N Gauge Forum

I read on the class 47/7 thread that Bachmann are trying to keep costs down on current DCC ready products because of grumbling customers. most of these new DCC ready locos, if not all are RRP over the £100.00 mark.

Hornby have came up with a Railroad range using the former Lima toolings and very old Hornby toolings on a budget chassis which is very similar to the former Lima N Gauge and Life Like set up, 1 power bogie and the other bogie has pick ups with wires leading to the power bogie.

On this forum, there are over 4000 members and obviously thousands of N Gauger's who are not on here, who model british outline.

Not everyone can afford these new dcc ready locos, Bachmann still have the old Poole toolings for locomotives, wagons and coaching stock, Maybe they would consider reusing those toolings on a budget chassis, for those interested in this hobby who could afford something at a lower price.

Anyone else think this is a good idea?

Mark

For anyone not bothered about DCC ready items or fine detail it would have appeal
assuming the cost was substantially lower than the main lineup, and the products ran ok.
Whether Bachmann would do it is debatable, for example if you wanted  a certain loco
available in both ranges many people might buy the cheaper version and thus the maker
would take longer to  recover the cost of developing the upmarket version.

The idea would appeal to those wanting a chassis or kit bashing however.

We come back to this question fairly frequently.

Personally: -

1) I don't think there would be sufficient scope to save money and bring the models down to a suitable price-point.

2) The Market isn't nearly big enough to support duplicate ranges and all it would do would be to dilute sales of the existing highly detailed models so commercially unattractive.

3) I don't think it is what the majority of modellers want anyway, regression to the crude inaccurate models of the like we had in the Farish Poole days is not at all appealing. Technology and expectation has moved on in my view.

4) By way of comparison and example, who is especially attracted to the recent Dapol "Re-treads" of the non Dcc Ivatt, 45xx and M7? In terms of running and detail these relatively new models have already been left way behind.

Regards

Roy

I personally don't see it been a starter, there are other issues apart from the ones Roy has pointed out.

Ok let me make sure I get the word right the DEMOGRAPHIC of N gauge modellers, as a rule of thumb N gauge is for the more adult modellers who as such demand higher standards. Also OO gauge is child friendlier and as I did I have OO gauge so a cheap version for little Jonny make sense and then Dad can have the more expensive ones.

There are lots of the older models still about and available from Fleabay and the like which you would most likely get a lot cheaper that what can be found.

As previously pointed out have duplicate ranges is a difficult balancing act and not really a risk worth taking for the N gauge market, however if there was demand for some the older range that were no long produced or going to be produced it may be worth a punt even if it was a case of detail it yourself.

Ironically, in a few years time it will be cheaper to produce models in other countries; China is becoming more expensive and the difference is less now than it was 25 years ago

Furthermore, a new supplier could fill this market
Sadly Dapol have duplicated some models already supplied by Farish (such as the Class 66)
However, Dapol produce many alternatives to the limited range offered by Farsh
The Class 37 and Class 47 could also be duplicated
Sadly the retail price remains about the same

A more basic version could be offered, but would customers be willing to sacrafice 20%, or would they prefer to pay the extra premium for the detailed model

Finally, if you want basic models, there are plenty of second hand ones on eBay UK

We were given a box of N Gauge 2 years ago for my son when he 8 years old, the fact that he had the smallest room in the house, it was ideal, but then we moved it to the loft for him and now he has his own shed in the garden ready for the new layout that we will build later this year.

A friend who also has a 10 year old son have N Gauge due to the size of their property, so they can run more realistic trains in a smaller space.

OO gauge and N Gauge now are virtually similar in R.R.P.

I admit there is a good strong second hand market via auction sites and various shops which both myself and son find useful when looking for locos and rolling stock.

If Bachmann still have the old Farish toolings then i think it's a shame to totally discontinue it, when others may welcome it.
ref duplication it seems that a lot of new items sell out pretty quick and become sought after such as Blue 20s, 25s, 26s, 27s, 37s, 40s, 44s, 45s, 46s, 47s, it the more unique private sector liveries that struggle to sell out and end up being sold off at discount prices. I cannot speak for Steam rolling stock as I have no interest in that era. but with diesel rolling stock green/blue and early Railfreight are the most popular.
I think the hobby is bigger than a lot think and if a manufacturer produces the right model in the right livery then they are on a winner.

unfortunately I agree with the sentiments that the budget range would probably reduce the sales of the detailed one, and so manufacturers would take longer to recoup costs, and therefore maybe be less interested in producing so many new models.

however, I wonder if undecorated models might be worth while ?

detailing bits in a bigger bag, the body being just that, with the locating holes for handrails etc still there for the modeller to install them after he's painted the body.

IIRC, this is more common in US HO models, but we have seen Dapol produce undecorated wagons, and I am sure that at one time they produced a loco without numbers.

the question of course is if the saving would make the model attractive to modellers.

just an idea  :hmmm:

alan

Quote from: class37025 on June 03, 2015, 08:01:57 PM
unfortunately I agree with the sentiments that the budget range would probably reduce the sales of the detailed one, and so manufacturers would take longer to recoup costs, and therefore maybe be less interested in producing so many new models.

however, I wonder if undecorated models might be worth while ?

detailing bits in a bigger bag, the body being just that, with the locating holes for handrails etc still there for the modeller to install them after he's painted the body.

IIRC, this is more common in US HO models, but we have seen Dapol produce undecorated wagons, and I am sure that at one time they produced a loco without numbers.

the question of course is if the saving would make the model attractive to modellers.

just an idea  :hmmm:

alan

OR! If they did a run of 2000 un-numbered BR blue 47s instead of the 500 x 47096 models (as an example) and added a pencil rub number sheet with numbers, so we could number our own.

If they were going to do that then why would they sell them as a cheaper alternative?

If they were going to do that Mark then realistically they would be charging more for the privilege and keep it to the higher priced models! 

There's no way I want to regress to the Poole models :no: I just love the newer Farish stuff with great detailing and decent motors. Just wish they'd sort the gears out so splitting doesn't occur.
No - please don't suggest reverting to brass :stop:

Quote from: newportnobby on June 03, 2015, 09:53:03 PM
There's no way I want to regress to the Poole models :no: I just love the newer Farish stuff with great detailing and decent motors. Just wish they'd sort the gears out so splitting doesn't occur.
No - please don't suggest reverting to brass :stop:

None of our new Farish DCC ready locos have had any gear issues, but thanks for the warning. The Poole and China split chassis flywheel stuff, we have had to stock up on spares for those, by scrapping some of the chassis units under kits which we had.

Quote from: mark100 on June 03, 2015, 08:52:37 PMOR! If they did a run of 2000 un-numbered BR blue 47s instead of the 500 x 47096 models (as an example) and added a pencil rub number sheet with numbers, so we could number our own.

Quote from: class37025 on June 03, 2015, 08:01:57 PM
however, I wonder if undecorated models might be worth while ?

The trouble is the modeller seems to expect a significantly lower price for unnumbered locos when in fact the cost of the transfer sheets is greater than the few pence saving from not printing the number on the factory production line. Far from a cost saving, the production cost is actually £2-3 more (and therefore retail price should be higher by a similar amount)!!

Quote from: class37025 on June 03, 2015, 08:01:57 PM
we have seen Dapol produce undecorated wagons, and I am sure that at one time they produced a loco without numbers.

Indeed they did - a batch of Class 73s and a small run of Class 67 however they were dismal sellers... even now you can find them new and they regularly turn up second hand either badly numbered or unnumbered, but always missing the unused transfers...

Quote from: mark100 on June 03, 2015, 06:26:23 PM
Hornby have came up with a Railroad range using the former Lima toolings and very old Hornby toolings on a budget chassis which is very similar to the former Lima N Gauge and Life Like set up, 1 power bogie and the other bogie has pick ups with wires leading to the power bogie.

The reason the Railroad works (sort of) for Hornby is (1) 00 is the introductory trainset scale - there is a market for cheaper items who wouldn't otherwise spend on 'toy trains'. In N there is much less of that sector - we'd not spend any more just some might spend the same amount differently. and (2) they acquired the Lima range cheaply and it was initially a way to get something back for their investment in items that were not fit to sell at current market rates.

Quote from: PLD on June 03, 2015, 10:45:21 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 03, 2015, 08:52:37 PMOR! If they did a run of 2000 un-numbered BR blue 47s instead of the 500 x 47096 models (as an example) and added a pencil rub number sheet with numbers, so we could number our own.

Quote from: class37025 on June 03, 2015, 08:01:57 PM
however, I wonder if undecorated models might be worth while ?

The trouble is the modeller seems to expect a significantly lower price for unnumbered locos when in fact the cost of the transfer sheets is greater than the few pence saving from not printing the number on the factory production line. Far from a cost saving, the production cost is actually £2-3 more (and therefore retail price should be higher by a similar amount)!!

Quote from: class37025 on June 03, 2015, 08:01:57 PM
we have seen Dapol produce undecorated wagons, and I am sure that at one time they produced a loco without numbers.

Indeed they did - a batch of Class 73s and a small run of Class 67 however they were dismal sellers... even now you can find them new and they regularly turn up second hand either badly numbered or unnumbered, but always missing the unused transfers...

I never knew that Dapol had already tried doing unnumbered locos or that doing transfer sheets would boost costs up. Thanks for sharing that.

I definitely agree that the UK market is not anywhere near large enough to support a "budget" range.

As someone relatively new to N gauge, I started out naively assuming that there'd be a broad range of "standard"/"classic" stock generally available. However it looks more like there are small production runs which get sold out quickly (and the ones which don't are the ones I wouldn't really want anyway...). And you never know if/when they'll be in production again; I've ended up grabbing what I can even if it's not quite what I want.

Case in question: I'd pay actual real money for a BR blue class 86, which IIRC had an original, very limited commission production and no sign that they'll ever appear again. Instead the market is flooded with discounted 86s in various specialist liveries, some of which I've ended up acquiring with an eye to respraying at some point, and which maybe gives Dapol the impression the only market for 86s is for cheapskates.

I do sympathize with the manufacturers who are faced with a plethora of conflicting demands and livery combinations, and when it comes down to it it's a "luxury" problem which I'm not going waste energy working myself up about.

What I'd like to see is better use made of the modern communications methods we have available, so consumers can express their wants and manufacturers know better what's in demand in this quite small, specialised market. However I don't think superficial engagement by manufacturers on forums like this or social media would be particularly productive as they'd be overwhelmed with wishlists and complaints and come away with the unhelpful knowledge that everyone wants everything preferably yesterday. What might be more productive is something I'll tentatively name "batch-on-demand", where people can place (actually pledge) pre-orders which the manufacturer will fulfill within a foreseeable period (maybe with additional features like customisation). Then (to go back to the class 86 example) Dapol would know that there's e.g. demand for blue ones but not much for the yellow Network Rail one-offs. Or maybe not much demand for either... but at least they'd know, which is an improvement over the current situation where all they know is I've bought an NSE-liveried 86 for half-price.

Apologies in advance for dampening the kindling wood but where would the manufacturing capacity for a second range come from?

If a manufacturer has only one factory and they cannot already delivery on promises made on their current range of products they'd have to rob Peter to pay Paul.  So production could be something like:

Years 1 and 2 - model 1 as premium and model 2 as budget
Years 3 and 4 - model 1 as budget and model 2 as premium
Years 5 and 6 - as per Years 1 and 2

So for example if you didn't get hold of a budget 47 in years 1 and 2 you'd have to wait at least three to four years for the next opportunity to buy one.

Additional manufacturing capacity could be gained by producing smaller batches of models so instead of say 5,000 DCC ready 47s split that number 50 / 50 between premium and budget ranges.  Not that this would help much as modellers complain enough already about getting hold of models from just one range.

Problems, problems.

Nigel

I keep hoping that Unions Mills, or anyone, will introduce railroad style n gauge diesels as I am getting to the point that paying for fine details (which sometimes breaks!) at the ever increasing prices for something I view from four feet going round the layout is not viable.  The same applies for the wagons, some cost nearly £30 now with detail I will look at only on the day I get it out the box.  Once it is on the layout I will never look at the fine detail again.

The reason that models are increasingly more detailed (and hence more expensive) is because this is what many people have been bemoaning for years, and as already discussed the market isn't there for two separate ranges. The manufacturers get criticised for lack of detail, so they put more effort in which raises the cost, then people complain about the cost! Put yourself in their shoes - they can't win really :no:


Paul

I agree with Simong what is the point of highly detailed under frames such as sand pipes and bits that fall off when the roof detail is crap and the gears split even in the box on the shelf . I would prefer a loco that ran really well for a long time than one that looks absolutely perfect as long as you don't use it.
On the subject of gears as NPN said we don't want to bring back brass gears but why can't they use the White nylon gears that Farish used once I would rather pay the extra for those knowing they would give smooth and quieter running than sand pipes and under frame detail that you can't see when your running your Locos which I thought was the idea of a model railway.
Bob

There are many that share those sentiments Bob, but just as many if not more that want the detail. One example is the ongoing discussion in the BachFar Diesel section about a missing pipe on one of the Class 47 variants ;)

Personally I wouldn't notice the difference, but it's a case of "each to their own" :thumbsup:


Paul

Modellers are we ever really happy?   :hmmm:

I must admit I's guilty of sitting on the fence on this one, as a Steam fan I am amazed even now at my Farish Jubilee models and the detail they have, but then I ask myself sometimes is it worth is when people who view my layout at home or exhibition refer to them as the "red ones".

Then again if I have to use rtr stock, this usually means I have to re-paint everything from those terrible BR liveries, and its at time like these when removing added on detail by the chaps at Farish/Dapol I wish I had a less detailed model to start with. ???? :confused2:

Like Paul I run steam (only) I think possibly what we need is something half way between the plain old Poole models and the current super detailed offerings.

Let's have the obviously visible items above footplate level like vac pipes & lamp irons, I always add those to Union Mills and old Poole locos, but below the footplate things like brake rodding is less noticeable and often fragile so leave it out.

Maybe a case for two levels of detail, all the bells and whistles for the collectors display cases, and a simpler version for the rest of us, possibly achieved by the basic model at a realistic price and a separate optional (pricey) enhancement kit (bag of bits) for the fuss pots.

I owned a model shop for 4 years not long ago and the average modeller would also mention the increasing prices, and many who were buying for a family layout would rather a less detialed model at a lower price.  This forum represents more of enthusiast market and we should not forget the family's who for many model shops represent over 50% of their trade. These increasing prices were putting people of N gauge as they could get Hornby railroad stuff so much cheaper.  It was hard enough to sell a brand they had not heard of without the price issue.  For the future of N Gauge we need models that are priced to attract the next generation who will have less ability to pay the high prices.

For me I have scaled back what I am going to buy as £100-120 for a loco, or £30 for one wagon when windows need replacing and kids want a holiday it is no longer justifiable to continue to build a large collection.

Quote from: simong on June 04, 2015, 04:47:56 PM
I owned a model shop for 4 years not long ago and the average modeller would also mention the increasing prices, and many who were buying for a family layout would rather a less detialed model at a lower price.  This forum represents more of enthusiast market and we should not forget the family's who for many model shops represent over 50% of their trade. These increasing prices were putting people of N gauge as they could get Hornby railroad stuff so much cheaper.  It was hard enough to sell a brand they had not heard of without the price issue.  For the future of N Gauge we need models that are priced to attract the next generation who will have less ability to pay the high prices.

For me I have scaled back what I am going to buy as £100-120 for a loco, or £30 for one wagon when windows need replacing and kids want a holiday it is no longer justifiable to continue to build a large collection.

Thank You for those comments, I'm glad to have a former retailer back me up to.  :claphappy:
There are to many people associating N Gauge for older people and that kids should have Hornby OO, this is no longer the case, People want what they can fit into a home at a realistic price and build up a large collection.

Quote from: Buzzard on June 04, 2015, 07:52:38 AM
Additional manufacturing capacity could be gained by producing smaller batches of models so instead of say 5,000 DCC ready 47s split that number 50 / 50 between premium and budget ranges.  Not that this would help much as modellers complain enough already about getting hold of models from just one range.

Nigel

Unfortunately the economics of that idea simply don't work for the way Kader/Bachmann operate...

You are effectively developing two models in parallel. There should be some shared cost so it shouldn't double the development costs but will probably add 40-50% AND you are doubling the set-up cost for each production batch. overall the impact on retail price would be that the 'Budget' model would very close to the current prices and the 'Premium' model would be at least 25-30% above current prices.

