Ready-to-lay OO Track and Pointwork - moving towards production

[billbedford]

I would suggest it is for the modeller end of the OO RTR market, the customer base that Bachmann, Heljan, Dapol have developed and are primarily engaged with. It's large enough to generate the sales to keep these companies in business. Probably most of these folk will use a ready to lay flex track system, of which Peco's Streamline ranges have dominant market share in the UK; some may well already use C&L or SMP flex track with ready to lay points for a better appearance. A goodly proportion of these folk likely will pay for a better track system. What they are not going to do is build track if they can avoid it. Better track by means of wallet in short.

 

There was a lot of nay-saying about the existence in the UK OO market of enough customers for better quality OO RTR models, with the pricing implications. Hopefully that one has now been thoroughly knocked on the head, after more than a decade of good RTR product introductions. No reason to believe that RTR OO 'track to match' wouldn't do as well; if either the dominant UK player, or an aggressive entrant competitor decided to take the risk.

 

Well lets see, If 20% of Peco's sales are in the UK and 20% of 00 modellers would be interested in this new track (which seems to me generous) then the potential sales would be of the order of 4% of Streamline sales. Sorry, but I can't see Peco seeing this to be worth their efforts.

[Clive Mortimore]

Gordon

 

I support anything to do with more realistic track, but I don't think anything will happen until modellers start buying 4mm scale 00 gauge track in volume. Lots of contributors on this thread say that they would buy it if it was available. Well it is available now.

 

For those near or visiting the St Albans show C&L will be there on the 11th & 12th of Jan. You can pre order both C&L (thin sleeper bases) or Exactoscale (Thick bases, the rail has to be thread on the bases (dead easy)) or just go and see them in the flesh. Those not near the show C&L advertise in the Railway Modeller, advert showing the difference between their 00 gauge track against another 00/H0 offering

 

Here is their show diary  http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=information/information&information_id=10

 

 For those near NW Greater London C&L will also be at Watford 15/16 Feb & Alley Pally at the end of March

 

I agree in many ways with Hayfield above, and have used SMP for many years both EM & OO, but I think this post is really about possibilities for more 'reaistic' British style OO pointwork. 

 

If that were available RTL then I think SMP and/or C&L plain track really would take off.

We have discussed this before, yes plain track is and has been available for some time. And to my eyes SMP and C&L look dated with their thin sleepers to match 1950s modeller's technology of soldered rail to copper clad sleepers. And where is the flatbottom rail as standardised by BR before the modernisation plan. Please don't point me to the Exatoscale concrete sleeper track system, if you had read Colin Craig’s review in DEMU's Update you would realise it is not representative of a BR or today's NR standards. All three types of plain track need the webs cut under the rails if you have a layout with any form of curves, so is that ready to lay?

None are a whole system of track, with turnouts and (as missed by many) some form of "set track" that has a resemblance to British practice in 00.

 

Well lets see, If 20% of Peco's sales are in the UK and 20% of 00 modellers would be interested in this new track (which seems to me generous) then the potential sales would be of the order of 4% of Streamline sales. Sorry, but I can't see Peco seeing this to be worth their efforts.

Please can you state where you got your figures from, Bill?

[Jeff Smith]

Well lets see, If 20% of Peco's sales are in the UK and 20% of 00 modellers would be interested in this new track (which seems to me generous) then the potential sales would be of the order of 4% of Streamline sales. Sorry, but I can't see Peco seeing this to be worth their efforts.

How does that stack up compared to Peco's other small specialist track ranges?

['CHARD]

Well lets see, If 20% of Peco's sales are in the UK and 20% of 00 modellers would be interested in this new track (which seems to me generous) then the potential sales would be of the order of 4% of Streamline sales. Sorry, but I can't see Peco seeing this to be worth their efforts.

 

Notwithstanding Clive and Jeff's subsequent relevant questions, I would suggest that this analysis oversimplifies the demand characteristics. 

 

Latent real demand, with both desire and ability to pay for the new improved product could convert some non-layout types into the fray.  I would be one had I not acquired many yards of C+L for a track renewal scheme that has now turned into a plan for a whole new layout. 

