DJM - Statement of Affairs released

[rab]

9 hours ago, Buhar said:

Do Rails of Sheffield share your view?  Their 3D printed LBSC van was a fair size run.

I stand corrected.

[DavidH]

52 minutes ago, John M Upton said:

Still hoping the Class 17 will see production one day but the more realistic part of my mind says the tooling is destined for the melting pot...

 

If there is tooling.

 

Is there anything on the metal bases, linked to above, that proves they are what they are identified as?

[spikey]

8 hours ago, roythebus said:

I don't know if anyone else here has had experience of getting plastic moulding toold made ...

 

No, but as an ex-toolmaker I've had enough experience of making them to know that all things being equal, the time it takes to complete one depends less on the complexity of it than on the priority given to the job and the expertise and facilities available in the toolroom that's making it. 

 

Problem is though, it doesn't end there.  Having finished the tool to drawing, the next stage is test shots and it's here that the fun can start - especially if there's a problem with the very first one off the tool.   Even with a single-impression mould, the expected delivery date can go right out the window if nobody looking at the drawing's spotted a potential problem from the moulding point of view.

[The Stationmaster]

10 minutes ago, spikey said:

 

No, but as an ex-toolmaker I've had enough experience of making them to know that all things being equal, the time it takes to complete one depends less on the complexity of it than on the priority given to the job and the expertise and facilities available in the toolroom that's making it. 

 

Problem is though, it doesn't end there.  Having finished the tool to drawing, the next stage is test shots and it's here that the fun can start - especially if there's a problem with the very first one off the tool.   Even with a single-impression mould, the expected delivery date can go right out the window if nobody looking at the drawing's spotted a potential problem from the moulding point of view.

I think folk might also find that 'priority' also relates to profitability and cash flow.  There seems to be a different way of doing the financial side in some of the Chinese factories since the 'the dispute' between one of them and DJ and more examples of payment being required in advance of the more expensive stages of the work such as tooling and production.

[rab]

36 minutes ago, spikey said:

 

No, but as an ex-toolmaker I've had enough experience of making them to know that all things being equal, the time it takes to complete one depends less on the complexity of it than on the priority given to the job and the expertise and facilities available in the toolroom that's making it. 

 

Problem is though, it doesn't end there.  Having finished the tool to drawing, the next stage is test shots and it's here that the fun can start - especially if there's a problem with the very first one off the tool.   Even with a single-impression mould, the expected delivery date can go right out the window if nobody looking at the drawing's spotted a potential problem from the moulding point of view.

Never trust a draughtsman; I should know, I was one for 40 years.

I once suggested that amongst all the standard notes found on drawings,

do not scale etc, should be one saying

Any similarity between this drawing and the finished product

is purely coincidental!

Edited July 9, 2019 by rab

[spikey]

55 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

I think folk might also find that 'priority' also relates to profitability and cash flow ...

 Indeed.  And where the firm making the tool is concerned, to which customer's shouting the loudest / best at paying bills in a timely manner / dangling the biggest carrot / biggest PITA etc etc ...

[pheaton]

2 hours ago, DavidH said:

 

If there is tooling.

 

Is there anything on the metal bases, linked to above, that proves they are what they are identified as?

There was a picture.....but it quickly dissapeared...........or i cant find it anymore....anyone still have it?

[57xx]

13 hours ago, Buhar said:

Do Rails of Sheffield share your view?  Their 3D printed LBSC van was a fair size run.

 

Can you tell us how many 1000's they made on their "fair sized" run?

Edited July 9, 2019 by 57xx
Speeling

[John M Upton]

43 minutes ago, pheaton said:

There was a picture.....but it quickly dissapeared...........or i cant find it anymore....anyone still have it?

 

Top of Page 7 of the now locked Class 17 thread:

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78681-n-gauge-class-17-clayton-locomotive/page/7/

[PMP]

11 minutes ago, 57xx said:

 

Can you tell us how many 1000's they made on their "fair sized" run?

https://railsofsheffield.com/news/articles/3044-rails-br-ex-secr-dia-1424-van

 

I don’t think any have appeared yet, and from the above they’re using an industrial high quality production facility to produce small runs into niche markets.

[spikey]

3 hours ago, PMP said:

https://railsofsheffield.com/news/articles/3044-rails-br-ex-secr-dia-1424-van

... from the above they’re using an industrial high quality production facility to produce small runs into niche markets.

 

 Sorry, but I have to ask where does it say that?  And does anybody know what it's supposed to mean?

[pheaton]

lets break that sentence up....

