Are modellers be priced out the hobby?

[ngartshore350]

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by alco_fan

Some posters should just stick to their repetitious warnings about the end of the hobby, because their stats work is poor.

According to the US Dept of Labor, 1980 average weekly earnings for non-supervisory and production workers (to leave out those accursed high wage earners some posters so despise) was $240.77. So far in 2005, it is $543.04.

So in 1980 the Atlas diesel I mentioned in an earlier post that cost $21.99 street price would have been about 9% of a week's salary for a production worker. An Atlas Trainman diesel at $55 street price in 2005 would be 10% of the week's salary for a worker making the average non-supervisory or production worker's wage.

1% difference in real cost for a vastly improved product? Sounds like the hobby is pretty cheap. Again, this is without extensive shopping around.

How about retirees? In 1980, the average social security weekly benefit to a male was $86.31. The Atlas diesel of 1980 was just over 25% of Grandpa's weekly Social Security benefit. In 2003 (the last year I had figures handy), the average weekly Social Security benefit paid to a man was $239.75. A Trainman diesel sets today's AARP member back 22.9% of the weekly benefit. Cheaper today in relative terms.

Sorry to intrude on all the gloom and doom with real data ... we now return you to the usual whining session.

Jon

Talk about poor stats work, Jon! How about comparing apples with apples?

For 1981 an Athearn F7, GP9, SW1500, S12, GP35 from Standard Hobby Supply were $9.69 - the U28, U30, U33B - $9.99 , while the rest of the line was under $10.50 . Athearn car kits $1.50 to $1.84 . Please, let's not forget that technological progress does actually take place in our hobby, it doesn't stand absolutely still. Items improve as technology advances. You can not make a fair price comparison of medium price range items from one era vs. extreme low end range items decades later and say, "Oh look, nothing's changed!"

Athearn offered at least standard quality items for the day back in 1981, essentially mid-range, so you would need to compare them to the mid-range, average items of today to be at all fair. That means diesel locomotives that are currently in the $85 to $120 range for street price. That's a helluva rise if you ask me! Has your salary increased 10-fold? Mine certainly hasn't!

CNJ831

[selector]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ngartshore350

The pricing is relative to the quality and detail. There have been numerous posts above looking at CPI that seem to show the prices compared to wages are comparative.

One thing we are getting is extra detail and smooth running. You look at a loco from 7 - 10 years ago and it doesn't compare to the detail you get now, some you almost don't need to touch before running them. I used to spend a fortune on Detail West products every time I bought a new loco. Now I just buy bits and pieces. But I must admit sound is expensive!

The really anying thing I find is that manufacturers seem to be running batches of products, so if you don't get one when they come out, sorry you lose, we've stopped production of that!

It makes it difficult to see what you like and save for it. If you don't get it then & there it more than likely won't be there next week.

Anybody else finding this?

NG

Well, it limits the exposure of the company to liability if the model doesn't do well. If it does, and they announce a second run, the word-of-mouth campaign in support of the model will ensure that it also sells. It's really a win-win, when you see it that way; the company keeps a strong balance sheet, we get an initial run of a successful model, report on our enjoyment of it, and the second run is highly anticipated. BLI seems to be following this approach to an extent. I just purchased one of their second (third) runs of the all-metal K4's.

[ngartshore350]

The pricing is relative to the quality and detail. There have been numerous posts above looking at CPI that seem to show the prices compared to wages are comparative.

One thing we are getting is extra detail and smooth running. You look at a loco from 7 - 10 years ago and it doesn't compare to the detail you get now, some you almost don't need to touch before running them. I used to spend a fortune on Detail West products every time I bought a new loco. Now I just buy bits and pieces. But I must admit sound is expensive!

The really anying thing I find is that manufacturers seem to be running batches of products, so if you don't get one when they come out, sorry you lose, we've stopped production of that!

