Wright writes.....

[chrisf]

I thought the CMRA Members' Day event yesterday was excellent, though it needs much greater publicity. It would appear very few people even knew about it. 

 

Quite.  It is another instance of telepathy failure.  As it happens, even if I had known about it earlier I would still have chosen to attend LarkRail instead.   I have a hunch that the subject will come up at the meeting of the EMGS Area Group on Wednesday next.  One of the guest speakers is likely to be there and so will the organiser, given a bit of luck and a following wind.

 

Chris

[islandbridgejct]

Hello Tony.

 

I just caught up on 20 pages of this thread over 2 days in hospital and for the most part I really enjoyed it. Pictures and discussions of actual modelling, and reminiscences on the great days of steam, are a delight to read.

 

There are a few topics that generate low grade heat and very little light. I had to skip over the last few pages about small producers and their use of the internet. I can see merit to both sides of the argument, but not to the rather tetchy tone of the exchanges.

 

I generally take my cue from the wartime poster and, before I post, ask, "Is your post really necessary?" Often, on reconsideration, it really isn't. 24 hours reflection before replying has saved me from many embarrassing letters in my work, and I try not to send a letter until I'm ready to laugh at my opponent.

 

In this case, throwing caution to the wind, I wonder might I suggest that others whose modelling talents far exceed mine might consider adopting the same approach? We all tend to become more dogmatic as we grow older, and less tolerant, and it is all too easy to fire off a cross expression of our own views. (This may even qualify as one, alas.)

 

I like the D9 and the B16. (Have I got the class number right?)

 

Alan

[Atso]

Hello Tony,

 

It was a good thing that you could check with home and locate your tool box - much better than you worrying about it all day! I do agree that the event could have been better advertised as I only found out from your post a few days ago - and I only live ten to fifteen minutes away! However, speaking selfishly, I'm not complaining as it gave me to opportunity to speak with yourself, Geoff and others at far greater length than I would normally do at a busier exhibition.

 

Thank you for taking those photos, all I can say is wow! I'm usually very critical of my own work but Geoff's and your comments yesterday coupled with these wonderful photos have actually made me feel quite satisfied with my latest efforts. I'll admit that I was a bit worried when you whipped out the camera and flashlight that it would highlight all the various bodges these locomotives have undergone as I've always used my limited phone camera (not wishing to start that conversation again!), usually in slightly poor light, for convenience - and hiding things! While I do not own a proper camera, I do have access to one but would never presume to think that I had the first clue as to how to operate it properly.

 

I do think however that your photos do highlight the work still required to bring the D49 to completion and I'm looking forward to finishing off the front end (I've just noticed I've not lined the front frames!) as well as having a go at the tender (having discussed the various methods with Geoff). The K3 is just about complete, other than the final front end detailing and repainting the cylinders. As we discussed, the K3's tender is the surviving part of my original 3D printed K3 and therefore represents my first ever lining attempt. I think it shows compared to the loco body but I'm not inclined to repaint it.

 

If it is acceptable to you, I would like to share these wonderful photographs elsewhere (obviously with credit to yourself).

[MarkC]

I can even make phone calls on mine...

What? You TALK to people with it? How terribly old-fashioned.    

 

t'll never catch on, I say... 

[Atso]

What? You TALK to people with it? How terribly old-fashioned.  

 

t'll never catch on, I say... 

I didn't even know that was what they were for! 

[Tony Wright]

Hello Tony.

 

I just caught up on 20 pages of this thread over 2 days in hospital and for the most part I really enjoyed it. Pictures and discussions of actual modelling, and reminiscences on the great days of steam, are a delight to read.

 

There are a few topics that generate low grade heat and very little light. I had to skip over the last few pages about small producers and their use of the internet. I can see merit to both sides of the argument, but not to the rather tetchy tone of the exchanges.

 

I generally take my cue from the wartime poster and, before I post, ask, "Is your post really necessary?" Often, on reconsideration, it really isn't. 24 hours reflection before replying has saved me from many embarrassing letters in my work, and I try not to send a letter until I'm ready to laugh at my opponent.

 

In this case, throwing caution to the wind, I wonder might I suggest that others whose modelling talents far exceed mine might consider adopting the same approach? We all tend to become more dogmatic as we grow older, and less tolerant, and it is all too easy to fire off a cross expression of our own views. (This may even qualify as one, alas.)

