DJ Models Announcement 01/05/19

[Ravenser]

16 minutes ago, njee20 said:

Rubbish, it's a perfectly good mechanism for delivering products, as other manufacturers have shown. The problem is that one man has potentially poisoned the well for everyone, and whilst I'd hope that people would be grown up enough to appraise each project on its individual merit I suspect many will go down the "crowdfunding's dodgy" route.

 

It's even more of a shame that's the conclusion people have come to when there's not actually been a failure of a project yet. No one's lost money, no one's said that a project is being cancelled, it's purely the inference people have taken from a different announcement, which is a bit curious. I can understand people not wanting to invest further in projects they've signed up for, but that's not the same.

 

Unfortunately with DJM he doesn't do cancellations of crowd-funded projects. This is one point that emerges quite strongly from tabulating his announcements and their current status . 

 

For example - DJM announced a Class 23 in N and O in 2013. CAD was shown . Nothing has been heard about either since 2015. Project on or off? Has any money been taken? Is this among the 14 further designs for which DJM have indicated they intend to register designs at the IPO?

 

Was money taken on the HUO , in either scale ? It looks like the 4mm version is off, because Accurascale are doing it. The last word on the N gauge version was "it doesn't look a go-er".  It was crowd-funded - was money taken ? Has it been returned. This is another angle for potential friction between Accurascale and DJM. Does DJM have CAD - probably not?? 

 

Is the Hudswell-Clarke alive or dead? Was money taken?

 

Etc etc 

 

With this scenario, when do people decide that a project has been dropped? How do they decide it is time to be refunded - rather than being told on here that they should be patient, nothing has been cancelled , nobody's lost money "Everything', fine, move along, nothing to see here."

 

The only crowd-funded project formally cancelled has been the 74. There Kernow were acting as the cash-holder , and may well have forced the issue of whether the project was off and money should be returned. This cost Kernow money of their own - and now we find that their relationship with DJM appears to have ended , and DJM has filed legal claims over Kernow projects...

[David Stannard]

7 minutes ago, Legend said:

 But I note "in the other place" that you are critical of the response on RMweb accusing people of lynch mob mentality.  The facts and record as brought out by Ravenser and The Stationmaster speak for themselves , and as you say people should be aware.  You accuse this thread of making things worse. Can I suggest that it was DJ himself that is responsible , the rest of the thread is trying to figure out what happens now . Would you put money into these projects? I wouldn't.

 

Curiously I think we are all saying the same thing but its not a Lynch mob

 

 You only have to read the number of comments where people are demanding refunds from Paypal etc, then there is the speculation about where the money has gone, the sad fact is due to the funding model used to finance these projects if there is a mass exodus of funds due to demands for refunds the projects would definitely collapse. I am not trying to absolve DJ for the substantial part that he has played in this issue due to his somewhat unhinged press release, the community response to this however also plays a significant part in the future prospects of the business.

[PaulCheffus]

7 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

Was money taken on the HUO , in either scale ? It looks like the 4mm version is off, because Accurascale are doing it. The last word on the N gauge version was "it doesn't look a go-er".  It was crowd-funded - was money taken ? Has it been returned. This is another angle for potential friction between Accurascale and DJM. Does DJM have CAD - probably not?? 

 

 

Hi

 

For the N gauge one it was purely expressions of interest.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[woodenhead]

4 minutes ago, David Stannard said:

 

 You only have to read the number of comments where people are demanding refunds from Paypal etc, then there is the speculation about where the money has gone, the sad fact is due to the funding model used to finance these projects if there is a mass exodus of funds due to demands for refunds the projects would definitely collapse. I am not trying to absolve DJ for the substantial part that he has played in this issue due to his somewhat unhinged press release, the community response to this however also plays a significant part in the future prospects of the business.

If Dave hadn't done what he did this thread wouldn't exist and people would not now be asking for refunds.

 

It's as simple as that, you cannot shift some of the blame towards  the 'community' for being up in arms over the debacle that was last week's announcement.

[JSpencer]

8 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

Unfortunately with DJM he doesn't do cancellations of crowd-funded projects. This is one point that emerges quite strongly from tabulating his announcements and their current status . 

 

 

The only crowd-funded project formally cancelled has been the 74. There Kernow were acting as the cash-holder , and may well have forced the issue of whether the project was off and money should be returned. This cost Kernow money of their own - and now we find that their relationship with DJM appears to have ended , and DJM has filed legal claims over Kernow projects...

