pgtr wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote:It's my fault I tried to make sense out of your original premise that somehow what Lionel sold in 1953 could somehow be equated to today. I figured there surely must be a deeper meaning, because what you said was nothing more than overstating the obvious.Well it shouldn't have required too much effort. Quite obviously in '53 (or 54 or so as you prefer) 160M people in the US spent about $33ish million on Lionel (in '53 dollars). Present population growth AND dollar value being what it is today I thought the conclusion somewhat self evident. That's why I looked for a deeper meaning. What you originally stated was so EXTREMELY self-evident it really didn't need to be said. Poppa_Zit wrote:But then I wasn't sure when you went out on a limb to write:"I'll hazard a hunch that compared to the 1953 population penetration Lionel is waaaaaay off that mark."So if that's 'going out on a limb' are you saying that today Lionel HAS a comparable or greater penetration into the US market than it did 50 some odd years ago?
Poppa_Zit wrote:It's my fault I tried to make sense out of your original premise that somehow what Lionel sold in 1953 could somehow be equated to today. I figured there surely must be a deeper meaning, because what you said was nothing more than overstating the obvious.
That's why I looked for a deeper meaning. What you originally stated was so EXTREMELY self-evident it really didn't need to be said.
Poppa_Zit wrote:But then I wasn't sure when you went out on a limb to write:"I'll hazard a hunch that compared to the 1953 population penetration Lionel is waaaaaay off that mark."
Absolutely NOT. I was being sarcastic because of so many changes (progress?) in the marketplace, and in the way people lead their lives with a multitude of new options to spend their free time, what Lionel did 50 years ago cannot be productively compared to anything today. It would be like comparing the sales numbers of Henry Ford's Model Ts to the automobile market 50 years later, in the mid-1960s. Can't be done to prove any point.
nitroboy wrote:Being in the hobby with my own company, I will say that there is no shortage of consumers. I have a very small business with limited resources, but have no problem with demand. There is season for trains, summer not being one of them. Fall, winter, and spring are what I call "the silly season". Calls pick up, orders get bigger, demand goes up. Summer comes and I am lucky to get one order a week. I am sure the big companies go through the same thing. The hobby is strong, and in no shape hurting.
Isn't your success really due to the excellent photos of your product taken on a great layout?
Celebrating 18 years on the CTT Forum.
Buckeye Riveter......... OTTS Charter Member, a Roseyville Raider and a member of the CTT Forum since 2004..
Jelloway Creek, OH - ELV 1,100 - Home of the Baltimore, Ohio & Wabash RR
TCA 09-64284
pgtr wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote:Points to consider before making the above comparison:Not really necessary. It's a simple pair of numbers. Arounnd 50 years ago there were about 160M folks in the US and they spent ABOUT 33M on Lionel. 2 variables: Today the population has increased and 1953 dollars have to be multiplied by a valuation calculator of some sort based on inflation, CPI or whatever is your pleasure. Poppa_Zit wrote: 1) In 1953, less than 20 percent of U.S. homes had a television set;So? What does that have to do with the price of rice? They also didn't have internet ecommerce, global production and the most youth consumer oriented market in history. Poppa_Zit wrote: 2) The 33M you say Lionel did in sales in 1953 means nothing unless you have the figures for net profits,Incorrect. It means plenty and it's very understandable and simple: There were 160M people once upon a time and they spent approximately 33M on Lionel trains back sometime around 53 or so. That says plenty and most folks can wrap their brains around that without clouding. Poppa_Zit wrote: so here they are, corrected: In 1953 Lionel did $28.1 in sales, <SNIP> Source: http://www.rit.edu/~tbbeqa/SalesAF.html, among others.Not so fast on the correction. Actually multiple sources list 32.9M (I rounded to 33M) for 53. Your own reference also shows the same 32.9M for 54. Hmmmm. Yet other references indicate 53 to be their acme without providing specific monetary values. I selected 53 as I was simply selecting the acme for their sales from the 'glory years'. If you insist it was actually 54 or want quibble over 28.1 vs 32.9 knock yourself out. I'll happily revise my statement to say 'approx 50+ years ago Lionel peaked doing about 33M in sales in a single year' and you can nitpick over subtracing 50 from subtracting the current year. But I'll be sticking to simple rounded numbers. Poppa_Zit wrote: 3) There were two main choices in 1953 -- Lionel, or American Flyer -- and the two were totally incompatable; What about Marx? Incompatible? So what? DCS and TMCC only have limited compatibility in 1 direction. Todahy's Z scale not exactly compatible with G either... Poppa_Zit wrote:in the heyday of both companies (1946-1959) Lionel sold $250 million (65% market share) worth of trains while Gilbert sold $134 million (35% market share) worth of American Flyer. This does not include 1960-1967, when both companies posted net losses for the eight-year period when interest in trains started to slide among youth. Nice. Picking year ranges and totalling them nicely convolutes things and makes comparisons much more difficult. Market shares between 2 companies within the same hobby has nothing to do with the comparison I was making above between then and now. The topic is about THE HOBBY, not about who has the higher percentage within the Hobby. Lionel was selected by me for what I thought would be obvious reasons based on it's leadership in the day and name recognition and relative leadership today. Poppa_Zit wrote:4) It is therefore obvious in 1953 Lionel wasn't competing with MTH Well OK. I guess I can buy that. ..and...? Poppa_Zit wrote: or any