 

I like the D9 and the B16. (Have I got the class number right?)

 

Alan

Dear Alan,

 

I hope you're recovering from your spell in hospital.

 

Regarding being dogmatic (authoritative, laying down the law, arrogant), will I become even worse (or better at it?) as I get even older? 

 

One thing (among many) things about this thread I enjoy is the often robust debate/discussion regarding different opinions. I do heartily respect the opinions of modellers whose work I admire and find inspirational, even though I might not always agree with their methods and opinions. They're problem-solvers, self-reliant and they actually make things themselves. For that, I'll tolerate any differences of opinion with pleasure. 

 

I have posted pictures recently of a D9, but I don't think any of a B16 have appeared. Perhaps a B2 or a B4? 

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited July 16, 2017 by Tony Wright

[micklner]

Yep B16 has appeared, built for someone else etc.

[Mallard60022]

I for one enjoy the 'robust discussion' or firm opinion on this thread as I know that most of those comments come from people that would still encourage one as a modeller and rarely make one feel inadequte. The latter is a skill I admire and, although difficult at times, it is easier to tolerate than some folk who just seem unable to  accept that another person's thoughts, ideas or methods could, in fact, be better than theirs. There is enough of that in the 'real world' (that I have a decreasing interest in) thanks.

Long may this thread continue to inform, challenge and cajole and most of all entertain. Thanks everyone.

Phil 

[Poggy1165]

I like the D9. Brilliant job, given the kit. Captures the prototype nicely. And I still think they were good-looking in this form, and much under-estimated. The LNER sent them all over the shop, and they seem to have done good work for many years.

 

I also very much enjoy the thread. Great place to spend an hour!

Edited July 16, 2017 by Poggy1165

[Tony Wright]

Both the new A1 and the D9 are now with Geoff Haynes for painting. They'll be used as subjects in the book he's writing. Since both were presented as gifts to me (the A1 a month ago and the D9 a week ago), I thought it good manners to build them as a priority (I'll be donating a sum to Cancer Research for the D9). 

 

 

 

Another loco which will be featured in Geoff's book is the O2/1 I've also built recently, using a Nu-Cast O2/2 kit and a Heljan O2/3 cab. I've painted it and Geoff will weather it. If nothing else, weathering will take down the far-too-shiny valve gear. As with all my locos, it's thoroughly layout-tested before it's finished. The fact that it's incomplete (or not finished, really) allows it to run without lamps. I'll fit the front numberplate and shedplate after it's weathered. The A1 (built by me, painted by Ian Rathbone) needs no layout-testing. It's 25 years old and has done many a layout mile. 

 

 

Whether Heljan's putative O2/2 will appear is a moot point, given that all the parts are made (at least in prototype-form). I jumped the gun by making a Heljan O2/3 into an O2/2 by altering it to right-hand drive, making a new front bufferbeam, fitting a lower (Markits) chimney, fitting a Heljan O2/2 cab and building a GNR tender for it. The weathering is my work (though why have I forgotten the shedplate?). It's as powerful as the kit-built sibling. What's nowhere near as powerful (in haulage capacity) is the Hornby A4 rushing past on an Up express. I only keep it because of Ian Rathbone's beautiful painting but it really is puny on a heavy, kit-built rake of cars. It's happy on the rake it's taking, though - eight kit-built/modified proprietary cars forming the Afternoon Talisman. 

 

 

[Atso]

Hello Tony,

 

Having seen the A1, D9 and O2 yesterday, I can only say that, as good as they look in your pictures over the last couple of pages, they look even better in the flesh. With regard to the two O2's mentioned above, I've already given you my opinion on which one I would like to own if I modelled in 4mm scale!

 

Having also seen Geoff's work first hand yesterday (thank you once again for introducing us), I am sure that you will have three more absolutely stunning locomotives once he has finished. 

[mullie]

Bodgeit & Leggit models are alive and well!

 

Some years ago I bashed a Bachmann J72 into something vaguely resembling a J65, the close up photos show some issues still to be resolved, coal rails, fit of the dome and a strange warping on the boiler as well as finishing painting and weathering. I decided to build a chassis to go under it so took the plunge and shortened a Comet J72 chassis to go under it. There is still work to do but this is progress so far.

