DJM, the end.

[Markwj]

But can they use the tooling if Dave holds the intellectual property rights or do they now belong to the liquidator also.

[adb968008]

16 minutes ago, John M Upton said:

So, what happens to the tooling that exists?  Will other manufacturers be allowed to write a cheque and take it into their own ranges?  If so I would speculate we will not know who or what until they suddenly announce it as new tooling in their own ranges.

 

If I were a betting man the OO scale J94 would go to Hornby and the N scale Mermaid and Shark to Dapol.  

I think the direction the tooling is heading, was already decided last December. 

Daves been trying to secure/preventing it.

 

Remember the manufacturer took the unprecedented step of surfacing on the forum. The destination was suggested to some of us.

 

Sad Times, I think it was inevitable, I doubt the tooling will be lost, though money has, and DJ lost this dream.

 

Lets reflect on how it could have been.

 

Note, the TheGazette notices include contact details at CG-Recovery for creditors, I would urge attention there and not leave it too long. Though they will be honest about the realistic situation though. 

 

 

 

Edited June 6, 2019 by adb968008

[JSpencer]

1 minute ago, Markwj said:

But can they use the tooling if Dave holds the intellectual property rights or do they now belong to the liquidator also.

 

Only time will tell. It is equally possible other makes will step in with completely new models too.

[truffy]

if you really want an authoritative answer, consult a real lawyer or the liquidator. I suspect that this is only in the realms of speculation here.

Edited June 6, 2019 by truffy
spoiling end grandma

[Colin_McLeod]

4 minutes ago, Markwj said:

But can they use the tooling if Dave holds the intellectual property rights or do they now belong to the liquidator also.

Depends on whether the IP belongs to Dave personally or if it belongs to the company.  Since the design work was funded by the company (including crowdfunders) there is an argument that it should belong to the company and thus under the control of the liquidators to turn into some funds for the creditors.

[Edwardian]

14 minutes ago, Markwj said:

But can they use the tooling if Dave holds the intellectual property rights or do they now belong to the liquidator also.

 

10 minutes ago, truffy said:

if you really want an authoritative answer, consult a real lawyer or the liquidator. I suspect that this is only in the realms of speculation here.

 

Truffy, that is a fair comment about speculation - ever a temptation - but I think Markwj has identified an important issue.  It might be that the designer, rather than the company has the design IP.  That is not uncommon.  It might be a way of allowing the designer to retain some value or, indeed, the right to manufacture from the CAD with a successor company.  Clearly if anyone wanted to buy the tools (if available and not in disputed possession in China) I would expect them to want to ensure that they also acquired any necessary IP. 

 

EDIT: Sorry, cross post with Colin McLeod, who makes the point. 

Edited June 6, 2019 by Edwardian

[Ravenser]

27 minutes ago, John M Upton said:

So, what happens to the tooling that exists?  Will other manufacturers be allowed to write a cheque and take it into their own ranges?  If so I would speculate we will not know who or what until they suddenly announce it as new tooling in their own ranges.

 

If I were a betting man the OO scale J94 would go to Hornby and the N scale Mermaid and Shark to Dapol.  

 

If I were a betting man, some years down the line the J94 would reappear through Hattons with new mechanicals. Maybe also the 14xx

 

But we are a long way from that. First of all there will be the liquidation, and we will have to see if the liquidators are able to establish any claim in practice over the tooling - which is 6000 miles away in a foreign country with very different laws. Nor is it clear that DJM actually owned the tooling - and we cannot be certain  tooling for an N gauge Shark actually exists, let alone who owns it.

 

There is also the little  matter of an N gauge Class 17, which DJM also may well not own.

 

We will now have to see how the question of the alleged IP rights pans out, since the liquidators will have a duty to maximise whatever assets they can. I hope this will not cause any problems for Kernow over the D600. The Class 92 IP is now irrelevant - I very much doubt if any tooling actually exists for that.  (The IP for the J94, 1361 and 14xx was invalid. The Class 71 and Mermaid are also time-barred)

 

And I think that's about it on the tooling front. 

 

So much was promised, but so little delivered.

 

If someone else in the trade decides to respond by producing their own high-spec J94 or 14xx, then that might well be the last anyone ever hears of the DJM tooling for them

Edited June 6, 2019 by Ravenser
To note that the IP claims for J94, 14xx and 1361 were in fact invalid

[truffy]

1 minute ago, Edwardian said:

It might be that the designer, rather than the company has the design IP.

 

And that i what I was alluding to when it comes to the liquidator maximising value.