So, half the modellers pay almost as much as they do now for a poorer model while the other half pay more for the model they have now...  :hmmm:

Quote from: PLD on June 04, 2015, 05:59:17 PM
So, half the modellers pay almost as much as they do now for a poorer model while the other half pay more for the model they have now...  :hmmm:

This may indeed be the case. Think about what a "railroad" range model would be. Something like the old Farish Class 25 or for that matter the current 'Peak'. Basic tooling, no DCC or lights, and a workmanlike rather than elegant mechanism ill-suited to silent running or low-speed crawling.

Hattons and others have had loads of those models on sale for around the £50 mark, which would seem to be a sensible starting point for a low-end range. Have they encouraged new modellers? Hard to say. But when it comes to new N-gauge modellers asking about them on forums, they usually receive lots of negative comments about these 'obsolete' or 'basic' models.

What happens if Farish were to carry on manufacturing these potential "railroad" models? Would that limit the quantity of new models? Would a "railroad" range add to the N-gauge market or eat away at it? If the latter, that could mean less profit all around.

No-one has mentioned them yet, but does Union Mills count as a "railroad" range? Their models are (relatively) cheap, solid, reliable, but basic. Any number of colourful and charismatic models though, plenty to attract casual hobbyists, and you could argue their sturdy models would be ideal for younger modellers. But my guess is the younger modellers start off with the trains they know, whether diesel or electric, rather than steam.

Cheers, NeMo

I personally like the more detailed models and am prepared to pay for them even if I can't buy as many as I would like to.

What I don't like is that with all the detail and the way they are designed it's so difficult to take them apart for servicing.

I know we shouldn't have to service locos but when you live thousands of miles away it is sometimes a necessity.

:NGaugersRule:

Great point Nemo regards the older garish models still being available, the old garish Class 31 was not bad at all and buying this at £50-60 would work for me.

Quote from: NeMo on June 04, 2015, 06:09:08 PM
Something like the old Farish Class 25 or for that matter the current 'Peak'. Basic tooling, no DCC or lights, and a workmanlike rather than elegant mechanism ill-suited to silent running or low-speed crawling.

Objection, m'lud!
I have 3 of the old Farish 25s and they all run at perfectly slow speeds. OK - they are not as accurate as the latest release but they also weren't cheap at the time of purchase, being comparable to all the other models in the range. Sorry, but I'll defend these old 25s against all comers :P

Quote from: newportnobby on June 04, 2015, 10:33:20 PM

Quote from: NeMo on June 04, 2015, 06:09:08 PM
Something like the old Farish Class 25 or for that matter the current 'Peak'. Basic tooling, no DCC or lights, and a workmanlike rather than elegant mechanism ill-suited to silent running or low-speed crawling.

Objection, m'lud!
I have 3 of the old Farish 25s and they all run at perfectly slow speeds. OK - they are not as accurate as the latest release but they also weren't cheap at the time of purchase, being comparable to all the other models in the range. Sorry, but I'll defend these old 25s against all comers :P

The Poole produced Class 25/3 and Class 31 bodyshells are what my son and I are using, the class 25/3 is being fitted with a Minitrix 2959 chassis and the 31s PA1 chassis units by Life Like and Kato, the bodyshells will be modified with recessed cab doors and handrails on the Class 25 and handrails added to the 31s. But if these shells were manufactured with a budget type chassis then i would still buy them. Even the old type class 20 shells can be tidied up with some filing here and there.

This is a most fascinating topic - thank you Mark for starting this thread.

There have been some great points made on both sides of the fence and regardless of my own thoughts, I can see that there are arguments for and against the release of cheaper models.

With reference to certain locos in certain liveries selling out quickly, my opinion is that this is intended by the manufacturers. A quick review of the basic supply/demand curve illustrates that lower supply (supply curve shifting left) leads to a higher price. Many buyers I would think are collectors, and what better way to make something more collectable than to restrict the number available. It has been said on here already by a poster that they'll grab what they can get as they are not sure when it will be available again, if ever.

Here's an example ...

Let us assume the 4000 members on this forum are the total UK N gauge market (I know they are not, but let's just assume for now). Each member has a different propensity (willingness) to pay for a loco, but let's keep it simple for this example and break the "willingness to pay" down into four groups, with 1000 members being in each group;

Group A; willing to pay GBP150
Group B; willing to pay GBP100
Group C; willing to pay GBP75
Group D; willing to pay GBP50

Now, as a manufacturer faced with this, I have various strategies when it comes to allocation of production. I could produce 4000 BR Blue class 47's, bringing them to market at GBP150. Once I had sold 1000, I could knock the price down a little to capture group B, then C, and then D (this is what you see in real life through discounting). The average price paid would be GBP87.50 (half way between groups B & C).

Now, a far more cunning strategy would be to produce four different liveried class 47's, with the production run being 1000 for each. That way I could sell them all to group A for GBP150, hence bumping up my average sale price from GBP87.50 to GBP150. Voila! Forget about the rest of the market, I've just doubled my average selling price.

Now, I know this example is extreme (and not necessarily taken to this level), but it's purely an illustration of why I think production runs are limited.

Group D is left bottom feeding, fishing around on ebay and buying at shows and whenever there's a sale on. Group C has most probably been curtailed in their buying activity and is also turning more to ebay. Group B is bemoaning the ever increasing cost of models, whilst Group A will always have the money to buy the models, even at GBP300 per loco!

Just my thoughts guys. A great discussion, one of the best I've read on here for a while.

Lastly, could there be a market for a budget line for groups C & D? Possibly. I doubt Farish will supply it yet, but the thought, no, the mere mention by someone else that Bachmann should dust off the old Poole designs fills me with joy - If only for spares!

I enjoy fettling and fiddling with my locos. I'm not really into hyper detail, but then that's just me and I recognise others are. If Farish don't come out with a cheaper alternative, then I suspect someone else will, since the first hand market is becoming unaffordable to many.

Cheers

Dan

Quote from: PLD on June 03, 2015, 10:45:21 PM
Indeed they did - a batch of Class 73s and a small run of Class 67 however they were dismal sellers... even now you can find them new and they regularly turn up second hand either badly numbered or unnumbered, but always missing the unused transfers...

Are you sure about 67s? As something of a 67 anorak, I don't recall ever having seen any.

Quote from: DesertHound on June 04, 2015, 11:00:50 PM
This is a most fascinating topic - thank you Mark for starting this thread.

There have been some great points made on both sides of the fence and regardless of my own thoughts, I can see that there are arguments for and against the release of cheaper models.

With reference to certain locos in certain liveries selling out quickly, my opinion is that this is intended by the manufacturers. A quick review of the basic supply/demand curve illustrates that lower supply (supply curve shifting left) leads to a higher price. Many buyers I would think are collectors, and what better way to make something more collectable than to restrict the number available. It has been said on here already by a poster that they'll grab what they can get as they are not sure when it will be available again, if ever.

Here's an example ...

Let us assume the 4000 members on this forum are the total UK N gauge market (I know they are not, but let's just assume for now). Each member has a different propensity (willingness) to pay for a loco, but let's keep it simple for this example and break the "willingness to pay" down into four groups, with 1000 members being in each group;

Group A; willing to pay GBP150
Group B; willing to pay GBP100
Group C; willing to pay GBP75
Group D; willing to pay GBP50

Now, as a manufacturer faced with this, I have various strategies when it comes to allocation of production. I could produce 4000 BR Blue class 47's, bringing them to market at GBP150. Once I had sold 1000, I could knock the price down a little to capture group B, then C, and then D (this is what you see in real life through discounting). The average price paid would be GBP87.50 (half way between groups B & C).

Now, a far more cunning strategy would be to produce four different liveried class 47's, with the production run being 1000 for each. That way I could sell them all to group A for GBP150, hence bumping up my average sale price from GBP87.50 to GBP150. Voila! Forget about the rest of the market, I've just doubled my average selling price.

Now, I know this example is extreme (and not necessarily taken to this level), but it's purely an illustration of why I think production runs are limited.

Group D is left bottom feeding, fishing around on ebay and buying at shows and whenever there's a sale on. Group C has most probably been curtailed in their buying activity and is also turning more to ebay. Group B is bemoaning the ever increasing cost of models, whilst Group A will always have the money to buy the models, even at GBP300 per loco!

Just my thoughts guys. A great discussion, one of the best I've read on here for a while.

Lastly, could there be a market for a budget line for groups C & D? Possibly. I doubt Farish will supply it yet, but the thought, no, the mere mention by someone else that Bachmann should dust off the old Poole designs fills me with joy - If only for spares!

I enjoy fettling and fiddling with my locos. I'm not really into hyper detail, but then that's just me and I recognise others are. If Farish don't come out with a cheaper alternative, then I suspect someone else will, since the first hand market is becoming unaffordable to many.

Cheers

Dan

No worries Dan, it seems a shame for Bachmann to just shelf the old Poole toolings, Dapol are using the old Airfix and Kitmaster toolings for plastic injection moulding and they are older than me. So there should be life in those old Poole plastic injection toolings.
My son and myself are happy to still use the Poole designed Class 20, 25/3, 31, 40, (China produced 44, 45, 46,) 50, 55 body shells, Bernard at TPM is hopefully restarting later this year according to my nephew, so detailing parts can be purchased if required. I think some Steam enthusiasts would still buy the older models at a lower price.
It just seems a shame to just say goodbye to something that people will still use.

Cheers Mark

I can't really imagine the old Poole models being resurrected, partly because they wouldn't be much cheaper than the re-tooled models anyway. The recent price increases of the latter are in large part due to labour costs in China.

An old Poole 47 cost me £42.75 in 1993. Compared to general inflation levels it doesn't make the new Farish offerings seem that expensive really.

For steam enthusiasts Union Mills already produce a range of fairly basic, but reasonably accurate models that seem fairly well liked by modeller.

Regards,
Paul

Quote from: mark100 on June 04, 2015, 11:52:37 PM
It just seems a shame to just say goodbye to something that people will still use.

But look at it from the manufacturers' point of view. Why would they want to reduce the sales of the new models which they have recently spent a lot on developing? Because that's the reality of what would happen if two ranges were available in a fairly small market (which N gauge is)

There are plenty of old models available second-hand for anyone who wants them - and its particularly noticeable that when a new tooling comes out a glut of the old ones will appear on ebay and can often be picked up quite cheap.

Hello all,

Please let's not go back to the bad old days.

The first N gauge model I bought, in the mid 90s, was a Kato Eurostar.  The second a CJM kit for a Class 73.  The third was a Farish 33, and I remember the crushing disappointment I felt at how poor it was in comparison.

Nowhere in the world, to my knowledge, are models as basic as the old Farish stuff still being produced.

In recent years Farish and Dapol have made huge leaps in producing decent, high fidelity models.

Finally we are getting models to match standards routinely expected in Europe and the US.  OK, they might be a few quid more expensive than theirs, because our market is smaller but at least we can hold our heads up!

cheers

Ben A.

Quote from: mark100 on June 04, 2015, 11:52:37 PM
it seems a shame for Bachmann to just shelf the old Poole toolings

Bear in mind another factor is that much of this tooling is 30+ years old (e.g the class 47 first arrived in 1981, so is close to 35 years old) and may be near the end of its useful life anyway - some models were never re-done by Bachmann in Poole form as the tooling on them was already reportedly shot (e.g. the LMS 4P and the original 101 DMU).

Regardless of the tooling condition, it's clearly evident Bachmann want to move away from these dated models now anyway - unsurprisingly - would many businesses want to trumpet that they are releasing a 35 year old design; when instead they can blow us all away with the standard of models they are now tooling (which aren't actually that much more complex)? There are virtually none of the original Poole derived models now in their range, even ones that haven't been retooled seem to have stopped being rerun. I think this is the correct decision. Poole Farish designs *were* the N gauge market for around 20 years - without them British N would have had virtually nothing, so they deserve their rightful respect, but equally, it's time for them to enter a respected retirement in terms of future production IMHO.

Also, Bachmann don't have the market to themselves - there is Dapol who've hugely driven up standards by means of competition, and DJM I think will continue this trend. Equally, Dapol tell a useful lesson that duplicate models that aren't up to the same standard as the best in the market just don't sell as well - they were trying to get shot of B1s for as cheap as £40 for years after they were produced, as the Farish version is better.

Bachmann know they want their company image to go I suspect, and know their market (both size and what sells) better than we all sometimes give them credit for, and I think (sadly for some) that a Rail-road style range is just never going to be a starter any time near future.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Ben A on June 05, 2015, 02:00:14 AM
The third was a Farish 33, and I remember the crushing disappointment I felt at how poor it was in comparison.

It no doubt got split gears at some point too....?!

Cheers,
Alan

Have to pick up on one point Ben said,

Compared to the US and Europe we are playing catch up in reality when it comes to detailing, now while we all moan about price (even the most flush with cash do) but long term it may play in favour of the British N gauge scene.
There is a large following of US and European modeling in the UK and I have heard some people say "I may go British outline now the models are getting better" so it they are saying that Farish and Dapol may get larger markets from more overseas sales.
While I doubt it will bring prices down (we could only wish) if there are more people outside the UK buying British outline it may slow the rate of price increases overall, even as new features and upgrades come into play.

While not a low priced version if it holds prices down then would there be a need for a cheaper one?

We really have a bit of a dilemma here my layout was built in 1980 so is getting on I've obviously changed some worn out points but the basic track is the same and there is a lot of it the layout is 20ftx8ft ,So my point is while it's nice to have smoother running and more detailed models some of the newer Locos especially steam Locos derail randomly I think it's because of the new finer profile wheels .I recently baught an Ixion Manor it ran absolutely perfect on a layout at the show pulling 12 coaches no bother and was a bargain at £50 I was very pleased but on my layout with old Peco Streamline code 80 track the only way it will run without trouble is backwards .I think it's too light .I can't possibly afford to replace the track but would like to run some new models when I get the money to buy the odd new loco . So maybe the manufacturers are getting too fine scale with the wheels no we don't want Pizza cutter wheels back but a compromise would be nice for us older modelers I know this is going to be a controversial subject but perhaps you can see my point of view .
Bob

If you're experiencing derailments with multiple modern models then it's most likely the track to blame, in particular bumps and kinks. Modern models should run absolutely fine on older code 80 track - there is absolutely no reason to replace it all (modern Bachmann and Dapol sets come with exactly this track). It may just need some fine going over to eliminate any such issues.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 02:12:29 AM

Quote from: Ben A on June 05, 2015, 02:00:14 AM
The third was a Farish 33, and I remember the crushing disappointment I felt at how poor it was in comparison.

It no doubt got split gears at some point too....?!

Cheers,
Alan

In a feeble attempt to balance that - I bought one new donkeys years ago for £50 and it hasn't split a gear yet (frantically touches wooden table)

Dr Al  I aggree with you it is caused by my old track but my point is the older Locos with more weight run perfectly with absolutely no derailments at all .
I have a new back to back gauge for finer profile wheels so it's not that ,
both the Ixion Manor and Dapol 9F with the modified front bogie  are the two problem Locos .
The 9F runs better with the metal coupling in the front it now only derails sometimes but it only made a slight difference on the Manor ,but it does look good running backwards which they did sometimes on the real railways anyway so I'm not too bothered .
I really think it's the light weight of the Locos as well as my very old track .
Bob

Can I just add a slightly different angle? That of introducing the next generation.

A couple of years ago I built a OO layout for my Grandson (Then 4). At the Folkestone show I purchased a BRAND NEW 0-4-0 loco for £5.00! Yes, that's not a typo, £5.00.

I was thinking Nellie or Polly standard but it has been a faultless runner and a pleasure to operate. Had I known how good it was going to be I would have bought more.

No doubt many of those locos have found their way onto industrial or narrow gauge layouts (O-16.5) If you now apply that to say the Dapol 0-4-2 and 2-6-2 along with the Farish 0-6-0 and their 2-6-2 I think there could be a new market for tougher locos that can take the knocks the younger generation will give them. It could also open up the kit bashing market as people may be more willing to have a go if the chassis was cheaper.

Just my thoughts.

On the subject of gears why o why can't we go back to the White nylon type gears Farish used for a while ,they were  much better they were quiter and smoother but I'm told were too expensive to make .I'd rather pay a few quid more than put up with split gears . If I can afford it I buy second hand Locos no matter what they look like as long as they are cheap just to get the gears maybe someone out there could produce some Already fitted to the original wheel sets .
Bob

Good morning All

I was just about to put pen to paper (or should that be finger to keyboard), when I read GrahamB's post above. I think Graham is bringing us back to Mark's initial posturings, which were;

" ... for those interested in this hobby who could afford something at a lower price."

