Why is their no budget range for the younger modeller to get into this hobby?

[Dunsignalling]

Doesn't what most contributors are advocating amount to basically Lima for the 21st century?

 

Fine, but bear in mind that Lima ultimately failed just after the end of the 20th century. That happened effectively because real customers who had been buying their products voted with their wallets for better mechanisms and more detail. That reduced demand for models at their level below the point of commercial viability. Can that process be reversed enough to allow such a business to thrive today? I very much doubt it.

 

But, don't expect any new range to stack up against Hornby's Railroad range on price, either. Railroad forms a useful extension of the broad Hornby set-up into "budget" territory, but only because most of the range is made from tooling that's already paid for itself several times over. Even simplified models from all-new tooling cost more to make, e.g. the Crosti 9F which has a "natural" price-point roughly half way between those of the Tri-ang/Lima level stuff and modern Hornby. That's not just because the market will stand it, it also reflects the cost of developing and producing the model.

 

OK, lets presume that somebody could be roped in to service this fondly imagined but wholly unquantified "beginner" market for "modern image". Unfortunately, the true junior beginner market probably won't be big enough on its own and it'll also be necessary to attract price-sensitive adult customers; people who currently buy more second-hand than new.  So, how would these models turn out?

 

My guess is that the prices would come out higher than anybody is envisaging and the trade-off in reduced detail and simplified finishes vis-à-vis current full-price standards would be greater than most would find acceptable.  

 

Why do I think that? Because it's a safe bet that Hornby, Bachmann, Dapol (and probably others who know their way around the industry) will have already crunched the numbers and found they don't add up.  

 

Empty niches often remain that way simply because there's not a sufficient return to be made from occupying them.

 

John

Edited August 17, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[tomparryharry]

4 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

  

Empty niches often remain that way simply because there's not a sufficient return to be made from occupying them.

John.

 

That is a very accurate sentiment. 

[Joseph_Pestell]

Much of the Railroad range is Lima for the 21st century.

 

I don't think that I would entirely agree with your analysis for the reasons for Lima's downfall. After all, they had high quality models in their portfolio as well. What caused them to fail was muddled marketing. Just like Jouef (before) and Hornby, they did not know how to differentiate their premium ranges from their entry-level range. That Crosti 9F is a good example of this muddled thinking.

 

But I agree with you that it probably needs extensive use of tooling that has already been amortised. Some new tooling might be needed and be used as a loss leader to attract people to a new brand.

 

There are two routes to doing this.

1) Hornby sets up (and subsequently sells) a new company to do this.

2) A new company is set up and buys/rents old tooling from several manufacturers - effectively what Bachmann is doing with the new EFE trains brand.

[009 micro modeller]

14 hours ago, Binky said:

This doesn't seem to be a problem for tabletop gaming such as wargames and scifi/fantasy games. Games Workshop are doing very well and many other systems seem to have a healthy following, with youngsters prepared to assemble and paint figures which come as plastic kits and make scenery from scratch.

 

Exactly - and having something more kit-based and creative could appeal to people who wouldn’t be interested in a conventional ‘train set.’ Hence my RTR chassis + interchangeable kits and bits idea.

 

Obviously this already exists in a sense with the combination of cheap RTR chassis and simple scratchbuilding/body kits/3D printed bits from smaller manufacturers, but I think to appeal to a wider market it would be necessary for a mainstream manufacturer to make both the chassis and the body parts, and to sell the chassis as separate items (Kato already does sell separate chassis). This is a lot more accessible and encouraging to newcomers than buying a chassis with a body they don’t want attached to it, then having to seek out a fairly obscure small manufacturer to get a body kit, and in other areas of model-making it is often expected that one manufacturer will supply most of the different bits for something like this.

