BBC Four - James May's Big Trouble in Model Britain

[clarkeeboy56]

Great thread, great TV. Not read through every post, so apologies if anyone else has mentioned this, regarding "duplication".  The Rail's Terrier nor the Hatton's Cl.66 will make any money for Hornby.       However the Hornby Terrier and Cl.66 WILL make money for all three.....

 

[CME and Bottlewasher]

16 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The whole Banner thing was, in my view, deliberately hyped up because it mad effort good TV' - while I'm sure words would have been said they might not have been quite as heated if a camera crew wern't on hand to record the 'outrage'

 

Similarly the whole Rails / Hattons / Hornby tiff was probably encouraged for much the same reasons.

 

The footage of the new designer assembling flat pack furniture was simply filler material - you could have had her sat there simply narrating what she said to the camera as a 'talking head'. Instead the production crew decided on something different - maybe her being a designer made them think that footage of her building something (even if it was Ikea stuff)  was a better 'fit'.

 

Meanwhile the terrier dome error and the CAD error with the axle dimensions were mightily handy for the TV crew.....

 

Overall it was an enjoyable couple of programmes - but I would take much of what was featured with a large dose of salt. At the end of the day the while series was in effect a glorified advert for Hornby  and not a warts and all documentary in the 'Dispatches' style....

Sadly false jeopardy is rampant in the world of TV.

 

Banner-gate? I'd suggest that the tone of voice and body language bore out the feelings over such issues. But, of course, we don't know how it was edited.

 

Atvb

 

CME

[The Johnster]

10 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

So, loco's are expensive & times are hard.

 

I suspect that there are many whose models do exactly the same job that the prototypes were designed for, hauling trains.  If they look good enough & work reliably surely there is an excellent case for dusting off the old tooling & producing a loco that is in reach of most modellers, while allowing others to produce the 'high end' stuff

But the cost of producing the older models, even with the tooling redacted decades ago, is high because the models were not designed to be produced with the benefits of CAD cost efficiencies; once the tooling has covered it's initial outlay, it probably costs more to have an older model manufactured and assembled than a current one despite the current model's greater complexity and number of separate parts.  And the modern model will be more profitable and sell better, unless it's a bit of a dog...  

 

As an example, look at the 14xx, brought out to go head to head with a much more expensive Hatton/DJM release.  Both models have complicated the issue by achieving poor reputations for performance, but the Hornby was a third of the price of the Hattons on original release; one suspects that it was a loss leader as it's since been re-issued at a higher price level that is probably more realistic.

 

This uses an Airfix body moulding that was designed by Trilobites in the Silurian era.  The tooling cost H nothing, but the body is expensive to produce.  Hornby have designed a new chassis for it, but have had to do so down to a cost and the chassis is a poor runner.  I am prepared to accept a degree of compromise in my RTR models, especially if they are cheap, but good running is not up for negotiation on my layout.  I'd rather pay more for a better model that runs properly and has cab detail, and don't regard this as 'high end stuff'; it's the way modern RTR should be.  High end stuff exists, like the Rapido Stirling, but I'm not in that world!

 

I think it would be a mistake for Hornby to make a policy of returning to the toy train lo-fi attitudes that almost sank the company in the face of better detailed models that were better value, even if the price was higher, from the competition.  What it costs is what it costs

[Workbench52]

29 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

I think re-issuing back catalogue items such as LOTI and the shortie clerestories is a knee-jerk response the demand for these products on 'Bay; prices here have dropped through the bottom since the re-issue was announced.  It is a cheap and easy exercise for H so long as they still have the toolings, and can be done relatively quickly, but there has been no attempt to improve the models or bring them to a modern standard, and the interiorless shorties are still on mk1 bogies having never been updated since 1961 except for the bogie mounting.  This may be damaging in the long term, as the company is less likely to introduce (and benefit from the profitability of) a re-tooled Dean Single, and will continue to produce the old model which is not acceptable to people used to modern standards of detail and daylight beneath boilers, even Railroad customers, likewise the coaches which are the wrong length and of indeterminate prototypes.  The Dean gangwayed coaches are also due a revisit, as their lack of moulded panelling is a major drawback.

