GWRtrainman

On 12/01/2024 at 10:25, MarkSG said:

 

It wasn't Hornby's decision to drop the Thomas range. The switch to Bachmann was a decision made by the brand owners. Kader (Bachmann's parent company) already had the USA rights, and when HIT Entertainment was taken over by Mattel, Mattel decided they wanted a single, global licensee for the brand on model trains rather than different national licensees. Hornby clearly weren't in that market because they don't have a significant US presence, so the only show in town was Kader who therefore acquired the UK and EU rights along with the USA rights.
 

It was Hornby's decision, I remember Simon saying the age group for the TV program had dropped and the Hornby range no longer had mass market appeal.

Perhaps the armchair experts on Copyright should take 1 minute to check before they state what is already registered. I did:

38 minutes ago, jonnyuk said:

although Hornby's profit is small, its profit. It buys them time and shows investors that the ship is possibly changing course, albeit slowly. You can't go from massive losses to big profits quickly, especially  when your new models are 2 years down the line and take time to feed into the new direction.

 

I could comment more on the Hornby bashing and any excuse to raise issues with the tier system again, all i would say is my local model shop is more than happy with the tier system and thinks its a good thing, for all concerned, there are winners and losers, such  is business.

Quite true - also many commentators on this discussion assume the point of this year was to make a big profit - maybe it's been about proving the company is profitable and doing all they can to invest and build the company up. They've done enough - the company has run profitably, none of us seem to be crying out for price rises or less new items which would have made them more profitable.

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

If you are looking at the financial performance of a company that is what you are doing and in some respects that irrespective of who that company is but it's natural to comare companies ina broadly similar line of business. So

 

Bachmann Europe Most recent accounts published are to year end 31 December 2019.  Turnover £ 13.9 million, gross profit £4,423 million, profit before taxation £206,000,  cash in hand £2.5 million

Hattons. Most recent accounts published up to year end  30 June 2020.  Turnover £12.6 million, gross profit £3.9 million, profit before taxation £492, 901.  Cash in hand £1.6 million.  Note H

Rails.  Most recent accounts published up to year end 31 March 2020.  Rails are exempted from full accounts so do not show so much information however they had £129,331 cash in hand and were showing £162,515 as 'retained earnings'. (which does not mean profit)

Hornby Group.  Most recent trading statement for year ended 31 march 2021 (i.e not complete accounts)   Revenue £48.5 million, (gross profit £21.7 million), operating profit £0.6 million, profit before taxation £300,000, net cash £4.7 million.  NoteHb  

 

So, in summary in terms of profit before taxation on sales/turnover in their most recently submitted accounts-

Bachmann made £206,000 on sales of £13.9 million

Hattons made £492,901 on turnover of £12.6 million

Hornby Group made £306,000 on sales of £48.5 million

 

The picture on gross profit is rather different and much more in Hornby's favour in percentage terms (and in many respects the fact that Hornby is starting from a worse past financial positions as well as its level of costs etc hasa greater impact on profit before taxation)

Bachman made £4.42 million on turnover of £13.9 million

Hattons made £3.9 million on turnover of £12.6 million

Hornby Group made £21.7 million on sales of £48.5 million

 

Note H. Hattons recorded a declines in sales but an improvement in profit compared with the previous year.

 

Note Hy . In the trading statement Hornby record an Undrawn Loan facility of £14,4 million.  Their current loan facilities are £12 million with PNC and what was originally (in 2018) a £6 million facility with Phoenix which was increased to £9 million in late 2019/early 2020  giving a total loan facility of £21 million

You could also look at Investment in new tooling. Hornby have lifted this from under £1m in 2016 to close on £5m this year.

That will have eaten into profit but has not yet delivered it's income and hence profits.

Hence they are investing their Gross profit in future profits - that's not the same has making no net profit full stop.

I like Tillig and got mine from Golden Valley Hobbies - plus I tried the rather nice Styrofoam pre shaped underlay - made the whole layout a very quick, yet realistic build.

I started off with their track planning folder to work out what I needed.

