What determines a re-run of a model?

[Noel]

What I want to know is when are the IRM Sulzer 101's going to be re-run?   

12 minutes ago, spudfan said:

The mm 121 class will be with us shortly and they can hardly be classed as current IR stock  (black and tan, original silver seem to be popular  preorders)) also the "A" class is eagerly awaited again hardly "current" rolling stock. Just because the 201 is currently running on our rails does not mean someone will want to buy it. If they want a 141/181 they want a 141/181.

Regarding 141/181, when they were initially issued MM had the development costs to recoup. If they were reissued as is, surely having no development cost to recoup could be reflected in the price? Maybe that would allow a price point below the 121 or the "A" class. By all means keep additional unrepresented models coming but not everyone has the where withall to fulfil their needs when a model hits the shops. Me, I would like one of the small CIE shunters. It would be great for someone entering the hobby. Add in a couple of IRM wagon packs, some sidings and you are set up.

Anyway it is refreshing that we can argue over something like this. Not so many years ago there would have been nothing there to argue over!

Yip 1st world problems. After a lengthy famine we are completely awash now with top quality Irish RTR models, and it looks like its going to keep growing.

[spudfan]

Who was that said "Be careful what you wish for"?

Little did we know how it would affect us and our balance of payments. Still some one else said "You can't take it with you".  I'd have to get some off the Mrs to take it with me, but I do intent to take my rolling stock with me. It'll put Tutankamun's hoard to shame!!!

[DiveController]

An you'll need a few shabtis to help you run your railway in the underworld 

[mphoey]

21 hours ago, spudfan said:

Who was that said "Be careful what you wish for"?

Little did we know how it would affect us and our balance of payments. Still some one else said "You can't take it with you".  I'd have to get some off the Mrs to take it with me, but I do intent to take my rolling stock with me. It'll put Tutankamun's hoard to shame!!!

coffin could be made out of stock welded together

 

[RKX]

On 7/2/2020 at 4:10 PM, DiveController said:

I wouldn't have thought that it would be viable to do a full run several models in 4 liveries for the 141/181, 9000 models as Dave says. I thought when people referred to a rerun, they were talking about maybe one new unweathered number in each livery which might give you 2000 models which is a lot to sell. If modelers wanted more they could renumber or weather to their needs.

If the Chinese do not want to do less than 2k units in a run, that would potentially be problematic not just for a MM rerun but also so other niche models like JM designs may wish to do or some of the 1970s wagons such a magnesites or barytes ever seeing the light of day.

Does this mean that the Chinese are saturated with injecting enough plastic for the world that they're now able to dictate what's worth their while on a bigger scale and will this bring in another workforce to undercut the Chinese just as this work previously moved to China from Europe and the Americas?

EDIT: Forgot to say that then there is buyers expectations and comparisons being drawn with state of the art locos such as the upcoming A if the original tooling was used and available. Many would not want to have to fiddle with tiny switches or have to install aftermarket sugar cube speakers or remove the cab only for it not to fit back perfectly and expectations would lead to comparisons still being drawn between something designed recently and nearly 2 decades ago  

I spoke to a Chinese manufacturer some time back, and their MOQ was 540. Not sure of the quality from that manufacturer, and certainly 540 would not be viable if all the tooling had to be made, BUT if the existing moulds could be bought cheaply (even rented) then a short 141/181 run might just be viable. 

[Railer]

What if a crowd funded expression of interest action was set up. I know crowd funding is a dirty word in the modeling world but it could get things going. Say 100 up front per model from everyone interested and the balance payed prior to delivery. Naturally nothing would happen until sufficient pre orders are committed to upfront and payed for.

Edited July 4, 2020 by Railer

[enniscorthyman]

When PM attended the Wexford club in February he did mention about a rerun of the 141/181,however he explained a new model would be required with rotating axel caps new lighting,grills etc,which would make it over 200quid and a minimum  run of 5000 if not more.

 

[jhb171achill]

11 minutes ago, enniscorthyman said:

When PM attended the Wexford club in February he did mention about a rerun of the 141/181,however he explained a new model would be required with rotating axel caps new lighting,grills etc,which would make it over 200quid and a minimum  run of 5000 if not more.