[acko22]

24 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Depends on whether the IP belongs to Dave personally or if it belongs to the company.

 

After a quick look and asking someone better versed in this type of thing than me, the IPs named owner are DJ Models Ltd, so they would be company assets rather than his own private ones.

But in that same thing the value of them is only there if someone is willing to pay for them! Which I would suggest unless there is tooling to go with the IP and Cads is highly unlikely

Edited June 6, 2019 by acko22
Worse grammar than my 8 year old nephew!

[Ravenser]

2 minutes ago, acko22 said:

 

After a quick look and asking someone better versed in this type of thing than me, the IPs named owner are DJ Models Ltd, so they would be company assets rather than his own private ones.

But in that same thing the value of them is only there is someone want to pay for them! Which I would suggest unless there is tooling to go with the IP and Cads is highly unlikely

 

Most of the IP registrations were invalid anyway, as they were made more than 12 months after the release of the model. I think the D600 , Class 92 and Class 17 were the only ones not time barred. 

[westie7]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

So now we know. 

 

The main thing now is for the liquidators to find out the extent of the shortfall - is the hole a large 5-figure sum or a 6-figure one? If the administration of DJM - and its crowdfunding monies was as haphazard as some of the anecdotes suggest , the liquidators may have a long and difficult job sorting out what money was taken, and where the funds ended up.

 

I really hope this is the end, and a line is drawn now. Enough money has been lost

 

Might never know the extent of the shortfall, however you can get an idea of financial trend by looking at the abbreviated figures for the last few years via the company check website

[MRDBLUE17]

Hi All,

 

I’m not sure this final news saddens me in any way. It brings the reality of my £30 for a 92 never appearing or a model from DJ. I was very sceptical and hence only put down for 1, I could see plenty of red flags that this wasn’t a good business model. 

 

Other players dropped working with Dave early on and for very good reasons. Announcing a list of models in 3 scales with no real funding was far too ambitious for a one man band. And collectively thousands have been lost/ taken from lots of modellers pockets that could be a lot of money to some and I feel very sorry for those who have potentially lost larger amounts. 

 

If anything I’m more angry that people have been strung along for far too long. It will be interesting to see the facts on just where the money has gone and what it was spent on.

 

Mark

[adb968008]

Liquidators don't work for free.

They will get their fee first and budget the wind up to whats feasible to recover.

 

If its already reached this stage, Id wager its unlikely theres loads of funds hanging around, to spend on chasing down toolings in China, or prolonging the companies death looking for a buyer of IP designs.

 

Once the companies fully wound up, What barriers remain to prevent those tooling being used ?

Edited June 6, 2019 by adb968008

[The Stationmaster]

40 minutes ago, Markwj said:

But can they use the tooling if Dave holds the intellectual property rights or do they now belong to the liquidator also.

It depends.  Some of the DJM tooling (as opposed to tooling commissioned by others for which they paid factories direct)  has been in limbo for a considerable time now.  Whether or not the liquidators can sort that out is an open, and potentially prolonged, question as it is perhaps likely as anything else that factories involved could also be creditors.   Any more recent tooling, to the limited extent that it exists,  is a separate but quite possibly similar matter where there could well be claim  and counter claim if the factories involved happen to be creditors.  Again it is potentially something the liquidators might have to sort out

 

As the  IPs were registered by DJModels they are now under the control of the liquidator but whether they are actually worth anything is a very moot subject.  They certainly won't be of much value to anybody if somebody else owns the tooling or if somebody else owns the .STL file and in at least one case it is simple to demonstrate that what was registered as the IP is different from the tooling (and in any case that tooling belongs to somebody else).   What we can hope is that the liquidators don't start trying to get any money out of other concerns on the basis of, say, the IPs as that could spread any agony further through the hobby.

 

44 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

 

Truffy, that is a fair comment about speculation - ever a temptation - but I think Markwj has identified an important issue.  It might be that the designer, rather than the company has the design IP.  That is not uncommon.  It might be a way of allowing the designer to retain some value or, indeed, the right to manufacture from the CAD with a successor company.  Clearly if anyone wanted to buy the tools (if available and not in disputed possession in China) I would expect them to want to ensure that they also acquired any necessary IP. 

 

EDIT: Sorry, cross post with Colin McLeod, who makes the point. 