 

The idea is to appeal to people who like making things but wouldn’t want an RTR train set, and to make scratch/kit building/bashing possible for a newcomer. If you think about it, for wargaming, model aircraft etc. a newcomer will often immediately expect to be building stuff from kits, as that’s what they came for. They might also build a plastic loco kit as a static model if it’s made by a manufacturer they recognise or involves similar skills, even if they don’t usually do railways (Revell produce one or two locos alongside their other plastic models for example). As an example of the reverse situation, I am not a serious aircraft modeller but have built a few of the snap-together Revell ‘mini-kits’ in the past. The potentially off-putting bit for the newcomer who wants to make a working model railway is the need for a working (and for locos, powered) chassis, but if the same manufacturer supplies an appropriate one this needn’t be a problem. The other issue could be layout wiring, which is why battery or radio control for the powered chassis might be appropriate.

Edited August 17, 2020 by 009 micro modeller

[Joseph_Pestell]

An interesting point about Games Workshop. And their products don't come cheap, as I know from SWMBO's nephew's Xmas & birthday requests.

[DK123GWR]

12 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

Exactly - and having something more kit-based and creative could appeal to people who wouldn’t be interested in a conventional ‘train set.’ Hence my RTR chassis + interchangeable kits and bits idea.

 

Obviously this already exists in a sense with the combination of cheap RTR chassis and simple scratchbuilding/body kits/3D printed bits from smaller manufacturers, but I think to appeal to a wider market it would be necessary for a mainstream manufacturer to make both the chassis and the body parts, and to sell the chassis as separate items (Kato already does sell separate chassis). This is a lot more accessible and encouraging to newcomers than buying a chassis with a body they don’t want attached to it, then having to seek out a fairly obscure small manufacturer to get a body kit, and in other areas of model-making it is often expected that one manufacturer will supply most of the different bits for something like this.

 

The idea is to appeal to people who like making things but wouldn’t want an RTR train set, and to make scratch/kit building/bashing possible for a newcomer. If you think about it, for wargaming, model aircraft etc. a newcomer will often immediately expect to be building stuff from kits, as that’s what they came for. They might also build a plastic loco kit as a static model if it’s made by a manufacturer they recognise or involves similar skills, even if they don’t usually do railways (Revell produce one or two locos alongside their other plastic models for example). As an example of the reverse situation, I am not a serious aircraft modeller but have built a few of the snap-together Revell ‘mini-kits’ in the past. The potentially off-putting bit for the newcomer who wants to make a working model railway is the need for a working (and for locos, powered) chassis, but if the same manufacturer supplies an appropriate one this needn’t be a problem. The other issue could be layout wiring, which is why battery or radio control for the powered chassis might be appropriate.

So in 00 would Dapol be well placed to enter this market by producing proper chassis for their loco kits (and then expanding the range), or do you think it would be better for somebody to start a new range (perhaps Hornby bringing back the Airfix brand - and hopefully some of their customers)?

[009 micro modeller]

34 minutes ago, DK123GWR said:

So in 00 would Dapol be well placed to enter this market by producing proper chassis for their loco kits (and then expanding the range), or do you think it would be better for somebody to start a new range (perhaps Hornby bringing back the Airfix brand - and hopefully some of their customers)?

 

Potentially. This is where the specifics of this idea become a bit more technical. Do you produce a generic chassis and then design kits with compromises specifically to fit that, or use a generic powered wagon in combination with more accurate models (as previously done with Airfix/Dapol kits)? Even for the second option it may be better to have a partly/fully assembled rolling chassis for the locos if the primary purpose is for them to run (remember that this might be somebody’s first loco, rather than something they make later on as is traditionally the case with the Airfix/Dapol kits, so skill levels could still be relatively low). This is again where a slightly impressionistic large scale narrow gauge range (but still using 16.5mm gauge track) might work better as there would be a greater range of reasonably realistic models that could be based around a basic 0-4-0 chassis, and it could be tied in nicely with wargaming and military models. My point about wood and card kits for younger or less experienced modellers would still apply alongside this though. I think either Dapol or Hornby (making use of the expertise/capabilities of the other companies they own) could be well-placed to do this, but for Hornby it seems to be too far away from what they currently see as the (especially young) beginner’s way into the hobby.