 

I would normally think long and hard before parting with sums much bigger than that for a loco, but I would certainly buy a couple and I am certain that many more here would too. But would he sell 5000? That would be the issue.

I think irrespective of whether a re-run ever happens or not, PM owes nobody anything! His models so far have been ground-breaking.

[enniscorthyman]

1 minute ago, jhb171achill said:

I would normally think long and hard before parting with sums much bigger than that for a loco, but I would certainly buy a couple and I am certain that many more here would too. But would he sell 5000? That would be the issue.

I think irrespective of whether a re-run ever happens or not, PM owes nobody anything! His models so far have been ground-breaking.

That's a good question,and as you said he owes nowbody anything.He gave a insight into the 121s and the problems involved,and by God fair play to him for producing them.

[Galteemore]

It’s one of those situations, I think, where one cannot eat one’s cake and still have it (I struggle to understand that phrase the other way round). Model railway production has vastly improved but customer expectations on availability may also have to change.

From the 1920s until the 1990s (barring World War II/Irish Emergency I) model railway products were freely available but from a very limited range. Hornby Dublo for instance, would only furnish a very limited LM region layout with an 8F, 4MT, Duchess and class 20. The catalogue hardly changed year on year - and only by the last few years was Super Detail rolling stock produced. Otherwise the standard of HD models hardly changed from 1938 to 1968. Factory jigs and personnel at Binns Road were dedicated to the same task for decades. 

The business model has changed now, and model locos are produced in shorter runs but with increasing prototype fidelity as years go by. Compare a Hornby loco of the 80s with today - and the standard is changing all the time. To go backwards is pricey and inconvenient. As the business model changes, so must the purchasing one. And the sad reality is that you have to buy it when you see it. 

Edited July 4, 2020 by Galteemore

[RKX]

39 minutes ago, enniscorthyman said:

When PM attended the Wexford club in February he did mention about a rerun of the 141/181,however he explained a new model would be required with rotating axel caps new lighting,grills etc,which would make it over 200quid and a minimum  run of 5000 if not more.

 

Are we getting a little spoilt now, and would there be existing interest in a run of an identical model (without those mods you mention), therefore keeping the price low, as the moulds exist? I missed out on the original run, so not too sure about the quality of the product, good or bad. 

As for the 200 quid, many are bidding on Ebay up and over 300, for Used, without these mods, suggesting interest is there. 

[iarnrod]

1 hour ago, enniscorthyman said:

When PM attended the Wexford club in February he did mention about a rerun of the 141/181,however he explained a new model would be required with rotating axel caps new lighting,grills etc,which would make it over 200quid and a minimum  run of 5000 if not more.

 

There would be a certain commonality of parts between the 121 and 141/181's, such as bogies, motor etc., so would assume that PM has factored that into any future plans for a new run of 141/181's. Would imagine that this would reduce developement costs a bit for a new 141/181 model. PM did go to great lengths after all to fit the motor and sound chip into the 121, so a similar setup could be used in the 141/181's.

I did hear from a reliable source that PM has another project or two lined up after the 121's.

Personally, would love to see the 141/181's released with a similar spec and detail level as the 121's and the A Class.

5,000 units would be divided up into about 10 different models, so not beyond the realms of possibility. 

[Warbonnet]

3 hours ago, RKX said:

I spoke to a Chinese manufacturer some time back, and their MOQ was 540. Not sure of the quality from that manufacturer, and certainly 540 would not be viable if all the tooling had to be made, BUT if the existing moulds could be bought cheaply (even rented) then a short 141/181 run might just be viable. 

MOQ of 540? We’d love to meet them, as any factory (4 currently being used) is a lot more than that.

Cheers!

Fran

[RKX]

14 minutes ago, Warbonnet said:

MOQ of 540? We’d love to meet them, as any factory (4 currently being used) is a lot more than that.

Cheers!

Fran

I met the guy a few years ago at the Canton Trade Fair, and kept their fa tory details. Before the lockdown I sent a general mail to see what the score was, but that MOQ was for wagons. I didn't ask about locos. 

