Production Run Size Then and Now

[papagolfjuliet]

On 04/06/2019 at 09:31, adb968008 said:

 

You only need to roll back to year 2000 to only have 2 choices of 00 Gauge steam.. Hornby and Bachmann. (Lima/ViTrains weren't steam, Dapol wasn't a force and Heljan was new but only diesels), no commissioners.. and Hornby Limited Editions were produced in numbers of 3000-5000, Lima's ranged from 350-550 with odd ones (92001) at 3000. I recall the decision for the Lima 92 was based on estimated sales of 30k units in all variants.

 

 

Go back to the mid- to late 80s and, with Airfix and Liliput gone, Palitoy having withdrawn from the UK model railway market, and Lima making nothing but diesels, you basically had Hornby and the small number of Dapol steam outline models plus Wrenn. No wonder that with so little competion Margate hardly produced anything new during that period. IIRC the only new steam outline models they came up with in those years were the 8F, the badly compromised 28XX on the 8F chassis, the Saint (a retooled Tri-ang Hall), and the little GKN tank.

Edited June 6, 2019 by papagolfjuliet

[Stanley Melrose]

I think you'll find that production runs in China today are based on a single day's output.  By this I mean that the parts bins are stocked overnight with sufficient components for the next day's production.  The workflow is planned so that painted parts are readily available to stock the bins and similarly for those that do not require any painting. 

 

The workforce is trained on the relevant assembly procedures and when the bell rings in the morning, production commences.  If all goes according to plan, the requisite number of finished models comes off the production lines and the staff go back to their barracks.  Any left-over parts are gathered up and thrown away or saved as spares (perhaps) while the bins are replenished for the next day's output.  Any testing (!) is carried out and packing follows before palleting and shipping.

 

That's why everything is a limited edition today, unlike the inventory rich days of yore - and why there are often too few spare parts.  Anyone tried to get a set of cylinders for a Hornby Pug?

 

Think about it - that's just about the only way the system can work.  It's not as if our brand names are our manufacturers any more.  Production slots have to be booked months in advance and if any part is not ready, that slot will be re-assigned PDQ to ensure that cost targets are met - hence delays and even cancellations.

 

It also explains why what may seem to be common components do not exist, e.g. tenders or loco chassis may seem to suit two or more locos but each product will almost certainly have been designed ab initio by a different team and they could not care less that a previously produced product's parts' could be re-used.

 

That's what just-in-time manufacturing means and why there is so much angst at present in the European car industry as the B-word looms.

 

Stan

[Ozexpatriate]

51 minutes ago, truffy said:

LEGO has changed beyond being a toy to build anything.

LEGO is still completely a toy to build whatever you want. You can still buy a 'box of bricks'. However, relatively few people do.

 

They have learned that they make a lot more money by selling kits. People buy more that way than they do with an assortment of bricks.

[Andy Hayter]

On 05/06/2019 at 19:45, Ozexpatriate said:

Chris, your point that 1950s train sets were marketed as children's gifts in the same way that LEGO makes children's gifts is well made, though I would add a couple of caveats for LEGO production volumes.

 

Their largest sets are not targeted as gifts for children. They are unquestionably targeting adult fans. 

Deliberately or not, I would suggest that many train sets of the 50s were bought for "the lad" but played with by "the dad".

I know that was the case with my Triang Christmas set, where I was permitted (under sufferance) to watch the adults playing trains.  

The box cover marketing shows dad (with pipe) and his lad - plus a layout to (then) die for.

 

I therefore see quite some parallels with today's Lego even if the marketing is now more openly aimed at the adult.

[truffy]

2 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said:

LEGO is still completely a toy to build whatever you want. You can still buy a 'box of bricks'. However, relatively few people do.

 

They have learned that they make a lot more money by selling kits. People buy more that way than they do with an assortment of bricks.

Which is why I wrote "changed beyond", rather than "changed from".

I've spent time at Legoland. I know.

[Nearholmer]

We could probably do with some pie-charts in this thread, to illustrate the breakdown of costs at the point of sale "then" and "now".

 

But, here is a guesstimate in words:

 

Design - even accounting for higher component count, costs significantly reduced by digitisation. No drawings to produce on paper, data fed direct forward into tool-making. Lower proportion of cost "now".

Tool - component count has gone up, so more tools, but a high proportion of the tool-making is almost certainly automated. Lower proportion of cost "now".

