C&L Finescale

[sharris]

i wouldn't even consider straying from oo based on the negative experiences on here of people attempting to deal with the new owner of c &l.

I don't know how many people actually use the website for orders - I suspect there will be many more satisfied customers (as I have been) from the exhibition stands.

[Vistisen]

I don't know how many people actually use the website for orders - I suspect there will be many more satisfied customers (as I have been) from the exhibition stands.

I live in Denmark, so I have to use the website rather than go to a show, although I have also used a proxy member here who seems to have a good access to C&L. I have spoken to Phil on the phone to give account details as this is the only way to pay from Europe. And my order was handled quite quickly with in a few days, so I have no complaints. Although I would be nice to see stock levels before ordering and online payments, I also know that this takes a lot of time and effort, and there is obviously more than enough work for one man already.

 

What I have noticed is that while this thread seems to consist of varying degrees of attack and defense of some assumed business strategy concerning shows versus web, At no point has C&L officially taken part in the debate. So those who defend Phil's apparent wish to stay in the 20th century as regards business practices, might be defending a stance he does not have. He might well be sitting there with mail labels, parcels, and the phone stuck under one ear, wishing that there was an easy route to a more modern venture. On the other hand he might be out the back feeding the horses before taking another wagon of packages down to the stage coach. We who only have access to RMWeb don't know which.

Edited June 5, 2018 by Vistiaen

[chris p bacon]

What I have noticed is that while this thread seems to consist of varying degrees of attack and defense of some assumed business strategy concerning shows versus web, At no point has C&L officially taken part in the debate. So those who defend Phil's apparent wish to stay in the 20th century as regards business practices, might be defending a stance he does not have.

 

 

John (Hayfield) helps Phil at shows and has known him for some time, so is very aware of the problems he's had.

[Stephen Freeman]

I am hoping that Phil is aware of the problem but is in a difficult position. Many of the shows he attends probably have a long lead time and he has had to commit to them some time in the past. It is therefore difficult for him to get out of attending them even if he wishes to, without cost and upsetting even more people.

 

Once he has had time to evaluate which are cost effective......

[Lecorbusier]

Looking a little further ahead, do we think all of this is 'growing pains', and things will settle down into an established model?

 

It appears that currently there is a good flow of orders, but sourcing is an issue? Communication may be terrible but I struggle to believe that the delays are maliceous. Maybe the backlog is due to weight of orders but it seems more likely to be waiting on supplies.

 

However, with the removal of exactoscale from the range, what will that do to viability? Why was exactoscale withdrawn?

 

Is C&L at risk? Are sales at shows enough to keep things going?

 

Change overs in this hobby rarely seem to go smoothly unless going to an already established setup such as Wizard.

[hayfield]

I live in Denmark, so I have to use the website rather than go to a show, although I have also used a proxy member here who seems to have a good access to C&L. I have spoken to Phil on the phone to give account details as this is the only way to pay from Europe. And my order was handled quite quickly with in a few days, so I have no complaints. Although I would be nice to see stock levels before ordering and online payments, I also know that this takes a lot of time and effort, and there is obviously more than enough work for one man already.

 

What I have noticed is that while this thread seems to consist of varying degrees of attack and defense of some assumed business strategy concerning shows versus web, At no point has C&L officially taken part in the debate. So those who defend Phil's apparent wish to stay in the 20th century as regards business practices, might be defending a stance he does not have. He might well be sitting there with mail labels, parcels, and the phone stuck under one ear, wishing that there was an easy route to a more modern venture. On the other hand he might be out the back feeding the horses before taking another wagon of packages down to the stage coach. We who only have access to RMWeb don't know which.

 

 

Phil is looking to change the website but needs to find someone he can trust, doesn't cost a kings ransom and easy to use

[hayfield]

I am hoping that Phil is aware of the problem but is in a difficult position. Many of the shows he attends probably have a long lead time and he has had to commit to them some time in the past. It is therefore difficult for him to get out of attending them even if he wishes to, without cost and upsetting even more people.

 

Once he has had time to evaluate which are cost effective......