 

industrial...could be a factory....or could be just a building on an industrial estate.....you could be led to assume that its not someones spare bedroom

high quality....speaks for itself i guess....its not like there going to say low or average quality or.....crap....

production facility.....again speaks for itself really you could be led to assume that its not one person producing it....and its probably not being produced in their bedroom bathroom, front room, kitchen or toilet.

small runs.......not a lot.....

niche markets.......oooh the possibilities....in other words they don't expect to sell many.......unlike say a flying scotsman (which could also have been produced in an industrial high quality production facility) wall clock which everybody must have because its....well ........flying scotsman.......

 

oh and not to forget...the plastic is aircraft grade....which is great....but its not an aircraft....or a model of one for that matter.....and it wont make it fly any better than it would normally.....

 

basically its sales speak for a 3d printed model in a factory....that looks good that we dont normally expect to sell many of.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 9, 2019 by pheaton

[spikey]

15 minutes ago, pheaton said:

... basically its sales speak for a 3d printed model in a factory....that looks good that we dont normally expect to sell many of.....

 

I assumed it was basically a lot of words used to avoid the term 3D printing but I wasn't sure that's what they're using.  Anybody care to take a guess at "A build process using the very latest light technology"?  All I can think of is that the assembly benches are lit by LEDs ...

[spamcan61]

16 minutes ago, spikey said:

 

I assumed it was basically a lot of words used to avoid the term 3D printing but I wasn't sure that's what they're using.  Anybody care to take a guess at "A build process using the very latest light technology"?  All I can think of is that the assembly benches are lit by LEDs ...

I suspect they mean it's printed using DLP rather than the usual 'consumer grade' FDM printing.

[Phil Parker]

As far as the Rails van goes - you COULD read the article in the current issue of BRM rather than just guessing. There's a lot of facts in there, the guys were happy to explain quite a lot of the process including the run sizes.

 

Not that this has any relevance to the DJM situation this thread is about of course.

[RedgateModels]

16 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

As far as the Rails van goes - you COULD read the article in the current issue of BRM rather than just guessing. There's a lot of facts in there, the guys were happy to explain quite a lot of the process including the run sizes.

 

Not that this has any relevance to the DJM situation this thread is about of course.

 

Why spoil a good "debate" with facts LOL

[PMP]

1 hour ago, spikey said:

 

I assumed it was basically a lot of words used to avoid the term 3D printing but I wasn't sure that's what they're using.  Anybody care to take a guess at "A build process using the very latest light technology"?  All I can think of is that the assembly benches are lit by LEDs ...

 

My guess is the models are produced using cutting-edge print technology, designed for volume production. This will enable a practically layer-free continuous print, up to a 100 times faster than conventional 3D printing. It probably uses a photochemical process to project light through an oxygen-permeable window into a reservoir of UV-curable resin. This results in a material with excellent mechanical properties, capable of capturing fine detail.

 

Thats just my guess though, based on what might have been said by Rails. 

 

And, 3,2,1 when I click my fingers you’re back in the room on the DJM thread.

 

 

[maico]

13 hours ago, John M Upton said:

 

Top of Page 7 of the now locked Class 17 thread:

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78681-n-gauge-class-17-clayton-locomotive/page/7/

 

So, what does that show apart from a LKM mould base, are there pics of the actual moulds floating about ?

 

https://www.lkm.com.hk/index.php?lkm=1&lang=en_us

Edited July 10, 2019 by maico

[JSpencer]

13 hours ago, RedgateModels said:

 

Late now I know, but the smoke may have come from a component on the blanking plug or the pcb it plugs into, scrape the remains off with a sharp knife and they work fine. OK maybe RF suppression might be not as it should be but the loco should still run.

 

Thanks. The thing was such a dreadful runner, jerking all over the place that the plug let go are 20 minutes on the rolling road.

I wanted to DCC fit it but there was no chance I was going to risk a chip on such a poor runner. 

[adb968008]

On 09/07/2019 at 08:29, DavidH said:

 

If there is tooling.

 

Is there anything on the metal bases, linked to above, that proves they are what they are identified as?

Gosh your a hard sell...

 

DJ did post some videos on youtube, it ran... kind of, I recall it needing nudge and stalling on points.

The videos have been pulled but were here..

https://djmodels.co.uk/product/class-17-clayton-locomotive

 

all that remains is a gif, in a google search..

 

 

I've full confidence that DJs tools will see the production light of day once more.

If I were a betting man, I’d say that decision was made early/mid-December 2018, and were just awaiting the motions before we see them in a position to be used.

