A question from Accurascale - At what stage of development should a manufacturer announce a new model?

[Accurascale Fran]

Hi everyone,

 

Firstly; a big thank you to @AY Mod and the BRM team for featuring us and putting on a great virtual show over the weekend!

 

Something that came up in the chat that I thought might be worth a discussion was "At what stage of development should a manufacturer announce a new model?" 

 

I have skipped it ahead here so you dont have to hear me say "fantastic" a lot to the point of discussion!

 

 

From our own point of view, we decided to announce a new wagon project with the tooling complete and a pre-production sample ready to show. This means the tooling process which is a significant outlay financially and takes a number of months to complete, is already done. At that point there is no turning back with a model as you have already laid out a lot of money on tooling. This allows us to cut down on waiting times for modellers to get the model to market, but it does run risks! As has been seen elsewhere recently, another model can be announced during that time of development which leads to possible duplication.

 

We have seen several manufacturers lay out plans to make new models before CAD process has even begun to mark their intentions against competitors, as well as let customers know, but of course, the waiting times for the projects are then longer as CAD, tooling, sample assessment, refinement, decoration, production and delivery have to take place. Crowdfunded models, or models that are a bit of a risk in the eyes of the company proposing them, have to take this strategy as they require funding of the tooling and/or wish to see if the market is there, which is understandable. 

 

So, which tactic do you prefer? Tooling completed, sample shown and less waiting? Or, stake claims from beginning, announcing more models with longer waiting times, but removing risk of duplication.  We'd love to hear your thoughts!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[spamcan61]

I'm in the 'stake claims from the beginning' camp due to the lower risk of duplication.

Edited November 9, 2020 by spamcan61

[slg]

Announce it when you feel it is right for you, it's your investment and your time that your putting into it you should dictate the pace you announce new products and show updates.

So far you have being doing an outstanding job of doing so, so no need to change.

[cheesysmith]

I like your timings, but a little earlier to allow more time to save would be helpful. 

 

Ps-if your comment was a hidden comment about the air brakes two axle hopper wagon for your black diamond range, if I can find the monies and there is no errors, I will be buying from both manufacturers.

[tomparryharry]

Hello Fran & team.  I'd suggest there are several scenarios to your question. I can think of one example where a company has 'announced' a particular model, but, several years ago. Nowadays, the same company runs the risk of lost sales. Not, I hasten to add, any quality of fidelity issue: The potential target audience have all died....

 

If your company philosophy is to produce the best, then looking about at the other producers won't help you one jot. Some years back, some manufacturers had an attitude of "that's yer lot, take it or leave it", and no doubt, that's where you guys want to change the game. If there is a model you intend to make anyway, it matters little when you announce it, possibly as early as possible.  Remember however, that an announcement in 2020, for retail sale in 2025, is a long, long time. 

 

fair play to Hornby, they bought out the Western suburban set, and the large prairie, in a quite decent timescale. Whether they were pushed into making them, we won't know, but they produced an entire train in what, 24 months? 

 

Plus of course, quality & fidelity will always sell. People will bleat & moan, but then, they always bleat & moan. The major gripe is some manufacturers turning out second-rate stuff for top Dollar. 

 

Best wishes,

Ian.

[Oldddudders]

When the models are in the container and have left China. Anything earlier risks a plethora of better ideas from "customers" (who may or may not buy, of course) about this or that detail, this or that livery. 

 

Have the courage of your own convictions.

[Andy 53B]

Hi Fran,

 

I personally think you've got it spot, I much prefer to know that once an announcement has been made, the model will be available within a shorter period of time. I also think that in the past, some manufacturers have acted a little like the animal kingdom and marked their territory, which have put other manufacturers off from developing a similar product.

 

Once you've already had one of the major outlays in developing in a product, you're much more committed to producing it, whereas only stating an intention just leaves the option of pushing the delivery date further and further in to the future which doesn't reflect well on the company. 

 

Obviously there can be valid reasons why dates get pushed out, but at least they way you work, they don't get pushed as far, and not only that, but the fact you're much more open and communicate with your consumers is such a breath of fresh air.

 

Keep up the great work, looking forward to an expensive 2021!!

