NEW OO gauge Crowdfunded Class 92 initiative

[classy52]

7 minutes ago, letterspider said:

This thread has gone strangely quiet...

 

We're all at the other one, like watching a train crash in slow motion 

[KDG]

Surely it's a dead duck now?

 

I was wavering about a 92, not really my mainstream interest, but rule 1 and all that.  My trainset could be somewhere in 3rd rail land, and I have several class 73's

 

If however, I do buy one, it won't be this brand now.......

[Colin_McLeod]

This needs either official cancellation or confirmation.  The silence from DJModels is not acceptable given the discussion in the "1st May announcement"  thread.

Edited May 10, 2019 by Colin_McLeod

[brittannia]

But would crowd funders trust DJM enough to pay another £50+ on a second payment, with a further payment down the line if he confirmed he would be going ahead with the Class 92?  If the "announcement" Topic is to go by the answer is probably if not certain to be no.

[JSpencer]

4 hours ago, KDG said:

Surely it's a dead duck now?

 

I was wavering about a 92, not really my mainstream interest, but rule 1 and all that.  My trainset could be somewhere in 3rd rail land, and I have several class 73's

 

If however, I do buy one, it won't be this brand now.......

 

If you ever lay peco 3rd rails, make sure they clear the gaurd irons of Dapols 73.

 

I don't do anything 21st century, so while the class 92s were in the south east before that, I cannot think of anything to stick behind one, most of my wagons being either too early (80s mainly) or completly inappropiate (engineering and cement trains). My SE collection being mostly sound fitted too, it would be something of an expensive white elephant.  But that other one really does look gorgeous!

[KDG]

17 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

 

If you ever lay peco 3rd rails, make sure they clear the gaurd irons of Dapols 73.

 

I don't do anything 21st century, so while the class 92s were in the south east before that, I cannot think of anything to stick behind one, most of my wagons being either too early (80s mainly) or completly inappropiate (engineering and cement trains). My SE collection being mostly sound fitted too, it would be something of an expensive white elephant.  But that other one really does look gorgeous!

Top tip, thank you

[SWT442]

This project must be dead, surely? I mean, newsletter #1 (Nov 30th, 2018) said the 2nd deposit was due "in the next few days". Then, newsletter #3 (Feb 9th) said it was due "in 6 to 8 weeks" and newsletter #4 (March 11th) said it was 2 weeks away. Don't know about you guys, but we're now between 2 & 6 months from the 2nd deposit suposedley being due, and I've not been asked for anything.

 

I'm not entirely sure I'd be willing to stump up the cash now, to be honest. I had every hope for this project to come to fruition, but so much has been promised (across the board) and yet not a lot has been delivered. And that announcement that wasn't a few weeks back has kind of killed my enthusiasm for any of this.

 

Sorry to say, but I think my money is going to be on Accurascale. At least they have delivered on all that they've promised so far...

 

Andy.

[newbryford]

9 hours ago, JSpencer said:

 

  But that other one really does look gorgeous!

 

What!!!????

 

Is someone else making a 92.......?

 

 

[iclose]

Accuracale are making one to go with the MKV  Caledonian sleepers

 

[Ravenser]

1 hour ago, iclose said:

Accuracale are making one to go with the MKV  Caledonian sleepers

 

 

 

Will DJM allow them to??? 

[timbowilts]

6 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

Will DJM allow them to??? 

If they are doing their own design how can he stop them?

[JSpencer]

7 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

Will DJM allow them to??? 

 

I don't think for a second he would try to stop them. Even If he did want to, I doubt he could even do anything about it.

[Ravenser]

I was being sarcastic in the light of the recent DJM Statement, and the fact that DJM have registered CAD designs for Class 92 in OO and N as their registered design and DJM Intellectual Property:

 

[From DJM Statement 1/5/19]

Quote

Well, if read correctly it could be a complete end to duplication of models, as those who IP them first will literally be in the ‘driving seat’.

