KR Models business model etc

[chris p bacon]

6 hours ago, Darius43 said:

I also recall that DJM was alleged to have indulged in some international travel to attend air shows, presumably using the proceeds of his enterprise to do so.  As far as I am aware KR Models has not indulged in that kind of behaviour.

 

Cheers

 

Darius

I don't recall there ever being any accusations of funds being used for other purposes, rather a case of poor business practice in not seeking the best advice or help, even refusing it when offered.

 

3 hours ago, GWR-fan said:

 

There may have been a "research" trip to the National Railway Museum back when the GT3 was in development.

 

The (full) drawings obtained claimed to be in the NRM, were prior to launch of the GT3

[No Decorum]

2 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

Locomotion/NRM have not had any involvement with a Leader model.

I believe the reference to Loconotion (my emphasis) is correct. It’s easy to misread.

[Colin_McLeod]

https://www.modelrailforum.com/threads/bulleid-leader-class-0-6-0-0-6-0.6819/

 

 

[AY Mod]

8 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

I believe the reference to Loconotion (my emphasis) is correct. It’s easy to misread.

 

My apologies - serves me right for reading the phone.

 

Loconotion seemed to stop trading in June 2015; there whereabouts and status seemed debatable before that date too.

 

http://www.loconotion.co.uk/

[john new]

5 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

Locomotion/NRM have not had any involvement with a Leader model.

 

(Correction follows in a later post)

Nor would they need to as none of the Leader's built/part built were preserved so isn't in the NRM collection. Their archives may well have the drawings but supplying those to A N Other is not an expression of interest in getting one produced as a model.

 

Being flippant, if you want one buy a Class 66 and put a new home made body shell/overlay on it!

[Ed-farms]

I model N gauge so their business model does not appeal to the "shot arm and deep pocket" modellers as they referred to us, not so much their models but their attitude at times has to be questioned.

 

Apart from bad mouthing a potential section of your market (which they have chosen to abandon now)  the King CAD they bought off DJM Liquidators  was originally claimed as their own work but then retracted that to admit it was DJM work. Then they decided o only tool up the single chimney kin thus robbing themselves of anything post approx 1960, except for 10 years of one King on preserved Railways - they wonder why this project failed.

 

Even just something as simple as the Palbrick van they didn't even consider EOI in N gauge, surely a wagon is a low risk venture.

[Ed-farms]

23 hours ago, frobisher said:

In their defence, KR haven't yet not delivered a model.

 

However, for a manufacturer primarily using a crowdfunding model, they appear more like a Christmas Club style venture than anything else.

 

Crowdfunding needs a constant, consistent level of communication, as to where things are, what will allow things to proceed to a next step etc.  Currently seeking any proper evidence of that.

 

 N gauge King
N Gauge Shark
N Gauge GT3
N Gauge Fell

 

All dropped due to low demand (or beaten to market in the shark's case) so they have failed to deliver there

[E100]

So for my two cents, I think KR Models deserve a place in the market and with the exception of the class 40 they are producing locos that were at best kit build which puts them out of reach for a lot or even scratch built. Their model of building to a price doesn't please everyone but they are still in business where unfortunately DJM isn't and they picked a heck of a time to start up a company.

 

I would love for them to be more engaging in this forum but accept and understand why they chose not too based on the tone a not insignificant number have taken towards them (which I do also understand to an extent). That being said when I have seen them at exhibitions they have been extremely open and welcoming and allowed people to get an actual feel for the models which is a real credit to them. There is clear passion there, if not for the absolute nth detail, for the more fun side of hobby.

 

I expect they had anticipated to be out of this crowdfunding approach sooner but they have honoured prices where others haven't and are delivering models in a challenging environment. Longer term once a bit more lands I really think it would serve them well to make the upfront payment optional and support retailers, with perhaps a discount for those who do pay up front early on.

 

Fell gate may leave a bitter taste for many and I get that but for me it's an acceptable loco for the company's 2nd attempt and I do hope they are learning from that. Nevertheless, the main thing I am thankful for is them bringing to market all these oddballs that, whilst I may have had a passing knowledge of, encourage me to do a lot more fascinating research to see if I can justify a rule 1!

[Ouroborus]

On 08/01/2023 at 13:30, The Stationmaster said:

They do?????  I read this and immediately looked at their website - where every Class 89 price they show includes VAT, and says so.  What exactly are you looking at and where are you looking from; somewhere outside the UK perhaps where no doubt they would exclude VAT because UK Vat doesn't apply?

 

And yes - we seem to be in agreement that KR's website is a mess.  It still strikes me as weird, and unprofessional, that somebody selling British outline models into the UK from a foreign country - or indeed selling to any other country - does not make clear on their headline ('come on') price that it does not include VAT. (or any other local sales tax).  And of course none of this explains where that extra 25%, on top of UK VAT, has come from.