We seem to be talking a lot about substitution of product (that is buyers opting for the cheaper range over the more detailed range, hence undermining the good work done by Bachmann with their newer models). Many people have said "please let's not go back to the bad old days", when really nobody is suggesting that we give up the strides made by Bachman et al.

Where GrahamB and Mark are coming from, to my mind, is in a) growing the market and b) having product offerings for those who cannot afford current prices.

a) Growing the market:

One way to grow a market is by reducing the price. Yes, this might be achieved through introducing a second, cheaper product, but for entry level hobbyists, current prices might just be too high. Think of a hobby or fleeting interest you've had in the past. You wouldn't wish to commit large sums of money to kit / equipment if you weren't sure if you would like the hobby or not. Therefore you opt for "entry level" kit so that you can try the hobby out. This could be anything from an SLR camera to golf clubs to kite surfing equipment - you name it. Many hobbies have different product offerings depending upon your experience with the hobby, your level of interest, your willingness / ability to pay etc.

A market can also be expanded in size by a lowering of price. Think of low cost airlines. They created a market which did not exist before they were formed. People now fly as often as they take a bus, all thanks to the lower price point offered by the low cost airlines. Yes, they did alter the product slightly from the "full service" airlines, in order to be able to offer the service at a lower price, and hence "create demand".

b) having product offerings for those who cannot afford current prices:

Bachmann, in bringing out an "entry level" range, needn't cannibalise the Graham Farish brand they've worked hard to build up. It could be branded as something else, so as to be distinguishable from Graham Farish. Associating it with Graham Farish, I believe, would just confuse the consumer, especially those not so into the hobby as us on here.

A good example of this is Volkswagen. Now, if I'm not mistaken, isn't the VW Passat estate also available as a SEAT, a Skoda and an Audi? It's the same car with a different badge and different trimmings. The best reason for this is to be able to maximise revenue, selling the car to as much of the market as possible, segmenting the product (via different badges and trimmings) so that the price can be best matched to each market segment's willingness to pay? This is a bit like my example above of groups A/B/C/D and having a product which you can sell to each group. Without three of the four brands of the car, VW might only be able to sell to 1/4 of the market.

So, should there not be consideration given to an n gauge market segment that might be being missed? I don't know the answer, should this be considered, and I imagine the manufacturers do consider this from time to time. Ultimately they are privy to commercial information and sales figures so they are best placed to decide upon this.

My inkling, however, is that if something doesn't happen with the major manufacturers then somebody else will try it, since it's just not a hobby that is affordable to most people these days. My money would be on Hornby having a better understanding of the entry level market. If nobody else tries it then I think the manufacturers will not be around in x years to come.

I know as modellers we want the best we can get. I think Mark was trying to bring to the table an option for others, who might then grow into modellers and also want "the best they can get". However, if the only car available on the market was a Rolls Royce, then 99.9% of us wouldn't be driving.

Best

Daniel

Quote from: Bob Tidbury on June 05, 2015, 09:57:30 AM
Dr Al  I aggree with you it is caused by my old track but my point is the older Locos with more weight run perfectly with absolutely no derailments at all .

I'm afraid I'm of the opinion that manufacturers shouldn't modify their designs to cope with poor track - most folk have no trouble with these sized flanges or weights of models.

N needs a level of precision of tracklaying to get the best out of it - older models may have been more tolerant of gaps, kinks, bumps and uneven sections, but I'm not in favour of the retrograde (IMHO) step of going back to deeper flanges or the likes to mitigate this (even if not as bad as they used to be). There would be an outcry from most if this happened, as there was for some of the early Dapol models that did exactly this (e.g. first batch 9Fs with steamroller wheels, and first batch of 221 Super Voyagers. Dapol retooled the wheels on both for subsequent runs).

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 10:54:01 AM
A good example of this is Volkswagen.

The absolutely key difference I think here is that VW are a huge worldwide manufacturer, with a huge market to draw on. N gauge model rail and Bachmann specifically are no such manufacturer. They cater for a very small, mainly UK, bespoke market that has very limited room for competing products.

The B1s are a perfect example of this.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Ben A on June 05, 2015, 02:00:14 AM

Hello all,

Please let's not go back to the bad old days.

The first N gauge model I bought, in the mid 90s, was a Kato Eurostar.  The second a CJM kit for a Class 73.  The third was a Farish 33, and I remember the crushing disappointment I felt at how poor it was in comparison.

Nowhere in the world, to my knowledge, are models as basic as the old Farish stuff still being produced.

Kato have a range of EMUs marketed as "KOKUDEN", which are very basic 3-car EMU sets based on the Japanese class 103 EMU in the liveries common in Tokyo when they were first introduced in the 1960s. They're missing "advanced" features such as forward/rear lights, no bogie pickups apart from the power car, or any form of additional detailing bits to worry about, and as far as I know they use the tooling for the old Kato mainstream production sets, which is not bad but  quite primitive compared to contemporary models (the motor unit is however the modern "underfloor" type). Here's one I happen to have:

(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/40/thumb_16265.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=16265)

which I bought in the dim and distant days of last summer when I was first trying out N-gauge after a hiatus of about 25 years from ('Orribly Oversized) model railways. The reason I bought it was: it was cheap, at around 3500 yen (around 20 quid at the current exchange rate, and about half the cost of "fully featured" basic sets), which is low enough to be able to write off as an experiment. Despite being a basic model I found it pretty damn impressive, watching it trundle back and forth on a short stretch of track and I was hooked.

Given that experience, I do think some sort of basic range might be very useful as a kind of "gateway drug", and I agree with @DesertHound (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=3706) 's sentiment that it should be distinct from existing brands. However I'm not sure how feasible that would be for the UK - in Japan, N gauge dominates and Kato can evidently afford to produce both the basic and "advanced" versions of the 103, and the market is big enough for Tomix and MicroAce to also have their own versions. To be honest I'm at a bit of a loss to come up with an equivalent basic model for the UK which would have reasonably universal appeal while not likely to cannibalize sales of the "advanced" model.

Quote from: railsquid on June 05, 2015, 11:55:03 AM
However I'm not sure how feasible that would be for the UK - in Japan,

The market in Japan is supposedly huge compared to here - I might be wrong, but IIRC it was said that Kato do runs of 10,000 models; as compared Dapol/Farish's 250-1000 odd....

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 11:41:48 AM
They cater for a very small, mainly UK, bespoke market that has very limited room for competing products.

That's also true Al, hence the option of growing the market. The market, or should I say the manufacturers, are facing a cross-roads in my opinion. Continue on the current path until you are down to your last few customers who can afford GBP300 for a loco and rake of ten wagons, or adapt the product so that the price point can be changed, in an attempt to grow the market.

Whether the market can be grown or not, with "toys" such as ipads, playstations etc. competing for the youf's (sic) attention, I cannot say. If we accept it cannot, however, then we are either consigned to a very small market (maybe that's the case and we accept that) or worse, a continually decreasing market, with ever increasing prices for the few modellers / collectors left.

I'm always heartened whenever I go into a model shop and see a thirty-something guy walk in and ask what the options are for starting out in "N". Sadly I think they are the last of the "model train" generation who we're likely to see in reasonable numbers reconnecting with their childhood, or their dad's hobby. It would be even better if they were bringing their kids in too! I know there are kids interested in the hobby (either thanks to dad's interest / support or just down to their own interests) but what could we, as a hobbyist body, do to broaden the appeal?

Cheers

Dan

Dr Al while I aggree my track is not perfect after 30 Odd years I still say that a lot of the problem is the weight of the steam Locos all my diesel Locos including my Class 22 which has the new fine scale wheels ,run fine because they are heavier and thier wheels are nearly the same size as pony and bogie wheels on steam Locos but never mind I will close my post now and hope I haven't annoyed you too much with my little rant. Im not one to keep on and on .
Bob

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 11:58:44 AM
but what could we, as a hobbyist body, do to broaden the appeal?

Personally I think that getting folks into model rail in general is the important thing. Not the scale.

Point folk to OO - it's the biggest option for getting new modellers, youngsters (particularly through Hogwarts models or Thomas the tank models, which are all available in OO) etc into railways. From this folks will then filter down in time to the other scales. OO also has much more market presence in wider stores, Amazon, high street etc, and is more widely known in the population in general (many more folks have heard of Hornby and OO, 'dublo' than of Graham Farish or Bachmann).

I think this is the way to grow things - grow model rail as a whole, not aiming at N in particular.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Bob Tidbury on June 05, 2015, 12:01:22 PM
I will close my post now and hope I haven't annoyed you too much with my little rant. Im not one to keep on and on .

Not at all  :no: - all healthy debate.   :wave:

I'm happy with current standards of most models in terms of weight - though there are some specific exceptions e.g. the new Farish 4F which is just way too light in terms of pulling power.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:04:56 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 11:58:44 AM
but what could we, as a hobbyist body, do to broaden the appeal?

Personally I think that getting folks into model rail in general is the important thing. Not the scale.

Point folk to OO - it's the biggest option for getting new modellers, youngsters (particularly through Hogwarts models or Thomas the tank models, which are all available in OO) etc into railways. From this folks will then filter down in time to the other scales. OO also has much more market presence in wider stores, Amazon, high street etc, and is more widely known in the population in general (many more folks have heard of Hornby and OO, 'dublo' than of Graham Farish or Bachmann).

I think this is the way to grow things - grow model rail as a whole, not aiming at N in particular.

Cheers,
Alan

That's a fair point. I had second-hand OO when I was young, as I'm sure many on here did.

I was going to bring up the "themed sets" too. They seem to be prevalent in OO. Does anybody think there would be a market for them in N gauge? Harry Potter in N? Just a thought.

Hornby seem to be very good on capitalising on movies, events etc. and associating them with their models. A great way to broaden the appeal. It will be interesting to see their approach to N gauge through Arnold. I know it's a "slowly slowly" approach and through Arnold it seems more aimed at the modeller, but I wonder what strategy they will use in N.

Going back to the above poster's point, if kids do like OO, then if they get down to a model railway exhibition and see N, they might just become a convert. That's what happened to me.

I hope for all of us the hobby continues in a healthy manner and the younger generation join us to carry the baton.

Dan

I agree with Dr Al

Over the last couple of weeks I have witnessed, and experienced the following.

When looking in a certain shop in Liverpool, at a crimson Jubilee the other half pointed out that I could get the same model but double the size for half the price, as a none modeller they could not see the initial sense in paying so much for N gauge.  When I mentioned the benefits of space I was told just build a bigger layout.......

The other this I witnessed was a middle aged chap with his son, purchasing some 00, and the Dad telling the son he could have the loco or the coach but not both, when I looked at what they were thinking about buying I was amazed that there was only £15 pound difference between the two.

I know we al moan about the costs, but know really they are good value (well sometimes at least) but for someone outside the hobby they must seem huge,

Railsquid

Great post! You and others, including Al, have made a fair point about market size, and this will no doubt sway the economics of what can / cannot be produced.

That said, the mission is to try and grow the market size, if at all possible.

Dan

V interesting thread about the economics of the industry  :thankyousign:

One issue for me is the magazine reviews. In Model Rail, for instance, they are astoundingly detailed, far beyond any demands I might have. Any deviation can lead to savage marking down. Is N gauge a rivet counters' ghetto?

Quote from: paulprice on June 05, 2015, 12:14:08 PM
... but for someone outside the hobby they must seem huge,

Paul

Surely that's why we need to explore ways in which the prices can be brought down (note, prices brought down for entry level models, not the "all singing, all dancing" varieties).

I think Mark's opening post was about making N gauge accessible to those who cannot afford current prices.

I'm not saying I hold the answers, nor that market size isn't an issue (it clearly is).  :hmmm:

Cheers

Dan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:14:54 PM
That said, the mission is to try and grow the market size, if at all possible.

Specifically for the N market size I think the way to do this is have outstanding high quality models, like those we are now getting;  precisely not a 'budget' lower quality range. Couple this with N's big advantage of space then it becomes a very attractive scale.

IMHO superb quality is what will make existing modellers in OO (or others) consider switching - Poole standard models will not.

Is N not currently growing anyway (anyone know of any stats?), precisely because of this?

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:19:42 PM
Surely that's why we need to explore ways in which the prices can be brought down (note, prices brought down for entry level models, not the "all singing, all dancing" varieties).

Bachmann have been very candid about this (their press briefing on this is on RMWeb) - it's labour costs in China that have caused big price increases recently. That's irrespective of the quality of model (30 year old design or latest cutting edge) being made unfortunately.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Buffin on June 05, 2015, 12:17:53 PM
V interesting thread about the economics of the industry  :thankyousign:

One issue for me is the magazine reviews. In Model Rail, for instance, they are astoundingly detailed, far beyond any demands I might have. Any deviation can lead to savage marking down. Is N gauge a rivet counters' ghetto?

:laughabovepost: :laughabovepost: :laughabovepost:

Good point Buffin. I guess it all comes down to the individual. For me no (I don't know much about the real trains), but for others yes, and that's perfectly understandable.

So, using my example above of VW Passats, we could now segment the market between the rivet counters and the non-rivet counters. The non-detailed loco is your VW and the "all signing, all dancing" version is your Audi. Voila.

Again though, a valid point has been made as to the economics of producing two different versions, particularly re market size. Hence I don't know if the economics would support it. What I think would support it is a larger market. How do we get a larger market ... ah, it's chicken and egg time  ???

Mention was made of the old Poole tooling being too old now. Surely they could dig out a few pieces to bring out a basics range, thereby attempting to grow the market. Just a thought.

Do something to grow the market and then the economics will change, enabling more models for different segments of the market to be produced (as Railsquid excellently pointed out in Japan).

Cheers

Dan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:21:51 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:14:54 PM
That said, the mission is to try and grow the market size, if at all possible.

Specifically for the N market size I think the way to do this is have outstanding high quality models, like those we are now getting;  precisely not a 'budget' lower quality range. Couple this with N's big advantage of space then it becomes a very attractive scale.

IMHO superb quality is what will make existing modellers in OO (or others) consider switching - Poole standard models will not.

Is N not currently growing anyway (anyone know of any stats?), precisely because of this?

Cheers,
Alan

A valid opinion. Is this how it is in Germany also I wonder.

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:19:42 PM

Quote from: paulprice on June 05, 2015, 12:14:08 PM
... but for someone outside the hobby they must seem huge,

Paul

Surely that's why we need to explore ways in which the prices can be brought down (note, prices brought down for entry level models, not the "all singing, all dancing" varieties).

I think Mark's opening post was about making N gauge accessible to those who cannot afford current prices.

I'm not saying I hold the answers, nor that market size isn't an issue (it clearly is).  :hmmm:

Cheers

Dan

Dan

Its not an easy one, I use to be responsible for supplying stock into Europe from a company which had its own plant in China, and I can tell you the production issues are a total nightmare, a good example was the problem of turning down known sales or older products, because we had to get newer ones to produced and to market, and to make the production runs economical it terms or set up times etc we had to run large batches which mean excess stock, at least until word got out about the new ranges but this could take months, and with a relatively cheap unit cost I was still having nightmares about stock holding, and import duties for stuff that once it was made I had to get to the UK, I dread to think what sort of stress the chaps at Bachman and Hornby are under.

I mean my previous company was managing to run at a profit, but is Hornby or are they still running at losses like in more recent years?

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:23:54 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:19:42 PM
Surely that's why we need to explore ways in which the prices can be brought down (note, prices brought down for entry level models, not the "all singing, all dancing" varieties).

Bachmann have been very candid about this (their press briefing on this is on RMWeb) - it's labour costs in China that have caused big price increases recently. That's irrespective of the quality of model (30 year old design or latest cutting edge) being made unfortunately.

Cheers,
Alan

That's true, but labour cost is something that would decrease, per unit of production, should more models be produced for a larger market. Okay, labour cost isn't strictly a fixed cost (it does increase with an increase in production), but there would be economies of scale in many areas through increased production (of course you would only increase production if there was a demand to be met).

Dan

One thing I didn't see mentioned in all this topic, if i missed it, please forgive.. still on the first coffee of the day..

