delivered, if that doesn't happen soon then yes more people may swap manufacturers  but it is still within Dave's gift to pull a rabbit out of the hat and deliver a 92.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
27 minutes ago, sorabain said:

 

I don't think it's a case of funders being allowed to "walk away" and be refunded. At best it'll be that if the entire project is cancelled you might get a refund. Personally I wouldn't expect to, and would actually rather not get it (I took the risk), as it would obviously leave DJM nursing all the losses, which could take him out of the game. I'd rather lose the deposit and keep the builder going as they might deliver novel things that otherwise money (alone) cannot buy.

I think it was more that a few people here have said "sod it, I'm only in for £30, I'm not paying any more now there's another option". If there are enough of them the project could falter, and if the funds have been spent it could be at the 'expense' (literally and figuratively) of those who continued to make payments in good faith.


We did the 'risks' of crowd funding to death, although it's still not been put to the test what happens if people try and reclaim large sums of money in the event of project failure.

 

GW appears to exist here only to shout about how awful DJM are. Like the noisy drunk guy in the corner of the pub.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

To the moderators - is it time to lock this thread and for a new one to be started? It was started up to attract interest and support for a DJM 92, however it seems to attract observers who (deliberately or not) are going to run it into the ground, while repeatedly going on about the competitor.

Accurascale have made it clear that it is inappropriate and that they would like members not to do the same on their thread - this seems to have been respected.

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

For god's sake, no! Dave already doesn't communicate with anyone who's not signed up, let's not close the bloody thread too, that really would be the final nail in the coffin!

 

How would another thread be any different?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, letterspider said:

To the moderators - is it time to lock this thread and for a new one to be started? It was started up to attract interest and support for a DJM 92, however it seems to attract observers who (deliberately or not) are going to run it into the ground, while repeatedly going on about the competitor.

Accurascale have made it clear that it is inappropriate and that they would like members not to do the same on their thread - this seems to have been respected.

 

 

You can't lock a thread because you don't like everyone's views - Mods will intervene when/if someone does over step the mark.

 

Accurascale asked that people don't get into the DJM/Accurascale whys and wherefores debate which is different to whether some people believe Dave is capable of delivering his model.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Great Western said:

 

You’d rather lose your hard earned money than a DJM lose money ?!  You really do have a heart of gold, fancy funding scheme to build a 1:1 scale flying Scotsman ?! 

 

We were offered this model by DJM as a crowdfunder and we signed up for it. This is 'our' project page and so thanks for your observations but we don't need it running down into the ground.

Perhaps you can start your own thread about it?

Edited by letterspider
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

You can't lock a thread because you don't like everyone's views - Mods will intervene when/if someone does over step the mark.

 

Accurascale asked that people don't get into the DJM/Accurascale whys and wherefores debate which is different to whether some people believe Dave is capable of delivering his model.

 

no but Dave could

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

People are already committed to this project, there has been money spent too so someone will lose out if it fails, so now is not the time to be talking it down more.

 

Dave has delivered crowdfunded locos - the class 71 as well as his commission work for Kernow.

 

Mechanically his motors/drives on the Austerity and the 14xx are not everyone's cup of tea and i am sure he can learn from that.

 

I agree with the Accurascale model now in development the pressure is on Dave to get his EP funded and delivered, if that doesn't happen soon then yes more people may swap manufacturers  but it is still within Dave's gift to pull a rabbit out of the hat and deliver a 92.

 

I'm afraid that's only partially accurate in regard to "crowdfunding"as such. The 71 upfront monies were held by Kernow and were sold on by  by them as agents (  in the same way as they have dealt with orders for their Bulleid and Warship diesels on pre order ) and not by DJ

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
24 minutes ago, letterspider said:

To the moderators - is it time to lock this thread and for a new one to be started? It was started up to attract interest and support for a DJM 92, however it seems to attract observers who (deliberately or not) are going to run it into the ground, while repeatedly going on about the competitor.

Accurascale have made it clear that it is inappropriate and that they would like members not to do the same on their thread - this seems to have been respected.

 

 

 

If you have issues which vex you on this forum,there is a process open to you which will deal with them discreetly and effectively .This can be accessed by clicking on "report post"

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, njee20 said:

I think it was more that a few people here have said "sod it, I'm only in for £30, I'm not paying any more now there's another option". If there are enough of them the project could falter, and if the funds have been spent it could be at the 'expense' (literally and figuratively) of those who continued to make payments in good faith.


We did the 'risks' of crowd funding to death, although it's still not been put to the test what happens if people try and reclaim large sums of money in the event of project failure.

 

GW appears to exist here only to shout about how awful DJM are. Like the noisy drunk guy in the corner of the pub.

 

I don’t drink, I’m making an observation on what I’ve read, is disagreeing with the majority wrong ? 

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Your last point isn't too bad, the (metaphorical) drunk guy in the pub can be right now and again. Most of your contributions here just come across as you having a bit of a grudge and sniping.

 

Quote

I’d of thought any new “announcement” would be met with a air of right oh sunshine, whatever. Rather than a wow, I can’t wait, take my cash ! 

 

Quote

 

I think you’ve more chance of raising the Titanic, or breading unicorns than that happening.


 

 

Quote

In the fantasy land of a DJ Class 92 yes

 

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a forum, which is supposed to permit (relatively) open discussion and fair comments and opinions.

 

I think this is what is being expressed, generally, in this and most other threads.

 

I've 'invested' in this project as well, and am happy with that ... 

 

Let's see how it develops in the next couple of months' time.

 

Al.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, letterspider said:

 

With the level of detailing on modern locos and high wage costs, I would have thought £30 would barely cover the cost of labour to assemble and test each unit - let alone all the parts.

Unless you want a self assembly kit like a Vitrains model?

 

Most probably true. The figure could be twice that, which would make crowdfunding litterally for 0 profit for any companytrying, getting only a set of free tools!

Edited by JSpencer
Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be reading this wrong, but I understood that there were no refunds from the djm 92 (or Or apt model).  What I understood by the staged payments is that you were paying for the development of the model - Cad, tooling, etc.  Your final payment got you the model.  Its hazy to say the least.  In contrast to the other guys who say to put down a deposit and pay the rest when it's done.   I can understand the latter modus operandi a lot better.   

 

 

The second payments for djm 92 are due soon, possibly, maybe - it'll be interesting to see what happens.

 

Going forward, I hope Dave learns from this and makes paying for his next model a dammed site clearer

Edited by Ouroborus
Typo
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I’m in it to win it, it’s an interesting gamble and at the time we put in for this there weren’t any other options for ‘92’ on the table, we may as well see it through!

 

There’s a lot of discussion around the £30 payments we’ve all made, I’m sure most of us aren’t that concerned but there is a lot of discussion from a vocal few...to those that are worried, if you think about it, yes it’s £30 put down, but sadly £30 isn’t a great deal these days in the grand scheme of things, it’s half a tank of fuel, it’s a Dominos pizza with sides, barely a round of beers in most pubs even...in fact we’d likely all get paid more than £30 during the time it takes to read through the 58 pages of this thread! :lol:

 

I’ve kind of got to that boring stage where you just think it’s going around in circles (both the model production and the RMWeb discussion), let’s just stop worrying and let DJM get on with it if he does, we all go off and do a bit of modelling and some arguing on other threads and we can restart the discussion when we get the next newsletter update through!

  • Like 7
  • Agree 8
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...