Jump to content
Grimleygrid

All new RTR Class 91 and Mark 4 carriages

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, delticfan said:

I would swop guises to either Class 89 or HST prototype, both would have the wow factor and Hornby wouldn’t do these. Silly to try and take on Hornby as irritating as it may be with the 91.

No the best way forward is just make a better model and get it to market first. 

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Maybe not in such detail, but i’d be surprised if they didn't sit in the board room and discuss how to deal with the competitive threat of independent small start up commissions threatening their brand.

 

Theres many ways to do it, its not just about making something that wins, it can also be about making sure your competitor loses.

 

Weaknesses of new tooling is lots of cash, so duplicating a tool would hurt the start up more than it hurts Hornby as it will also weaken future demand (the hobby is only so big). Once the threat is gone their tooling is a sound investment for the future (who’s going to buy the 71 tooling and make dj 71’s in the future ?)

 

The one I don't get personally is Hornby tooling the APT... I don't see a competitive threat, or a long term future demand for it, i’m sure theres other models with a greater ROI, unless they know something about the real APT that we dont know.

 

agreed about competition

 

its not so long ago though that there was another APT-P model being worked on. DJM may have went belly-up, but with the gestation period on these models Hornby may have already been working on a competing one in the background. I think the APT is a great announcement and while I doubt there would be many repeated production runs, I can imagine it being one that could sell well and probably a surprising number of 14-car trains sold!

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Theres many ways to do it, its not just about making something that wins, it can also be about making sure your competitor loses.

 

Weaknesses of new tooling is lots of cash, so duplicating a tool would hurt the start up more than it hurts Hornby as it will also weaken future demand (the hobby is only so big). Once the threat is gone their tooling is a sound investment for the future (who’s going to buy the 71 tooling and make dj 71’s in the future ?)

Whilst I don't dispute the truth in your words, I actually think that is quite a depressing view of the nature of competition in a relatively small arena.  There is a more optimistic view where no model company is able to offer a complete range of models (or anywhere near a complete range) and therefore complementary ranges from other brands are not so much competition but helpful to both parties.

 

Even if one accepts that there is only a finite amount of cash to be spent (and that seems to ignore that part of any marketing choices should hopefully be attempting to grow the market) as long as each brand is not overwhelming the market and is producing what people want then there appears to be space (certainly in 4mm) for all to thrive - it doesn't have to be one company succeeds at the expense of another company.  A lot of individual company problems are not specifically about the actions of competitors but poor choices made by that company eg wrong model choice, over production, under production, discounting etc etc.

 

Each company needs other manufacturers to survive and thrive - one of the reasons that Ben and I were convinced that the Pendolino was so necessary in N was that the Farish 350 was fairly pointless without it!

 

Cheers Mike

Edited by red death
  • Like 1
  • Agree 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, scumcat said:

No the best way forward is just make a better model and get it to market first. 

Agreed, I would just love a prototype HST, came close with Rapido but slipped the net again.....

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, red death said:

There is a more optimistic view where no model company is able to offer a complete range of models (or anywhere near a complete range) and therefore complementary ranges from other brands are not so much competition but helpful to both parties.

 

Even if one accepts that there is only a finite amount of cash to be spent (and that seems to ignore that part of any marketing choices should hopefully be attempting to grow the market) as long as each brand is not overwhelming the market and is producing what people want then there appears to be space (certainly in 4mm) for all to thrive - it doesn't have to be one company succeeds at the expense of another company. 


unfortunately that isnt the human nature, or even that of free open market competition, nor is it always legal.

 

But even if it cleared any regulatory issues.. everyone has to agree to fence their territories.. who defines what is who’s territory ? Or what each player makes ?  What about making space for new entrants ? Someone will always want a bigger slice of the pie, or a larger profit etc.. Then theres ,”when”, everyone will want the pre-christmas spot for their product and no one wants summer holiday season.

 

Looking at the real world, SLOA was a real world attempt at managing mainline steam who, where, when, what and how owners can run back in the 1970’s, Does anyone hanker back to it as a good thing..especially those who couldnt join that club, because the rule was supposedly that two of that class were already in it, plus friends.

 

A less gloomy view would be forums like this represent the concentrate of the hobby, and when a small minority from that concentrate choose To “go it themselves”, it turns heads from the diluted majority.. and So Hornby responds to the mass market by saying if they want it, we will do it for them.

 

I recall a published quote from a Russian engineer about the Illyshin -62 when asked why it looks so like the VC10.. iirc the response was “imitation is the best form of flattery”, history records the il62 was much more successful & cheaper than the vc10.

 

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, adb968008 said:


unfortunately that isnt the human nature, or even that of free open market competition, nor is it always legal.