The market has changed over the years.   I started in N gauge in the 70's.  My first loco was a Grafar holden tank which threw it's coupling rods across the room every time it started up.. sooo  in 1972 the peco jubilee came out..  9 pounds 10 shillings.  (still have the box).   If you take that by most of the general inflation rates between then and now  thats about 160 - 180 pounds in todays money.  Whilst it stacks up quite well against the latest farish, it's still sub par on some fronts and the new ones are comparatively cheaper..  however what has changed is that todays market comprises people who want instant gratification and less modelling and they want it now..  its the current generations curse to my mind.

For me..  that Jubillee was one Xmas present and one birthday present, and I was lucky.  I was brought up where if you wanted something like that, you saved...  today.. it has to be available right now and be affordable right now in someones eyes.

Even today, I still have to save for my trains..  and start putting money away when they are announced in the full knowledge that there will be enough available when it's released..  but how often do I see people saying.. oh man that's way to expensive when it's released after it was announced 2 years previously.  I agree there a major difference between finding 150 pounds now, or finding a couple of quid a week for 18 months.

Personally, I don't think the market in UK N gauge is big enough for a cheap range..  frankly, it's only just big enough for the few manufacturers we have now.

For anyone interested in the real financial costs of releasing a UK locomotive, I would suggest that you do some research on the Interwebs of the actual manufacturing costs and the real costs of distribution, packaging, spares, QA and marketing, and then if you feel that you have a good handle on all of that, and can produce the thing..  go kickstarter with it and see if you get the backing.

An alternative would be to see if any of the old manufacturing tools from Farish are still available and see if they are avialable for sale..  then with the above do a kickstarter...  that will give you far more feedback than just postulating a theory within a subset of enthusiasts.

As a final comment, i would point out that by comparison to some of our continental friends, there's a lot of locomotives ready to run on the continent that are 2/3 times (or more) expensive than ours that regularly sell out on pre-order before manufacture :)

I think, in summary, the biggest change is not an increase in price, its the expectations of the current marketplace..  not that that is a bad thing.. manufacturers need to be aware of the I want it now and cheap fraternity..  but I think they have a pretty good handle on what currently sells and how much people will pay.

After all..  CJM models are at least 3 times the cost of farish/Bachmann..  have no working lights, are not DCC ready (although they can be chipped) and still regularly sell out years in advance.

Those expectations also drive the.. out of the box.. on the track rtr need..  the "modelling" aspect of our hobby is getting rarer..  hey.. me to on this :)  not pointing fingers, due to time constraints and to me that provides even less market for a cheaper version.

Regards

Graham

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:26:24 PM
Mention was made of the old Poole tooling being too old now. Surely they could dig out a few pieces to bring out a basics range, thereby attempting to grow the market. Just a thought.

This is a fair point in terms of logic of the existing tooling.

I would suspect that Bachmann want to distance themselves from the elderly models now though, and drive their own high quality range so that that's how their brand image is seen. Common sense seems to suggest that having a brand image of producing fairly ancient tooled models isn't a particularly good or forward looking one?

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:31:45 PM
That's true, but labour cost is something that would decrease, per unit of production, should more models be produced for a larger market. Okay, labour cost isn't strictly a fixed cost (it does increase with an increase in production), but there would be economies of scale in many areas through increased production (of course you would only increase production if there was a demand to be met).

True I guess, but the markets take time to grow in model rail - it simply won't come overnight or even in a couple of years - a lot of folks perception of N is still that of the bad old days of pizza cutter wheels, poor running (which in itself isn't really true, it's a perception) and split gears. It's why I think excellent quality high detail, high standards is the road to growing N.

In the interim, labour costs are clearly escalating steeply from the cheaper times we used to know. That's just something we'll have to accept in the short term no matter what the model is :-( .

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: paulprice on June 05, 2015, 12:31:26 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:19:42 PM

Quote from: paulprice on June 05, 2015, 12:14:08 PM
... but for someone outside the hobby they must seem huge,

Paul

Surely that's why we need to explore ways in which the prices can be brought down (note, prices brought down for entry level models, not the "all singing, all dancing" varieties).

I think Mark's opening post was about making N gauge accessible to those who cannot afford current prices.

I'm not saying I hold the answers, nor that market size isn't an issue (it clearly is).  :hmmm:

Cheers

Dan

Dan

Its not an easy one, I use to be responsible for supplying stock into Europe from a company which had its own plant in China, and I can tell you the production issues are a total nightmare, a good example was the problem of turning down known sales or older products, because we had to get newer ones to produced and to market, and to make the production runs economical it terms or set up times etc we had to run large batches which mean excess stock, at least until word got out about the new ranges but this could take months, and with a relatively cheap unit cost I was still having nightmares about stock holding, and import duties for stuff that once it was made I had to get to the UK, I dread to think what sort of stress the chaps at Bachman and Hornby are under.

I mean my previous company was managing to run at a profit, but is Hornby or are they still running at losses like in more recent years?

Fair cop Paul. That's a whole new can of worms we're opening there. I can only imagine the challenges faced. That said, isn't this part of "doing business" and a challenge which should be overcome, as opposed to seen as a constraint on growing your market? I'm not for one minute discounting your sentiments, just wondering why it should be a barrier, as opposed to a challenge to be overcome.

I don't know the ins and outs of the Bachman manufacturing, but I think they contract their manufacturing to third party factories - is this the case? If it is, then this only goes to back up what you say about what a nightmare it must be Paul.

That said (and me being strictly a Poole fan), I believe in reaping what you sow and by moving the factory so far away from the home market Bachmann and Hornby must have known they would face these issues. Didn't Hornby encounter some serious production issues in China a few years back? I'm not saying the companies would have survived had they continued with an "on-shoring" policy, just that if you move your factory to the other side of the planet then logistics has just become a whole lot more complicated.

Would be interested to hear more on the logistics front Paul. This really is an interesting discussion we are having.

Cheers

Dan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:41:19 PM
I don't know the ins and outs of the Bachman manufacturing, but I think they contract their manufacturing to third party factories - is this the case?

No, I believe their parent company, Kader, has a factory in China where all Bachmann products are produced for all their markets.

Edit: more info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kader (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kader)

Cheers,
Alan

P.s. This phrase of the wikipedia article is telling:

"Kader's business model for each take over, from its original purchase of Bachmann to the present day, is to buy a perceived quality brand in the target market or country. The company then closes local in-country production facilities, and then improves quality by re-engineering the models in Hong Kong, and reduces cost by producing the models in mainland China."

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:44:02 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:41:19 PM
I don't know the ins and outs of the Bachman manufacturing, but I think they contract their manufacturing to third party factories - is this the case?

No, I believe their parent company, Kader, has a factory in China where all Bachmann products are produced for all their markets.

Edit: more info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kader (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kader)

Cheers,
Alan

Good info, cheers.

The other reference piece - Bachmann on price increases:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/85287-bachmann-why-price-increases-are-necessary/ (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/85287-bachmann-why-price-increases-are-necessary/)

HTH,
Alan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 10:54:01 AM
Good morning All

I was just about to put pen to paper (or should that be finger to keyboard), when I read GrahamB's post above. I think Graham is bringing us back to Mark's initial posturings, which were;

" ... for those interested in this hobby who could afford something at a lower price."

We seem to be talking a lot about substitution of product (that is buyers opting for the cheaper range over the more detailed range, hence undermining the good work done by Bachmann with their newer models). Many people have said "please let's not go back to the bad old days", when really nobody is suggesting that we give up the strides made by Bachman et al.

Where GrahamB and Mark are coming from, to my mind, is in a) growing the market and b) having product offerings for those who cannot afford current prices.

a) Growing the market:

One way to grow a market is by reducing the price. Yes, this might be achieved through introducing a second, cheaper product, but for entry level hobbyists, current prices might just be too high. Think of a hobby or fleeting interest you've had in the past. You wouldn't wish to commit large sums of money to kit / equipment if you weren't sure if you would like the hobby or not. Therefore you opt for "entry level" kit so that you can try the hobby out. This could be anything from an SLR camera to golf clubs to kite surfing equipment - you name it. Many hobbies have different product offerings depending upon your experience with the hobby, your level of interest, your willingness / ability to pay etc.

A market can also be expanded in size by a lowering of price. Think of low cost airlines. They created a market which did not exist before they were formed. People now fly as often as they take a bus, all thanks to the lower price point offered by the low cost airlines. Yes, they did alter the product slightly from the "full service" airlines, in order to be able to offer the service at a lower price, and hence "create demand".

b) having product offerings for those who cannot afford current prices:

Bachmann, in bringing out an "entry level" range, needn't cannibalise the Graham Farish brand they've worked hard to build up. It could be branded as something else, so as to be distinguishable from Graham Farish. Associating it with Graham Farish, I believe, would just confuse the consumer, especially those not so into the hobby as us on here.

A good example of this is Volkswagen. Now, if I'm not mistaken, isn't the VW Passat estate also available as a SEAT, a Skoda and an Audi? It's the same car with a different badge and different trimmings. The best reason for this is to be able to maximise revenue, selling the car to as much of the market as possible, segmenting the product (via different badges and trimmings) so that the price can be best matched to each market segment's willingness to pay? This is a bit like my example above of groups A/B/C/D and having a product which you can sell to each group. Without three of the four brands of the car, VW might only be able to sell to 1/4 of the market.

So, should there not be consideration given to an n gauge market segment that might be being missed? I don't know the answer, should this be considered, and I imagine the manufacturers do consider this from time to time. Ultimately they are privy to commercial information and sales figures so they are best placed to decide upon this.

My inkling, however, is that if something doesn't happen with the major manufacturers then somebody else will try it, since it's just not a hobby that is affordable to most people these days. My money would be on Hornby having a better understanding of the entry level market. If nobody else tries it then I think the manufacturers will not be around in x years to come.

I know as modellers we want the best we can get. I think Mark was trying to bring to the table an option for others, who might then grow into modellers and also want "the best they can get". However, if the only car available on the market was a Rolls Royce, then 99.9% of us wouldn't be driving.

Best

Daniel

Thanks Dan
My initial posting was regarding the former Poole bodyshells being fitted to a basic chassis similar to the old Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.
Obviously production line costs will be the same as no one is going to change their hourly rate depending on what the production line run is each day. but development costs maybe cheaper if a basic chassis was produced that has no circuit boards, lights and DCC equipment to worry about.

Cheers Mark

Moira

I really like your post. You bring up many valid points. One thing that stands out to me from your observations, is that the market does indeed seem to have many segments. Forgetting N specifically for a moment, we have a market for;

Entry level younger age (more toy-like perhaps)
Entry level older age (basics range)
Current highly detailed range
Range for kit-bashers and modellers

Now, if only each of these segments could be catered for. From these discussions we are having I too think the market is too limited (small) to sustain all of the above. I still ponder the question though of trying to increase the size of the market, and this can be manufacturer led, but not over night.

I'm just working on a Grafar loco right now, one of my first. It's an LMS 0-6-0 maroon. SWMBO just walked in and said, why does it have SMALL, MEDIUM, LARGE on the side?  :smiley-laughing: :smiley-laughing: :smiley-laughing:

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.

Please no! Those were truly dire - we do not need a return to that, it would be terrible for N!!

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:58:18 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.

Please no! Those were truly dire - we do not need a return to that, it would be terrible for N!!

Cheers,
Alan

Maybe for some, but possibly not for those who have limited budgets and would be just happy with a N Gauge loco that just ran forwards and backwards.

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 01:00:26 PM
Maybe for some, but possibly not for those who have limited budgets and would be just happy with a N Gauge loco that just ran forwards and backwards.

Maybe, but I doubt any manufacturer in their right mind would consider it and put their reputation on the line as a result - certainly for Bachmann it would go completely against their business model of improving standards and quality through re-engineering.

And they'd need to tool that from scratch anyway, so it'd cost similar to tooling something far superior - IMHO there is no way we'll ever see this.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 11:58:19 AM

Quote from: railsquid on June 05, 2015, 11:55:03 AM
However I'm not sure how feasible that would be for the UK - in Japan,

The market in Japan is supposedly huge compared to here - I might be wrong, but IIRC it was said that Kato do runs of 10,000 models; as compared Dapol/Farish's 250-1000 odd....

Exactly... I don't have access to any figures, but my guess - going entirely from my amateur observations - is that the Japanese N-gauge market is somewhere between 10 and 20 times larger than the UK one. All down to economies of scale - Japan has twice the population of the UK, trains are much more part of everyday life, N gauge became the dominant scale early and manufacturers were savvy enough to make it easy and accessible even for people with little space and small budgets (hence Unitrack/Finetrack). The market is certainly large enought to support two major manufacturers (Kato and Tomix), two large "niche" producers (MicroAce and GreenMax) as well as a bunch of niche manufacturers (e.g. Modemo for trams), with a fair bit of duplication especially for the more popular models. Not without its problems - MicroAce in particular has problems, apparently it uses the same Chinese factory as Dapol. Kato and Tomix do split production between Japan and China, which presumably mitigates their exposure to the vagaries of the Chinese labour market.

FWIW HO here by contrast is "expensive" - typically at least 3 times the price of N - and the range is much more limited, and O is presumably for the 1%ers, I was looking at a display earlier today and if I sold my entire N collection I could probably raise most of the purchase price for a single loco...

Quote from: railsquid on June 05, 2015, 01:12:26 PM
FWIW HO here by contrast is "expensive" - typically at least 3 times the price of N - and the range is much more limited, and O is presumably for the 1%ers, I was looking at a display earlier today and if I sold my entire N collection I could probably raise most of the purchase price for a single loco...

O is hardly cheap in the UK either - the Heljan diesels are usually around the 500 quid mark.

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:58:18 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.

Please no! Those were truly dire - we do not need a return to that, it would be terrible for N!!

How about the old LoneStar mechanisms? I'm sure any patents on them must have run out by now :D

Quote from: davidinyork on June 05, 2015, 01:19:07 PM

Quote from: railsquid on June 05, 2015, 01:12:26 PM
FWIW HO here by contrast is "expensive" - typically at least 3 times the price of N - and the range is much more limited, and O is presumably for the 1%ers, I was looking at a display earlier today and if I sold my entire N collection I could probably raise most of the purchase price for a single loco...

O is hardly cheap in the UK either - the Heljan diesels are usually around the 500 quid mark.

Multiply that by 5 for Japan...

Personally I do not think the British N Gauge market is big enough yet to support "premium" and "standard" ranges of models.  I am sure the folks at Bachmann (and other manufacturers) are all too aware of how price rises can reduce volumes but what can they do about it?

Hornby tried "Design Clever" and this seemed to backfire on them and are now reverting to high spec models.  One area I think Bachmann could look at is the bag of bits that seem to come with most N gauge rolling stock these days.  I for one do not tend to fit these and they simply go in a tub with a label.  It might reduce the cost of models if these bags were made available as "spares" for those who wish to purchase them?  For people like me it might reduce the cost of models by a few Pounds...

Another option (which I am sure Bachmann are striving to do) is to grow the market volume.  No doubt they can achieve lower price points as volume increases.  However, as the current estimate seems to be that British N gauge is roughly 10-20% of OO then we are probably being cross subsidised already.  I remember Richard Lines remembering the issues Tri-Ang had with TT where customers thought the "little one" should cost less than the "big one" but production costs were almost identical.

One area Bachmann do seem to be trying is train packs/sets which are often excellent value for money.  Possibly extending this range might be an option to lower the average prices for locos and stock?

One idea above which I think does have real merit is targeted production.  Rather than producing thousands of models in all manner of liveries just focus on those requested by customers.  Now there is a risk here as I believe Dapol got their fingers burnt with the original run of Gresley coaches where the "market" said we want BR maroon and then promptly refused to buy them!  However, I am sure it is not beyond the whit of man to come up with a method where customer and production numbers can be better matched.  Of course this does raise the question about the sustainability of model shops...

Kind regards

Paddy

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 01:00:26 PM

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:58:18 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.

Please no! Those were truly dire - we do not need a return to that, it would be terrible for N!!

Cheers,
Alan

Maybe for some, but possibly not for those who have limited budgets and would be just happy with a N Gauge loco that just ran forwards and backwards.

I think the crux of Mark's point here is less on the actual mechanism (maybe I'm wrong Mark, so feel free to say so), and more on getting something to market that's simple and cheap - hence making the models more affordable to those who can't / won't pay the going rate for the super detailed stuff. And even if it's not the crux of Mark's point, to my mind it's the crux of the debate.

I see your point Al about Bachmann not wishing to "go backwards". That said, if you own a stable of brands, there's no reason you can't introduce a "lower budget" brand which doesn't in any way tarnish the superior brands in your stable. New entrants to the hobby wouldn't know, or associate, Graham Farish with a lower budget brand, even if that said lower budget brand was owned by Bachmann, so long as Graham Farish didn't go down that route themselves.