I'd personally love to see a completed CIE 20T brake van released; you've stated in the past this is not on IRM radar. 540 min order might be viable, for a mid range model? 

[BosKonay]

6 minutes ago, RKX said:. 

I'd personally love to see a completed CIE 20T brake van released; you've stated in the past this is not on IRM radar. 540 min order might be viable, for a mid range model? 

The trouble with any new RTR model is that the tooling is a pretty predictable cost. If you make 540 models you have to amortise that tool cost over only 540 models. Making the model very expensive. 

[Warbonnet]

They also never offered us a figure as low as 540 for a wagon. Again, a lot more than that, and as Stephen says above, recouping the figure over such a low production run makes it hugely expensive. You may get 540 per livery, but not production run.

As we learned with our plough vans such runs for niche vehicles are expensive and not really viable, so that’s why we rule the brake vans out. You don’t run rakes of them at the end of the day.

Cheers!

Fran

[Galteemore]

11 minutes ago, Warbonnet said:

that’s why we rule the brake vans out. You don’t run rakes of them at the end of the day.

Cheers!

Fran

Not as a rule,  no.....

http://www.taillampphotography.com/SGWR 1366_1371.htm

Edited July 4, 2020 by Galteemore

[Warbonnet]

10 minutes ago, Galteemore said:

Not as a rule,  no.....

http://www.taillampphotography.com/SGWR 1366_1371.htm

My only saving grace is that they’re not CIE vans

Some interesting comments on here about the market etc, and while we do know it’s growing, some of the figures being stated in the topic are ambitious to say the least. It is still quite small in general. I can’t speak for Murphy Models and I never would, but I’m sure if demand is there a new run would occur. However, a few large EBay sales does not necessarily mean sufficient demand for a large production run is there (which is a 4 figure sum.) It also has to compete against two forthcoming models in a niche market. Maybe in the near future, but I’d be surprised if it was right now.

Cheers!

Fran

 

[RKX]

20 minutes ago, Warbonnet said:

They also never offered us a figure as low as 540 for a wagon. Again, a lot more than that, and as Stephen says above, recouping the figure over such a low production run makes it hugely expensive. You may get 540 per livery, but not production run.

As we learned with our plough vans such runs for niche vehicles are expensive and not really viable, so that’s why we rule the brake vans out. You don’t run rakes of them at the end of the day.

Cheers!

Fran

Indeed. They're  just on my personal wish list, but appreciate their not viable in the Irish market. If you don't mind me asking, what size was the plough van run? Give or take. 

[Warbonnet]

1 minute ago, RKX said:

Indeed. They're  just on my personal wish list, but appreciate their not viable in the Irish market. If you don't mind me asking, what size was the plough van run? Give or take. 

No problem at all. It’s no secret (on the website) we did 250 packs over 3 variants with 2 per box, so 1500 models. Very, very small run in the grand scheme of things, hence the higher than usual RRP. This also benefited from using the cement bubble / ballast hopper chassis, so gives you an idea of costs involved. We do love a brake van, and the ploughs are a lovely model, but it just doesn’t add up at the moment. Still, if the market keeps growing, who knows!

Cheers!

Fran

[iarnrod]

16 minutes ago, Warbonnet said:

My only saving grace is that they’re not CIE vans

Some interesting comments on here about the market etc, and while we do know it’s growing, some of the figures being stated in the topic are ambitious to say the least. It is still quite small in general. I can’t speak for Murphy Models and I never would, but I’m sure if demand is there a new run would occur. However, a few large EBay sales does not necessarily mean sufficient demand for a large production run is there (which is a 4 figure sum.) It also has to compete against two forthcoming models in a niche market. Maybe in the near future, but I’d be surprised if it was right now.

Cheers!

Fran

 

Fair points, Fran. Think it's fair to say there is a more than sufficient supply of new Irish railway models due between now and the end of the year,  and a great thing it is too.

We are really spolit for choice these days.

And we have the forthcoming IRM announcement that you mentioned recently to look forward to aswell. 

