Hornby Announce L&MR 0-4-2 "Lion"?

[adb968008]

Lets not forget that aside of the flying cash machine, there was a whole fleet of similar race horses, nothing stopping anyone modelling them. Just avoid £60103.00p.

 

 

Edited July 11, 2022 by adb968008

[RichardT]

41 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Lets not forget that aside of the flying cash machine, there was a whole fleet of similar race horses, nothing stopping anyone modelling them. Just avoid £60103.00p.

 

 

<Yawn>

[RichardT]

As this thread is ostensibly about “Lion”, the one Hornby proposal in this whole mess for which there *aren’t* any IP issues, can we call a halt to the parade of uninformed amateur IP lawyers? (Graham Muz very much *not* included in this chunter.)

 

As someone who in a previous life was responsible for negotiating fees for the use of NRM collection material it’s interesting to see all the misunderstandings that are out there, but I’m not going to waste my precious free time writing long posts explaining all the nuances.

Oh, and the phrase a previous poster was looking for was “laissez faire”.

 

Richard T

Edited July 11, 2022 by RichardT
Clarifying

[eldomtom2]

4 hours ago, Graham_Muz said:

Except in most cases it is how it works

It is not. Just because most registered trademarks are unchallenged does not mean they cannot be challenged.

[Graham_Muz]

9 hours ago, eldomtom2 said:

It is not. Just because most registered trademarks are unchallenged does not mean they cannot be challenged.

 

I have never said they can not be challenged. Anyway the thread is digressing.

[jjb1970]

If Hornby was profitable and with enough spare capacity to do this without affecting anything else I could understand them pressing on to make a point. I am not saying I would agree but I have seen it done by others in various segments. However, Hornby don't seem to be awash with either cash or development capacity so sinking resources into a subject which is niche to start with and which is being done by someone else seems somewhat questionable. Especially when the alternative looks to have a good headstart and is generally considered a more reliable supplier in terms of getting stuff right. I think this is one of those times when good judgement would advise swallowing pride and bowing out of doing this one. 

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

If Hornby was profitable and with enough spare capacity to do this without affecting anything else I could understand them pressing on to make a point. I am not saying I would agree but I have seen it done by others in various segments. However, Hornby don't seem to be awash with either cash or development capacity so sinking resources into a subject which is niche to start with and which is being done by someone else seems somewhat questionable. Especially when the alternative looks to have a good headstart and is generally considered a more reliable supplier in terms of getting stuff right. I think this is one of those times when good judgement would advise swallowing pride and bowing out of doing this one. 

Hornby has access to rather a very large amount of capital (£12.6 million according to their accounts) but it is somebody else's money so it would cost them. They have  got shot of one rather costly borrowing facility where they had to pay for the facility whether they actually used any of the money or didn't use it (two different rates of interest).  

 

Provided they can turn a profit they don't lack for access to capital.  But in my view, and from what we have repeatedly seen, the 'capital' they are short of is original innovation and new market ideas where they'd rather try to jump on someone else's bandwagon instead of coming up with things themselves.  There is a rumour that a few years they sunk a large amount of money into developing something far more original which would have opened up a new market area for them, with little or no competition, but they shelved all the work and didn't proceed to cash in on their investment.

 

Similarly it seems very much the case that at times they have shoved planned release dates for some things aside in order to beat others to market with particular models.  I continue to wonder if some models being put back to 2023 are more a consequence of trying to rush through 'Lion' rather than a reflection of various problems in China?

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Hornby has access to rather a very large amount of capital (£12.6 million according to their accounts) but it is somebody else's money so it would cost them.

imo Therein is the problem…

 

Shareholders and Finance provide the cash but neither have a real passion for the hobby.

If the message is we need cash to compete, in a normalised industry is usual and to be expected, i’m a bit less convinced its sound logic in this hobby.

 

if you look at the list of manufacturers… everyone except Bachmann are owned or backed by hobbyists…

Even Bachmann are owned by the factory thats dedicated to the hobby.

 

Hiring ex-“insert your trade” professionals into leadership roles who dont know a class 50 from the 0815 from Margate imo is never going to produce the right result in a niche hobby.

 

If I applied to be a “insert management role of your choice” at Stanley Gibbons i’d make a right hash of it, I might apply skills I know to be reasonably successful but as I don't know the difference between a 1p stamp and a penny black… any amount of research will always see me behind the customer base who know it better than I. 

 

Ive heard anecdotally that Hornby have attitudes against this forum, that to me would underpin my opinions.