Edited July 10, 2019 by adb968008

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Gosh your a hard sell...

 

DJ did post some videos on youtube, it ran... kind of, I recall it needing nudge and stalling on points.

The videos have been pulled but were here..

https://djmodels.co.uk/product/class-17-clayton-locomotive

 

all that remains is a gif, in a google search..

 

 

I've full confidence that DJs tools will see the production light of day once more.

If I were a betting man, I’d say that decision was made early/mid-December 2018, and were just awaiting the motions before we see them in a position to be used.

But was the Class 17 tooling ever completed?  If money was taken in advance to pay for that tooling to be completed but then work seemingly stopped and the money was refunded it implies that either the work was never done or it was never paid for or the money was paid to the factory and the money which was refunded came from somewhere else.  According to a DJM post on 11 May 2018 tooling had taken place on the model  but not clear if this was the additional tooling work previously announced or simply any earlier tooling work and that payment had been made for tooling (again it was not clear if this meant the earlier tooling work or what had been referred to as '2nd EP tooling' - presumably the latter?).

 

All then was seemingly lost in the dispute with the factory which suggests the '2nd EP tooling' as it had been referred to by DJM might bmot have actually taken place.  If there is still tooling etc work to do the factory might well seek a UK partner, with the necessary cash,  once DJM is fully wound up and out of the way as a going concern - which could well be a considerable way off judging by the time it has taken to liquidate some other small companies.

[melmoth]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

But was the Class 17 tooling ever completed?  If money was taken in advance to pay for that tooling to be completed but then work seemingly stopped and the money was refunded it implies that either the work was never done or it was never paid for or the money was paid to the factory and the money which was refunded came from somewhere else.  According to a DJM post on 11 May 2018 tooling had taken place on the model  but not clear if this was the additional tooling work previously announced or simply any earlier tooling work and that payment had been made for tooling (again it was not clear if this meant the earlier tooling work or what had been referred to as '2nd EP tooling' - presumably the latter?).

 

All then was seemingly lost in the dispute with the factory which suggests the '2nd EP tooling' as it had been referred to by DJM might bmot have actually taken place.  If there is still tooling etc work to do the factory might well seek a UK partner, with the necessary cash,  once DJM is fully wound up and out of the way as a going concern - which could well be a considerable way off judging by the time it has taken to liquidate some other small companies.

 

The Class 17 was the one DJM model that I paid for in advance (and for which I was fully, and promptly, refunded). The following two emails might, or might not, help. 

 

First of all on 25/01/18:

 

Quote

Dear customer,

 

I write to you because i have received from you an 'expression of interest' for the forthcoming N gauge class 17 in either single, multiple, weathered or twin pack.

 

As you probably know by now, the model has now gone successfully through testing and initial tooling. 

However in recent months, China has subtly changed it's terms and conditions in some of the model railway factories, and this has had an impact upon other stockists, private commissioners, larger companies within the UK and of course DJModels Ltd.

 

Basically, due to what i surmise to be some 'deals gone bad' in some of the factories, they are now asking for monies up front for tooling, and product. This is having, as you would probably already have noted, a detrimental effect on some companies models, with delays and requests for monies up front to see the projects onto the ship to the UK.

 

These companies truly cannot help it, and i'm sure, like myself we are looking elsewhere now for future development projects.

 

So how does this affect you? Well, i'm now in the same boat. china has started to ask me for monies for all projects up front, and whilst this has worked with crowdfunding, suddenly trying to find many thousands of pounds out of nowhere to pay for tooling and product is quite awful, as i just don't have this kind of cash flow at the minute.

 

The class 17 has been underwritten by DJM to get to the 1st EP stage, but i am at a loss to guarantee delivery within this year for the model unless it is financed externally (or crowdfunded if you wish).

So i am asking each and everyone of you who has expressed an interest whether you would be willing to pay for you model up front so that we can go into 2nd EP tooling, painted and decorated samples and finally product to fulfil your orders?

 

This would take approximately 6 months from now, so i would expect a release for the model to you around, if not before, TINGS N gauge show 2018.

In fact the tooling can start within 2 weeks and finish before Chinese New Year if enough of you who want the model pay the total soon.

 

Therefore, i am writing to you individually to give you the option, and if you would like to help in this way let me know by returning the e-mail, and i will send you a paypal invoice to pay by debit or credit card.

If you do not want to take this option, no problem, and i fully understand, and the model will reach the stockists in the fullness of time.