[RKX]

27 minutes ago, Warbonnet said:

No problem at all. It’s no secret (on the website) we did 250 packs over 3 variants with 2 per box, so 1500 models. Very, very small run in the grand scheme of things, hence the higher than usual RRP. This also benefited from using the cement bubble / ballast hopper chassis, so gives you an idea of costs involved. We do love a brake van, and the ploughs are a lovely model, but it just doesn’t add up at the moment. Still, if the market keeps growing, who knows!

Cheers!

Fran

Thanks for the  reply.  Yes, 1500 is a lot to shift. If you find any more ballast hoppers, when you're stock taking, I'll take a few ploughs off you.

[Mayner]

11 hours ago, Railer said:

What if a crowd funded expression of interest action was set up. I know crowd funding is a dirty word in the modeling world but it could get things going. Say 100 up front per model from everyone interested and the balance payed prior to delivery. Naturally nothing would happen until sufficient pre orders are committed to upfront and payed for.

Crowdfunding is reasonably safe when its set up through an established crowdfunding platform like "Kickstarter" rather than the company that is selling the models.  Crowdfunding got a bad reputation in the UK when money raised by Crowdfunding was not ringfenced and apparently used to prop up an undercapitalised and  failing business.

If they believe there is sufficient demand for a particular model there is nothing to stop a member or members of this group setting up a crowdfunding appeal with the objective of raising €1.7m * to commission Murphy Models to do a re-run of the Bachmann B141/181 (10,000 locos @  €160 + 5% Crowdfunding platform fee based on Bachmann's min. production run.

On a less ambitious scale a crowdfunding appeal could be used to establish of there is sufficient demand for a high quality rtr CIE Buffet Car or BR Heating Van to run with Murphy Models Cravens

The appeal would need to raise approx  €250,000 based on 3000 coaches selling at approx €80 + fee

 

[DiveController]

I'd be fine with an rtr coach at Eur80 upfront if good quality niche models could be supplied that way, 2999 to go...

Edited July 5, 2020 by DiveController

[RKX]

9 hours ago, Mayner said:

Crowdfunding is reasonably safe when its set up through an established crowdfunding platform like "Kickstarter" rather than the company that is selling the models.  Crowdfunding got a bad reputation in the UK when money raised by Crowdfunding was not ringfenced and apparently used to prop up an undercapitalised and  failing business.

If they believe there is sufficient demand for a particular model there is nothing to stop a member or members of this group setting up a crowdfunding appeal with the objective of raising €1.7m * to commission Murphy Models to do a re-run of the Bachmann B141/181 (10,000 locos @  €160 + 5% Crowdfunding platform fee based on Bachmann's min. production run.

On a less ambitious scale a crowdfunding appeal could be used to establish of there is sufficient demand for a high quality rtr CIE Buffet Car or BR Heating Van to run with Murphy Models Cravens

The appeal would need to raise approx  €250,000 based on 3000 coaches selling at approx €80 + fee

 

Bachman selling coaches at €80 includes Backman's profit margin, so I'd imagine a crowd funding exercise would have a lower price (if you could get someone with knowledge to take it on). Otherwise it'd be not much different to a Pre-order. Or am I reading it wrong?

[BosKonay]

9 minutes ago, RKX said:

Bachman selling coaches at €80 includes Backman's profit margin, so I'd imagine a crowd funding exercise would have a lower price (if you could get someone with knowledge to take it on). Otherwise it'd be not much different to a Pre-order. Or am I reading it wrong?

Note however that bachmann likely make 10-15,000 coaches in a run, if not more. 

[WRENNEIRE]

I feel I am knocking my head against a wall here

 

[spudfan]

I was wondering what the noise was..

[Mayner]

8 hours ago, RKX said:

Bachman selling coaches at €80 includes Backman's profit margin, so I'd imagine a crowd funding exercise would have a lower price (if you could get someone with knowledge to take it on). Otherwise it'd be not much different to a Pre-order. Or am I reading it wrong?

A crowdfunded the promoters are uncertain about the level of demand and a project does not proceed unless it achieves specific funding targets,  with pre-orders the manufacturer/commissioner is reasonably confident about the level of demand and has already decided to proceed with the project.