 

The solution of course is easy.. engage with your customer. I can understand that reluctance, afterall who wants to go to a hostile meeting to be thrown under a bus ? But Ive had countless customer meetings where everything but the kitchen sink was thrown at me… (Dutch, Arabic and Japanese cultures are particularly good at this) but remeber if they didnt care, they wouldnt invite you to that meeting in the first place, they would just move on.. so let them vent, its not personal its passion, then sit down and understand how to address it.

The worrying thing is this year imo the Hornby threads are largely silent, except the venting which could be a sign the customer is moving on..

 

Anyone in sales will tell you silence can be worrysome, if they arent talking to/about you, then who are they talking to ?

 

If it were possible to count comments by manufacturer for HY 2022 that might be an interesting stat.

 

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by adb968008

[The Stationmaster]

A very quick count (excluding the original announcement pages by AY and 'Trains On Film') I reckon there are total of 94 pages covering those items with a 2022 subject heading and consequent discussion.  Some of them are abysmal when considered against the investment going into the item - for example the new Black 5 with all sorts of added things (some might say gimmicks although I don't) such as exhaust steam has barely got a handful of pages.

 

Bachmann Spring & Summer 2022 announcements pages total 15 (and excluding the thread about 2022 pricing);  EFE Rail new announcements for 2022 - 0n3 page.   Accurascale has 38 pages for only three items, Rapido has 56 pages opened  for items announced this year (including 'buses) although in several cases it is individual threads about various items previously announced for the Titfield subject area.  There are no new threads this year for KR models but the threads for some of theirs are much longer than those for Hornby threads of similar vintage of announcement.  There are two Revolution new item threads started this  year totalling 6 pages.  Dapol 10 pages for two 2022 announcements.  Kernow 3 pages, three items.  Rails 7 pages, 2 items.  Cavalex 9 pages one item,  Heljan 3 pages, 2 items.

 

If course the age count can include the final page with pnly one post - I'm not going to go bog-eyed counting the number of posts.  Basically I have tried to counr - quickly - only threads opened for new 2022 announcements and have excluded December 2021 announcement threads - taht would add another 10 pages to Accurascale's total and 2 pages to Rapido's total - possibly some elswhere as well.

 

If we take Accurascale as an example the number of pages of posts per new item (or range of teh same basic item) from December 2021 to date averages 12. Rapidos is much lower but Dapol are making 5 pages per item.  I don't know if it means anything at all but including a steam age vehicle Accurascale has managed twice as many pages per single item/range than some of Hornby's 2022 . While Dapol's best is level with some of Hornby's lower page counts.

 

I haven't got a clue what it proves or disproves but - be the comments good or bad - it is clear that some newcomers can excite far greater interest in some of their models than Hornby can in quite a lot of theirs.  that suggests to me that people pther than Hormnby are far better at picking subjects which create interest and presumably interest creates sales

[adb968008]

Mike ive got to congratulate you on that effort !!

 

 

But pertinent that Hornby has announced more than most (ok they do it all at once in January), but also has arguably delivered more (APT, 91, mk4’s W1) and Aside of Accurascale, its worth noting how Rapido seems to be touching a chord too.. yet Hornby has the high page count there is a lot of discontent within.

 

Beating Hornby (and Bachmann) with a stick has been part of the course for years, what should be considered is what is being made… Accurascale are giant hunting.. Manor, 55,37,31 are all high wishlist duplication items… my magic 8 ball would put bets on a Rebuilt MN, Black 5 and a class 50 too…indeed even the humble 64’ mk1 might be in their sights.

 

Whilst not debating the rights and wrongs of making the above, if giants are cherry picked its far more difficult to compete on little black goods 0-6-0’s if your cash cows are gone… 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by adb968008

[MarkSG]

On 11/07/2022 at 12:01, Graham_Muz said:

 

Not true I'm afraid, the Science Museum Group  hold a wide range of "Flying Scotsman" and "Mallard" registered trademarks across a number of trademark classes. 

 

Yes, but, rather crucually in this context, none of them cover models. And that particular omission is, I think, because that's the one class that they would genuinely have had trouble defending, because by the time they registered the various trade marks there had already been several models of Flying Scotsman. So it's a classic case of prior art.

 

Note that prior art doesn't (contrary to popular opinion) render a trade mark invalid, or stop it being registered in the first place. But what it does do is make the trade mark exclusive rights unenforceable against those who had already been using it prior to registration. So if BobCo have been selling "Wazzockade" drinks since 1934, and FredCo later comes along in 2011 and registers "Wazzockade" as a trade mark, BobCo can continue to use it, but JillCo can't. BobCo's grandfather rights do, though, pass to any sucessor company, so if BobCo is taken over by AliceCo, then AliceCo can continue to make Wazzockade.