I really do hear both sides of the debate on this one. It's a difficult call (maybe not to the manufacturers who have studied it and decided against it, since they have all of the info) but I'd like to think something will come along one day at the more "entry level". On the other hand, forging forward technically is also desirable, I just hope we don't price people out of the market (or should that be, I hope we don't restrict the size of the market). Perhaps we always have done.

Dan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 01:48:26 PM
I think the crux of Mark's point here is less on the actual mechanism (maybe I'm wrong Mark, so feel free to say so), and more on getting something to market that's simple and cheap - hence making the models more affordable to those who can't / won't pay the going rate for the super detailed stuff. And even if it's not the crux of Mark's point, to my mind it's the crux of the debate.

I think we had this already - the Bachmann rechassied Poole models were essentially this - a simple chassis with existing body tooling. But they weren't significantly cheaper or certainly not as cheap as some folks appear to want though - it may just be that prices are what they are given constraints of the market and *can't* really come down much, no matter how simple (and potentially garbage) the chassis ends up being?

Add things like DCC compatibility (which would be a must on any model produced new-tool now) and I doubt it'll end up much cheaper than we currently see. I doubt any manufacturer could release a non-DCC compatible model these days without coming in for a lot of flak, unless there is excusable size reasons for very small tank locos or suchlike.

Cheers,
Alan

Hi Paddy

I think I have come to the same conclusion re size of the market. You said;

Quote from: Paddy on June 05, 2015, 01:44:00 PM
Personally I do not think the British N Gauge market is big enough yet to support "premium" and "standard" ranges of models.

So, with that in mind, your other comment follows on nicely ...

Quote from: Paddy on June 05, 2015, 01:44:00 PM
Another option (which I am sure Bachmann are striving to do) is to grow the market volume.

This to me is the $64,000 question. How do you grow the market? There will be those who convert from "Orribly Oversized" over time but wouldn't dipping a toe in the budget market be worth a go for Bachmann? Start with two budget models perhaps and a few wagons, coaches. Approach it from a "softly, softly, slowly, slowly" angle, rather than throwing large sums at it from day one with a fifty line range. I don't know what old tooling would be suitable but perhaps they have something they could use.

Just a thought. I really don't know if it would work, but it surely must be one strategy that could (note the word could, not will) grow the market.

I like your idea of "order on demand" but you are right, it would decimate what is left of the model shop scene.

Dan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 01:59:55 PM
This to me is the $64,000 question. How do you grow the market? There will be those who convert from "Orribly Oversized" over time but wouldn't dipping a toe in the budget market be worth a go for Bachmann?

$64000 is a handy number as that's probably the cost of tooling one of those models!

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 01:57:33 PM
I think we had this already - the Bachmann rechassied Poole models were essentially this - a simple chassis with existing body tooling. But they weren't significantly cheaper or certainly not as cheap as some folks appear to want though - it may just be that prices are what they are given constraints of the market and *can't* really come down much, no matter how simple (and potentially garbage) the chassis ends up being?

That's true but they were released as "normal range", priced as such. They were targeted at the existing N Gauge market, with subsequent low volumes in mind (hence high prices). Any new budget range would be priced in order to grow the market, and a larger market means lower production costs. I know, I know ... it's chicken and egg! How do we get lower prices if we don't have a large enough market? How do we get a large enough market if we don't have lower prices?

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 01:57:33 PM
Add things like DCC compatibility (which would be a must on any model produced new-tool now) and I doubt it'll end up much cheaper than we currently see. I doubt any manufacturer could release a non-DCC compatible model these days without coming in for a lot of flak, unless there is excusable size reasons for very small tank locos or suchlike.

Good point bringing up DCC. I would say any budget brand forgoes DCC. Entry level is most likely going to be an oval or end to end with a siding or two. There's no need here for DCC. That's one of the bells, or whistles, you get when you pay top dollar. The more differentiating points you can come up with between your premium and budget products, the more you can separate the two markets and stop the cheaper products cannibalising the premium sector. Maybe have them DCC upgradeable (I don't know - I'm not a DCC man).

Dan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 02:04:54 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 01:59:55 PM
This to me is the $64,000 question. How do you grow the market? There will be those who convert from "Orribly Oversized" over time but wouldn't dipping a toe in the budget market be worth a go for Bachmann?

$64000 is a handy number as that's probably the cost of tooling one of those models!

Cheers,
Alan

Hence the idea to use some of the old tooling.

Ah, is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?

Seriously, this has been done again and again.  The market just is not big enough to have 2 ranges.   You inevitably cannibalise sales of one of the ranges.

I'm really not sure that larger production runs = lower unit costs.  If the tooling is old and amortised then the costs are all production costs and they are the same per unit if you produce 500 or 5000. The real issue is about how many pieces are required to produce a model - when you look at the seperate detail on a Polybulk you can understand why it costs so much to produce - the question then becomes not whether the detail is worth doing (it absolutely is) but whether all those individual parts need to be seperate.  My view on the later is that they don't necessarily have to all be seperate detail. I suspect that finding a balance between seperate and moulded detail (provided the detail is present and accurate) is a more likely way to find cost savings than a second range or larger production runs.

Cheers, Mike

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 02:10:07 PM
Any new budget range would be priced in order to grow the market, and a larger market means lower production costs. I know, I know ... it's chicken and egg! How do we get lower prices if we don't have a large enough market? How do we get a large enough market if we don't have lower prices?

There's a very real risk that this sort of strategy would just fragment the market without actually growing it.

I can't understand why anyone would encourage manufacturers to 'dumb down' their range.

There are many many threads and comments regarding the poor quality of some 'older' models, but I cant find any where the compaint is that the detail is too good.

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 02:10:07 PM
How do we get a large enough market if we don't have lower prices?

IMHO Quality, quality quality. Attract people to N by having the best quality models we can. The prices need not rise further to attain this quality - we are now getting it with the current ranges.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 12:26:24 PM

Mention was made of the old Poole tooling being too old now. Surely they could dig out a few pieces to bring out a basics range, thereby attempting to grow the market. Just a thought.

As purchasers of N gauge we frequently complain about the timescale from announcement to arrival and it would appear much of this is down to 'our' production slots being bumped in favour of something else. How would the buyers of the 'premium' product feel if they were then bumped again for a run of the 'economy' product (or vice versa)? I'm sorry but I just think this way chaos lies.
Paddy makes a fair point about removing the detailing packs and making the product slightly cheaper, but rather than that, how about doing away with DCC fitted locos. OK - I know nothing about DCC but it strikes me from reading much on this forum that in many cases the chips fitted are not what folks would fit given the choice (Bachmann in particular). It may not take much time/expense at the plant to make a small run of the fitted models but every little helps.
If, by any stretch of the imagination, Farish were to sell off old tools, where would the new owner have the models manufactured? If China is the reply then all the same arguments about wage rises, production slots etc apply.

Quote from: newportnobby on June 05, 2015, 03:07:24 PM
but rather than that, how about doing away with DCC fitted locos. OK - I know nothing about DCC but it strikes me from reading much on this forum that in many cases the chips fitted are not what folks would fit given the choice (Bachmann in particular).

Bachmann don't sell DCC fitted models (apart from a couple in DCC train sets) - only DCC ready (i.e. you fit your own chip).

Dapol offer DCC fitted versions of their models, but these are simply the DCC ready versions fitted by hand with Gaugemaster DCC23 chips, and offered at the price of the DCC ready model plus a bit (actually, usually less than the DCC23 chip separately, so a good deal if you DCC).

Peco offered their only loco DCC fitted.

DJM we shall see in time.

Cheers,
Alan

Ok, so from the discussion so far, I think we have arrived at two lines of thought;

1) The future lies in striving for greater and greater quality and there isn't room for a budget line.

2) The budget line, if introduced, would enable more modellers to buy new locos.

The arguments for the former (number 1) do seem compelling, although I just feel, in my heart of hearts, the manufacturers are slowly tightening the noose around their own necks. Just my humble opinion of course.  :admiration:

Dan

Quote from: davidinyork on June 05, 2015, 02:50:48 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 02:10:07 PM
Any new budget range would be priced in order to grow the market, and a larger market means lower production costs. I know, I know ... it's chicken and egg! How do we get lower prices if we don't have a large enough market? How do we get a large enough market if we don't have lower prices?

There's a very real risk that this sort of strategy would just fragment the market without actually growing it.

Yes that's true Dave. Where this happens in other product sectors, the manufacturer builds in enough "inferiority" in the cheaper product, or enough "superiority" in the premium product to mitigate this as much as possible. To what degree this could be achieved in model trains, I do not know. A few aspects would be detailing, lighting, DCC etc. etc. As I imagine Kato do with their different lines.

Dan

Quote from: red_death on June 05, 2015, 02:47:50 PM
Ah, is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?

Seriously, this has been done again and again.  The market just is not big enough to have 2 ranges.   You inevitably cannibalise sales of one of the ranges.

I'm really not sure that larger production runs = lower unit costs.  If the tooling is old and amortised then the costs are all production costs and they are the same per unit if you produce 500 or 5000. The real issue is about how many pieces are required to produce a model - when you look at the seperate detail on a Polybulk you can understand why it costs so much to produce - the question then becomes not whether the detail is worth doing (it absolutely is) but whether all those individual parts need to be seperate.  My view on the later is that they don't necessarily have to all be seperate detail. I suspect that finding a balance between seperate and moulded detail (provided the detail is present and accurate) is a more likely way to find cost savings than a second range or larger production runs.

Cheers, Mike

Mike

You'll now doubt have quite a fair bit of knowledge on this subject so I take your comments with more than a pinch of salt  :D

Manufacturing of any kind though is not just about the cost of production at the coal face. Bachmann have a product development team, they have a team in Leicester, there's marketing and various other "fixed costs" that are spread out more thinly if you increase production (whether that be within the same range, or with a new range). Yes, there would be some costs associated with a new range, but you use the resources and people you have.

As for the logistics of using old tooling, I really don't know their capacity constraints etc. I just like exploring the idea of a second range, even if it's most unlikely to come from Bachmann.

Just my thoughts.

Cheers

Dan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 03:11:19 PM

Quote from: newportnobby on June 05, 2015, 03:07:24 PM
but rather than that, how about doing away with DCC fitted locos. OK - I know nothing about DCC but it strikes me from reading much on this forum that in many cases the chips fitted are not what folks would fit given the choice (Bachmann in particular).

Bachmann don't sell DCC fitted models (apart from a couple in DCC train sets) - only DCC ready (i.e. you fit your own chip).

Sorry, Alan. I should have been clearer in that I was referring to Bachmann chips rather than DCC fitted locos.

There is a move to N amongst 'new' modellers - be they returnees to the fold or people who have never had a model railway before - but it is in small numbers compared to many other hobbies.

From the retailers perspective additional ranges of similar models just tie up more money in stock.
("I'd like a N gauge class 99 please."
"Yes sir. Premium or cheap? DCC fitted or not? Weathered or not? Which of the four livery versions?......")

Attracting the youngsters is a different thing all together - play value is the key here. Thomas and film tie-ins (sensible ones where the train is actually part of the story) are good - but film tie-ins are very ephemeral. Working features are good (car transporters, mail bag pick ups, container cranes etc.) but not really robust enough in N. Also it needs to be cheap - the fact that in virtually any other market, like cameras, mobile phones, oil paintings the smaller the item is the more you expect to pay doesn't cut the mustard with toys and passtimes.

You wouldn't want to ditch DCC for the budget range - most people just can't cope with two rail wiring from a standing start. If you can open the box, connect the track to the controller and run a number of locos straight out of the box then that is definitely a plus. If you can do it from your 'phone or tablet even better.

Tin hat on and taking shelter...

Are Bachmann interested in the younger modeller?

Lets say you have a 10/11 year old son/daughter and they want to get into model railways, what would you buy them?

As an aside, the death of the hobby has been predicted for years with doomsayers always bemoaning that there aren't enough youngsters in the hobby. 

Is the situation now really that much different to 20 or 30 years ago?  Sure there is much more competition for youngsters' attention when they are young, but that doesn't mean they are not interested in railways (or won't come to the hobby later in life when they have cash).

Cheers, Mike

Quote from: Ian Morton on June 05, 2015, 03:48:33 PM
There is a move to N amongst 'new' modellers - be they returnees to the fold or people who have never had a model railway before - but it is in small numbers compared to many other hobbies.

From the retailers perspective additional ranges of similar models just tie up more money in stock.
("I'd like a N gauge class 99 please."
"Yes sir. Premium or cheap? DCC fitted or not? Weathered or not? Which of the four livery versions?......")

Attracting the youngsters is a different thing all together - play value is the key here. Thomas and film tie-ins (sensible ones where the train is actually part of the story) are good - but film tie-ins are very ephemeral. Working features are good (car transporters, mail bag pick ups, container cranes etc.) but not really robust enough in N. Also it needs to be cheap - the fact that in virtually any other market, like cameras, mobile phones, oil paintings the smaller the item is the more you expect to pay doesn't cut the mustard with toys and passtimes.

You wouldn't want to ditch DCC for the budget range - most people just can't cope with two rail wiring from a standing start. If you can open the box, connect the track to the controller and run a number of locos straight out of the box then that is definitely a plus. If you can do it from your 'phone or tablet even better.

Tin hat on and taking shelter...

Definitely with you on the "themed" angle Ian. And yes, playability for youngsters would be the draw - controlling the train through your iPhone or iPad might be a major draw. Sounds gimmicky to us guys, but it's about expanding the customer base, drawing in more recruits who will later move on to "our kind of modelling".

In that case then DCC would be required wouldn't it Ian. Ah .... the cost has just shot up again!  :'(

The idea of a range to draw in more kids, or a range to bring in those who cannot afford the current ranges sounds such a noble one to me. That said, nobility doesn't come into economics does it?  :(

Maybe we should accept (maybe most of you already have) that this is now a grown-up's hobby, with some kids being interested, but it being very niche in their generation. Perhaps that's just the way of the world. Like all things, we change over time, from generation to generation.

Perhaps the kids of 2050 will be saying "what's an ipad?"

Dan

Quote from: red_death on June 05, 2015, 03:58:56 PM
As an aside, the death of the hobby has been predicted for years with doomsayers always bemoaning that there aren't enough youngsters in the hobby. 

Is the situation now really that much different to 20 or 30 years ago?  Sure there is much more competition for youngsters' attention when they are young, but that doesn't mean they are not interested in railways (or won't come to the hobby later in life when they have cash).

Cheers, Mike

Good question you pose there Mike.

NGS society membership over the years might be a telling guide. I'm not saying you are at liberty to share that info. on a public forum (although surely available to us members should we request it) but a look back on membership numbers might be a good guide to the health if the hobby.

That said, I suppose membership can rise or fall for a number of reasons so not exactly a scientific analysis, but interesting to look nonetheless.

Dan

Quote from: railsquid on June 05, 2015, 01:21:17 PM

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:58:18 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.

Please no! Those were truly dire - we do not need a return to that, it would be terrible for N!!

How about the old LoneStar mechanisms? I'm sure any patents on them must have run out by now :D

I think the elastic band mechanism on the polystyrene plane we got from Lidl would work better than the old lone star mechanism.

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 04:01:56 PM

Quote from: Ian Morton on June 05, 2015, 03:48:33 PM
There is a move to N amongst 'new' modellers - be they returnees to the fold or people who have never had a model railway before - but it is in small numbers compared to many other hobbies.

From the retailers perspective additional ranges of similar models just tie up more money in stock.
("I'd like a N gauge class 99 please."
"Yes sir. Premium or cheap? DCC fitted or not? Weathered or not? Which of the four livery versions?......")

Attracting the youngsters is a different thing all together - play value is the key here. Thomas and film tie-ins (sensible ones where the train is actually part of the story) are good - but film tie-ins are very ephemeral. Working features are good (car transporters, mail bag pick ups, container cranes etc.) but not really robust enough in N. Also it needs to be cheap - the fact that in virtually any other market, like cameras, mobile phones, oil paintings the smaller the item is the more you expect to pay doesn't cut the mustard with toys and passtimes.

You wouldn't want to ditch DCC for the budget range - most people just can't cope with two rail wiring from a standing start. If you can open the box, connect the track to the controller and run a number of locos straight out of the box then that is definitely a plus. If you can do it from your 'phone or tablet even better.

Tin hat on and taking shelter...