 

 

 

I don't think anyone is likely to produce a J65 rtr so for now this is the closest I can get although there is a 3D print I could try in the future. Above all, it works and I built it. Did I enjoy the process? Yesterday I ordered most of the parts to put a Comet chassis under my J39 so the answer is definitely yes. There were issues, I stripped the gear wheel but now know why and hopefully won't repeat the exercise too often.

 

Is such a chassis cost effective? As an example, I have a Bachmann V1/V3, a loco I like despite its shortcomings because of a fascinating photo of one working in Norfolk during 1948. The split chassis has never worked properly, to buy the Bachmann DCC model is around £130 because I don't think the chassis can be bought as a spare, the Comet replacement will I believe be cheaper and an interesting challenge.

[Woodcock29]

Andrew, I am building a Perseverance GCR tender for a B3, and can recommend it as a suitable match for the D9, instead of a plastic (Yeccch!) tender.

One cure for an oval boiler is a vice with soft jaws.

Hello jrg1

I'm curious as to your apparent aversion to using plastic Bachmann tenders?

The Bachmann tenders are very good. The more recently made J11s have the best tenders as they have the brakes in line with the wheels (well for 16.5mm gauge at least). Granted the Bachmann O4 tenders need some work if one wants a tender with GC water pickup but they are generally much better than a range of kit tenders that I have. For example the older Ks tenders (supplied with the O4 and B2 kits by Ks, NuCast and more latterly Autocom) are too short. The Millholme tenders that came with B5 and Q4 kits have a non-prototypical band along the top of the sides and back that needs to be removed otherwise they're quite good albeit they need some additions to include all water pick up characteristics.

The self trimming 4000 gallon tender provided by Bachmann with its BR Prince Albert is a lovely model and I have one set aside for the probable eventual build of the elusive B7. I would have used one of these tenders on my B3 Valour if they had been available 25 years ago!

A friend of mine has a Perseverence D11 which I re-motored for him and that has a self trimming tender if I remember correctly (?) and is probably the pick of the kit tenders but takes a lot more time to build than modifying a Bachmann tender.

I like to use what ever suits the purpose so although I'm definitely a kit builder/modifier I'm quite happy to use plastic RTR parts where they are suitable.

By the way a set of soft vice jaws is not the answer for the McGowan B4 smokebox/boiler, as indicated previously by Graeme King, as the smokebox is a very strong section at the front and can't be squeezed - I've already tried!

Andrew Emmett

[Tony Wright]

 

Yet another request, please. 

 

In this shot of an O4/1 at Darnall Shed in 1954, is the equipment in the foreground (which is a kind of railway) part of the ash-disposal process? 

 

I know Darnall was one of the most modern of BR's steam depots, so is it part of the mechanised system? I used to pass Darnall shed on regular occasions, but I can't remember noticing this. 

 

Many thanks in anticipation.

[teaky]

O4 01 63624 Darnall 19.04.54 small.jpg

 

Yet another request, please. 

 

In this shot of an O4/1 at Darnall Shed in 1954, is the equipment in the foreground (which is a kind of railway) part of the ash-disposal process? 

 

I know Darnall was one of the most modern of BR's steam depots, so is it part of the mechanised system? I used to pass Darnall shed on regular occasions, but I can't remember noticing this. 

 

Many thanks in anticipation.

Safety grids covering the wet ash pit - 200' long, 10' deep with 6' water and could hold a week's worth of ash and clinker.

 

Plate 36 in John Hooper's LNER Sheds in Camera.

[Tony Wright]

Safety grids covering the wet ash pit - 200' long, 10' deep with 6' water and could hold a week's worth of ash and clinker.

 

Plate 36 in John Hooper's LNER Sheds in Camera.

Thanks Rob,

 

I actually have that book. Do you think the interweb makes one lazy? 

 

Speaking of being lazy, that's the opposite of the team which has built Little Bytham. With so many visitors now (at least one group/individuals a week - four today), it's easy to lose track of the progress that's been made in the last nine years (actually seven, because for two years I just abandoned the whole thing). 

 

 

This was the state of progress in the summer of 2008, with all Norman Solomon's scenic-side trackwork laid and ballasted on top of Norman Turner's superlative baseboards. I still had to wire it all up and lay the fiddle yard trackwork. The scenery is at its absolute basic. 