 

Phil has already looked at the shows he attends and has pruned those which either duplicated or clashed with each other and tried to go to areas not previously covered. Not to say there will not be further alterations to shows being attended. But shows are important revenue streams and part of his business model

[Stephen Freeman]

Phil has already looked at the shows he attends and has pruned those which either duplicated or clashed with each other and tried to go to areas not previously covered. Not to say there will not be further alterations to shows being attended. But shows are important revenue streams and part of his business model

In that case I have to point out that Phil isn't the only source of components.

 

Exactoscale parts are probably going to be leaving C&L, Peco do chairs etc in 7mm scale (OK maybe not to everyones taste only fit their rail etc) and parts for Flatbottom in both scales, plus there is a growing availabilty on Shapeways in both scales. 

 

People will vote with their wallets if they find it difficult to buy from him, especially those who cannot for whatever reason or wish, to, attend shows, where they might or might not be able to obtain what they require..

[hayfield]

Looking a little further ahead, do we think all of this is 'growing pains', and things will settle down into an established model?

 

It appears that currently there is a good flow of orders, but sourcing is an issue? Communication may be terrible but I struggle to believe that the delays are maliceous. Maybe the backlog is due to weight of orders but it seems more likely to be waiting on supplies.

 

However, with the removal of exactoscale from the range, what will that do to viability? Why was exactoscale withdrawn?

 

Is C&L at risk? Are sales at shows enough to keep things going?

 

Change overs in this hobby rarely seem to go smoothly unless going to an already established setup such as Wizard.

Tim

 

It has been start up pains, rather than growing pains. Plus the business had been allowed to run down by the previous owner. There has been a whole range of issues, condition of existing tools, stock levels and learning new skills running a business

 

I felt the initial order process Phil set up was flawed and overly complicated, further compounded with an initial IT failure. Most of the issues have been resolved and the outstanding orders reducing. 

 

In the short term loosing the Exactoscale sales could be a blessing to Phil, Competition can be a good thing and in itself may improve matters for both customers and companies, In the past Exactoscale could not stand up on its own two feet, we just have to wait to see what plans are afoot 

 

Part of the problem was that the change over was done at the last minuet, there was a change over date, a buyer was interested but pulled out. Phil stepped in at a very late stage and things were not quite as he thought.

 

Both companies should survive in the short term, simply because two buyers have money invested which they both want to recoup.

[hayfield]

In that case I have to point out that Phil isn't the only source of components.

 

Exactoscale parts are probably going to be leaving C&L, Peco do chairs etc in 7mm scale (OK maybe not to everyones taste only fit their rail etc) and parts for Flatbottom in both scales, plus there is a growing availabilty on Shapeways in both scales. 

 

People will vote with their wallets if they find it difficult to buy from him, especially those who cannot for whatever reason or wish, to, attend shows, where they might or might not be able to obtain what they require..

 

 

Exactoscale are separating from C&L after July.

 

Peco also have a small selection of 4 mm modern image components

 

Off the Rails also supply 7 mm parts

 

Colin Crain and Massokits supply ranges of etched components

 

Both the EM and Scalefour Societies supply track building components and even more important tools

 

Dont forget Marcway who supply copperclad construction components

[hayfield]

One of the problems we have is that the owner of Exactoscale has decided to communicate with his customers via the Scalefour website, thanks to Martin these communications have been uploaded to this and Templot club forums

 

The Chairman of the Scalefour Society has stated talks have been had between them and the owner, I have also been told another business has been approached to be the main suppliers (they declined the offer) other may have also been approached. No doubt we will find out in the next two months what is happenning

[martin_wynne]

One of the problems we have is that the owner of Exactoscale has decided to communicate with his customers via the Scalefour website, thanks to Martin these communications have been uploaded to this and Templot club forums

 

Hi John,

 

The relevant topic is public for anyone to read:

 

 https://www.scalefour.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=5859

 

There have been some further posts on there today (page 2) about C&L.

 

Martin.

[Horsetan]

....I have also been told another business has been approached to be the main suppliers (they declined the offer)....

Poisoned chalice?