 

 

They do.  And at the risk of repeating myself, here is another screenshot.  As pre previous, Accurascale website is advanced and uses cookies to determine your ip site.  Wait long enough and you'll get the price in your currency and including VAT where the cookie determines it.

 

 

But your post did make me notice something on their website regards the BNPL (buy now.pay later) option (Clearpay) and given a number here have piled onto KR Models about varying pricing, what do you see here?  Mistakes happen, even to the best of us.

 

[Colin_McLeod]

1 hour ago, Ed-farms said:

All dropped due to low demand (or beaten to market in the shark's case) so they have failed to deliver there

 

That is not "failed to deliver".  It is deciding not to proceed due to low demand.  

[frobisher]

1 hour ago, Ed-farms said:

 N gauge King
N Gauge Shark
N Gauge GT3
N Gauge Fell

 

All dropped due to low demand (or beaten to market in the shark's case) so they have failed to deliver there

 

Not the same thing as I presume these were fully refunded if any funds had been taken.

 

 

[john new]

1 hour ago, Ouroborus said:

 

They do.  And at the risk of repeating myself, here is another screenshot.  As pre previous, Accurascale website is advanced and uses cookies to determine your ip site.  Wait long enough and you'll get the price in your currency and including VAT where the cookie determines it.

 

 

But your post did make me notice something on their website regards the BNPL (buy now.pay later) option (Clearpay) and given a number here have piled onto KR Models about varying pricing, what do you see here?  Mistakes happen, even to the best of us.

 

Just bunged it in the calculator. £158.32 plus 20% VAT is = £189.98. When you add the £158.32 into the cart does it (presumably) then recalculate with tax added but, yes the 4 Clearpay at £39.58 (£158.32) do seem to be ex-VAT. Confusing. Which price is correct.

Edited January 9, 2023 by john new

[JDW]

2 hours ago, E100 said:

So for my two cents, I think KR Models deserve a place in the market and with the exception of the class 40 they are producing locos that were at best kit build which puts them out of reach for a lot or even scratch built. Their model of building to a price doesn't please everyone but they are still in business where unfortunately DJM isn't and they picked a heck of a time to start up a company.

 

I would love for them to be more engaging in this forum but accept and understand why they chose not too based on the tone a not insignificant number have taken towards them (which I do also understand to an extent). That being said when I have seen them at exhibitions they have been extremely open and welcoming and allowed people to get an actual feel for the models which is a real credit to them. There is clear passion there, if not for the absolute nth detail, for the more fun side of hobby.

 

I expect they had anticipated to be out of this crowdfunding approach sooner but they have honoured prices where others haven't and are delivering models in a challenging environment. Longer term once a bit more lands I really think it would serve them well to make the upfront payment optional and support retailers, with perhaps a discount for those who do pay up front early on.

 

Fell gate may leave a bitter taste for many and I get that but for me it's an acceptable loco for the company's 2nd attempt and I do hope they are learning from that. Nevertheless, the main thing I am thankful for is them bringing to market all these oddballs that, whilst I may have had a passing knowledge of, encourage me to do a lot more fascinating research to see if I can justify a rule 1!

 

I'd agree with a lot of this, apart from one thing, which I think has been a sticking point for many on the topic: They are indeed producing some models which, let's be honest, are a lot better than most of us could build, and enable a lot more people to have a model they wouldn't otherwise have the skill to make themselves. And building to a price is fine too, so long as it works. But I think the stumbling block isn't so much that some things have been wrong per se but it's what was wrong. If it were, say, the shape of a class 37 or 50 windscreen, it's a very complex area and very difficult to get spot-on. Something like that might have been moaned about, but at the same time it's fairly understandable. But when it's something that would have been just as easy to get right, I think that's when it becomes a problem - sticking with the Fell, if both ends are identical, then it stands to reason that the boiler ports will be diagonally opposite, there's little interpretation required. Hopefully, it'll be part of a learning curve for all involved, which will up the quality next time. There's certainly a place for them in the market. 

[Pteremy]

I was never in the market for the Fell, but I dipped in and out of the thread out of curiosity. And I do remember a point, when there was lots of toing and froing about the picture evidence, when I thought, so are people saying it was asymmetric then? At that point I may have lost the will to live because it was only sometime later that I read that was not the case.

 

If the retooled Fell is unchanged that is a real missed opportunity - a symmetric retooling, with some additional 'bodies only' for anyone wanting to improve their first edition, would have created a lot of goodwill. (I am sure I read a magazine review that said that the mechanism is actually rather good.)

 

I think that all this agonising about the KR 'business model' is a bit of a red herring. Most small businesses fail because they do not have all the skills needed to develop and grow a viable business. Isn't that, in effect, the issue with KR, that there are clearly some areas where the skills available are currently falling short of what is needed? 

