wasabi

In my case, I ordered a Garratt soon after it was announced, when I think the planned delivery date was about now. I did get the e mail mentioned above and called to check I was still on the list. which was duly confirmed. The lady to whom I spoke thought that mid 2020 was the likely arrival date. To my mind this is a sort of prestige project for Hatton's but with lower financial risk as they are (presumably) taking both wholesale and retail margins. In fact, my layout is Japanese N but having enough Japanese stock (and more!) to run it I am now interested in adding a small number of the more unusual prototypes. So I wouldn't buy an 8F or Black Five, but in the LMS sphere a Michelin railcar would be tempting...

Con-cor do (or did) models of the Aerotrain - I think in both N and HO. I bought the N version some time ago (second hand) but there are a lot of inflexible wires between the cars which make it unusable on any layout with curves. I think I can see how to re-wire it with more flexible wiring but there are other priorities at the moment.

The post from Keith HC says it all to me - the GWR was the only one paying a dividend after the war., The railway companies were there to provide a return to their shareholders and without that would not have been able to raise more capital to restore war damage, let alone pay a dividend - hence nationalisation was almost inevitable. I would like to see comparisons of who provided the best returns to shareholders (capital plus any dividends) rather than who had the fastest locomotives. Is there any record anywhere of how profitable the Cheltenham Flyer actually was? (The publicity value would have been good, but who costed that in those times?). The best locomotives for the shareholders were not the ones with the most advanced superheaters but those that shifted the most tonnage at the lowest cost.

The busiest railway stations are actually in Tokyo with Shinjuku first then Shibuya and Ikebukuro. On one visit I had to take the Yamanote line from Shinjuku in the morning peak and the trains seemed to be almost continuous with the departure indicator going straight to 'Train Approaching' as soon as the previous one in the platform left. It's a few years since I've been to New York but I wouldn't have thought that there is any comparison with Tokyo. Perhaps they suspended the programme to correct the title. IPW

I've never exhibited a layout but would emphasise the usefulness of making one transportable. Mine was originally in the spare bedroom at my current house but when I was able to have a building/shed put up in the garden it wasn't too complex a task to get it downstairs and outside with minimal damage (only to some OHLE). Two of the boards in fact came from my previous flat and although now much modified are in their third home. I also think independent supports are worth considering - upstairs mine mainly had to rest on bookcases but now I use Screwfix trestles and they certainly give a good solid base, which has to be vital given that I don't have much woodworking experience - I went to a school which considered itself a bit above teaching useful subjects like that, but at least my father knew something about DIY and was able to pass it on. [No doubt other trestles are available but I saw these recommended either here or in a magazine article so that is what I bought and found their service exemplary ]. IPW

It makes me wonder how many browsers are actually just filling in time when changing trains at New Street, or have booked on a specific train to save money and given plenty of leeway getting to the station? New Street is a pretty depressing place to have to spend half an hour (or more) so being able to nip down the road to somewhere more amenable is a better option (although, personally, I'd prefer a decent pub).. To be honest, I went to the Manchester shop quite a few times on this basis but often didn't find anything I wanted to buy beyond a magazine to read on the train. However, my wife did buy a couple of mugs adorned with reproductions of 1930s LNER advertising posters, which we still use daily. IPW

You should think about water - if modelling a garden by the house then an external tap on the building, with a suitable drain, would be ideal. My father had an allotment and I remember that there was a well, probably dug by the Council when the allotments were created. I think the hole was just covered by a board and buckets were kept in the shed when not in use along with the all-important rope. This would have been 60s/early 70s so there might be more standpipes now for water. Many allotment holders probably use fertiliser now, but back then it was considered expensive (and non-organic) so my father relied on a compost heap and would top it up with food waste from the house, which he took in a covered bucket on his bike. The allotment was right next to where he worked so if he 'dropped off' a bucket after lunch (he was near enough to cycle home for lunch) he really would be seen on the allotment in his suit and tie. I think one of the German scenic manufacturers does (or did) a compost heap model with a smoke generator incorporated.