 

It is my belief that modern standard models of these items, inevitably much more expensive of course, would sell very well; there is very little competition in this sector of the market.  Hornby may claim that it is a bit niche, but the coaches especially were in service for many years, well in to the 'period 3' era, which is not by any means niche but pretty mainstream!  Rapido are making a go of the Stirling single, and that hasn't even got any coaches to run with it! 

 

But Hornby will have to pause to draw breath over the next year or so after this year's phenomenal (and very creditable) effort, and investors will probably want to see some of their money back before endorsing further expansion for a while, so not much is going to happen any time soon in this respect.

It would be nice if they did a bare unpainted moulding of i) Each of the two different old short clerestories and ii) the roof moulding (I think they used the same one for each?). These could be sold in a plastic bag as "Modeller's Aids". In the 60's the Railway Modeller was full of imaginative conversions to produce dozens of coaches from this 1880 - 1910 period, both bogie as well as 4 and 6 wheel types, not just for GWR but most of the other pre-grouping railways. Look closely at the coaches on Peter Deny's Buckingham and you'll see what I mean. The other reason I think this would be a good idea is to try to get modellers to "have a go" at some real 'hack it and stick it' modelling. I do demo's at a few small local shows encouraging people to do this, as an antidote to the prevailing 'take it out of the box and plonk it on the layout' ethos. So many people seem convinced that they don't have the skill to do even simple things and would make a mess of anything that they try, which is such a shame.

[rob D2]

I don’t see any issues with the three competing 66s

kids will love the limby one,

price conscious modellers will go with Bachmann’s older tooling 

those who can afford it , and want the detail level will go with hattons 

[CME and Bottlewasher]

After reading through two thirds of this thread;

 

With the industry, as it currently stands, as with most UK industries (either poorly run, with a few exceptions, or owned by foreign concerns along with our debt), I'm reminded of Nero fiddling whilst Rome burns!

 

I believe Simon Kohler is the exception.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CME and Bottlewasher

[The Johnster]

18 minutes ago, CME and Bottlewasher said:

After reading through two thirds of this thread;

 

With the industry, as it currently stands, as with most UK industries (either poorly run, with a few exceptions, or owned by foreign concerns along with our debt), I'm reminded of Nero fiddling whilst Rome burns!

 

I believe Simon Kohler is the exception.

'What an artist dies with me'!

 

36 minutes ago, Workbench52 said:

It would be nice if they did a bare unpainted moulding of i) Each of the two different old short clerestories and ii) the roof moulding (I think they used the same one for each?). These could be sold in a plastic bag as "Modeller's Aids". In the 60's the Railway Modeller was full of imaginative conversions to produce dozens of coaches from this 1880 - 1910 period, both bogie as well as 4 and 6 wheel types, not just for GWR but most of the other pre-grouping railways. Look closely at the coaches on Peter Deny's Buckingham and you'll see what I mean. The other reason I think this would be a good idea is to try to get modellers to "have a go" at some real 'hack it and stick it' modelling. I do demo's at a few small local shows encouraging people to do this, as an antidote to the prevailing 'take it out of the box and plonk it on the layout' ethos. So many people seem convinced that they don't have the skill to do even simple things and would make a mess of anything that they try, which is such a shame.

This is a nice idea and I like anything that encourages people to have a go, even if it's only improving what came out the box with a coat of weathering gunge.  The Brake 3rd has the correct number of clerestory windows and ventilators, and the roofs are not identical.  The Second, which Triang described as a composite, has the clerestory window lights at the correct spacing to match the compartments, spaced differently to those on the Brake 3rd.  This was in line with the standard Triang coaches of 1961, short mk1 compos, RK, and Brake 2nds, and the 'matching' freelance suburbans, which had proper moulded roof detail including periscopes on the brakes.  But while the bodies are very adaptable to cut 'n shut modelling. there are no underframes; the coach is 'monocoque' with an added moulding for the trusses and vac cylinder, the same one as on all Triang coaches. 

 

I have 3 shorty clerestories which I've worked up to represent a late 40s-early 50s South Wales Miner's workman's; the last such coaches in service ended their days on such work in the area in the mid 50s.  I have replaced the buffers, provided compartment dividers and seating, glazed the clerestory lights, and had a go at the mk1 bogies.  These are not bad mk1s, especially considering their age, though of course wrong entirely for these coaches which need Dean 8'6" bogies (but not the ones from the Hornby gangwayed Deans).

