Loco duplication

[ruggedpeak]

With announcements in recent times of multiple manufacturers producing the same OO locos in new/updated form in the 'modern image' world of OO, and following discussions with AY I have set up a thread to discuss.

 

This is to keep general and wide ranging discussions off model specific threads. The intention is not to create a space for people to tell us how brilliant/terrible they think a particular manufacturer is, but to discuss issues arising and impacts on the hobby (if any!). Predictions of the next duplicated model welcome!

 

For my tuppence worth we are blessed with high quality models from new and existing companies, but there does not yet seem to in any significant inroads into the long list of prototypes we have yet to see in RTR.

 

I also note that it remains established players like Hornby and Hornby and Bachmann who have been turning out new prototype modern image models, even if they are not always top spec. Where would Making Tracks be without Hornby Pendos and Bachmann EMUs in addition to an endless supply of diesel locos?

 

An interesting topic I think and worthy of friendly discussion.

[cornelius]

My hot take on this is that it's not a solvable problem under capitalism.

[Vanguard 5374]

I think the underlying issue here is that we rarely see a model announcement before any work is done bar basic CAD work. The last time I think we saw this with British outline for a mainline diesel would be Heljan with a TT gauge Class 31, who then threw a fit when Hornby announced that they planned one and withdrew altogether from the scale.

 

I’m sure at this point we would have a Heljan 31 as a released model by now with no signs of a Hornby one yet, given Hornby are doing several diesels before touching upon it.

[davidw]

To a certain extent solvable. 

 

How? By choosing prototypes never modelled (Though duplicates could still occur).

 

We don't know what parameters are used in deciding  on new tooling on existing models but we've got duplicates of Class 60, 9f, deltic, 08 etc... to name a few. 

 

Popular though these items are. It must be a very difficult judgement call for the manufacturers when considering a duplicate/upgrade.

 

Is it a greater risk for a model of a prototype previously not made?

 

 

 

[Andy Hayter]

For the last couple of years, it seems that most of the producers have decided to concentrate on prototypes from   the last 50 years and  this has been a period of standardisation (in construction if not livery).  Given the number of prototypes is then relatively limited, duplication is virtually inevitable.  

 

Those steam outline models that have been produced have been later/last generation and earlier periods seem to be being largely overlooked for now.  (There are exceptions of course and these with one notable exception are duplicate free.)  I wonder why that is since the evidence of availability of those  models that do represent early grouping or before suggests they have sold out quickly.  

 

In contrast some of the diesels seem to be being heavily discounted* - and in part that must be because duplication reduces the sales potential for an individual producer.   That of course is the downside for the producer but can be, for the short term, good for the modeller.  Longer term however it will result in supply drying up if producers and shops cannot make an adequate profit on their models.

 

*  Is that discounting coming from the producer with models he cannot sell, or is it coming from the model shop that needs to shift slow moving stock they have bought?  Or maybe a bit of both.  

[Wheatley]

17 minutes ago, davidw said:

We don't know what parameters are used in deciding  on new tooling on existing models but we've got duplicates of Class 60, 9f, deltic, 08 etc... to name a few. 

 

Popular though these items are...

Answered your own question. The same reason why every plastic kit manufacturer does a Spitfire, Me109, P51 Mustang and a B17 Flying Fortress, often in multiple scales. 

[kevinlms]

14 minutes ago, davidw said:

To a certain extent solvable. 

 

How? By choosing prototypes never modelled (Though duplicates could still occur).

 

We don't know what parameters are used in deciding  on new tooling on existing models but we've got duplicates of Class 60, 9f, deltic, 08 etc... to name a few. 

 

Popular though these items are. It must be a very difficult judgement call for the manufacturers when considering a duplicate/upgrade.

 

Is it a greater risk for a model of a prototype previously not made?

 

 

 

So which prototypes from the diesel classes of 01 - 67 are ones that have been 'never modelled'?