 

From memory Crowdfunding projects were money was taken in order of appearence:

Class 71 - via Kernow Delivered

Class 74 - via Kernow after a few years of zero progress, Kernow stopped being the banker and monies returned money to customers

Class 17 - initially not crowdfunding, DJM asked customers to pay in advance to get tooling through after running EP was shown, nowt happened, money returned. Project to be restarted from CAD stage IF it restarts

Class 92 - N and OO. 1st installment paid, some gap was to be covered by retailer orders on other variants. Reached CAD in factory 1, now at CAD in factory 2 (3D prints exist)

King in N - 1st installment paid, Digitrains filling the order gap with sound version. At CAD stage maybe tooling

APT-P - Fully funded in Paypal 1st installments, most then credited back. How many paid the 2nd attempt unknown. Some additional orders at 30% increased price after original deadline done. CADs exist almost done. 3D prints of scans exist.

 

Other crowdfunding projects exist in N gauge but are currently only Exprssions of Interest and don't appear to have numbers to move to development. These are 3 locos and there may be a few wagons.

Remaining projects were never intended to be crowd funded, but will probably have to be at some point! They effectively rest in limbo state pending public interest to move it to crowd funding, suitable other finanacing,  a major win on the lottery, someone else doing the model etc. etc.

 

[Ravenser]

3 minutes ago, David Stannard said:

 

 You only have to read the number of comments where people are demanding refunds from Paypal etc, then there is the speculation about where the money has gone, the sad fact is due to the funding model used to finance these projects if there is a mass exodus of funds due to demands for refunds the projects would definitely collapse. I am not trying to absolve DJ for the substantial part that he has played in this issue due to his somewhat unhinged press release, the community response to this however also plays a significant part in the future prospects of the business.

 

My reading of the "unhinged press release" was that it was an attempt to close down projects by Accurascale, RevolutioN and Kernow, and potentially to strike out at them and others. The comments made in the "Announcement of an Announcement" appear to have been an attack on members of this forum generally - , so comment on the Statement was always inevitable.

 

DJM have a large number of projects outstanding , some of them for up to 4 years - at some point it was inevitable that confidence would crack , and frankly that Statement may have done the job. It's not justifiable to suggest forum members are attempting to take down DJM by destroying confidence in him, given where matters are on DJM side

 

To be frank, I do not expect an exodus of funds from DJM , because I do not expect them to refund money from "pending" projects; and I certainly don't expect DJM to announce that a pending project has been cancelled after money has been taken . There is  no clarity on the T&Cs involved - it has even been suggested that crowd-funders might be legally liable for further instalments if they did not pay, and no certainty that anyone has any real entitlement to their money back . If DJM/its projects go bellyup in the way you suggest it is not clear there is any real likelihood crowd funders would be re-imbursed. Most crowd-funders seem to assume they would lose the lot as unsecured creditors . If crowd-funders' money from a project  has been spent on CAD and the project then folds, do they have any entitlement to a refund? Certainly there would be no money to pay them back.

 

There's no chance of this thread starting a "run on the bank" and bringing down DJM - because it's not clear crowd-funders have any right to get their money back, and it's not clear it would be possible to secure refunds in practice even if there were indeed a legal right to do so.

 

The nearest parallel to this situation appears to be Coopercraft

[DY444]

37 minutes ago, David Stannard said:

 

 You only have to read the number of comments where people are demanding refunds from Paypal etc, then there is the speculation about where the money has gone, the sad fact is due to the funding model used to finance these projects if there is a mass exodus of funds due to demands for refunds the projects would definitely collapse. I am not trying to absolve DJ for the substantial part that he has played in this issue due to his somewhat unhinged press release, the community response to this however also plays a significant part in the future prospects of the business.

 

The community response does indeed play a significant part in the future prospects of the business.  The big word there though is response.  It is responding to an announcement which the business chose to make for reasons known only to itself.  Given the nature of the announcement and the way things appear to have been going then a negative reaction from potential customers and other stakeholders is not exactly surprising.  The mystery to me as I keep saying is why that wasn't anticipated.

[njee20]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

 

Unfortunately with DJM he doesn't do cancellations of crowd-funded projects. This is one point that emerges quite strongly from tabulating his announcements and their current status . 

 

For example - DJM announced a Class 23 in N and O in 2013. CAD was shown . Nothing has been heard about either since 2015. Project on or off? Has any money been taken? Is this among the 14 further designs for which DJM have indicated they intend to register designs at the IPO?