 

I've cut the tie bar out, and fabricated footboards from real treewood, actually Sainsbury cafe coffee stirrers cut in half lengthways and then cut to length.  You need to cut rebates in footboards to clear the axleboxes, and then it can be simply superglued in position.; not scale modelling but what I describe as 'impressionist', in that they look not unlike Dean non gangwayed clerestories for the purposes of the 2 foot rule.  I may replace them in time with cast whitemetal Deans of the proper type, but it feels like overkill on coaches that'll never be scale models of anything anyway!

 

There are some photos if you can be bothered looking on my layout topic (on 'Layout Topics') 'South Wales Valleys in the 50s, but you've probably got a life...

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Even in 7mm, the Heljan diesels are effectively just large scale 'Airfix' type kits.

 

Heljan add value (thus more profit for them) by supplying them as RTR, as opposed to kits. 

 

I do think that there is a market for easy to build, IMP, loco kits (but decent market research would bear out if my beliefs are accurate or not).

[Bernard Lamb]

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

 

for example, ( its only a random thought but imagine say) ..If a few of the  retailers / commissioners decided to joint venture and pool their comission operations side of their businesses, whilst retaining independant retail. they are suddenly nolonger too small to be kicked about... mergers / jv’s  are afterall an industry norm of growth, and toolings only earn money if used, and Hattons already have established a trade customer base.

 

I recently received an email from Rails advertising the new Hattons container wagons.

One major outlet/commissioner is promoting the product of another major outlet/commissioner.

It is but a small step to reach the situation in your example.

Of course I am not party to the intercompany pricing policy. What you are giving as an example could be actually happening.

As you say, just a random thought.

Bernard

[Phil Parker]

42 minutes ago, CME and Bottlewasher said:

I do think that there is a market for easy to build, IMP, loco kits (but decent market research would bear out if my beliefs are accurate or not).

 

DJH have produced kits like this for an 02 diesel and Barclay steam loco for many years. Both are excellent and when I show the ones I've built to modellers are met with the cry "How much!!!" because they cost a couple of hundred quid. The trouble is that the R&D required for an easy build kit is higher than a normal model. People will expect a kit to be cheaper than RTR by a loooooong way. 

 

 

[PMP]

2 hours ago, The Johnster said:

But the cost of producing the older models, even with the tooling redacted decades ago, is high because the models were not designed to be produced with the benefits of CAD cost efficiencies; once the tooling has covered it's initial outlay, it probably costs more to have an older model manufactured and assembled than a current one despite the current model's greater complexity and number of separate parts.  And the modern model will be more profitable and sell better, unless it's a bit of a dog...  

 

 

That makes no sense at all. The benefits of using ‘old’ tooling is clear, it’s cost effective, and cheap.

To follow your logic would mean almost the entire Railroad range is more expensive to produce than the more detailed and complex to assemble ‘regular’ items. Hornby then, should have designed, tooled and produced a high end class 66 to rival Hattons spec because it’s cheaper than running out reliveries on a Lima body.

 

 

 

 

[Guest Locomotion No. 3]

In response to the point raised by Jol Wilkinson

 

"It seems that Hattons, Rails, Kernow, NRM/Locomotion and others are trying to have their cake and eat it. Presumably they still want to buy in RTR products, rely on Hornby and the others to produce the complimentary items, etc. while they cherry pick the "popular" and more profitable products in the loco centric RTR market."

 

Can I clarify that all models produced of items from the National Collection and released under the Locomotion Models brand have been commissioned from leading manufacturers that serve the British ready-to-run market namely - Accurascale, Bachmann, Dapol, Hornby, Oxford Rail and Rapido Trains. This includes items produced in partnership with Rails of Sheffield such as the Dynamometer Car (Rapido Trains) and the forthcoming LB&SCR Terrier (Dapol).

 

We work very closely with all the manufacturers and their own branding appears alongside ours on the boxes. 

 

Dennis Lovett

Exclusive Models Marketing Executive

Locomotionmodels.com

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

I recently received an email from Rails advertising the new Hattons container wagons.