other strong contender for 3-rail dollars. It had cornered the 3-rail market with 65%; the other 35% was S gauge;...and...? Poppa_Zit wrote:5) In 1953 Lionel and American Flyer didn't waste ... er, expend huge dollar amounts on attorneys while suing each other over nebulous issues.I somehow doubt that wasteful business decisions were invented in the last 5 years. But I suppose pink trains, odd diversification product lines and ousting the talent of Giaimo, Zier, Marfuggi were not wasteful. Poppa_Zit wrote:So, if the margins are the same today -- roughly 4.5% -- MTH on $40 million in sales would have had roughly $1.8 million in earnings.Based on the tangents introduced here there seems to be a miss of the basic point. Considering Lionel to be a toy train hobby industry bellweather from approximately 50 years ago they did about 33M in one year which was spent by a population of about 160M. TODAY, just to stay EVEN (status quo, no positive growth) with population growth since the glory days they would need to do APPROXIMATELY 475M sales in 2005 dollars. Are they? Poppa_Zit wrote:Guess the model train biz ain't the pot o'gold some people think it is.Yes, now we're getting it! Using Lionel as a bellweather: It's increasingly a niche hobby catering largely to a shrinking adult buyer customer base that is further facturered by sub-niches and manufacturer infighting (that no industry is immune to). "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply pgtr Member sinceJanuary 2006 149 posts Posted by pgtr on Friday, September 15, 2006 11:21 AM Poppa_Zit wrote:Points to consider before making the above comparison:Not really necessary. It's a simple pair of numbers. Arounnd 50 years ago there were about 160M folks in the US and they spent ABOUT 33M on Lionel. 2 variables: Today the population has increased and 1953 dollars have to be multiplied by a valuation calculator of some sort based on inflation, CPI or whatever is your pleasure. Poppa_Zit wrote: 1) In 1953, less than 20 percent of U.S. homes had a television set;So? What does that have to do with the price of rice? They also didn't have internet ecommerce, global production and the most youth consumer oriented market in history. Poppa_Zit wrote: 2) The 33M you say Lionel did in sales in 1953 means nothing unless you have the figures for net profits,Incorrect. It means plenty and it's very understandable and simple: There were 160M people once upon a time and they spent approximately 33M on Lionel trains back sometime around 53 or so. That says plenty and most folks can wrap their brains around that without clouding. Poppa_Zit wrote: so here they are, corrected: In 1953 Lionel did $28.1 in sales, <SNIP> Source: http://www.rit.edu/~tbbeqa/SalesAF.html, among others.Not so fast on the correction. Actually multiple sources list 32.9M (I rounded to 33M) for 53. Your own reference also shows the same 32.9M for 54. Hmmmm. Yet other references indicate 53 to be their acme without providing specific monetary values. I selected 53 as I was simply selecting the acme for their sales from the 'glory years'. If you insist it was actually 54 or want quibble over 28.1 vs 32.9 knock yourself out. I'll happily revise my statement to say 'approx 50+ years ago Lionel peaked doing about 33M in sales in a single year' and you can nitpick over subtracing 50 from subtracting the current year. But I'll be sticking to simple rounded numbers. Poppa_Zit wrote: 3) There were two main choices in 1953 -- Lionel, or American Flyer -- and the two were totally incompatable; What about Marx? Incompatible? So what? DCS and TMCC only have limited compatibility in 1 direction. Todahy's Z scale not exactly compatible with G either... Poppa_Zit wrote:in the heyday of both companies (1946-1959) Lionel sold $250 million (65% market share) worth of trains while Gilbert sold $134 million (35% market share) worth of American Flyer. This does not include 1960-1967, when both companies posted net losses for the eight-year period when interest in trains started to slide among youth. Nice. Picking year ranges and totalling them nicely convolutes things and makes comparisons much more difficult. Market shares between 2 companies within the same hobby has nothing to do with the comparison I was making above between then and now. The topic is about THE HOBBY, not about who has the higher percentage within the Hobby. Lionel was selected by me for what I thought would be obvious reasons based on it's leadership in the day and name recognition and relative leadership today. Poppa_Zit wrote:4) It is therefore obvious in 1953 Lionel wasn't competing with MTH Well OK. I guess I can buy that. ..and...? Poppa_Zit wrote: or any other strong contender for 3-rail dollars. It had cornered the 3-rail market with 65%; the other 35% was S gauge;...and...? Poppa_Zit wrote:5) In 1953 Lionel and American Flyer didn't waste ... er, expend huge dollar amounts on attorneys while suing each other over nebulous issues.I somehow doubt that wasteful business decisions were invented in the last 5 years. But I suppose pink trains, odd diversification product lines and ousting the talent of Giaimo, Zier, Marfuggi were not wasteful. Poppa_Zit wrote:So, if the margins are the same today -- roughly 4.5% -- MTH on $40 million in sales would have had roughly $1.8 million in earnings.Based on the tangents introduced here there seems to be a miss of the basic point. Considering Lionel to be a toy train hobby industry bellweather from approximately 50 years ago they did about 33M in one year which was spent by a population of about 160M. TODAY, just to stay EVEN (status quo, no positive growth) with population growth since the glory days they would need to do APPROXIMATELY 475M sales in 2005 dollars. Are they? Poppa_Zit wrote:Guess the model train biz ain't the pot o'gold some people think it is.Yes, now we're getting it! Using Lionel as a bellweather: It's increasingly a niche hobby catering largely to a shrinking adult buyer customer base that is further facturered by sub-niches and manufacturer infighting (that no industry is immune to). From an adult