But it then raises the question of who was the designer?  For instance in the case of one of the IPs the original CAD was produced by the factory in China from an original prototype works drawing while another CAD was similarly produced by the factory in China using a large scale model as the source because no suitable drawings of the original loco could be found.  But whatever the outcome there the crunch issue is more likely to be who owns the .STL file and who owns the tooling in respect of any possibility of future production and it would perhaps be up to the liquidators to try to prove ownership?

[Covkid]

9 minutes ago, MRDBLUE17 said:

Hi All,

 

I’m not sure this final news saddens me in any way. It brings the reality of my £30 for a 92 never appearing or a model from DJ. I was very sceptical and hence only put down for 1, I could see plenty of red flags that this wasn’t a good business model. 

 

Other players dropped working with Dave early on and for very good reasons. Announcing a list of models in 3 scales with no real funding was far too ambitious for a one man band. And collectively thousands have been lost/ taken from lots of modellers pockets that could be a lot of money to some and I feel very sorry for those who have potentially lost larger amounts. 

 

If anything I’m more angry that people have been strung along for far too long. It will be interesting to see the facts on just where the money has gone and what it was spent on.

 

Mark

 

I would just like to correct you on your last sentence Mark.  It depends how you define "strung along". 

 

If the New Whizzbang Motor company advertised a new car with some optional features that you thought was just what you wanted for your £22k, would you impulsively sign up to crowdfunding of it without checking the credibility of New Whizzbang ?  You would hand over the £6k straight away, then the subsequent "milestone" £5.5k - oh well, lets say about six months time.

 

Would you really do it, or would you really question whether your investment was actually secure ? I am not trying to suggest people should really have investigated DJM thoroughly prior to signing on the dotted line, but maybe my modelling budget means a little more to me. 

 

The collateral damage is that the APT-P is looking very unlikely to materialiase, and the DJ 92 likewise. However the 92 will be produced by other companies in at least 2mm and 4mm.  I am guessing the N king will almost certainly appear from another producer in the next five years, so in actual fact, all that is lost is a load of crowdfunding money which is really sad, and Dave's reputation.    

[5944]

Out of interest, have DJM actually released anything in the last couple of years? Last I can see is the N gauge mermaids in July 2017, and the OO class 71 a couple of months beforehand. Have I missed anything? Any commissions from retailers? He always stated the sales of one model would fund the next - if there's nothing to sell, he didn't stand much of a chance. 

[MRDBLUE17]

44 minutes ago, Covkid said:

 

I would just like to correct you on your last sentence Mark.  It depends how you define "strung along". 

 

If the New Whizzbang Motor company advertised a new car with some optional features that you thought was just what you wanted for your £22k, would you impulsively sign up to crowdfunding of it without checking the credibility of New Whizzbang ?  You would hand over the £6k straight away, then the subsequent "milestone" £5.5k - oh well, lets say about six months time.

 

Would you really do it, or would you really question whether your investment was actually secure ? I am not trying to suggest people should really have investigated DJM thoroughly prior to signing on the dotted line, but maybe my modelling budget means a little more to me. 

 

The collateral damage is that the APT-P is looking very unlikely to materialiase, and the DJ 92 likewise. However the 92 will be produced by other companies in at least 2mm and 4mm.  I am guessing the N king will almost certainly appear from another producer in the next five years, so in actual fact, all that is lost is a load of crowdfunding money which is really sad, and Dave's reputation.    

Hi Covkid,

 

You’ve nothing to correct me on. Comparing a small sum £30 to a £22k car being crowdfunded is just ludicrous. I knew at the time no one else was going to do the 92 in OO I had explored these options and took what I considered a gamble, knowing the risks. 

 

The facts are clear to see from when the model was announced and deposits paid. We have been strung along with delays and excuses as to why there was a lack of tangible progress on this one project alone. Next deposits and tooling where often just a couple more weeks away, then months etc. I’m not saying any of these were not genuine either, but this could have been communicated clearer long before it got to this situation so a better outcome could have been found for all concerned.

 

Mark

[The Stationmaster]

36 minutes ago, 5944 said:

Out of interest, have DJM actually released anything in the last couple of years? Last I can see is the N gauge mermaids in July 2017, and the OO class 71 a couple of months beforehand. Have I missed anything? Any commissions from retailers? He always stated the sales of one model would fund the next - if there's nothing to sell, he didn't stand much of a chance. 

The somewhat delayed production samples of the Kernow 1361s arrived in September 2017 according to an AY post on RMweb; the Hattons48XX/14XXetc production samples had arrived at the same destination in December 2016 according to another AY post.  As far as I know these were the last completed commissioned loco models to be delivered via DJM as an intermediary between the commissioner and the factory.  

