Jump to content
 

An interview with Jason Shron


mdvle
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

I think there is no “one size fits all” approach to models. There are many potential levels of detail, use of separately applied parts etc and there is a market space for these different approaches. I guess the two extremes would be the sort of ultra-basic low cost 0-4-0 models still made by Hornby at one end, and the very low volume factory finished brass models offered by Golden Age, Loveless (and overseas, the likes of Lematec, Fulgurex, UTI etc) at the other, with a vast spectrum in-between. Whether a model offers value depends on whether the price is commensurate with product quality, not all cheap models offer good value because it doesn’t matter how cheap something is if you wouldn’t want it. Equally, at the other extreme it doesn’t matter how good a model is, most of us reach a point where the price is not justified. If the product is well targeted, well produced (basic detail and finish are not the same as low quality of build and running) and a company can manage the mechanics of running a business then a low cost entry range can work (I keep pointing to Piko to illustrate this with their Hobby range). Similarly, there is a market for high end models. Where it get problematic is when companies don’t know what they want to be and try to be different things. Even that can work if properly executed and designed in well, for example Scale Trains in the North American market are an excellent example of a company using smart design to service different markets using the same basic tooling with their Operator and Rivet Counter ranges. Hornby tried this with the infamous “design clever” concept, making Railroad and main range versions of the same basic tooling but executed it very badly with the result that the concept itself became toxic. I still believe that if it had been well executed design clever wasn’t necessarily a bad idea, Scale Trains seem to have made the principle of offering different levels of detail on a common base model work well and Piko and others have demonstrated that it is perfectly possible to balance detail and cost control by judicious use of moulded detail where it is appropriate and separate detail where it is needed. Or as the old adage has it, there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I want an accurate coach, well decorated that looks good side on and from the top, which is the angle we mostly see it from . I’m really not interested on what’s underneath or that it has separately fitted seats . Why? I hardly notice them. So something with less parts , more mouldings , good decoration at a reasonable cost will do me just fine.

 

What's underneath can have a significant impact on how the model looks from the side.

 

If a layout is low, so you get a birds eye view, then yes the underneath of the model will not be as important.

 

But if you layout is such that it is normally viewed from a more eye level height then the underneath becomes more important as it is more in sight.

 

 

Can’t help feel that the manufacturers are heading in the wrong direction here.

The market says otherwise.

 

If the manufacturers were going in the wrong direction then it would be reflected in their sales, and they would thus correct their actions or go out of business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

A one piece moulding is more than adequate for 99% of buyers, why would that 99% expect anything else. Price is a huge factor for many people when they buy anything, and it has be done to death on here numerous times.

Hi there,

 

Price is a factor, of course, but I don't think it's a huge factor. Most people buying Rapido models are adults with disposable income who choose to spend it on model trains.

 

Jason unabashedly caters for the sector of the market that wants high levels of detail and will pay for it.

 

His business has grown year-on-year, as has his reputation, so I think the evidence is there.

 

I am not hugely familiar with the 4mm market, but it appears that Oxford Rail are approaching the market with a similarly unabashed desire to compete on price.

 

So there is plurality which should work for everyone, and no need for Jason to occupy a sector of the market already catered for.

 

And yes, it was Revolution who met with Jason on the Severn Valley Railway. As we are all enthusiasts it's become a bit of a tradition. Though I don't think we discussed anything that was running there as a potential model.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

Edited by Ben A
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like your view is diametrically opposite to Jason's. He has said in the past that his first view of trains was as a small child and from a Canadian station platform at rail level. Thus, his view of trains was of all the stuff underneath the cars and that's why he has to model it. It's not the number of parts that's a badge of honour, it's the ability to say that it's accurate in every detail. Equally with the Tempo seats. They were evidently a distinctive shape which would be compromised with a one-piece interior moulding. The Tempo trains are a very important aspect of Jason's own layout. He's a perfectionist and he's certain to go to great lengths to get them exactly how he wants them. We're lucky that he's sharing that with us by making RTR models rather than investing considerably less and having someone scratch-build them. He did produce a Rapido 'Prime Movers' locomotive just recently, with some simplified detail and a lower price point. It's a very nice model but the reaction to it has been such that Rapido has abandoned the 'Prime Movers' idea after just one model. In a nutshell, if one wants a more basic level of detail at a cheaper price, it's out there already, from other manufacturers using older tooling. (CJL)

 

fine for those Canadian models - I think the comment still stands up if we stick with just UK models with our solebar level platforms as far as coaching stock is concerned.  wagons can be argued in favour of the mega detail as they don't get viewed typically from a platform.   I agree that on UK models as far as coaches are concerned and less so on wagons there is no benefit to the extra detail.   

 

you could have a bag of the extra bits pipes wires tanks etc for a modeller to fit if they want to know that underneath is no less detailed than the sides and top.  I think the majority are unlikely to pay much attention to such rarely seen equipment.  

 

I feel that the balance is in danger of shifting too far from a fair compromise.   Naturally when you go to such lengths on detail few will ever check or see or notice its time and money that could have been invested elsewhere.

