N gauge Crowdfunded APT-P (Warley announcement)

[carderrail]

Dave,

 

I can see why,  would be my first choice and gives options to cut back to shorter units (now or later)...

 

Choice is great but in the N Gauge Market can be a luxury as orders can be diluted across the options to the extent none are viable.

 

What do you beleive are the viable options? A cut-down "less featured" 14-car and 7-Car set? One Yellow Front and One Black Front?

 

Regards

Tony

 

 

 

hi mate,
not so sure as the highest orders were for 14 car sets.
cheers
dave

[JSpencer]

Simply put, you have to shift xxx amount of product at xxx price to break even (break even includes, development, tooling, cad/cam desin, research, shipping to the docks, shipping on a ship, then shipping to a distribution centre, then shipping to you the customer.........then there is good old VAT. All this before a portion of wage is considered), and at the full fat price we couldnt attract 100 orders!

Apart from a lovely looking and running model, what you would be getting is an exclusive club membership of how ever many are made, as rather like the oo one, i do not see second or more runs made past the initial one.

Is the "go" based on just reaching the break even point or a higher figure so that you can at least draw a living wage? I sincerely hope the latter in your case as this must be your most expensive project to date.

 

I know you said on previous crowd funders like the 71 that you wanted to get a set of tools. But you also say that there is very little probability of a second run ever happening. So those tools are worth very little in the end if no second run ever follows.

[DJM Dave]

Break even is the goal, but it would be nice to make money on the project

However, as i hope to be owning the tooling for the model, i will be able to write the too,ing down for a few years so will gain that way, but its over the longer term rather than a short sharp 'hit' of cash into the funds.

 

so yes, the 'go' is purely break even taking into account the tools, shipping etc etc etc, and of course the dreaded 20% VAT paid to HMRC.

[RichardBenn]

This might sound weird (and it goes against what you said above about being able to write down the tooling for a few years) but if you destroyed the tooling after the initial run it might actually prompt more orders from (a) people who would like one but will wait for a possible second run where there is less financial risk and (b) people who will see it as an investment, because with no future runs the value is only going to go up.

 

It would be a true limited edition, one-chance-only opportunity.

 

Just a thought....

 

P.S. I agree with what others have said about a stripped down version. No bells and whistles for me, just an accurate looking model, but if it ends up having traction tyres can we have a non-tyred set (or the ability to order one) as well? :-)

[njee20]

Yes, that does sound weird! I'd counsel against doing that myself, although I now have an image of Dave going mad with a baseball bat following the production of the only APTs ever. 

 

OT: How can there be so many emojis but not a simple "hmmm" one!?

[DavidH]

Break even is the goal, but it would be nice to make money on the project

However, as i hope to be owning the tooling for the model, i will be able to write the too,ing down for a few years so will gain that way, but its over the longer term rather than a short sharp 'hit' of cash into the funds.

 

so yes, the 'go' is purely break even taking into account the tools, shipping etc etc etc, and of course the dreaded 20% VAT paid to HMRC.

 

You won't make any money on the APT? None at all? Not even a wage?

 

Edited May 16, 2018 by DavidH

[DJM Dave]

You won't make any money on the APT? None at all? Not even a wage?

 

 

Neither Michaell at DToS and I are interested in making amounts for ourselves from this model, as we are both avid N gaugers and see it as a way of getting an iconic model out there, and with luck, have enough in the kitty to re-invest in our aim of having N gauge classes 81-85 plus possibly some proper OHLE EMU's, like the 304 etc.

 

However, as i keep reitterating, its all moot unless we can get over the line with the N gauge APT with enough funding to get it into Production and deliver the model to crowdfunders. So far, as you know, the response to the oroginal formay proposed has been less than stellar, so we will take a look at the revised ideas, and get quotes from China to present as 'APT-P mk2' and see how that 'flies' with everyone.

 

I suppose only then will we know if there is a hunger for an APT in N gauge at a stipped down price point rather than a fully singing and dancing model at a higher price point.

 

long way to go yet though, thats for sure.

