Hornby's 2013 Announcements

[James]

I presume you have sent an appropriate letter to Simon Kohler then Thane ?

 

What was his e-mail address? I've just tried lookinbg but on our rather slow work connection it'll take me hours to go through 98 pages!

[Guest Tom F]

Simon.Kohler@Hornby.com

[James]

Thank you

[Legend]

I think they've got about 18 months to 2 years before Hornby needs Scotrail mk3s but I'm not sure they have the joined up thinking to know they could sell them. I don't think they look outside the Hornby empire and are probably not aware that there is a market. So it will need some enterprising model shop to commission some runs.........not typically Hornby territory but you never know. I think Harburn in Edinburgh had a Lima special commission of 3 mk3 Scotrail coaches some time ago, and they seem to have a good relationship with Hornby, staging open days etc, so that might be best bet. Sensible prices please, in line with Bachmann.

['CHARD]

ScotRail is one of the easiest liveries to reproduce on a MkIII - I had a full DBSO 'shove' rake back in the mid eighties, done the old school way with masking tape and patience.  

 

Surely an area where a little modelling could be nurtured....

[Mike at C&M]

The ScotRail Class 47/7 is already available, and has been for some time. I wouldn't bet against the ScotRail 47/7s being sold out before the DBSOs are released.

 

I am also led to believe that the minimum order quantity for a limited run with Hornby is 1,000 pieces. So someone is likely to be left with a huge number of 'FO's (or 'CO's') if they do commission Hornby to produce the coaches.

 

These are the reasons why we went for the 'N' Gauge commission on these coaches, rather than 'OO'

[brushman47544]

The ScotRail Class 47/7 is already available, and has been for some time. I wouldn't bet against the ScotRail 47/7s being sold out before the DBSOs are released.

 

I am also led to believe that the minimum order quantity for a limited run with Hornby is 1,000 pieces. So someone is likely to be left with a huge number of 'FO's (or 'CO's') if they do commission Hornby to produce the coaches.

 

These are the reasons why we went for the 'N' Gauge commission on these coaches, rather than 'OO'

 

Ah but couldn't someone commission a 1000 piece Coach Pack with one FO and four TSOs...

[frobisher]

brushman47544, on 08 Apr 2013 - 14:10, said:

Ah but couldn't someone commission a 1000 piece Coach Pack with one FO and four TSOs...

Some one with deep pockets... That's conservatively £125K of stock at retail. I'd seriously doubt there were 1000 customers for such a set out there, especially if you're matching this up against Bachmann's smaller batch sizes. if you're spending that much on a commission, you'd almost be cheaper to commission Dapol et al to make a MK3a to modern standards for this (but again, deep pockets).

[Waverley West]

The ScotRail Class 47/7 is already available, and has been for some time. I wouldn't bet against the ScotRail 47/7s being sold out before the DBSOs are released.

 

I am also led to believe that the minimum order quantity for a limited run with Hornby is 1,000 pieces. So someone is likely to be left with a huge number of 'FO's (or 'CO's') if they do commission Hornby to produce the coaches.

 

These are the reasons why we went for the 'N' Gauge commission on these coaches, rather than 'OO'

Interesting that you considered a 'OO' version, Mike. It's a shame Hornby are so unresponsive to such market opportunities with such a high minimum number for limited editions. There must surely be an opportunity there for them if they can get their act together and the numbers right.

 

Still, Hornby would probably had used that 'orrible orangy yellow (sorry, InterCity pale grey) of theirs, which would need overspraying anyway. That was a large part of the work involved in converting a Hornby InterCity Mk 3 into the ScotRail version.

 

As Chard says, it's not hard to produce a passable rake of ScotRail Mk 3s, especially if like me you're more concerned about the general look than the differences between the loco-hauled and HST Mk 3s.

 

Cheers,

Dave

[bennyboy]

if Hornby have any sense they would think about a run of Mk3 coaches in scotrail livery now Bachmann have the shove duff and a dbso around the corner. or retool them before Bachmann does anyway.........

 

I bet that even if they did make them, their interpretation of the Scotrail livery would be slightly different to Bachmann's.

[Removed a/c]

I bet that even if they did make them, their interpretation of the Scotrail livery would be slightly different to Bachmann's.

or have 2 Ts 

[tractor_37260]

Some one with deep pockets... That's conservatively £125K of stock at retail. I'd seriously doubt there were 1000 customers for such a set out there, especially if you're matching this up against Bachmann's smaller batch sizes. if you're spending that much on a commission, you'd almost be cheaper to commission Dapol et al to make a MK3a to modern standards for this (but again, deep pockets).