One major outlet/commissioner is promoting the product of another major outlet/commissioner.

It is but a small step to reach the situation in your example.

Of course I am not party to the intercompany pricing policy. What you are giving as an example could be actually happening.

As you say, just a random thought.

Bernard

As I said previously in some case various concerns have already reached the point in the examples given by 'adb968008' - there have been co-operative commissioned models advertised for some months past while it is also quite a few months since Hattons moved into 'Walthers mode' and began to supply other retailers with their own branded products.  No doubt things will continue to change in what is still in many respects an evolving and changing market even if the progress of change is no faster or more radical than it has been over the past 12 months.

 

The vibrancy in the hobby has over recent years come partly from Hornby with such things as 'The Engine Shed' and product innovation such as the Peckett, and from Bachmann with their move into narrow gauge. while the independent sector' of  commissioner and new entrants to 'manufacturing' has produced some excitement and interest in the marketplace.  The Lyndon Davies approach at Hornby has helped to re-establlsh Hornby's relationship with the retail trade and that is clear in new orders because retailers are now confident to order knowing they won't be undersold by the 'manufacturer' plus they are getting new product to keep them in the marketplace alongside their bigger brethren.

 

We shouldn't forget that Hornby faces an uphill fight from a position of serious losses and it has loan facility with a company recognised for its predatory habits (and which is costing the company a goodly sum of money every year whether it is used or not) but it does mean it has ready access to capital for investment.  Whether it can be sufficiently flexible in today's market of greatly increased, and fast moving, competition and be able to keep itself at the front of end customer's thoughts, and spending while others are continually snapping at its heels might be another issue and it is an important one.  By this time next week at least one other new model will have been announced by one of Hornby's competitors and it might well be clocking up the posts on their section of RMweb.  And for all we know they might not be the only ones in an era when announcements at major shows have become more common?  That is the competitive arena for one segment of the market and, as Lyndon Daviies has already said (as reported earlier in this thread)  Hornby need to be out there developing and rebuilding other market areas and hopefully they will be piling up orders for their latest ventures into the land of Harry Potter.  That might not interest us but it must be an area where Hornby will be able to make good use of their brand provided their pducts can compete with everything else on offer in toyland.

Edited March 17, 2019 by The Stationmaster

[CME and Bottlewasher]

2 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

DJH have produced kits like this for an 02 diesel and Barclay steam loco for many years. Both are excellent and when I show the ones I've built to modellers are met with the cry "How much!!!" because they cost a couple of hundred quid. The trouble is that the R&D required for an easy build kit is higher than a normal model. People will expect a kit to be cheaper than RTR by a loooooong way. 

 

 

Hi Phil,

 

Good points well made, in regard of and to white metal/pewter based kits (manufactured in the UK specifically for the kit market). Cracking looking loco BTW.

 

Kits are more expensive, most of the time, from smaller, UK based manufacturers. And it always amazed me, when, 20yrs or so, ago, that UK modellers (OO) wanted European quality RTR, but were only prepared to pay Lima prices.

 

It also makes me chuckle when someone sneers at one of my 7mm locos re cost, when I have one of that type, then only to find out that the individual has draws full of OO locos worth an awful lot more than my handful of O gauge locos. I digress.

 

I know that IMP tooling, for a loco, can cost anything from £40k-over £100k, yet they are made for easy assembly by Chinese workers. Ergo such IMP kits could be made for the same/similar development costs as a RTR model. I'm unsure of mark up margins (I assume it would be akin to a large scale Airfix kit or similar to a large scale motorised Tamiya kit) - and as I mentioned before a RTR loco has 'value added' and thus more profit in it. I believe that there could be a market for IMP kit locos. Always amazes me, as well, how Chivers do such for 7mm NG locos at a reasonable cost/price.

 

I also think that its time many UK companies stopped subcontracting to communist China as doing so is detrimental for a myriad of reasons.

 

Atvb

 

CME

Edited March 17, 2019 by CME and Bottlewasher
typo

[adb968008]

8 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

While competition is regarded as a good thing (unless you are Amazon, Apple, Microsoft or one of the other USA internet giants), it would have appear to have a negative effect if others share your view.