Definitely with you on the "themed" angle Ian. And yes, playability for youngsters would be the draw - controlling the train through your iPhone or iPad might be a major draw. Sounds gimmicky to us guys, but it's about expanding the customer base, drawing in more recruits who will later move on to "our kind of modelling".

In that case then DCC would be required wouldn't it Ian. Ah .... the cost has just shot up again!  :'(

The idea of a range to draw in more kids, or a range to bring in those who cannot afford the current ranges sounds such a noble one to me. That said, nobility doesn't come into economics does it?  :(

Maybe we should accept (maybe most of you already have) that this is now a grown-up's hobby, with some kids being interested, but it being very niche in their generation. Perhaps that's just the way of the world. Like all things, we change over time, from generation to generation.

Perhaps the kids of 2050 will be saying "what's an ipad?"

Dan

Our 2 eldest pulled Windows Vista to pieces and then gave their verdict to rest of the family, stick to XP, They learn quick these days,
We will never go DCC but will stick to the old way and some track isolation switches here and there.
I'm not even fussed about directional lighting and once we have built the new layout, i can see myself snipping wires in certain locos to stop the lights working.

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 02:10:07 PM

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 01:57:33 PM
I think we had this already - the Bachmann rechassied Poole models were essentially this - a simple chassis with existing body tooling. But they weren't significantly cheaper or certainly not as cheap as some folks appear to want though - it may just be that prices are what they are given constraints of the market and *can't* really come down much, no matter how simple (and potentially garbage) the chassis ends up being?

That's true but they were released as "normal range", priced as such. They were targeted at the existing N Gauge market, with subsequent low volumes in mind (hence high prices). Any new budget range would be priced in order to grow the market, and a larger market means lower production costs. I know, I know ... it's chicken and egg! How do we get lower prices if we don't have a large enough market? How do we get a large enough market if we don't have lower prices?

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 01:57:33 PM
Add things like DCC compatibility (which would be a must on any model produced new-tool now) and I doubt it'll end up much cheaper than we currently see. I doubt any manufacturer could release a non-DCC compatible model these days without coming in for a lot of flak, unless there is excusable size reasons for very small tank locos or suchlike.

Good point bringing up DCC. I would say any budget brand forgoes DCC. Entry level is most likely going to be an oval or end to end with a siding or two. There's no need here for DCC. That's one of the bells, or whistles, you get when you pay top dollar. The more differentiating points you can come up with between your premium and budget products, the more you can separate the two markets and stop the cheaper products cannibalising the premium sector. Maybe have them DCC upgradeable (I don't know - I'm not a DCC man).

Dan

Sorry Dan, I have to disagree..  Forgoing DCC would be absolutely the wrong choice.  You want new modellers and those new modellers are into pushing buttons like they are used to on their PS4's and Xbox's, so to get those new modellers, I believe you need DCC and probably Sound.  This is the way Hornby are going..  cheaper models with sound built in, but they have the luxury of economies of scale that N gauge doesn't have.

PS lets look at this...  Xbox one.. 399 pounds...  each game 70 pounds...  Xbox live subscription...  50 pounds / 12 months... 

assuming 3 or 4 games for the console..  a minimum to keep someone occupied for a few months..  700 - 750 pounds.   Bearing in mind the working life of a console is 3 - 4 years and the average console owner buys 2 games a month,  I don't think the "costs" are what is the issue here.

I think the issue is more that with the reduction in usage of railways today in the real world.. there just isn't the interest there used to be.

I suggest, humbly  :bounce:  that cost is a percieved issue, but not a valid one..  getting people to understand what the railways are and generating an interest in them is far more important and the hobby will then grow as a result.

Regards

Graham

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 01:59:55 PM
Hi Paddy

I think I have come to the same conclusion re size of the market. You said;

Quote from: Paddy on June 05, 2015, 01:44:00 PM
Personally I do not think the British N Gauge market is big enough yet to support "premium" and "standard" ranges of models.

So, with that in mind, your other comment follows on nicely ...

Quote from: Paddy on June 05, 2015, 01:44:00 PM
Another option (which I am sure Bachmann are striving to do) is to grow the market volume.

This to me is the $64,000 question. How do you grow the market? There will be those who convert from "Orribly Oversized" over time but wouldn't dipping a toe in the budget market be worth a go for Bachmann? Start with two budget models perhaps and a few wagons, coaches. Approach it from a "softly, softly, slowly, slowly" angle, rather than throwing large sums at it from day one with a fifty line range. I don't know what old tooling would be suitable but perhaps they have something they could use.

Just a thought. I really don't know if it would work, but it surely must be one strategy that could (note the word could, not will) grow the market.

I like your idea of "order on demand" but you are right, it would decimate what is left of the model shop scene.

Dan

Hi Dan,

I do not see many OO modellers moving to N gauge because there is a "budget" range.  To me a budget N gauge range would be aimed at the train set market primarily and this is owned by Hornby and OO.  However, if British N gauge continues to improve in both detail, quality and remains price competitive with OO then we may steal market share from them.

My concern over this though is whether sales of OO models are effectively subsidising the prices of N especially in the case of Bachmann.  If OO declines and not enough modellers switch to N then we could see an even worse situation as there would not be sufficient volumes in either scale thus prices rise even faster.

Kind regards

Paddy

Quote from: red_death on June 05, 2015, 02:47:50 PM
Ah, is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?

Seriously, this has been done again and again.  The market just is not big enough to have 2 ranges.   You inevitably cannibalise sales of one of the ranges.

I'm really not sure that larger production runs = lower unit costs.  If the tooling is old and amortised then the costs are all production costs and they are the same per unit if you produce 500 or 5000. The real issue is about how many pieces are required to produce a model - when you look at the seperate detail on a Polybulk you can understand why it costs so much to produce - the question then becomes not whether the detail is worth doing (it absolutely is) but whether all those individual parts need to be seperate.  My view on the later is that they don't necessarily have to all be seperate detail. I suspect that finding a balance between seperate and moulded detail (provided the detail is present and accurate) is a more likely way to find cost savings than a second range or larger production runs.

Cheers, Mike

Hi Mike,

Larger production runs would equate to lower costs but as you say not at the 500 to 5000 level.  You would probably need to be looking at 5 figure runs and I cannot see British N gauge or any other scale reaching those levels again.

There is also the possibility of a new China coming on stream but this is likely to take many years.

Kind regards

Paddy

With a production line there is a set up cost - loading the tools, etc.. that has to be paid regardless of the number of models in the run. A run of 5000 will, per model, have 1/10th the set up cost of a run of 500 - and the down time to change the tools can be as much as the time taken to run the models for a short run.

Given that there is usually a reissue of a model with a new name/number/livery etc . they could always do a much larger initial production run and hold back enough for the subsequent runs.

Quote from: Dorsetmike on June 05, 2015, 06:43:13 PM
Given that there is usually a reissue of a model with a new name/number/livery etc . they could always do a much larger initial production run and hold back enough for the subsequent runs.

That involves having capital tied up in stock and not recovering your production cost plus the cost of warehousing somewhere. Most take the view these days that you only batch produce what you hope to sell. Bachmann produce 1008 of each livery variant and that is I would think pretty substantial for the N Market.

Regards

Roy

Quote from: Roy L S on June 05, 2015, 07:32:02 PM

Quote from: Dorsetmike on June 05, 2015, 06:43:13 PM
Given that there is usually a reissue of a model with a new name/number/livery etc . they could always do a much larger initial production run and hold back enough for the subsequent runs.

That involves having capital tied up in stock and not recovering your production cost plus the cost of warehousing somewhere. Most take the view these days that you only batch produce what you hope to sell. Bachmann produce 1008 of each livery variant and that is I would think pretty substantial for the N Market.

Not only that; producing twice as many per variant but only half as many variants, will REDUCE overall sales as the 'collectors' who buy 1 or every variation will now buy only one model instead of two!  :doh:  ::)

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 02:10:07 PM
Good point bringing up DCC. I would say any budget brand forgoes DCC. Entry level is most likely going to be an oval or end to end with a siding or two. There's no need here for DCC. That's one of the bells, or whistles, you get when you pay top dollar. The more differentiating points you can come up with between your premium and budget products, the more you can separate the two markets and stop the cheaper products cannibalising the premium sector. Maybe have them DCC upgradeable (I don't know - I'm not a DCC man).

Dan

Completely the WRONG way round if the hope of  budget range is to attract new and younger modellers!  :no:

New entrants to the hobby are MORE likely to adopt DCC than the existing modellers with perhaps significant funds tied up in a lot of non-compatable stock and the younger modeller is more likely to be comfortable with digital/computer control devices...

Where does the existing Union Mills range fit into this? Simple, robust, reliable, great value for money. Strikes me that a dumbed down Bachfar range is going to hit the same price point without the UM plus points.

Very unlikely that Oxford Rail will come along with a cheaper rolling stock range, so we are stuck with even simple wagons being relatively expensive. I am convinced that N will remain a niche market in the UK, and that the price attraction of a budget range would not change that.

Quote from: woodbury22uk on June 06, 2015, 08:21:20 AM
Where does the existing Union Mills range fit into this? Simple, robust, reliable, great value for money. Strikes me that a dumbed down Bachfar range is going to hit the same price point without the UM plus points.

I brought that up earlier in this thread (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=28093.msg308133#msg308133), and like you, wondered why no-one had mentioned UM before!

But to answer my/your question, I think the problem is that UM only make steam locomotives, and in very small quantities. They're virtually impossible to buy in model shops (they do sometimes turn up secondhand to be sure) and without an online presence, UM aren't going to be visible to casual hobbyists searching around for ideas.

That's a crying shame, because like you, I think Union Mills models have a lot going for them. Imagine something like a J39 with three or four pretty private owner coal wagons, or a Prince of Wales in LMS red with a couple of Stanier coaches! Lovely starter sets, and pretty much rock solid so far engineering and reliability goes.

But younger modellers (and that's who we're talking about here) don't automatically click with steam locomotives. UM don't make any diesels, which are the default starting point of pretty much any modeller under the age of 50.

Cheers, NeMo

Okay guys, I've been having a think and to me there's no clear "right" answer to this conundrum of introducing a budget range.

Just a note re DCC vs non-DCC. I think we're talking about two different issues here. The original gist of the topic was about releasing a budget range. We have moved the topic along slightly to also include "bringing new people into the hobby" and this is where the DCC appeal is coming into play for the youngster. Completely agree that for that segment DCC would be desirable.

As someone above mentioned a few posts back, there also isn't the interest in railways today like there was years ago, and that's a factor which doesn't help boost the hobby.

My opinion is still that it is a hobby in decline (certainly in the UK) and it is down to the manufacturers to try and change that if they still want a business in x years to come. Of all the manufacturers, I only recognise Hornby as taking any meaningful steps in this direction.

I also still think it is a very expensive hobby and beyond the means of some people who might like to try it.

It's been an interesting discussion nonetheless.

Cheers

Dan

I had a look on the Hornby website yesterday and clicked on their Railroad budget section. It seems like a really good idea to me and the only (or should I say the most compelling) case I've seen yet of a manufacturer trying to broaden their sales base and increase market participation.

With the caveat of the size of the N market, factory capacity and so on, I can still imagine Bachmann doing something in N, using a different brand than Graham Farish and using old tooling. No it wouldn't be to the appeal to most on here (experienced modellers) but it would be the start for many new entrants who would just be out off by cost otherwise.

Every hobby I can think of (I know someone will come up with one I haven't thought of) has entry level ranges, but it's not really there with Bachmann in N. I guess the train sets are the closest they come and do represent some kind of value.

I'm not sure if I can add much else to the discussion from here, but as I said above, it's been a very enjoyable topic.

Cheers

Dan

Is the old garish gp tank locomotive that occasionally appears in sets not the equivalent of this

Hi Dan,

I am still struggling to see who a "budget" range of British N gauge would be aimed at.  Without wishing to cause offence it would seem to be:

1. Kids
2. Modellers with less disposable income for their hobby
3. Modellers looking for low cost super detailing projects

Taking each of these in turn...

1. Kids.  I am not sure there really is a significant toy train market for N gauge - well not in the UK.  OO and Hornby in particular seem to have this market covered.  Also OO tends to fit in with other toys in this area such as cars, trucks and toy soldiers (assuming kids still play with such things).

2. Modellers with less disposable income for their hobby.  This one I can see a need for although from a business perspective I would want to know volumes, margin before going down that route.  I fear that modellers in this category would not actually spend anymore money but would simply get more for the buck.  Not sure how this grows the market or benefits someone like Bachmann.

3. Modellers looking for low cost super detailing projects.  Again I can see a market here although once again the question of volumes/margin comes in to play.  Also if you want low cost models to use as detailing projects/repaints etc. then there is already a ready supply on places like eBay.

So in summary I am not sure British N gauge can supprot a "budget" range or even would benefit from one.  Personally I still believe the best way to grow the market is to continue to produce the best models possible within a reasonable price structure.  If Bachmann are unable to deliver on volume/price then this will surely become an opportunity for some other enterprising manufacturer such as Dapol, Hornby, Oxford or even large retailers like Hattons, Gaugemaster etc.

Kind regards

Paddy

Quote from: javlinfaw7 on June 06, 2015, 10:17:22 AM
Is the old garish gp tank locomotive that occasionally appears in sets not the equivalent of this

That kind of thing javlinfaw7, yes. What stands out with Hornby is their distinctive, and consistent, message of Railroad being a cheaper alternative. The stock looks to me less detailed, brighter in colours, something between a model and a toy perhaps. I'll have a look at that GF gp tank set, since I haven't seen it for a while.

Cheers

Dan

Going back to Union Mills - they don't sell through model shops so their price doesn't need to include a mark up for the retailer. Once you factor that in then they wouldn't be priced much differently to Farish.

Quote from: Paddy on June 06, 2015, 10:26:50 AM
Hi Dan,

I am still struggling to see who a "budget" range of British N gauge would be aimed at.  Without wishing to cause offence it would seem to be:

1. Kids
2. Modellers with less disposable income for their hobby
3. Modellers looking for low cost super detailing projects

Taking each of these in turn...

1. Kids.  I am not sure there really is a significant toy train market for N gauge - well not in the UK.  OO and Hornby in particular seem to have this market covered.  Also OO tends to fit in with other toys in this area such as cars, trucks and toy soldiers (assuming kids still play with such things).

2. Modellers with less disposable income for their hobby.  This one I can see a need for although from a business perspective I would want to know volumes, margin before going down that route.  I fear that modellers in this category would not actually spend anymore money but would simply get more for the buck.  Not sure how this grows the market or benefits someone like Bachmann.

3. Modellers looking for low cost super detailing projects.  Again I can see a market here although once again the question of volumes/margin comes in to play.  Also if you want low cost models to use as detailing projects/repaints etc. then there is already a ready supply on places like eBay.

So in summary I am not sure British N gauge can supprot a "budget" range or even would benefit from one.  Personally I still believe the best way to grow the market is to continue to produce the best models possible within a reasonable price structure.  If Bachmann are unable to deliver on volume/price then this will surely become an opportunity for some other enterprising manufacturer such as Dapol, Hornby, Oxford or even large retailers like Hattons, Gaugemaster etc.

Kind regards

Paddy

Hi Paddy

Yes, I'd go along with what you have said above. Very good points IMO. Definitely no offence taken by me, although I can't speak for the kids and the other two groups  :D Much earlier in this thread we were discussing (or perhaps I brought it up) the possibility of growing the market.

I'd agree that there isn't a huge market for kids, but is it one that could be "created"? I don't know the answer to that. Possibly yes, possibly no. However, without trying to grow the market, the manufacturers, I believe, will be selling to an ever dwindling number of hobbyists, this pushing prices up further, thus decreasing the number of hobbyists again, and so on and so on. Sure people do come into the hobby, but are they going to be in sufficient numbers to replace those who leave us as we move into the next generation?

I think Hornby understand this very well and are doing whatever they can to reach out to the next generation. Okay, it might always remain a very limited market going forward, what with so many gadgets competing for kid's attention, but they are giving it a go, since they know their survival in the model railway business depends upon it.

Agreed that OO and Hornby have the toy market covered, so N has a lot to do. That said, why should the toy market be the preserve of OO and Hornby? Agree though that the size is more compatible with cars etc. and the larger sized trains are more sturdy.

I just think we're accepting the status quo and coming up with very good points as to why the status quo is the way it is, but not really being bold in our thinking about what is possible. Like I said before, it might not be feasible (without being privy to info. I just don't know), but if I owned a business where I had to put up costs every year by an unsustainable percentage, I'd either be looking at ways of reaching out to new markets, or exiting the business.