 

Err  - 1000 coaches run in packs   = 200 of 5 coach packs or 250 of 4 coach packs, and they I'm sure would sell no problem, and with no left over FO/CO's etc.  As well as Hornby, perhaps Dapol would look at scaling up their N Gauge version for a limited run. As WW commented, assuming Hornby did produce them, the lower skirt colour used may end up dubious, then there's also the CDL detail issue ( wrongly present on their MK3 Blue/Grey coaches).

Plenty of old Lima MK3 FO/SO's around, easy enough to paint up a rake to suit. Check out the prices some old Lima ScotRail MK3's are fetching on eBay, there's one sitting at £48 with 2 days+ left !

Regards

Ken

[newbryford]

Err  - 1000 coaches run in packs   = 200 of 5 coach packs or 250 of 4 coach packs, and they I'm sure would sell no problem, and with no left over FO/CO's etc.  

 

I think the understanding is that the minimum run is 1000 pieces of one item = 1000 FO's, therefore 1000 coach packs with however many TSO's as required.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[S.A.C Martin]

Question for the LNER fans among us.

 

Having had the L1, B1, O1 and B17 over the last four years, with excellent running qualities, detail and a high specification for RRPs not dissimilar to Bachmann's top end steam outline models, if the Gresley P2 shares many of its design traits with the 42xx/72xx (square axle boxes without brass bushes, moulded details such as smokebox door darts, very simple and easily ill fitted handrails and similar), will you still buy the Gresley P2?

 

I ask this to gauge the interpretation of the brief Hornby are setting themselves and whether or not it's worth asking the question and putting it forward to Hornby that a certain specification would be better?

[The Stationmaster]

Question for the LNER fans among us.

 

Having had the L1, B1, O1 and B17 over the last four years, with excellent running qualities, detail and a high specification for RRPs not dissimilar to Bachmann's top end steam outline models, if the Gresley P2 shares many of its design traits with the 42xx/72xx (square axle boxes without brass bushes, moulded details such as smokebox door darts, very simple and easily ill fitted handrails and similar), will you still buy the Gresley P2?

 

I ask this to gauge the interpretation of the brief Hornby are setting themselves and whether or not it's worth asking the question and putting it forward to Hornby that a certain specification would be better?

Simon I can understand exactly why you're asking but I suspect you are far too late.  Most of the tooling design is probably well advanced and probably far, far, too late to alter many of the constructional/assembly concepts - don't forget that the model's price has been announced and that almost certainly means (I hope) that its production costs are either known or set to a particular budget level.

 

I think the proof of the P2 pudding will come with sales but they are in any case going to be subject a huge number of influences and variables and i am still trying to rationalise the commercial decision behind choosing it in the first place because it is, literally, a complete blank with many members of the non-railway minded populace (and probably with quite a number of those who are railway minded as well).  Thus its place in the market is going to be very much - I think - as 'another big Hornby engine' which has the cachet of a nice colour scheme and looks a bit different, and that is what is most likely to sell it in the toyshop, and for that 'design clever' doesn't matter.

 

The other think - I suspect - is that the GW tanks are not so much 'design clever' as 'let's cut some costs' (what I've referred to as penny pinching).  I suspect that emerging 'design clever' is likely - I hope - to be a bit cleverer than the option of just not bothering with certain things.  And note too that although a number of us have been critical of the 42XX it in various respects we , and no doubt others, are still buying/waiting for them.  And if Hornby is making enough money out of them they won't care too much what we say - even if they don't get a 'Model of The Year' bit of kudos to shout at their shareholders. 

 

But the P2 did do pretty well in the 2010 MREMag poll (110 votes, 218 wanted) which was double what the GW 42XX got in the same year.  The difference which does show tho' is sales point - the GW tanks were sold out from Hornby long before they went on the trade website, ie. retailers were optimistic about potential sales well in advance.  In contrast to that I have heard of one retailer who has ordered less than  a handful of P2s, i.e. he's not so optimistic about potential sales.