I just wanted to share something on this, back in 1998, right at the start of my career I worked in Seattle for a few months for Amazon, at that time just an online bookshop.

my local friends were telling me how much a good thing Amazon was, as when it came to dvd’s, music and books Blockbuster and Borders were controlling the market due to their size.., chief complaint was their decisions effectively were telling the Music / Film and Publishing companies what to make, dictated by sales volume... Amazon was open to anyone doing anything, independants and all.

so I felt good... working at a dotcom was somewhat more interesting than your average UK company too.

 

Roll on 20 years, both Blockbuster and Borders are gone. Amazon stands accused of not only controlling the film/music and book market, but they’ve ben able to short circuit the manufacturers and now promote their own Films/Music and books (Amazon Originals etc)...

 

chief to remember is both Blockbuster and Borders were on the high street (several in every US town), Amazon was online.

 

I should point out Amazon is my local model shop, you can buy model railways, sometimes competitively... in May last year I ordered 16 packs of Hornby R8264 * wheels for 50% Hornbys RRP... they arrived at lightening speed in an Amazon box, sold by Amazon EU Sarl, not an independent retailer.

 

It might be measured in $bns of dollars, but the power of retailers out growing their supplier still applies, as does your way of selling, whether it’s a good thing or a bad depends on your point of view.

 

*Still available today on prime, just not so cheap any more (10 months later they are 3x the £6.60 price I paid)

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hornby-R8264-Gauge-14-1mm-Coach/dp/B004648IAU/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1?keywords=Hornby+r8264&qid=1552849463&s=kids&sr=1-1-fkmrnull

Edited March 17, 2019 by adb968008

[Accurascale Fran]

5 hours ago, The Johnster said:

But the cost of producing the older models, even with the tooling redacted decades ago, is high because the models were not designed to be produced with the benefits of CAD cost efficiencies; once the tooling has covered it's initial outlay, it probably costs more to have an older model manufactured and assembled than a current one despite the current model's greater complexity and number of separate parts.  And the modern model will be more profitable and sell better, unless it's a bit of a dog... 

 

 

Hi there,

 

Sorry, this is not correct. Once the tooling is made it is the same difficulty squirting plastic into an existing tooling as it is a brand new one; relatively straightforward. The reason a brand new model is more expensive is due to the need to recoup the initial outlay for tooling and the higher labour costs for assembling a more intricate model. Older models (think pre China design) have significantly less separate parts and tooling has been well paid off, and as a result are much less expensive to produce. There is no difficulty in production due to the tooling being older.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Cheers,

 

Fran

Edited March 17, 2019 by 071

[The Evil Bus Driver]

I saw Thornbury Hill on there, which was a nice surprise. As well as a member of Brighton MRC on the operating team too. I won't say which one lol. That's a fantastic layout if anyone gets a chance to see it

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Good points, up to a point 'adb'.

 

However most local (model) shops pay their taxes (with little or no help from the UK govt at this point in time). Amazon, EBay et al have been telling our (UK) tax office what they want to pay when the tax bill comes in. Not to mention ducking and diving VAT, Corporate Tax etc. The taxman/VATman, myopic cowards that they are, capitulate and fall to their knees in front of such big businesses and then turn around and bully hard working tax payers especially SMEs.

 

In that regard its all becoming VERY Damien Thorn (Thorn Industries).

 

Until humanity is at zero on the scale of madness, our egos are in check and a genuine utopia has arrived, competition is king. AFAICT (even acting as an umbrella for smaller businesses), big businesses such as Amazon, EBay et al are very close to being anti competitive. Reminds me of the cult movie 'They Live'. Luckily I have had the right type of sunglasses for sometime now.

 

We need to support local business, mix and match our purchasing preferences. I now only purchase from Amazon 1-3 times a year.

 

As 5 model shops, like pubs, a month fall by the wayside, the big box shifters might think that failing competition is good. Only in the short term it is! Longer term it will be detrimental. FWICT local model shops are still working on ten year old margins, toy shops get more, smaller model shops need a bigger slice of the pie from manufacturers.

 

I hope that younger modellers will still have access to products for this wonderful hobby in twenty-thirty years time, however, with all the grey beards (like myself) we see in the hobby, my fear? Is that we are at the zenith of railway modelling and not enough is being done to perpetuate it, despite the valiant efforts of some. Perhaps all good things come to an end?