 

Was money taken on the HUO , in either scale ? It looks like the 4mm version is off, because Accurascale are doing it. The last word on the N gauge version was "it doesn't look a go-er".  It was crowd-funded - was money taken ? Has it been returned. This is another angle for potential friction between Accurascale and DJM. Does DJM have CAD - probably not?? 

 

Is the Hudswell-Clarke alive or dead? Was money taken?

 

Etc etc 

 

With this scenario, when do people decide that a project has been dropped? How do they decide it is time to be refunded - rather than being told on here that they should be patient, nothing has been cancelled , nobody's lost money "Everything', fine, move along, nothing to see here."

 

The only crowd-funded project formally cancelled has been the 74. There Kernow were acting as the cash-holder , and may well have forced the issue of whether the project was off and money should be returned. This cost Kernow money of their own - and now we find that their relationship with DJM appears to have ended , and DJM has filed legal claims over Kernow projects...

You over complicate it greatly with your frothing. The projects that money has been taken - the King, the APT, the 92 have not been cancelled. They are not actually in any worse health than last week. But people are now decrying crowdfunding as being a fool's errand. That's lunacy. I fully understand people writing off their small investment, rather than parting with further sums due to a lack of faith in Dave, but the fact remains that those projects are still just as active as last week.

 

That Dave isn't good at killing things that haven't reached critical mass isn't relevant in that, the HUO, 23 etc are just noise.

[jcredfer]

6 minutes ago, DY444 said:

 

The community response does indeed play a significant part in the future prospects of the business.  The big word there though is response.  It is responding to an announcement which the business chose to make for reasons known only to itself.  Given the nature of the announcement and the way things appear to have been going then a negative reaction from potential customers and other stakeholders is not exactly surprising.  The mystery to me as I keep saying is why that wasn't anticipated.

 

I wouldn't say anyone could have anticipated the Announcements, however, the tone of them shouldn't have been much of a surprise.  There is a certain amount of "form" for the nature of communication from that source.

 

Regards

 

J

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, njee20 said:

I fully understand people writing off their small investment, rather than parting with further sums due to a lack of faith in Dave, but the fact remains that those projects are still just as active as last week.

 

Hardly!

 

Every investor who jumps ship makes it less and less likely that the project will come to fruition - due to insufficient funds being forthcoming to go forward to production.

 

Is it not the fact that the projects in question have been largely inactive that has contributed to the current situation? Asserting that they are "... still just as active as last week ..." is hardly a statement of confidence!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[njee20]

Yes, I agree, but that doesn't actually change the actual status of the project - people are talking as thought they've been cancelled, they've not, but that's not the same as their not being viable to continue, which seems likely given the metaphorical grenade Dave has pulled the pin on.

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

Is the Hudswell-Clarke alive or dead? Was money taken?

 

 

Don't know. No it was pre orders without money taken/expression of interest only.

 

 

Jason

[Torper]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

If Dave hadn't done what he did this thread wouldn't exist and people would not now be asking for refunds.  It's as simple as that, you cannot shift some of the blame towards  the 'community' for being up in arms over the debacle that was last week's announcement.

 

You can if it was a gross over-reaction to what was at most a rather silly announcement.

 

DT

[Edwardian]

25 minutes ago, njee20 said:

 still just as active as last week.

 

 

 

[jcredfer]

2 minutes ago, Torper said:

 

You can if it was a gross over-reaction to what was at most a rather silly announcement.

 

DT

 

Much of the posting is about the length of time projects are taking and speculation about possible outcomes for those projects.  The announcement hasn't attracted a vast amout of comment in it'self, but, rather, has sparked off much discussion about the results DJM are / are not managing to achieve.

 

Regards

 

J

[philiprporter]

8 minutes ago, jcredfer said:

 

Much of the posting is about the length of time projects are taking and speculation about possible outcomes for those projects.  The announcement hasn't attracted a vast amout of comment in it'self, but, rather, has sparked off much discussion about the results DJM are / are not managing to achieve.

 

Regards

 

J

Yes I think that's it in a nutshell - I know that many of us who knowingly took a financial risk to support DJ projects, were getting increasingly concerned about delay after delay (you only have to look at the DJ Models class 92 thread to see how long ago people were starting to express concerns) and I rather suspect that the recent announcement has acted as a catalyst to prompt a more public airing of concerns and questions among/from those who may have kept such concerns under wraps for hope of a good outcome - which may of course still happen, but patience and goodwill have limits, which were already probably being stretched close to breaking point.

