Out of touch?

[PaulRhB]

What's attached to this is that if you can't buy as soon as new releases appear, you just miss out.

That I can sympathise with but the long lead times from announcing a model do give you chance to pre order and save as long as you don't get carried away.

 

I agree with SAC that it does seem a little cynical to have such a high price on a model aimed at the very youngest enthusiast. I would also suggest that if you think the prices are too high that you do a little internet research into producing models and compare similar complex models in the RC world and see how they compare. If you are going to say a Hornby model is overpriced then give examples to back up your argument against other comparable models from other manufacturers. It's easy to quote end of line clearances but not comparable.

[James]

That I can sympathise with but the long lead times from announcing a model do give you chance to pre order and save as long as you don't get carried away.

A lot depends on personal circumstances too and sometimes, as hard as it is, you have accept that, at that point, you can't afford it. Sadly that's life sometimes.

[PaulRhB]

Another example of costs that seem too high.

I worked for RJH for a year in the early 90's and they produced etched and cast kits for diesels and coaches. A regular complaint was that the coaches were priced too high compared to the loco so we explained it to those who asked. The body and chassis cost the same for both as they were near identical in size and number of castings. The only difference came in the mechanism as a coach doesn't have a motor or gears which were about £50-60 pounds, for two of each, if bought separately which was the difference in kit cost too.

Go to Warley and with a little patience you can have an interesting chat with Simon Kohler or search the net to see if you can find one of his interviews about producing models. He also does talks to model clubs and fields questions where he is fairly frank about why they do certain things.

[Ron Ron Ron]

I agree with SAC that it does seem a little cynical to have such a high price on a model aimed at the very youngest enthusiast. .......

I wouldn't for one minute think that the Thomas themed item, "Gordon the Big Engine", or any other of the "Thomas" range, was aimed at any "enthusiast", whether young or old.

These items are sold as toys and bought mostly by parents or grand-parents, quite probably as presents at Christmas and birthdays. As such, most will be retailed through toy shops, toy departments, mail order catalogues and outlets such as Argos.

The pricing may therefore reflect the company's respective marketing and pricing policy for the toy market and the deals they strike with the larger retail chains.

Most of the people buying these items will not be aware of the specialist model railway shops or "box-shifters". They may not be aware that there is such a thing as the highly detailed models sold to model railway enthusiasts.

 

We're really talking about two different markets for different products, that both happen to be toy trains.

[simon hudson]

Thanks for the replies, I take on board price comparisons from years ago. Locos were always Christmas presents,it was the price of the coaching stock the new Pullmans look fantastic,it was their price that shocked so much.Although in hindsight when the midland region restaurant car came out years ago it was expensive.I agree about Hornby railroad I aquired a "Flying Scotsman a few months ago and was expecting some thing akin to the old Triang Hornby A3.I was happily surprised at the standard of it, ideal for bashing about and the right price

[S.A.C Martin]

Just to say Ron, my apologies, but it is very difficult to respond to a post which has such a vast amount of formatting in its code.

 

However, I press on:

 

I wouldn't for one minute think that the Thomas themed item, "Gordon the Big Engine", or any other of the "Thomas" range, was aimed at any "enthusiast", whether young or old.

 

That really was not the point I was making, though I do not deny (in fact, I agree) with your assessment, BUT there is no way on earth that £110 for a tender drive locomotive, of significantly older vintage, painted blue, should be nearly double that of a significantly newer and better performing locomotive of the "same class".

 

One of the things which absolutely pains me to say, is that Hornby have absolutely, 100% stuffed up their pricing for the Thomas range this year. I'm not talking about appealing to enthusiasts: I am talking about the child who'll buy one of these models, and if the bug bites, will want more.

 

These prices across their Thomas range are significantly prohibitive for the vast majority of households across the length and breadth of Britain, whether you are an enthusiast or not, you will not justify paying full RRP of £110 for Gordon the Big Engine when Flying Scotsman - an equally famous and similarly sized locomotive - undercuts it by £50 exactly.