buyer's perspective, the hobby is looking pretty good. From a business or historical perspective maybe not. Reply Bob Keller Member sinceJuly 2003 From: Wisconsin 2,877 posts Posted by Bob Keller on Friday, September 15, 2006 7:56 AM My spider sense tingles and I fear that for some strange reason, this thread has taken a strange turn and may steer onto the rocks and its own destruction. Lets stay focused on the topic, okay? Bob Keller Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Friday, September 15, 2006 1:35 AM RR Redneck wrote:Well when you are black, a redneck, and hate rap music, when every other person is in some form or stage of "gansterism", wouldnt you say that I am doing a darn good job? You misunderstand. Skin color or those other things you mention has nothing to do with conforming. It's like that song in the TV commercial with the people all mouthing in unison the refrain " 'Cause I'm not like everybody else..." When many of us were younger during the late 1960s and early 1970s, we too did not want to conform so we did things like grow our hair and beards long and wear jeans, etc. Except by doing that -- not conforming to our parents -- we were considered by anyone with a crew cut to be conforming to a very large group called "hippies." Get it? Same thing with men who work in offices and wear a three-piece suit, shirt and tie to work every day. "I'm glad I don't have to wear a uniform," they'll say, when in reality their three-piece suit IS a uniform -- of sorts. Go to a courthouse and hang around for awhile and tell me most lawyers don't wear a "uniform." Not that there's anything wrong with that. Pop Z "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply RR Redneck Member sinceJuly 2006 From: Pisa, IT 1,474 posts Posted by RR Redneck on Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:50 PM Well when you are black, a redneck, and hate rap music, when every other person is in some form or stage of "gansterism", wouldnt you say that I am doing a darn good job? Lionel collector, stuck in an N scaler's modelling space. Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:46 PM RR Redneck wrote: I can make the same point. If I were on the insecure people, then right now skate boarding is the big thing in Cuero. It ticks me off how many people will do something just because they will be considered cool. I, unlike so many of my class mates, refuse conformity. Unlike so many of my classmates, I am not afriad to truly be myself. But when you're in school -- like we all were -- the refusal to conform WAS conforming. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply RR Redneck Member sinceJuly 2006 From: Pisa, IT 1,474 posts Posted by RR Redneck on Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:43 PM I can make the same point. If I were on the insecure people, then right now skate boarding is the big thing in Cuero. It ticks me off how many people will do something just because they will be considered cool. I, unlike so many of my class mates, refuse conformity. Unlike so many of my classmates, I am not afriad to truly be myself. Lionel collector, stuck in an N scaler's modelling space. Reply pbjwilson Member sinceJanuary 2004 1,634 posts Posted by pbjwilson on Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:09 PM Illinois - Land of Lincoln Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, September 14, 2006 6:10 PM Allan Miller wrote:I imagine we can all pretty much agree that this segment of the hobby will likely never again be as strong and robust as it is today. Any disagreement with that?And I would further argue that this segment of the hobby, as it exists today, is not as strong and robust as it was at the start of the current century. Again, any disagreement there?So what's that all indicate? I'm not sure, because I can't predict the future any better than anyone else here, but I do have my suspicions. All I know for sure is that I'm going to enjoy my trains while I can, regardless of how many manufacturers there are and how much (or little) product they produce, and will leave the hand-wringing to some other folks who seem to really enjoy worrying about what can be seen in that clouded crystal ball. My sincere hope is that most others here will elect to do the same. wallyworld wrote:The state of the hobby, with all things considered, is remarkably healthy considering how long it has been around and the fact that it models a facet of fading americana that, as a shadow of it's 19th century leading edge, has no toy industry national advertising campaign to support it as it did in the 40's and 1950's, some 50 years + ago. Not too shabby for a scale that was for all purposes "dead" in the 1960's. Whither the slot cars..hula hoops..slide viewers.. all wildly popular buying fads that are only footnotes in popular culture. This hobby will be around in my lifetime and beyond...these are golden years part 2..enjoy it while it lasts. Good points, Ayem and Dubya-Dubya. Like you, to get my personal enjoyment out of this hobby I don't need the comfort of knowing an army of others are also involved; I could care less. I do it because I enjoy it, not because it might be popular right now. It is the insecure people -- followers --who are constantly looking for validation (that they're in a "cool" hobby) who seem to be the ones most concerned about any decline in numbers. Or those who are deathly afraid the value of their trains willl take a severe nosedive because they held on to them too long. And while I do my part as an active clubmember and officer, I really don't see it as my job to be attracting new customers for model train companies to ensure their survival and profitabilty . It's all in the semantics. To some, what has happened over the last 50 years is "change" -- which upsets some people. I like to think it's "progress" -- something none of us can stop. So, like you say, hop aboard and let's all enjoy it while we can. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:57 PM mrclean351 wrote:Poppa-zit, I like your attitude! If more people could kick back and enjoy life, like you probably do, there would be less uptight people out there, just looking for offenses. Thanks for the kind words. You're dead on about kicking back and enjoying life and not being uptight, although I still put in some long hours on the business I own. I do look for offenses, thought -- people who make up "facts" to support their ultra-thin arguments, closed-minded people with biases, bigots, liars, people who have one set of standards for themselves and another for everyone else, bullies, people who use forums like this to enhance their faux feelings of superiority by belittling others, people who have a personal political agenda and try to force it down the throat of others. But for me, that's fun too. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:57 PM I imagine we can all pretty much agree that this segment of the hobby will likely never again be as strong and robust as it is today. Any disagreement with that? And I would further argue that this segment of the hobby, as it exists today, is not as strong and robust as it was at the start of the current century. Again, any disagreement there? So what's that all indicate? I'm not sure, because I can't predict the future any better than anyone else here, but I do have my suspicions. All I know for sure is that I'm going to enjoy my trains while I can, regardless of how many manufacturers there are and how much (or little) product they produce, and will leave the hand-wringing to some other folks who seem to really enjoy worrying about what can be seen in that clouded crystal ball. My sincere hope is that most others here will elect to do the same. Reply Edit nitroboy Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Columbus, Ohio 426 posts Posted by nitroboy on Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:50 PM Being in the hobby with my own company, I will say that there is no shortage of consumers. I have a very small buisness with limited resources, but have no problem with demand. There is season for trains, summer not being one of them. Fall, winter, and spring are what I call "the silly season". Calls pick up, orders get bigger, demand goes up. Summer comes and I am lucky to get one order a week. I am sure the big companies go through the same thing. The hobby is strong, and in no shape hurting. Dave Check out my web page www.dmmrailroad.com TCA # 03-55763 & OTTS Member Donate to the Mid-Ohio Marine Foundation at www.momf.org Factory Trained Lionel Service Technician Reply wallyworld Member sinceJuly 2002 From: A State of Humidity 2,441 posts Posted by wallyworld on Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:44 PM The state of the hobby, with all things considered, is remarkably healthy considering how long it has been around and the fact that it models a facet of fading americana that, as a shadow of it's 19th century leading edge, has no toy industry national advertising campaign to support it as it did in the 40's and 1950's, some 50 years + ago. Not too shabby for a scale that was for all purposes "dead" in the 1960's. Whither the slot cars..hula hoops..slide viewers.. all wildly popular buying fads that are only footnotes in popular culture. This hobby will be around in my lifetime and beyond...these are golden years part 2..enjoy it while it lasts. Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has. Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:32 PM pgtr wrote:In 1953 Lionel did $33M in sales. US population was around 160M. I don't know how many sets they produced off hand but they had a pretty darn impressive market penetration at the time.2006 - care to guess what they'd need to do in sales to rival 1953? About 250M give or take a few depending upon the inflation or index calculator your subscribe to. Today's population? About 300M. I'll hazard a hunch that compared to the 1953 population penetration Lionel is waaaaaay off that mark. Points to consider before making the above comparison: 1) In 1953, less than 20 percent of U.S. homes had a television set; 2) The 33M you say Lionel did in sales in 1953 means nothing unless you have the figures for net profits, so here they are, corrected: In 1953 Lionel did $28.1 in sales, with earnings of $1.6 million; while in the same year A.C. Gilbert Co. (American Flyer) did $18 million in sales with earnings of $536,000. Source: http://www.rit.edu/~tbbeqa/SalesAF.html, among others. 3) There were two main choices in 1953 -- Lionel, or American Flyer -- and the two were totally incompatable; in the heyday of both companies (1946-1959) Lionel sold $250 million (65% market share) worth of trains while Gilbert sold $134 million (35% market share) worth of American Flyer. This does not include 1960-1967, when both companies posted net losses for the eight-year period when interest in trains started to slide among youth. 4) It is therefore obvious in 1953 Lionel wasn't competing with MTH or any other strong contender for 3-rail dollars. It had cornered the 3-rail market with 65%; the other 35% was S gauge; 5) In 1953 Lionel and American Flyer didn't waste ... er, expend huge dollar amounts on attorneys while suing each other over nebulous issues. So, if the margins are the same today -- roughly 4.5% -- MTH on $40 million in sales would have had roughly $1.8 million in earnings. Guess the model train biz ain't the pot o'gold some people think it is. Pop Z "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:07 PM Poppa_Zit wrote: perry1060 wrote: In my humble opinion, I think if you want to market trains to kids, you have to link the products to the present culture in which they live. Great point. However, it would never fly in practice. Or not be allowed to fly. Those who have decided to put themselves in charge of our hobby had a cow when someone posted pictures of the controversial "Grafitti cars" being sold in the toy aisle at Wally World. All of the grumpy old men chimed in like a choir. Or the Infamous Pink Lionel Engine. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:31 PM Poppa-zit, I like your attitude! If more people could kick back and enjoy life, like you probably do, there would be less uptight people out there, just looking for offenses. Reply Edit Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:06 PM nblum wrote:Agree on all your points. That's one reason I also referred to more objective data such as the massive layoffs that occurred around the time of the purported sales decrease. No one knows exactly who has what market share, but I think most in the industry will agree that MTH's has dropped significantly, and Lionel's has dropped less or is relatively stable. K-Line made some inroads, but I think the major factor was simply a drop in total sales in the hobby across the board. Since Lionel has the cushion of the seasonal Christmas time set sales, they have been less affected than MTH. Gotcha. So maybe the business becoming oversaturated with manufacturers contributed something toward hurting the hobby, as so many companies making sales pitches can be downright intimidating. Not to mention confusing. I'm not thinking rolling stock as much as electronic train control. Everybody seemed to have their own system (DC-AC-TCC-TMCC, et al), each of which I believe was incompatible with competitor's products (remember, I'm an S guy). It's like the old, old days of railroading, where each railroad set it own track gauge and designed its own coupling system. When the government finally called meetings in an effort to standardize these things, of course Railroad A wanted its competitors to adapt Railroad A's standards. You can guess where that went. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply nblum Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Upstate New York 899 posts Posted by nblum on Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:45 PM Agree on all your points. That's one reason I also referred to more objective data such as the massive layoffs that occurred around the time of the purported sales decrease. No one knows exactly who has what market share, but I think most in the industry will agree that MTH's has dropped significantly, and Lionel's has dropped less or is relatively stable. K-Line made some inroads, but I think the major factor was simply a drop in total sales in the hobby across the board. Since Lionel has the cushion of the seasonal Christmas time set sales, they have been less affected than MTH. Neil (not Besougloff or Young) :) Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:37 PM nblum wrote:"How did you derive the information to make the above statement?"From an interview that Mike Wolf gave in INC magazine some time ago, 2004 I believe. It's also based upon MTH laying off over 50-60% of their staff during the first few years of the new century, and the claim that their sales were in the $40 million range in the late 1990s and in the $25 million range around the time of the interview, if I recall correctly. I won't vouch for the exact numbers or the "about 1/2" being precise, but it's probably close enough. Maybe it's 30%, maybe it's 60%, adjusting for inflation, but the details come from Mike Wolf's interview. Oh. Mike Wolf. I thought you had a reliable source. Seriously, I personally would not put a lot of stock in numbers given to an interviewer from a publication like that, as most glib entrepreneurs seize any public opportunity to further an agenda. Trust me on this, as I've been on both sides. Consider this: could he have been downplaying the numbers to paint himself as the sympathetic figure, i.e., the Poor Little Train Guy Who's Been Wronged By The Big, Bad, Corportion Lionel? And if he went the other way (braggadocio) and talked about his success in building his company and how much money he was making, he'd stand to alienate all of his loyalists who'd take that as solid evidence he's been overcharging them for his product. Just a thought. MTH RULES! (Just kidding) "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply nblum Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Upstate New York 899 posts Posted by nblum on Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:18 PM "How did you derive the information to make the above statement?"From an interview that Mike Wolf gave in INC magazine some time ago, 2004 I believe. It's also based upon MTH laying off over 50-60% of their staff during the first few years of the new century, and the claim that their sales were in the $40 million range in the late 1990s and in the $25 million range around the time of the interview, if I recall correctly. I won't vouch for the exact numbers or the "about 1/2" being precise, but it's probably close enough. Maybe it's 30%, maybe it's 60%, adjusting for inflation, but the details come from Mike Wolf's interview. Neil (not Besougloff or Young) :) Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, September 14, 2006 12:53 PM nblum wrote:Brian, I just don't think running down the other guys' interests works to further the hobby whether it's the scale guys sniping at stuff or you making derogatory remarks about the scale guys' stuff. Both have a place in the hobby, you just want a bigger place at the table. Unfortunately, mass marketing of toy trains ain't happening, even though Lionel is going to give it a try with their NASCAR sets and using department stores, and MTH is making a wildly popular beer train :). Money talks and everything else is secondary. The guys who are buying the Big Boy are those spending thousands per year on the hobby and their needs and interests will carry more weight than 10 guys spending 1/10 as much, it's simple economics. The companies would not be making stuff they can't sell for very long. Parenthetically, MTH's sales appear to have dropped by about 1/2 or so, but that had more to do with the PS1 to PS2/DCS transition fiasco than anything to do with their hi-rail models or changes in the hobby. Even if command control users are only 40% of the serious hobbiests, they probably account for 50% or more of sales, excluding sets, which are sold heavily to the Christmas tree layout only crowd. Neil, I keep reading on forums a lot of postulating over how much MTH is making, how much Lionel's numbers are