 

So when we are told to expect an announcement, I know I and others hoped that this would be an announcement about the APT going to tooling or some other genuinely exciting development - but when we actually saw what the announcement contained, patience and goodwill reached breaking point - at least that's what went on in my head and I know the same applies to others. 

[Ravenser]

 

I

42 minutes ago, jcredfer said:

 

Much of the posting is about the length of time projects are taking and speculation about possible outcomes for those projects.  The announcement hasn't attracted a vast amount of comment in it'self, but, rather, has sparked off much discussion about the results DJM are / are not managing to achieve.

 

Regards

 

J

 

Given that a large part of the thrust of the DJM Statement was about the legal claims he had registered - and intend to , and their implications for other parties planning models of the same subjects , it becomes relevant to assess what other projects are outstanding from DJM , and whether Dave Jones has CAD  for them which could be one of the 14 additional design registrations he has "promised" - with a view to assessing whether there are implications for others like Kernow. [ which we've done earlier in the thread - this is not trolling DJM...]

 

To  give a specific example- the registration of the design for the Kernow D600 by DJM (It can't be anyone else's design) raises the question of whether DJM intends to register CAD for an LSWR road van, given that he was formerly part of a project by Kernow for an LSWR road van , which they now intend to progress directly with a factory.  This raises obvious questions about the viability of the N gauge LSWR road van which DJM announced seemingly as a spin-off from the Kernow commission  (is "that statement no longer operative" from DJM?) , apparent grievances between DJM and Kernow, and whether this might affect the Kernow project in some way (I trust not - there is the question of whether DJM would own any IP if he were to register CAD)  . It raises questions which may well have good answers but which concern possible purchasers of the Kernow model.

 

Again - the DJM 92 projects in OO and N can't be considered in isolation from the Accurascale and RevolutioN projects. We might note the existence of terminated collaborations between DJM and both the others, the clash over the HUO, the delivery records of each of the 3 parties, and the registration of Cl 92 designs in OO and N with Dave Jones comments on what he thinks are the implications. It's difficult not to see it all as "clash between DJM and Accurascale/RevolutioN over the 92" and wonder whether the market can sustain both projects and how it might end. It's also difficult to avoid wondering whether the legal costs for registering the 92 design were paid from from the crowd-funding , how much cash is left after CAD/lawyers and whether crowd-funders, as "investors",  have any right to money back if the project does not ultimately succeed but the money has all been spent on CAD and lawyers.

 

The APT-P seems to me a "heroic" project - to borrow a favourite word of Roger Ford's. I'm genuinely puzzled why DJM is promising to register the designs - who on earth does he think might pirate this??? The instalments for this one are not at all small sums - I really can't see anyone else ever attempting a RTR model if this project  fails

Edited May 10, 2019 by Ravenser
To note that we've done the list a few pages earlier

[The Stationmaster]

43 minutes ago, jcredfer said:

 

Much of the posting is about the length of time projects are taking and speculation about possible outcomes for those projects.  The announcement hasn't attracted a vast amout of comment in it'self, but, rather, has sparked off much discussion about the results DJM are / are not managing to achieve.

 

Regards

 

J

Exactly so - but surely an inevitable outcome when an announcement is announced and then turns out to have nothing to do with the company's progress of various current projects but is actually seen as some sort of ill-considered swipe (perhaps a consequence of being poorly worded?) at just about everybody else with attempts to stake a claim to their work ,or work they have paid for.  A very common political (in its broadest sense) trick is to divert attention from one thing, usually the most important matter currently in hand, by going off down a totally different avenue and that could easly be seen by some as the case here.

 

It is then a natural consequence that people will tend to look at things in broader terms as well as at the detail of what has been said, and I definitely commented earlier in this thread about the veracity of claim to have IP'd some of the subjects and others have done the same.  But above all if a business, any business, starts to behave in that sort of way it is inevitable that people will look at that business in its wider context.  And to me that context is very simple - of its own account models, including those crowd funded, announced prior to the end of 2015 DJM has actually delivered c.16% of what was announced and that includes models where it was claimed that  'development work is (i.e. was) already underway in the factory in China'  but which have still not appeared.