This will save model railway companies wasting money on projects, when they find a rival model already IP’d……. I will not back down, I will fight each and every one publicly, and due to having IP, more than likely win each case being on the right side of IP law. 

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I agree with Timbowilts and JSpenser- if Accurascale are developing their own CAD and in collaboration with RevolutioN are receiving cooperation from Brush Traction in the form of design info, DJM can't  stop them producing their model. 

 

But I can't agree with JSpenser's first sentence. The core of recent DJM announcements is that he does want to stop others producing rival models , or retailing in the UK models produced from moulds developed from the CAD he has registered. The 92 is certainly a part of this.

 

So Dave Jones is ploughing on with the 92, in the belief that his registered designs in OO and N form a major obstacle to any rival product. Whether that belief is well founded is another matter. 

Edited May 11, 2019 by Ravenser
Adding note attributing quote

[JSpencer]

3 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

But I can't agree with JSpenser's first sentence. The core of recent DJM announcements is that he does want to stop others producing rival models , or retailing in the UK models produced from moulds developed from the CAD he has registered. The 92 is certainly a part of this.

 

So Dave Jones is ploughing on with the 92, in the belief that his registered designs in OO and N form a major obstacle to any rival product. Whether that belief is well founded is another matter. 

 

The first announcment uses the word "could". Yeah, he seems to have considered potential implications. The day after he states in his clarification:

 

My IP’s cover the external look of all my designs, not the internals, and do no prevent anyone making the same model. It does, however, as far as i understand it, prevent cloning and using my design cues.

It will also make any fellow designer think about how they will design their model to not only be better (that cant be bad can it?) but to look better (and that cannot be bad either right?)

 

I conclude he won't be stopping others who designed their's from the bottom up. He just does not want anyone to sell his models behind his back. (Of course it includes some commision work though I'd be pretty amazed if he intended to stop Kernow et al from doing extra runs from their tooling).

As said on the other thread, he won't have resources to follow it through and would be unlikely to win.

 

None of this excuses the - rather useless from a customer perspective - public announcement in the first place.

 

In a practical sense, I have ZERO fears that Accurascale and RevolutioN will be prevented from producing dam excellent class 92s.

 

[MRDBLUE17]

Hi everyone,

 

I have a deposit on a DJM 92 as at the time we didn’t expect another 4mm Model. As this is supposed to be a crowd funded model I’m beginning to think more and more that clarity is needed as to where this project is and where has all the money gone. Dave has made it clear all along that any money he would make would come after the crowd funded models through retail sales etc from the tooling that he would then own. We have seen very little so if it does get cancelled now refunds should be given with his vague T&C’s or evidence where this has gone. 

 

With Accurascales 92 in production and as we’ve see the development images is going to be an excellent model in 4mm and Ben and Mikes Revolution 2mm Model which was leaked by Dave if we all remember as a spoiler tactic, looks excellent in that scale too. Can this really continue to fruition?

 

Sadly for Dave there is only one person responsible and he needs to be clear and open about all projects, costs, where money has been spent etc or deliver models ASAP.

 

Mark

[John M Upton]

Unfortunately Dave has disappeared out of the office for a couple of weeks leaving the still smouldering wreckage of his infamous 1st May announcement in his wake.

[letterspider]

Crowdfunders come to attention and rally around!

 

there was a time when a gentleman was a man of his word...no I don't mean Dave but us crowdfunders who pledged allegiance to his banner and marched behind him waving our mighty £30 deposits - willing to fight for the freedom to choose the model we wanted.

 

 

Yes that 92 from Accurascale looks really nice but should we be so quick to run to it. They have revealed a CAD just a few weeks ahead of announcing they are going to tooling, so there was a lot of advance planning and work going on, who knows how soon after Dave announced his plan for a 92. They are almost apologetic about the 92 that they are making. I think they say the original plan was they wanted to make the Mark 5 but on agreement they have to make a Class 92 as well to go with it. So sorry for them ruining our project. 