 

A quick glance at where Gordon is being sold - mostly online, at box shifters, and is nowhere to be seen in the Argos catalogue or similar, in fact, and has not been seen for many years.

 

I've no doubt it'll appear in a few toy shops somewhere, but the Thomas range is no longer a mainstream item for Hornby, that much is clear.

 

Just out of interest - we have some online retailers on RMweb - how many of you stock Thomas items, and would you say that they sell close to their RRPs?

 

These items are sold as toys and bought mostly by parents or grand-parents, quite probably as presents at Christmas and birthdays. As such, most will be retailed through toy shops, toy departments, mail order catalogues and outlets such as Argos.

 

There's no doubt they will now be a luxury item - but before, when Hornby's pricing was less hit and miss, and more reasonable across the range as a whole, the Thomas range was the entry point for the child, not into the hobby, which is a different entity altogether, but in owning - and wanting to buy into more - model railways in general. That Hornby Thomas is at the £50 mark whereas the similarly proportioned (and sharing the same chassis) Railroad Pannier tank (or Jinty for that matter) is £30 is ludicrous.

 

We're really talking about two different markets for different products, that both happen to be toy trains.

 

It may be two separate markets, but that does not make their pricing structure right nor reasonable when put into perspective.

 

We are saying that the Triang tooling for Flying Scotsman, used to make Gordon - the Triang tooling for the 3MT used to make James - the old Hornby E2, used to make Thomas - are priced competitively. I can assure you, they are not. The Thomas range is significantly overpriced for what they are, and at what cost - not to us, the enthusiasts, but to the people who would buy them, the kids and their parents?

 

What parent on this forum - taking off the enthusiast/modeller's hat for the moment, and firmly putting on the father/mother's hat, can seriously justify £110 on Gordon the Big Engine?

 

I bet we could all justify paying £140 for a decent A3 Pacific - the eagerness for Brown Jack proves this. But a similarly sized engine, whose whole makeup is significantly older, less detailed, both in separate components and paintwork, nearing the same price?

 

I am all for price increases where they are warranted. This is not the same world I grew up in, in the 90s, when the most expensive model - Gordon - was £50 in today's prices. But Hornby have been increasing the price of the Thomas range way beyond inflation, beyond their material value, and by far and above the cost of the license fee for their range for several years now, and frankly I worry for them.

 

Because if they kill the Thomas range off, by pricing it out of the range of the grandparents and parents you mention for birthday presents and similar, they'll hurt the rest of their range too, in years to come.

 

That it is currently cheaper to import models from the American range, which are more interactive and in some cases, closer to the characters for overall look, is the crux of the matter. If Hornby aren't careful, they are going to price themselves completely out of that market, lose the license and find Bachmann willing to fill the void with their own range.

 

Note that the Bachmann large scale range seems to be having some degree of success, both sides of the pond, in comparison, with pricing which is arguably competitive for its scale.

[Horsetan]

.....I bet we could all justify paying £140 for a decent A3 Pacific ....

 

I did. That's more or less what I paid for a Martin Finney A3 plus tender. And the wheelsets.

 

All I have to do is build it......

[PaulRhB]

I'd like to say that many kids Thomas toys (or books) turn kids into enthusiasts

 

I think the Bachmann G scale range is an excellent example of value and growing in popularity for bashing into Gauge 3 models.

 

Railroad Tornado already causing a stir on here but what will be interesting is how it sells in comparison to the Full Spec version to see if modellers and collectors think the price is out of touch for a few extra details, finer paint job and better motor.

If there's loads sitting on the shelves in a few months it'll be interesting to see which.

[coachmann]

I'd like to say that many kids Thomas toys (or books) turn kids into enthusiasts

 

Sure glad I wasn't influenced by what I read as a young boy. I'd be like Desperate Dan and eating cow pie.

[Phil Traxson]

One of the things which absolutely pains me to say, is that Hornby have absolutely, 100% stuffed up their pricing for the Thomas range this year. I'm not talking about appealing to enthusiasts: I am talking about the child who'll buy one of these models, and if the bug bites, will want more.

