NEW OO gauge Crowdfunded Class 92 initiative

[DavidH]

I too remember Dave's astonishing allegation that the Chinese factory had kept both his CAD and money. I also can't find it on here - was it moderated out, maybe in order to protect the site from any libel/defamation issues? Anyone else remember Dave's posting?

 

It might have been on the class 17 thread, but it was also I think a reason for the set-back in class 92 production. (Unless my memory is wrong, and I know that memory is not as infallible as we might hope)

[The Stationmaster]

I too remember Dave's astonishing allegation that the Chinese factory had kept both his CAD and money. I also can't find it on here - was it moderated out, maybe in order to protect the site from any libel/defamation issues? Anyone else remember Dave's posting?

 

It might have been on the class 17 thread, but it was also I think a reason for the set-back in class 92 production. (Unless my memory is wrong, and I know that memory is not as infallible as we might hope)

 

It's on another thread.  Which also made it clear that the crowd funding refund was at Kernow's expense because they had taken on handling of the crowd funding payments on behalf of DJM (and they lost money as a result of having to make the refunds because they had to pay all the transaction charges etc) .

Edited December 6, 2018 by The Stationmaster

[njee20]

I get the impression, rightly or wrongly, that Dave has decided not to spend so much time on RMweb and I bet there are a few others on here who are refularly told that sort of thing by their wives (not that I'm suggesting Dave is under any sort of domestic cosh).  But obviously he has decided the best way to communicate with his customers is via the route he has now adopted.  And of course, as a supplier of models, he is not alone in taking that path so there is nothing 'odd' or even 'unusual' about it - just that he has changed his communication approach.  And what I presume was in his 'embargoed' emails is now on his website anyway.

Yes and no. Dave hasn't yet shared the content of his emails, and I'm not aware of any other supplier actively placing an embargo on comms by making them only available to people who've paid rather than prospective customers. As Chris/Dave said the thing I find most curious is actively engaging in various channels and then suddenly withdrawing from them. I for one hate the self-indulgent "that's it, I'm leaving the forum, don't try to stop me" posts, but this is one case where it would have been very useful!

[Andy Y]

It's on another thread.  Which also made it clear that the crowd funding refund was at Kernow's expense because they had taken on handling of the crowd funding payments on behalf of DJM (and they lost money as a result of having to make the refunds because they had to pay all the transaction charges etc) .

 

That solely relates to the Class 74 crowdfunding with ring-fenced payments held by Kernow MRC where customers were refunded or given incentivised credit to their account for alternative purchases rather than the Class 17.

[Andy Y]

I too remember Dave's astonishing allegation that the Chinese factory had kept both his CAD and money. I also can't find it on here - was it moderated out, maybe in order to protect the site from any libel/defamation issues? Anyone else remember Dave's posting?

 

It might have been on the class 17 thread, but it was also I think a reason for the set-back in class 92 production. (Unless my memory is wrong, and I know that memory is not as infallible as we might hope)

 

See http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78681-n-gauge-class-17-clayton-locomotive/?p=3161064

 

It certainly doesn't mention 'cheating' and I think part of the problem is some people thinking they read something different from what the actual text said.

[Ely_South]

It's on another thread.  Which also made it clear that the crowd funding refund was at Kernow's expense because they had taken on handling of the crowd funding payments on behalf of DJM (and they lost money as a result of having to make the refunds because they had to pay all the transaction charges etc) .

 

 

That solely relates to the Class 74 crowdfunding with ring-fenced payments held by Kernow MRC where customers were refunded or given incentivised credit to their account for alternative purchases rather than the Class 17.

 

Thanks for this. As someone who only looks at the Class 92 thread rather than the broader DJ Models area, this is the first time I've seen Dave's reasoning for the delay in tooling of the 92. 

 

Which; as an investor who found and joined the project based on his posts here; tells me he should be doing MORE communicating here; not less. Especially as his email lists are demonstrably not complete.

 

Hey ho.

 

Rob

[DavidH]

See http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78681-n-gauge-class-17-clayton-locomotive/?p=3161064

 

It certainly doesn't mention 'cheating' and I think part of the problem is some people thinking they read something different from what the actual text said.

 

Thanks for looking Andy, but I'm certain that's not the post I remember, or it was edited from what Dave originally wrote.

 

I still recall there was a post where he explicity said that the CAD had been kept, along with his money.  Possibly he may have had second thoughts on this and edited it, or another moderator did it for him.

[The Stationmaster]

See http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78681-n-gauge-class-17-clayton-locomotive/?p=3161064

 

It certainly doesn't mention 'cheating' and I think part of the problem is some people thinking they read something different from what the actual text said.

 

Thanks for making that clear Andy, my error in not being specific.  And as you imply it was not the case in respect of the Class 17 where crowd funders lost money as a consequence of the project not coming to fruition.