I through the slight flexibility of the track was amazing - imaging creating a curved point from a straight one - albeit only a tiny curve without breaking it, but still rather handy!

https://www.goldenvalleyhobbies.com/track/track-1/9620-tillig-planning-folder-h0

11 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

I'd suggest that if Hornby continue to be "unable to supply" for too long, it will amount to them throwing themselves under the bus and the relative trickle of direct commissioners will grow, if not to a flood, to quite a healthy stream. 

 

Unfortunately, Hornby's "main competitor" seems to lack the ability to mount any real challenge to their dominance, and Hornby continue to get away with customer service that would see them out of business in most other fields.

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the emergence of an agency offering design work and prototype research services to retailers, or groups thereof, who lack the capacity to do it for themselves.

 

John

Step forward a man called Dave....

8 minutes ago, Chris M said:

In other words. If traders want a full allocation of popular Hornby products they must also take all of the other Hornby brands as well. This will not be good for small specialist model railway shops. 
I heard that shops have to agree to not discount new items when they first appear. 
One local model shop I use has dropped Hornby because of their attitude to small shops. The owner seemed to be very angry with the way Hornby wanted to dictate terms to him.

 

The big two seem to have put the squeeze on Hattons . I’m neither friend or critic of Hattons but I do hope they continue to be a successful company.

'In other words' - well provided they mean something completely different to the Press Release.  :-)  Perhaps you should just write your own - oh wait you have done...

1 hour ago, Hilux5972 said:

Hmm very odd. Perhaps it varies depending on what country. I know I have to pay customs taxes in NZ on anything that is over, I think, $400 so perhaps they account for that on whether to add VAT or not. 

There is a couple of countries which expect UK companies to add VAT (or local equivalents ) to all orders being shipped to that country.

Australia is one - 10%. So the ex-vat price is £166.66, add shipping then add 10% and the price works out correct. It's not shown very clearly perhaps... but I would assume most Australians who buy on a regular basis know Tax is paid at point of order not at point of import.

NZ does not - so you see £166.66 plus the shipping price only.

It's going to become more widespread - all the EU will be like this from July this year. So any UK company shipping into Europe have to change their systems again to charge the Local VAT element and show it on the checkout page.

I think they reacted - it got leaked this weekend - apparently someone spotted them in the Musuem doing some measuring up and posted about it!

Hi

The sound one is here if that's any help:

https://support.Hornby.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360016117980-Schools-Class-Steam-Loco-Version-3-LokSound-Manual

Share price seems to be going in the right direction too.

On 26/10/2020 at 12:47, Edwardian said:

RMWeb Trade & Products: Where they'll moan if you tell them it's bad and they'll moan if you tell them it's good.

 

"... Rails was put in a very difficult position by Hornby's spoiler launch and TV hype. Theirs is, when all's said and done, objectively the better model, albeit not perfect in my view. People need to move on from that...."

 

 

A bit biased on that point - and not strictly true - I think it's been widely reported that Hornby were working on an upgrade of their model. You could equally spin this as Rails stole an existing model from the Hornby range and then cried fowl when the company defended itself.

Depends on your definition of Spare Parts. Hornby have never to my knowledge offered every part of a loco as a spare part. It's always been focused on 'engineering' components that suffer wear and tear during operation.

Motors, brushes etc.

With over 250 parts being shown clustered around the disassembled loco in last years (?) catalogue, many of which are painted it suspect it's impossible to get close to offering a complete suite of bits.

On 04/05/2020 at 23:33, Hroth said:

Tonights round-up.

 

 

Hornby went up to 3500 before deciding to call it a day, which is a pretty marvellous figure, seeing as the model was only announced on Thursday.  Even more marvellous is the £140,000 that will go to NHS charities thanks to this model.

 

As Hornby has decided to allow a "small number of 'waiting list pre-orders'", there is a chance to get one if any of the carpet-bagger/disappointed that there were more than 500 models cohort decide to reveal their true colours and cancel.

 

Three Cheers for Hornby!

 

 

I think the said they were operating a waiting list once they had hit 3500 orders? Perhaps some people ordered after this point and are still on the waiting list ?

Probably the mold was not at the right temperature - normally when it's just starting to be run. The body does not drop out of the tool cleanly and the slight friction pulls on the outer ends of a long shape... hence the banana shape.