 

The other thing is that we really don't know where Hornby will go next.  The Kohler concept of moving to far more highly detailed higher price locos almost certainly saved the company a decade ago.  The question now is how the market will react to the Martin (I presume) idea of lower detail and cheaper production methods - and it is far too early to judge that but so far Hornby has/will be sold out of everything produced in that way that has come to market and that must be an important factor as far as they're concerned.

[tractor_37260]

I think the understanding is that the minimum run is 1000 pieces of one item = 1000 FO's, therefore 1000 coach packs with however many TSO's as required.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

  According to your thinking/understanding, that would mean a retailer committing to a run of 4000 or 5000 coaches. That's never going to happen.  A more likely possibility, as there is very little external difference (livery wise) between a ScotRail Exec CO/FO/SO MK3 coach, apart from the running no and the half or full length yellow stripe and 1's on the end door(s), a 1000 units could be produced with ScotRail branding only, with no running no's or yellow stripes, this would also meet Hornby's unit numbers necessary for a retailer edition. Transfers could also be included: a selection of running no's and a first class yellow stripe - which could then be used for a CO or a FO.  They could then be sold as packs of different quantities and/or individually.

Let's wait and see, shall we ?

 

Cheers

Ken

[newbryford]

  According to your thinking/understanding, that would mean a retailer committing to a run of 4000 or 5000 coaches. That's never going to happen.  A more likely possibility, as there is very little external difference (livery wise) between a ScotRail Exec CO/FO/SO MK3 coach, apart from the running no and the half or full length yellow stripe and 1's on the end door(s), a 1000 units could be produced with ScotRail branding only, with no running no's or yellow stripes, this would also meet Hornby's unit numbers necessary for a retailer edition. Transfers could also be included: a selection of running no's and a first class yellow stripe - which could then be used for a CO or a FO.  They could then be sold as packs of different quantities and/or individually.

Let's wait and see, shall we ?

 

Cheers

Ken

 

Including seperate transfers will instantly discourage a proportion of prospective buyers. The only way may be for an enterprising retailer to commission somebody to apply the transfers!

 

Cheers,

Mick

[frobisher]

tractor_37260, on 08 Apr 2013 - 22:03, said:

Err - 1000 coaches run in packs = 200 of 5 coach packs or 250 of 4 coach packs, and they I'm sure would sell no problem, and with no left over FO/CO's etc.

Given this came from a retailer who actually has looked into it, I'd suspect that Hornby don't work that way (though Bachmann et al might).

tractor_37260, on 08 Apr 2013 - 22:03, said:

As well as Hornby, perhaps Dapol would look at scaling up their N Gauge version for a limited run.

Not exactly cost effective. DapolDave elsewhere said that a new body tooling for the N gauge MK3 would cost at least £10K. An 00 one would be more costly. That was body only (talked about in the context of a CDL less version). Then you've got the rest of the carriage to tool up.

tractor_37260, on 08 Apr 2013 - 22:03, said:

As WW commented, assuming Hornby did produce them, the lower skirt colour used may end up dubious, then there's also the CDL detail issue ( wrongly present on their MK3 Blue/Grey coaches).

Hornby MIGHT have another option though. Within the group they also possess the toolings from Lima and Jouef both of which are CDL less, though the Lima SO/FO "just" requires new glazing (they've done the chassis and roof already for the TGS etc that are already in the range).

[Dunsignalling]

The other thing is that we really don't know where Hornby will go next.  The Kohler concept of moving to far more highly detailed higher price locos almost certainly saved the company a decade ago.  The question now is how the market will react to the Martin (I presume) idea of lower detail and cheaper production methods - and it is far too early to judge that but so far Hornby has/will be sold out of everything produced in that way that has come to market and that must be an important factor as far as they're concerned.

Anything can sell out; all it proves is that the manufacturer has estimated the market for a particular item at or below the actual demand that exists. Too far below that reduces the return they could have had and puts money in the pockets of speculators instead.

 

The critical factor that will make or break the 'Cock o' the North' is how many Hornby decide to make and that is made more complicated by releasing two versions from the outset. 

 

The parallel range structure carries the danger of Hornby cannibalising their own sales. 

 

2000 fully detailed ones might well sell out if that were all they intended to make (so long as they made the number public in advance) but the existence of the Railroad option introduces two scenarios that could easily scupper it.

 

1. If significant numbers of customers who would normally go for "Fully detailed" choose the Railroad version instead.

 

2. If they make too many of the full detail version, the market might smell discounts on the wind and hang fire in the hope of acquiring the surplus for the price of Railroad ones.

