Bachmann OO Spring 2022 Announcements inc. OO9

[andyman7]

4 hours ago, scottrains29 said:

With disposable income now severely squeezed it's now even more important that Bachmann etc can absorb as much of the cost increase as possible. 

 

Luxury goods (model trains etc) will be one of the first things people will cut back on.

 

Not necessarily - when expenditure is squeezed, people will often focus what little remaining spare money they have on the things they are most passionate about - football, trains, whatever. So the market will come under pressure but there will be opportunity there. 

3 hours ago, micklner said:

The only reason they are selling out is due to the deliberate or otherwise reasons for producing only limited editions of virtually everything now being made. With the usual carrot of get it quick or lose out,  hanging over everything now being sold.

People with very deep pockets are very rapidly becoming the only customers of the so called "big" makers of Model railway products can now sell or hope to sell too.

The even sadder/bizarre  thing is that at the same time quality ,reliablity, lead times and some actual designs are all falling away and not improving. You only have to read the threads on here relating to all these current issues.

I think you are mistaking cause and effect here - I was around when the 'mass' model railway market collapsed in the early 1980s. Many box shifters as well as companies like Dapol built their original empires on buying up and clearing huge stock backlogs, often in the late 80s selling stuff made a decade previously. This kind of environment is deadly for manufacturers who have borne down on deep discounting, stock dumping etc as a basic survival strategy. And as regards quality, reliability etc, whilst I would agree there have been some recent shortcomings, the quality and reliability of modern items is lights years ahead of what was considered acceptable for RTR in the 1980s. 

2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Bachmann Uk is owned by Kader, it is not a UK company, it came out of Palitoy and Airfix both of which originated with manufacture in China.  Heljan is not a UK company either.  Hornby did manufacture here once, I don't know what the mix with Dapol was, whether it ever solely manufactured in the UK given it's original models were ex Mainline.

Kader manufactured for both Palitoy and Airfix but didn't 'come out' of them; Palitoy was a subsidiary of a US conglomerate, and Airfix was a British firm. The use of contract manufacturing in Hong Kong (which was a British colony) was at one time a very different beast to the modern Chinese manufacturing industry - it was focused on cheap low value goods; however Airfix and Palitoy/Mainline were a key part of the transition to high detail/high value production being achievable in the far east. 
Hornby first started having items made in China in 1992 and ceased UK production in 1998; indeed the 1990s saw the cessation of pretty much all diecast and model railway production in the UK as the cost differentials and benefits of relocating manufacture to China were so enormous. 
Dapol have retained a UK manufacturing base as have Peco but it is of note that neither of them have complex items such as mechanisms or superdetail items made here - it is simply not economic to undertake that kind of highly skilled manual process in this country.

Edited February 3, 2022 by andyman7
Spelling

[brushman47544]

3 hours ago, D860 VICTORIOUS said:

Hi Andrew,some good points there.This is no criticism whatsoever of KMRC,and I think they said the weathering on 47537 was based on research,but despite searching online,seeing the loco on various DVD's and my own pictures,I haven't found any pictures of 47537 in the condition portrayed on the model. 47526 however does look the part.

A gfye 47 will hopefully be among future releases.

Interesting, as I have. Here’s one from Flickr taken in 1992 that’s pretty much there, and it lasted longer and got worse in that livery. Kernow based the weathering on a photo too.

 

[ThaneofFife]

4 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

Actually I purposely designed my shed layout without shed windows, and with polychromatic, dimmable lighting specifically to allow me to simulate low light conditions because rolling stock in now available with interior working lights.  With LED street lighting so cheap from China, making a model railway layout that can simulate dawn, dusk or even a moonlit night (very low dark blue light is a good moonlight simulant) has never been easier.  I'm even adding interior lighting to my older, but still passable stock by using battery operated magnetic reed switch LED lighting strips from China, which works out at between £10-15 depending on length of LED strip needed and exchange rates.

 

also look out in the co-op for cheap coin cell battery operated warm white LEDS strung together on 2m long wires.  these are fabulous and cheap.   these will be going along  theyre labelled up as "bottle lights" ideal for my planned  1980s euston platforms build.