 

The crowdfunded (originally Kickstarter) Class 71s arrived in May 2017 after a production delay and J94s were about in August 2016, again judging from posts on here.

[GWR-fan]

While I do have some sympathies for Dave,  one important question will have to be answered at some point in the future, was Dave trading insolvent? In a newsletter in late April,  the website was extolling the updates on the APT and even stating that you could still purchase further models.

 

Quote from the April 26th newsletter on the APT updates.  "....... If you are thinking of purchasing a second or even third APT, even if it’s just to sell on e-bay or for a model railway club friend, please feel free to, and remember you will still be able to do so at the lower ‘crowdfunded’ price.' (End quote).

 

Perhaps Dave considered the APT as the magical Phoenix that would rescue him from financial oblivion,  but surely by late April the writing would have been obvious that the company was in severe financial trouble.  Were further deposits received after this date?

[chris p bacon]

1 minute ago, GWR-fan said:

Perhaps Dave considered the APT as the magical Phoenix that would rescue him from financial oblivion,

 

In an early post about the costs he stated he was doing it for no profit (he would own the tooling) so it was walking a tightrope from day one.

[south_tyne]

Sad outcome to what has developed into a long running saga, but sadly somewhat inevitable. Personally I feel very sorry for Dave - he is clearly an enthusiastic, knowledgeable guy, who is a modeller at heart and had so much ambition. I must admit, I was really excited when DJM first launched and was really looking forward to the O gauge austerity tank - however, I had written this off as a 'never going to happen' years ago now. Sadly, the whole thing just hasn't worked out as planned. I wish Dave all the best for the future. I also have great sympathy for those who have invested and lost money. From all angles and perspectives it is a very disappointing conclusion. 

 

[turbos]

DJModels appears to be a case of the Peter Principle - everyone has a managerial ceiling, but nobody discovers it until they go above their managerial ability ceiling. Everyone has a managerial ceiling.

David Jones intentions were honorable, he did bring much wanted models in to fruition, but trying to continually find that rich seam of latent model 'wants' is hard going, especially after you have found a limited one. There's always plenty of encouragement for new models but it's actual sales that matter.

My main concern at the moment in all this is David Jones the person (I've never met or bought any of his products but have been tempted by the J94 now and again). He has lost more than anyone and possibly needs the moral support of the 'Model Rail' community now more than ever.The liquidators will do what they have to do, but what we all say and do over the next few days and weeks will influence what happens to the wreckage of this situation. He has a wealth of experience which would be a loss to our hobby. I hope he can play a part in future product to market development as that appears to be his strength, possibly as a consultant or suchlike.

The other aspect of this situation is that the financial markets tolerate our hobby (along with such things as Golf and Gyms) as it is considered to be a weather vane of the amount of money people have to spare/fritter. I really hope this isn't the first casualty in our hobby of a forthcoming recession.

 

Brian.

[timward55]

In a past life I observed a number of charitable companies go bust. Quite often this was preceded by a period of blind optimism that the problems could be resolved. Then there was a period of stress and near-panic as the optimism clashed with brutal reality. 

 

On a human level I could imagine there being a mixture of disappointment coupled with relief of not having the stress of being faced with insurmountable problems any more.

 

With regard to the administrators, they don’t come cheap. There must be some doubt that pursuit of uncertain and complicated IP and tooling ownership issues will be of benefit to creditors if any funds raised are swallowed up by administration fees. 

 

I was was one of those who kept their APT deposit refund from PayPal and my sympathy is with those who may lose significant sums as a result of DJ models going into administration.

[Hal Nail]

Much earlier in this, or one of the many other threads, there was a comment attributed to the liquidators to the effect that they were having trouble getting the tooling released in China.

 

It has been pointed out that the liquidators don’t work for free so will act within the constraints of what is economically practical (ie there’s a limit to how long they will pursue certain avenues).

 

Having said that, if those holding the tools are also creditors, then I’m sure this would be resolved.

 

[Chris M]

7 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Further, I cannot see it as a loss to the hobby, because the designer never managed to produce a product within my areas of interest that was to an worthwhile standard and really it had become a thing of empty promises long before the end. 

 

I see it as a big loss to the hobby, especially for those of us involved in N gauge. Not so much DJ Models but Dave Jones, the designer, is a keen N gauge supporter. As I understand it, he played a significant part in the design of a number of excellent Dapol models. I hope he might end up being in a position to design more models in the future, but it is probably best if he does this working for someone else's business.