 

Cheers

 

Andy

[Legend]

My preference is absolutely to have as short a period as possible .  There are some companies that announce and take an indeterminate amount of time or give unrealistic time frames to begin with . As well as the time frame its the variability that causes them to lack credibility .  Maybe 2 years , but who knows maybe 5  and what price will it be when it finally arrives? As Andy53B says the impression sometimes given is that they are marking their territory.  Also this announcing something with price TBA is frankly annoying .  So as short a time as possible should mean its fully costed and you can give a price .

 

I appreciate that this means there is a chance of duplication . However I also think that Accurascale have established a reputation for quality and value for money  so that even if there is a duplicate model , people will still defer to your model . As Oldddudders said have the courage of your convictions .   It isnt the same for other companies .

 

The fact that you are even asking us the question distinguishes you from the rest 

[MikeParkin65]

For me I like to be 'wowed' by a proper pre production model and be able to get my hands on that model within 3-6 months maximum, sooner if possible.  The single most exciting rtr announcement was the NRM Deltic prototype which, if I recall correctly went from announcement on here to delivery in about 4 weeks!

 

I have to be honest, with a well stocked layout already, if that initial enthusiasm wanes the purchase may be deferred to much later (because something else catches my eye) or even cancelled out altogether. For me this is true of the Kernow Warship for example which was a dead cert when announced but which I have only just bought one from the second batch - and thats only because its nicely weathered.  

 

I'm afraid your production Deltic has slipped a little for me and my Bachmann ones have been getting detailed and sound fitted as a result. I'm still a definite for green 37 though

[spamcan61]

As a consumer I would indeed prefer the 'last minute' approach, but this increases the risk of duplication, and whilst a Hornby vs. Bachmann (for example)  fight club might well result in a  financial loss on that product for both companies it is unlikely to cause either to fail (unless they keep doing it...)

 

However, if there's a big/medium sized player versus small player duplication, that might well result in the small player, or even both, failing financially, and deciding to stop playing trains either voluntarily or forcibly through bankruptcy. 

 

I'd really like to see all different sizes of company thriving in the marketplace, hence my original 'preference' for early announcements.

Edited November 9, 2020 by spamcan61

[Adam FW]

I think an announcement besides the first CAD model or rendering that you’re happy with is the way to go in most cases, it shows you’re serious but it’s not too late to make changes if one of the experts spot something that could be improved upon and it allows those who need to enough time save up for it.

 

18 months or less before delivery of a brand new item is probably a good sweet spot, there should be enough going on to keep people posted with to maintain interest and it doesn’t feel like a lifetime away

[mdvle]

So a response not specific to Accurascale.

 

I think the biggest danger is deciding that there is one answer to fit every project.

 

There may be projects that it is better to find out if there really is a market before committing the major expense of tooling, while other projects are either obvious enough (or the tooling reasonable enough) that the risk is low.

 

It may also be wise with some projects to do the proverbial staking a claim, to see if anyone else is planning the same risky project - though I think have at least done the research and perhaps at least some CAD would reassure people you are serious about tackling the project.  Things like your Mk5/Mk5A or Hornby's APT are both projects that require a significant investment, with as a result significant risk if there is duplication, and thus maybe can only be pursued with an early announcement to protect the manufacturer.

 

It will also depend on how well the manufacturer keeps to their proposed timelines (which in part will be how honest they are with themselves when plotting it out), and how well they keep the prospective customers informed.  Sometimes it seems that a manufacturer proposes an optimistic timeline that they know won't be kept, but decide it is necessary as part of the marketing effort, which then leads to angst.

 

The anger/hatred of the early announcement of items seems to really have came about first when Hornby went through their production problems, and then Bachmann currently, where the combination of unknown timescales and at least some lack of communication frustrated those who wanted the buyers.

 

So, short version - be realistic when planning schedules (yes, things will still happen), keep the customer informed, and choose what you (as both the people risking the money, and with the best insight as to what is the best way forward for the project) think is best.

 

Because you won't make everyone happy with whatever decision(s) you end up making.

[Graham_Muz]

It’s an interesting question and one that Chris at the Kernow Model Rail Centre mulled over a while ago that now forms part of our new Skrifa (blog) here http://www.kernowmodelrailcentre.com/pg/145/KMRC-Skrifa---To-announce-or-not-to-announce

 

We also discussed it briefly too in our piece that we did for last weekends virtual show.