 

If SMG had registered Flying Scotsman in a class which covers models, therefore, they wouldn't have been able to prevent Hornby or Bachmann (Kader) using it, but probably would have been able to prevent Accurascale or Rapido using it (if, indeed, either of them ever felt like making a Flying Scotsman). But that level of control probably wasn't worth the effort, and possibly also not worth the potential negative publicity.

 

In any case, though, when it comes to models of existing prototypes (eg, museum pieces as well as still-running locos and rolling stock) these days, a laser scan is pretty much essential. Working solely from drawings and photos when you've got the real thing to copy would be an exercise in corporate self-flagellation. So the owner of the real thing still gets to control access to it for potential model-makers, and that access control is probably more useful, in the real world, than relying on IP rights.  Because stopping someone from infiringing your IP can mean a costly court case with no guarantee of winning, whereas preventing someone from carrying out a scan is as simple as saying "no".  So no manufacturer is going to make a new (or completely re-tooled) model of Flying Scotsman without SMG's co-operation anyway. So the IP issue is pretty much moot.

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, MarkSG said:

none of them cover models.

 

I thought we'd parked IP/TM issues?

 

Anyway, the registrations do cover the use of any TM on models which is distinct from a model.

 

I have linked to the relevant specific protections before and haven't got the time, right now, to look it up again.

 

Edit https://www.trademarkelite.com/uk/trademark/trademark-detail/UK00002057869/FLYING-SCOTSMAN

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Mike ive got to congratulate you on that effort !!

 

 

But pertinent that Hornby has announced more than most (ok they do it all at once in January), but also has arguably delivered more (APT, 91, mk4’s W1) and Aside of Accurascale, its worth noting how Rapido seems to be touching a chord too.. yet Hornby has the high page count there is a lot of discontent within.

 

Beating Hornby (and Bachmann) with a stick has been part of the course for years, what should be considered is what is being made… Accurascale are giant hunting.. Manor, 55,37,31 are all high wishlist duplication items… my magic 8 ball would put bets on a Rebuilt MN, Black 5 and a class 50 too…indeed even the humble 64’ mk1 might be in their sights.

 

Whilst not debating the rights and wrongs of making the above, if giants are cherry picked its far more difficult to compete on little black goods 0-6-0’s if your cash cows are gone… 

 

 

Quite right about cash cows so maybe the message which is there is to protect them but not in the stupid manner of the Terrier (where Hornby had the stroke of luck of having the Oxford model well advanced in development) or the generic coaches (where picking up a ball previously kicked into touch was done hastily(.  But more in the manner of what come over as genuine improvements tackling some of the existing problems with the A3 (but still getting that trailing truck wrong) or doing what they are doing with the Black 5 - although we have yet to see the result).  And there are still some wide open goals where new markets could be developed but again they seem to be missing some important boats.

 

There have been people in Hornby - and perhaps still are some - who have the passion and could understand the market in a way that allowed them to be one jump ahead of anyone seeking to get their feet under the table without being childish about it.  Bachmann have taken the hint in a number of different ways - such as by upping their game to 'protect' the 47, or by developing a new market area with their narrow gauge range, and tackling their new model release criticism by changing how they do it.

 

This is where Hornby should be taking the hint.  The Class 50 has been an increasingly open goal for a couple of years, as was the Class 31 and Class 56 plus newly emerging coaching stock. They've increased their staff in the development and design area and they've got a wagonload of available finance.  What they need to do now is think properly about their marketing because that strikes me, as far as model railways are concerned, as their major weakness. 

[Johan DC]

16 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

What they need to do now is think properly about their marketing because that strikes me, as far as model railways are concerned, as their major weakness. 

Have you seen the #GograbaGresley-action this weekend? Didn't strike me as a failure. So there is still hope marketing-wise, However, with TT-gate, price-hikes and limited allocations to retailers, they're their own biggest competition. 

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, Johan DC said:

Have you seen the #GograbaGresley-action this weekend? Didn't strike me as a failure. So there is still hope marketing-wise, However, with TT-gate, price-hikes and limited allocations to retailers, they're their own biggest competition. 

But that surely is more about selling and existing buyers than about marketing?

[Johan DC]

Isn't selling and connecting with your current customers not marketing? Or is it something else you Mean?

[BroadLeaves]

Essentially, marketing is about making potential customers, both new and existing, aware of your products and instilling a desire to purchase, whereas sales is about converting that desire into a financial transaction.

In reality, those two activities are necessarily intertwined and picking them apart for a clean distinction is rarely possible.

[adb968008]

11 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

 What they need to do now is think properly about their marketing because that strikes me, as far as model railways are concerned, as their major weakness. 

The oddity being in the thrust of cuts and savings of the last few years, Marketing does seem, imo to have a pretty good budget thats been rising.