 

Are they aware that they are going to hurt all the crowdfunders really bad? They don't want to talk about it.

 

Luckily Accurascale are coming to our rescue us with a great looking 92 (no I really do think it looks to be a stunning model) after torpedoing our project - thanks guys. 

 

Now some of YOU crowdfunders are complaining about Dave and saying they are going to walk away from 2nd deposits because they are going to buy from Accurascale.  Even if he came to market next week with a better, more affordable Class 92 with a free sound chip and which laid golden goose eggs would you come back?

 

Should we be surprised if Dave walks away from this project? 

 

It is the crowdfunders who have walked away which killed this project - not Dave. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Markwj]

How have the crowdfunders walked away as he has not asked for anymore money? Dave has killed it with his poor business model and lack of progress but of course it's all someone else's fault. 

Is Dave a man of his word how many promises broken and deadlines passed? 

Think you are pointing the blame at the wrong people.

 

 

[classy52]

43 minutes ago, letterspider said:

Crowdfunders come to attention and rally around!

 

there was a time when a gentleman was a man of his word...no I don't mean Dave but us crowdfunders who pledged allegiance to his banner and marched behind him waving our mighty £30 deposits - willing to fight for the freedom to choose the model we wanted.

 

 

Yes that 92 from Accurascale looks really nice but should we be so quick to run to it. They have revealed a CAD just a few weeks ahead of announcing they are going to tooling, so there was a lot of advance planning and work going on, who knows how soon after Dave announced his plan for a 92. They are almost apologetic about the 92 that they are making. I think they say the original plan was they wanted to make the Mark 5 but on agreement they have to make a Class 92 as well to go with it. So sorry for them ruining our project. 

 

Are they aware that they are going to hurt all the crowdfunders really bad? They don't want to talk about it.

 

Luckily Accurascale are coming to our rescue us with a great looking 92 (no I really do think it looks to be a stunning model) after torpedoing our project - thanks guys. 

 

Now some of YOU crowdfunders are complaining about Dave and saying they are going to walk away from 2nd deposits because they are going to buy from Accurascale.  Even if he came to market next week with a better, more affordable Class 92 with a free sound chip and which laid golden goose eggs would you come back?

 

Should we be surprised if Dave walks away from this project? 

 

It is the crowdfunders who have walked away which killed this project - not Dave. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No Dave may have killed it...nobody else.

Edited May 11, 2019 by classy52

[Great Western]

47 minutes ago, letterspider said:

Crowdfunders come to attention and rally around!

 

there was a time when a gentleman was a man of his word...no I don't mean Dave but us crowdfunders who pledged allegiance to his banner and marched behind him waving our mighty £30 deposits - willing to fight for the freedom to choose the model we wanted.

 

 

Yes that 92 from Accurascale looks really nice but should we be so quick to run to it. They have revealed a CAD just a few weeks ahead of announcing they are going to tooling, so there was a lot of advance planning and work going on, who knows how soon after Dave announced his plan for a 92. They are almost apologetic about the 92 that they are making. I think they say the original plan was they wanted to make the Mark 5 but on agreement they have to make a Class 92 as well to go with it. So sorry for them ruining our project. 

 

Are they aware that they are going to hurt all the crowdfunders really bad? They don't want to talk about it.

 

Luckily Accurascale are coming to our rescue us with a great looking 92 (no I really do think it looks to be a stunning model) after torpedoing our project - thanks guys. 

 

Now some of YOU crowdfunders are complaining about Dave and saying they are going to walk away from 2nd deposits because they are going to buy from Accurascale.  Even if he came to market next week with a better, more affordable Class 92 with a free sound chip and which laid golden goose eggs would you come back?

 

Should we be surprised if Dave walks away from this project? 

 

It is the crowdfunders who have walked away which killed this project - not Dave. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

God is this where the money has gone, a blame everyone apart from DJM spokesman?

 

Blame literally everyone or anything except his own inability to deliver many years on from the launch!

 

You really couldn’t make this comment up !   