[purplepiepete]

Phil is looking to change the website but needs to find someone he can trust, doesn't cost a kings ransom and easy to use

 

John, then I would suggest a quick / cheaper approach would be to use an ebay shop. Many traders have a basic 'front' website with a link to ebay. This avoids the huge cost of developing a new e-commerce site from scratch and may restore some confidence in online ordering as payments would likely be done via Paypal and communication via the messaging service.

 

Issue is that clearly this is not zero cost option as both ebay and Paypal would charge commission - last time I spoke to Phil he thought these were excessive hence the current preference for bank transfer. Increasing product prices to cover charges would probably go down like a lead balloon !

[Stephen Freeman]

John, then I would suggest a quick / cheaper approach would be to use an ebay shop. Many traders have a basic 'front' website with a link to ebay. This avoids the huge cost of developing a new e-commerce site from scratch and may restore some confidence in online ordering as payments would likely be done via Paypal and communication via the messaging service.

 

Issue is that clearly this is not zero cost option as both ebay and Paypal would charge commission - last time I spoke to Phil he thought these were excessive hence the current preference for bank transfer. Increasing product prices to cover charges would probably go down like a lead balloon !

True, I think Ebay charges on top of Paypals, would be too much to stomach (may be less than shows of course but what would I know?).

 

Many companies both large and small offer Paypal these days as an option to card payment. I would have thought the "customer not present" option is more expensive with the card handlers, he must already have that to deal with phone payments. Internet Bank Transfer is not that popular for payment for goods for obvious reasons.

 

The future we have to look forward to is not without it's problems. Exactoscale's payment mechanisms were not what is expected these days either but at least you could get the stuff from Wizard, when Andrew had it in stock.

[Mallard60022]

Exactoscale are separating from C&L after July.

 

Peco also have a small selection of 4 mm modern image components

 

Off the Rails also supply 7 mm parts

 

Colin Crain and Massokits supply ranges of etched components

 

Both the EM and Scalefour Societies supply track building components and even more important tools

 

Dont forget Marcway who supply copperclad construction components

There are some 'new' players in this game now as well; DCC Concepts I believe is one?

P

[purplepiepete]

True, I think Ebay charges on top of Paypals, would be too much to stomach (may be less than shows of course but what would I know?).

 

Many companies both large and small offer Paypal these days as an option to card payment. I would have thought the "customer not present" option is more expensive with the card handlers, he must already have that to deal with phone payments. Internet Bank Transfer is not that popular for payment for goods for obvious reasons.

 

The future we have to look forward to is not without it's problems. Exactoscale's payment mechanisms were not what is expected these days either but at least you could get the stuff from Wizard, when Andrew had it in stock.

 

Agreed , given that cheques and postal orders have all but disappeared (and no one of sound mind would send cash in the post) the only real alternative is to use e-payments. Like most people I don't like bank transfers given the scams in operation these days and at least consumer protection is offered by card providers and Paypal.

 

Sadly I guess traders have to either absorb the costs incurred or (groan) increase prices accordingly. As a regular on ebay I wince most months when the seller fees invoice arrives !

[2ManySpams]

Earlier in this long thread it was noted that Phil has chosen not to price his track related items on his exhibition stand. Iirc this was to save him time pricing up packs and re-pricing them if costs go up. He maintains all the prices in a thick book he keeps behind the stand.

 

I can fully understand the logic of this as it saves him time and effort preparing stock. The downside to customers at shows though is that you only get an indication of the cost when it comes to pay. I did get an unpleasant surprise myself at the Demu show when I had to get an extra note out to pay for two items I assumed would come to less than £20.

 

This issue aside (I still bought the items) I do wonder if Phil is aware he could be falling foul of legislation (The Price Marking Order 2004)? If there was a complaint, and Trading Standards were officious, then he could be subject to a sizeable fine or worse. Not something any of us wants to see I'm sure.

 

To avoid this, my interpretation is that he either needs to:

1. Price each packet individually, or

2. Put a price on the cards he hangs up showing each product, or

3. Provide a customer copy of his price book on the front of the stand (must be accessible without having to ask for it).