[jjb1970]

Thanks for looking Andy, but I'm certain that's not the post I remember, or it was edited from what Dave originally wrote.

 

I still recall there was a post where he explicity said that the CAD had been kept, along with his money.  Possibly he may have had second thoughts on this and edited it, or another moderator did it for him.

 

I think it was the class 74 thread.

[njee20]

There are certainly stronger inferences to it on the 74 thread:

 

Notably here and here.

[classy52]

There are certainly stronger inferences to it on the 74 thread:

 

Notably here and here.

 

That's a real eye opener 

[njee20]

Crucially though there's no mention of a factory stealing Dave's work - simply that if he chose to take his business elsewhere they keep the work to date, even (or probably particularly) if that work would theoretically be transferrable.

[mikeharvey22]

Thanks for making that clear Andy, my error in not being specific.  And as you imply it was not the case in respect of the Class 17 where crowd funders lost money as a consequence of the project not coming to fruition.

 

I lost no money on the Class 17. My advance payment was refunded in full, as Dave stated that it would be.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78681-n-gauge-class-17-clayton-locomotive/?p=3161064

[chris p bacon]

I lost no money on the Class 17. My advance payment was refunded in full, as Dave stated that it would be.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78681-n-gauge-class-17-clayton-locomotive/?p=3161064

 

 

Run that by Kernow and see how they feel about the project.

[mikeharvey22]

Run that by Kernow and see how they feel about the project.

 

 

Kernow had no involvement with the N gauge Class 17 project. Now the 00 gauge Class 74 might be a different matter.....

[dogbox321]

Whilst I am no expert in DJM's operating or Financial Affairs, and nor do I wish to speculate on either.......

 

What I would say is - in looking at recent developments - how long have the MK2 F's and DBSO's taken to come to market, from a company with more than 1 member of staff?  And, how long has a new 158 been promised, along with a Class 117?

 

Whilst delays are regrettable, then for a pretty much one man band, are they reasonable?

 

Likewise, "Cashflow" is the life blood of any business, and as I have said on a number of occasions - to a "relatively" small supplier such as DJM, then I view "delays" as potentially one of the biggest risks, as inflation/exchange rates adds to unit costs/eats into margins, continuous delays leads to diminishing investor confidence, and through reduced finance -  less business activity..

 

Ultimately, I hope DJM produces a fantastic Class 92 and APT.....

 

Regards,

 

C.

[chris p bacon]

Kernow had no involvement with the N gauge Class 17 project. Now the 00 gauge Class 74 might be a different matter.....

 

 

I stand corrected, with so many projects on the go I got them mixed up.

[SRman]

Whilst I am no expert in DJM's operating or Financial Affairs, and nor do I wish to speculate on either.......

 

What I would say is - in looking at recent developments - how long have the MK2 F's and DBSO's taken to come to market, from a company with more than 1 member of staff?  And, how long has a new 158 been promised, along with a Class 117?

 

Whilst delays are regrettable, then for a pretty much one man band, are they reasonable?

 

Likewise, "Cashflow" is the life blood of any business, and as I have said on a number of occasions - to a "relatively" small supplier such as DJM, then I view "delays" as potentially one of the biggest risks, as inflation/exchange rates adds to unit costs/eats into margins, continuous delays leads to diminishing investor confidence, and through reduced finance -  less business activity..

 

Ultimately, I hope DJM produces a fantastic Class 92 and APT.....

 

Regards,

 

C.

 

I seem to recall that when Dave started out on his own, he said something like the rate of delivery on projects would depend on the previous ones selling well enough to fund the next ones. While not trying to speculate on his cash flow, that does suggest that things were tight to begin with. The crowdfunding projects are separate in one way, but probably still would rely on Dave having some extra funds to push things on.

 

While I had begun to wonder if the 92 project was going to proceed, it is nice to receive a bit of news. The delay actually works in my favour now, because I have been on long service leave on half pay for the last few months, so my own cash flow had to be regulated a bit too.

[adb968008]

Whilst I am no expert in DJM's operating or Financial Affairs, and nor do I wish to speculate on either.......

 

What I would say is - in looking at recent developments - how long have the MK2 F's and DBSO's taken to come to market, from a company with more than 1 member of staff? And, how long has a new 158 been promised, along with a Class 117?

 

Whilst delays are regrettable, then for a pretty much one man band, are they reasonable?

 

Likewise, "Cashflow" is the life blood of any business, and as I have said on a number of occasions - to a "relatively" small supplier such as DJM, then I view "delays" as potentially one of the biggest risks, as inflation/exchange rates adds to unit costs/eats into margins, continuous delays leads to diminishing investor confidence, and through reduced finance - less business activity..

 

Ultimately, I hope DJM produces a fantastic Class 92 and APT.....

 

Regards,

 

C.

Cashflow?