Manufacture - more components, but far less waste, rework, and fettling, and the materials used are probably cheaper. Roughly the same proportion of cost "then" and "now"

Assemble - since model train assembly isn't automated, and there are now more components, greater "now" than "then". I'm assuming that Liverpudlian girls in 1957 were paid similarly basic wages to Chinese girls now.

Pack - much more sophisticated packaging now, higher proportion of cost "now"

Ship to retailer - Take a wild guess and say that modern efficiencies make shipping from China to Canterbury (England or New Zealand, you ask?) comparable to shipping from Liverpool.

 

If this guesswork is about right, it indicates that "up front costs" are now a smaller proportion than they were, which is what makes small batches viable.

 

Add to that the fact that the market is different, and demands smaller batches. Every boy in 1957 wanted a Hornby Dublo train-set, and could never expect to "get everything in the catalogue", even if only a couple of new models were added each year, so was happy with limited choice ('cos it didn't seem like that at the time!). That same boy, having grown-up and become a pensioner, is now a mega-picky consumer, who wants not just any old model, but a detailed facsimile of the very loco that he copped at Crewe on his eleventh birthday, or whatever, and, what's more, he can enter a Wishlist poll in the hope of voting it into existence. That sort of particularity is only possible with small batches - if large batches were made, a high proportion of product would go unsold.

[PatB]

On the subject of the target age group for the more sophisticated Lego kits, I noticed an enormous Lego box in a shop window yesterday.  It contained a kit for the Taj Mahal (the mausoleum in India, not the restaurant in the high street) and claimed to be for ages 16+. No price in evidence but I doubt if it was cheap. 

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, truffy said:

 

I've spent time at Legoland. I know.

 

Poor thing. You were lucky to get out in one piece.

 

That was what a very dodgy estate in Runcorn was known as. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southgate_Estate

 

Thankfully now gone.

 

 

Jason

[Steamport Southport]

11 minutes ago, PatB said:

On the subject of the target age group for the more sophisticated Lego kits, I noticed an enormous Lego box in a shop window yesterday.  It contained a kit for the Taj Mahal (the mausoleum in India, not the restaurant in the high street) and claimed to be for ages 16+. No price in evidence but I doubt if it was cheap. 

 

Taj Mahal is £250 in John Lewis.

 

https://www.johnlewis.com/lego-creator-10256-taj-mahal/p3444676?sku=237271032&s_kwcid=2dx92700044776382117&tmad=c&tmcampid=2&gclid=CO_V_aKI1uICFdX2UQodGJ8POQ&gclsrc=aw.ds

 

 

 

 

Jason

[PatB]

3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Taj Mahal is £250 in John Lewis.

 

https://www.johnlewis.com/lego-creator-10256-taj-mahal/p3444676?sku=237271032&s_kwcid=2dx92700044776382117&tmad=c&tmcampid=2&gclid=CO_V_aKI1uICFdX2UQodGJ8POQ&gclsrc=aw.ds

 

 

 

 

Jason

Probably ~$700 here then. I prefer their train sets anyway :D.

[Dunsignalling]

On ‎03‎/‎06‎/‎2019 at 11:56, PatB said:

Of course, back in the day, if you fancied loco X in the catalogue, but didn't have the readies at the time, no problem. Save up over weeks/months and your local model shop will have one on the shelf when you get there, or if they don't, the next nearest will, or you can send a  postal order off to Railmail or whoever. Now, it seem, unless you're cashed up when pre-orders open for something desirable, you're out of luck and stuck with Ebay chancers once you've found the money. Although I guess this can work the other way, with the less popular variants ending up with Hattons and going for bargain prices just to shift them. The Rail Blue 2-BIL(?) and some of the parcels cars spring to mind.

 

Overall, though, I'm not sure that putting together a coherent stock collection for a layout is really any easier today than when there just wasn't much available. The challenges have just changed from those of actually adapting/building stock to those of planning and budgeting many months or even years in advance. How many potential converts did 0 gauge lose, for example, when everybody got excited about the Dapol 08 and started planning large scale Inglenooks, only to become disillusioned with the seemingly interminable wait and went and built something they could get the bits for?

The trick nowadays is to start saving when the model is announced, That generally works, though Hornby have recently begun springing releases on us with little notice. When that happens, just hope that the initial releases don't include your preferred livery...

 

My method, since retirement, is to decide what my monthly modelling budget is and set that aside each month so a pot builds up over the months I don't spend it. The hard bit is not raiding it for other purposes or getting tempted by models that are attractive but don't fit my real interests. It works for me and I only buy the "lollipops" now when the slush fund is in healthy surplus over anticipated arrivals. Surprisingly often, they have moved to the clearance discount category by the time that happens.