[009 micro modeller]

53 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

An interesting point about Games Workshop. And their products don't come cheap, as I know from SWMBO's nephew's Xmas & birthday requests.

 

I should say that I don’t actually know much about Games Workshop, but talking to somebody I used to know who did wargaming it did seem as though the main wargaming companies produce all the constituent bits that most people would need.

[Legend]

Lima for the 21st century probably a good description, when you think of it .The Railroad range does indeed sprout 37, 47 with updated mechanisms . I have a 47 and it’s absolutely fine . 

 

Remember  early 70s when Lima got into your local shop with Trainsets Based on Fowler 4F and 33 , that’s really what you need a low cost trainset capable of wide distribution . I think Hornby are ideally placed for this . Imagine trainsets each with a bright 66 , Freightliner , DB, GBRF each with three large hoppers giving a bit of play value .   With reference Games Workshop posting above , Airfix could have a series of kits to compliment it . 
 

 

[kevinlms]

2 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Much of the Railroad range is Lima for the 21st century.

 

I don't think that I would entirely agree with your analysis for the reasons for Lima's downfall. After all, they had high quality models in their portfolio as well. What caused them to fail was muddled marketing. Just like Jouef (before) and Hornby, they did not know how to differentiate their premium ranges from their entry-level range. That Crosti 9F is a good example of this muddled thinking.

 

But I agree with you that it probably needs extensive use of tooling that has already been amortised. Some new tooling might be needed and be used as a loss leader to attract people to a new brand.

 

There are two routes to doing this.

1) Hornby sets up (and subsequently sells) a new company to do this.

2) A new company is set up and buys/rents old tooling from several manufacturers - effectively what Bachmann is doing with the new EFE trains brand.

I was under the impression that Lima always did quite well in the British market. There was no shortage of limited edition diesels right to the end.

I suspect their big problem was their international range, which covered all 4 corners of the world. 

Trying to get that market balanced for quantities, must have been near impossible. 

Near the end, there was a lot of Australian prototypes, which didn't sell well. It certainly wasn't cheap.

[Dunsignalling]

3 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Much of the Railroad range is Lima for the 21st century.

 

I don't think that I would entirely agree with your analysis for the reasons for Lima's downfall. After all, they had high quality models in their portfolio as well. What caused them to fail was muddled marketing. Just like Jouef (before) and Hornby, they did not know how to differentiate their premium ranges from their entry-level range. That Crosti 9F is a good example of this muddled thinking.

 

But I agree with you that it probably needs extensive use of tooling that has already been amortised. Some new tooling might be needed and be used as a loss leader to attract people to a new brand.

 

There are two routes to doing this.

1) Hornby sets up (and subsequently sells) a new company to do this.

2) A new company is set up and buys/rents old tooling from several manufacturers - effectively what Bachmann is doing with the new EFE trains brand.

Lima's hi-fi and lo-fi ranges were perfectly easy to differentiate.

 

The detailed stuff with flywheel drives etc. all represented foreign prototypes and the competent-but-basic stuff with crude pancake motors was the UK range.

 

I agree that Hornby's Crosti 9F really falls between their two ranges, but their marketing and pricing reflected that from the beginning. There's never been any suggestion of it being presented as something it's not. On a personal level, I just wish they'd release the thing in its later "de-Crostied" form.....

 

Your suggestions are quite reasonable. It might work but, in essence, it would mean creating a business specifically attempting to make a half-decent living out of customers who either don't have much money, or just don't like spending it.... 

 

Some end up like that, but I'd venture that it's never been anybody's Plan A. OK, there's Poundland, but their business model isn't predicated on servicing the margins of an activity that was traditionally the preserve of the better-off.