 

Dissatisfaction with track has made me not bother with completing layouts for the best part of 25 years, and that means the ONLY expenditure I've made in that time was on the C+L in 2011.  Everything else has been reused since I upgraded from insul- to electro-frog maybe 25 years ago.  All my NS flexible track was recovered from a garden layout in 1988, so Peco's not had a penny out of me for plain track in that time.

 

I think the conversion rate would be much higher than 20% if a step-change range was offered, PLUS the latent new layout builders.  As for the UK market representing 20%, I fail to see the relevance of this variable whilst the relative importance to the balance sheet of Peco's various narrow gauge systems remains unknown.  Common sense alone tells me that any of these won't approach the critical mass of even substandard 'beyond compromise' OO's UK sales, yet the Pritchard Patent Product Co perservere perversely with them.  Not perversely, it seems.

Edited January 2, 2014 by 'CHARD

[billbedford]

 

Please can you state where you got your figures from, Bill?

 

Got any better ones?

Edited January 2, 2014 by billbedford

[billbedford]

Notwithstanding Clive and Jeff's subsequent relevant questions, I would suggest that this analysis oversimplifies the demand characteristics. 

 

 

Oh I don't think so. I suspect that the majority of people who really care about the quality of their trackwork have already jumped ship to other gauges/scales or have built their own. I also suspect that unless these putative new turnouts are spectacularly good few of these people will go back to Hornby/Peco type track.

[Colin_McLeod]

It has been said in this thread that Peco has a monopoly.  They do not as there are many other RTL track companies around - Tillig is only one. Where Peco have the advantage is that their existing competition do not advertise very much in the UK & Ireland, so most modellers think "Track = Peco", much in the same way as the parent buying a train set for little Johnny think "Trainset = Hornby"

 

If Tillig and others were to up the ante in its UK/Ireland advertising, Peco might then notice the competition.  I'm sure Peco could react as they have undoubtly done often in Europe and North America.  They just have not had the same need to react here.

[gordon s]

I have now purchased a copy of Peco's accounts which make interesting reading.  At present I am unsure of the copyright coverage, so cannot give you the precise figures, but I will say Bill's estimate of 20% in the UK is incorrect...

 

If anyone else would care to purchase them, they are available from here at £5.99.  A bargain for the info they contain...

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/?x=ymk8x8n

Edited January 2, 2014 by gordon s

[Metr0Land]

If they are published at Companies House for all to see then I would say they are in the public domain?

[gordon s]

Not necessarily.  If I have paid for the report and then disclosed the figures it contained, then I am in essence depriving Companies House the revenue from others who wish to buy the report.  Much the same as buying a film on DVD and then making it publicly available for free.  There are laws on copyright and royalty protection to prevent that info being subsequently made publicly available.

 

Truth is, I am unsure of my position and have intention of risking any potential lawsuit.

 

In any case, it was only £5.99, so if anyone is serious about this topic, it would be worth the investment. 

Edited January 2, 2014 by gordon s

[Jeff Smith]

I have now purchased a copy of Peco's accounts which make interesting reading.  At present I am unsure of the copyright coverage, so cannot give you the precise figures, but I will say Bill's estimate of 20% in the UK is incorrect...

 

If anyone else would care to purchase them, they are available from here at £5.99.  A bargain for the info they contain...

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/?x=ymk8x8n

Can you at least indicate if it's too high or too low?

[gordon s]

Sorry guys.  I can only suggest you buy a copy.  It may give you a better understanding of what is involved from a business perspective in manufacturing track and associated components.

[cromptonnut]

Companies House WebCheck - http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo - and search on company 00408782, "order information on this company" for full accounts up to 30/4/13 is only a pound?

 

I don't know if this is the same information you paid £5.99 for.

[gordon s]

I paid for a copy of their 2013 Full Accounts dated 30/4/13.

 

Happy with the info I have been given for the price I paid as it provides year end audited figures.  If it is available direct for £1.00, then it is even more value for money…:-)

 

I would still be mindful though of discussing any figures contained in an official report on a public forum and then making assumptions or stating your opinion on the figures contained, as none of us know the detail behind those figures.

['CHARD]

I'm prepared to believe that the USA dominates Pritchard thinking, due to its buying power.

 

And based on Walthers' write-up, the US market explains where the lion's share of the NG stuff goes too:

http://www.walthers.com/exec/manuinfo/552/Peco.html

 

Well, this is all good, because the position of Peco as dominant UK player at present needs to be weighed with its global strategy. 

