Intermountain is Cancelling Reading F7's and more

[sirenwerks]

Bryan,

Have you ever heard the following saying? 'Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig'.

Um, no, but I'll try to remember that when I am around swine.

[CBQ Fan]

What it all boils down to is we do not like it when a manufacturer brings something to the marketplace to obtain orders, then after some time passes says "oops, not enough orders so scratch XYZ".  Instead of discussing things (much of which we are uninformed) here about what the manufacturing costs are and how this system won't work but that other one will, why don't we find a way to tell that manufacturer that we don't like they way they are doing business.  An email campaign, letters, phone calls, hobby shop you purchase from, whatever.  If they are not on the forum how are they going to know how their customers feel.  I would hope that a business would listen to some degree to their customers.  Sometimes they actually know what they are doing even when we disagree.

[John]

Lets not let this thread get personal ..

[Mark5]

What it all boils down to is we do not like it when a manufacturer brings something to the marketplace to obtain orders, then after some time passes says "oops, not enough orders so scratch XYZ".  Instead of discussing things (much of which we are uninformed) here about what the manufacturing costs are and how this system won't work but that other one will, why don't we find a way to tell that manufacturer that we don't like they way they are doing business.  An email campaign, letters, phone calls, hobby shop you purchase from, whatever.  If they are not on the forum how are they going to know how their customers feel.  I would hope that a business would listen to some degree to their customers.  Sometimes they actually know what they are doing even when we disagree.

Brian,

Quit calling us a bunch of idiots! There are several former IM employees here and believe it or not some of us have real world business experience.

It's a good idea to email or write to IM (or any manufacturer) about things that we dislike (or like!) - many of us do this very thing.

Mark

[bbussey]

The costs to produce the basic model are the same no matter what road it is painted in...

I will tell you that, from first-hand experience and from first-hand knowledge of other manufacturers' experience - your statement simply is not accurate.  Some manufacturers (such as Atlas) choose to spread the cost evenly across a run so all of the schemes in a release are the same MSRP.  Other manufacturers (such as MTL) use the actual cost of the specific scheme to determine the MSRP.  But absolutely there are cost variables involved when comparing different deco schemes on the same model, even if the quantities produced are the same.

On the initial ESM G26 release, the Pennsy CK scheme cost less than the Pennsy SK, PC and CR schemes, but I decided to use the cost savings on the CK to lower the MSRP overall on the four cars.  With the XIH, that won't be the case, entirely.  Some of the NH block and BAR repaint schemes cost savings will be used to offset the cost of the four-color/four-masked State of Maine cars, but not entirely so as to keep the NH block car at a reasonable MSRP.

... What I gave in my post was a basic, no frills model.  Now if you start to add something else to the base model, say for instance, a phase III shell as well as the Phase I shell then you have another base model [as far as the shell].  A manufacturer would have to determine how many phase I's, II's and III's they could sell.  But the basic mechanism and its associated costs remain the same for all three phases as well as any other variation. The manufacturer should know their cost to produce that model.  What they have to determine is how many customers will want to buy it and at what price.  It may be that an insufficient number of customers will want to buy it. Or a manufacturer could just build the phase I shell and then take orders for the II or III phase shells.  It may well be that the customer demand will be insufficient for the phase II model so the manufacturer does not make it but does make the phase I and III shells.  So it doesn't matter where you draw the line between the basic model and the variable items.  All it does is determines which costs are amortised over the entire run and which are amortized over just a portion of it.  The same is true of paint schemes...

And how is this different than the system that is in place today?  In your scenario, how does the manufacturer determine how many customers will want to buy the various variations of the product?  How is that information solicited without announcing the product and receiving feedback from the consumer base?

... And I did not assume that the painting and printing is done by another contractor although it can be.  Atlas and Micro trains will custom paint any scheme on any of the cars they make.  All you have to do is order enough of them and pay for it all.

Obviously.  But that would be a guaranteed up-front sale with the minimum requirements met.  Yet other factors come into play.  The quantity requirement for a special run model from Atlas, for example, would be far less if it is piggy-backed with a scheduled regular run of the model - assuming, of course, that Atlas would even entertain accepting a special run request for a model they don't have on the schedule.

MTL is different - since they control all their rolling-stock production in-house, you can commission a scheme on any bodystyle you wish.  But you would be surprised at how your cost would escalate the more intricate (and less mainstream) your specifications are of the deco scheme.  Truck/wheel/coupler/stirrup color other than black; paint colors; paint masks; printing pad hits; report mark variations; box insert artwork; shrink-wrapping - all that contributes to the per-piece cost as well as the minimum quantity.

[TiVoPrince]

Actually
I would rather see IMR cancel some marginal releases than go under from producing unsellable products...

[Erik W]

It's a good idea to email or write to IM (or any manufacturer) about things that we dislike (or like!) - many of us do this very thing.