 

Despite all the whinging about prices, I reckon this hobby can be about as affordable as it's ever been, but aspirations have ballooned and we want more stuff than we can ever fully employ, or enjoy. I've acquired ten to twenty times more locos, coaches and wagons than I could have dreamt of as a child.

 

We're now a bit over twenty years down the road from Hornby's Clan Line, the point I identify as when my excesses really got going. The models were so much better than I was used to and buying them just became addictive. However, I've come to realise that many of them just constitute "Retail Therapy" and won't go near a piece of track again; the novelty having worn off after the first month or two. No harm to anyone else, as I'm single and childless. The worst I might have done is pass on activities that would have made more fulfilling use of the funds, though I couldn't cite anything very specific. However, the bulging cupboards are starting to bug me and a thin-out is definitely needed.

 

I'd suggest that developing an idea of what you really, really want (sorry, girls!), plus a bit more focus than is customary these days, would probably enable most of us to afford "enough" of the good stuff, making this discussion somewhat redundant. 

 

The trick is probably doing so at the beginning rather than when one notices the downstairs ceiling is (at least figuratively) starting to sag!

 

John

Edited August 17, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[Pandora]

Bachmann or Farish train sets or train packs can be a budget friendly beginners purchase, the Farish Cumbrian Mountain Express  train pack , new specification Duchess , 3 coaches plus accesories was only a few pounds over the Duchess loco alone.

['CHARD]

On 16/08/2020 at 07:49, Dunsignalling said:

My Tri-ang Brush Type 2 was 57/6

 

That's one complex conversion 

[009 micro modeller]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

I'd suggest that developing an idea of what you really, really want (sorry, girls!), plus a bit more focus than is customary these days, would probably enable most of us to afford "enough" of the good stuff, making this discussion somewhat redundant. 

 

I think this makes a lot of sense, if I’m following the point correctly. When I started out in 009 I bought lots of cheap second hand locos (in 009 at the time there wasn’t really another option for RTR without getting very continental-looking locos - even more so than the old Egger ones that I have - even ignoring my relative lack of funds then and more recently). Today I still have this motley collection but also have two new, flywheel-fitted Minitrains locos. They cost a lot more per loco than the old second hand stuff (obviously) but they are reliable enough to be able to operate the same layouts by themselves. I particularly like the improved running qualities - the relatively low level of detail (improved, but not much improved from original Egger locos) is less of a concern.

 

5 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Hornby sets up (and subsequently sells) a new company to do this.

 

I’m confused about why Hornby selling off such a company is such a key part of this. They can differentiate the brand while retaining ownership, surely? Or is there a concern that it will just get absorbed back into their main range?

[kevinlms]

3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Lima's hi-fi and lo-fi ranges were perfectly easy to differentiate.

 

The detailed stuff with flywheel drives etc. all represented foreign prototypes and the competent-but-basic stuff with crude pancake motors was the UK range.

 

 

John

I read somewhere that the British market was happy to only pay for the pancake motors. The only one with a non pancake motor was the Class 20, which was only a half way house.

 

The flywheel drive stuff certainly didn't make it to the Australian Lima.

[Joseph_Pestell]

I think that his comment was made in jest. Even now, Lima produces some low-grade models for its Italian market. And in the past, it did the same for France, Germany and the Netherlands.

 

Yes, I think that Hornby would need to split off a company making Railroad style models. It needs to concentrate on Hornby as a premium brand. And Hornby could do with a capital windfall right now.

 

As an independent company, there might be more opportunities to acquire secondhand tooling from other companies.

[tomparryharry]

Hornby produce the Railroad  models, and often get a kicking because people will write in and say:- "Oh, why didn't 'they' make so & so? I would have bought that if t was full spec".  It would appear you can't win either way....

 

Another producer will always charge 'Top Dollar' because you can "either like it, or go without".  And certainly no names, and certainly no pack drill; it is what it is......