 

Looking around the show, C&L was the only stand I noted not pricing items. Can John bring this to Phil's attention?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/sites/default/files/folders/documents/business/tradingstandards/PriceMarkingofGoods.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwju36_tt7XbAhXTTcAKHa4lDJEQFjAFegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1F4qpxr9mJkxWv0LXvHTj3

[Ravenser]

Hi John,

 

The relevant topic is public for anyone to read:

 

 https://www.scalefour.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=5859

 

There have been some further posts on there today (page 2) about C&L.

 

Martin.

 

 

 

 

Martin:  I would add a comment on something you posted there :

 

 

 

One thing I would advise Phil -- collect up the entire stock of the DOGA-Fine 00 track gauges and chuck them in the bin. The failure of 00 turnouts built with them to run RTR models out of the box must have turned countless potential customers away from trackbuilding. Why Brian ever adopted that standard for the 00 turnout kits is an utter mystery.

 

 

For the record this track standard for OO largely originated with C+L , and it goes back way before Brian Lewis (and John Pottinger for that matter) into the late 1980s/early 1990s,

 

It must have originated with C+L and Ultrascale c1990 deciding that they wanted to sell their EM crossing Vs and EM wheels to OO modellers.  Presumably the idea was to broaden their market without having to produce or carry a separate wheel profile or two sets of crossing Vs. The whole concept was supported/championed as "the way forward for OO" by Iain Rice in MORILL in 1993-6 , and neither the products nor the concept were new in 1993 . At that time Iain Rice seemed to believe it was compatible with RTR to RP25 - which I think both you and I can agree it isn't

 

One might even call this the "C+L track standard" - though as C+L never published a formal standard or told people what they were really doing , the whole issue was left in deep obscurity with great potential for confusing modellers.....

 

The gauges that upset you are almost certainly C+L's own product , sold by them over many decades. I've never heard of any gauges being supplied to them by DOGA

 

In those days  (late 80s/early 90s) it was taken for granted that any scale modeller aspiring to work to any kind of meaningful wheel and track standard in OO would have to rewheel any RTR stock used  . I don't think Len Newman (if it goes back that far) or whoever ran Ultrascale in those days would have considered running un-rewheeled RTR as anything to do with finescale modelling

 

DOGA published a standard  for this practice codifying it , and defining the matching wheels (EM profile) in (I think) 2001. That at least meant people knew what it was, and could work out which wheel products go with which track standards/gauges.components . Effectively it was only when that sheet was published that modellers could work out what C+L were actually doing and selling....

 

For the record DOGA publishes 2 sets of wheel/track standards and - just like the 3mm Society - it doesn't recommend one over the other.

 

(My personal view is that these days the incompatibility of OO-Fine with modern RTR is a significant drawback nowadays , and that OO Intermediate is the way to go. Any EM-derived standard is problematic because of the restrictions on curvature it imposes - which gets worse if you use "over-thick" RP25/110 flanges. Most people working in OO simply couldn't accept the limitations on radius imposed by EM/P4 - it's one reason they are working in OO. But I don't think the rest of the forum would thank either of us for debating that particular issue) 

[martin_wynne]

The gauges that upset you are almost certainly C+L's own product , sold by them over many decades. I've never heard of any gauges being supplied to them by DOGA

 

Hi Ravenser,

 

Regardless of the origins* of the DOGA-Fine standard, the C&L web site at: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=346_375_376 says:

 

"

4mm OO Track Gauges.

Track Gauges are to the Double O Gauge Association Finetrack Standard, using a 1mm flangeway gap. 

4mm OO Back to Back Gauges

Back to Back gauges are to the Double O Gauge Association Intermediate Standard

"

 

Disregarding the obvious nonsense of selling track gauges and wheel gauges to two different standards which are not compatible with one another, the clear implication is that the gauges comply with standards "owned" by DOGA.

 

By whatever means C&L arrived at this situation, they are clearly doing no favours for the majority of 00 modellers.

 

Made all the more nonsensical by the fact that they also supply 00-SF track gauges, which DO allow both the use of EM-style 1mm flangeways AND unmodified modern RTR models together, even if not at very sharp radii (a restriction equally applicable to DOGA-Fine).

 

*I believe originally suggested by Iain Rice in his trackbuilding book.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Edited June 6, 2018 by martin_wynne

[Stephen Freeman]

For what it's worth, if Brian Lewis hadn't taken over when he did, then there might not be a C&L today. As far as I know Ultrascale had nothing to do with the situation being basically Brian Rogers. Len Newman originated the K&L brand later C&L, and items were retailed via Alan Gibson.