Mark

I agree with this on many levels.  It doesn't hurt to let your likes or dislikes be known, but I'm one who's also written the last 3 Presidents, my Senators and Representatives, etc.

Erik

[bbussey]

... Instead of discussing things (much of which we are uninformed) here about what the manufacturing costs are and how this system won't work but that other one will, why don't we find a way to tell that manufacturer that we don't like they way they are doing business...

I have a better idea:  Instead of telling the manufacturers that you don't like the way they are "doing business," devise a method in which you can solicit the information from the consumer base on which paintschemes to offer on the given model without the misconception that any solicitation raises expectations for said paintschemes to be produced.

Mind you, that is far different than a manufacturer deciding whether or not to tool a new model.  I think it's safe to assume that if tooling is green-lighted, the manufacturer ALREADY has done due diligence in determining that the model in general will sell.  What the whole dust-up in this thread has centered on is specific reintroduced deco schemes being canceled on an established model - NOT new tooling that was canceled after being announced.

If manufacturers start announcing new tooling, and then cancel it months down the road - then I could understand a response akin to what has been in this thread.  But to complain about canceled paintschemes of re-releases that had been successful before (hence the re-releases) is ridiculous.  And all the chest-thumping about boycotting or not trusting IMRC is just bluster.

This whole faux-outrage reminds me of when Kadee/MTL went direct-only on the sale of its N scale rolling stock 30-or-so years ago.  Widespread outrage over the decision ensued.  Well, people still kept buying the product once it went direct-only.  And after a year or so, Kadee/MTL resumed offering the cars through the dealers (mostly due to volume demand as opposed to public criticism), albeit at a substantial price increase.  There were proclamations of people swearing never to buy another MTL car again!  Well, here we are in the present, and MTL rolling stock sells as well as it ever did, with new bodystyles introduced annually.

So, if anyone here can post a reasoned thesis on how a manufacturer can determine if a paintscheme should be RE-RELEASED for the third, fourth, fifth or tenth time without consulting the consumer base in a reservation-based system where everyone already knows the items will not be produced if there are not enough pre-commitments, please do so.

Also note that the manufacturers DO NOT ASK for deposits up front, only for verbal commitments.  So all this complaining is without even having to ante up some green.  :

[tom mann]

The costs to produce the basic model are the same no matter what road it is painted in...

Well I'll chime in   Joe from MTL has told us many times that cost increases when additional color passes are required and if both sides of the model are the same or not. 

[Mark5]

The costs to produce the basic model are the same no matter what road it is painted in...

Well I'll chime in   Joe from MTL has told us many times that cost increases when additional color passes are required and if both sides of the model are the same or not. 

This makes sense.

[Mark5]

But to complain about canceled paintschemes of re-releases that had been successful before (hence the re-releases) is ridiculous.  And all the chest-thumping about boycotting or not trusting IMRC is just bluster.

Bryan,

I cannot consider you impartial since IM distributes ESM.

Heck only 18.4% of the announced stuff (including ESM, RC, etc. in the tally) was cancelled. 39 out of a possible 212. Many more "TBD".

Are they really all re-releases? I hesitate to post them all here.

Either people like this kind of marketing, or they don't care. Time will tell.

Mark the chest thumper! ;D

[inkaneer]

The costs to produce the basic model are the same no matter what road it is painted in...

I will tell you that, from first-hand experience and from first-hand knowledge of other manufacturers' experience - your statement simply is not accurate.  Some manufacturers (such as Atlas) choose to spread the cost evenly across a run so all of the schemes in a release are the same MSRP.  Other manufacturers (such as MTL) use the actual cost of the specific scheme to determine the MSRP.  But absolutely there are cost variables involved when comparing different deco schemes on the same model, even if the quantities produced are the same.

On the initial ESM G26 release, the Pennsy CK scheme cost less than the Pennsy SK, PC and CR schemes, but I decided to use the cost savings on the CK to lower the MSRP overall on the four cars.  With the XIH, that won't be the case, entirely.  Some of the NH block and BAR repaint schemes cost savings will be used to offset the cost of the four-color/four-masked State of Maine cars, but not entirely so as to keep the NH block car at a reasonable MSRP.

So what you are doing is subsidizing those more costly schemes by taxing the least costly.  Sort of like a government transfer payment.  Why not let the costs fall as they may and let the market decide?  Maybe the demand for those higher cost schemes will be reduced or even disappear.  But the decision would be in the hands of the customer who would have no grounds to gripe.  If you want it you should be willing to pay for it.  Hey, I would like to drive a Lexus I just wish I could get one for the price of a Corolla.

