April MR Editorial

[davekelly]

Ken,

How about taking some pics of your friend and the kids running "their" engines on his layout? I think that would make a great little article in Model Railroader. That guy is a Saint. He's helping the hobby and perhaps giving a couple of kids an introduction to what can be a lifelong hobby. Kudos to your friend!

[whitman500]

Ken:

That is a great idea. I guess I should put my money where my mouth is and see if there is anything I can do in that respect. For starters, I will make sure to buy my nephew a trainset for Christmas this year.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by whitman500

My biggest concern is that the model railroading industry is not doing enough to attract new modelers, particularly kids. ... ...We need to do our part as well by both welcoming new modelers as well as not creating impossible standards that new modelers cannot meet.

I remember a thread here a few months ago, where somebody suggeted that some of us modelers with a lot of disposable income might 'adopt' a young modeler who is long on enthusiasm but short on cash. For eaxmple, I know somebody who has a huge layout, he has let a few area kids pick out a high-quality loco or two from a local hobby store, paid for them himself, then allowed them to regularly operate those locos on his layout[^].

[whitman500]

My biggest concern is that the model railroading industry is not doing enough to attract new modelers, particularly kids. I recently returned to the hobby after a 15-year absence and while impressed by many of the new products (DCC, sound, etc.), I was also surprised at the startup costs of getting a layout up and running. I have to believe that this discourages new modelers since the expense of the hobby can be somewhat daunting, particularly for younger modelers.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the new features and increased reliability and am willing to spend the money. However, I think manufacturers have to keep in mind the long-term outlook for the hobby. Right now it feels like the hobby is dominated by 50-something modelers who are at their peak earning power and so the manufacturers are concentrating their efforts on catering to this demographic that can afford DCC, sound and $200+ locomotives. The result has been a profusion of a high-quality products that from a relative perspective are quite affordable. But at the same time, if you walk into Toys R Us or other kids stores there are no train sets (and there were 15 years ago when I was in junior high and last involved in model railroading). I worry that the industry today is benefiting from the fact that 25-30 years ago, toy trains were something that every kid had and that this produced a large number of adult modelers with lots of money to spend. However, the current group of 50-something modelers will eventually pass from the scene and the big question is whether there will be anyone to replace them given how little the manufacturers seem to be doing to get kids involved in the hobby. If that becomes the case and the pool of modelers dramatically shrinks, then we all suffer because a smaller pool will not be able to support the current wide range of reasonably-priced products.

Anyway, my basic point is that I think the manufacturers are devoting too many resources to the modelers of today versus the modelers of tomorrow. We need to do our part as well by both welcoming new modelers as well as not creating impossible standards that new modelers cannot meet.

[jfugate]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

My concern is that the profusion of RTR equipment will eliminate the "craftsmanship" from the hobby. Changing from "modelers" to "collectors".

Dave H.

Not hardly.

First, the manufacturers tend to chase the money, and more people are getting into the hobby who want to pay for prebuilt equipment and can afford to do so. And why not? If the hobby is to grow beyond a mere small niche, that was bound to happen.

Second, if I can buy ready built stuff, that doesn't mean I stop building *anything*. It simply means I will kitbash more (that in itself takes some real craftmanship skill to do well), and if I can't buy it, I still need to build it. It simply alters my focus, it doesn't make me stop building models.

It lets me build more ambitous efforts than I ever could before, to a higher level of quality all the way around. If that isn't craftmanship, I don't know what is.

[siberianmo]

I read the editorial. My take on it is that Terry poses some thought provoking insight for all of us "into" the hobby. There is no "right" or "wrong" with what I came away with - just kind of a continuum to follow along on - perhaps better said would have been, "Where are we going?"

The beauty of this hobby is that each of us determines the level of "finished" product we are content with. I have several 4 x 8 ft wall mounted display cases chock full of HO trains from my past - TYCO and AHM just a couple of manufacturers no longer with us. Those trains look great - to me. Isn't that what counts? To look at whatever it is that "flicks your bic" and come away with a good feeling inside about it - yeah!

I don't like the prices of today's model railroad "stuff" - but then again, I don't like the prices of automobiles either! My first new car was a 1957 Studebaker Silver Hawk and that car came in at just around $2,000 - yes, that's not a typo. Try and find one today and see what the "market" will bring in on a price. The late model Volvo station wagon sitting in my garage cost a hell of a lot more than my first house! Prices are just like water seeking its own level .... demand drives it each and every time (and I'm no bean counter or economist!!).