 

KMRC now wait until much later in the process to announce than was done in the past. 

[97403_Ixion]

If sticking to your two options, I would say late than early.  I suspect this would prevent another company stopping their announcement when you make yours, only to hasten their process to release in advance of your own.

 

Personally though, I would say best when the first major CAD iteration is done and ideally with a 3D print to display... so neither early nor late...

 

This shows progress beyond just an intention to make, stopping short of heavy tooling costs.

It allows suggestions for popular liveries and gives people a little more time to save up.

 

That all said, announcing weeks/months before release does have a certain 'Getting a prezzy' feeling which is exciting and good for the soul!  Announcing too early just prolongs that wait

 

Cheers,

Ixion.

[Gopher]

Fran - good question.  I find it frustrating when some models take years to arrive after first announcement. I appreciate this can occasionally be for reasons outside the manufacturer's control.  I waited 5 years for the Bachmann Class 117, the spec was upgraded in this time, it is however an excellent model, and I am very happy with it.    So I am in the"announce it when  it can be delivered in the next 12 months" camp.  So I guess when you have pre-production samples to tempt us with.  Yes in a crowded market there is always a chance of duplication, in which case specification and price may come into play with the consumer.   It is clear your models carry a high specification (even by today's high standards), and I think priced competitively for the specification.  So you are carving out a niche in the market which hopefully will be profitable for you, and help build a loyal customer base.  I think also with long lead times the initial price can increase if costs go up for any reason, and/or macro economics come into play.  This can be frustrating     

 

With regards to possible duplication - if I know two manufacturers are producing a model I may be interested in i.e. similar spec  - I tend to wait until both are available.  There is of course a risk that I may miss out on the first one which arrives if there are limited production runs.  

 

Finally I think you are excellent at keeping us updated on progress and managing expectations, explaining any delays etc.  This goes a long way to keeping  customers on side if delays occur.            

[The Stationmaster]

37 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

When the models are in the container and have left China. Anything earlier risks a plethora of better ideas from "customers" (who may or may not buy, of course) about this or that detail, this or that livery. 

 

Have the courage of your own convictions.

I like this approach but I think it increasingly involves financial risks for 'manufacturers' and that might lead to a firm failing.  No problem if all they have turned out is carp buta big problem if they've worked hhard to get things right.

 

That in turn opens up a mixed scenario.  So if 'Stationmaster Models' next week announces a GWR 2721 tank engine and asks for expressions of interest (EOIs), gets enough (he would for one of those) and then starts taking deposits without even a CAD shown potential custiners woiuld be well advised to take care with where they 0lace their money especially if it turns out their advance money is actually financing production of the 2721.

 

In contrast if an established concern - say Bachmann - announced a 2721 and didn't ask for any money up front but offer a reasonably, if not rapid, prospect of delivering what they promise and retailers were taking pre-orders that is very different from an unknown announcing at a similar stage.  So if you have reputation established and a track record established you could perhaps announce earlier especially if you can offer a realistic timescale.  But no money to be taken until at the very least you have shown a finalised CAD (even if it gets criticised) and have given a clear delivery timescale which you will work to.  In fact far better, and sensibly, nothing being called for money wise until you've got the production level samples on view.  (And ideally even at that stage only a deposit).

 

We have a wide range of examples of all these approaches currently in the market place and indeed Chris Trerise also expressed a view regarding upfront payment during his interview over the virtual exhibition weekend.  But note of course that Kernow announce at the time they are starting a project (usually).  Kernow can in my view reasonably do that because they have a track record. as do Bachmann - even it it can be years before the model appears.

 

So the situation varies between those who have a track record and those who don't.   Equally there is the matter of quality and reliability - another sort of track record not just in making it but making a very good job pf making it - that too is an influencing factor, certainly for me and perhaps for others.

 

There is a further side to the coin which might not be entirely relevant here and certainly isn't relevant to Accurascale.  This is the announcement, at a very early stage, of what i refer to as 'dreams' - out of the run-of-the-mill/mainstream models which can be very attractive to a particular market area.  Invariably this area is one that announces even before any work has started and very often seeks money at a very early stage.  One such concern came to a sticky end so it is a 'business model' that I tend to discount.  (I'm not talking about well organised approaches to crowd fudning such as Revolution - that's a very different model from this one).