[Helmdon]

5 hours ago, woodenhead said:

I doubt very much they are making excessive profits right now, they are not energy companies you know.

 

A business without a profit is not a business for very long.

Interesting fact - on your energy price the government takes more in tax than the energy company makes in profit, even *after* today’s hikes…

[97406]

51 minutes ago, brushman47544 said:

Interesting, as I have. Here’s one from Flickr taken in 1992 that’s pretty much there, and it lasted longer and got worse in that livery. Kernow based the weathering on a photo too.

 

 

 

 

It wasn’t a particularly good advert for the county of Gwynedd, though at the time!

 

Greyfriars Bobby had wierd pointy black windscreen surrounds for much of its life, but it carried the more conventional style as well, as reflected in the model. It does look good!

[TomScrut]

2 hours ago, andyman7 said:

Not necessarily - when expenditure is squeezed, people will often focus what little remaining spare money they have on the things they are most passionate about - football, trains, whatever. So the market will come under pressure but there will be opportunity there. 

 

I aren't sure that makes a lot of sense. Are you saying that people will spend more money on trains because they have less money?

[Legend]

29 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

I aren't sure that makes a lot of sense. Are you saying that people will spend more money on trains because they have less money?

With an argument like that I wonder if Andy’s in politics ?

[andyman7]

3 hours ago, andyman7 said:

Not necessarily - when expenditure is squeezed, people will often focus what little remaining spare money they have on the things they are most passionate about - football, trains, whatever. So the market will come under pressure but there will be opportunity there. 

 

 

37 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

I aren't sure that makes a lot of sense. Are you saying that people will spend more money on trains because they have less money?

No, I was responding to a comment that model railways would be amongst the first things that people would cut; and I was making the point that even if people do make cuts, things they are passionate about get spared where possible. 

[stonojnr]

2 hours ago, 97406 said:

 

It wasn’t a particularly good advert for the county of Gwynedd, though at the time!

 

Greyfriars Bobby had wierd pointy black windscreen surrounds for much of its life, but it carried the more conventional style as well, as reflected in the model. It does look good!

 

still looked a lot better than this one, maybe a future weathering livery option

 

[Global]

56 minutes ago, stonojnr said:

 

still looked a lot better than this one, maybe a future weathering livery option

 

Not much point in doing the pretty glazing option on that one! 

[Chameleon]

Out of all the models in the announcement, I was most impressed with 47 526. That one of the best factory weathering jobs I’ve seen since Bachman did the scabby MK1 test train coaches. 
 

[ruggedpeak]

3 hours ago, TomScrut said:

 

I aren't sure that makes a lot of sense. Are you saying that people will spend more money on trains because they have less money?

In economic terms that is perfectly possible. Less money overall means more focus on those things that produce "utility". If buying trains produces more utility (e.g. pleasure) than other expenditure then the net train expenditure could go up whilst other things go down.

[scottrains29]

3 hours ago, andyman7 said:

 

No, I was responding to a comment that model railways would be amongst the first things that people would cut; and I was making the point that even if people do make cuts, things they are passionate about get spared where possible. 

Hmm, I'm passionate about trains but would always pay the bills (food, energy, mortgage, etc) first. Model trains are a non-essential item, therefore will get reduced first. less disposable income typically means less spenditure on model trains.

 

Yes, some people may reduce spending on other non-essential items first and model trains could be the last non-essential item they cut, but I doubt the average modeller will actually be increasing their model train expenditure purely as a consequence of reducing disposable income.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, scottrains29 said:

Hmm, I'm passionate about trains but would always pay the bills (food, energy, mortgage, etc) first. Model trains are a non-essential item, therefore will get reduced first. less disposable income typically means less spenditure on model trains.

 

Yes, some people may reduce spending on other non-essential items first and model trains could be the last non-essential item they cut, but I doubt the average modeller will actually be increasing their model train expenditure purely as a consequence of reducing disposable income.

There is also the point that a lot of us of us already have enough models to populate our layouts several times over without purchasing any more! 