It makes it difficult to see what you like and save for it. If you don't get it then & there it more than likely won't be there next week.

Anybody else finding this?

NG

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by alco_fan

Some posters should just stick to their repetitious warnings about the end of the hobby, because their stats work is poor.

According to the US Dept of Labor, 1980 average weekly earnings for non-supervisory and production workers (to leave out those accursed high wage earners some posters so despise) was $240.77. So far in 2005, it is $543.04.

So in 1980 the Atlas diesel I mentioned in an earlier post that cost $21.99 street price would have been about 9% of a week's salary for a production worker. An Atlas Trainman diesel at $55 street price in 2005 would be 10% of the week's salary for a worker making the average non-supervisory or production worker's wage.

1% difference in real cost for a vastly improved product? Sounds like the hobby is pretty cheap. Again, this is without extensive shopping around.

How about retirees? In 1980, the average social security weekly benefit to a male was $86.31. The Atlas diesel of 1980 was just over 25% of Grandpa's weekly Social Security benefit. In 2003 (the last year I had figures handy), the average weekly Social Security benefit paid to a man was $239.75. A Trainman diesel sets today's AARP member back 22.9% of the weekly benefit. Cheaper today in relative terms.

Sorry to intrude on all the gloom and doom with real data ... we now return you to the usual whining session.

Jon

There ya go John. Raining all over everyone's parade with that factal material. [:D]

I still haven't been able to convince a friend of mine that it's better to own your home outright than it is to spend $1 in mortgage interest to save 25 cents in Federal income tax (assuming you're in the 25% marginal bracket).

No mortgage. No mortgage payment. No mortgage payment, no need for income to cover mortgage payment.

Andre

Andre

[selector]

Those last two posts are super. Thanks. Unfortunately, some will NOT be told. It just doesn't fit with their world-view.

[dcgrosvold]

Hmmm... Let's see - compared to my other hobbies:

Astronomy - telescope, camera and accessories - $4000
Photography - another camera: $1299 lenses: $800- $900 each
SCUBA - regulator: $300 -$800 mask $ fins: $200, dive computer $800;
wetsuit: $250 - $400, BCD: $950 (times TWO - hers and mine)
Woodworking - tools $8000 - $10000, shop space: $80 - $100 per square foot.
RV - $15,000 (truck camper, used at equine events)
Equestrian - horses: $4000 - $12000 each, saddles: $1200 - $3500 each,
other tack: $400 - $1000, horse trailer: $15,000 trucks: $32,000
tractor - $10,000, well - you get the idea.

Model railroading expensive? I don't think so. You can scratchbuild a lot of your model railroad for a fairly small investment, or you can buy everything Ready-To-Run, including your layout.

I don't think I'm all that different from the other average joes on this forum. I'm sure we all have more than one hobby. How do I get my wife to let me spend money on mine? I take her camping. I take her SCUBA diving. SHE gets most of the horse stuff (yes, I have my own as well,) Generally, we play together. She does model railroading as well. NOW she's talking about 12" guage live steam! She wants us to be able to ride around the ranch on our own railroad! Can't argue with THAT! [:D]

[Anonymous]

Some posters should just stick to their repetitious warnings about the end of the hobby, because their stats work is poor.

According to the US Dept of Labor, 1980 average weekly earnings for non-supervisory and production workers (to leave out those accursed high wage earners some posters so despise) was $240.77. So far in 2005, it is $543.04.

So in 1980 the Atlas diesel I mentioned in an earlier post that cost $21.99 street price would have been about 9% of a week's salary for a production worker. An Atlas Trainman diesel at $55 street price in 2005 would be 10% of the week's salary for a worker making the average non-supervisory or production worker's wage.

1% difference in real cost for a vastly improved product? Sounds like the hobby is pretty cheap. Again, this is without extensive shopping around.