Dave

[JSpencer]

This might sound weird (and it goes against what you said above about being able to write down the tooling for a few years) but if you destroyed the tooling after the initial run it might actually prompt more orders from (a) people who would like one but will wait for a possible second run where there is less financial risk and (b) people who will see it as an investment, because with no future runs the value is only going to go up.

 

)

 

Only if they are psychologically weak AND have money to spare AND are aware this project exists.

 

I had to choose between the APT-P OR renovating the terrace. Guess which my family opted for?

Edited May 16, 2018 by JSpencer

[Fenman]

...

I suppose only then will we know if there is a hunger for an APT in N gauge at a stipped down price point rather than a fully singing and dancing model at a higher price point.

 

long way to go yet though, thats for sure.

...

I’m beginning to get a strong feeling about why Dapol appears to be withdrawing from N and instead expanding in 0; and why Hattons and Rails (who probably see more of the market than anyone) are in 00 and 0, not N.

 

Paul

[Karhedron]

Choice is great but in the N Gauge Market can be a luxury as orders can be diluted across the options to the extent none are viable.

I don't think it is a case of either/or.

 

Dave has indicated that the full-length 14-car set has received the most interest. That being the case, he will need to tool up all the vehicles.

 

At that point, he might as well offer shorty formations in as many permutations as possible. It will not cost more or dilute orders to have more options and may appeal to people who can only afford/fit a short train as well as those who want something a bit more impressive but not quite the full 14 cars.

[njee20]

Although there must be a small cost associated with (for example) packaging for smaller units. I conceptually agree though. I imagine 10 would be the sweetspot for me. 14 would be too long, but 10 would still be a formidable train.

[Mr_Tilt]

The 10 car P-Trains, 2 x Trailers, 2 x Power Cars, 6 x Trailers, was the most common consist during the original 1981 service period. Actually I think that was the ONLY consist during the period, but when it went back into service later in 1982 the consists became more varied.

 

Having said that, the 10 car sets were still the most common, with the leading two trailer cars full of engineers and test equipment and the rear six for the passengers. 

[Bomag]

I’m beginning to get a strong feeling about why Dapol appears to be withdrawing from N and instead expanding in 0; and why Hattons and Rails (who probably see more of the market than anyone) are in 00 and 0, not N.

 

Paul

 

Sorry, I don't get the connection. From the information I have seen Dapol have issues with particular products not selling and a lack of pre-oders, both of which may be down to the often silly mistakes in models (mainly livery defects). The inference is that N Gauge modelers are seen as fickle; coversely some N gauge modelers see Dapol as being wofully inconsistent e.g. the Class 68 looks good, the 142 less so. This has no bearing on whether a £900 APT model will sell and whether a £600 lower spec version would sell better.

 

In tems of the limited number of retailers doing 'N' gauge specials, there is a fairly obvious difference between 'N' and 'OO' - the former has a quality society dedicated to its promotion which also produces many kits and RTR products which in OO are covered by shop commisions.

 

While I am just about willing to spend £900 on the current APT concept I would much rather have fewer bells and whistles leave enough cash for a Class 85, or even better a 309.

[Covkid]

I’m beginning to get a strong feeling about why Dapol appears to be withdrawing from N and instead expanding in 0; and why Hattons and Rails (who probably see more of the market than anyone) are in 00 and 0, not N.

Paul

Really ? So that will be why Dapol are working on a new class 50 in "N" then, as well as a number of other models. I believe a considerable investment has been made by Chirk in rehashing the class 142 but not sure if it has hit the retailers shelves yet.

 

I actually believe "N" is a great market to be in, particularly as new houses seem smaller these days and particularly the younger folk are having to start off with "compact lives". "TING" seems to be in excellent shape and I can understand why Dave wants to work in this scale, particularly where longer / iconic trains are possible.

 

The concern I have for this project - I feel Dave (in his keen ness) has offered too many choices to potential customers which may actually spark reticence to order. I believe Dave should offer a 7 car with head and tail lights and a ten car with head and tail lights. One with yellow cabs and one with black cabs. All the cars would be unnumbered but Dave would supply numbering transfers in the packaging.