 

Yes, there might be a couple of obscure ones remaining, (01, 02), but would these sell in reasonable numbers? Not a case of 'no market', but a limited market. It's why every manufacturer, early in the piece, comes out with models of classes, that were built in large quantities. 20s, 25, 31, 37, 40, 45, 46, 50, 52, 55, 56, you simply can't go wrong, as unless very poor models will sell.

[davidw]

1 minute ago, kevinlms said:

So which prototypes from the diesel classes of 01 - 67 are ones that have been 'never modelled'?

 

Yes, there might be a couple of obscure ones remaining, (01, 02), but would these sell in reasonable numbers? Not a case of 'no market', but a limited market. It's why every manufacturer, early in the piece, comes out with models of classes, that were built in large quantities. 20s, 25, 31, 37, 40, 45, 46, 50, 52, 55, 56, you simply can't go wrong, as unless very poor models will sell.

I wasn't necessarily referring to Diesels

[Downer]

2 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

 It's why every manufacturer, early in the piece, comes out with models of classes, that were built in large quantities. 20s, 25, 31, 37, 40, 45, 46, 50, 52, 55, 56, you simply can't go wrong, as unless very poor models will sell.

I very much doubt that all the major manufacturers producing all those classes is a financially viable proposition. 

[adb968008]

This is a small hobby, and a small talent pool. I’m sure there is cross pollination about who is making what, at a minimum theres plenty of chinese whispers. 

 

However ultimately the companies make their own decisions to go head to head, knowingly or unknowingly.

So its there own choice, and they do the sums.

 

I think what spooked the industry was, at least in my perception, a deliberate decision by one major player to aggressively pursue a number of companies offerings with direct duplication on what felt like rushed models… After that we went from a level of openness with long term plans (announcements at CAD or even pre- CAD stage, and a longer wait until delivery), to much shorter notification of models being announced after the metal is cut and the EPs made, resulting in landmine surprises of duplication when its too late to do anything.

 

Thats not helped by Covid slowing the entire process down from what used to be a somewhat 2-3 year cycle to 4-7 year cycles to release stuff.

 

Each company is in this game to make money, and feed their staff, ultimately, and if they feel they can take a slice of the others pie and still make the maths stack up then you cannot blame them for doing it, and its maybe unrealistic to expect one company to ignore a high selling model to a competitor out of a British sense of fair play.

 

The market would easily sustain 2 or even 3 high detailed class 66’s… in Germany Roco, Piko, Trix and LsModels have all made a Vectron, and wow havent they done it… over 80 HO scale super detailed models made.

 

However where it becomes risky is high cost items (Like multiple units requiring separate toolings per coach) or edge cases (like small shunting classes from the 1930’s) where sales maybe would not sustain multiple toolings and utimately duplication would cause a loss… this is what we the consumer are bemoaning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 15 by adb968008

[ruggedpeak]

38 minutes ago, cornelius said:

My hot take on this is that it's not a solvable problem under capitalism.

Capitalism may not be a problem after the beginning of next month🤣😮

[Downer]

Just now, ruggedpeak said:

Capitalism may not be a problem after the beginning of next month🤣😮

You must be joking - this Labour Party leadership is as pro-capitalist as the people they’re about to replace.

[Phil Parker]

This is your "No politics" alert. Let's just swerve this and stick to toy trains please.

[ruggedpeak]

There is the modelling perspective but also the business one, given the sheer volume of sales of the likes of the AS 37 it is hard not to argue i makes business sense to duplicate if you can nail the market.

 

There is a harsh reality that sought after multiple units may not get close to those quantities which may affect business decisions.

[Phil Parker]

4 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

After that we went from a level of openness with long term plans (announcements at CAD or even pre- CAD stage, and a longer wait until delivery)

 

And the tantrums of modellers unhappy with the long delays between announcements and delivery.

 

4 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

to much shorter notification of models being announced after the metal is cut and the EPs made

 

Leading to a whole new set of moans...