How about retirees? In 1980, the average social security weekly benefit to a male was $86.31. The Atlas diesel of 1980 was just over 25% of Grandpa's weekly Social Security benefit. In 2003 (the last year I had figures handy), the average weekly Social Security benefit paid to a man was $239.75. A Trainman diesel sets today's AARP member back 22.9% of the weekly benefit. Cheaper today in relative terms.

Sorry to intrude on all the gloom and doom with real data ... we now return you to the usual whining session.

Jon

[slotracer]

In the fifties things were probably considerably more expensive compared to average wages....and the quality was considerably less than even Athearn blue box so the value quotient was way low.

I remember thinking through the mid seventies up to the very early nineties of how little inflation there was at all (At least in HO)....particulalry Ahearn, MDC and similar stuff, one could get Blue box engines, shake the box kits and so many other items at pices within dimes of what the item cost a decade or more prior.

The move to RTR is one factor, the move to high quality stuff is another and many items who's prices were stagnant for years have ahd an inflationary "catch up"

The $100 diesels are a landmark piece but one needs to consider these $100 Sugested lsit items can be picked up at shows and discounts for $50 to $75 pretty frequently.

I recall in teh late eighties taking Athearn Blue box engines for about $20 new, adding $25 to remotor and upgrade teh drive and another $20 minimum to add details and probably paint and decals so the price comes out about the same, when one fgures the $100 list engine today is of far better die work, better detail, better running characteristics and does not require many hours of time to create, they are a comparitive bargain Consider teh value of a buck in say 1988 vs 2005 and it is cheaper today in literal tersm and definitely in value consideration

[Anonymous]

For those who think they are being priced out of the hobby, I believe some of the manufacturers have heard you now you must respond. Atlas is now offering their "Trainman" line of products. Cars will be selling for 10 dollars and their first engine will be 50 dollars. Broadway Limited is now offering some of their units as "stealth" units, cutting the price in half.

If you think you are being priced out of the hobby I suggest you buy these products immediately! The only thing that these companies will listen to is the ring of the cash registers when these products are sold. If the intial run of these products is successful then they will produce more. The manufactors are listening and it's time for you to say "YES WE HEAR YOU AND WE WANT MORE!"

[whitman500]

Read your first two sentences. You specifically mentioned young versus old in the context of differences in earning power.

However, if you want to shift your argument to the claim that income disparities were just as great 40 years ago as they are today that is also not correct. The distribution of both income and wealth in the US has widened significantly over the last 25 years and is much higher than in the 1950s and 1960s (i.e., the gap between the wealthiest Americans and everyone else has widened significantly).

[Anonymous]

Andre said it,I said it,YOU HAVE TO LIKE TRAINS TO WANT TO MODEL THEM. How many people would buy trains if they were cheap? Oh, sure, there would be a jump, but don't think it would be the rage it was back in the fifties/sixties, when it was the gotta have toy. The reason us babyboomers are into model railroading is because we had it in our youth, a lot of us left the hobby in mid sixties as we grew up,went to college,war,got married,did other things, then in 80's/90's, we all discovered our old friend,model trains.
Have you been to walmart/k-mart, or toysrus?How many model cars and airplanes do you see now? Not as many as a few years back. Why? Prices? No, lack of interest. Go buy a kid an eractor set, see how long before it sits idle. Buy him a gamecube, and try to pry him from it to eat dinner. No my freinds,prices are higher,but the interest has dropped and the two aren't necessarily related.
Mike

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by whitman500

QUOTE: You're forgetting one thing. Us supposedly well heeled old codgers were once young puppies without a container in which to pass water. The hobby was just as expensive then as it is now relative to the overall cost of living and wage rates. Things weren't any better then. 35 cent a gallon gas in 1965 is roughly the equivalent of what gas sells for locally here in Monterey (about $2.21/gal at the cheapest places).There were people then at the peak of their earning years who could afford brass, just as there are people now who can afford the latest that BLI has to offer. Guess how many nice brass engines were offered as compared to new offerings of moderately priced plastic or cast metal engines.