 

These prices across their Thomas range are significantly prohibitive for the vast majority of households across the length and breadth of Britain, whether you are an enthusiast or not, you will not justify paying full RRP of £110 for Gordon the Big Engine when Flying Scotsman - an equally famous and similarly sized locomotive - undercuts it by £50 exactly.

 

 

 

 

What you must remember here is that Hornby have to pay silly money to the people who own the Thomas "rights"who contribute nothing and are just out to make money. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Hornby's actual profit margin on the Thomas range is less than on there"proper" model trains.

 

Phil T.

[S.A.C Martin]

What you must remember here is that Hornby have to pay silly money to the people who own the Thomas "rights"who contribute nothing and are just out to make money.

 

No they don't Phil - I can state that categorically as fact.

 

The license fee for Thomas & Friends went up by 1-2% this year - but it is a relatively small expense in the overall costs of the Thomas range.

 

I might add, if the above were true, then the costs of all the merchandise in the Thomas & Friends brand line - take along toys, mega block models, cake mixtures etc, would have gone up by similar amounts. They haven't risen by the levels the Hornby models have done by any means.

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Hornby's actual profit margin on the Thomas range is less than on there"proper" model trains.

 

Phil T.

 

I'd be amazed, given the toolings have more than paid for themselves over the last 30 years since the original Thomas model was introduced in the late 80s...!

 

EDIT: There I go again, ranting on the costs of the Thomas range again...I'll shut up about it, I promise.

[Invicta]

f

What you must remember here is that Hornby have to pay silly money to the people who own the Thomas "rights"who contribute nothing and are just out to make money. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Hornby's actual profit margin on the Thomas range is less than on there"proper" model trains.

 

Phil T.

 

Not being totally clued up about things in the world of Thomas, how do Bachmann's US-market versions compare on price with Hornby's Thomas range for the UK? IIRC, the Bachmann product is cheaper, though I think built to a lower spec (aren't the freelance locos Bachmann market in their starter sets derived from the US Thomas product?)

 

Bearing in mind the size of the respective markets, could Hornby simply be stuck with a less favourable licencing fee deal with HIT than Bachmann get?

Other Thomas-related products probably sell in much bigger volumes than electric train sets do, so maybe the manufacturers of cake mixes, Mega Blocks, pull-along toys etc have the sales numbers to be able to get a better deal out of HIT, and keep their unit cost lower?

[hollywoodfoundry]

I'd be amazed, given the toolings have more than paid for themselves over the last 30 years since the original Thomas model was introduced in the late 80s...!

 

There seems to be a view that tooling, once produced, lives forever.

 

It is certainly not the case. Every run you do with injection mould tooling runs the risk that parts of the die will fail or be seriously damaged. Ejector pins, of which there are often dozens in a complex die, will spontaneously break and imbed themselves in the tooling, frequently causing serious damage. That damage has to be repaired, often at great cost, and ocassionally the die is beyond repair.

 

I would be seriously surprised if the original tools have lasted 30 years, based on my experience. I would suggest that if you could get 15 years out of a die set you would be doing well.

[298]

You cant really compare the prices directly as the Bachmann range cannot be sold in the UK. Tooling costs would be debatable as all of the Bachmann locos are new and have to look like the TV series (which to me sounds expensive), whereas Hornby have an extensive back catalogue to raid and stick faces on.

[James]

I would be seriously surprised if the original tools have lasted 30 years, based on my experience. I would suggest that if you could get 15 years out of a die set you would be doing well.

But model railway tools often don't get used to the same intensity as mass market dies would so in some cases it probably is the original tooling. And in a lot of cases I'd be disappointed to see manufacturers perpetuating mistakes when they would have chance to rectify them if they were continually replacing tooling.

[Pennine MC]

... And in a lot of cases I'd be disappointed to see manufacturers perpetuating mistakes when they would have chance to rectify them if they were continually replacing tooling.

 

It's admittedly a fine point, but Geoff suggested that 'repaired' rather than 'replaced' was the norm:

 

That damage has to be repaired, often at great cost, and ocassionally the die is beyond repair.

[James]

Ian, I was commenting (or trying to, it was rather early at that point!) about the life of the dies.