The lesson from this saga is that 'crowdfunding' has become (and not just in model railways) a trendy term for an instalment purchase system. True crowdfunding involves subscribing for shares or loans and is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). A way of using this for selling products would be to set up a new company to which the rights to the product could be transferred for shares, at an independent valuation. Further shares would be sold to the 'crowdfunders', possibly in two instalments and with payment in dollars if that is what the largest part of the costs has to be paid in. The 'funders would get their model and the founder(s) their costs back (including a salary or equivalent). If there is scope to sell a further run, all parties would have a share of profits. I know this is more complex and would cost more, but it gives better protections rather than seemingly falling between consumer and investor protection. I also appreciate that more work is needed to see if this idea does behave as intended, but perhaps a group of manufacturers could pay the cost of establishing a standard model (and get comments from the FCA). I hope that this will not be regarded as amateurish interference since I have a background of over 35 years in investment management, mainly relating to private companies, and clients of the firms where I worked ranged from large insurance companies (such as AXA) and pension funds (such as Hermes) down to private individuals. However, I have to admit that we kept well clear of crowdfunding.

I have a recollection that at some point DJ produced a list on one of the threads on this forum showing how far he had to go to get to the minimum target for each proposed model. I haven't found it yet (although I think it was repeated at least once) but if someone can find it then it would provide a starting point for calculating how much money was paid - although I accept that the numbers still have to be treated with care since they obviously could have included expressions of interest which never led to a payment.

On record keeping, the liquidator might be restricted in his powers to compel disclosure but HMRC has clear rules and there can be heavy fines for not retaining records for the relevant period. The rules vary by type of tax but for Corporation Tax it is six years after the end of the tax year. HMRC will receive a copy of the report, as a creditor, and decide whether to take action if the liquidator has been unable to obtain figures. As far as I know, this would not normally become public unless it ends up in court which could take years.

Could it be that DJ thought that by referring to what I (and others) see as sales by instalments as crowd-funding he could avoid having to charge VAT and thus, in effect, be undercutting competitors? That sort of thinking might attract interest from HMRC. Buying shares in a company through crowd funding (the main use of it, at least as far as I have seen) is one thing because there is no VAT anyway and future rewards are indeterminate. But trying to translate the same methodology to straightforward retail sales strikes me as rather different.

DJ won't get a bill from the liquidators because they act on behalf of the creditors and have first bite at monies recovered. What Funding Circle can claim depends on their terms, but I think that sometime ago he posted on another DJ-related thread that he had two houses - quite possibly one was inherited. This would have been part of his discussion on 'capacity' to take on more projects. It might be worth mentioning that whilst I am retired now my background includes 35 years of working in investment on a professional basis. My first employer had a mortgage subsidiary which got into trouble around the late 80s in commercial loans, and a colleague and myself were asked to look into this. We did find some evidence of potential wrongdoing in certain loan applications and our report went as far as the CEO (we were an 8000 employee FTSE company) but he decided not to take any action due to potential publicity, although the mortgage manager found himself 'early-retired' and his deputy was demoted and moved to another job. As already mentioned, lenders to DJ almost certainly have a bad loans provision in their costings which will absorb their losses. An angle not mentioned (I think) is that Chinese contracts are likely to be in US dollars and, depending on when they were signed, there could have been a lot of currency movement between then and now. Keeping the same selling price in GBP would involve taking on the whole currency risk - especially if the crowd funder's price incorporated no profit margin. The longer the project takes to deliver, the more the risk. Finally, crowdfunding is regulated to an extent by the Financial Conduct Authority in the UK which defines four types in the relevant part of its website (in google, put in FCA crowdfunding). I think DJ comes under the fourth category where only payment provision is regulated. However, I would certainly recommend any business contemplated calling something 'crowdfunding' to check with the FCA to establish the regulatory position.

This has developed into a fascinating saga which is becoming the best read on any of these fora in a long time. My own involvement with DJ is limited to attempting to buy a Clayton and I have no losses myself, but one point that strikes me as not covered is the role of the Chinese. It does seem strange that DJ took a two week trip to China at such a crucial point for his business, unless it was not a 'jolly' as some have implied but actually a last ditch attempt to stop the Chinese pulling the plug - the factory may perhaps have demanded his presence for face to face talks. No doubt they retain a solicitor here, whom they could easily have then instructed to take the necessary steps. Any tooling that was completed is no doubt already marked for recycling. Crowd funding takes different forms as explained on the Financial Conduct Authority website but in DJ's case it would probably count as 'pre-payment crowdfunding' which is not regulated. However, if DJ implied that funders were making an 'investment' then the situation would be different. Put me down for a copy of the book when Warner publish it. No doubt it will sell more copies than any of DJ's models ever did.