If you actually look at the demographic data, this isn't really correct. In 1965 the poorest segment of the US population was retired people. Today they are the richest. While things have decidedly moved in their favor, the situation is the reverse for young people. Over the last 40 years, we've seen the creation of Medicare and vast increases in the generosity of Social Security which has materially improved the standard of living of retired people and people near retirement (who no longer have to save as much money as previously). On the otherhand, young people have to deal with higher education costs (which have grown much faster than inflation), higher health insurance costs (which have also grown much faster than inflation and which there is no Medicare-equivalent subsidy for), much higher Social Security payroll taxes, and much less generous pension plans from employers (requiring people to save more). I guarantee you that in terms of disposable income the gap between people in their 20s and 30s and people in their 50s and 60s has widened considerably over the last few decades.

While this may be something of a tangent, I do think this trend makes it more difficult for manufacturers to simultaneously appeal to new, younger hobbyists and baby boomers and exacerbates the tension between planning for the future and maximizing current profits.

Had you really read what I said, I talked about people in their peak earning years, not retired people. There's a difference.

Andre

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ctcbound

I had an interesting chat with a gent a couple of days ago. He said, that his friends either stopped buying trains completely or got out the hobby because the cost were increasing too fast. Has anyone else heard this? And if so why aren't the companies responding to this?

Roger

This hobby is like any other hobby that people spend money on according to their own interest.

You can spend way too much or just a little and still enjoy the hobby. You have to know "when to hold them and when to walk away. "

[whitman500]

QUOTE: Power tools are conveniences, not necessities. You can get a lot of good work done with files, razor saws, hand saws and screwdrivers while you are saving your money to buy those power tools. But you may take more time to get things done. Again, if you find it important to get it built in a hurry, then it's gonna cost ya.

Ed,

My point here was that the increasing lack of home workshops is making it more difficult for people to enter the hobby. This is still true even if they try to go the hand tool route to save money. The advantage of power tools is not simply that they are faster but also that they are easier to use. I bought a band saw because having never done this before, I'm not very good with a hand saw (my arm is weak and I can't cut straight). Others can lecture me that I should stop complaining and learn how, but this is precisely how newbies get discouraged.

[whitman500]

QUOTE: You're forgetting one thing. Us supposedly well heeled old codgers were once young puppies without a container in which to pass water. The hobby was just as expensive then as it is now relative to the overall cost of living and wage rates. Things weren't any better then. 35 cent a gallon gas in 1965 is roughly the equivalent of what gas sells for locally here in Monterey (about $2.21/gal at the cheapest places).There were people then at the peak of their earning years who could afford brass, just as there are people now who can afford the latest that BLI has to offer. Guess how many nice brass engines were offered as compared to new offerings of moderately priced plastic or cast metal engines.

If you actually look at the demographic data, this isn't really correct. In 1965 the poorest segment of the US population was retired people. Today they are the richest. While things have decidedly moved in their favor, the situation is the reverse for young people. Over the last 40 years, we've seen the creation of Medicare and vast increases in the generosity of Social Security which has materially improved the standard of living of retired people and people near retirement (who no longer have to save as much money as previously). On the otherhand, young people have to deal with higher education costs (which have grown much faster than inflation), higher health insurance costs (which have also grown much faster than inflation and which there is no Medicare-equivalent subsidy for), much higher Social Security payroll taxes, and much less generous pension plans from employers (requiring people to save more). I guarantee you that in terms of disposable income the gap between people in their 20s and 30s and people in their 50s and 60s has widened considerably over the last few decades.

While this may be something of a tangent, I do think this trend makes it more difficult for manufacturers to simultaneously appeal to new, younger hobbyists and baby boomers and exacerbates the tension between planning for the future and maximizing current profits.

[Anonymous]

walking thru the local LHS.......