A crowdfunded model may be more expensive than a speculative model produced by a manufacturer/commissioner because of a smaller production run and the additional cost of the crowdfunding platform fees, the manufacturer/commissioner are highly unlikely to undertake the design and production of the model unless they can make a profit on the transaction.

The HO Auto Boxcar project is a good example of the likely uptake for a crowdfunded appeal for a small production run of a wagon or coach  https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ho-40-single-sheathed-box-and-auto-cars-1929-70s#/updates/all.

 

[BosKonay]

6 hours ago, Mayner said:

The HO Auto Boxcar project is a good example of the likely uptake for a crowdfunded appeal for a small production run of a wagon or coach  https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ho-40-single-sheathed-box-and-auto-cars-1929-70s#/updates/all.

 

A nice piece on the real costs of RTR models also by them

https://www.prototypejunction.com/2020/03/what-does-it-take-to-make-model-why-so.html

[Ironroad]

This is and extremely important topic and there and been a lot of interesting and valid input in which the consensus seems to be that supplying a niche market is problematic and most certainly anything niche within that market is not going to happen. So, it seems to me that if there are things we want “we” (the interested modelers and collectors) need to be more proactive in the process.

As already mentioned, gone are the days when producers offered a range of products with little variation or upgrade year after year. In today’s world we need to be very alert to what is developing and on offer and to snap up what we want immediately because when “it’s gone it’s gone”.  After that it is down to what might appear on EBAY and that can really determine for us “the price of our desires”.

That is why I have been happy to pay upfront when pre-ordering from IRM and was very concerned when they suggested they were discontinuing this practice. I do acknowledge that initially I was a bit uneasy with paying upfront because while this was not crowdfunding, it seemed a little akin to that.  Any initial unease has long dissipated  Ultimately I’m happy to pay upfront because (a) it gives me peace of mind that I will secure the items I want and (b) I’m happy to help fund the project though I acknowledge this was never suggested by IRM and they committed to projects without real certainty of recouping their outlays.

I was astonished when IRM produced the plough vans. While they compliment the ballast wagons, they are nonetheless a very niche item in a niche market and I would imagine it will take some time to shift this stock and this may be a motivating factor in a re-run of the ballast wagons, But at the same time a deterrent to producing a regular brake van (or other one-time items in a rake).

However, in considering a re-run of anything, the producer must consider whether demand will be at similar levels as the original and whether upgrades are required or necessary.  

There is a precedent. The Murphy Models LIMA class 201 release in 2001 was superseded by a vastly improved re-release in 2011 but it seems to me that nine years later the re-release has not sold out whereas the original sold out within two years. So that might suggest there is little chance of a successful re- release of an upgraded Baby GM, at very least it would make the producer very cautious.

There is anther question here. How many original buyers of the 201 bought the re-release? How many were simply happy to accept what some would point out as shortcomings in the original given that it was nonetheless a reasonable representation of this locomotive?

How much does super detailing cost us and is there a trade off in robustness? Personally I don’t think rotating axle caps are necessary (or add that much) and I get worried when IRM consider it necessary to include 16 spares in each box and to find some already missing when the box is opened for the first time. How many of us have broken detail on our super detailed models? EG the brake wheels on IRM wagons (because of the fineness of the stem) and the roof detail on MM locos? There was time that those who wanted super detailing were happy to add this themselves as part of the fun in the hobby.

I would advocate this. If it helps with costs, we should probably row back a little on the fiddly detail (particularly things that cannot be seen) and secondly. we should consider how we might work with producers to make it possible to manufacture items we desire.

On this second point I would ask if IRM would be interested in managing crowd funded projects? I acknowledge this route has failed modelers in the UK in the past but with proper ring-fencing of the funds IE escrow accounts it should be possible to make this work. The great advantage is that nothing proceeds without sufficient demand and financial commitment on the part of the purchasers and with IRM hosting there is the benefit of their expertise.

[RKX]

19 hours ago, Mayner said:

A crowdfunded the promoters are uncertain about the level of demand and a project does not proceed unless it achieves specific funding targets,  with pre-orders the manufacturer/commissioner is reasonably confident about the level of demand and has already decided to proceed with the project.