 

The original bolt together gauges date from the early period. I have some for 00 and P4. I wouldn't rely on the settings for 00, though plain track is OK. P4 version is OK, I even machined  (for my own purposes) some sleeves to take them out to Irish P4.

[Ravenser]

Hi Ravenser,

 

Regardless of the origins* of the DOGA-Fine standard, the C&L web site at: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=346_375_376 says:

 

"

4mm OO Track Gauges.

Track Gauges are to the Double O Gauge Association Finetrack Standard, using a 1mm flangeway gap. 

4mm OO Back to Back Gauges

Back to Back gauges are to the Double O Gauge Association Intermediate Standard

"

 

Disregarding the obvious nonsense of selling track gauges and wheel gauges to two different standards which are not compatible with one another, the clear implication is that the gauges comply with standards "owned" by DOGA.

 

By whatever means C&L arrived at this situation, they are clearly doing no favours for the majority of 00 modellers.

 

Made all the more nonsensical by the fact that they also supply 00-SF track gauges, which DO allow both the use of EM-style 1mm flangeways AND unmodified modern RTR models together, even if not at very sharp radii (a restriction equally applicable to DOGA-Fine).

 

*I believe originally suggested by Iain Rice in his trackbuilding book.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

 

 

Martin: I'm not aware that DOGA has ever claimed that their standards are "owned" by them , or "their intellectual property". As far as OO Fine is concerned,  DOGA merely provided a coherent definition for what C+L were already selling (and implying should happen on the wheel side) , and made that definition freely available to all as a data-sheet on the website

 

 

 

Disregarding the obvious nonsense of selling track gauges and wheel gauges to two different standards which are not compatible with one another,

 

But the same situation exists with EM/P4 , and it also exists in 3mm with there being more than one standard defined for 12mm gauge plus "TM"/13.5mm gauge and 14.2mm gauge, all supported by the 3mm Society.  How many track standards are there now in 7mm ? At least 6, I think. The GOG has supported and defined coarse and fine standards for Gauge O for at least 2 generations 

 

I think Iain Rice's book was recommending adoption of what C+L were already selling , to be honest  

 

For what it's worth, I don't think it's the right approach for a scale society to recommend a particular wheel track standard as The One True Path  . The history of the Protofour Society stands as a bit of a warning as to where that approach takes you.

 

Nor do I think it is sensible for an individual trader to try and push one particular track standard to the exclusion of others , where people in a particular gauge /scale work to several. A past C+ L proprietor, Brian Lewis, I believe works to one of the "narrow" Gauge O standards himself , but I'm not aware of any suggestion that C+L in his time were refusing to support 32mm or 33mm gauge as "wrong". It would have been extremely foolish to turn away customers working to other 7mm standards by refusing to support them

Edited June 6, 2018 by Ravenser

[hayfield]

Hi John,

 

The relevant topic is public for anyone to read:

 

 https://www.scalefour.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=5859

 

There have been some further posts on there today (page 2) about C&L.

 

Martin.

Martin

 

 

Thanks for the link, a good proportion seem more concerned about the wheels, and hopefully the track seems to be from a retailer rather than a supplier

 

It is my humble opinion that no one has grasped the versatility of the Exactoscale track parts, whilst designed for P4 the track bases and chairs can easily be used for EM gauge and of course using the turnout and crossing timber pack along with the chairs with a few minor modifications quality S&C module can easily be built to a higher standard of detail than whats available in the RTR market.

 

Again in my opinion marketing has always been non existent at both C&L and Exactoscale, whilst expensive kits have been available there has never been to my knowledge a trial kit at a budget price, or show specials. Why not have EM kits at Expo EM shows, less expensive P4 kits at Scale forum. Or simply a pack of timbers, chairs a few rails and a plan, as a show special

 

As for roller gauges, why are there check rail guides on both sides? or even on the roller gauges at all, in my opinion madness. The reason C&L still sell the 00 gauge ones is they inherited so many. 

