Would "Patronizing" Be A Good Descriptor of 21st Century Train Production?

[IDM1991]

I think it is sad to see over a century of toy trains (i.e. tangible miniatures designed and manufactured by talented craftsmen at Lionel and other trainmakers) reduced to the status of being little more than a brand (i.e. an abstract noun used to capitalize on a consumer's emotion when buying and using a particular product).  Although I am not an operator of prewar material, I point to the trains and accessories being manufactured by MTH under the name "Lionel Corporation Tinplate" as an example of this mentality.  A few years back (as in 2006-2008), a few prewar-style premium sets appeared in Lionel's annual consumer catalogue.  One would think that that Lionel is quite capable of remanufacturing its own products, even if tooling is limited.  This isn't unique to tinplate reproductions, either.  For a number of years, Williams (or Williams By Bachmann) has put together a number of postwar outfits (as if Lionel wasn't capable of doing so itself).

One would think that that Lionel is quite capable of remanufacturing its own products, even if tooling is limited.  In many respects, this practice would, in theory at least, be similar to General Motors placing a Ford oval on their products or Honda selling sedans with a Buick tri-shield on them, as if Ford and Buick are little more than quaint brands from long, long ago.  The same idea can be applied to a manufacturer's own products.  A few years back (2006-2008), it wasn't uncommon to see Magne-Traction applied to modern locomotives of scale proportions (of course, they were all Diesel locomotives, as though Magne-Traction on a steam locomotive was some sort of category mistake).  As of 2011, Magne-Traction is pretty much limited to postwar reproductions, again, reinforcing the idea that some things in the toy train world are really nothing more than quaint concepts.  The recent anxiety over whether or not Lionel would continue to produce tubular track is a good example, as though us hobbyists who use tubular track (I recieved several extra-long sections of straight track for Christmas of 2010!) are little more than members of a flat-earth society in the world of classic toy trains.

 

I intend this only as a theoretical discussion.  Any opinions?  

[phillyreading]

While Williams sold re-productions of Lionel products they never claimed or used the Lionel name to market them. They were sold as Williams Re-production Line or WRL for short. Also the Luxury Lines name was Williams attemp to compete with some of Lionel's passenger cars.

MTH has been selling Lionel tin plate reproductions with the Lionel name on them, so I guess MTH has an agreement with Lionel to market them as such.

Today Lionel has the decades old name to sell stuff. Not everybody is running down to the hobby store or going to the internet site to buy Atlas or Williams when they know of Lionel Trains.

It is to my understanding that a lot of trains are made in China, most of them are made at the same factory, sometimes just a differant name plate put on. At one time a holding company named Sanda Kan made or marketed things for a few of the major toy train companies, like Lionel and K-Line.

While you mention about cars; Chevrolet has sold Toyotas(GEO Prism=Toyota Corolla) and Subarus(Justy, don't recall the GEO name) under the GEO name brand. I had a 1992 GEO Prism so I know that I could swap Toyota parts on the Prism and they fit perfectly. Also the last three to four years the Chevrolet Nova was made, it was a Toyota Camry in disguise Nice surprise!!

Lee F.

 

[RockIsland52]

IDM1991

I think it is sad to see over a century of toy trains (i.e. tangible miniatures designed and manufactured by talented craftsmen at Lionel and other trainmakers) reduced to the status of being little more than a brand (i.e. an abstract noun used to capitalize on a consumer's emotion when buying and using a particular product)........ 

........I intend this only as a theoretical discussion.  Any opinions?  

Please don't take offense that I only quoted just part of your good post. 

I think what the existing trainmakers would like to do and what they actually can do, and still remain profitable and solvent, is quite a bit different than it was six to seven decades ago when passenger rail transportation and freight transport was king and held the public's fascination while the number of players/manufacturers was less.  Back then kids' and grownups' interests drove the market growth.  Today sadly, kids not so much.  Make, outsource, or leave it on the table and do nothing?  Adapt or die.

Outside of financial constraints, for a good many of us, emotion has played and continues to play a significant role in our particular train purchases, new or pre-owned.  A couple of mistakes by a manufacturer predicting what will move off the shelves at various price points while still retaining a broad-based market appeal is no easy task.

Jack

[Penny Trains]

I think you guys have hit all the major nails nicely and squarely on their heads.  It's about fiscal solvency and those laws that require corporations to pay dividends to their stockholders.  Remember Lehmann Brothers?  (And I don't mean LGB )  All the dividends and bonuses the company was required to pay out while they were going bankrupt?  "Lionel" as an entity is so tied up in legaleeze it's got to be hard to accomplish much of anything that will make us collectors happy.  Add the wonderful economic condition the majority of us are in at the moment and you've got one heck of a sales problem.  So, it appears they're following the path of least resistance to keep their heads afloat.

I'd suggest the best evidence of this was the restructuring of 2009(?) that led to the "Vision Line" and "Signature" catalogs.  Catalogs are easy to produce, my LHS has given them to me for free since the day they opened.  Anyhoo, the Lionel catalogs suddenly took on a whole new look reminiscent of the uber-huge LGB catalogs of recent years.  Granted, the Lionel catalogs aren't hard bound telephone books like the LGB's!   But the new Lionel catalogs are not just a listing of this year's toys anymore either.  They have a certain aire of respectability and quality that speaks to our communal subconscious.  It looks and reads more like a book that's meant to be saved and referenced rather than carried around in your back pocket till it falls apart.  So the catalogs themselves are one area where Lionel has shown true growth.