 

 

Taken this morning, hasn't a lot been added? With 'big' projects like this there seem to be a variety of ways of taking them through to fruition. The most noble way (definitely not mine) is to make it a lifetime's work and do everything oneself. It literally could take a lifetime's modelling to complete (assuming one had all the requisite skills). 'My' way is to be part of a dedicated team which has (in the main) pooled resources and 'horse-traded' (again, in the main) among itself so that the likes of my work is present on others' layouts, I've provided pictures for portfolios/articles, helped members with their personal model-making or assisted in the making of DVDs. I'm very privileged to have such a team to build LB and, without them, it would be no more than an extensive collection of locos and rolling stock with years ahead before anything was ready for it to run on. Another way is to have it all built on commission. Though it's not my approach (I don't have the fiscal resources, and it's important that I have a large, practical input to the project), it does have merit, providing the whole thing is well-managed with extensive research conducted on the part of the owner. Without the latter, it could end up an expensive mish-mash. 

 

Approaches two and three do mean that the whole thing is built in far less than a lifetime. That said, it's still taken me over 40 years to build the locos and rolling stock I need (and still building more). 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Four very good friends who are members of the 2mm Association visited today. After running trains on LB, they showed me some models they'd brought with them. Though principally 2mm modellers, they have dabbled in OO in the past. 

 

 

Dabbled enough to produce this rather nice DJH B16/3, built/painted by Brian Hume. It ran very well.

 

 

Or dabbled enough to produce this Mallard GWR steam railcar, built/painted by John Aldrick (I hope I've got John's surname right from his writing in my visitors' book). It also ran very well (and a definite first on LB). 

 

It was the 2mm work which impressed me most, however. 

 

 

Wonderful loco-building such as this, by Nick Mitchell. These are scaled-down 4mm kits and both ran exquisitely. This is craftsmanship of the highest order, by a 'young' modeller, too (he's only 41). At last, a return to 'proper' model-making in my view; self-reliant, inventive, highly-skilled and very traditional. 

 

 

He also showed me what could be done with a Farish RTR product. This has had new tyres fixed on to the original Farish drivers, and been re-gauged to suit the finer standards. It's also been detailed and beautifully-weathered. 

 

Whenever I feel the craft of personal model-making is dying, things like the above come along and prove to me that I'm wrong. 

 

Thank you, gentlemen, for a most inspirational day. 

 

Some of the above 2mm models will be appearing in the MRJ. 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Tony Wright

[gr.king]

The fitting of finer scale tyres on good-looking RTR wheel centres of distinctive types has cropped up as a topic of discussion at the local Scalefour group meetings that I gatecrash (or even host on occasions!). I don't know what it's like in 2mm scale (apart from more challenging presumably) but the perceived problem in 4mm seems to be that of obtaining the necessary tyres without having to pay for unwanted wheel centres. Those with unlimited money, or with lathes, skills and time need not worry about such trivia of course.

[Willie Whizz]

...

 

I thought the CMRA Members' Day event yesterday was excellent, though it needs much greater publicity. It would appear very few people even knew about it. 

 

...

 

 

 

Been away for the weekend, so apologies for the slow response.

 

As they used to say on 'House of Cards' Tony - "You might very well think that ... but I couldn't possibly comment".  Not least because to my regret, off the top of my head I don't immediately know what the 'CMRA' is.

 

Except that, given the responses to my observations last week regarding marketing by small suppliers, actually perhaps I can comment after all, based on the words in the response I got from one poster. who - using his same line of argument consistently - would in this context have surely said:

 

"If [the CMRA] have enough [interest] for the amount of trade they get but don't have any extra time available, then how would they be able to handle the extra enquiries and [interest] that a website would be expected to generate?

 

It is not just about setting a website up [or, presumably even, opening a thread on RMWeb?  EDIT:  actually, just spotted that there is a thread - but it was only opened on 13 July, by an Exhibitor, asking who else would be there(!) - and the second post (of 9 brief ones in total) summed it up in these words:  "When/where/what is it?"]. It is about keeping it updated and having the resources to deal with the interest generated by it.

 

[The CMRA] have a good amount of [interest] coming in through recommendation and word of mouth and no spare capacity to do more. Tell me again why [they] should be expected to... take any other steps to publicise their existence and events? The same applies to [other] sorts of [model railway-related organisations] you are talking about.

 

I find that asking around, particularly on RMWeb, will soon get you pointed in the direction of more obscure [events]. If there are [associations] that are so under the radar that nobody has heard of them (Yup, that's me!!), then you can always either [start one dealing with] what you want yourself or choose to [study] something else.