Edited March 17, 2019 by CME and Bottlewasher

[The Johnster]

3 hours ago, PMP said:

 

That makes no sense at all. The benefits of using ‘old’ tooling is clear, it’s cost effective, and cheap.

To follow your logic would mean almost the entire Railroad range is more expensive to produce than the more detailed and complex to assemble ‘regular’ items. Hornby then, should have designed, tooled and produced a high end class 66 to rival Hattons spec because it’s cheaper than running out reliveries on a Lima body.

 

 

 

 

I'd agree that it sounds counterintuitive, but the point I was making, perhaps inadequately, is that older toolings are designed for a different type of production and are nowadays less cost effective, or maybe what I mean is that they are not so much less cost effective than they were as that modern ones, designed with the aid of CAD for maximum efficiency, are more so.  And I was referring to the cost of the moulding process alone, not the final cost of the model, into which factors such as R & D, and assembly of many parts in 3rd party facilities, must be taken into account.  The initial cost of tooling is high, but is no longer the largest component of the retail price; that is assembly and finishing, labour intensive delicate hand work that cannot be automated in a Chinese economy where labour costs are rising as the workers understandably want a better standard of living.  The entire rationale of outsourcing to China, cheaper production costs, is being called into question but the companies are so committed to it that a return to UK manufacturing is unlikely.

 

I suspect many of the Railroad items are more expensive to mould than modern hi-spec equivalents, but can be assembled and finished more cheaply; that said, some of them are not that cheap!  £40 for the Airfix A28/30 auto trailer which 'ought' to cost next to nothing, when the current hi-spec and very superior Collett Suburbans only cost a tenner more, and the price of the Railroad Crosti 9F illustrate the point.  Hornby are not ripping us off with A28/30s, that is what they have to charge to cover costs and make a reasonable return

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, CME and Bottlewasher said:

5 model shops, like pubs, a month fall by the wayside

 

Have you got a source for this information? I would contest the figure and there are start-ups, I don't doubt there is a net annual reduction but not of that magnitude.

[JohnR]

5 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

I recently received an email from Rails advertising the new Hattons container wagons.

One major outlet/commissioner is promoting the product of another major outlet/commissioner.

It is but a small step to reach the situation in your example.

Of course I am not party to the intercompany pricing policy. What you are giving as an example could be actually happening.

As you say, just a random thought.

Bernard

 

I think this dates back to the autumn, when there seemed to be some sharing of resources amongst the main model retailers, that I dont think received the level of comment it deserved.

 

Now, you can buy your Kernow O2 from Hattons  and your Hattons Barclay and P from Rails, Kernow and several others. 

 

[adb968008]

Does it perhaps depend on tooling complexity, associated to assembly time ?

 

The railroad 47 consists of 1 piece each for body, glazing, frames, but also buffers, headlight/window lenses, coupling hooks, two different bogie frames etc... without counting, i’d Guess it’s somewhere around 40 component pieces, if split down to the axles and coupling hooks  themselves.

 

That’s nothing compared to the class 50 which is nearing 20 years old, and has the sprung cab doors, and some lucky person has to fit each and every Louvre into those body side grills...there’s 40 pieces in those adjustable body side louvres alone.

 

If someone tooled a class 50 today I don’t think it would be made with 12 pieces just for the 4 cab doors... but if you want a class 50, that’s the only tooling in town, and it seems to still be selling... those doors need painting too, and lined if NSE, as do those louvres, and before fitting because they are adjustable.

 

That said the class 50 is popular, would Hornby continue with this tooling or simplify ? (Personally i’d Have thought they may have moulded on the doors and louvres before now, but I don’t know if that would be possible or just worth sticking as is for the runs they make ?)... its the Concorde of modern image rtr.. way ahead of its time, very manual but a lovely model.. I don’t think a replacement would be any better, but quite possibly simpler and faster to paint/assemble.

 

 

Just thinking ?

 

Edited March 17, 2019 by adb968008

[CME and Bottlewasher]

1 hour ago, AY Mod said:

 

Have you got a source for this information? I would contest the figure and there are start-ups, I don't doubt there is a net annual reduction but not of that magnitude.