 

Certain long in the tooth models have shown their age - things like the Hornby 37 and 47 bodies were sharper earlier on for example. Polystyrene is quite a soft plastic so won't wear tools as quickly as harder plastic do and the small volumes required by model railways should mean a replacement tool is unusual due to wear and tear. Only the odd thing like Hornby's B12 seems to have had new tools made on a like for like basis.

[coachmann]

The 'plastic' used by Hornby today is nothing like the plastic used in olden times. So whats that got to do with the price of bacon? Well, nothing really.

[James]

So whats that got to do with the price of bacon? Well, nothing really.

Material choice has a huge bearing on the subject of tool wear - which is directly related to the points about old models still being sold in bright liveries as SAC mentioned.

 

Characteristics of the material may have changed but, as far as I'm aware, the thirty or more bodies in the workshop are polystyrene (certainly react to the same solvents as polystyrene!). So a soft plastic will have been chosen as it'll taken detail easily and not wear moulds as quickly. As technology has improved smaller components have moved to tougher plastics as the technology and materials used with the production process have changed and improved. And all of this has a bearing on the cost of the models in same shape or form.

[coachmann]

Cellulose used to craze the surface of the old plastic, hence I never accepted RTR for repainting.

 

Todays plastic is more like plastikard and it does accept cellulose. However, it later rejects it! The anwer is to use 'plastic primer' and leave it for several hours, but never put colour (cellulose) on so wet that it melts through the primer. If this happens, a reaction will take place after a year of so and the paint will simply un-key and fall off. I play safe and spray any plastic wagons I build with enamel (thinned with cellulose thinners).

[James]

Todays plastic is more like plastikard

I think it may be down to refinements in the production of the material itself. It seems 'finer' now - some very old polystyrene mouldings can have quite a distinct grain structure is you snap them and look at the result.

 

I knew the materials modules from my degree would come in useful one day!

[Pennine MC]

Ian, I was commenting (or trying to, it was rather early at that point!) about the life of the dies.

 

Yep, I appreciate that, I was drawing the distinction for other readers really - you know how some folk are at the mere mention of the word 'retool', they bandy it about without understanding what it actually means

 

Certain long in the tooth models have shown their age - things like the Hornby 37 and 47 bodies were sharper earlier on for example.

 

I wouldnt like to speculate about comparative quantities, but the 37 is significantly older (c1967 I think, compared to 1975 or so for the 47). That said, I understood it had a claim to be Hornby's biggest selling diesel, and it has had a few mods along the way, so who knows if it's the original tools.

[James]

you know how some folk are at the mere mention of the word 'retool', they bandy it about without understanding what it actually means

The term 'retool' should be banned!

 

Often people actually mean 'new tooling' and I think that as a result people don't always apprciate the investment that such things represent.

[hollywoodfoundry]

There are a whole range of reasons why injection mould tooling may have to be replaced, and it generally has nothing to do with the type of plastic being used. In earlier years, there were inserts in the die block, often made of softer metals such as brass. This was done because the brass was easier to work and the cost of the tooling was thus reduced. With the enormous pressures used in injecting plastic, you would eventually get plastic coming out between the insert sections causing flash. So it was a race to see how soon the die lasted, even though the runs were relatively small.

 

As I previously mentioned, items like ejector pins breaking and imbedding themsleves in the metal die surface also occurred, often requiring extensive repairs. And with softer die surfaces, even something as simple as a part not ejecting properly and 'hanging' in the tool could cause a damaging imprint in the die surface.

 

With many model rail dies, the ability to mould a complete body in one operation can mean the tool has a number of moving parts that must open and close reliably every time the injection machine cycles. The possibilities for malfunction here are quite high, and can result in total desctruction of a die if it goes badly wrong.

 

Nowadays many people have their die hardened to extend the life of the tool. One of my dies has been hardened, and although the die is only used about once a year to produce a run, it has had to be repaired several times due to problems.

[The Evil Bus Driver]

Sure glad I wasn't influenced by what I read as a young boy. I'd be like Desperate Dan and eating cow pie.

 

 

Complete with horns...