 

But even if it cleared any regulatory issues.. everyone has to agree to fence their territories.. who defines what is who’s territory ? Or what each player makes ?  What about making space for new entrants ? Someone will always want a bigger slice of the pie, or a larger profit etc.. Then theres ,”when”, everyone will want the pre-christmas spot for their product and no one wants summer holiday season.

 

 

Sorry but you have completely misunderstood my point - it is nothing to do with collusion or anything of the sort.  Free market competition does not mean that everyone has to produce the same thing!

 

I'm not talking about ring fencing territory but understanding that for example producing a Cl 350 is a little pointless if Pendolinos are not available - it doesn't have to be the same company that produces both.  There is nothing illegal about that - it is about understanding that it is better for the whole market to have complementary products rather than lots of duplicates (some will be inevitable and some duplication will be necessary to improve models and standards but not always). 

 

Competition is not a zero sum game where for Company A to prosper then Company B has to lose out...

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, red death said:

Sorry but you have completely misunderstood my point - it is nothing to do with collusion or anything of the sort.  Free market competition does not mean that everyone has to produce the same thing!

 

I'm not talking about ring fencing territory but understanding that for example producing a Cl 350 is a little pointless if Pendolinos are not available - it doesn't have to be the same company that produces both.  There is nothing illegal about that - it is about understanding that it is better for the whole market to have complementary products rather than lots of duplicates (some will be inevitable and some duplication will be necessary to improve models and standards but not always). 

 

Competition is not a zero sum game where for Company A to prosper then Company B has to lose out...

True, but playing devils advocate, Hornby can reasonably argue that when it comes to class 1 trains on the ECML, they have covered just about everything since 1923... theyve done the full “complementary” range on their own...

which of course leaves complementary class 2 stuff.. 313/365/700/717 but no one wants that.

 

Edited by adb968008

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

True, but playing devils advocate, Hornby can reasonably argue that when it comes to class 1 trains on the ECML, they have covered just about everything since 1923... theyve done the full “complementary” range on their own...

which of course leaves complementary class 2 stuff.. 313/365/700/717 but no one wants that.

 

 

Post-steam have they covered just about everything for ECML Class 1 trains? Deltics? Class 40s? Class 47s? Class 45/46s? They may have ex-Lima models of the first 3, but they are far from best in breed and they haven't retooled any of those themselves. Similarly they 'have' a Class 91, so just assuming they'd be retooling that too would be a leap of faith

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what about the coaches? Retooling the 'not quite right' Gresleys and providing more diagrams so that prototypical formations can be run would be a popular start. And Thompsons are Bachmann. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

which of course leaves complementary class 2 stuff.. 313/365/700/717 but no one wants that.

 

 

Why does no one want that? If you are trying to model large chunks of the ECML over the last 30-40 years the 313s/365s are necessary along with the 7xx series more recently.  Kids often recognise the trains that they see and/or that their parents commute on. 

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, red death said:

 

Why does no one want that? If you are trying to model large chunks of the ECML over the last 30-40 years the 313s/365s are necessary along with the 7xx series more recently.  Kids often recognise the trains that they see and/or that their parents commute on. 

We are in agreement I absolutely want it...

But Manufacturers dont.. theyve had 40 years to do a 31x... 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time there is a duplication these days, which is an inevitable consequence of lead times and the ban on collusion (even ignoring the possibility of deliberate competition), we get quite a bit of discussion about the perceived impact.

 

Anyone (or at least anyone who isnt criminally negligent) setting up a model railway business will be just as aware of this risk and will have factored it in to the business case in the first place.

 

Is it actually an issue at all? Sure it's not ideal but perhaps the poorer sellers - which can happen for all sorts of reasons - still do enough to wash their face and you simply move on to the next one.

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At last something about the Class 91 and its development. I often despair when I come on to this page looking for 'news'!! One day we may even be talkin about the N Gauge version. I live in hope!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me odd (many do) but somehow the Hornby announcement makes me want to buy a Cavalex 91 more.  I don't need one, I don't need one... but I want one

  • Agree 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m wondering whether this is a form of the “Streisand effect” occurring.

 

People see the Hornby 91, see the comments about Cavalex and think “who are this Cavalex lot?”

 

At the end of the day, This exposure is rapidly raising the profile of Cavalex

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those heavily into the Class 91's here's a 40min compilation from YouTube uploaded yesterday..enjoy

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn I didn't know 2 Class 91's have been adorned with the Europhoenix livery and they do look smart...nudge, nudge, wink, wink say no more ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I don’t need a 91 but the Scotsman loco and DVT will be stunning.

 

all the best

Mark

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has it been said what the situation will be with sales on the MK4, will they be sold individually or only as packs? No prices yet I assume. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it only the complete train is available when it comes to Mark 4 coaches.No prices yet.

Edited by guarded

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.