 

But I would rather these [groups] carry on as they are rather than have them swamped with [interest] to the point where they get fed up and pack in [operating]."

 

Or words to that effect ...

 

 

Like I said,this is 2017, not 1917 or even 1957. Sorry Tony, and I absolutely do not wish to give offence to you or anybody, but if a small business - or a small association - is serious about what it's doing, as opposed to just indulging the key person's (peoples') own interest a little more widely to help out a few mates (and remember, I did say I understood how that happens), then it has to take modern publicity and advertising techniques with at least a degree of seriousness.  If needs be, by doing a little Wright-style "horse-trading" to get some no-cost or low-cost support.  Otherwise, it's going to be not so much "adapt or die" as "risk dying before your dwindling band of customers/members beat you to it".

.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Willie Whizz

[Tony Wright]

Been away for the weekend, so apologies for the slow response.

 

As they used to say on 'House of Cards' Tony - "You might very well think that ... but I couldn't possibly comment".  Not least because to my regret, off the top of my head I don't immediately know what the 'CMRA' is.

 

Except that, given the responses to my observations last week regarding marketing by small suppliers, actually perhaps I can comment after all, based on the words in the response I got from one poster. who - using his same line of argument consistently - would in this context have surely said:

 

"If [the CMRA] have enough [interest] for the amount of trade they get but don't have any extra time available, then how would they be able to handle the extra enquiries and [interest] that a website would be expected to generate?

 

It is not just about setting a website up [or, presumably even, opening a thread on RMWeb?]. It is about keeping it updated and having the resources to deal with the interest generated by it.

 

[The CMRA] have a good amount of [interest] coming in through recommendation and word of mouth and no spare capacity to do more. Tell me again why [they] should be expected to... take any other steps to publicise their existence and events? The same applies to [other] sorts of [model railway-related organisations] you are talking about.

 

I find that asking around, particularly on RMWeb, will soon get you pointed in the direction of more obscure [events]. If there are [associations] that are so under the radar that nobody has heard of them (Yup, that's me!!), then you can always either [start one dealing with] what you want yourself or choose to [study] something else.

 

But I would rather these [groups] carry on as they are rather than have them swamped with [interest] to the point where they get fed up and pack in [operating]."

 

Or words to that effect ...

 

 

Like I said,this is 2017, not 1917 or even 1957. Sorry Tony, and I absolutely do not wish to give offence to you or anybody, but if a small business - or a small association - is serious about what it's doing, as opposed to just indulging the key person's (peoples') own interest a little more widely to help out a few mates (and remember, I did say I understood how that happens), then it has to take modern publicity and advertising techniques with at least a degree of seriousness.  If needs be, by doing a little Wright-style "horse-trading" to get some no-cost or low-cost support.  Otherwise, it's going to be not so much "adapt or die" as "risk dying before your dwindling band of customers/members beat you to it".

.

The CMRA is the Chiltern Model Railway Association, the largest of its type in the land. Each summer it hosts a sort of members' day (the Saturday just gone) where there are a few layouts, demonstrators and traders. All associates (club members of associate clubs) are welcome to attend. It's £10.00, but that includes an excellent lunch and as much tea/coffee as can be drunk. About 100 members attended. I think details are sent out to member clubs, but whether these are fully distributed I don't know. I'm sure the event is advertised electronically. 

 

The CMRA is really a fantastic organisation and it puts on a great annual show in Stevenage in January (it used to be in St. Albans. My reason for mentioning the 'poor' attendance on Saturday in Watford is because the event is worthy of far more visitors. 

[65179]

The fitting of finer scale tyres on good-looking RTR wheel centres of distinctive types has cropped up as a topic of discussion at the local Scalefour group meetings that I gatecrash (or even host on occasions!). I don't know what it's like in 2mm scale (apart from more challenging presumably) but the perceived problem in 4mm seems to be that of obtaining the necessary tyres without having to pay for unwanted wheel centres. Those with unlimited money, or with lathes, skills and time need not worry about such trivia of course.

The 2mm Scale Association make the tyres available separately so the limits are the sizes available, traction tyred wheels, and (for Graham Farish locos) the suitability of the mazak wheel centres for turning (for those with a lathe).

 

Simon

Edited July 17, 2017 by 65179

[cctransuk]

 

 

Like I said,this is 2017, not 1917 or even 1957. ....... if a small business - or a small association - is serious about what it's doing, .......