Edited May 11, 2019 by Great Western

[SWT442]

1 hour ago, letterspider said:

Crowdfunders come to attention and rally around!

 

there was a time when a gentleman was a man of his word...no I don't mean Dave but us crowdfunders who pledged allegiance to his banner and marched behind him waving our mighty £30 deposits - willing to fight for the freedom to choose the model we wanted.

 

 

Yes that 92 from Accurascale looks really nice but should we be so quick to run to it. They have revealed a CAD just a few weeks ahead of announcing they are going to tooling, so there was a lot of advance planning and work going on, who knows how soon after Dave announced his plan for a 92. They are almost apologetic about the 92 that they are making. I think they say the original plan was they wanted to make the Mark 5 but on agreement they have to make a Class 92 as well to go with it. So sorry for them ruining our project. 

 

Are they aware that they are going to hurt all the crowdfunders really bad? They don't want to talk about it.

 

Luckily Accurascale are coming to our rescue us with a great looking 92 (no I really do think it looks to be a stunning model) after torpedoing our project - thanks guys. 

 

Now some of YOU crowdfunders are complaining about Dave and saying they are going to walk away from 2nd deposits because they are going to buy from Accurascale.  Even if he came to market next week with a better, more affordable Class 92 with a free sound chip and which laid golden goose eggs would you come back?

 

Should we be surprised if Dave walks away from this project? 

 

It is the crowdfunders who have walked away which killed this project - not Dave. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'll have what you're smoking!

 

The crowdfunders haven't walked away from anything, literally nothing has been asked for beyond the first payment.

 

If you're the PR Department, no wonder it's all doomed...

 

Andy.

[GWR-fan]

My old mother used to say many times, "It takes two to tango".  When a contract is initiated party A agrees to compensate party B for carrying out a specific task and delivering a result.  Crowdfunders enter into a "contract" by paying an initial deposit and then agree to make further payments when requested to the completion of the project.  Likewise party B has a responsibility to complete his/her part of the contract in either carrying out the work contracted and/or  supplying the contracted product.

 

The T&C of the contract should be clearly stated so that both parties know their responsibilities in fulfilling the contract.  Were the T&C fully explained when the crowdfunders entered into the "contract"?    What were their expectations as regards a delivery date?    I note with the APT project that the product was scheduled for a December 2019/January 2020 delivery and yet the project is still at the CAD stage.  Common sense would indicate that tooling and production and release would take at least a further two years.  Was the initial production schedule a little optimistic and did this schedule perhaps encourage orders?  The APT is a very complex project and applying a production schedule applicable to a single locomotive is not relevant.  A large well established company like Bachmann currently takes in excess of two years to release a new product,  including a "simple" coach or wagon.

 

An analysis of the potential failure of any project will seek to proportion blame.  One must look at the events involved and see if correct checks and balances were used to determine a successful outcome or perhaps was either party a little too optimistic and ambitious to get the ball rolling without a full cost analysis of the project and being able to deliver in a timely manner. 

[Clagsniffer]

2 hours ago, letterspider said:

Crowdfunders come to attention and rally around!

 

there was a time when a gentleman was a man of his word...no I don't mean Dave but us crowdfunders who pledged allegiance to his banner and marched behind him waving our mighty £30 deposits - willing to fight for the freedom to choose the model we wanted.

 

 

Yes that 92 from Accurascale looks really nice but should we be so quick to run to it. They have revealed a CAD just a few weeks ahead of announcing they are going to tooling, so there was a lot of advance planning and work going on, who knows how soon after Dave announced his plan for a 92. They are almost apologetic about the 92 that they are making. I think they say the original plan was they wanted to make the Mark 5 but on agreement they have to make a Class 92 as well to go with it. So sorry for them ruining our project. 

 

Are they aware that they are going to hurt all the crowdfunders really bad? They don't want to talk about it.

 

Luckily Accurascale are coming to our rescue us with a great looking 92 (no I really do think it looks to be a stunning model) after torpedoing our project - thanks guys. 