down, blah, blah, blah. Since both companies are privately held, where are these "insiders" getting the sales figures they keep referring to as if they were cut in stone? How did you derive the information to make the above statement? Am I the only one to find it ironic that the same posters who claim model train prices are unaffordable and should be discounted are the same high financiers who chastize MTH and Lionel for not spending enough money on advertising, marketing and promotion? You can't have one without the other. The divisiveness I've experienced on these forums between the MTH supporters and Lionel loyalists is palpable, much worse than the Ford vs. Chevy arguments of my teens. And so many "legal experts" have offered their differing opinions on the outcome of MTH v. Lionel, all colored by their personal allegiance. I'm neutral, being an S gauger. Frankly, I'll be glad when it's over. Pop Z "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply 123 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month SIGN UP More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Poppa_Zit wrote:Points to consider before making the above comparison:
Poppa_Zit wrote: 1) In 1953, less than 20 percent of U.S. homes had a television set;
Poppa_Zit wrote: 2) The 33M you say Lionel did in sales in 1953 means nothing unless you have the figures for net profits,
Poppa_Zit wrote: so here they are, corrected: In 1953 Lionel did $28.1 in sales, <SNIP> Source: http://www.rit.edu/~tbbeqa/SalesAF.html, among others.
Poppa_Zit wrote: 3) There were two main choices in 1953 -- Lionel, or American Flyer -- and the two were totally incompatable;
Poppa_Zit wrote:in the heyday of both companies (1946-1959) Lionel sold $250 million (65% market share) worth of trains while Gilbert sold $134 million (35% market share) worth of American Flyer. This does not include 1960-1967, when both companies posted net losses for the eight-year period when interest in trains started to slide among youth.
Poppa_Zit wrote:4) It is therefore obvious in 1953 Lionel wasn't competing with MTH
Poppa_Zit wrote: or any other strong contender for 3-rail dollars. It had cornered the 3-rail market with 65%; the other 35% was S gauge;
Poppa_Zit wrote:5) In 1953 Lionel and American Flyer didn't waste ... er, expend huge dollar amounts on attorneys while suing each other over nebulous issues.
Poppa_Zit wrote:So, if the margins are the same today -- roughly 4.5% -- MTH on $40 million in sales would have had roughly $1.8 million in earnings.
Poppa_Zit wrote:Guess the model train biz ain't the pot o'gold some people think it is.
Bob Keller
RR Redneck wrote:Well when you are black, a redneck, and hate rap music, when every other person is in some form or stage of "gansterism", wouldnt you say that I am doing a darn good job?
You misunderstand. Skin color or those other things you mention has nothing to do with conforming.
It's like that song in the TV commercial with the people all mouthing in unison the refrain " 'Cause I'm not like everybody else..."
When many of us were younger during the late 1960s and early 1970s, we too did not want to conform so we did things like grow our hair and beards long and wear jeans, etc. Except by doing that -- not conforming to our parents -- we were considered by anyone with a crew cut to be conforming to a very large group called "hippies." Get it?
Same thing with men who work in offices and wear a three-piece suit, shirt and tie to work every day. "I'm glad I don't have to wear a uniform," they'll say, when in reality their three-piece suit IS a uniform -- of sorts. Go to a courthouse and hang around for awhile and tell me most lawyers don't wear a "uniform." Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Pop Z
Lionel collector, stuck in an N scaler's modelling space.
RR Redneck wrote: I can make the same point. If I were on the insecure people, then right now skate boarding is the big thing in Cuero. It ticks me off how many people will do something just because they will be considered cool. I, unlike so many of my class mates, refuse conformity. Unlike so many of my classmates, I am not afriad to truly be myself.
I can make the same point. If I were on the insecure people, then right now skate boarding is the big thing in Cuero. It ticks me off how many people will do something just because they will be considered cool. I, unlike so many of my class mates, refuse conformity. Unlike so many of my classmates, I am not afriad to truly be myself.
But when you're in school -- like we all were -- the refusal to conform WAS conforming.
Allan Miller wrote:I imagine we can all pretty much agree that this segment of the hobby will likely never again be as strong and robust as it is today. Any disagreement with that?And I would further argue that this segment of the hobby, as it exists today, is not as strong and robust as it was at the start of the current century. Again, any disagreement there?So what's that all indicate? I'm not sure, because I can't predict the future any better than anyone else here, but I do have my suspicions. All I know for sure is that I'm going to enjoy my trains while I can, regardless of how many manufacturers there are and how much (or little) product they produce, and will leave the hand-wringing to some other folks who seem to really enjoy worrying about what can be seen in that clouded crystal ball. My sincere hope is that most others here will elect to do the same.
wallyworld wrote:The state of the hobby, with all things considered, is remarkably healthy considering how long it has been around and the fact that it models a facet of fading americana that, as a shadow of it's 19th century leading edge, has no toy industry national advertising campaign to support it as it did in the 40's and 1950's, some 50 years + ago. Not too shabby for a scale that was for all purposes "dead" in the 1960's. Whither the slot cars..hula hoops..slide viewers.. all wildly popular buying fads that are only footnotes in popular culture. This hobby will be around in my lifetime and beyond...these are golden years part 2..enjoy it while it lasts.