 

I'm already at the point where running out of storage space is limiting further acquisitions rather than any shortage of funds. As a result, I have become very resistant to buying new stuff unless it's something that really fills a gap.

 

I am currently undertaking a "thin-out" of items I'm not likely to run again. I've unearthed some that have been in the back of the cupboard for so long, I'd forgotten I even had them....

 

John

[Helmdon]

7 hours ago, scottrains29 said:

Hmm, I'm passionate about trains but would always pay the bills (food, energy, mortgage, etc) first. Model trains are a non-essential item, therefore will get reduced first. less disposable income typically means less spenditure on model trains.

 

Yes, some people may reduce spending on other non-essential items first and model trains could be the last non-essential item they cut, but I doubt the average modeller will actually be increasing their model train expenditure purely as a consequence of reducing disposable income.

 

Some might actually.

 

There absolutely are people out there who have bills to pay and then model railways are the only other thing they spend money on, so those people will have no choice but to cut their railway expenditure if they come under pressure. However, most people are not in that position. 

 

Hypothetically, someone will have to pay the bills, and then have a list (of varying length depending on the individual) of lots of things - so for example:

-model railways

-going to the pub

-masons/rotary/round table

-going to the football/rugby/cricket

-stamp collecting

-etc

 

Now, as I understand it all the poster was saying was that when people are squeezed *most* people are not going to suddenly have to drop *all* of that and just pay the bills. So it becomes more about how each person prioritises their list and which ones they drop. 

 

Hypothetically then, some people are going to drop everything but model railways, or everything but going to the rugby (or whatever) but actually because of all the savings they're making elsewhere they might end up - through indulgence/treat/little luxuries - spending slightly more on what they still spend on than they would have done otherwise, even though their total overall spending has gone down.

 

Make sense? 

 

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by Helmdon

[TomScrut]

17 minutes ago, Helmdon said:

Make sense? 

 

TBH I don't think it does but I don't know how other people's finances or priorities work.

 

Ultimately using the same logic there will be people who will quit spending money on trains and go to their number one priority which still means that there will be less money available to the model railway market IMO.

[Dunsignalling]

52 minutes ago, Helmdon said:

 

Some might actually.

 

There absolutely are people out there who have bills to pay and then model railways are the only other thing they spend money on, so those people will have no choice but to cut their railway expenditure if they come under pressure. However, most people are not in that position. 

 

Hypothetically, someone will have to pay the bills, and then have a list (of varying length depending on the individual) of lots of things - so for example:

-model railways

-going to the pub

-masons/rotary/round table

-going to the football/rugby/cricket

-stamp collecting

-etc

 

Now, as I understand it all the poster was saying was that when people are squeezed *most* people are not going to suddenly have to drop *all* of that and just pay the bills. So it becomes more about how each person prioritises their list and which ones they drop. 

 

Hypothetically then, some people are going to drop everything but model railways, or everything but going to the rugby (or whatever) but actually because of all the savings they're making elsewhere they might end up - through indulgence/treat/little luxuries - spending slightly more on what they still spend on than they would have done otherwise, even though their total overall spending has gone down.

 

Make sense? 

 

 

But equally, some may cut spending on model railways drastically (or altogether), in favour of conserving funds for something else on the list. Alternatively they may trim expenditure a bit on most or all of them.

 

Those who have been in the hobby for a long time will usually have built up enough stock to carry on enjoying running their layouts without any need to add more. Among my "circle", galloping price rises have already made most think a lot more about what they really want/need/will use vs. the "nice-but-not-really-relevant".

 

That quickly becomes habit and, after a while, you mentally rule stuff out almost automatically. In cash terms, I and several others are probably spending less now than five years ago, before any of this kicks in.

 

Whatever individual decisions are made, all discretionary spending is going to take a knock. The effects will average out across the board, but model railways won't be immune. 

 

John

Edited February 4, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[Helmdon]

15 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

TBH I don't think it does but I don't know how other people's finances or priorities work.

 

Ultimately using the same logic there will be people who will quit spending money on trains and go to their number one priority which still means that there will be less money available to the model railway market IMO.

 

I think we're at cross purposes here - no one has been saying that the money available to the market won't go down for starters...