Why does this n scale loco cost so much?..........because it is small.......um, ok.
Why does this O scale loco cost so much?.........because it is big............um, ok.

Why does this hobby cost so much?.............because we want it and will buy it.

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrechapelon

People get into this hobby because they're interested in trains. Nobody (and certainly not a kid) does a cost/benefit analysis comparing the relative merits of one hobby over another. If kids aren't interested in trains these days, the hobby is going to die. Period. Lower prices won't save it, nor will they bring in additional model railroaders. The Baby Boomers who now appear to be the financial backbone of the hobby were once on the poorer end of the economic spectrum and couldn't afford the higher end goodies the hobby offered at that time. When my late father was young, he was dirt poor. When he was the age I am now, he was much better off. That's the way it works for most people. You don't get to start off in the upper income brackets.

Andre, you are absolutely correct in that the Boomers are the financial backbone, and a certain percentage are the driving force, in the hobby today. However, you fail to fully understand the motivation that got them here in the first place and the fact that current circumstances are not likely to supply their replacement in the future. Hobbyists are drawn to model railroading through exposure. The majority of Boomers saw real trains in their daily lives and, more importantly, model trains were fully the equivalent of (or more desirable than) computers and celphones for today's younger generation. They were once THE toy to have and I can't remember any friends I had back then who were without them.

That exposure is lacking post 1965, which is partly why we see progressively fewer and fewer younger people in the hobby today...just look at the hobby's demographics. Nevertheless, there is still a small percentage of folks who are coming to the hobby today. Unfortunately, they are running up against huge prices...well in excess of what it cost to enter model railroading years ago (don't go by memory, go back and look at the ad prices in old MRs compared with today...I have). As I noted earlier, I've personally witnessed exchanges with newbies at the hobby shop and their reactions on hearing how much it takes to get started.

Time, of course, is the other major constraint. It, alone, is enough to keep people from considering the hobby but it's severely compounded by today's high pricing. So, whether you put the ultimate blame "us" or the "manufacturers", the result is the same: any future the hobby has is being stifled by the current prices. You suggest that most of us started out on a lower financial rung of the ladder but today can afford these expensive items. To this I reply, if the younger, less afluent folks can't ever get into the hobby, what they make in their peak earning years in the way of affording trains will be totally irrelevant.

CNJ831

[rolleiman]

QUOTE: Pendon Museum in England

SHARP!! [tup] Just goes to show what can be done if willing to spend the time at it..

Jeff

[edkowal]

QUOTE: Originally posted by whitman500

I think the problem is not so much that hobby companies are gouging customers or making huge profits but rather that people's expectations about what their layout should look like has increased in recent years. With sound, DCC, photo realistic backdrops, etc., you can really make a top quality layout that looks like the real thing. Certainly that is the case with the layouts that are featured in MR. However, these layouts cost real money: tens of thousands of dollars. In the past, a rich man's layout probably didn't look a lot better than a poor man's but that gap has really widened, and I think that discourages newbies who see the layouts in the magazine and get excited and then realize to their dismay the vast financial resources that are required to meet their expectations.

It is not necessary to spend tens of thousands of dollars to have a top quality layout that looks like the real thing. If, however, you are unwilling to learn how to make it look realistic yourself, or you want to have it NOW, and therefore must pay someone else to do that, then yes, you will pay a lot.

As just one example, take structure models. The recent revolution in laser cut and resin cast kits has made it possible to produce a beautiful structure relatively easily. But you have to pay the producer of the kit for the efforts that have gone into producing such an excellent model. But whether or not these two technologies existed, it was always possible to do such work. It just couldn't be done in a week of evenings until recently. If you don't believe me, look at some of the work that is on exhibit at the Pendon Museum in England pendonmuseum.com/index.jsp Some of the models in those exhibits were made in the 1930's and they have not been spruced up or made any better than they were when first completed. They have all been made of paper and cardboard in 1/76 scale by volunteers. They are still made in that same way. Those models were not completed in a week of evenings, though.