Good points, Ayem and Dubya-Dubya.
Like you, to get my personal enjoyment out of this hobby I don't need the comfort of knowing an army of others are also involved; I could care less. I do it because I enjoy it, not because it might be popular right now.
It is the insecure people -- followers --who are constantly looking for validation (that they're in a "cool" hobby) who seem to be the ones most concerned about any decline in numbers. Or those who are deathly afraid the value of their trains willl take a severe nosedive because they held on to them too long.
And while I do my part as an active clubmember and officer, I really don't see it as my job to be attracting new customers for model train companies to ensure their survival and profitabilty .
It's all in the semantics. To some, what has happened over the last 50 years is "change" -- which upsets some people. I like to think it's "progress" -- something none of us can stop. So, like you say, hop aboard and let's all enjoy it while we can.
mrclean351 wrote:Poppa-zit, I like your attitude! If more people could kick back and enjoy life, like you probably do, there would be less uptight people out there, just looking for offenses.
Thanks for the kind words.
You're dead on about kicking back and enjoying life and not being uptight, although I still put in some long hours on the business I own.
I do look for offenses, thought -- people who make up "facts" to support their ultra-thin arguments, closed-minded people with biases, bigots, liars, people who have one set of standards for themselves and another for everyone else, bullies, people who use forums like this to enhance their faux feelings of superiority by belittling others, people who have a personal political agenda and try to force it down the throat of others.
But for me, that's fun too.
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
pgtr wrote:In 1953 Lionel did $33M in sales. US population was around 160M. I don't know how many sets they produced off hand but they had a pretty darn impressive market penetration at the time.2006 - care to guess what they'd need to do in sales to rival 1953? About 250M give or take a few depending upon the inflation or index calculator your subscribe to. Today's population? About 300M. I'll hazard a hunch that compared to the 1953 population penetration Lionel is waaaaaay off that mark.
Points to consider before making the above comparison:
1) In 1953, less than 20 percent of U.S. homes had a television set; 2) The 33M you say Lionel did in sales in 1953 means nothing unless you have the figures for net profits, so here they are, corrected: In 1953 Lionel did $28.1 in sales, with earnings of $1.6 million; while in the same year A.C. Gilbert Co. (American Flyer) did $18 million in sales with earnings of $536,000. Source: http://www.rit.edu/~tbbeqa/SalesAF.html, among others. 3) There were two main choices in 1953 -- Lionel, or American Flyer -- and the two were totally incompatable; in the heyday of both companies (1946-1959) Lionel sold $250 million (65% market share) worth of trains while Gilbert sold $134 million (35% market share) worth of American Flyer. This does not include 1960-1967, when both companies posted net losses for the eight-year period when interest in trains started to slide among youth. 4) It is therefore obvious in 1953 Lionel wasn't competing with MTH or any other strong contender for 3-rail dollars. It had cornered the 3-rail market with 65%; the other 35% was S gauge; 5) In 1953 Lionel and American Flyer didn't waste ... er, expend huge dollar amounts on attorneys while suing each other over nebulous issues.
1) In 1953, less than 20 percent of U.S. homes had a television set;
2) The 33M you say Lionel did in sales in 1953 means nothing unless you have the figures for net profits, so here they are, corrected:
In 1953 Lionel did $28.1 in sales, with earnings of $1.6 million; while in the same year A.C. Gilbert Co. (American Flyer) did $18 million in sales with earnings of $536,000. Source: http://www.rit.edu/~tbbeqa/SalesAF.html, among others.
3) There were two main choices in 1953 -- Lionel, or American Flyer -- and the two were totally incompatable; in the heyday of both companies (1946-1959) Lionel sold $250 million (65% market share) worth of trains while Gilbert sold $134 million (35% market share) worth of American Flyer. This does not include 1960-1967, when both companies posted net losses for the eight-year period when interest in trains started to slide among youth.
4) It is therefore obvious in 1953 Lionel wasn't competing with MTH or any other strong contender for 3-rail dollars. It had cornered the 3-rail market with 65%; the other 35% was S gauge;
5) In 1953 Lionel and American Flyer didn't waste ... er, expend huge dollar amounts on attorneys while suing each other over nebulous issues.
So, if the margins are the same today -- roughly 4.5% -- MTH on $40 million in sales would have had roughly $1.8 million in earnings.
Guess the model train biz ain't the pot o'gold some people think it is.