 

Each payment will receive a DJModels Ltd receipt as proof of purchase.

 

You probably don't know this but as the Chinese have raised their prices year on year, the 17 has had a price rise with stockists, but not only will i honour the 'expression price' which is lower than RRP, i will also includespecial delivery postage for each order.

 

So if this interests you, please let me know, but in the meantime, could i ask you keep from social media etc for a few days (maybe until Sunday) as i will be posting this mail there, but as a courtesy i think you all should receive this e-mail first and i am sending out all of them individually rather 1 bulk to keep your privacy and this will take a couple of days.

 

Followed by this on 12/05/18:

 

Quote

Dear N gauge class 17 crowdfunding customer,

 

It is with a heavy heart that i write to you to inform you that due to circumstances beyond my control, i have decided to put the N gauge class 17 model on hold for the foreseeable future.

 

As you know, i asked for 'crowdfunding' monies to help me over the line in paying for the 2nd EP tooling and progressing this model to product, and this was, thanks to you, successfully raised and transferred along with a considerable 5 figured sum to pay the balance to the factory under an agreement to push ahead with the 2nd EP and Crystal box ready for production.

Artwork was also raised, along with deco specification, and so it was just a case of waiting for the 2nd EP , testing, deco samples, approval and production.

 

Whilst i cannot go into details for, i hope, obvious reasons, i have decided to put the project on hold for an indeterminate length of time to see where this situation goes. With this in mind i am obliged to refund your monies in full that you paid for this crowdfunding, and will do this over the next 5-10 days.

 

Please note, i'm not suggesting the project is dead. I am merely stating that i hope the situation will be resolved sooner rather than later, but i do not think giving a 'guesstimate' time frame for this, is sensible at this time.

 

I hope you understand and i hope that if / when this model becomes available, you will be able to purchase the models you want accordingly.

 

Below is the press release on my web site and on RMweb and N gauge forum for your files.

 

I apologise to each and every one of you for this aggravation this has caused.

Kindest regards to you all

 

Dave

Dave Jones

DJModels Ltd

 

Note that this only a day after the posting noted by above by Mike (The Stationmaster) regarding tooling. It's also worth noting that the "Press Release", which I've not quoted here, makes mention of "crowdfunding investors", whatever they might be. 

[adb968008]

Interesting letter from Dj, usual generalisations.

 

try this for size...

 

if you replaced every variation of “china”, “some factory” etc with “DJs factory” and every variation of UK manufacturer etc with “DJ models”, it reads a bit more sense..., at least to me.

 

 

[Covkid]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Interesting letter from Dj, usual generalisations.

 

try this for size...

 

if you replaced every variation of “china”, “some factory” etc with “DJs factory” and every variation of UK manufacturer etc with “DJ models”, it reads a bit more sense..., at least to me.

 

 

 

 

Indeed, that is exactly how I interpreted it.

Seeing as Dave pretty much daubed "the Chinese" on his first statement,  I wonder how many other model manufacturers suffered from those "nasty" Chinese factory owners. Dave did a good job of pluralising, but I just wonder.

 

 

Edited July 11, 2019 by Covkid
Typo

[GWR-fan]

5 hours ago, melmoth said:

Quote from email from Dave as posted above (quote)  ".................................As you know, i asked for 'crowdfunding' monies to help me over the line in paying for the 2nd EP tooling and progressing this model to product, and this was, thanks to you, successfully raised and transferred along with a considerable 5 figured sum to pay the balance to the factory under an agreement to push ahead with the 2nd EP and Crystal box ready for production.

Artwork was also raised, along with deco specification, and so it was just a case of waiting for the 2nd EP , testing, deco samples, approval and production.

 

Whilst i cannot go into details for, i hope, obvious reasons, i have decided to put the project on hold for an indeterminate length of time to see where this situation goes. With this in mind i am obliged to refund your monies in full that you paid for this crowdfunding, and will do this over the next 5-10 days....................................(end quote)

 

 

I am at a loss.  If upfront "crowdfunded or in Dave's words external finance" money to complete the project plus as stated above "a considerable 5 figured sum to pay the balance to the factory under agreement" then why did the project not proceed (lack of finance possibly, however, the Chinese would make great scapegoats)?  If he paid upfront then where did the money come from to repay the upfront class 17 payments?   did the Chinese repay the money paid for the class 17 tooling (not likely)?   Dave's whole business model (if there ever actually was a business plan) has left a lot of unanswered questions about stalled projects,  expenditure seemingly not accounted for and income seemingly not declared as part of his business accounts.