Similarly, the masters for a cast resin kit are produced by an individual using traditional materials and traditional techniques. The masters for resin model railroad kits are unlikely to be made by rapid prototyping and CAD/CAM. And here, too, the masters are not the result of a quick week at the workbench. Anyone with reasonable hand-eye coordination and a discerning eye can do excellent work. It takes practice, and it takes time to devote to each model.

When looking at the efforts of most of the modelers depicted in those articles in the magazines, with few exceptions, I think you will find that they took many years to get to the size and level of detail that you see.

QUOTE: Originally posted by whitman500

Separately, a number of people have mentioned how the startup costs for the hobby are daunting and this drives people away. One factor that may be contributing to this is the cost of tools. You see fewer and fewer people with home workshops these days and so while in the past a new hobbyist probably had a power drill, a couple of power saws, a soldering iron, etc., today many do not. I came into the hobby a year ago with nothing and had to spend probably $500-600 just to get equipped with the tools I needed to build benchwork.

Power tools are conveniences, not necessities. You can get a lot of good work done with files, razor saws, hand saws and screwdrivers while you are saving your money to buy those power tools. But you may take more time to get things done. Again, if you find it important to get it built in a hurry, then it's gonna cost ya.

-Ed

[Anonymous]

as a 40+ year buyer of H-O, I personally know the sting of the hundred dollar plastic diesel that was $20.00 a few years back...My suggestion to new comers is to buy one piece at a time and hang on to it with dear life.

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by whitman500

I think the manufacturers are caught between two opposing forces. On the one hand, there is a large number of baby boomer hobbyists that are in their peak earning years and so it makes perfect sense for the manufacturers to focus their efforts on selling expensive, high-end products liek sound-equipped locos, pre-weathered buildings, etc. The problem, however, is that catering to this market simultaneously limits the growth of the hobby since new, younger hobbyists don't have the money to buy these products. For the manufacturers the issue is that doing the right thing in the near-term could prove to be disastrous in the long-term since the big spending baby boomers will eventually grow old and pass on and there aren't enough new, younger hobbyists to replace them.

I'm not trying to argue that the manufacturers are being irrational since on an NPV basis it may make sense to maximize profits for the next several years even if the result is long-term decline but for the hobby it is not a good thing in the long-term.

You're forgetting one thing. Us supposedly well heeled old codgers were once young puppies without a container in which to pass water. The hobby was just as expensive then as it is now relative to the overall cost of living and wage rates. Things weren't any better then. 35 cent a gallon gas in 1965 is roughly the equivalent of what gas sells for locally here in Monterey (about $2.21/gal at the cheapest places).There were people then at the peak of their earning years who could afford brass, just as there are people now who can afford the latest that BLI has to offer. Guess how many nice brass engines were offered as compared to new offerings of moderately priced plastic or cast metal engines.

People get into this hobby because they're interested in trains. Nobody (and certainly not a kid) does a cost/benefit analysis comparing the relative merits of one hobby over another. If kids aren't interested in trains these days, the hobby is going to die. Period. Lower prices won't save it, nor will they bring in additional model railroaders. The Baby Boomers who now appear to be the financial backbone of the hobby were once on the poorer end of the economic spectrum and couldn't afford the higher end goodies the hobby offered at that time. When my late father was young, he was dirt poor. When he was the age I am now, he was much better off. That's the way it works for most people. You don't get to start off in the upper income brackets.

Andre

[whitman500]

I think the manufacturers are caught between two opposing forces. On the one hand, there is a large number of baby boomer hobbyists that are in their peak earning years and so it makes perfect sense for the manufacturers to focus their efforts on selling expensive, high-end products liek sound-equipped locos, pre-weathered buildings, etc. The problem, however, is that catering to this market simultaneously limits the growth of the hobby since new, younger hobbyists don't have the money to buy these products. For the manufacturers the issue is that doing the right thing in the near-term could prove to be disastrous in the long-term since the big spending baby boomers will eventually grow old and pass on and there aren't enough new, younger hobbyists to replace them.