Poppa_Zit wrote: perry1060 wrote: In my humble opinion, I think if you want to market trains to kids, you have to link the products to the present culture in which they live. Great point. However, it would never fly in practice. Or not be allowed to fly. Those who have decided to put themselves in charge of our hobby had a cow when someone posted pictures of the controversial "Grafitti cars" being sold in the toy aisle at Wally World. All of the grumpy old men chimed in like a choir.
perry1060 wrote: In my humble opinion, I think if you want to market trains to kids, you have to link the products to the present culture in which they live.
In my humble opinion, I think if you want to market trains to kids, you have to link the products to the present culture in which they live.
Great point.
However, it would never fly in practice. Or not be allowed to fly.
Those who have decided to put themselves in charge of our hobby had a cow when someone posted pictures of the controversial "Grafitti cars" being sold in the toy aisle at Wally World. All of the grumpy old men chimed in like a choir.
Or the Infamous Pink Lionel Engine.
nblum wrote:Agree on all your points. That's one reason I also referred to more objective data such as the massive layoffs that occurred around the time of the purported sales decrease. No one knows exactly who has what market share, but I think most in the industry will agree that MTH's has dropped significantly, and Lionel's has dropped less or is relatively stable. K-Line made some inroads, but I think the major factor was simply a drop in total sales in the hobby across the board. Since Lionel has the cushion of the seasonal Christmas time set sales, they have been less affected than MTH.
Gotcha. So maybe the business becoming oversaturated with manufacturers contributed something toward hurting the hobby, as so many companies making sales pitches can be downright intimidating. Not to mention confusing.
I'm not thinking rolling stock as much as electronic train control. Everybody seemed to have their own system (DC-AC-TCC-TMCC, et al), each of which I believe was incompatible with competitor's products (remember, I'm an S guy).
It's like the old, old days of railroading, where each railroad set it own track gauge and designed its own coupling system. When the government finally called meetings in an effort to standardize these things, of course Railroad A wanted its competitors to adapt Railroad A's standards.
You can guess where that went.
nblum wrote:"How did you derive the information to make the above statement?"From an interview that Mike Wolf gave in INC magazine some time ago, 2004 I believe. It's also based upon MTH laying off over 50-60% of their staff during the first few years of the new century, and the claim that their sales were in the $40 million range in the late 1990s and in the $25 million range around the time of the interview, if I recall correctly. I won't vouch for the exact numbers or the "about 1/2" being precise, but it's probably close enough. Maybe it's 30%, maybe it's 60%, adjusting for inflation, but the details come from Mike Wolf's interview.
Oh. Mike Wolf. I thought you had a reliable source.
Seriously, I personally would not put a lot of stock in numbers given to an interviewer from a publication like that, as most glib entrepreneurs seize any public opportunity to further an agenda. Trust me on this, as I've been on both sides.
Consider this: could he have been downplaying the numbers to paint himself as the sympathetic figure, i.e., the Poor Little Train Guy Who's Been Wronged By The Big, Bad, Corportion Lionel?
And if he went the other way (braggadocio) and talked about his success in building his company and how much money he was making, he'd stand to alienate all of his loyalists who'd take that as solid evidence he's been overcharging them for his product.
Just a thought.
MTH RULES! (Just kidding)
nblum wrote:Brian, I just don't think running down the other guys' interests works to further the hobby whether it's the scale guys sniping at stuff or you making derogatory remarks about the scale guys' stuff. Both have a place in the hobby, you just want a bigger place at the table. Unfortunately, mass marketing of toy trains ain't happening, even though Lionel is going to give it a try with their NASCAR sets and using department stores, and MTH is making a wildly popular beer train :). Money talks and everything else is secondary. The guys who are buying the Big Boy are those spending thousands per year on the hobby and their needs and interests will carry more weight than 10 guys spending 1/10 as much, it's simple economics. The companies would not be making stuff they can't sell for very long. Parenthetically, MTH's sales appear to have dropped by about 1/2 or so, but that had more to do with the PS1 to PS2/DCS transition fiasco than anything to do with their hi-rail models or changes in the hobby. Even if command control users are only 40% of the serious hobbiests, they probably account for 50% or more of sales, excluding sets, which are sold heavily to the Christmas tree layout only crowd.
Neil, I keep reading on forums a lot of postulating over how much MTH is making, how much Lionel's numbers are down, blah, blah, blah. Since both companies are privately held, where are these "insiders" getting the sales figures they keep referring to as if they were cut in stone? How did you derive the information to make the above statement?
Am I the only one to find it ironic that the same posters who claim model train prices are unaffordable and should be discounted are the same high financiers who chastize MTH and Lionel for not spending enough money on advertising, marketing and promotion? You can't have one without the other.
The divisiveness I've experienced on these forums between the MTH supporters and Lionel loyalists is palpable, much worse than the Ford vs. Chevy arguments of my teens. And so many "legal experts" have offered their differing opinions on the outcome of MTH v. Lionel, all colored by their personal allegiance. I'm neutral, being an S gauger. Frankly, I'll be glad when it's over.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month