 

Now some of YOU crowdfunders are complaining about Dave and saying they are going to walk away from 2nd deposits because they are going to buy from Accurascale.  Even if he came to market next week with a better, more affordable Class 92 with a free sound chip and which laid golden goose eggs would you come back?

 

Should we be surprised if Dave walks away from this project? 

 

It is the crowdfunders who have walked away which killed this project - not Dave. 

 

 

 

 

 

Where’s the ‘disagree’ button when you need it 

[letterspider]

2 hours ago, Markwj said:

How have the crowdfunders walked away as he has not asked for anymore money? Dave has killed it with his poor business model and lack of progress but of course it's all someone else's fault. 

Is Dave a man of his word how many promises broken and deadlines passed? 

Think you are pointing the blame at the wrong people.

 

 

 

Hi Mark yes really think Dave could have done things a little better on the social media side maybe if he had done ICT at GCSE and A level, together with Economics and Business Studies but I don't agree on your other points. A man who doesn't keep his promises and fails to meet their own deadlines could be dishonest, have poor foresight, bad luck or any combinations of those.  

 

Number 1: is Dave likely to be dishonest and is this all a scam - this is the biggest worry to crowdfunders and from his track record - highly unlikely. Most observers on this thread say he is overly honest to a fault.

Number 2: has Dave had a run of bad luck. Yes we know that from what he told us about the personal and business matters.

Number 3: does Dave have poor foresight / business acumen. Well ask yourself this question.

 

The first 92 was made by LIMA probably not too long after 1992. That model I think was better, certainly the pantographs were better, than the Hornby updates.

Is there enough demand in the UK for an updated model - initial pre-orders and expression of interests probably good enough.

Then the global marketplace becomes highly volatile, manufacturing prices shoot up and production capacity drops as a consequence - possibly you are told there is going to be an indefinite wait. All this will cause any model you make likely to have a very small profit margin. Your national political system is going through a meltdown unlike anything seen in one or two generations and this is making the economic situation really bad. Major global manufacturers have no interest in this nonsense occurring in Britain and are voting with their feet.

Other bad stuff will happen and a competitor decides to go against you - 

 

Now you are looking at this in your crystal ball. Would you take all that on? I don't think many business models could thrive in that environment.

 

 

 

 

[YesTor]

2 hours ago, GWR-fan said:

...I note with the APT project that the product was scheduled for a December 2019/January 2020 delivery and yet the project is still at the CAD stage.  Common sense would indicate that tooling and production and release would take at least a further two years. 

 

I think we have to be a little careful what we actually interpret as fact in the run-up to these events.  I do not recall at any stage there being a specific "schedule for December 2019/January 2020 delivery".  However, what I do clearly recall are several contributors to the APT topic at that time pressuring for an "expected delivery date", and furthermore I also recall Dave specifically stating that he would not be drawn to make any confirmation/promise or otherwise as to a specific delivery time, however some estimated/approximated (call it what you may) indication was given as there being a gestation period of around two years, subject to unforeseen, and likely inevitable delays.  Always happy to be proved wrong of course however this was my longterm understanding of what to expect.

 

 

On 11/05/2019 at 00:44, SWT442 said:

This project must be dead, surely? I mean, newsletter #1 (Nov 30th, 2018) said the 2nd deposit was due "in the next few days". Then, newsletter #3 (Feb 9th) said it was due "in 6 to 8 weeks" and newsletter #4 (March 11th) said it was 2 weeks away. Don't know about you guys, but we're now between 2 & 6 months from the 2nd deposit suposedley being due, and I've not been asked for anything.

 

This depends upon one's own outlook on this whole unfortunate situation, ie. whether we opt to view this from a 'glass half empty', or 'glass half full' perspective.  Perhaps you/we should consider ourselves fortunate that we haven't actually been asked for and potentially submitted second and third deposits, as otherwise you/we could be sitting here having paid out further funds and still have little to show for it...