 

Producers are fairly pressed to turn a profit.  However, they know to the decimal point what's what. There are bargains out there, but a little bit of detective work is required. 

 

Cheers,

Ian.

[009 micro modeller]

34 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

As an independent company, there might be more opportunities to acquire secondhand tooling from other companies.

 

Ah yes, didn’t think of that. Although it doesn’t seem to have stopped Bachmann EFE getting Heljan tooling; I’m still not sure I understand how that works.

[mdvle]

35 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

Ah yes, didn’t think of that. Although it doesn’t seem to have stopped Bachmann EFE getting Heljan tooling; I’m still not sure I understand how that works.

 

I don't think it has been made public, but at a guess Bachmann don't have the tooling but rather have contracted for x units to be made for their EFE brand.

[mdvle]

4 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I’m confused about why Hornby selling off such a company is such a key part of this. They can differentiate the brand while retaining ownership, surely? Or is there a concern that it will just get absorbed back into their main range?

 

Hornby a currently losing a lot of money, thus they don't have the spare cash to use to try and launch a cheap price line with the inherent risks of losing money on the tooling costs if things don't sell well.

[Zomboid]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Hornby as a premium brand

As someone who gave up on British model railways because of how terrible Hornby was in the 90s, I find that really rather amusing.

 

But even aside from that, Hornby is *the* brand for trainsets and things for people who don't know anything about model railways. I knew someone who referred to model railways in general as "Hornby Railways".

 

If they want a proper premium brand they should use one of the many others they own. I think Roco is theirs for example.

[Joseph_Pestell]

27 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

As someone who gave up on British model railways because of how terrible Hornby was in the 90s, I find that really rather amusing.

 

But even aside from that, Hornby is *the* brand for trainsets and things for people who don't know anything about model railways. I knew someone who referred to model railways in general as "Hornby Railways".

 

If they want a proper premium brand they should use one of the many others they own. I think Roco is theirs for example.

 

Perhaps it is a reflection on my age. Hornby is a premium brand to me, both here and in France.

 

But you may well be right. For people who are parents now, Hornby is probably a trainset brand and it is the high-detail models that should be given a new branding.

 

The only historic premium brands that Hornby owns are Rivarossi and Arnold. Neither would work for the UK market.

[Zomboid]

14 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

The only historic premium brands that Hornby owns are Rivarossi and Arnold. Neither would work for the UK market.

Why not? I'm not aware of any baggage associated with either of them in the UK. I actually have a Rivarossi American passenger car, but I've never heard of Arnold.

 

Might be my age though!

[DK123GWR]

11 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Why not? I'm not aware of any baggage associated with either of them in the UK. I actually have a Rivarossi American passenger car, but I've never heard of Arnold.

 

Might be my age though!

Lack brand recognition may be a minor issue. For example, you've never heard of Arnold.

[Binky]

10 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

Exactly - and having something more kit-based and creative could appeal to people who wouldn’t be interested in a conventional ‘train set.’ Hence my RTR chassis + interchangeable kits and bits idea.

 

Obviously this already exists in a sense with the combination of cheap RTR chassis and simple scratchbuilding/body kits/3D printed bits from smaller manufacturers, but I think to appeal to a wider market it would be necessary for a mainstream manufacturer to make both the chassis and the body parts, and to sell the chassis as separate items (Kato already does sell separate chassis). This is a lot more accessible and encouraging to newcomers than buying a chassis with a body they don’t want attached to it, then having to seek out a fairly obscure small manufacturer to get a body kit, and in other areas of model-making it is often expected that one manufacturer will supply most of the different bits for something like this.

 

Agreed, I've seen people take an interest in various hobbies only to be put off by being told the best way to go is to get several things from various different manufacturers they've never heard of and modify them. Being able to get everything you need from one manufacturer, and knowing they are designed to work together appears much more attractive to a beginner.