 

Here's the thing. Dave would then offer a "platinum service" to those customers who want it, of applying the numbers of the customers choice and light bars to the saloons. In my view this would get the train delivered to the crowdfunders who want it at a reasonable price. But it would also allow those people with additional disposable cash to spend more on their iconic train. In my view this would make ordering the train simpler and probably make production a whole lot simpler.

[John ks]

Dave

I am going for the OO version

 

Kato do some very nice N scale models &,

 

I believe Jason from Rapido is keen on British models & it was him who did the APT-E in OO( got one & well worth it)

 

So would it be worth asking Kato in Japan to do the N scale model or maybe the Rapido people

 

​John

[njee20]

Eh? Why would a manufacturer (Dave) ask another one to make a product for him?

DToS may approach Rapido or Kato (I imagine the latter would laugh heartily at a production run of c100), but that's like saying why don't Samsung ask Sony to produce their TVs!

[cutting42]

Eh? Why would a manufacturer (Dave) ask another one to make a product for him?

DToS may approach Rapido or Kato (I imagine the latter would laugh heartily at a production run of c100), but that's like saying why don't Samsung ask Sony to produce their TVs!

 

Actually its not that unusual in the manufacturing world. Where a company has a particular expertise in manufacturing it can sell its capacity on the general market even to a competitor. The Panasonic OLED panels are made by LG for example.

[njee20]

Yeah I did think that when I posted it, but you know what I mean, your example is akin to Dave buying PCBs from Rapido, not asking Rapido to build his product.

[DJM Dave]

Yeah I did think that when I posted it, but you know what I mean, your example is akin to Dave buying PCBs from Rapido, not asking Rapido to build his product.

anyway, moving on ;-)

[njee20]

Indeed!

So... where are we up to with a 'light' version - any thoughts on viability and ball park cost?

[scottystitch]

anyway, moving on ;-)

On a different (albeit potentially contentious) tack.

 

Rather than struggle to find orders for the APT, have you considered going straight to the electric locomotives without stopping off at the APT?

 

Presumably they would all be one chassis with different bodies (I realise that is simplified, but I'm sure you catch my drift) and I'm guessing different bogies. Do you think there would be enough support to launch these instead?

 

You might find a bigger market of people prepared to buy 3 or 4 locos at £120-£150 than those prepared to pay £1000 for one train. Especially when the rolling stock to run behind them is already available.

 

I know it's 5 sets of body tools, but I felt it worth throwing out there, and the APT would need, what, ten sets?

[DJM Dave]

On a different (albeit potentially contentious) tack.

 

Rather than struggle to find orders for the APT, have you considered going straight to the electric locomotives without stopping off at the APT?

 

Presumably they would all be one chassis with different bodies (I realise that is simplified, but I'm sure you catch my drift) and I'm guessing different bogies. Do you think there would be enough support to launch these instead?

 

You might find a bigger market of people prepared to buy 3 or 4 locos at £120-£150 than those prepared to pay £1000 for one train. Especially when the rolling stock to run behind them is already available.

 

I know it's 5 sets of body tools, but I felt it worth throwing out there, and the APT would need, what, ten sets?

Hi,

my initial thoughts were, on the APT, 2 x half sets, (of a 5 car each), one set powered 1 set dummy, with separate coaches and a trailer available for shorter than 10 rakes, or longer than 10. so there would basically be 3 different numbered trailers available ( inc 1 each in each set).

stripped down, no frills, hopefully 1 decoder rather than 3. but you can get cheap 6 pin decoders now so 3 wont be bad costs wise, especially if you put a good 6 pin in the motorised unit.

lose the through wiring to save on that too.

 

i havn't asked for a quote yet, as a decision needs to be taken on format first that we can all 'live with'.

 

As for the loco's, i have the drawings for the 81-85, but thats for the future.

 

cheers

Dave

[njee20]

Seems reasonable on all fronts.

[cutting42]

I'd be in on that basis

[PaulCheffus]

Seems reasonable on all fronts.

Hi

 

Provided one motor can move a full 14 car set at a reasonable speed and I can't see any reason why it shouldn't.

 

Cheers

 

Paul