 

If RT are establishing a UK business then I hope they continue to churn out great models but for British based models that balance needs to be kept in mind.  Surley you would get more sales too because of the lower RRP starting point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

also interesting to note that on the one hand JS states you cant be a one man band and you need a team.    he has a team...... but then went onto to quote two examples involving project managers and factory bosses who were not 100% happy with a detail on a model yet JS said sent them out!      Is the team a safety net or does he really need them if ultimately he is the one who decides yay or nay?   Sounds to me like the managers were simply going what they were paid to do but this was not required in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

If RT are establishing a UK business then I hope they continue to churn out great models but for British based models that balance needs to be kept in mind.  Surley you would get more sales too because of the lower RRP starting point. 

 

 

Just to re-iterate, Rapido's business model is to produce a highly detailed and accurate model, if they should produce more UK stock I would expect them to stick to their principles as what you describe is already being produced.

Edited by chris p bacon
Link to post
Share on other sites

... on UK models as far as coaches are concerned and less so on wagons there is no benefit to the extra detail.

...

I feel that the balance is in danger of shifting too far from a fair compromise.

...

If RT are establishing a UK business then I hope they continue to churn out great models but for British based models that balance needs to be kept in mind. Surley you would get more sales too because of the lower RRP starting point.

The compromise may be “fair” to you, but what about those of us who want as few compromises as possible? Are we not allowed to have even one manufacturer who shares our passion, and who produces crazily good models at commensurately high prices?

 

Your compromise seems to involve manufacturers producing precisely the level of detail you want, at the price level you want, and everyone else should just accept that.

 

Hm. Maybe you should be a Brexit negotiator...?   :jester: 

 

Paul

Edited by Fenman
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Again I re iterate no matter what the cost or how much visible detail you want is there any point in producing detail that you will never see on a layout ie under the coach or removable seats , just because you can. Seems like a waste and over indulgence to me.

Edited by Legend
Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that the manufacturer is only happy with his product if he has the level of detail that pleases him. If he produces a poorer product and makes less margin on it, where's the satisfaction in that? And the incentive is next time to make it less detailed and even cheaper - then what? The hobby is where it is because manufacturers try to improve their products and make each better than the last. There's no point in running faster or jumping higher than the next guy but there's huge admiration for those who do. (CJL) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I re iterate no matter what the cost or how much visible detail you want is there any point in producing detail that you will never see on a layout ie under the coach or removable seats , just because you can. Seems like a waste and over indulgence to me.

 

You have quoted the removable seat issue several times. I'd be interested to know what you would feel is a fair compromise. I've put 4 levels below.

 

A) Keep the floor at the correct level. If the floor is to be at the correct level, the injection moulding tool would be fiendishly complicated to include the correctly shaped seats, if not separately installed.

 

 

B) If you move the floor up to seat level, you lose the airiness of the interior. But a lot of people were happy with the Dapol Class 122 railcar with a floor almost at this level. Painting the seats will highlight the compromise.

 

 

 

C) A really nice simple moulding would be moving the floor up a bit higher, almost level with the window sills. Just put on a bit of paint for the antimaccassars.

 

 

D) No interior at all, just tint the glazing heavily.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Ref the pic on P16 floor at same level with molded seats.You can’t see under the seat when the body is on , so why bother? It’s just added cost.

 

 

And yet they sell them all. . . .

 

Sometimes,  people have different ideas of what detail they're happy with, and this seems to be one of those times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The compromise may be “fair” to you, but what about those of us who want as few compromises as possible? Are we not allowed to have even one manufacturer who shares our passion, and who produces crazily good models at commensurately high prices?

 

Your compromise seems to involve manufacturers producing precisely the level of detail you want, at the price level you want, and everyone else should just accept that.

 

Hm. Maybe you should be a Brexit negotiator...?   :jester: 

 

Paul

 

Its no more complicated than you having your view and me having mine.

 

I haven't forced it down anybody's throat.  No need to try and blow it up into something bigger.........   

Link to post
Share on other sites

fine for those Canadian models - I think the comment still stands up if we stick with just UK models with our solebar level platforms as far as coaching stock is concerned.  wagons can be argued in favour of the mega detail as they don't get viewed typically from a platform.   I agree that on UK models as far as coaches are concerned and less so on wagons there is no benefit to the extra detail.   

 

So apparently I, and from what I have seen on RMweb and elsewhere many others, are planning or building our UK based layouts incorrectly.

 

Apparently the only thing we can model is stations platforms everywhere.  And I guess they better all be single track platforms with the track on the far side of the platform so we can make sure there is nothing to be seen beneath the solebar.

 

Elsewhere, most of my experience of UK trains was 

- standing at a road crossing

- looking up at trains on an embankment

- looking at trains on an opposite track, with a missing centre track meaning they were far enough from my platform that I could clearly see beneath the solebar.

 

Most of us as modellers model trains in places where that underneath detail is visible, whether it be because the train's platform is on the other side of the view or because the train isn't at a platform at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Ref the pic on P16 floor at same level with molded seats.You can’t see under the seat when the body is on , so why bother? It’s just added cost.