But what's inside them is what keeps Lionel's doors open.  And in recent years they're top loaded with very expensive locomotives!  Electronics are cheap and fairly easy to produce.  But the pricetags the high tech engines command makes up for other shortfalls.  It's like selling soda pop in a restaurant.  The profit margin on soda fountain drinks is extreme!  So those 5 and 10 cent circuit boards installed in a locomotive that has maybe 20 dollars worth of metal and plastic in it equals a product that you can sell for boocoo bucks.  Obviously many factors go into production overhead, I'm not disputing they exist or even suggesting what those costs may be in respect to the profit margin.  But rather that toy trains are a fairly cheap commodity to produce and still a viable investment option in the 21st century.

Back to the path of least resistance thing, it's the competition between Lionel, MTH and now Atlas O that screams in my face every time I open a catalog from one of those manufacturers.  The "wow factor" has taken over and that's what dictates the catalog contents these days.  Strangely however, Williams by Bachmann has gone the other route.  I don't entirely understand their use of the "collector values" as a marketing tool, it's a radical concept in my opinion.  Maybe Bachmann ought to start producing engines that compete more directly with the current Lionel, MTH and Atlas product listings rather than the Lionels of 1954?  I wonder what that would look like?    What would the "Collector Value" number be if Williams produced a 2-8-8-8-2 like Lionel? 

Anyhoo.  My days of buying current motive power may be limited.  I like the plusses and features the new can motors provide but I just can't afford the engines anymore.  So like many of us who are unemployed I've gone the opposite direction and I repair and rebuild junkers to satisfy my railroad mojo.  So I don't really qualify as a consumer anymore since I buy mostly pre and postwar pieces here in 2011.  The opposite used to be true.

Becky

[wallyworld]

Nearly all of modern toy train production is retrospective, going back fifty to nearly one hundred years ago, copying to one aspect or another of the long ago eras. Unless one is interested in the what largely amounts to the restoration of  the remaining and ever scarcer originals , we are faced with the situation that. Louis Marx,  Mr Cohen  etc are long since gone along with their intangible assets. This is from a consumer perspective. Much of what is produced is a copy of a copy. Sort of a print versus the original painting, and so attribution becomes a moot point.

Compare a motor unit and the internal workings to that of a reproduction and by definition, they are not truly copies of the originals, the outside or appearance mimics the originals in fit and finish but it's only skin deep.

To have a copy of the original, creates a entirely unique context. in terms of classic trains. To dilute this further, they are made in less than a handful of factories in China. The equipment to produce the originals has long since been scattered to the four winds. What we tend to forget is the original market is gone, so what is left is nostalgia by adults or interest in what were once children's toys. They are no longer toys by and large as defined by their original aim, so..by definition perhaps, they have been re purposed. Younger folks are too young to have a nostalgia that dips backward into that era, unless they simply enjoy the uniqueness and variety of what were once kid's toys.

There are makers of original tinplate trains, largely in O gauge, most of them are in Europe, small outputs made by true craftsmen, with a price tag that makes reproduction prices look like a fire sale. bargain..I have seen some of them and they are works of art..beautiful, a Pacific in standard gauge with all the trimmings done better than what was made nearly one hundred years ago.The cost is similar to a very good quality original work of art..surprised?

In the end, what you have for most of us as in the rest of life is a compromise and the same applies to those who make reproductions..we cannot return to 1920 or 1954, simply because it no no longer exists.

For those that are interested in modern tinplate originals , here is a link. Don't be off-put by the title, there are many American prototypes. Be prepared to be awed by their craftsmanship and cost..

http://www.tinplatetimes.com/Modern%20tinplate/Booth3/booth.htm

[RockIsland52]

Good stuff and some interesting observations.  I would like to add this as we look back while we look forward.  

The engines that the older (than me) folk amongst my family and friends like to watch operate and ask for the most, friends my age, my 31 year old son, and my 7 year old granddaughter......are the postwar steamers that have no electronics.....not the FA1s, the GP9, or the U36B, etc.  Is it because of the relative simplicity and visual action of the drivers and the smoke and something they don't ever get to see running in person?

We have quite the selection in the marketplace.  But the old stuff seems to be the main attraction in my (narrow) world.

I think a Polar Express set purchase should get me and mine through another year.  

Jack

[Seayakbill]

I don't believe the market is capable of supporting 2 major players in the tinplate world. If Lionel was to jump in the tinplate market a sizable investment would be needed to compete with MTH.  MTH would have the upper hand as far as available tooling but Lionel would have the name recognition. I think both companies would suffer with neither making a desirable profit to sustain the tinplate line.

Also one must remember that Lionel is owned by Guggenheim Capitol Management, they would question Lionel's decision if it was a significant money loser, Guggenheim has to show a portfolio profit to their investors. Whereas Mike Wolf has no one to answer to but himself if he makes a bad business decision.