 

Summarise -

1.  if you have a good track record and reputation I think you can probably safely announce once you've got your detailed CAD finalised and that far it hasn't cost too much (although you will have spent money).  

2.  Similarly nothing much wrong with announcing an 'intention to make' if you have the reputation and record but it's perhaps not quite so good as that finished CAD although it has less financial risk.

3.  On the other hand if you know how good you are and that your mousetrap will be the best  If you can afford the financial risk them - whoever you are - hold on until you've got at least a 3-D print and ideally an EP and announce then with a far more reliable shot at a delivery date.  But you run the risk of duplication and not maximising your profit.

4. If it is just announced, especially from someone you have never heard of who hasn't previously delivered anything, then as a customer  treat with care and wait to see what they can do before giving them you money.   You never know - they might just be a chancer even if they are registered company with visible financials (of a sort) at Companies House.  

 

[truffy]

1 hour ago, Accurascale Fran said:

As has been seen elsewhere recently, another model can be announced during that time of development which leads to possible duplication.

 

1 hour ago, spamcan61 said:

I'm in the 'stake claims from the beginning' camp due to the lower risk of duplication.

 

TBH, I don't think that your approach runs the risk of duplication, at least not risk to AS. If JoSchmo Ltd announces a Conflat L (yes, @Porcy Mane, that one's for you!), with a lead time of two years, and then AS delivers six months later, you've just got in under the radar!

 

I don't have any particular preference as to when in the cycle an announcement is made, just as long as the lead time isn't measured in millennia.

[No Decorum]

I’m with Adam FW on this one. There is a vast wealth of knowledge in RMweb and announcing at CAD stage allows anything spotted to be corrected. Announcing at the last minute means that no corrections can be made. Take the example of the Midland 1P from Bachmann. Bachmann may have already anticipated the reaction to the chimney but perhaps didn’t anticipate the adverse reaction to the traction tyres, which is a matter of taste rather than accuracy. Take another example: your very own Deltic. You were going to use scale sized wheels and use a cam arrangement to provide clearance. It proved impractical. We (well, most of us) understood your motives and appreciated the reasons for abandoning the idea.

 

It used to be that an announcement prevented duplication, which is better avoided, not least because two models of one thing means that something else isn’t modelled. Now, however, it seems to act as red rag to the Hornby bull. Careful selection is needed and there might indeed be times when a late announcement is a good defence.

 

More and more, financial planning is needed. Early announcements help with this. Your easy terms are helpful, no doubt, and will draw money away from competitors but they don’t suit everyone.

 

Last and not least, I find it fascinating to follow the process a new model goes through. The Deltic’s wheels, for example, makes me feel much more involved with the model than an explanation after the event.

[Benjamin Brady]

I'll go along with what most people are saying on here. 

 

In my eyes it's got to be a short lead time. Painted samples to show and the tooling is already underway etc. 

 

Back in the days where we had shows  you could see an item announcey d and think ah I should have them ready for X show. 

 

The quality of your product is always worth the investment, and I am looking forward to running a rake of gbrf hoppers. However as it has been mentioned on here, we've waited for a 92 and now we are waiting again. It's a shame the mk5s have also slipped.

 

When it comes to duplication, if your products is worth it people shall pay it. If Hornby announced the mk5s tomorrow, knowing your quality I'd stick with your investment knowing you shall deliver the goods. span widget

[rembrow]

I prefer models to be announced when tooling is partially done, to first ep stage. This allows the potential buyer to see the main outline and detail of the model and know that it should be available in 6 to 12 months. I have always been annoyed and frustrated by those businesses who announce a model with limited development, one company who uses blue boxes stands out. That method is designed to put off competitors, but leaves the potential purchaser with years to wait. I've always favoured the manufacturer who uses the red boxes, as their method is to announce models at completed cad or first ep tooling stage. I do favour your current system for most of your models, though personally I felt the powered models were announced too early, such that when development delays occurred they have had a much longer timeline, this has allowed another business with tooling of the same models, to push out multiple versions at lower prices.

[Porcy Mane]

37 minutes ago, truffy said:

If JoSchmo Ltd announces a Conflat L (yes, @Porcy Mane

 

You mist have mussed the announcement by AnyMilenienienium Models about the forthcoming introduction of this much requested wagon  (and every other BR wagon diagram produced between 1949 and 1967)

 

 They plan to do all  three wagon variations along with the three different container types.