What does bother me though about products coming out is the feeling that those of us who do NOT want to move onto DCC will somehow wind up paying the price for the "capability," whether we want it or not. That is a real concern. My comparison would be what is happening with the television set industry. Obviously you all know (or should!) that we are not that far away from analog TV sets going the way of the dinosaur. Do we like it? Are the new ones affordable? No and no - but as the "man" said - progress is our most important product! And to get that progress, one must pay for it.

Great question ...... greater responses.

[selector]

As a new returnee to train modeling, I was surprised to see the plethora of modern diesels available, and most sounding an looking quite good! Then, I reasoned that times have changed. Most 10-year olds would be temporarily interested in steam locomotives, but their 'reality' is the modern diesel. Those of us who prefer steam are going to lose out over time as manufacturers, who answer to shareholders, have to make a buck by selling what they can at a modest profit.

Many years ago, as a ten-year old, my little smoking Marklins were fantastic. I have long since forgotten what they looked like, but they had no sound. Their noise on the track was not annoying, but neither did it help to convince me that I was not seeing a toy.

If I can afford a sound-equipped loco that improves my expereince, as I define it, then the company that makes that achieveable will get my hard-earned dollars.

I like the new super-detailing and the sound. The industry must move with the times, and digital controlling and sound are fascinating new developments that make for a more realistic and fun experience, as their relative popularity will attest.

[potlatcher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul3
I think the manufacturers are closer, "more in touch" to the consumer than ever before. Why else are they making things like scale RDC's and DL109's for pete's sake. The modelers have been dreaming of these things for decades, and they're finally being delivered.

I had an interesting experience at the National Train Show in Seattle last summer. I asked the guy from Proto 2000 about producing a model of the Alco HH series switchers. He replied that they wouldn't be doing one because there were too many variations in the different production phases of the prototype locomotives. P2K just couldn't afford to produce all the tooling to catch all these variations.

Ten or fifteen years ago, a manufacturer would produce only one basic locomotive model, then it was up to us if we wanted to kitbash/detail the unit to match a specific locomotive. Model Railroader was full of articles explaining how to make a GP-39-2 from an Athearn GP-38-2, for instance. Cannon, Smokey Valley, Details West and Details Associates did a land office business in conversion parts. Modelers frequently gave themselves license to paint a set of F-7's for their railroad, even if the prototype only had F-3's. It was "close enough" and they still had fun doing it.

Now the pendulum has swung the other way. I think it's ridiculous that someone can't make one model of an HH-660, then let us figure out how to turn it into a HH-1000 if that's what we want. Who knows, it might even be fun!

[Anonymous]

I sort of agree with Paul Cutler, if the price was not high enough then the market would not be there for the correct RDC cars and DL109, the same could be said for the RS-27 that is supposed to come out. Limited production means higher prices. Look at the brass market runs are now 50 locomotives when in the past it was 500 locomotives.

I remember when Atlas came out with their yellow box locos at $25.00 and everybody said they would never sell with Athearn at 12.50. But quality will always sell. The same thing was said when Kato broke the 100 barrier for a plastic diesel. This was when a brass diesel was about $275.00, now they are $800-900 so the $100 plastic diesel is a bargain, plus it is easier to detail to you own roads peculiarities.

This brings me to my point, please give me undecorated kits so I can do my thing, that is all I ask.

Rick

[SpaceMouse]

I am new so maybe I don't know what I should want. I want DCC so my whole family can run trains. I want them built well enough that they are going to ride smooth and stay on the track--but if they have a fragile parts, I'm going to worry when my autistic son wants to play with them.

A lot of any fantasy experience is sound. George Lucas says that sound is 80% of your theater experience. I think it is a great addition to the model train experience, but you have to keep the volume to a level that you only hear the train that is near you.

There is plenty of room to be artistic--or if you don't want to you can pay way too much for cheap plastic models.

I like seeing the higher quality mid-range stuff. The BLIs drive the midrange guys to stay close in quality without losing their market.

Like I said, though, I'm too new to know what I should want.

[philnrunt]

Good responses, every one of them. I tend to agree with the middle of the roaders, willing to pay more for a better detailed model, but not a huge ammount for items I don't want or need.
Museum quality pieces are very nice, and I would love to have tons of 'em, but a good runner is really what matters. Of course, now you can get both brass detail and spectacular running characteristics out of most models.
Thanks for the great thoughts, all of you.

[Paul3]

Dave H. wrote:

QUOTE: My concern is that the profusion of RTR equipment will eliminate the "craftsmanship" from the hobby. Changing from "modelers" to "collectors".