 

 

John  

[Legend]

The other thing is that we really don't know where Hornby will go next.  The Kohler concept of moving to far more highly detailed higher price locos almost certainly saved the company a decade ago.  The question now is how the market will react to the Martin (I presume) idea of lower detail and cheaper production methods - and it is far too early to judge that but so far Hornby has/will be sold out of everything produced in that way that has come to market and that must be an important factor as far as they're concerned.

 

Per Stationmaster

 

Really not sure about that. I think Hornby realised they had hit the ceiling on prices as sales started to drop off and realised they had to moderate them. Thats why we've got the so called "design clever" initiative.  Meanwhile Bachmann appraoach to the market is to continue to produce models of smaller locos at more reasonable prices , and not items like Cock of the North, which I really doubt will be a big seller until the full scale replica appears and you get the "Tornado" effect

 

[Fenman]

I think Hornby realised they had hit the ceiling on prices as sales started to drop off and realised they had to moderate them. Thats why we've got the so called "design clever" initiative.  Meanwhile Bachmann appraoach to the market is to continue to produce models of smaller locos at more reasonable prices

 

The market appears to be changing, certainly as a result of changing supply issues including soaring labour costs for non-"Design Clever" products ("Design Clever" I take to mean those with minimised extra hand-fitted parts), possibly as a result of changing consumer behaviour (though I'm less sure about this; the feeding frenzy when the Blue Pullman was released struck me as very pre-austerity. "Right glamour product + high cost" is still a winning combo).

 

But it's also difficult to make sense of what we can see on the market. There's clearly a dramatic change in the cost of hand-fitting fiddly bits: a pre-Design Clever "bog standard" Hornby Class 31 now has an eye-watering RRP of £150/155 (R3144/A) and even a discounted price of £110, compared with a "Design Clever" 2BIL RRP of £129 discounted to £99.

 

But on the other hand, there's a Bachmann 4CEP (31-426A) discounted at Hattons from an RRP of £170 to just £69 (the 31-425A with no yellow ends shows the same discounting - other box-shifters available). I'm assuming Bachmann has always been "Design Clever" and has not pursued the hand-fitting extras as vigorously as Hornby, stuck with 3-pole rather than 5-pole, etc. Assuming the cost of a couple of trailers in a 4CEP is, to the consumer, £20 a pop, that makes the 4CEP (£170 minus 2 x £20 = £130) pretty much the same RRP as the 2BIL (£129).

 

Er... I'm not sure what those straws in the wind tell us other than they may show that Hornby and Bachmann are now operating on a more equal cost base (and, hence, potentially, a more equal RRP structure*), and to me there's something surprising about the sheer scale of that 4CEP discounting. I'm hoping this does not indicate customer indifference to EMUs, but if it does that may show a reason why Hornby appear to have been (massively over-) cautious with 2BIL production numbers.

 

Paul

 

 

* Not including, of course, the strange world of Railroad pricing, in which I can see little consistency.

 

Edit: to make myself a tad less unclear

[Robin Brasher]

Hattons are heavily discounting a lot of DMUs as well as the blue and grey Brighton Belle and the Bachmann CEPs. The Hornby 4 VEP is also not selling well. Perhaps there is a bigger market for EMUs in eras 3,4 and 5: the big four, cycling lion and late lion crest eras. The Kernow Thumper produced by Bachmann seems to be selling as well as the Hornby 2 BIL.

 

In duplicating models it looks like Hornby are targeting expensive or outdated Bachmann models like the 9F, Tornado and the A4. I bought the Hornby Railroad Tornado because of its low price but on reflection I should have bought the upgraded model. The Bachmann Tornado is now being discounted to the level of the upgraded Hornby model so it looks like that is the amount customers are prepared to pay.

 

I think Hornby's Rood Ashton Hall is going to provide some serious competition to Bachmann's Halls. It could result in some of Bachmann's Halls being sold at a discount.

[The Stationmaster]

The market appears to be changing, certainly as a result of changing supply issues including soaring labour costs for non-"Design Clever" products ("Design Clever" I take to mean those with minimised extra hand-fitted parts), possibly as a result of changing consumer behaviour (though I'm less sure about this; the feeding frenzy when the Blue Pullman was released struck me as very pre-austerity. "Right glamour product + high cost" is still a winning combo).