 

A first for this 4mm scale wagon will be operating DCC actuated pneumatic brakes  (pressure as opposed to vacuum) The brakes will be moved by air pressure contained within a reservoir built into one of the three containers and pressurised using  your Eco friendly bicycle pump or by utilising the hot air from other manufacturers premature announcements.

 

Unfortunately due to the currant (bun) crisis and ongoing Brexit negotiations, sub contractors  can give no estimates as to which millennia, the offshore  (Unst ) manufactory will be completed hence there may be a slight delay with the introduction of this model.

 

Mr Jones, the Conflat L project manger states he is still willing to take payments by sending cash to his office adjacent to Lynden Pindling International Airport.

 

HTH

 

P

[newbryford]

2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

When the models are in the container and have left China. Anything earlier risks a plethora of better ideas from "customers" (who may or may not buy, of course) about this or that detail, this or that livery. 

 

Have the courage of your own convictions.

 

Who'd want to ne a model manufacturer/producer?

 

Yes - have the courage of your own convictions, but:

What happens if the demand for such a model outstrips the already produced quantity?

Getting the number right between supply and demand is far beyond a black art.

 

Going back to the container already on board ship.

 

Demand for this new model already in the container will only really be known when dealers place orders via their customers and also direct orders to the manufacturer.

Then how does the manufacturer allocate sales if orders outstrip the container load?

Prioritise sales to direct customers (higher margin, so quite an attractive proposition to the manufacturer)

And then under-supply the dealer orders and disappoint their customers.

Next time round, the customer will order direct and cut out the dealer - end result of that will be more model shops closing.

 

Over demand and under supply will also generate inflated ebay prices - as in today's market, there seems to be no firm commitment to repeat production runs.

 

 

Or the opposite, when demand is far less than production and they remain on a shelf somewhere.

 

 

 

A pre-announcement  - as some stage - possibly mid-late CAD - may be able to help gauge production numbers as direct pre-orders and dealer pre-orders can be calculated.

And at mid-CAD, that would be the stage at which other manufacturers chasing the same model, but less advanced can make their decision to carry on or not.

 

The one thing I wouldn't want is the simple "land-grabbing" before any detailed research is undertaken.

 

TBH - I don't think there is any perfect way - especially now as there are so many producers of models out there.

 

I finish this post with a similar sentiment to my opening line.

I wouldn't want to be a manufacturer/producer.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 9, 2020 by newbryford

[D9020 Nimbus]

The big European-based manufacturers (e.g. Roco) tend to announce when they have something to show — usually a 3-D print, so probably when the CAD stage is complete. They are usually fairly definite as to when the model is due, down to the quarter. They don't seem to generate the angst that Bachmann have in the past, although some models have been delayed — ISTR the S160 was particularly effected.

[Accurascale Fran]

2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

When the models are in the container and have left China. Anything earlier risks a plethora of better ideas from "customers" (who may or may not buy, of course) about this or that detail, this or that livery. 

 

Have the courage of your own convictions.

 

Hi @Oldddudders,

 

Thanks for that. I think on the boat from China is a tad unrealistic from a manufacturers point of view, but do agree it would cut down on the "What about XYZ, what about a different scale?" type questions! 

 

1 hour ago, Legend said:

As Oldddudders said have the courage of your convictions .   It isnt the same for other companies .

 

The fact that you are even asking us the question distinguishes you from the rest 

 

Hi @Legend,

 

Thanks for that. As you know from here and meeting us at Model Rail Scotland for a chat we do care about customer feedback and it's why we thought we would bring this up. We do feel that we are going about things the right way and believe in that conviction, but as we say recently there was howls of "duplication" on a model due to us holding off until tooling stage. We do like to hear peoples ideas though so always good to chat it out! 

 

 

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

So a response not specific to Accurascale.

 

I think the biggest danger is deciding that there is one answer to fit every project.

 

There may be projects that it is better to find out if there really is a market before committing the major expense of tooling, while other projects are either obvious enough (or the tooling reasonable enough) that the risk is low.

 

It may also be wise with some projects to do the proverbial staking a claim, to see if anyone else is planning the same risky project - though I think have at least done the research and perhaps at least some CAD would reassure people you are serious about tackling the project.  