A crowdfunded model may be more expensive than a speculative model produced by a manufacturer/commissioner because of a smaller production run and the additional cost of the crowdfunding platform fees, the manufacturer/commissioner are highly unlikely to undertake the design and production of the model unless they can make a profit on the transaction.

The HO Auto Boxcar project is a good example of the likely uptake for a crowdfunded appeal for a small production run of a wagon or coach  https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ho-40-single-sheathed-box-and-auto-cars-1929-70s#/updates/all.

 

The crowd funding example makes an excellent read - thanks both for sharing. 

Having said that, I think some of the figures are way out. I know this is US, but typically a 20ft container to Ireland costs €1,100 and 40ft box about €1,500 (as opposed to $5000 - maybe they were located in the middle of the US, and needed road haulage inland). 25% fees for credit card and spurious expenses is also very, very high imo, but that's the retailers problem. 

Taking his manufacturing costs as accurate (including tooling, CAD, assembly cost per unit), then a 2, 000 run of, say, a brake van, would cost around €40 per unit. By my rough calculations. 

Would you a) sell 2,000, and b) what could you reasonably sell them for? 

 

[Georgeconna]

 "40ft box about €1,500". Try double that from East cost and Add on locals for clearance and Delivery. 

 

[Warbonnet]

1 hour ago, Ironroad said:

This is and extremely important topic and there and been a lot of interesting and valid input in which the consensus seems to be that supplying a niche market is problematic and most certainly anything niche within that market is not going to happen. So, it seems to me that if there are things we want “we” (the interested modelers and collectors) need to be more proactive in the process.

As already mentioned, gone are the days when producers offered a range of products with little variation or upgrade year after year. In today’s world we need to be very alert to what is developing and on offer and to snap up what we want immediately because when “it’s gone it’s gone”.  After that it is down to what might appear on EBAY and that can really determine for us “the price of our desires”.

That is why I have been happy to pay upfront when pre-ordering from IRM and was very concerned when they suggested they were discontinuing this practice. I do acknowledge that initially I was a bit uneasy with paying upfront because while this was not crowdfunding, it seemed a little akin to that.  Any initial unease has long dissipated  Ultimately I’m happy to pay upfront because (a) it gives me peace of mind that I will secure the items I want and (b) I’m happy to help fund the project though I acknowledge this was never suggested by IRM and they committed to projects without real certainty of recouping their outlays.

I was astonished when IRM produced the plough vans. While they compliment the ballast wagons, they are nonetheless a very niche item in a niche market and I would imagine it will take some time to shift this stock and this may be a motivating factor in a re-run of the ballast wagons, But at the same time a deterrent to producing a regular brake van (or other one-time items in a rake).

However, in considering a re-run of anything, the producer must consider whether demand will be at similar levels as the original and whether upgrades are required or necessary.  

There is a precedent. The Murphy Models LIMA class 201 release in 2001 was superseded by a vastly improved re-release in 2011 but it seems to me that nine years later the re-release has not sold out whereas the original sold out within two years. So that might suggest there is little chance of a successful re- release of an upgraded Baby GM, at very least it would make the producer very cautious.

There is anther question here. How many original buyers of the 201 bought the re-release? How many were simply happy to accept what some would point out as shortcomings in the original given that it was nonetheless a reasonable representation of this locomotive?

How much does super detailing cost us and is there a trade off in robustness? Personally I don’t think rotating axle caps are necessary (or add that much) and I get worried when IRM consider it necessary to include 16 spares in each box and to find some already missing when the box is opened for the first time. How many of us have broken detail on our super detailed models? EG the brake wheels on IRM wagons (because of the fineness of the stem) and the roof detail on MM locos? There was time that those who wanted super detailing were happy to add this themselves as part of the fun in the hobby.

I would advocate this. If it helps with costs, we should probably row back a little on the fiddly detail (particularly things that cannot be seen) and secondly. we should consider how we might work with producers to make it possible to manufacture items we desire.

