Wow, I thought that model railroading was just a hobby. Apparently, it is just one large conspiracy from the powerfull manufacturers who do everything to fool us with bad products for exorbitant prices. I have always thought that they just provided us with nice (and yes, sometimes less nice) products so that we can enjoy our hobby and they can make a living out of their hobby. Silly me.:tb-err:
But the thing you have to keep in mind is that this is a very low quantity business. Most places aren't selling hundreds of these or anything else. Look how much merchandise is being moved through a supermarket. Then look at how much is being moved through a hobby store. If the supermarket was making $40 profit off a turkey, then you'd have a point. But they aren't and they don't need to. Because they're moving a ton of stuff every day, which means that they can make cents on the dollar and still make millions. The Wrigley's got rich off chewing gum because they sold millions of them. I doubt they are even making $40 profit on a loco, but lets say they are... OK, assume you sell 2 locos a day. I think for many stores that would be a pretty good day, but lets say 2. So now you've got $80. OK, what are you paying out... Rent in a decent area $2000-6000 a month. Any employee is going to want at least $100 a day to stay around. Insurance. Workers comp. Paying back biz loans. Restocking. The average small store/biz needs 8000-10000 a month to make it. And that's not counting the personal expenses of the owners. Even under the tightest budget, most people are going to need at least $3000-4000 a month just to survive. A lot more if they have kids. Now tack on about 30% more to that for taxes, because they love taxing the little guys most. So realistically you're looking at about 12,000 to 16,000 a month just to make it. How great does that $40 profit seem now?
My... my... how we continue to digress for the original post. But... sometimes the side-tracked commenting does answer some of those original concerns. On the latest issue with cost... I really don't blame the dealers one bit. I wonder how some of them stay in business with the short margins in a market which has so much diversity and diverse opinions of the products being sold. The MSRP is set by the manufacturer at an artificially high rate IMHO. I believe they do this to allow for the different costs associated with the dealers. A dealer with a storefront in a metropolitan area probably needs a bigger margin than someone who is selling out of their basement on the internet. The MSRP could be reduced from 0% to 35% depending on the dealer' situation. That 'cushion' varies from manufacturer... with IMHO... Walhers being the MOST overpriced in MSRP. It seems to me they thrive on creating a high MSRP then within a few months... have blow-out sales at 50-70% off MSRP. Is that mismanagement or a shrewd way to suck consumers to their brand? Years ago the biggest problem had been overproduction leading to a lot of unsold product. Whle that has lessened considerably with the advent of 'built-to-order' philosophy adopted about 7 year ago... the problem NOW is becoming less disposable incomes for a larger percentage of modelers. We are seeing more blow-out sales from all dealers because the distributors and dealers over-ordered beyond built-to order standards. These distributors and dealers need CASH or CREDIT to pay for the next round of goodies from the manufacturers. When sales like this occur... it seems to me that there is NO margin of profit... its just a way to get capital to pay for more new stuff. Now back to the original topic. YES I'd like more details added and more prototype fidelity... NO I don't want to mortgage the homestead to pay for it. The manufacturers will need to find ways to economize on the production of stuff in order to pass the savings (if any) or hold the prices down. Also they need to recognize and satisfy a more picky consumer which has less disposible income now... than a few years ago... that includes an aging consumer base going onto lower fixed incomes.
I could be wrong because I really don't know, but I thought the mfgs have done a great job of reducing the basic cost of locos by going to China, and now, even doing the tooling in China, reducing that cost from perhaps $250K to under $100K. Technology improvements have really brought the cost of tooling down as well. I know that most of those savings have been eaten up with exchange rates and the like, so oddly, while prices continue to rise, I think they are rising less than they might have, as hard as that is to believe. If they are only selling 5000 locos vs 20,000 in the past, as a Tony's DCC ad in MR recently suggested, then the tooling costs alone would save $30 per loco. But other costs would remain fixed or rise because of exchange rates and/or remain fixed or rise on a per loco basis because of the lower production runs. I think mfgs are between a rock and a hard place in this economy and may actually be working in a break even situation just to keep afloat, knowing now is not the time to raise prices any more than they absolutely have to.
Dave...as horrible as that all sounds...realize that a LHS is not JUST selling 2 locomotives and thats all trying to make that 8000.00 in expenses a month. LHS sell other items too. AND...yes I know the cost to operate a bussiness can be outragious. Thats wasnt my point. Years ago markup was 15%. Today its 50%+. YUP...operating costs and cost to run a bussiness have skyrocketed...understood. What I was/am saying is...if a LHS sells locomotives at a 'firesale' for 40.00...The are still making $$$. and if they originally sold em for 80.00 and made a profit...that original price was 100% higher then the profit margin to begin with. I suppose its all acedemic anyways...as customers will dictate what they are willing to pay in the end....thnxs .
I agree. Wouldnt it make more sense for manufactures/etailers/LHS to hold the line on prices and bank on customer satisfaction and repeat business to keep them afloat as opposed to jacking prices up more because sales are down? When manufactures/etailers/LHS's basically screw the consumer...it leaves a bad taste in the consumers mouth which will eventually effect their bottom line even more. Just a thought...thnxs. .