 

 

 

Perhaps you could clarify the type of business / organisation to which you refer?

 

In my experience, there are mainstream businesses such as Hornby / Bachmann etc. who, in general, do have more than adequate publicity and advertising techniques; (as do many of the mainstrem retailers).

 

There is then a huge, empty gulf before we come to the likes of Cambridge Custom Transfers (me), who rely on a very basic website and word-of-mouth to generate the level and type of sales that they can / wish to handle.

 

You seem to be referring to what, to me, is a mythical body of suppliers who would love to get, and could handle, a greatly increased volume of sales, but who won't make the necessary effort to advertise and market their output in what you deem to be 'the modern way'.

 

It may not suit you, but much of the really desirable model railway equipment is produced by 'one-man-bands', who do it mainly for the love of the hobby and have no aspirations to 'go large'. Obtaining their output requires some extra effort on YOUR part - and no amount of crying 'Luddites' will change that.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Willie Whizz]

In that case, Tony, I would certainly agree, it deserves better.  But this is the largest website of its kind in the country I believe, yet there was certainly no thread on the RMWeb 'Exhibitions' page (as per my amendment to my last post) until one was started by an apparently frustrated exhibitor.  (But perhaps, as you say, they don't see the event as an 'Exhibition' and publicise it in the same way? ... but then, can't have it both ways", either they want plenty of people there or they don't

 

Let us hope in the nicest possible way that, as the politicians say, "Lessons will be Learned".

[cctransuk]

In that case, Tony, I would certainly agree, it deserves better.  But this is the largest website of its kind in the country I believe, yet there was certainly no thread on the RMWeb 'Exhibitions' page (as per my amendment to my last post) until one was started by an apparently frustrated exhibitor.  (But perhaps, as you say, they don't see the event as an 'Exhibition' and publicise it in the same way? ... but then, can't have it both ways", either they want plenty of people there or they don't

 

Let us hope in the nicest possible way that, as the politicians say, "Lessons will be Learned".

 

Having read Tony's explanation of the CMRA 'sort of members' day', I would not expect to find it on the RMWeb 'Exhibitions' page - because it's not a public exhibition !!

 

The last thing that you want at a members' day is an embarrassment of non-members turning up, who would turn a relaxed, informal event into the rugby-scrum that characterises some of the larger, well publicised events.

 

It all comes back to your assumption that all companies and organisations MUST want to attract more business; you'll find that many do not, and are quite content with the volume and type of custom that we achieve.

 

The last thing that many of us want is the type of customer who believes that he has the right to obtain his requirements instantaneously, and at the touch of a button.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Willie Whizz]

Perhaps you could clarify the type of business / organisation to which you refer?

 

In my experience, there are mainstream businesses such as Hornby / Bachmann etc. who, in general, do have more than adequate publicity and advertising techniques; (as do many of the mainstrem retailers).

 

There is then a huge, empty gulf before we come to the likes of Cambridge Custom Transfers (me), who rely on a very basic website and word-of-mouth to generate the level and type of sales that they can / wish to handle.

 

You seem to be referring to what, to me, is a mythical body of suppliers who would love to get, and could handle, a greatly increased volume of sales, but who won't make the necessary effort to advertise and market their output in what you deem to be 'the modern way'.

 

It may not suit you, but much of the really desirable model railway equipment is produced by 'one-man-bands', who do it mainly for the love of the hobby and have no aspirations to 'go large'. Obtaining their output requires some extra effort on YOUR part - and no amount of crying 'Luddites' will change that.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Thank you John.

 

I have to say I certainly wouldn't have been aware of your products and services if I hadn't seen your posts on Wright Writes.  So I am pleased you, at least, find sufficient customers by other means to satisfy your financial expectations.

 

Having just taken a quick look at your website it seems a model of what might be expected from a 'small supplier' who has neither the wish nor the expertise to keep "fiddling" with it or devoting large amounts of time to dealing with it rather than producing 'product', yet sees the need to recognise he lives and works in the second decade of the 21st Century.

 

I was particularly impressed with the fact that apparently the 'WebMaster' is your own son - which is just the kind of (Tony's phrase) "horse trading" and calling-in of favours that I was suggesting in my post that can reduce or negate the costs if the producer feels they cannot acquire the necessary skills, or begrudge spending the time.

 

Best of luck for the future.

 

WW