Plastic has a memory - once it cools it will try try to retain it's shape when warm,

Bit unlucky as once the mold is running at temperature it would be fine.

35 minutes ago, fezza said:

Prices are killing the hobby for new entrants. I constantly hear parents at shows using words like 'ridiculous' 'mad' and suchlike when they see the price stickers for new stock. 

 

My small group of modern image modeller friends were all up for a 117. None of us will be buying at that price... they are basically asking £100 for an 00 gauge coach... 

and Yet you and others who complain about prices getting too high for new entrants and kids seem to always point out the price of something you want. Never a genuine entry level product.

There's never any mention of the Hornby Railroad, Bachmann junior or second hand options.

I bought my grandson a Hornby train set for £50 this Christmas at ASDA - and picked up a second bigger one second hand at my local model shop. For £100 they've got two locos, 7 wagons and two complete ovals of track.  Beats an iPhone which my Daughter has currently wasted £1000 on!

13 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Part of the problem in my view. Not the first time that a company has taken on other businesses that have ultimately been a burden rather than a benefit.

 

It could have been so different if they had been in a position to maximise the opportunities for these brands in their home markets. It would certainly have been better to take on Jouef when it first became available rather than let it go to Lima.

and yet the Half Year report states the European business has had the highest growth of any part of the Group in 2019 (no doubt from a small base - it's a big market). And the numbers show it is the closest to being profitable. 

Maybe they've got it right this time around?

9 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

Not scientific proof but I note that as someone who buys a reasonable number of D&E locos my experience is that some Bachmann and Hornby models have turned up either damaged (not clear if factory or delivery related) or in several cases had seven shades of wotsit kicked out of them (delivery related). However to date locos in the Dapol/Hattons style of of larger foam lined box have all arrived intact and working.

Certainly not scientific if you read the Hattons forum where a fair number of faulty Class 66 are being mentioned with bits fallen off, dropping off after arrival or simply missing.  

It it happens to all manufacturers - the models are delicate and over detailed not to have some damage in shipping from time to time. 

On 25/07/2019 at 07:43, Roy Langridge said:

 

As per the Rails terms and conditions the deposits are non-refundable.

 

 

I can't see anything that says you cannot cancel.

 

Roy

 

A non refundable deposit has to meet two criteria to be enforceable 

1. Any time scale given must be complied with

2. The value of a deposit should not be excessive - which I think means covering loss in the event of a cancellation.  

Then if a refund is refused the retailer would be expected to mitigate the loss.  I believe if they find another buyer for your item at the same price them the majority of the deposit should be refunded.  

In short point one has been breached therefore people can claim a refund.  

On 22/07/2019 at 18:01, melmoth said:

 

That in itself, and taken in isolation, doesn't actually prove anything. I'm sure this has been debated on here before.

 

Example (all figure completely made up)

 

You buy 100 models at £75 each from a producer to sell in your shop - cost £7500

The model has an RRP of £100 - potential income £10000

You sell 70 models at RRP - actual income £7000

You discount the remaining 30 by 30% and sell them all at £70 each - actual income £2100

Overall income £9100

Overall profit (before any of the many other costs invovled) £1600

 

Overall, in this purely fictional example, you've made a profit despite selling almost a third of your inventory below cost price*

 

Now unless anyone knows exactly how many Lord Nelsons Rails bought and at what price, it is well nigh impossible to make assumptions about the cost price and margins involved.

 

*there is some much else to consider, but this is really just to make a point about isolated statistics

and a few less hypothetical figures on the cost side you've ignored:

VAT 20% - £2,000

Staff costs (around 7.5% in my supermarket) - £750

Rent, Rates, Lights, Heating - ?

Credit Card margin - 2% - £200

Website - a share of the development, hosting and fees - ?

Shrinkage - shoplifting, parcels not received - 1% - £100

Without getting detailed someone just risked £7500 and ended up owning £1300 +

Sorry, but Gross Profit does not equate to a viable business model - certainly not in Retailing.

VAT is a rather more complicated beast if you are investing (in tooling) overseas and importing product.  