 

[Michael Hodgson]

On 11/07/2022 at 12:01, Graham_Muz said:

 

Not true I'm afraid, the Science Museum Group  hold a wide range of "Flying Scotsman" and "Mallard" registered trademarks across a number of trademark classes. 

 

Hmm.

 

I'm no lawyer and they may well have IP rights on things like original LNER posters or souvenir tea towels, and I don't know whether that would extend to a detailed model of an A3/A4.  However a mallard is just a kind of duck!  Some sister locos were named after various other birds.  I don't see that the Science Museum could stop (say) Virgin Trains from naming some of their rolling stock after birds, including that one if they so chose.  Historically quite a lot names were used multiple times on different companies' locos, sometimes concurrently.  Would there be a problem if some firm modelled such an item?  Would it be illegal to call a model A3 "Flying Scotsman" but OK to put that name on a class 158?

 

 

 

 

[5Dublo2]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

Hmm.

 

I'm no lawyer and they may well have IP rights on things like original LNER posters or souvenir tea towels, and I don't know whether that would extend to a detailed model of an A3/A4.  However a mallard is just a kind of duck!  Some sister locos were named after various other birds.  I don't see that the Science Museum could stop (say) Virgin Trains from naming some of their rolling stock after birds, including that one if they so chose.  Historically quite a lot names were used multiple times on different companies' locos, sometimes concurrently.  Would there be a problem if some firm modelled such an item?  Would it be illegal to call a model A3 "Flying Scotsman" but OK to put that name on a class 158?

 

 

 

 

 
I have no idea if any legal request took place, but Virgin have already named a Class 91 as "Flying Scotsman"

 

[Michael Hodgson]

1 hour ago, 5Dublo2 said:

 
I have no idea if any legal request took place, but Virgin have already named a Class 91 as "Flying Scotsman"

 

Thanks, that has escaped my notice despite being only a couple of hunderd yards from the ECML, but those trains are a fair blur when they cross the Cambridge Road and I don't use my local station so often now I'm retired.  I tend to lose track of all the TOC changes, but preferred ECML stock still in the purple GNER colours - but it's just not right on Deltics!

 

Perhaps Virgin should also have applied the name to the 10.00 from Euston 😁 when they had that franchise.

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, 5Dublo2 said:

 
I have no idea if any legal request took place, but Virgin have already named a Class 91 as "Flying Scotsman"

 

I don't know about loco names but as I understand it all the train names were registered and  passed to BR Residuary (except perhaps some which might have been purchased by train operators?) and were thus BR Residuary property and could not be used without their permission, and possibly a fee as well. I don't know where they are owned now.  So nothoing wrong - probably - with naming a loco 'Flying Scotsman' but at some stage, and possibly still (?) a distinct problem naming it 'The Flying Scotsman' would have been illegal because it is a registered name.

 

So you might say that it's a matter of semantics but in fact it's rather more than that.

[Steamport Southport]

51 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Thanks, that has escaped my notice despite being only a couple of hunderd yards from the ECML, but those trains are a fair blur when they cross the Cambridge Road and I don't use my local station so often now I'm retired.  I tend to lose track of all the TOC changes, but preferred ECML stock still in the purple GNER colours - but it's just not right on Deltics!

 

Perhaps Virgin should also have applied the name to the 10.00 from Euston 😁 when they had that franchise.

 

 

 

Why put an inferior name on a WCML train?

 

Besides we had Flying Scouseman! 

 

 

ISTR The Flying Scotsman train name itself is still in use. Just that they don't tend to use headboards anymore. But many of those traditional names are published in the timetables. Sometimes they even appear in the announcements. I'm pretty sure I saw The Royal Scot recently.

 

 

But I think people are taking the NRM (whatever they are calling themselves now) trademark a bit too seriously. It's mostly to stop unscrupulous companies jumping on the merchandise market and making things like FS clocks, watches, ornaments, etc. for financial gain rather than penalising genuine uses of the names.

 

I would expect if you had a genuine use for the name then they wouldn't be bothered. They're not going to send the heavy mob around if you've made a few etched nameplates for models.

 

 

Jason

[Budgie]

5 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

So nothing wrong - probably - with naming a loco 'Flying Scotsman' but at some stage, and possibly still (?) a distinct problem naming it 'The Flying Scotsman' would have been illegal because it is a registered name.

 

I suppose you could spell it differently: "The Flying Scotchman" springs to mind.

[Michael Hodgson]

40 minutes ago, Budgie said:

 

I suppose you could spell it differently: "The Flying Scotchman" springs to mind.

In the 19th century they tended to refer to those from north of the borders as Scotchmen (still a good way of getting a Scot riled) and I think the Quintinshill reporting referred to late-running trains as "the Scotch Expresses".  Any true Scot will you though that Scotch is something you drink.