I really don't know the definitive answer Paddy, I just think it's a good one to explore. I think we've done a good job here in doing that, and to be honest, I've taken the "opposing side" of the debate so that we could elicit a lot of these points.

I'll still keep a foot in the "hoping for a budget range" camp, but respectfully note, and in some cases concur, with a what has been said on the other side of the fence.

Cheers

Dan

Quote from: Ian Morton on June 06, 2015, 10:41:04 AM
Going back to Union Mills - they don't sell through model shops so their price doesn't need to include a mark up for the retailer. Once you factor that in then they wouldn't be priced much differently to Farish.

Where can you buy UM Ian? Someone mentioned earlier they don't have an online presence either.

To contact UM you phone for a price/stock list. sometimes appears
on the forum. A point about UM I think there is no VAT because of
their level of sales. VAT accounts for a large chunk when you pay
about £100-£120 for a loco.

Quote from: DesertHound on June 06, 2015, 10:51:57 AM
Where can you buy UM Ian? Someone mentioned earlier they don't have an online presence either.

Direct from the manufacturer - a 'one man in a shed' style enterprise.

More info here: http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=156.0 (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=156.0)

Union Mills always put an advert on the N Gauge Journal and often in the Railway Modeller (but not every edition). This tends to summarise his available stock at that point.

He may be a one man band but I think the operation is a little more sophisticated than a bloke in a shed, he has been in the model railway industry for many years, involved with Cooper Craft and also worked for Peco for a time I believe. Although on e-mail, the best thing to do is give him a call, he is very helpful.

He does limit production to small batches and keeps below the VAT threshold, were he to sell through retailers prices would not be anything like as keen (Looking at Journal 3/15 a J11 0-6-0 tender loco will cost you £69 plus postage).

These locos do in many ways fit the "budget" range idea. They are simple with few (if any) separate fittings, no see through spokes, brake gear or underframe detail and not DCC ready. Mechanisms are simple and reliable but do not expect the kind of slow running as you will get with the latest Farish offerings, especially coreless motor variants and pickup footprint is limited to loco one rail, tender the other. They will however pull the side off a proverbial house and far more likely to survive being dropped or roughly handled.

For me personally the more recent BachFarish offer has left them well and truly behind but this comes back to what people want which is where this thread started!

Roy

Quote from: Roy L S on June 06, 2015, 11:44:34 AM
These (UM) locos do in many ways fit the "budget" range idea.

The big difference of UM locos is that they are a one individual organisation (hence they can't really be superdetail) and crucially, they never duplicate prototypes already for sale on the market - they are always types that aren't available and in some cases are types that are probably niche enough to never be likely to appear to the bigger manufacturers.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 01:48:26 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 01:00:26 PM

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:58:18 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.

Please no! Those were truly dire - we do not need a return to that, it would be terrible for N!!

Cheers,
Alan

Maybe for some, but possibly not for those who have limited budgets and would be just happy with a N Gauge loco that just ran forwards and backwards.

I think the crux of Mark's point here is less on the actual mechanism (maybe I'm wrong Mark, so feel free to say so), and more on getting something to market that's simple and cheap - hence making the models more affordable to those who can't / won't pay the going rate for the super detailed stuff. And even if it's not the crux of Mark's point, to my mind it's the crux of the debate.

I see your point Al about Bachmann not wishing to "go backwards". That said, if you own a stable of brands, there's no reason you can't introduce a "lower budget" brand which doesn't in any way tarnish the superior brands in your stable. New entrants to the hobby wouldn't know, or associate, Graham Farish with a lower budget brand, even if that said lower budget brand was owned by Bachmann, so long as Graham Farish didn't go down that route themselves.

I really do hear both sides of the debate on this one. It's a difficult call (maybe not to the manufacturers who have studied it and decided against it, since they have all of the info) but I'd like to think something will come along one day at the more "entry level". On the other hand, forging forward technically is also desirable, I just hope we don't price people out of the market (or should that be, I hope we don't restrict the size of the market). Perhaps we always have done.

Dan

Bang on, this is what im trying to get at, the original Poole toolings on a basic economy chassis, not the previous China twin flywheel type but something more basic even if it was a plastic housing with white metal weights to help gain traction.
People are saying the market is not big enough, but when Bachmann bring a new BR Green/Blue diesel out in the Farish range, they sell out pretty quick and there is a demand for more and people end up paying higher prices on ebay for them, i understood they made 504 of each model but have been corrected it is 1008
Dapol BR Blue stuff sells out very quick to.
I apologise to the steam enthusiasts but I don't have a clue as to what steamers & liveries are popular
In my opinion it's not that the hobby is not big enough, its the era people are modelling that depict sales, it seems some eras are more popular than others.
Mark.

I really can see an argument both ways but are we really saying £100 for a super detailed DCC ready loco is not a fair price ?.
For me the deatiling level is now excellent and any further improvements need to be concentrated in reliable out of the box running requiring no "fettling" and I would happily contnue to pay £100 if the locos reliability both from electrics and mechanics were improved. For some I understand the fun of repairing the less complex older style locos but for me it would be a backward step. I am sure we have some petrol heads on the forum who love playing about with car engines etc.. but I would rather the reliability of a newer car even though they are now very complex and almost impossible for a fettler to repair if anything goes wrong....but it should not go wrong at £100 a throw!

Quote from: mark100 on June 06, 2015, 12:06:52 PM
Dapol BR Blue stuff sells out very quick to.

That's a generalisation - some didn't - e.g. the unnumbered blue 73s. The market is small in in some cases like this fickle, that even experienced manufacturers don't always get it right.

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: sparky on June 06, 2015, 12:21:36 PM
I really can see an argument both ways but are we really saying £100 for a super detailed DCC ready loco is not a fair price ?.
For me the deatiling level is now excellent and any further improvements need to be concentrated in reliable out of the box running requiring no "fettling" and I would happily contnue to pay £100 if the locos reliability both from electrics and mechanics were improved. For some I understand the fun of repairing the less complex older style locos but for me it would be a backward step. I am sure we have some petrol heads on the forum who love playing about with car engines etc.. but I would rather the reliability of a newer car even though they are now very complex and almost impossible for a fettler to repair if anything goes wrong....but it should not go wrong at £100 a throw!

Hi Sparky

Isn't it something like GBP140-150 now for a Graham Farish loco? I don't know exactly since I'm a Poole fanatic.

I'm not saying GBP100 is too much for those who want these super models. It's more a case of having something for those who want something at the entry level, new to the hobby, and then trade up over time.

Don't forget, it's not just locos. Wagons and coaches included you'll be looking at 300 quid for a train. Ok, starter sets are a good idea with a three coach rake I guess, as beginners don't necessarily need 8-10 coaches.

I agree with you, for those serious models era / collectors who have the money to spend, 100-150 is beer money. For those considering the hobby, it's often not.

Dan

Quote from: Dr Al on June 06, 2015, 12:04:51 PM

Quote from: Roy L S on June 06, 2015, 11:44:34 AM
These (UM) locos do in many ways fit the "budget" range idea.

The big difference of UM locos is that they are a one individual organisation (hence they can't really be superdetail) and crucially, they never duplicate prototypes already for sale on the market - they are always types that aren't available and in some cases are types that are probably niche enough to never be likely to appear to the bigger manufacturers.

Cheers,
Alan

J39 aside true (and it took Farish long enough to cotton on to that one!).

It was more the general idea of what a "budget" model might be that I was thinking of and my perception is that as far as steam is concerned we are really talking about something akin Mr Heard's products.

Regards

Roy

You guys have gotten me interested in UM now! Wouldn't mind getting one if only to poke around inside to see how it's been made.

Dan

Quote from: DesertHound on June 06, 2015, 01:21:34 PM
Isn't it something like GBP140-150 now for a Graham Farish loco? I don't know exactly since I'm a Poole fanatic.

The latest diesels are round about the hundred quid mark. Some of the steam locos (e.g. the Duchesses) are a bit more at round about the 120-130 mark.

Quote from: mark100 on June 06, 2015, 12:06:52 PM

Quote from: DesertHound on June 05, 2015, 01:48:26 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 01:00:26 PM

Quote from: Dr Al on June 05, 2015, 12:58:18 PM

Quote from: mark100 on June 05, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
Lima types both in N and OO gauge as an economy range. 1 motor bogie and a feed coming from the trailing bogie to the motor bogie.

Please no! Those were truly dire - we do not need a return to that, it would be terrible for N!!

Cheers,
Alan

Maybe for some, but possibly not for those who have limited budgets and would be just happy with a N Gauge loco that just ran forwards and backwards.

I think the crux of Mark's point here is less on the actual mechanism (maybe I'm wrong Mark, so feel free to say so), and more on getting something to market that's simple and cheap - hence making the models more affordable to those who can't / won't pay the going rate for the super detailed stuff. And even if it's not the crux of Mark's point, to my mind it's the crux of the debate.

I see your point Al about Bachmann not wishing to "go backwards". That said, if you own a stable of brands, there's no reason you can't introduce a "lower budget" brand which doesn't in any way tarnish the superior brands in your stable. New entrants to the hobby wouldn't know, or associate, Graham Farish with a lower budget brand, even if that said lower budget brand was owned by Bachmann, so long as Graham Farish didn't go down that route themselves.

I really do hear both sides of the debate on this one. It's a difficult call (maybe not to the manufacturers who have studied it and decided against it, since they have all of the info) but I'd like to think something will come along one day at the more "entry level". On the other hand, forging forward technically is also desirable, I just hope we don't price people out of the market (or should that be, I hope we don't restrict the size of the market). Perhaps we always have done.

Dan

Bang on, this is what im trying to get at, the original Poole toolings on a basic economy chassis, not the previous China twin flywheel type but something more basic even if it was a plastic housing with white metal weights to help gain traction.
People are saying the market is not big enough, but when Bachmann bring a new BR Green/Blue diesel out in the Farish range, they sell out pretty quick and there is a demand for more and people end up paying higher prices on ebay for them, i understood they made 504 of each model but have been corrected it is 1008
Dapol BR Blue stuff sells out very quick to.
I apologise to the steam enthusiasts but I don't have a clue as to what steamers & liveries are popular
In my opinion it's not that the hobby is not big enough, its the era people are modelling that depict sales, it seems some eras are more popular than others.
Mark.

Having owned and run Lima models I can agree with Alan that it is certainly NOT the way to go. That would attract and retain nobody, the models are a throwback to another time.

The idea of a "cheap" chassis with extra weights ignores a number of points: -

1) Tooling - separate components all need to be tooled and all those extra components assembled there is a cost to all of that and as has already been said it is unlikely any real savings will result.
2) Cost of a duplicate range (I repeat) is surely unattractive to ANY mainstream manufacturer, the only way I could ever see it happening is if someone like Hornby stepped in with a competing range based around a different demographic. This I think unlikely.

I do think an element of "design clever" thinking is a realistic prospect going forward as the labour (and therefore assembly) cost element of a loco increases. On the current BachFarish range there are numerous added fittings like (e.g.) tender steps which could surely be moulded as part of the tender underframe?

Roy

Quote from: sparky on June 06, 2015, 12:21:36 PM
I really can see an argument both ways but are we really saying £100 for a super detailed DCC ready loco is not a fair price ?.
For me the deatiling level is now excellent and any further improvements need to be concentrated in reliable out of the box running requiring no "fettling" and I would happily contnue to pay £100 if the locos reliability both from electrics and mechanics were improved. For some I understand the fun of repairing the less complex older style locos but for me it would be a backward step. I am sure we have some petrol heads on the forum who love playing about with car engines etc.. but I would rather the reliability of a newer car even though they are now very complex and almost impossible for a fettler to repair if anything goes wrong....but it should not go wrong at £100 a throw!

That's not what I'm actually saying, some people cannot simply afford to build a fleet up with rolling stock at the current prices.
Bachmann farish have 2 different toolings for the following (All diesel again as i know nothing about the steam)
class 08
class 20
class 31
class 37
class 40 as of next year
class 47
Class 55

Dapol have duplicated class 33, 50 (?) 52, 56

If i have missed any other classes, it's not really that relevant for the perfectionists.

Why see the old toolings going to waste when they could be popped onto a basic chassis and offered to those who are just happy with a basic model, no DCC ready chassis, no working lights, no bits bag,
the same with the old wagons and coaches.

I agree there is a second hand market on eBay and at shops, but not everyone owns internet or has a model shop nearby that offers second hand. some shops trade old for new then sell the secondhand stuff at exhibitions.

Quote from: mark100 on June 06, 2015, 03:40:58 PM

Quote from: sparky on June 06, 2015, 12:21:36 PM
I really can see an argument both ways but are we really saying £100 for a super detailed DCC ready loco is not a fair price ?.
For me the deatiling level is now excellent and any further improvements need to be concentrated in reliable out of the box running requiring no "fettling" and I would happily contnue to pay £100 if the locos reliability both from electrics and mechanics were improved. For some I understand the fun of repairing the less complex older style locos but for me it would be a backward step. I am sure we have some petrol heads on the forum who love playing about with car engines etc.. but I would rather the reliability of a newer car even though they are now very complex and almost impossible for a fettler to repair if anything goes wrong....but it should not go wrong at £100 a throw!

That's not what I'm actually saying, some people cannot simply afford to build a fleet up with rolling stock at the current prices.
Bachmann farish have 2 different toolings for the following (All diesel again as i know nothing about the steam)
class 08
class 20
class 31
class 37
class 40 as of next year
class 47
Class 55

Dapol have duplicated class 33, 50 (?) 52, 56

If i have missed any other classes, it's not really that relevant for the perfectionists.

Why see the old toolings going to waste when they could be popped onto a basic chassis and offered to those who are just happy with a basic model, no DCC ready chassis, no working lights, no bits bag,
the same with the old wagons and coaches.

I agree there is a second hand market on eBay and at shops, but not everyone owns internet or has a model shop nearby that offers second hand. some shops trade old for new then sell the secondhand stuff at exhibitions.

I think the reason has already been discussed and there is a general consensus as to why reuse of existing older tooling will not happen even if it still exists and remains viable.

Let's take the Class 40 that is we hope to be introduced within the next 18 months. This will have cost probably over £100k to tool. At launch we will see three livery variants, two BR Green and one BR Blue, a total of just over 3000 models to shift. Given the demographic of N Gauge modellers most will expect a "state of the art" model and hopefully not be disappointed. They will have one choice and most will buy it.

What possible commercial attraction would there then be to Bachmann of dusting off the old Class 40 tooling, have to source again the (now redundant) open framed motor and produce this "old" model in direct competition to the new one even IF it could be manufactured and assembled significantly more cheaply which cannot be taken as a given? The answer appears to me very little/none.

Regards

Roy

Quote from: mark100 on June 06, 2015, 12:06:52 PMBang on, this is what im trying to get at, the original Poole toolings on a basic economy chassis, not the previous China twin flywheel type but something more basic even if it was a plastic housing with white metal weights to help gain traction.

But to do as you propose, to introduce a new/different chassis, immediately you need new additional tooling which means around £100k sunk costs before you actually produce anything... To recover that on the limited likely demand for your 'Budget' range, you will probably have to charge a HIGHER retail price than the more popular 'detailed' range.

Designing and creating tools for additional/alternative components to a lower standard simply does not work. It increases costs not reduce them! The only way it is ever going to make sense (and the only reason it works for Hornby) is that they use old existing tools.

Quote from: mark100 on June 06, 2015, 12:06:52 PMPeople are saying the market is not big enough, but when Bachmann bring a new BR Green/Blue diesel out in the Farish range, they sell out pretty quick and there is a demand for more and people end up paying higher prices on ebay for them

While they do often sell out quickly at the big name boxshifters, you can usually still pick them up for only a few pounds more at the smaller less well known retailers for quite a while.
The reality is the naive or lazy panic-buy and over-pay on e-bay...

When models genuinely sell out quickly, Bachmann do produce a new batch relatively quickly (with a different number so with the bonus of selling a second one to collectors!)

Quote from: mark100 on June 06, 2015, 03:40:58 PM
Bachmann farish have 2 different toolings for the following (All diesel again as i know nothing about the steam)
class 08
class 20
class 31
class 37
class 40 as of next year
class 47
Class 55

Why see the old toolings going to waste when they could be popped onto a basic chassis and offered to those who are just happy with a basic model, no DCC ready chassis, no working lights, no bits bag, the same with the old wagons and coaches.