 

Then don't buy it - simple as that. Some people like all the bells and whistles and accept that all this costs money.

 

Rapido's business model relies on them producing a top quality model every single time. Buyers need the confidence that when a model is announced, they will be happy with it because you have to pre-order. As Jason has said, "we don't make inventory". They make what is ordered plus a few spares to cover delivery issues and that's it. 

 

This isn't a model that most of the industry could, or would wish to, operate on. As others have said, it's nice to have a choice. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish Jason, with his fond memories of Birmingham, would make a bells and whistles model of the AM10 electric multiple unit.  I'd happily fork out up to £500 for one to the standards of their APT-E and wouldn't be offended if the underframe gubbins were hand rolled on the thighs of Chinese virgins and the seats had chewing gum modelled stuck to their undersides.  You could ask what was the point of the flashing lights on the computers in the APT-E but they are there and they are fun.

Each to their own, of course, but I'm more offended by Hornby deciding to model a solebar on their Mk2e which shouldn't be there than Rapido modelling detail that is there but only seen when the train derails.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Then don't buy it - simple as that. Some people like all the bells and whistles and accept that all this costs money.

 

Rapido's business model relies on them producing a top quality model every single time. Buyers need the confidence that when a model is announced, they will be happy with it because you have to pre-order. As Jason has said, "we don't make inventory". They make what is ordered plus a few spares to cover delivery issues and that's it. 

 

This isn't a model that most of the industry could, or would wish to, operate on. As others have said, it's nice to have a choice.

Thanks Phil. Yes you are right at then end of the day I'm a "Tight Wad" and not a Bells and Whistles man , but that's not to criticise others who want lots of detail at the requisite price.

 

By way of explanation I am one of those dreaded bean counters who works in Manufacturing. One of my roles is costing comparisons and recosting products to manufacture the leanest way possible ie take cost out while not impacting or , better still,improving functionality. Ideally by making the product less expensive we get to keep the profit ourselves but more often than not , because its a competitive environment and there's a threat of lower costs from China, we end up reducing the price to the customer to retain and expand the business. It's Continuous Improvement . It is therefore a complete anathema to me that we would design additional cost in , instead of taking it out and passing on the benefits. However I suppose the bit I can't get my head round is that Model Railways is not the typical market and that people are indeed prepared to pay the highest price for something that to me is not at all visible . But I accept there is an intrinsic value in knowing something is hand made even though its price could be much less if it had fewer parts .

Link to post
Share on other sites

So apparently I, and from what I have seen on RMweb and elsewhere many others, are planning or building our UK based layouts incorrectly.

 

Apparently the only thing we can model is stations platforms everywhere.  And I guess they better all be single track platforms with the track on the far side of the platform so we can make sure there is nothing to be seen beneath the solebar.

 

Elsewhere, most of my experience of UK trains was 

- standing at a road crossing

- looking up at trains on an embankment

- looking at trains on an opposite track, with a missing centre track meaning they were far enough from my platform that I could clearly see beneath the solebar.

 

Most of us as modellers model trains in places where that underneath detail is visible, whether it be because the train's platform is on the other side of the view or because the train isn't at a platform at all.

 

Don't get too bogged down about what you can see away from platform level - it was merely a point of fact rather than a panacea.  Fact is there is still a myriad of details you could simply not see on the real railway from ground level....... unless of course you was trespassing and climbing in between or under the vehicles !  From a normal viewing angle on most layouts you really can live without every widget and rivet underneath - can't you?  Or is the perceived satisfaction in just knowing the detail "is there"? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

One of my roles is costing comparisons and recosting products to manufacture the leanest way possible ie take cost out while not impacting or , better still,improving functionality. Ideally by making the product less expensive we get to keep the profit ourselves but more often than not , because its a competitive environment and there's a threat of lower costs from China, we end up reducing the price to the customer to retain and expand the business. It's Continuous Improvement.

Hi Legend,

 

It's an interesting argument and I see your point in a market where cost is the over-riding factor for all your customers.

 

But as you say, model railways is different and different things are important to different customers. For some it is cost, and for this market Hornby Railroad and Oxford Diecast will be the "go-to" manufacturers. For others, cost takes second place to knowing the detail is there - whether it's visible or not! These are the people that Jason is targeting, and so far he seems to have no shortage of takers.

 

What would Jason would gain by changing his approach? All I can see is negatives - disapppointing his existing customers, losing his hard won reputation and producing models he personally wouldn't buy.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

By way of explanation I am one of those dreaded bean counters who works in Manufacturing. One of my roles is costing comparisons and recosting products to manufacture the leanest way possible ie take cost out while not impacting or , better still,improving functionality. Ideally by making the product less expensive we get to keep the profit ourselves but more often than not , because its a competitive environment and there's a threat of lower costs from China, we end up reducing the price to the customer to retain and expand the business. It's Continuous Improvement . 

 

And that's why Wagon Wheels are smaller.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...