 

 

[jjb1970]

Building to a price does not mean a model needs to be inaccurate. If done well a 'design clever' philosophy could produce an accurate model but with less separately applied details, avoids trick features and perhaps simplified printed fine details etc. I think that such models could find a positive response if done well. Hornby did a pretty good job with the mk.1 coach and Crosti 9f. I thought the Railroad Hall was also well done as a Railroad model. If companies want to see how to do it well my advice would be to study Japanese N gauge. Companies like Kato and Tomix provide superb mechanisms, put a lot of effort into getting shape right (and a lot of Japanese trains have very complex contours) but with the exception of a handful of high grade releases they put details where they make a difference and economise in areas which don't make a difference when on a layout. They have avoided a detail arms race but models are superbly done.

[Ed-farms]

19 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

Not the same thing as I presume these were fully refunded if any funds had been taken.

 

 

 

No funds were ever taken a they never got passed a basic expression of interest. But still they failed to deliver aby of 4 attempts at N gauge.

 

Whether their business model accounted for serious attempts to break into the N gauge market I am not sure, bit of basic advertising of a few things and not pushing them big style leaves their ambitions in N gauge up for debate 

[frobisher]

1 hour ago, Ed-farms said:

No funds were ever taken a they never got passed a basic expression of interest. But still they failed to deliver aby of 4 attempts at N gauge.

 

That's not a failure to deliver, that was a failure to find customers.

[woodenhead]

2 hours ago, Ed-farms said:

 

No funds were ever taken a they never got passed a basic expression of interest. But still they failed to deliver aby of 4 attempts at N gauge.

 

Whether their business model accounted for serious attempts to break into the N gauge market I am not sure, bit of basic advertising of a few things and not pushing them big style leaves their ambitions in N gauge up for debate 

They asked for expressions of interest, they didn't get many, so no development.  It's not a failure to deliver, a failure to deliver would be taking funds and then not producing the promised model.

 

1 hour ago, frobisher said:

 

That's not a failure to deliver, that was a failure to find customers.

Agreed.

[JDW]

2 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

That's not a failure to deliver, that was a failure to find customers.

 

And a success in realising it

[JDW]

It does feel like there's a bit of a desire to look for "failures". Whether that's frustration that it wasn't produced or influenced by the pervading negativity is hard to know, but I think calling it a failure to deliver when expressions of interest showed that there wasn't any (or not enough, at any rate) is unnecessary exaggeration

[jjb1970]

Unfortunately the N gauge part of the hobby seems to be struggling in British outline, though it's promising that Rapido are giving it a go. Graham Farish and Dapol seem a lot less active than they were and Revolution has evolved from being an N specialist to working in both N and OO. 

In some ways though I think this may show the limits of the EOI and crowdfunding model. I remember the famous line from the movie 'Field of Dreams', 'build it and they will come'. When the Revolution 390 failed to achieve the necessary kickstart target they got close enough for Rapido to take a punt with Revolution and the model ended up being very successful despite failing as a kickstarter. 

And if people are putting up their own money and carrying commercial risk they have quite a big incentive to get it right. The crowdfund and pre-pay models dilute that incentive as projects are derisked. That clearly helps producers to take projects forward, but in removing risk i can't help feeling they can fall into a sort of 'that'll do' complacency and accept a lesser standard of product because they don't have to hit the shelves and win sales.

[woodenhead]

@jjb1970

 

Dapol have a reworked M7 and Ivatt 2-6-2 on the way, they are also working on the Bulleid pacifics

 

Farish have delivered a 319/769 in n, have reworked the chassis on several locos now to make them N18 and Sound ready.  A new 90 has just arrived and there is a class 69 in develpment.

 

RevolutioN continue to develop models in N - the class 128 is due this year, there is a class 120 dmu in development, the class 59, the class 175 and a class 313/314 not to mention wagons and a working 1938 underground train

 

If anyone is missing in action at present it is Sonic models, but I expect that relates to the production issues generally in China at the moment.

 

Whilst we don't get the volume and choice of OO, its fair to say we do have some models coming before they exist in RTR OO and that there is certainly development within the scale, just a lack of coaches.

[E100]

8 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

That's not a failure to deliver, that was a failure to find customers.

 

I'd agree and go further and say that's a success in making sure you have a viable market before spending the big money.

[frobisher]

Just now, E100 said:

I'd agree and go further and say that's a success in making sure you have a viable market before spending the big money.

 

And also realising until you have the big money, it doesn't matter how viable the market is.  As far as can be observed, KR not ploughing ahead with projects without knowing that they are viable and ultimately deliverable (which is where DJM collapsed into the mess it did).

[chris p bacon]

46 minutes ago, E100 said:

 

I'd agree and go further and say that's a success in making sure you have a viable market before spending the big money.

The failure was in purchasing the CADS from the receiver of DJM without actually checking that it would include the tooling which was owned by the factory.

The factory had offered the part completed DJM product to several parties.