 

I thought crowd fundings purpose was to mitigate cashflow by providing cash in advance ?

 

Maybe i’m wrong, but I would have thought this unlikely an issue for crowd funding.

 

Meanwhile here is the sample of Revolution trains n gauge class 92

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/115580-revolution-trains-proposes-class-92-in-n/?p=3380629

 

Announced October 6th 2016, 6 weeks later than this oo and Dj n class 92 projects.

This too was crowd funded.

Both projects are 3 years old, one is close to production, the other is still at CAD.

Edited December 7, 2018 by adb968008

[Ely_South]

Does anyone know if DJ Models is; theoretically; Dave's main employment (i.e. he aims to devote most of his time to it, and needs to derive a regular income to pay his bills; not just a surplus at the end of each project), or is it more a side business (i.e. he gets his money to live on from elsewhere, and manages DJ Models in his spare time; probably for free in the first instance, but possibly in the hope it might grow into his main employment over time - or at least deliver a few nice bonuses on success)?

 

The appearance; to me; is of the former, and I set my expectations as such. If the latter, then perhaps my expectations might be unrealistic.

 

Cheers

 

Rob

[jjb1970]

There is a fundamental difference in delays at Bachmann (or indeed at Hornby, Dapol, Heljan etc) and a crowd funded project. Bachmann at al are funding their own product development, carrying their own risk and ultimately they're the ones who will lose if product is delayed. I haven't lost anything from delays to various RTR projects I'm interested. I very seldom pre-order, but even if I did retailers don't expect payment up front for pre-orders. With a crowd funded model customers are paying up front based on a specification from the supplier, if I'd paid money up front and schedules kept slipping and there was very limited information then I'd take a very different view to how I look at other product delays.

[ThaneofFife]

this thread makes for some very sorry reading.........I hope the whole mess gets sorted ASAP.

[PMP]

Does anyone know if DJ Models is; theoretically; Dave's main employment (i.e. he aims to devote most of his time to it, and needs to derive a regular income to pay his bills; not just a surplus at the end of each project), or is it more a side business (i.e. he gets his money to live on from elsewhere, and manages DJ Models in his spare time; probably for free in the first instance, but possibly in the hope it might grow into his main employment over time - or at least deliver a few nice bonuses on success)?

 

The appearance; to me; is of the former, and I set my expectations as such. If the latter, then perhaps my expectations might be unrealistic.

 

Cheers

 

Rob

According to this post from Dave Jones, the former.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/120871-djm-n-gauge-crowdfunded-king-class-steam-loco-has-started/page-8&do=findComment&comment=2762652

According to the entry quoted there’s no income from the N gauge King (if I understand it correctly), except from later excess sales over the initial production run.

[The Stationmaster]

There is a fundamental difference in delays at Bachmann (or indeed at Hornby, Dapol, Heljan etc) and a crowd funded project. Bachmann at al are funding their own product development, carrying their own risk and ultimately they're the ones who will lose if product is delayed. I haven't lost anything from delays to various RTR projects I'm interested. I very seldom pre-order, but even if I did retailers don't expect payment up front for pre-orders. With a crowd funded model customers are paying up front based on a specification from the supplier, if I'd paid money up front and schedules kept slipping and there was very limited information then I'd take a very different view to how I look at other product delays.

 

I think that relates very much to the questions with which I started the thread about crowd funding and what it is meant to achieve -

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/133839-crowdfunding-or-minimising-risk/page-1

 

A business either starts by obtaining capital investment (in its most basic form possibly mortgaging a property or getting a bank loan against the results and expectations of an associated business, e.g. retail) or it seeks funding by some other route such as crowd funding.  Once the business is up and running the proprietors then face a choice about obtaining further capital but eventually, as with the likes of Hornby and Bachmann it is either develop sufficient internal funds or borrow against the value of the business.  Crowd funding can obviously continue to work well for a buying concern (e.g. in effect Revolution) where they remain what amounts almost to an organised grouping of potential end customers buying a known quality of product from an established supplier.

[classy52]

this thread makes for some very sorry reading.........I hope the whole mess gets sorted ASAP.

 

I think his honesty in divulging all manner of information on how he conducts his business has literally bitten him on the proverbial as each individual will interpret this information in an entirely different way either in a positive or negative light.

It had snowballed so much that I can't really blame him for stepping away from these threads which you have said above has become very sorry reading but having said that he is still tripping up when it comes to customer communication i.e. only a % getting his latest email with info on the 92 project & I suppose failing to just put that on his website under latest news for everyone to see including current and prospective customers.

Have to say it is a mess, in these threads, but hopefully not from where he is standing.

 

Edit: Didn't realise until now that Rails of Sheffield have also got DJM's Class 92 on pre-order along with Kernow, so two big players waiting on the product thus hopefully Dave can get this project finished and on the shelves and making him money.

Edited December 7, 2018 by classy52