Hi Andy,

 

Nice to hear from you.

 

You are, of course, welcome to doubt my comments (and you are correct there is no known empirical/statistical research with regard to start ups and how long said start ups last and who is backing such. There is a stat for the failure rate of new SMEs though).

 

My source? Two reputable, known, SME model shops (one is an importer/stockist). That info is further backed up by senior industry representatives.

 

My hope? That pace of closure has slowed since I was told those stats.

 

Rest assured I only comment from the point of fact, empirical research, known facts, data and stats etc. I never just throw comments out, as my comments are carefully considered these days.

 

The closure rates relate to the compromised margins SME model shops face. Eg. IIRC mark up for 'toy shops' can be 100%, for certain SME model shops? 15-30%, plus rates and overheads. In other words many are treading water, some are sinking.

 

I would be interested to know more of your thoughts/sources. PM me if you wish.

 

Many thanks, kind regards,

 

CME.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CME and Bottlewasher

[Jol Wilkinson]

4 hours ago, Locomotion No. 3 said:

In response to the point raised by Jol Wilkinson

 

"It seems that Hattons, Rails, Kernow, NRM/Locomotion and others are trying to have their cake and eat it. Presumably they still want to buy in RTR products, rely on Hornby and the others to produce the complimentary items, etc. while they cherry pick the "popular" and more profitable products in the loco centric RTR market."

 

Can I clarify that all models produced of items from the National Collection and released under the Locomotion Models brand have been commissioned from leading manufacturers that serve the British ready-to-run market namely - Accurascale, Bachmann, Dapol, Hornby, Oxford Rail and Rapido Trains. This includes items produced in partnership with Rails of Sheffield such as the Dynamometer Car (Rapido Trains) and the forthcoming LB&SCR Terrier (Dapol).

 

We work very closely with all the manufacturers and their own branding appears alongside ours on the boxes. 

 

Dennis Lovett

Exclusive Models Marketing Executive

Locomotionmodels.com

Dennis,

 

whether all those companies you list are manufacturers in the generally accepted sense is open to discussion. The facility to have a model manufactured on a sub-contract basis in China provides the opportunity for large retailers with sufficient funding to commission products, which may be welcome by many. Having the sole rights to retail that model also provides them with a competitive advantage in the marketplace. However, if that it puts at risk those businesses such as Hornby and Bachmann, who "manufacture" and distribute a far wider range of products to the retail outlets, then the hobby as followed by the majority will be much worse off.

 

Jol

[Legend]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

I'd agree that it sounds counterintuitive, but the point I was making, perhaps inadequately, is that older toolings are designed for a different type of production and are nowadays less cost effective, or maybe what I mean is that they are not so much less cost effective than they were as that modern ones, designed with the aid of CAD for maximum efficiency, are more so.  And I was referring to the cost of the moulding process alone, not the final cost of the model, into which factors such as R & D, and assembly of many parts in 3rd party facilities, must be taken into account.  The initial cost of tooling is high, but is no longer the largest component of the retail price; that is assembly and finishing, labour intensive delicate hand work that cannot be automated in a Chinese economy where labour costs are rising as the workers understandably want a better standard of living.  The entire rationale of outsourcing to China, cheaper production costs, is being called into question but the companies are so committed to it that a return to UK manufacturing is unlikely.

 

I suspect many of the Railroad items are more expensive to mould than modern hi-spec equivalents, but can be assembled and finished more cheaply; that said, some of them are not that cheap!  £40 for the Airfix A28/30 auto trailer which 'ought' to cost next to nothing, when the current hi-spec and very superior Collett Suburbans only cost a tenner more, and the price of the Railroad Crosti 9F illustrate the point.  Hornby are not ripping us off with A28/30s, that is what they have to charge to cover costs and make a reasonable return

 

Valiant try Johnster but I think the price of a model relates more to the manufacturers perception of what they can get for it rather than any link at all to the cost of making it . That’s why you get £40 ex Airfix Autocoaches because Simon Kohler thinks that’s what the market will pay .  That’s why M7s were very high priced , because that’s what people would pay for them .  On the other hand Terriers and 66s are pitched low enough because there is competition .  I’ll bet in none of these cases there is a direct correlation between cost of production and selling price.