 

 

Hi @mdvle,

 

I think you make a great point here. We can have our ideals and stick to one plan, but each project is different for a variety of reasons. Locomotives are a much bigger risk due to costs involved which is why we have announced before tooling (though with CAD complete) so far as a means of protecting ourselves somewhat. This will change in due course as we get bigger though! Each project is different, due to competitors, deadlines etc. 

 

1 hour ago, Gopher said:

With regards to possible duplication - if I know two manufacturers are producing a model I may be interested in i.e. similar spec  - I tend to wait until both are available.  There is of course a risk that I may miss out on the first one which arrives if there are limited production runs.  

 

Finally I think you are excellent at keeping us updated on progress and managing expectations, explaining any delays etc.  This goes a long way to keeping  customers on side if delays occur.            

 

Hi @Gopher,

 

I think it's what I would do if I was the consumer too. Luckily we do make a largish production run of everything we do so stock is carried, allowing modellers to take a punt and not worry about selling out straight away (with some exceptions of course, some of the stuff sold so well it took us very much by surprise!)

 

Thanks, we really do our best to keep you updated, whether its via RMWeb, email, website, FB etc! 

 

45 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

I’m with Adam FW on this one. There is a vast wealth of knowledge in RMweb and announcing at CAD stage allows anything spotted to be corrected. .

 

More and more, financial planning is needed. Early announcements help with this. Your easy terms are helpful, no doubt, and will draw money away from competitors but they don’t suit everyone.

 

Last and not least, I find it fascinating to follow the process a new model goes through. The Deltic’s wheels, for example, makes me feel much more involved with the model than an explanation after the event.

 

Hi @No Decorum,

 

I'm going to tempt faith a bit here, (this better not come back to bite me!) but I do think model manufacturers SHOULD know their stuff when making a model and not have to rely on others to tell them what is right and what is wrong. I am not being dismissive of the vast knowledge base of enthusiasts, and we do engage with many on projects and always appreciate their input, but if a company has the capital to do so they should be confident enough in their model to tool it before showing it to customers?

 

It should be presented to enthusiasts in a correct manner from the get go. Maybe that's just us! Of course, when you get to EP level the only things that should need correcting are tiny details, rather than big things like shape etc., which doesn't cost that much in the end, only time. So it can be fixed and have the input from modellers at that stage. We have done that in the past with very minor details, but I know not all manufacturers have. 

 

Maybe that's just us, and we do enjoy the participation (one member very cleverly spotted that the body of our MDO sample is on the wrong way round on Saturday, easy fix of course but as we rushed the samples over direct to Andy before seeing them ourselves to support the virtual show something was bound to be off!) 

 

We do like sharing the processes and give you all an insight into what goes on and what decisions we make on a model. We absolutely will continue to do that and engage and have involvement in that manner! 

 

27 minutes ago, Benjamin Brady said:

 

The quality of your product is always worth the investment, and I am looking forward to running a rake of gbrf hoppers. However as it has been mentioned on here, we've waited for a 92 and now we are waiting again. It's a shame the mk5s have also slipped.

 

When it comes to duplication, if your products is worth it people shall pay it. If Hornby announced the mk5s tomorrow, knowing your quality I'd stick with your investment knowing you shall deliver the goods. span widget

 

 

Hi @Benjamin Brady,

 

We absolutely hear you on the Class 92 (and Deltic and Mark 5) for that matter. As explained with the Mark 5 update, we announced both the coaches and Class 92 at the very beginning of development (though the 92 was CAD designed just before launch) and this is the long wait that has ensued and I guess part of my point. If we announce at the very start, this is how long it can take, whereas if we launched with a sample, a lot of the bumps in the road to get to that point in the project would've been accounted for. It is a bit more difficult to do it for a loco when you're building up from a small basis as explained above, but it's a very valid point, and was the one that lead us to "announce with EP sample" on wagons and coaches from now one, and ultimately the goal to do so with locos as we get stronger.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[black and decker boy]

avoid vapour-ware announcements. Having a sample to show off builds confidence and helps me allocate funds knowing timescale to delivery is going to be pretty accurate. A stake-a-claim announcement where CAD, EOIs and endless periods with no visible progress quickly turns me off and I then sit on my money / commitment until very close to due date.