I got news for you, it's already happened. [:)] Go back and read some MR's from the 1940's and 1950's, railing against the plastic model or the "shake the box" models. Back then, if you didn't wind your own motor wires, cast your own smokeboxes, or turn your own drivers, you weren't really a modeler, you were a collector.

As far as the original point goes, I think the manufacturers are closer, "more in touch" to the consumer than ever before. Why else are they making things like scale RDC's and DL109's for pete's sake. The modelers have been dreaming of these things for decades, and they're finally being delivered. It's ridiculous to think the manufacturers have "lost touch" with their customers.

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************

[n2mopac]

I think the ideal here is to achieve some balance in available stock. There are some high end modeler who want extremely detailed items are are willing to pay the big bucks to get it. Many of these modelers, however, would rather buy a somewhat less detailed model and do the detail work themselves. This is, after all, a modeling hobby.

There are also some bottom end modelers who just want something that represents a box car to go in circles and don't want to pay much for it.

Most of us are probably somewhere in the middle. I would like a relative good level of detail, but I don't want to pay $300 for a locomotive. I think it is important that the industry provides for all of these levels of hobbyist, with the obvious bulk of items offered in the range of the greatest number of modelers. Once again, this is a modeling hobby. I fear that we are becomming too interested in buying a highly detailed model when once in the past we would have done the detailing work ourselves. I hope this does not point to a decline in the craftsmanship of model railroaders.

Ron

[dehusman]

My concern is that the profusion of RTR equipment will eliminate the "craftsmanship" from the hobby. Changing from "modelers" to "collectors".

Dave H.

[MidlandPacific]

There may be more manfacturers out there than the market can support, but that's not a new phenomenon: pick up a bound volume of MR from, say, 1976 and make some notes about the advertisers: Arbour. Cary. The Locomotive Company; go back a few more years and you'll find others, like Varney, whose products are now available only on ebay: all of them casualties of the market. But the hobby went on, and the products on offer improved in response to public demand.

[davekelly]

Hmmm. I think Terry and Trainnut are both right. I think that the increase in prices will deter some people, but only for that particular line - there will be someone there to pick up the slack with shake the box moderately priced stuff. On the other hand, those that left because they couldn't get a blue box to look like brass now have an option with the "higher end" stuff. Perhaps this brader spectum of products will actually give the new comer more options and keep the "old timers" in. I guess only time will tell.

[hminky]

Does anyone really remember the good old days? How well all that unsophisticated stuff ran? How much remotoring and detailing cost on all that wonderfully cheap stuff? I like sophisticated products, I had Onboard Analog for sound in the mid-80's. Sure the majority of modelers want cheap crap and the manufacturers probably overestimated the market for really good models. That has always been the case.
Just a thought
Harold

[CNJ831]

Yes, Terry is right on this one. The past decade has seen the prices, particularly of locomotives, start running away with themselves. This apparently has been in response not so much as to the crying need for an extremely detailed product as much as to the recognition by manufacturers that there is a moneyed 10% or so of hobbyists willing to pay any price set for an item they want. However, recent developments would seem to demonstrate that this fraction of hobbyists has proven so small that a number of manufacturers have of late run into problems selling off even their limited run items.

Are hobbyist really desparate for more DCC, sound-added, smoke-puffing engines? It sure doesn't look like it after all if you take a look at BLI's recent fire sale and changes in their product line. Model railroading is a really limited hobby, populated mainly by older fellas happy with DC powered, silent-running equipment offered at reasonable prices and available for more than just a week around the time of issue. If the big manufacturers don't wake up to this fact, more than a few are going to fall by the wayside before the decade is out (and I predict MTH HO will be the first)

CNJ831

[MidlandPacific]

I argued before against the notion that the industry was out of touch with the modeler. I think it is, on the contrary, in better touch than it has ever been.

A lot of this is attributable to the information revolution. When I started reading MR (1976), advertisers had a strictly limited means of reaching the greater national audience: they could advertise in MR, RMC, or the NMRA newsletter. Nothing else had the same reach, and all of the potential means of reaching customers (newsletters, for example) were slow and unreliable. When I started buying brass in the early 1990s, Caboose Hobbies was still circulating a monthly list of models on sale, and every call was a lengthy negotation, as you tried to find out what might have arrived and what had already been sold. And that was a point where long distance calls had already become cheap: I'm old enough to remember my mother telling me to hurry up when I was talking to my grandmother, because long distance calls were so expensive.