 

The record is statistically slightly better in respect of originally crowd funded models from that era as 50%, i.e, one out of 2, has been delivered although in my view as customers' money was involved in getting the Class 17  towards production it also effectively became a crowd-funded project and that means only one out of three has materialised.    As ever we can only judge by results but if - as has been implied in model related announcements from DJM - the N gauge 'King' is now on a firm footing and progressing towards tool making there is a chance to regain trust and build reputation and the record of achievement will improve.  Any question of the company's reputation lies solely within the hands of its owner and his products, all people on here can do - if they stick to facts - is look back at history and to be blunt none of it would encourage me to place any money at all in one of its crowdfunding schemes.   Others will obviously form their own views and make their own decisions based on whatever criteria they chose and their criteria could be very different from mine.

[Joseph_Pestell]

2 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

 

 

The nearest parallel to this situation appears to be Coopercraft

 

I don't think that it is a parallel case at all.

 

1) Coopercraft is not run via a limited company.

 

2) Coopercraft advertises goods as being already available when they are not. That's very different to taking money for a product that people know is not yet available but which they still choose to support.

[JSpencer]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

 

 

Oh come on, the tortoise will move at least once a day to eat some salade.

Edited May 10, 2019 by JSpencer

[Edwardian]

42 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

I'm genuinely puzzled why DJM is promising to register the designs - who on earth does he think might pirate this??? 

 

Sorry, quoting you out of context but:

 

 

The shock wave is still running around the railway world, following the service of a writ in Swindon yesterday, taken out by DJ Models against the Great Western Railway, alleging intellectual property infringement. Several members of the Swindon Drawing Office are named in the writ, including Mr C.B. Collett, the Great Western's Chief Mechanical Engineer.  

 

The claim is understood to relate to Mr Collett's new 'King Class' locomotive, which DJ Models alleges is its own design. Your correspondent has gained sight of the writ, which claims that "the DJ Models's King Class design contains a number of distinctive DJ Models's design cues that the Great Western has copied, such as wheels and a boiler". 

 

Damages of £200,000,000 are claimed against the defendants for the alleged infringement, which industry experts estimate is over two hundred million times the value of DJ Models's business.

 

C B Collett: Confused

 

When asked to comment upon this development, Mr Collett said he was confused, "it's not even really my design; it's really George Jackson Churchward's, I just made it bigger".

 

In response, D J Models threatened to make its King much, much smaller.  

 

 

[adb968008]

1st we had an announcement of an announcement, followed by a release lead to 45 pages of doh !!!

 

It draws a lot of parallels to this... a lot of wind, a release and oops.

 

Train crash in slow motion

Edited May 10, 2019 by adb968008

[Hroth]

Unless the IP consists of the model being powered by Unicorn Tears, the main stumbling block would appear to be "Prior Art".

 

Mind you if the (N)RM can get away with licencing "Flying Scotsman", "Mallard" etc, then there's no hope for the world!

[Captain Kernow]

Don't get me wrong, I have no wish to imply that any of this debate is unnecessary or that those making such in-depth and detailed contributions shouldn't have done so, but I am now beginning to wonder how much modelling could have been achieved, if all the (wo)man-hours involved had been directed at building something(s) instead!

 

I would estimate that the amount of potential personal modelling time I have spent reading this thread alone, could have produced either:

- a fully assembled and painted Airfix 'City of Truro', or

- a small branch goods-worth of Parkside wagons, or

- driven to Horrocksford and back, or

- worked out how to change the ring tone on my phone, or

- worked out how to take the body off a Hattons/DJM 14XX.

 

Alternatively I could perhaps have re-decorated a small bedroom or given the missus's car several washes, polishes and interior valets (but don't tell her that!).

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by Captain Kernow

[Edwardian]

8 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Don't get me wrong, I have no wish to imply that any of this debate is unnecessary or that those making such in-depth and detailed contributions shouldn't have done so, but I am now beginning to wonder how much modelling could have been achieved, if all the (wo)man-hours involved had been directed at building something(s) instead!

 

I would estimate that the amount of potential personal modelling time I have spent reading this thread alone, could have produced either:

- a fully assembled and painted Airfix 'City of Truro', or

- a small branch goods-worth of Parkside wagons, or

- driven to Horrocksford and back, or

- worked out how to change the ring tone on my phone, or

- worked out how to take the body off a Hattons/DJM 14XX.

 

Alternatively I could perhaps have re-decorated a small bedroom or given the missus's car several washes, polishes and interior valets (but don't tell her that!).

 

 

Yes, Cap'n, but I think you're fine; it's not as if you announced you were going to do all those things.