[davidw]

18 minutes ago, Wheatley said:

Answered your own question. The same reason why every plastic kit manufacturer does a Spitfire, Me109, P51 Mustang and a B17 Flying Fortress, often in multiple scales. 

Not really the question was at the end was:

 

39 minutes ago, davidw said:

 

Is it a greater risk for a model of a prototype previously not made?

Recent steam that Bachmann have produced are the V2, the excellent G5 and the Caley. The later being a commission with TMC and I think Rails.

Edited June 15 by davidw

[Big Jimbob]

I think duplication depends on the fleet size of the prototype as you can get away with not doing the same number twice such as with the black 5 or the class 66. But i definitely got the feeling that the duplicated 4MT from Bachmann and Hornby hurt both. 
 

But a few years ago we got a perfect storm of the various manufacturers complementing each other by releasing the various SECR prototypes. I think everyone won that time

[adb968008]

16 minutes ago, Big Jimbob said:

I think duplication depends on the fleet size of the prototype as you can get away with not doing the same number twice such as with the black 5 or the class 66. But i definitely got the feeling that the duplicated 4MT from Bachmann and Hornby hurt both. 
 

But a few years ago we got a perfect storm of the various manufacturers complementing each other by releasing the various SECR prototypes. I think everyone won that time

There was definitely a period, around a decade ago, where it felt like a region got a focus… a lot of ER and SR stuff arrived in quick succession, with LMS and GWR left to one side. More recently that swing has changed to GWR and niche steam. Its possible this is down to fashion… someone seen someone wearing the latest tech and every goes “me too” and suddenly a range is created….
 

Opening a new market is the best way to avoid duplication, because its all greenfield.. lots of examples to pick from.. unfortunately OO has opened a lot of markets and finding new ones, that are worthwhile is getting harder…

 

Theres three that I definitely see existing… pregrouping, multiple units and 1930’s-1960’s coaches. Whilst pregrouping maybe a smaller interest, and multiple units higher risk…coaches from the 1930’s to 1960’s is a lower cost and quite under served market…especially if some pre1923 coaches were made..that could open the market for pregrouping locos down the road…the bell weather, as always is SR which has started tapping this.

 

Now if were talking niche, but interesting, many older coaches were turned into Electrification trains in the 1960’s and hung around to the 1980’s.. and no ones touched these.

Edited June 15 by adb968008

[MoonM]

40 minutes ago, davidw said:

To a certain extent solvable. 

 

How? By choosing prototypes never modelled (Though duplicates could still occur).

 

We don't know what parameters are used in deciding  on new tooling on existing models but we've got duplicates of Class 60, 9f, deltic, 08 etc... to name a few. 

 

Popular though these items are. It must be a very difficult judgement call for the manufacturers when considering a duplicate/upgrade.

 

Is it a greater risk for a model of a prototype previously not made?

 

 

 

Solvable, but likely not hugely profitable for manufactures. If I was running (say) accurascale I would focus on locos and rolling stock that will be in demand for years and many variations and liveries can be modelled. E.g. Diesels such as 08, 31, 33,37,40,43,44,47,50,52,etc. And steam such as black 5,8f,pannier, and many more. 

Accurascale can undercut the large manufacturers (eg Hornby and Bachmann) on quality, price and detail. I for one do not mind duplication here because you end up with a better and/or cheaper model. It will also someone like accurascale by profitable and scale their business and be around for the long haul. There might be a few locos I would avoid though, eg the A1s and A3s which Hornby seems very keen to keep investing in and are very good models already. 

What I do find sad though is when good new entrants duplicate (eg accurascale and cavalex with the class 60). Both companies being a similar ethos to the hobby in areas or quality and detail, however they are now competing against each other reducing market share for each. Whilst I feel likely coincidental, I feel especially sorry for cavalex as it appears that cavalex cannot quite compete on price (perhaps they don't quite have the scale on production costs and maybe need to work with higher margins due to producing much less volume than accurascale?). An open line of dialogue between these two manufacturers could be helpful or, more starkly, potentially consider either some joint venture initiatives or a merger of the two manufacturers?