The Internet revolution has, I think, been real. I now do a LOT of my hobby shopping on it, some of it from manufacturers whose audience in prior years would have been strictly local. I can google "CM battleship gondola" and find a manufacturer in thirty seconds, and place an order with almost no transaction costs. Even if we ignore the fact that the disposable income of most Americans is significantly higher than it was in the '70s, the reduction in transaction costs that the web allows gives us greater spending power. So I think there is more money chasing more goods. This is, I think, more generally true of American society: the rising tide, as Kennedy said, is lifting a lot of boats.

The growth in variety (and the greater attention to customer desires) is something that's broadly noticeable across the entire economy. When I was a kid, "beer" meant Budweiser, Miller, Pabst, Busch, and, if you were West of Kansas City, Coors. Now its a rare bar that can't quadruple that - because the reductions in transaction costs have allowed the sellers to improve or create products to suit buyers' desires. That's why we have die cast 2-8-8-2s at $300: it's a seller's response to the unfulfilled desire for a well-detailed Mallet that didn't cost five times that price.

[rrinker]

I have to agree with Trainnut. I now have 6 locos on my roster, and I paid less than $60 for each one. Yet they are all those newer, highly detailed models mentioned in the editorial (no sound - yet), from Proto2000 and Stewart. Yes, at full retail most of these would have been OVER $100, but that's not what I paid. Each one is light years beyond the Blue Box Athearn I got about 12 years ago for $25.
It is still possible to restrain the hobby budget and yet still have nice models. Certain things recently have skewed such analysis - such as Lionel's INSANE price on the Challenger when first released (and they wonder why it didn't sell?).

--Randy

[Anonymous]

Trainnut,

Very Good Points! And I agree with you.

As someone seriously getting back into Trains after a 8-10 years of layoff, I have seen the increase in quality in the P2K and Athearn lines. I am just as willing to pay $180 for my new P2k GP9 as I was to pay $40 for the P2K SW1200. I am amazed at how well both of these units ran right out of the box!

I don't want to go backwards. I want the ability to have the choices we currently have. For myself, I've never considered Brass Engines, and have seen few in my time in the Hobby. I will admit the few I have seen have been marvelous pieces, but I would be afraid to have them on my current layout.

For myself, I will continue to but what I feel is good for my dollar spent, and what I want to buy. I run my trains, I am not a collector, and I do enjoy tinkering.

Chris

[Anonymous]

Boy, I bet this one will stir up some comments.

I have to say up front that I am one of those guys who drills and installs grab irons on freight cars, I have scratch built cars and I have put together lots of stuff that is wire, wood and metal castings because I like the realism of the finished product. I like highly detailed stuff and am willing to pay (up to a point).

When it comes to the perception of an item as expensive, I think that you run into problems because not everyone judges things in the same way. We all have a different idea of what expensive is. To some, $300.00 for a loco is outrageous, to others it is a good deal.

While terry makes a good arguement, I can't agree with the premise of his editorial on several counts:. For one, I don't see a lot of the stuff being that much more expensive that non-detailed stuff that was available a few years ago when you adjust for inflation. When I see blue boxes going for the same price as discounted P2K kits, I'm not sure I see the arguement that superdetailing is making stuff expensive.

In the area of locos, BLI is often pointed out as driving the price up by offering stuff we may not want (DCC and sound). I personally think these locos are a great deal considering what you get. Try buying an Athearn Mikado and adding sound and DCC and see what it runs. Another example: I paid $300.00 for my P2K 2-8-8-2 when they first came out, The sound, DCC equipped one is on sale at around $320.00 !!!! Which is the better deal?? Now I know there are those who will say that ten years ago they were buying steam locos for $50.00. But what were they getting for the $50.00??? I doubt anyone wants to go back to those days.

I think the market that most benefits by this is the market of modelers who ar looking to RUN trains (not collect), who were forced to buy brass because they wanted higher detail. While the new plastic is still not as detailed as brass, I'm sure that many of these modelers are very happy with the newer, better detailed plastic that is still far cheaper than brass. I know I am.

I think that having lots of high quality goods is a good thing for the hobby and that we shouldn't go back. I'm sure that as things get too expensive, the market will correct itself (people will buy less) and many manufacturers offer less detailed cheaper lines already. I think everyone benefits from having protoypically accurate stuff around and I suspect that even the cheaper stuff that comes out in the future will look and run better because of all the attention to detail, quality and accuracy in the current offerings.

I will continue to buy the newer high detailed items as I need and can afford them.

Ducking for cover,

[philnrunt]

Terry Thompson poses a good question in April's MR- Has the model railroad industry lost touch with the average model railroader?
He makes a good argument that in producing ever more highly detailed and technically complex items, they are pricing and specializing themselves out of potential customers.
Give it a read, and tell me whether you agree or not.