I seem to remember he blamed a delay on releasing his first product on HMRC.  

I guess he was unaware that VAT is due on the entire container upon docking unless he was creditworthy and had a deferment account.  Hence he probably had to find a pile of cash before making any sales to pay the VAT due.  

Then the VAT man would ask how were these trains made? Mention of tooling would then generate a second surprise VAT bill on the tooling value.  Or maybe he did not know and his accountant failed to declare the tooling.  In which case the VAT man is another creditor not shown on the Insolvency paperwork.  

Excuse me I need to catch that Omnibus to Clapham!

10 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

All totalling a nice round number, a bit like the cash at bank + petty cash tin.

As the Directors Loan was not on the last annual accounts, it is definitely not start up finding or evidence of remortgaging a house at the early part of the business.

However, many years ago when starting a business - our accountant said if you can't afford to pay yourself a salary, make a paper payment and add the debt to the Directors Loan, then you can withdraw it later on without paying further tax (or tax at a higher rate). So in theory I think Andy is right - this sudden increase in Directors Loan is quite possibly someone loading all the costs into the pot so the creditors debts are expanded.  Presumably any distribution means he would get a larger share, plus if he hadn't gone into Liquidation, then this is a nice tax free lump sum for when the company makes a profit.

13 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

 

From a business perspective, I wouldn't want to increase my holding in a venture that has a competitor with a proven track record already further ahead. 

 

If DJM thought he'd been given a hard time so far then it's going to get even harder now.  He could seek his own funding to finish one of the ongoing projects, but I remember him posting that he wasn't even looking to make a profit from the APT. It was a ridiculous statement to make and at the time I thought it was made to make him look more like an altruistic modeller rather than a business (profit being a dirty word to some).

 

One way forward for DJM could be to partner up with someone who is trusted and more skilled in negotiation and business, and who could unravel whatever has happened with the 'lost' tooling.  This might throw DJM a lifeline, so long as he doesn't continue to write the press releases himself. 

That's an interesting thought - Profit.

Even if an individual acting as Managing Director of a company decided to design, tool and manufacture an APT and make no profit.

They still need to earn a living - this is Dave's pronounced full time job.

How much would an MD of a firm earn - maybe £40k a year? Dave's be at this for 6 years. That's a figure getting on for the £250k he mentions as having lost in tooling. Maybe we need to consider that the crowdfunding money will have been increasingly eroded. The delay's don't avoid the running costs of a business occurring (salaries in this case). The longer the models are delayed the less cash is left to actually make them.
As Dave quoted in a reply to someone - all the money is spent.

10 minutes ago, imt said:

 

I Now it may well be that the realisation that so many people have been let down, misled or harsher words if you prefer, is having an awful effect on DJ personally.  Now I can understand the desire to "get one's own back" but even if it makes everybody feel better, the ultimate fall out in how DJ is affected may not be what (in our more sober and less vengeful moments) we would like to see happen.

Afraid many would disagree with you. Dave is not the only person or the one having the worst day today.

The REAL people who are suffering are those who paid big deposits for products that have not arrived (and may or may not arrive in future).

Plus those people who commissioned products from DJModels and have spent a sleepless night until he reversed his position wondering if the investment  had been wasted through Dave registering CAD of a product they had subsequently developed (with or without) him.

He's not the victim here,

5 minutes ago, Trains4U said:

So the latest clarification simply says what he should have done the first time around.

 

That he has invested in tools to which he no longer has access, and is trying to prevent their use.

 

DJ models will have a hard time preventing a Chinese factory from manufacturing models using his tools.   He could, however, justifiably pursue any business importing, selling or marketing those models in the UK (Provided he can prove they are made using his designs)

 

What he cannot do (And the original statement seemed pretty clear in this intent) is prevent another manufacturer from producing any model, in any scale, that he has on his development list, provided that manufacturer has not a) used his CAD designs or b) directly copied physical components of existing models.

 

Quite how this affects tools bought and paid for by commissioning partners is yet to be tested.  On that, we will have to wait and see.

 

I think it's damage limitation, but still means all models he has produced CAD for:

His clarification was:

"My IP’s cover the external look of all my designs"