 

The point is that it is unlikely to be as cataclysmic as some suggestions that the market is about to get sideswiped by everyone turning the taps off at once. Some will turn off the taps, some will be unaffected, some will turn the taps down a bit and some will turn them up. I think that's literally all anyone has been saying, but some people have interpreted it as people have been saying either 'there's nothing to worry about' or 'spending's going to go up'

 

 

[rob D2]

There’s not one solution to that .

If I ever get to the point where I can’t have any hobbies due to cost, I’ll sell the damn house and get a camper van or rent .

Life's about having fun , and if there is none what’s the point ?

[Helmdon]

Just now, Dunsignalling said:

But equally, some may cut spending on model railways drastically (or altogether), in favour of conserving funds for something else on the list. Alternatively they may trim expenditure a bit on all of them.

 

Those who have been in the hobby for a long time will usually have built up enough stock to carry on enjoying running their layouts without any need to add more. Among my "circle", galloping price rises have already made most think a lot more about what they really want/need/will use vs. the "nice-but-not-really-relevant". In cash terms, I and several others are probably spending less now than five years ago.

 

Whatever individual decisions are made, all discretionary spending is likely to take a knock, and model railways won't be immune. 

 

John

we've just cross posted - I don't think *anyone* has been disagreeing with anything you've written. There is, however, a strawman to the effect that they have been that keeps getting talked about...

[TomScrut]

Just now, Helmdon said:

I think we're at cross purposes here - no one has been saying that the money available to the market won't go down for starters...

 

That was the original point being argued with IIRC.

 

The way I saw it in summary (willing to be corrected otherwise):

Original point:

People (in general) have less money, so less money (in general) spent on model trains.

 

Counter argument:

But people with less money will spend less/nothing on other stuff so spend more on trains because trains are important to them.

 

3 minutes ago, Helmdon said:

The point is that it is unlikely to be as cataclysmic as some suggestions that the market is about to get sideswiped by everyone turning the taps off at once.

 

I don't think anyone was suggesting taps being turned off completely. It is just more that the increasing prices combined with average Joe having less disposable income at present is a double whammy on potential sales.

[ruggedpeak]

Looking at the pricing, I paid £68 for a blue/grey DBSO in February 2020, that was I think the permissible discounted price off an RRP of £77. Exactly two years later RRP is £150. That is a big move, even allowing for all the recent pressures.

 

The challenge will be at these sort of increases/price points that things will either sell out (looks like NR DBSO is) or stall as prices are (at the moment at least) psychologically too high for ad hoc purchases (Tinsley 47). A real tough challenge for the manufacturers to land the right items for the market.

[No Decorum]

5 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

Looking at the pricing, I paid £68 for a blue/grey DBSO in February 2020, that was I think the permissible discounted price off an RRP of £77. Exactly two years later RRP is £150. That is a big move, even allowing for all the recent pressures.

 

The challenge will be at these sort of increases/price points that things will either sell out (looks like NR DBSO is) or stall as prices are (at the moment at least) psychologically too high for ad hoc purchases (Tinsley 47). A real tough challenge for the manufacturers to land the right items for the market.

Good point. In cheaper times, I’d have gone for Kernow’s red 90, in the hopes that the third member of the trio would be produced at some stage. Now I just sigh and use the money for something which fills a more significant gap.

[adb968008]

Ive looked several times to buying Kernows weathered 47’s, and concluded that albeit very nice, at £189 it just dipped the scales to not being worth it, and passed on buy to other purchases first… at £219 after discount 47527 doesnt change that.

Ive many class 47’s, my shed is nearly full so its time to be fussy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[adb968008]

A lot of doom about the imminent end of the hobby, but stock levels seem to be in short supply, though admittedly many of Jan 2022’s new releases haven't disappeared into dust at the same speed as last years did.

 

As always the best place to watch the market is at the bottom… if the s/h on ebay demand/prices rises with inflation its ok, if inflation rises but s/h prices stagnate or demand falls, or suddenly huge volumes appears into the marketplace…theres a problem, that will affect recycling of cash further up the food chain.