As Lifeboatman said earlier, a direct enqiury would either eliminate or rule the Pritchards in as contenders.  That's a task for tomorrow, I feel.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Oh I don't think so. I suspect that the majority of people who really care about the quality of their trackwork have already jumped ship to other gauges/scales or have built their own......

 

I personally think you are quite out of touch there. The numbers of people making that leap to hand built  track is a relatively small proportion of those who would want better British looking 00 RTL. 

Those going to other gauges in the scale even fewer.

 

But it isn't just those who care or would be bothered now, or yesterday.

Given the choice, which obviously currently doesn't exist, who is going to choose the Peco H0 offering if a British style 00 option is available (from Peco or anyone else) and the accepted wisdom of the day and magazine/internet opinion suggests this is a better choice?

That purchasing decision will also be based on build quality, availability and price. If the balance of those three aspects are well judged, the attractiveness of the product itself, over a visually inferior alternative, will be fairly compelling.

 

That puts a different perspective on the perceived potential market for this new track.

It's availability would have the potential to widen and create a new market, drawing in not only the people who currently would like to see it becoming available, but people who would otherwise keep on using the H0 compromise. I am fairly sure it will also attract some people who otherwise may have gone on to the hand built option, or even EM or P4.

 

I suspect that wouldn't be good news for the promoters and purveyors of hand built products, in 00, EM or even P4. So I can understand why some people would go out of their way to rubbish the whole notion.

Whenever the topic is aired, they usually appear out of the woodwork and try to disrupt and divert discussion and debate.

 

As far as I'm aware, this is the first time on any forum when I've seen the topic raised (as it has been on numerous occasions), that the "disrupters" have been kept in check so to speak, to the benefit of constructive and intelligent discussion, both for and against.

To that end, I hope that in some small way we have moved the debate forward.

 

Anyone who values the health and well-being of the hobby should be behind this cause.

If you prefer to build your own, more realistic prototypical looking track, shouldn't you also support the call?

Why would anyone oppose it?

 

Questions of viability and economics are obviously paramount, but only to those who might consider manufacturing such a product.

Do I worry if Bachmann, Hornby, Heljan, Dapol or whoever, can afford to produce a new XYZ loco? Of course not, that's their business.

['CHARD]

In support of my earlier notion (aired in post #672) I did a quick and dirty bit of market testing using readily available internet techniques.

 

This found that from a sample of 60+ packages of flexi-track available from US sellers:

1. Atlas was far away the largest recorded presence in the population, at 56%;
2. Peco trailed with a generally cheaper HO offering and recorded 27% of returns;
3. Micro Engineering's flexi-track 9%; and
4. the remaining 8% and statistically insignificant quota comprised products from Piko, Marklin, Kato and Shinohara.

I'm not saying these pieces of the jigsaw provide the answer, but they are certainly helping build a much more mature picture in my mind.

Edited January 2, 2014 by 'CHARD

[Ron Ron Ron]

Truth is, I am unsure of my position and have intention of risking any potential lawsuit.

 

Gordon, I think you are wise to be cautious, but I'm fairly confident you are in the clear to report individual facts and figures.

What you can't do is reproduce, replicate or disseminate the report in part, full or similar form.

Hopefully someone suitably qualified can give an opinion?

 

Newspapers, business publications and internet channels release "snippets" and facts from company reports on a daily basis.

Even if a media friendly version has been publicly released, there are always more analytical reports published by journalists who have delved through the official version.

 

I could say "I've seen David Beckhams latest bank statement and he's currently got X Squillion quid in his account".

Provided there is no case for defamation of character (libel or slander) and I haven't invaded his privacy in obtaining the information, it is simply stating a fact.

I'm fairly sure that what I can't do is publish, supply or replicate his bank statement.

 

As the first Duke of Wellington said, "Publish and be Damned". So come on Gordon, we'll come and watch your trial if it goes wrong.

 

 

.

[Ravenser]

Well lets see, If 20% of Peco's sales are in the UK and 20% of 00 modellers would be interested in this new track (which seems to me generous) then the potential sales would be of the order of 4% of Streamline sales. Sorry, but I can't see Peco seeing this to be worth their efforts.

