A New Hope - Great Model Railway Challenge benefits

[Pacific231G]

I think the roof material and other textured surfaces are from Redulux, based in Spain, and are a textured riubbery type material, not card. Loco Revue have been involved in distribution, so it is possible they have uaedvthem with other kits.I got the impression that the main structure of each building was more like a laser cut (very thick card or wood?) kit,not thin card.

Hi Simon

I wondered about that, LR modelisme do sell Redutex sheets but also others including Juweela and Decapod as well as their own printed and embossed A4 card sheets in the Regions & Compagnies range.

 

All the Regio. & Cies. kits- including such intricate ones as signals and even a large dockside crane based on those at Dieppe Maritime-  are described as Maquette en carton imprimé, patiné, contre-collé et pré-découpé au laser (printed card, weathered, laminated and pre-cut by laser) with all assembly with wood glue, so they are card but the laminated card used for the main structure is fairly thick and presumably less apt to warp than thinner card.  

 

The buildings in L-R modelisme's own range - which are taken from those supplied for the four regional versions of Train'in Box- though a lot cheaper than the Regio. & Cies. kits- are also based on laser pre-cut laminated card (with unlaminated card for details like door/window frame and corner stonework) Their instructions (pdfs abstracted from the Train'in Box instruction booklet)  do refer to using Redutex sheet for the roofing- there is a laminated card structural roof and the Redutex, which is self adhesive, is cut to size and stuck down to that.  I'm not sure if Redutex is also used for the Regio. & Cies. range. I suspect it depends on whether they supply the right texture for the particular building. 

Edited December 18, 2018 by Pacific231G

[OnTheBranchline]

TV advertising isn't cheap. You have to make the commercial to the set standards and format, then pay to see it on air. According to this interesting article, the slots would be around £1500 per appearance. So, 4 add breaks over 5 shows is £30,000 plus the cost of making it in the first place*. I doubt any of the manufacturers could afford to risk this on a show they didn't know. 

 

Also, marketing budgets are finite, so spending here would reduce spending elsewhere, hitting the finances of magazines and RMweb. Or, you take money out of another budget, the cost would go a long way towards tooling up an item of rolling stock.

 

More to the point, does an advert on TV for modelling products generate the same level of return as an advert in a magazine? That's something for the Advertising department, who you are so quick to denigrate, to consider. 

 

* There is an explanation as to why a single advert won't do on Wikipedia. Basically, people don't buy on the first showing - more like the 7th.

 

Especially considering that advertising now is done more online and through social media as well rather than in a 'dead' format as TV.

[RJS1977]

Whilst agreeing that TV advertising is prohibitive in cost, an advert during GMRC would at least have been an avenue where 'new blood' was likely to see it. As others have mentioned, the series has been watched by a lot of people who aren't normally into railway modelling and are unlikely to have gone into Smiths to buy a magazine. Likewise the use of analytics/cookies on the Internet means people who see model railway adverts on the internet are generally already into model railways.

 

Perhaps an alternative would have been for Hornby (or a collaboration of manufacturers) to have put together a 'bundle' of 'everything you need to build a model railway' as the prize for the viewers' competition. 

[john new]

Whilst agreeing that TV advertising is prohibitive in cost, an advert during GMRC would at least have been an avenue where 'new blood' was likely to see it. As others have mentioned, the series has been watched by a lot of people who aren't normally into railway modelling and are unlikely to have gone into Smiths to buy a magazine. Likewise the use of analytics/cookies on the Internet means people who see model railway adverts on the internet are generally already into model railways.

 

Perhaps an alternative would have been for Hornby (or a collaboration of manufacturers) to have put together a 'bundle' of 'everything you need to build a model railway' as the prize for the viewers' competition. 

The prize suggested would make sense for series two,

Edited January 13, 2019 by john new

[Scottish Modeller]

Hi all,

 

Perhaps the manufacturers did not realise how popular the series would be?

 

As a result, they would have been reluctant to commit to paying for adverts.

 

On the other hand....

 

Maybe the marketing by the channel put the costs at to high a price to be viable for the manufacturers.

 

Just my thoughts......

 

Phil H

[rue_d_etropal]

The Lego challenge (2nd series) which followed closely on the heelsof the railway challenge program(but CH4 not CH5), included adverts fo Lego, and even got Amazon to have an advert which referenced Lego. Granted it was a single manufacturer, but even advertising it probably got people to buy alternatives(cheaper),. .

[MarkSG]

The Lego challenge (2nd series) which followed closely on the heelsof the railway challenge program(but CH4 not CH5), included adverts fo Lego, and even got Amazon to have an advert which referenced Lego. Granted it was a single manufacturer, but even advertising it probably got people to buy alternatives(cheaper),. .

 

Lego Group is the world's largest toy company. Amazon is the world's largest online retailer. Both of them have advertising budgets that are several orders of magnitude greater than any model railway manufacturer. In fact, both of them probably spend more on advertising than the revenue of all UK model railway manufacturers combined.