Andy Hayter

Static grass suppliers https://www.maurienne-trains.com/noch-m-54.html?page=4 www.fbsystems.com - sorry cannot give you a direct link since their SSL certificate has expired and my security system won't let me even see what is on their pages. https://www.jura-modelisme.fr/fr/234-flocage-et-fibre - would be nice to support them as being local - ish to you and because they suffered a disastrous fire recently

I don't have instant ink, having found a way to avoid it. My printing is too erratic - weeks and months of no printing and then tens (and just recently hundreds) of pages. I have however on two occasions had problems when loading legitimate HP cartridges with the system telling me that they are empty or not suitable. Each time I have had to get their on line help desk to tell their machine that the cartridges are legitimate. The last time the boss of the help desk individual rang me after the system had been reset and admitted that their detection system is too sensitive.

Regarding the UK, I think you need to understand how small many homes are. Our rented house in Germany had a living room that was approximately the same footprint of a typical 2 or 3 bed new build in the UK. The potentially small rooms that result leads to this open plan desire. So your approximation to an aircraft hanger light well apply in large sections of Europe but would often not apply to many UK houses.

I have posted this elsewhere before but it shows the impact of not getting permission to use a trademark. Back in the 1990s Jouef produced a range of Wagon Lits coaches. Accor Hotel Group then held the ownership of the Venice Simplon Orient Express and held the CIWL trade marks. They took Jouef to court for trademark infringement - not sure if it was for the use of the CIWL name across the top of the coaches but if so it was also certainly for the use of the WL crest on the side of the coaches. Jouef lost. Not long after they went into liquidation to be bought up by Lima/Rivarossi - which may be connected or maybe not. The irony is that the VSOE was selling Jouef CIWL models in the then in-vogue crystal boxes from their on-board shop as keepsakes for their passengers.

I have an apology to make. The accident rate I gave of every 20 minutes was for deer. Wild boar incidents occur every 2 minutes!

As I reported last weekend, this weekend saw the second muddling exhibition. Once again a good hours drive - but on mountain roads perhaps not as far as some might imagine. Somewhat disappointed since there were rather few layouts on display, although those there were very good and ran well. trade support was however very good and only strong will stopped me spending several Deltics worth. So that is probably that for another couple of years.

I have posted as agreeing because I think you are right about the confusion but there is still a hole. If you have an asset with a book value of 400k that never gets used then the write down of that asset, whether done incrementally or as a one-off, creates a negative impact on the final company results. You are writing down against no tangible benefit accruing from that asset.

Not fatalities, but I was surprised by the damage wild boar do to motor vehicles. ADAC in Germany (like the AA or RAC) reported being called out to rescue vehicles immobilised by boar strikes at an average rate of once every 20 minutes day and night.

The problem is, using your numbers, no matter how you dress it, you have a £400k hole. You can "hide" it through annual depreciation or you can take a one off hit with a write off. There is always the possibility that a model might be brought back for another run and until that is firmly set aside, you would probably not want to unduly depreciate a valuable asset. Remember a company is valued by its profit loss plus the value of its assets. There is also an argument that the longer you leave depreciating an asset, the less its value becomes because inflation devalues fixed values. If you had unlimited production capacity I would agree, but the choices are always there when there is a limit to what can be produced. A repeat run of that black workaday model that sold but sold rather slowly, or a model of the latest must have in colourful livery, that is likely to not only sell well and quickly but will capture the attention of the model press, modellers and collectors and so promote the Bachmann brand.

I think you might be reading too much into the write down. I know nothing about amortisation rules in China and Hong Kong but I can tell you that in Europe there are very different rules in place across different countries. For example in Germany a long-life asset would have 10% of its investment cost written down each year (1) whereas in the UK the same asset would have 10% of its residual book value written down each year (2). (1) So with no further investment in the asset, after 10 years it has zero book value. (2) So in the first year 10% of the investment value is written down. The net book value is 90% of the investment as you enter year 2, when 9% is written down leaving 81% book value for year 3 and a write down of 8.1% and so on. The asset always has book value. So what might be happening in Kader? Just some thoughts. 1. You poo-hoo the idea of only writing down when a mould is used. I however can see that that is a good way to operate (if its allowed under the legal accountancy rules). How else do you get a good view of the true profitability over time of a single model? If you write down the value of all moulds each year, then the profitability of Mk2 coaches carries the write down costs of for example the Midland 1F 0-4-4T. Does that make sense? Is it right that a successful model should carry the write down costs of (potentially if UK rules are applied) every model ever produced unless totally written off? 2; The write down might apply to moulds that have been found to have been damaged. 3. The write down might be due to moulds for models that have now been superseded by newer versions. 4. Write down is a useful and legitimate accountancy mechanism to minimise tax liability. Of course you can only use it once per asset. In the real Kader world a combination of the above plus more could well be the reason we see the results we do.

I really must invest in a copy but the publicity suggests a mid brown https://www.gehf.fr/inscriptions-et-couleurs-des-wagons-de-marchandises/

At the risk of Monty Pythonesque escalation: Stolen the sun - you were lucky. We woke up to 4cm snow. Now melting but it's pretty nippy and indoor "work" is called for today

That may be true when a Bachmann model is in direct competition with a competitor but the number of such concurrent models is quite limited across the ranges and across time.

The thing about muddling in France profound is that you can wait literally years for an exhibition and then 2 come along at once. Yesterday we travelled north to Annonay for a general muddling expo. A few railway items that were OK to really very good. Sadly the 3 rail 0 gauge layout was not working while we were there but to be honest these "collectors layouts" interesting though they can be are not really my thing. Lots of off road radio controlled 4x4s on show doing their stuff over rough terrain. The articulated radio controlled truck set up was very impressive and I could see that joystick control was just as difficult as moving the real thing. Some very nice models which I probably did not fully appreciate, with some very good driving, which I did. The powered boats were very good and perhaps the cherry on the cake was a radio controlled hot air balloon. Very appropriate for the birthplace of manned flight in a hot air balloon courtesy of the Montgolfier brothers. And French for a balloon is a Montgolfier as a consequence. And next weekend near Valence a proper muddle train exhibition - held once every 2 years, covid permitting, which it didn't.

The sack barrow would not help much even if you were allowed to use it. You would be taking the boards through the door on the wrong axis but one skate board might just do the job. I suspect 2 would be messy when you get to that raised threshold.