 

But it's also difficult to make sense of what we can see on the market. There's clearly a dramatic change in the cost of hand-fitting fiddly bits: a pre-Design Clever "bog standard" Hornby Class 31 now has an eye-watering RRP of £150/155 (R3144/A) and even a discounted price of £110, compared with a "Design Clever" 2BIL RRP of £129 discounted to £99.

 

But on the other hand, there's a Bachmann 4CEP (31-426A) discounted at Hattons from an RRP of £170 to just £69 (the 31-425A with no yellow ends shows the same discounting - other box-shifters available). I'm assuming Bachmann has always been "Design Clever" and has not pursued the hand-fitting extras as vigorously as Hornby, stuck with 3-pole rather than 5-pole, etc. Assuming the cost of a couple of trailers in a 4CEP is, to the consumer, £20 a pop, that makes the 4CEP (£170 minus 2 x £20 = £130) pretty much the same RRP as the 2BIL (£129).

 

Er... I'm not sure what those straws in the wind tell us other than they may show that Hornby and Bachmann are now operating on a more equal cost base (and, hence, potentially, a more equal RRP structure*), and to me there's something surprising about the sheer scale of that 4CEP discounting. I'm hoping this does not indicate customer indifference to EMUs, but if it does that may show a reason why Hornby appear to have been (massively over-) cautious with 2BIL production numbers.

 

Paul

 

 

* Not including, of course, the strange world of Railroad pricing, in which I can see little consistency.

 

Edit: to make myself a tad less unclear

In view of the fact that according to some sources the labour cost is a relatively small element of the total cost I suspect we are as much looking at the manufacturers exploiting what they are offering as much as the various elements which are all increasing costs.  And in fact one of the biggest of the latter is the fall in the international value of the £ which must surely make a difference to margins?  

 

But that is all costs and as you have pointed out that doesn't necessarily seem to correlate with what happens in the marketplace and that presumably also influences pricing or in the whole matter of volume.  It seems relatively clear - thus far - that provided the right things are delivered at the right perceived level of fidelity and 'quality' there is a degree of price flexibility and this applies to part of the r-t-r market, commissions generally appear to sell.  But high volume doesn't necessarily go with that sort of price flexibility on the part of purchasers so in some cases  - a course seemingly adopted by Hornby - prices are being reduced by economies at the production end in order to maintain or improve volumes; whether it will work or not in my view is not entirely price related.  

 

If the product develops a reputation for failure to deliver what the customer has come to expect from a brand that will impact the image of the brand and the inclination of some customer's to purchase or trust the brand.  That s what Hornby seem to be potentially risking added to which there seems to be little attractively tangible difference between the Railroad and 'standard' versions if 'Duke of Gloucester is any indication.  The effect might thus be to increase sales resistance for the more expensive version.  Only time will tell - Hornby presumably think their strategy will work and judging by the 2 BIL I think they are probably right when it comes to coaching stock,  I suspect they might be on rather different ground when it comes to putting into a high volume marketplace an unknown loco from a dim & distant past.  but again time will tell.

[frobisher]

Robin Brasher, on 09 Apr 2013 - 17:49, said:

In duplicating models it looks like Hornby are targeting expensive or outdated Bachmann models like the 9F, Tornado and the A4.

Not really. The 9F is the likely end point of an aborted development plan for a "super detail" model that took a left turn when Bachmann announced theirs. Tornado was squarely aimed at producing a Flying Scotsman for the next generation, and Hornby have had an A4 in their range for the last 33+ years and it's obvious train set fodder - the Bachmann A4 is not the impetus for this.

 

What goes into the Railroad range depends to a large extent upon the outdated tooling available within the Hornby inventory plus "Design Clever" opportunities from new tooling. It's notable that it's only been the last three years that Hornby have been making new tools specifically for Railroad items.

[RJL]

wise words

 

Not really. The 9F is the likely end point of an aborted development plan for a "super detail" model that took a left turn when Bachmann announced theirs. Tornado was squarely aimed at producing a Flying Scotsman for the next generation, and Hornby have had an A4 in their range for the last 33+ years and it's obvious train set fodder - the Bachmann A4 is not the impetus for this.

What goes into the Railroad range depends to a large extent upon the outdated tooling available within the Hornby inventory plus "Design Clever" opportunities from new tooling. It's notable that it's only been the last three years that Hornby have been making new tools specifically for Railroad items.

 

Wise words frobisher.