[MoonM]

51 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

For the last couple of years, it seems that most of the producers have decided to concentrate on prototypes from   the last 50 years and  this has been a period of standardisation (in construction if not livery).  Given the number of prototypes is then relatively limited, duplication is virtually inevitable.  

 

Those steam outline models that have been produced have been later/last generation and earlier periods seem to be being largely overlooked for now.  (There are exceptions of course and these with one notable exception are duplicate free.)  I wonder why that is since the evidence of availability of those  models that do represent early grouping or before suggests they have sold out quickly.  

 

In contrast some of the diesels seem to be being heavily discounted* - and in part that must be because duplication reduces the sales potential for an individual producer.   That of course is the downside for the producer but can be, for the short term, good for the modeller.  Longer term however it will result in supply drying up if producers and shops cannot make an adequate profit on their models.

 

*  Is that discounting coming from the producer with models he cannot sell, or is it coming from the model shop that needs to shift slow moving stock they have bought?  Or maybe a bit of both.  

People often have a bias for the period of time where they were a child or young adult. People with a little surplus cash tend to be older and the model railway demographic is biased towards older men. 50s/60s BR has been popular for a while and will always be, however I think this trend explains why BR blue and now sectorisation areas are becoming popular. Eg Charlie Chadwick I think models BR blue because it reminds him of his earlier years photographing locos. I personally find BR blue a little dull but I really like and model sectorisation (despite the NSE liveries being objectively garish!). This is likely because I am slightly younger than Charlie and I remember these colourful trains from my youth and have no real recollection of BR blue before. 

If I was a manufacturer, I'd focus on these areas where greater demand is expected as it should lead to greater profits. We see the same in classic cars. 'modern classics' from the 80s,90s and 00s have shot up in value recently because the people who remember these cars as kids now may have the money to buy them

[Bernard Lamb]

43 minutes ago, Downer said:

I very much doubt that all the major manufacturers producing all those classes is a financially viable proposition. 

Probably not, if you take each class as a stand alone product.

However, if you are trying to establish a range and want to build up brand loyalty, it starts to make more sense.

Providing you are able to deliver the requred standard at the perceived price point of course.

Bernard

[atom3624]

Why do they duplicate 'the popular models'?

For precisely that - they're popular - people want them, they'll sell, they can be used in multiple situations without looking out of place.

 

Selecting 'not yet produced' models may be fascinating for some, but, will they sell enough  ...

 

Progress in manufacture and modelling, bringing things 'more scale' whilst duplicating will always exist it appears.

 

Is it possible for manufacturers to huddle together, then decide between them who'll make which model, at what standard / price bracket ?  Somehow I don't think so!

 

Al.

[GreenGiraffe22]

When both Hornby and Rails announced  Terriers, there's sooooo many different ones that could be done I was looking forward to all the different versions that both companies could churn out without duplicating, but both seem to have stagnated... 

[jjb1970]

I really don't see it as an issue or a problem. The suppliers make commercial decisions over what to offer, we as customers make decisions what to buy. The major classes and rolling stock items support multiple offerings and if they don't then the risk of making a loss on a product is the flip side to potential profit. Competition is generally good.

[298]

40 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Now if were talking niche, but interesting, many older coaches were turned into Electrification trains in the 1960’s and hung around to the 1980’s.. and no ones touched these.

 

Am I right in thinking Hornby did something with "Electrification" wording on, and in theory could use an old coach with a replacement flat top roof moulding? Southern Pride of course have done the MK1 flat tops as kits and I built a rake about 25 years ago from Lima coaches. 

 

The problem is, it's that dreaded "Electrification" word, not the easiest stuff to model out of the box and there is currently a big hole in what is available, either new or secondhand. Using the forty year rule shows that there is little of the mundane available such as 81-84 and units to support the more glamorous stuff.