Yes we could use more choices...but at what cost. The average consumer is NOT going to pay 50% more for rolling stock just because an extra set of trucks and 2 MT body mount couplers are included in the box. Someone would still complain that the trucks are still wrong...the axles arent what they wanted..and the MT couplers arent what they wanted either. Lets leave those decisions to the individual modeler. I feel the same way about detailing. Let the consumer decide how far and how much detail they want...and pay for it after the purchase. ALL consumers shouldnt have to pay out the nose for it to begin with. Back to the original post. I would however love to see an across the board effort by manufactures to include pads and drill holes for body mounting couplers. I think that in itself would go a long way to help satisfy the grumbling of the masses. I run truck mounted couplers. I have a few body mounted...but mostly because body mounting on a piece of rolling stock not manufactured with the necessary area predetrermined has caused me more frustration then its worth...at times...to change em over. JMO. .
Several people have mentioned FVM’s Boxcars as a perfect example of getting better detail while maintaining an affordable price. The problem with FVM, from my point of view, is that FVM came along too late in the game for me. I already have a large fleet of modern boxcars that are perfectly acceptable for my needs and wants. I’m simply not going to sideline my MT and MDC boxcars so I can spend lots of money replacing them with other boxcars. It’s why I haven’t spent any money on any of the new auto transport cars that have been released over the past ten years, my Con-Cor’s can do anything the newer cars can, which in a nut shell, is roll down the track, while not derailing and sit at the siding. The newer offerings aren’t going to do either of those two things any better. Improvements in locomotives are another thing entirely. They have had a direct impact on the performance and reliability of our locomotives while improvements in rolling stock has had little, if any, impact on P & R, though I will agree that including MT trucks and couplers did.
It's not what I said, it's what you got out of it. Did I clearly state what I meant and did you hear words that led you to a different conclusion? Or did I muck it up with so much dialogue and "Texas Two Stepping"? There is something we miss here, every time this topic jumps up. In my last diatribe I was doing my best to entertain you as well as make a valid point. Without appearing to attack anyone of my friends and the issues discussed here. It was probably to much dialogue to wade through and you forgot your shovels. I guess, I can't leave you to arrive at the same conclusion, I do. Humm, that sounds like something my mother would say. The point is: We have a virtual explosion of products available to us today as compared to 20 years ago. There are more train products on LHS shelves then there has ever been. G, O, S, HO, N, Z scales all have a virtual bonanza of products available. I've heard TT is strong in the European arena. So, if the above is true and it is...why the whining? What we want to get into is: Problem Identification and Problem Resolution. Both have to work hand in hand. I hear many of you doing just that with your suggestions. You identify the problem and then you suggest a resolution. Well done! To get a perspective with regard to where we are and where we came from. Go back 30 years ago, 40 years ago and 50 years ago. All the way back to when I got into model railroading at the age of 12. Let's see, is it really 47 years ago? In HO you were lucky to get a pre-fab Athearn GP9 and a few train cars and some very early Atlas track. Does anyone here remember Hi-fi drive? No, it wasn't some sort of sound decoder delivering stereo sound. And, N scale was unheard of...unheard of, did I say Unheard Of? The point is, most model railroaders were proud to be able to develop, build and deliver their own home made products. Many of the items operating on their layouts, was more accurate in detail and dimensions then the pre-fab we buy today. My personal goal was to be as good as anyone of them. Now, I never made the grade and I suspect I'm not alone. So, for me purchasing pre-fab is the best way to go. To sum up what you, we and I are saying collectively. (1) Body mounted couplers, preferably knuckle couplers of the correct scale. (2) Details added to locomotives Ie., handrails, stirrups, brake wheels or at least provide them in the packaging. (3) Correct sizing such as cars that sit to high. Blamed on Pizza cutter wheels the height of the wheels. Incidently the deep flange was the norm from all the providers...until recently. It wasn't an issue until the prototypers showed up. Grin! (4) Track properly gauged or scaled. (5) DCC plug in ready. (6) __________________ I'l leave this blank and you can fill in anything I missed. Diverting to what I want: Steam locomotives that pull 12 passenger cars or 20 to 30 freight cars up 2% grades. Have I ever mentioned WITHOUT TRACTION TIRES? Some have mentioned they wish NMRA would take more interest in N Scale. Actually they already have. It's just that many of us saw what happened in HO scale and we are a little reluctant to have them pushing in on us N scalers. Now about your LHS. I used to work for one and the profit margin at that time was poor. Lucky if we made 12% on any one item. More like 5% to 10%. The mistake many of us makes (me included), is we deduct that when a LHS sells a $90.00 item for $40.00 the difference must be their mark-up. Not so. They are simply sacrificing it to clear it out of inventory, to increase cash flow and stock their shelves with new items. I admire the writing skills of many of you. Your education and station in life shows. Me, I got kicked out of a college creative writing class and this is as good as it gets. Thanks again for giving this a read or totally ignoring it. Grin!