I'm not trying to argue that the manufacturers are being irrational since on an NPV basis it may make sense to maximize profits for the next several years even if the result is long-term decline but for the hobby it is not a good thing in the long-term.

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MAbruce

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrechapelon
It's not the manufacturers who are to blame for whatever perceived wrongs are going on.

QUOTE: Mantua finally killed itself because it tried to make "collectors items" out of items where the basic tooling was in excess of 50 years old and bore (at best) only a vague resemblance to prototype. That's got to be one of the stupidest blunders in this hobby.

So you first tell us it's not the manufactures fault for what's been going on in the industry, and then you turn around and give us an example of how a manufacturer committed one of the stupidest blunders in history????

May I suggest you re-read your posts before you hit the “post reply” button next time?

QUOTE: Blaming the manufacturers may make you feel better, but you're shooting at the wrong target with an obsolete weapon while wearing blinders in a dense fog.

Andre

After reading your post(s), I wonder who's really in the dense fog wearing blinders firing away with a musket at an airplane?

Yeah, Mantua committed a major blunder. That's Mantua, not all the manufacturers in the business who, if some are to be believed, are out to rob us blind and then sell us the white walking stick after they kick our feet out from under us. One manufacturer does not an industry make. Trying to pass off as collectibles items made with 50 plus year old tooling is just plain stupid. Mantua was faced with a choice and made a really bad one. It happens.

As opposed to Mantua, there's Walthers, which started out at roughly the same time and not only is still in business, but is probably the largest single manufacturer in the business in the US as well as the largest distributor. Well..... maybe calling Walthers a manufacturer is stretching it, since I believe all that stuff is "outsourced". Nonetheless, Walthers is a resounding success. Walthers understands the business.

As I said before, model railroad manufacturers are subject to the same economic forces as anyone else and since it's a small business with a small and highly segmented market, it's more vulnerable than most. Let's face it, we don't NEED this stuff, we WANT it and when push comes to shove we can do without it. Try doing without food, clothing and shelter.

If you don't want to pay the price, don't buy it. Just quit complaining about it. Or, you could try one of those futile one day boycotts like people have tried to use against the oil companies. "Hey everybody, on the Xth of Y, let's all not buy gasoline and see how they like it.". Yeah, right. I hate to tell you this, guys, but 6 days out of 7, I don't buy gasoline, so 6 days out of 7 am I boycotting gasoline? Or that inane "Buy Nothing Day" (the day after Thanksgiving when the Christmas buying season "officially" starts). Oh yeah, that's effective. I don't go near any store the day after Thanksgiving. It's not because I support "Buy Nothing Day", but because I'd rather have a root canal or run with the bulls at Pamplona than face the maddened hordes at the mall.

And just as an aside, I find the dire predictions of the hobby's imminent demise intensely amusing. There's more stuff available in greater variety than at any time in the hobby's history. Virtually every diesel model ever made has been done (sometimes multiple times) by various manufacturers. The explosion in the number of well detailed, smooth running (and often sound equipped) steam locomotives since Bachmann introduced the Spectrum 2-8-0 in 1998 is just phenomenal. You don't expand into a shrinking market. Not if you want to stay in business anyway. You don't make more buggy whips in a bigger variety in a society rapidly converting to the automobile. Nor do you invest considerable sums into a start up venture like Broadway Limited to sell hobby products into a dying hobby.

The problem with hobby is not price. It's the fact that so much is available, people actually have to think about what they're going to buy next and allocate their expenditures accordingly. That hasn't always been the case.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. THIS IS THE GOLDEN AGE of the model railroad hobby. Enjoy it while it lasts.