 

 

I'm going to bite here, and say that with respect these assumptions are wildly wrong

 

1. Although I've never spoken to Peco myself I've spoke with one or two people who have, and I understand that a couple of years ago Peco did admit in private that a majority of their track sales are in Britain.

 

It has been very much in Peco's interest as a business for many years to have it thought that the UK market was not very important to them, precisely because it has enabled them to deflect the demands of their British customers by deploying exactly the argument you have outlined. So they will always downplay the significance of British sales 

 

There are some slight complications in the argument , in that some sales of Streamline outside the UK are to British outline OO modellers in Australia, Canada and elsewhere, who would form part of the market for a genuine OO ready made point , and some of Peco's UK sales are to British domiciled modellers modelling US or Continental prototype in HO , who wouldn't. Its reasonable to say, as a quick approximation, that the two groups roughly balance each other and therefore Peco's UK sales roughly equate to the UK market for reasonable OO track

 

(The market sector which wouldn't even consider buying such a product - the train set sector - is largely covered by Hornby track and Peco Setrack. Nobody believes Setrack is a big part of Peco's 16.5mm track business : it's Streamline 100 not Setrack that is the big Peco presence on retailers shelves (including the late ModelZone)) 

 

So the potential market for ready-made OO points, realistically, is 55-60% of the market for Peco Streamline - not 20% . And there is evidence to support that statement. 

 

2.  20% is unrealistically low for the proportion of the market who might actually buy a better OO point . 

 

It's outside your own modelling interests so you wouldn't have reason to be aware, but (as others have mentioned) many of us have strong memories the debates in the 90s about better RTR locos - especially RTR diesels . Exactly the same argument was used again and again to "prove" that high-spec  British outline RTR locos were impossible and we should get real and stop wanting them. A central assumption was that only a limited sector of the market had any interest in buying a better product , and that (given a choice between 90s Lima and Hornby and something much better) less than a third of the hobby would pay any kind of premium price - and that the very limited niche market, even for the commonest classes,  would drive the price so high that it would wipe out most even of that demand.... 

 

Then Heljan introduced their 47 , at what was then a 50% premium to the price of new Lima (£90 plays £60)  and a 100% premium to the going rate for Lima a couple of years earlier. And far from nose-diving in flames , the model was a great commercial success and is still in production. And this was repeated again and again with new RTR diesels and new generation high-spec steam (and subsequently coaches too)  We found that at least 75% of the market was willing to pay a substantial premium for a better product and "old cheap and nasty" products struggled to find buyers. In fact a great many folk rushed out to  "upgrade" -replace their existing models with the new ones  

 

So realistically , the potential market for  decent ready made OO pointwork is 75% of 55-60%:  that is , roughly 40-45% of the worldwide market for Peco Streamline code 100 + code 75 - certainly enough to support a product

 

I reckon your estimate of the market is out by a factor of 10.

 

(And note that the breakthough product in RTR locos didn't come from the two established dominant players - but from a new entrant)

[highpeak]

I would have thought you could quote some information under a Fair Use doctrine as long as you don't quote the whole set of accounts. Some information is at http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p27_work_of_others and http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p09_fair_use

[Paul Cram]

He didn't say "proportionate to the gauge".

 

 

.

Then what is it proportionate to?

['CHARD]

Then what is it proportionate to?

 

It wasn't strictly proportionate to anything.  It was just a compromise to shrink the overly long exposed sleeper ends.

[Colin_McLeod]

Why shold Gordon be the only one to pay for the Peco information?

 

However, Gordon, I can't find Peco. Do you have their eXact name and/or company number. That way I should be able to find them.

 

Thanks

[Ron Ron Ron]

Then what is it proportionate to?

 

 

It wasn't strictly proportionate to anything.  It was just a compromise to shrink the overly long exposed sleeper ends.

 

Just as is done with existing track base components for hand built 00 track.

A bit of visual trickery, for the want of a better phrase.

 

 

.

[Arthur]

Why shold Gordon be the only one to pay for the Peco information?

 

However, Gordon, I can't find Peco. Do you have their eXact name and/or company number. That way I should be able to find them.

 

Thanks

Colin, search for Pritchard Patent Products, that should find it. They're in Seaton, Devon.