On this second point I would ask if IRM would be interested in managing crowd funded projects? I acknowledge this route has failed modelers in the UK in the past but with proper ring-fencing of the funds IE escrow accounts it should be possible to make this work. The great advantage is that nothing proceeds without sufficient demand and financial commitment on the part of the purchasers and with IRM hosting there is the benefit of their expertise.

Hi Ironroad,

You make some points I agree with from experience. I think retooling an all new 141 would be a complete folly, as the current model is indeed excellent. You certainly wouldnt sell thousands of them to justify the tooling outlay. The 201 made sense as the drive and detail was a quantum leap over Lima. But, for every person happy with the new model, plenty are happy and run the old Lima one still and they just want to play trains. The jump forward with a 141 would be much, much shorter in my personal opinion. Why would you sell the current one to buy the new one? 99% wouldnt, and there are other locos to be made in the meantime which make more sense. 

Regarding detail, your opinion is valid of course, but plenty of people do want that those detail items. When we started this our ethos was to do super detailed quality items, as MM had set the benchmark and these were the models we wanted to create. You may disregard it as "unnecessary" but our ethos to to make accurate scale models (track width aside, nothing we can do about that) so if it's on the real one, it needs to be on our one too. It's not about vanity either, it's about value for money. As production runs are tiny for the Irish market, charging high prices for mediocre models does not offer good value for money. The models would've looked shabby next to existing MM products and customers would dismiss it as "not worth the money". It's about bang for buck. Could robustness be improved? Sure, and we are building that more into future lines, but the detail will remain. These are models, not toys, and that means detail. We want to push things forward, and the reason why Lima, Mainline, Hornby Dublo etc died was because they stood still. The hobby needs to progress, not stand still.

Suggestions are always welcome for new models, and we are working on several new tooling models for IRM which we have not announced yet. I am sure MM has stuff up his sleeve too. We will always be honest and say if something doesnt fly, and we have above. We get people really want something, but the needs to be fiscal reality added to the mix too. The market is also tiny and we have had plenty of comments from people saying "slow down, you're bringing too much out" and then on the other side "I want I want I want" We have to balance between the two to keep viable. There are spoil wagons, weedsprays, A Classes, 121s all coming in the next 6 months. That's on top of kegs, bubbles and plough vans and a ballast hopper run and God knows what MM has planned. Where does another new model fit in?

Finally, we have no desire to manage a crowdfunding initiative. They take up a huge amount of admin time which we just cant spare right now and we are a self financing company. If someone wishes to commission a model from us, we would gladly do that. We have performed this several times in the UK market and offered these services to JM Design when those ideas for two wagons were scoped out. There has been a very public utter catastrophe regarding crowdfunding in the UK that shows how wrong it can go. 

 

29 minutes ago, RKX said:

The crowd funding example makes an excellent read - thanks both for sharing. 

Having said that, I think some of the figures are way out. I know this is US, but typically a 20ft container to Ireland costs €1,100 and 40ft box about €1,500 (as opposed to $5000 - maybe they were located in the middle of the US, and needed road haulage inland). 25% fees for credit card and spurious expenses is also very, very high imo, but that's the retailers problem. 

Taking his manufacturing costs as accurate (including tooling, CAD, assembly cost per unit), then a 2, 000 run of, say, a brake van, would cost around €40 per unit. By my rough calculations. 

Would you a) sell 2,000, and b) what could you reasonably sell them for? 

 

a) I really have my doubts tbh based on examples we have experienced and outlined and the lack of stock to run with them currently. You need two plough vans per train, but only one brake van.

b) You'd be looking at €60-70 a pop I reckon (rough estimate) but there are many variables. 

I really do not mean to drag the spirits down, but after 5 years at this we do have the voice of experience at this stage.

Cheers!

Fran

16 minutes ago, Georgeconna said:

 "40ft box about €1,500". Try double that from East cost and Add on locals for clearance and Delivery. 

 

And a very sizable VAT bill when it lands! 

[RKX]

24 minutes ago, Georgeconna said:

 "40ft box about €1,500". Try double that from East cost and Add on locals for clearance and Delivery. 

 

East Coast China? 

Edited July 6, 2020 by RKX