Andre

[GAPPLEG]

I really welcome Atlas's trainman series, if they are decent, I buy what I can get and repaint anyway, I'll detail what I want to detail myself, I don't need a manufacturer to do that for me. It's hard to get undecorated units anymore.

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

Well, I happen to agree with Andre. We ARE the market, and they provide what we tell them we'll buy. How? With our wallets. Some don't have the money, and they are the losers, but no one ever compelled a company to stay in business to satisfy customer demand at the expense of the corporation.

The problem, Selector, that so many seem to fail to acknowledge, is that most of the current manufacturers are not aiming at the WE but instead are producing for a select well-heeled segment of the hobby. The marketing strategy currently in place demands that items be soldout almost as soon as they come on shore. Historically, the average hobbyist has alway bought on impulse and assumed the item of his desire would be there when either he really wanted it or could afford it. As I alluded to previously, in the past the makers of mrr items were mainly hobbyists themselves and understood this, stocking their products to be available longterm. That era has past and we now see very limited runs and a "buy it now or lose" mentality. This only works for a relatively small percentage of hobbyists since, as the prices continue to grow yearly, the wages most hobbyists are not in any way keeping pace. In the long run, the hobby is going to suffer greatly from this. Today we are starting to see major manufacturers fall by the wayside, particularly in Europe where they have indeed priced themselves out of business (read the comments of those corporation leaders). Some are attempting to re-organize and return but this will be only temporary. Stateside you are going to see a number of further companies drop out or be absorbed by 2010. So far only Atlas appears to have given consideration to perpetuating the hobby by introducing affordable locos and rolling stock of constant availability. If others do not follow relatively soon, model railroading as a fairly widely enjoyed, viable hobby, will be gone before 2025.

CNJ831

[SpaceMouse]

Another way to save money is to trade and sell your stuff. No, I don't mean on eBay, that's the hard way. I mean with each other. When it comes to trusting people, this hobby has some of the tightest butt people out there. And the stakes aren't that high.

For instance, in Cowboy Action Shooting, guys trade and sell guns to each other on line all the time and no one gets ripped off. The last one I got was a Sharps .45-70 that I paid $1100 sight unseen. It is a great gun.

Here, people are so afraid of being ripped off by people that they talk to every day that they won't consider trading coaches because the other person might steal their identity because they have their address.

It's just sad.

[SpaceMouse]

I started out with a bonus check and blew through it very quickly spending money vary inappropriately--meaning buying stuff I ended up not needing or wanting. Since then I've turned into Joe cheap.

Now, I go to construction sites and get pieces of 2" foam. I have enough now o do all the mountains in my basement, I've salvaged the wood for my benchwork.

My structures I get off eBay in "lots" and end up spending around $3-4 structure. I don't just buy anything, but look for the hidden treasures. I got 4 craftsmen kits for $12 because of the way the ad was listed.

I then spend 10 hours or so on each tricking them out with paint and scenic grasses.

I pay $3 per car of rolling stock by rooting out deals at Train Shows.

Something's there's no getting around--like my Digitrax Zephyr. But other things--get creative. It's more productive than complaining.

[selector]

Well, I happen to agree with Andre. We ARE the market, and they provide what we tell them we'll buy. How? With our wallets. Some don't have the money, and they are the losers, but no one ever compelled a company to stay in business to satisfy customer demand at the expense of the corporation. Maybe in the old USSR, but not elsewhere.
We vote with our cash, and they capitalize on the the undertstanding that if we decline to buy what they offer, they lose. If nothing toy train related can be sold in sufficient numbers, your darned right the industry will collapse. And it should. Yes, it would be a pity, but it would be a fact. We'd all move to wood carving.

So, Andre is in no fog. He is clearly stating what others seem to feel is an infringement on their God-given right to have really nice hobby stuff at an affordable price. Sorry, but when trains become truly unaffordable for me, I had better have a fallback. So should you.