 

In essence, it helps if you can keep your definition of "coherent" fairly tight and avoid ones prototype interests wandering about in response to whatever new loco becomes the "flavour of the month". Mine have widened over the years but never diverged by much, being firmly rooted in what got me hooked on railways in the first place. Summoning up the necessary self-discipline is therefore probably easier for me than many others. 

 

John

[RAF96]

Unfortunately the journey between announced and actually produced these days seems to be reliant upon reaction to pre-orders. If not enough folk show interest then the product is canned.

[Craigw]

12 hours ago, Stanley Melrose said:

I think you'll find that production runs in China today are based on a single day's output.  By this I mean that the parts bins are stocked overnight with sufficient components for the next day's production.  The workflow is planned so that painted parts are readily available to stock the bins and similarly for those that do not require any painting. 

 

 

 

Stan

 

One needs to be on facebook to see  it , but this post from an Australian Company shows what the Assembly part of the Chinese factories is like plus other bits. The assembly is not as high tech as many people may imagine and a production run will take several days to assemble.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[Ozexpatriate]

15 hours ago, Craigw said:

One needs to be on facebook to see  it , but this post from an Australian Company shows what the Assembly part of the Chinese factories is like plus other bits. The assembly is not as high tech as many people may imagine and a production run will take several days to assemble.

If you subscribe to Rapido's newsletters you will see many images of the production process in China.

 

It is very much a blend of very low tech and quite high tech depending on the application.

[Ozexpatriate]

On 06/06/2019 at 16:10, Nearholmer said:

Design - even accounting for higher component count, costs significantly reduced by digitisation. No drawings to produce on paper, data fed direct forward into tool-making. Lower proportion of cost "now".

Tool - component count has gone up, so more tools, but a high proportion of the tool-making is almost certainly automated. Lower proportion of cost "now".

Manufacture - more components, but far less waste, rework, and fettling, and the materials used are probably cheaper. Roughly the same proportion of cost "then" and "now"

Assemble - since model train assembly isn't automated, and there are now more components, greater "now" than "then". I'm assuming that Liverpudlian girls in 1957 were paid similarly basic wages to Chinese girls now.

I like the way you have tried to break the problem down and agree with some of your assumptions.

 

One thing you haven't factored is today's quest for perfection. The cost of revising tooling, and waste and rework is very high for those companies (like Rapido) that really try to achieve perfection. I would give Hornby (today) pretty high marks here too, though I would not have said so a couple of years ago. Jason Shron's newsletters frequently illustrate reject bins and expensive, manual tooling modifications required to reach his standards of fidelity. Others (whom I won't name, but the forums are full of complaints) do presumably benefit from the lower costs in tooling and manufacture that you articulate. 

 

Given today's detailed parts, I have to assume that assembly takes much longer today. Comparing relative costs of 1957 Liverpudlians and contemporary Chinese workers on some kind of inflation/cost-of-living/time adjusted scale is quite beyond me, but given the extraordinary detail in today's assembly for not too different adjusted-for-inflation final prices, my instinct is that Chinese manufacture is vastly cheaper in some relative time-adjusted measure. I don't know whether in the end I agree or disagree with costs being greater "now" than "then" for assembly. It's very hard to assess.

[Ozexpatriate]

On 06/06/2019 at 17:02, Steamport Southport said:

Taj Mahal is £250 in John Lewis.

 

21 hours ago, PatB said:

Probably ~$700 here then. I prefer their train sets anyway :D.

Website says AU$499.99 for the LEGO Taj Mahal. UK price is £299.99. I'm surprised John Lewis is discounting it. LEGO hold pretty firm on pricing.

 

This is not a child's toy. If I'm not mistaken, it's also the second-most expensive set (after the ultimate Millennium Falcon).

[PatB]

3 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said:

 

Website says AU$499.99 for the LEGO Taj Mahal. UK price is £299.99. I'm surprised John Lewis is discounting it. LEGO hold pretty firm on pricing.

 

This is not a child's toy. If I'm not mistaken, it's also the second-most expensive set (after the ultimate Millennium Falcon).

 

Remarkably good pricing given the still rather prevalent practice of gouging Australian customers. Mind you, it tends to be Australian businesses who excel at that, so maybe Lego themselves are a bit less prone to it.