... What I gave in my post was a basic, no frills model.  Now if you start to add something else to the base model, say for instance, a phase III shell as well as the Phase I shell then you have another base model [as far as the shell].  A manufacturer would have to determine how many phase I's, II's and III's they could sell.  But the basic mechanism and its associated costs remain the same for all three phases as well as any other variation. The manufacturer should know their cost to produce that model.  What they have to determine is how many customers will want to buy it and at what price.  It may be that an insufficient number of customers will want to buy it. Or a manufacturer could just build the phase I shell and then take orders for the II or III phase shells.  It may well be that the customer demand will be insufficient for the phase II model so the manufacturer does not make it but does make the phase I and III shells.  So it doesn't matter where you draw the line between the basic model and the variable items.  All it does is determines which costs are amortised over the entire run and which are amortized over just a portion of it.  The same is true of paint schemes...

And how is this different than the system that is in place today?  In your scenario, how does the manufacturer determine how many customers will want to buy the various variations of the product?  How is that information solicited without announcing the product and receiving feedback from the consumer base?

The manufacturer should have some basic market knowledge or should be knowledgeable enough to know where to obtain that knowledge.  I am sure there are government, industry, private and public sources of information that can be tapped. There are a number of historical societies that can be tapped for information. Hey, here's an idea how about have the hobby periodicals run a survey in their magazine maybe even pay for it if you wanted to keep the results private proprietory information.  But the current system of announcing something smacks of the old cliche of, "let's run it up the flag pole and see if anyone salutes."  

... And I did not assume that the painting and printing is done by another contractor although it can be.  Atlas and Micro trains will custom paint any scheme on any of the cars they make.  All you have to do is order enough of them and pay for it all.

Obviously.  But that would be a guaranteed up-front sale with the minimum requirements met.  Yet other factors come into play.  The quantity requirement for a special run model from Atlas, for example, would be far less if it is piggy-backed with a scheduled regular run of the model - assuming, of course, that Atlas would even entertain accepting a special run request for a model they don't have on the schedule.

MTL is different - since they control all their rolling-stock production in-house, you can commission a scheme on any bodystyle you wish.  But you would be surprised at how your cost would escalate the more intricate (and less mainstream) your specifications are of the deco scheme.  Truck/wheel/coupler/stirrup color other than black; paint colors; paint masks; printing pad hits; report mark variations; box insert artwork; shrink-wrapping - all that contributes to the per-piece cost as well as the minimum quantity.

I guess what it all boils down to is that we have this box called the pre-order system of production planning and everyone is thinking inside that box.  That is short term thinking.  Who is thinking about who will our customers be in 10 years or 20 years?  The pre-order system is a hand to mouth system and is short sighted and dooming this hobby to go the way of the dinosaurs.  

[inkaneer]

The costs to produce the basic model are the same no matter what road it is painted in...

Well I'll chime in   Joe from MTL has told us many times that cost increases when additional color passes are required and if both sides of the model are the same or not. 

Sure the cost increases but that additional cost is not part of the basic model.  In the case of an MTL car the base model would be the raw unpainted car with trucks and couplers sans painting.  Think of an  undecorated car.  That would be the base model and the cost to produce that base model is the same  no matter what paint scheme you apply to it. 

[MichaelWinicki]

I'll tell you what, any business model that leaves the perspective customer feeling disenchanted with the buying process is not a good business model.

[CBQ Fan]

What it all boils down to is we do not like it when a manufacturer brings something to the marketplace to obtain orders, then after some time passes says "oops, not enough orders so scratch XYZ".  Instead of discussing things (much of which we are uninformed) here about what the manufacturing costs are and how this system won't work but that other one will, why don't we find a way to tell that manufacturer that we don't like they way they are doing business.  An email campaign, letters, phone calls, hobby shop you purchase from, whatever.  If they are not on the forum how are they going to know how their customers feel.  I would hope that a business would listen to some degree to their customers.  Sometimes they actually know what they are doing even when we disagree.

Brian,

Quit calling us a bunch of idiots! There are several former IM employees here and believe it or not some of us have real world business experience.

It's a good idea to email or write to IM (or any manufacturer) about things that we dislike (or like!) - many of us do this very thing.

Mark

Mark,

I am not calling anyone anything so please do not put words in my mouth.  I have plenty of real world business experience.  I have been self employed, successfully enough to get recruited back into the corporate world.  I am and have run departments that total in the millions to 10's of millions of dollars annually.  Should that impress you? No!  Does it matter, not really!  But suffice it to say I am educated enough and experienced enough to have an opinion.  My opinion is that instead of arguing back and forth about the ins-and-outs of why-and-why-not lets focus on how we can change the market place to something we like more.  The thread seemed to have taken a personal attack slant a little and that is why I wrote what I did.  Now maybe I am missing something here and there as I don't know the personal resume of those who post here frequently.  Just to clarify when I stated "Uninformed" I meant that no one in this post to my knowledge was sitting in the room when IM made the decision to cancel announcements.  Past employees would have a great incite but not first hand knowledge from my experience.  And just in case anyone is wondering I am still smiling!