 

At times I am surprised how both track ranges have survived, on the C&L stand few manning the stand have had a depth of knowledge of track building, worst of all in my opinion little if any marketing the product. A real shame that these products have suffered from so little attention. On the other hand for some years the stands have had to supply other products to keep going

 

For the modeller two companies in coppition is the best thing, keeps the suppliers on their toes, one interesting fact is that the time scale for the reintroduction of Exactoscale's track products, the range is up and running, and apparently (from what I have been told) stocks are available for most items.

[martin_wynne]

But the same situation exists with EM/P4 , and it also exists in 3mm with there being more than one standard defined for 12mm gauge plus "TM"/13.5mm gauge and 14.2mm gauge, all supported by the 3mm Society.  How many track standards are there now in 7mm ? At least 6, I think.

 

Hi Ravenser,

 

I put "owned" in quotes simply to indicate the published source.

 

Of course there can be no objection to the existence to multiple track standards, or to suppliers supporting them. My comments were about C&L referring to two different non-compatible standards for track and wheels in the same paragraph, without mentioning the fact. Supplying a back-to-back gauge stated to be suitable for RTR, while simultaneously supplying a track gauge which isn't (and including it in their 00 turnout kits).

 

I believe C&L has had 5 owners in its troubled history. Unfortunately none of them seemed to have had much understanding of the 00 market, concentrating on EM and P4. Which is surprising in view of the dominance of 00 in the UK hobby. And unfortunate now that Peco have introduced their 00 bullhead, and more 00 modellers are trying trackbuilding.

 

Phil could do his 00 customers a great service by hiding the DOGA-Fine gauges at the back of the shelf, or at the very least not including them in the 00 turnout kits. If the kits contain ready-assembled crossings with 1mm flangeways, he could offer to include the 00-SF gauges. If they don't, there are several other sources of 00 track gauges such as DOGA (Intermediate), Markits, SMP. All compatible with unmodified modern RTR models.

 

But does Phil understand this stuff? Did any previous owner?

 

Martin.

Edited June 6, 2018 by martin_wynne

[Ravenser]

Hi Ravenser,

 

I put "owned" in quotes simply to indicate the published source.

 

Of course there can be no objection to the existence to multiple track standards, or to suppliers supporting them. My comments were about C&L referring to two different non-compatible standards for track and wheels in the same paragraph, without mentioning the fact. Supplying a back-to-back gauge stated to be suitable for RTR, while simultaneously supplying a track gauge which isn't (and including it in their 00 turnout kits).

 

I believe C&L has had 5 owners in its troubled history. Unfortunately none of them seemed to have had much understanding of the 00 market, concentrating on EM and P4. Which is surprising in view of the dominance of 00 in the UK hobby. And unfortunate now that Peco have introduced their 00 bullhead, and more 00 modellers are trying trackbuilding.

 

Phil could do his 00 customers a great service by hiding the DOGA-Fine gauges at the back of the shelf, or at the very least not including them in the 00 turnout kits. If the kits contain ready-assembled crossings with 1mm flangeways, he could offer to include the 00-SF gauges. If they don't, there are several other sources of 00 track gauges such as DOGA (Intermediate), Markits, SMP. All compatible with unmodified modern RTR models.

 

But does Phil understand this stuff? Did any previous owner?

 

Martin.

 

One key sentence:

 

 

Unfortunately none of them seemed to have had much understanding of the 00 market, concentrating on EM and P4. Which is surprising in view of the dominance of 00 in the UK hobby.

 

There's a good reason for that - the owners have, very largely, been working in EM, P4 or 7mm finescale. However the bulk of the market is OO - I remember John Pottinger telling me that quite frankly at a Chatham show last century

 

So the owners of C+L have found ways to sell their EM components to OO modellers to get the increased sales volume they needed for  the products they wanted to make for EM/P4 modelling to become viable.  (Same goes for Ultrascale)

 

OO  has been bedevilled by having wheel and track standard set for it by people who don't work in OO and don't actually believe in OO , because they are personally committed to EM/P4/S7/O-Fine of some variety. 

 

It's not surprising that people who are committed to other gauges don't understand the OO market.  Their own personal modelling  is defined by their rejection of OO for themselves