Off topic: ride height and pizza-cutter wheels. Off topic: ride height and pizza-cutter wheels. I’m not sure if pizza-cutter wheels are the only reason for incorrect ride height. I think it has more to do with MT truck mounted couplers. Looking at some of my rolling stock it seems that the cars that ride too high all have MT truck mounted couplers. This is because of the room needed for the coupler box to swing from side to side. Some manufacturers of box cars have for example manufactured their box cars with smaller ends in allow for coupler box swing and still maintain a closer to prototype ride height. There is an other way though, anybody have KATO Gunderson well cars? The Kato Gundersons have truck mounted couplers and yet have the correct ride height. Kato uses an other technique which allows for this.
George, Isn't that the truth. Actually they crossed that line with me when Kato came out with the SP GS4. Ok, so I sacrificed and bought it anyway. It's no wonder, I hate oatmeal. I ate it three times a day? For a week? err: And that's the TRUTH! Boy, was I regular!
I thingk yu got in a arrgument ovr on Modle Railraoder about this. I dont lyke them and aparanttly you dont like them eithr butt I thnigk Rapido couplers will probly alwaays be with us oar at least four a long time I don't even know if Rapido couplers can be boddy monted. If you want boddy monted couplers you need to lurn how to mont them yurself.
Yu wantoo bee very carfull on what yu say about n scael steem locomoetves ovr on Atlass the uthr day some guy gaht beet to deth for saying that n scael steem locomoetves dont all runn perfict.
Originally Posted by jdcolombo And I want the stuff that IS made to WORK. No more Berkshires that pull 6 cars out of the box; a steam loco should pull at least 30 cars on level track or it simply isn't manufactured correctly. No more 0-8-0's that run poorly out of the box after a $150 investment; and I shouldn't have to send one of every two Bachmann locos back to them for replacement to get a good one. End quote. From Rick's pen, The problem with Bachmann, is they never did listen to their customer complaints. Apparently they aren't listening to their repair facility, either. They tend to go on blindly producing what I would call beginners train equipment. I'm not sure it's far to push them on to newbies. Depsite all the good things I keep hearing about Bachmann today, I still hear about locomotives failing to cut the mustard or having to be returned for one reason or the other. The only good, I'm hearing that is consistent comes from hobby shop staff. If you look around their hobby shops you will find it stocked with Bachmann. The key here is the staff working there must sell what's in the store. Like it or not. You won't find them sharing their honest feelings. They are required to speak positively and not realistically, about Bachmann. Time will tell as to whether the company steps to the plate, faces down the shortcomings and finally realizes it's time to get to the business of producing quality products. They are getting close...just not close enough. We shall see. For the longest time they were the only creative source we had for N scale equipment.
I'd make (6) relate to your last sentence quoted: heavier locos. The only way to have an N scale steamer that will pull 30 freight cars up a 2% grade is to make it about 3 times the weight of what we have today. Example: a friend of mine has a Kato Mike with a Pennsy pewter boiler conversion by GHQ. The thing weighs a ton, relatively speaking, and will easily pull 30 freight cars on my flat layout with no traction tires. So . . . manufacturers . . . would you at least THINK about this problem? I'm not a metallurgist and don't know what might be possible within the confines of reasonable pricing (which I'd define as, oh, maybe $50 more per unit). John C.
Actually, the cost for the alloy to add significant weight is about $14 per pound So you want a 3 pound frame it will cost $42 This is from the guys in the materials lab.
I agree with what you say, we need Mythbusters to do an episode on N scale to bust some of these 1970's myths. FVM, IM and Atlas all have their own fine scale metal wheels and MTL has their plastic ones that they will sell us seperately, but do they use them on their cars? We all use body mount couplers and fine scale metal wheels on our locomotives, but for some reason resist them on our freight cars. Every time I come home from work there's another four pages of this thread to read through, I wonder though if any manufacturers are doing the same otherwise we're just wasting computer time that could be spent on our model railroading.
Westfalen, I was participating on a different board where we got involved in a similar discussion about a product from Atlas. It wasn't long before they came out with a new replacement that corrected the problem. Some were concerned about the motors being to fast and wanted slower speed motors for better realism. I was happy with the motors as I used Momentum to slow them down. Atlas, listened and it turned out the whole thread, at a representatives request, was forwarded to Atlas. The ones that are tuned in here are Kato, Atlas, ConCor, InterMountain, Life Like now Walthers, Micro-Trains and a host of other providers. In all fairness to Bachmann, it appears they are finally listening as well. Someone, must be listening. A number of years back, I recieved a call from a very concerned Bachmann representative. On a different website, he read something I posted. Asking for clarafication. No doubt in my mind they are tuned in. A word of caution. Our comments need to be objective, identify problems and suggest resolutions, to be honest and straight forward. What we write here, is here for posterity. Time will tell and as I said earlier, "If the past is anything like our future, you are going to like what's about to happen next", I guarantee it. Have fun!