Because changing tools between production runs adds a massive amount to the cost so it is much cheaper to produce more of one type than a smaller number each of two different types.

The actual difference in materials and assembly cost of the two variants of a model will be a matter of a few £s certainly well under £20. To have two parallel ranges means double the set-up costs for each batch and that has a significant effect on the final price.

As a rough guide you produce 1000 'Detailed' locos with an overall factory gate cost of £50,000. (average cost £50) If you produce 500 'Detailed' and 500 'Budget' models your total factory gate cost will be in the range of £65-70,000 (average £65-70). Therefore to make the same profit as you do now selling at £100 each, you need to sell at an average of £115-120. If the retail price difference truly represents the production cost difference there should be about £20 difference so you have to sell the 'Detailed' model at £125-130 and the 'Budget' model at £105-110. i.e. splitting the production means the 'Budget' Model actually costs the end customer MORE than the 'Detailed' one would be if only the 'detailed' version is made...

Well, I must admit to being a little confused regarding some of the Railroad range & fitting into the larger scheme.  Let me explain ...

Most of the RR range are from the older toolings, and are less detailed (and a lot lower cost); no-one is going to cry if little Jimmy drops it & it shatters (well, apart from Jimmy, that is !  :P).  So far, so good; Hornby are making a bit more money out of long-paid for moulds etc, and the budget & child market is being met.  I get that & am OK with it (although don't buy them myself - 20-y-o mouldings are fine on a 20-y-o model, to me, but not a new one  ::))

Then along comes something like the P2, and the marketing strategy leaves me wondering ...  It's a brand-new model (OK, maybe chunks of the chassis are pulled in from another one, but the body is brand new), and the 'best' version is the TTS release : RRP is £155.  Using the same model, but without the TTS chip, you can have it at RRP £123.  And then you can have the RailRoad version at RRP £83 !!!  OK, it lacks some things (no striping, non-detailed mouldings (eg unpainted rails), lack of lining etc), but as far as I can tell - it's the same chassis as the 'proper' versions, it's the same body moulding, it's purely the detailing level that is minimal.  They've also put it into a set, and it appears to be the middle version (ie fully detailed, no sound chip).

Surely producing this RR model, from the same components as the main range model, is diluting the sales of the more detailed version ?  I can imagine some people wanting to do the detailing themselves (Hornby have made some errors, including one (to me) glaringly obvious one), and they'll go for the RR version ...  £40 will buy a lot of detailing extras & leave money on the table too !  There are also some examples where a brand new model has gone into RailRoad but not the full range  ???  I find the strategy on some of these crazy ...  :hmmm:

Mike

Hi PLD

That's really good info. you've provided there, if indeed your figures are correct, or even close to correct. I do see what you are saying.

I think Mark was talking of using some pre-existing tooling / moulds for the range. Why not even have one/two basic chassis only and just fit bodies onto those?

All that said, I again maintain I'm not saying it's 100% commercially viable! but the discussion we're having is a good one!  :thankyousign:

Cheers

Dan

Quote from: Roy L S on June 06, 2015, 04:15:19 PM

What possible commercial attraction would there then be to Bachmann of dusting off the old Class 40 tooling, have to source again the (now redundant) open framed motor and produce this "old" model in direct competition to the new one even IF it could be manufactured and assembled significantly more cheaply which cannot be taken as a given? The answer appears to me very little/none.

Regards

Roy

Roy

I think the idea is not to produce something that directly competes, but something aimed at an entirely new market segment (entry level, younger members). The product would be "inferior enough" so as not to compete with the far more superior models, just like a BMW 318 most probably doesn't compete with a 323 etc. (I'm not a car expert but I know one's an entry level and one's higher up the range).

Those open core motors have been used up until quite recently in the class 20 and I wouldn't be surprised if Bachmann still had a shedload, or could get them produced for not more than they used to.

I think I've exhausted all I have to say on this and I think you guys have put up some compelling reasons as to why this most probably won't happen. I'll still respond in kind to new posts on the topic but I'll try and be mindful not to repeat what we've already said as I can see how we could go around in circles here.

Maybe Mark & I can put in an offer for the Poole tooling, get down to Homebase and buy a garden shed and set up business  :D

Thanks for all the input and debate from both sides.

MikeDunn thanks also for that analysis of the Hornby RR range. Interesting thoughts

Dan

Quote from: MikeDunn on June 06, 2015, 07:10:55 PM
Well, I must admit to being a little confused regarding some of the Railroad range & fitting into the larger scheme.  Let me explain ...

Most of the RR range are from the older toolings, and are less detailed (and a lot lower cost); no-one is going to cry if little Jimmy drops it & it shatters (well, apart from Jimmy, that is !  :P).  So far, so good; Hornby are making a bit more money out of long-paid for moulds etc, and the budget & child market is being met.  I get that & am OK with it (although don't buy them myself - 20-y-o mouldings are fine on a 20-y-o model, to me, but not a new one  ::))

Then along comes something like the P2, and the marketing strategy leaves me wondering ...  It's a brand-new model (OK, maybe chunks of the chassis are pulled in from another one, but the body is brand new), and the 'best' version is the TTS release : RRP is £155.  Using the same model, but without the TTS chip, you can have it at RRP £123.  And then you can have the RailRoad version at RRP £83 !!!  OK, it lacks some things (no striping, non-detailed mouldings (eg unpainted rails), lack of lining etc), but as far as I can tell - it's the same chassis as the 'proper' versions, it's the same body moulding, it's purely the detailing level that is minimal.  They've also put it into a set, and it appears to be the middle version (ie fully detailed, no sound chip).

Surely producing this RR model, from the same components as the main range model, is diluting the sales of the more detailed version ?  I can imagine some people wanting to do the detailing themselves (Hornby have made some errors, including one (to me) glaringly obvious one), and they'll go for the RR version ...  £40 will buy a lot of detailing extras & leave money on the table too !  There are also some examples where a brand new model has gone into RailRoad but not the full range  ???  I find the strategy on some of these crazy ...  :hmmm:

Mike

Hi Mike

I think the simple answer is economies of scale in a much bigger Market, but I do agree with you.

The Railroad P2, Duke of Gloucester and A1 were I believe products of the "design clever" period, one which Hornby now seem to be quietly forgetting where various levels of decoration and detail justified different price-points on the same basic model.

It has to be said that not all Railroad is old tooling - the Crosti 9F is brand new and the chassis it goes on, while I believe a carry over from the "standard" Railroad 9F is a new loco-drive unit. Many others like the D49 which was tender drive all those years ago is now loco drive. So yes, extracting maximum value out of the old thoroughly amortised tooling plus tweaking to keep to an acceptable standard too works in 00.

However the 00 market is about four to five times bigger than N, so they have the demand to do this and still find room for the super detail stuff too.

Regards

Roy

Quote from: DesertHound on June 06, 2015, 08:25:06 PM

Quote from: Roy L S on June 06, 2015, 04:15:19 PM

What possible commercial attraction would there then be to Bachmann of dusting off the old Class 40 tooling, have to source again the (now redundant) open framed motor and produce this "old" model in direct competition to the new one even IF it could be manufactured and assembled significantly more cheaply which cannot be taken as a given? The answer appears to me very little/none.

Regards

Roy

Roy

I think the idea is not to produce something that directly competes, but something aimed at an entirely new market segment (entry level, younger members). The product would be "inferior enough" so as not to compete with the far more superior models, just like a BMW 318 most probably doesn't compete with a 323 etc. (I'm not a car expert but I know one's an entry level and one's higher up the range).

Those open core motors have been used up until quite recently in the class 20 and I wouldn't be surprised if Bachmann still had a shedload, or could get them produced for not more than they used to.

I think I've exhausted all I have to say on this and I think you guys have out up so e compelling reasons as to why this most probably won't happen. I'll still respond in kind to new posts on the topic but I'll try and be mindful not to repeat what we've already said as I can see how we could go around in circles here.

Maybe Mark & I can put in an offer for the Poole tooling, get down to Homebase and buy a garden shed and set up business  :D

Thanks for all the input and debate from both sides.

Dan

Hi Dan

An interesting debate. I think your tongue in cheek suggestion of setting up in competition to potentially target a new market within the scale is the one and only way the idea could ever fly.

Regards

Roy

Quote from: MikeDunn on June 06, 2015, 07:10:55 PM
Then along comes something like the P2, and the marketing strategy leaves me wondering ...

The difference with the Railroad P2 to reissuing the old Poole Farish range as some are suggesting is that it uses exactly the same body tooling and chassis as the main stream detailed version, it just has less passes through the paint shop and some of the hand-fitted details are omitted. What is left off doesn't impact on the economies of scale of the mechanised stages of production. There is only one body moulding tool etc so only one set-up charge for the production run covering both variants...

Quote from: DesertHound on June 06, 2015, 08:25:06 PM

Quote from: Roy L S on June 06, 2015, 04:15:19 PM

What possible commercial attraction would there then be to Bachmann of dusting off the old Class 40 tooling, have to source again the (now redundant) open framed motor and produce this "old" model in direct competition to the new one even IF it could be manufactured and assembled significantly more cheaply which cannot be taken as a given? The answer appears to me very little/none.

Regards

Roy

Roy

I think the idea is not to produce something that directly competes, but something aimed at an entirely new market segment (entry level, younger members). The product would be "inferior enough" so as not to compete with the far more superior models, just like a BMW 318 most probably doesn't compete with a 323 etc. (I'm not a car expert but I know one's an entry level and one's higher up the range).

Those open core motors have been used up until quite recently in the class 20 and I wouldn't be surprised if Bachmann still had a shedload, or could get them produced for not more than they used to.

I think I've exhausted all I have to say on this and I think you guys have put up some compelling reasons as to why this most probably won't happen. I'll still respond in kind to new posts on the topic but I'll try and be mindful not to repeat what we've already said as I can see how we could go around in circles here.

Maybe Mark & I can put in an offer for the Poole tooling, get down to Homebase and buy a garden shed and set up business  :D

Thanks for all the input and debate from both sides.

MikeDunn thanks also for that analysis of the Hornby RR range. Interesting thoughts

Dan

Ironically i was discussing this with Gareth tonight whilst having a few jars, and he suggested i create a basic Bo Bo and Co Co chassis housing in resin that would use parts from a life like chassis or similar and fit the existing Farish shells. However
1) I don't think i would have the time to do this and i don't want to give up the family time I have each day.
2) Would people be interested
3) If i was to do this, do i pick specific classes such as 25, 31, 37, 47, 50, 55, which were popular and in large fleets.

Haven't read all the posts now but I would be 100% for a "budget" version these days (I can only comment on diesels):

• I'm priced out of the market now -just can't justify £100 or thereabouts for a loco
  I'm kind of fed up with fancy new loco's with lights which inevitably stop working every now and again, and very fine detail just falling off.  I can live without either for better reliability and durability -you can't see the detail unless close-up anyway

...I wouldn't touch Poole stuff again after a few experiences with them but I'd have no quarms going for a re-run of China models at "say" £60'ish, rather than the new DCC ready versions at £100 or more.  It would at least mean I could buy something new again rather than rely 100% on second hand.  I still think there's a market for unpainted versions of locos and wagons, but everyone says been there done that.  Peco are getting my hard earned pennies these days because I can build a rake of wagons at £3-4 each, if I went for the Dapol / Farish finished ones I could only have a rake of 2 or 3 over any reasonable timescale.

Rich

Unless something changes the economic viability of new releases is questionable as many people are not spending more they will end up buying fewer loco's meaning more unsold stock lying around at Dapol and Grafar which in turn will provide cash-flow issues and reduce their ability to produce new items.
something needs to give.  The high prices are also deterring people from N gauge.

Quote from: Roy L S on June 06, 2015, 08:29:46 PMIt has to be said that not all Railroad is old tooling - the Crosti 9F is brand new and the chassis it goes on, while I believe a carry over from the "standard" Railroad 9F is a new loco-drive unit.

Creating a Crosti 9F always seemed like a no brainer to me and it amazes me it took Hornby or Bachmann this long to release one.  However, when it was announced there were two decisions that surprised me:

1. Why create a Crosti as part of the Railroad "budget" range.  Surely such a class of model is likely to appeal to the serious modeller more.  I am not sure little Johnny even knows what a Crosti was.  ;)  This is a big black freight locomotive so does not have the appeal of passenger locos like the Tornado, P2 or Duke.  One can only assume that Hornby were concerned about how many Crostis they would actually sell and opted for the safer, cheaper option of creating a less detailed RR version.

2. However, if you are going for the lower cost, less risky option then why on earth spend money on creating a new chassis.  They have already created a loco drive chassis for the standard 9F - surely this could have been used under the Crosti with only minor tweaks and/or compromises.

Personally, if I was Hornby I would release the Crosti as a fully detailed model with its new chassis and much of the finer fitted detailed such as smokebox door dart, sprung buffers etc.  Still what do I know, I am sure Mr Kohler had very valid reasons for his decisions.  I suppose it could be down to the fact that the mouldings and chassis for the standard 9F are in a different factory from the Crosti 9F.

Interesting topic but rather off the topic of a budget British N gauge range.  :D

Paddy

Having been a kid in the 70s with a cheap model railway/train set I remember that my OO model railway was a definite mix of cheap and not so cheap rolling stock. One of the things that popularised OO back in the day was apparently Triang bringing out relatively cheap, not quite so detailed, models as trains sets that put them into the price bracket that normal families could afford.

They weren't the best quality models by a long chalk, but they weren't horrific and they were a pretty good start. Which got me thinking..

How practical, both technically and commercially, would it be to do a budget line of N Gauge rolling stock that gives an economical starting point for those new to N Gauge? We already have the Peco kits that are probably the nearest thing to this in kit form but what about some *really* simple Mk1 BR coaches for instance?

The idea would be that these models would certainly be low-end in terms of detail to make them simple and cheap to manufacture but accurate enough in actual scale to be able to be retained and detailed as their owner upgrades later to more detailed models.

This isn't a call to lose the detail/price of current models either. This is something that would be a new SKU, targeting a different niche.

A potential side effect of a cheap Mk1 BR carriage might be if it's manufactured clear like the original Farish ones. Not only does this mean it can use cheap vinyl overlays for its printing, it could also then be easily customised with the Electra Graphics vinyls (and provides a new source of donor models for these too).

Anyway, there are minds out there with far more knowledge of current manufacturing techniques  than mine, so I put it here as a thought experiment for us to *politely* chew on :)

This comes up every now and again, and the conclusion is usually that there just aren't the economies of scale in the British market to support it.

Expanding Squiddy's observation:

Assuming this would be aimed primarily at children, some questions to ruminate on:

- What sort of age range are you thinking this would be aimed at? Anything less than 8 or so would, I suspect, lack the fine motor skills to be able to accurately manipulate the small rolling stock.

- How would things like wheels be retained in the event of rough handling (inevitable with children at some point or another)

- How small a niche are you aiming at? Existing releases appear to be in multiples of 500 or so (at least for one of the major manufacturers) for what might be described as 'mainstream N', which is probably as small as would be considered for a new venture (guessing here).

- How do you overcome the perceived danger of small parts in children's toys? (EVERYTHING is a small part in N)

- Given the current plight of Hornby, the major British toy train manufacturer, what is the perceived appetite for any manufacturer to release a completely new range in the UK?

All very good points :)

Personally, I'd see this being aimed as a "Play with your kids" level. So for older children when used unattended but intended to be played with the proper way that all train sets used to be, which is to say Dad (or Mum!) plays with it with the kids 'helping'. Or rather, played with by kids under supervision. 8+ is a good basis though.

Wheel retention is a good engineering problem. One angle is to go for an almost Lego like route and make it so the bogies and wheels pop off, making them both easy to replace when damaged and easier to assemble at the manufacturing stage.

I'd be thinking of this being a *really* budget line, so more in the thousands for items like carriages (for the common components like bodies, bogies and wheels). *if* you can market them as a collectible toy, (with lots of different printed sides, but the same basic model used as a base) then there's possibly a market there. As a for instance, there's the Thomas line of collectible loco toys. They're *really* *really* basic, but come as a random push along engine in a bag for £2. That's with the benefit of Thomas the Tank Engine marketing of course (but also with the cost of that license involved).

The Hornby issue and the general image of toy trains and 'old' toys is a definite issue. Essentially you'd be looking at someone coming up with a really good new way of marketing them. Although I suspect this is something needed by all the current manufacturers at the moment.