Trains.com

UP Making Friends The Hard Way

8655 views
70 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: Roanoke, VA
  • 2,019 posts
Posted by BigJim on Saturday, August 6, 2005 1:37 AM
You guys can have your wimpy little four bangers. Give me a Lotus 79 and I'll win the World Championship!

.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, August 6, 2005 5:17 AM
No point in focusing this thread on personalities, since that is precisely the tactic UP's defenders prefer in order to get such discussions deleted. Far better to just stick to the topic; keep the heat turned up; and continue to inform others, in a reasonable way, of the detrimental way UP's policies are impacting the model railroad and railfanning community.

And, of course, it's important to repeatedly remind the various manufacturers that, while they may elect to continue making UP-related products, they should treat the rest of the hobby fairly by passing on those licensing costs--royalties and all the associated administrative costs--only to those who consume those specific products (which should, in fact, facilitate their record keeping). Over time, that will have an impact, especially since so many hobbyists are very price sensitive. Aristo-Craft, Kato, and a few others are already following that course, and all others who intend to produce UP-related items need to be continually reminded to do the same.
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: North of Philadelphia
  • 2,372 posts
Posted by tmcc man on Saturday, August 6, 2005 6:34 AM
BigJim, my favorite is the lotus Espirit, with NOS though, i will still beat you., but if you give me the Lamborghini Murceliago you will be tasting my exhaust
Colin from prr.railfan.net
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, August 6, 2005 7:09 AM
Let's definitely keep it friendly over here on this Board. It is actually relaxing to read the posts here, rather than the blood-boiling that one finds on some of the other boards. We can all agree to disagree, or agree to agree, or whatever, but I agree with Allan on his idea to keep it friendly. I do, respectfully disagree with his idea that higher prices for UP stuff should only be paid for by the people buying the UP stuff. I see his point, and it's generally a good one, but where I disagree is that I don't see how his intended outcome will be the result. It's not like if Lionel, Atlas, MTH, K-Line, and Weaver charge $5-$10 more for UP items that you will see 50,000 angry train hobbyists surrounding the UP headquarters building with picket signs and chanting "No Way ! No Way ! We're just not going to PAY". I just don't see it happeneing. (Sorry Allan !) I think that the train manufacturers should sell good merchandise, at a reasonable profit, and treat their customers like human beings.

But anyway, let's keep it civil and kind over on this forum. As the great philosopher and musician Phil Lesh once said, "In heavy times such as these, it is important to remember to act with some grace, so that we don't just survive, but do it in style."
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: North of Philadelphia
  • 2,372 posts
Posted by tmcc man on Saturday, August 6, 2005 7:14 AM
thanx Reading and PA RR, i was finished but thanx for that truly.[^]
Colin from prr.railfan.net
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, August 6, 2005 8:02 AM
Reading and PA RR:

I don't for a minute think that charging a premium for UP models will cause UP to reverse its policy--only more enlightened and public-spirited leadership in Omaha can do that.

But I do believe the following:

1. Charging a premium for UP items is both logical and fair. UP is collecting the bounty, and the manufacturers are left holding the bag accounting for those amounts. Furthermore, there are a good many of us who are very unhappy with the UP's heavy-handed approach and who do not want to be supporting it through our purchases, even if the dollar amounts are modest.

2. A lot of newcomers to the hobby will quickly see that UP items cost more than identical items decorated in some other livery (as they do now in some cases, based on inquiries I've seen posted on various forums and boards). Unless they already have a preferred roadname (unlikely in the case of many novices), they'll opt for the lower-cost item, all other things being equal. This will help to reduce UP's "take" from the manufacturer's till.

3. As demand for UP items decreases (due to their greater cost), fewer of these items will be sought, and fewer will be made. It won't adversely impact the manufacturers all that much because there are plenty of roadnames for them to choose from in most cases, but it will reduce the overall visibility of UP throughout the hobby. That, in turn, will have a ripple effect that will continually reduce the viability of UP products. The only folks hurt by this would be the avid UP supporters/modelers, but that's the way it should be, shouldn't it?

As I noted earlier, some manufacturers are already pricing UP items differently than the same items decorated for other roads. I applaud that policy, and hope that a good many hobbyists will support those manufacturers who are following that course.

The ideal solution would have been for the hobby industry--including dealers--to have come together to fight this nonsense--particularly as it relates to long-gone fallen flags--but I guess there's too much division and competitiveness in the industry nowadays for that to have happened. They have no unified voice, and that hurts them in this case and will likely hurt them all even more as time goes by. You can already see it happening on an almost daily basis, as more and more mom-and-pop hobby dealerships fall by the wayside. Little effective and repetitive promotion of the hobby by the industry; a declining number of hobby retailers; consolidation and/or bankruptcy by model makers in various scales; rampant litigation; a glut of product that can't be absorbed by the market; continually rising prices; and a market itself that is decreasing in terms of its real numbers because next to nothing is being done to effectively grow the hobby. None of that bodes particularly well for the future, and this ridiculous policy from UP just makes a bad situation worse.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, August 6, 2005 12:49 PM
Finally some logic! You make a lot of sense, but how much is UP charging compared to any other company? I don't know, but would love to find out. If it is unreasonable, UP is just shooting themselves in the foot. However it is possible some companies are using licensing costs as an excuse and charging more for UP to make more profit on a very popular road name. I notice Athearn doesn't charge more for UP and with their low price they would loose a greater margin, but other companies who charge more charge much more for UP even though the licensing is a much smaller % of the cost. I meant no insults, but people back east often ask how far from Des Moines, they forget this state is here, so we make a lot of jokes about people back east.
James[C):-)]
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, August 6, 2005 5:05 PM
The UP fees are basically defined in their licensing agreement, which is (or was) posted on their web site. The fee charged depended on a variety of factors, and the record-keeping requirement was ridiculous.

Most railroads with licening arrangements do not charge royalties (or, at least, haven't to this point). Most are simply interested in maintaining some measure of quality control over products made bearing their trademarks. In other words, they want the right to "sign-off" on a product before it is produced and sold. Definitely nothing unreasonable about that. The same applies to a great many other major corporations. Some I have worked with on licensing agreements in the past include Coca-Cola, Disney, Mattel, Harley Davidson, United Features Syndicate (Peanuts), Remington, and a number of others. Never paid fees to or royalties to any of them, and none ever asked for any in their agreements.

But let me tell you one firm that did want royalties on a book I wrote: Lionel, when it was under *** Maddox's control.

The only other one I can recall in my experience was Ty--the Beanie Baby folks. And we turned that one down. You can see what eventually--rather quickly, in fact--happened to the Beanie Baby empire as the result of their heavy-handed approach on licensing with numerous other entities.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, August 7, 2005 10:05 AM
Here is what I found at the website (bolded by myself):

The Union Pacific licensing program is designed to allow manufacturers of branded merchandise to use the names, symbols and heralds of the company in an accurate and successful manner. This includes the constituent and historic railroads that currently make up the Union Pacific system. Licensees will receive program support from the company and will benefit from the company's investment in a much larger licensing and branding program.

Highlights of the program include:

A rate structure for model train manufacturers that is significantly below industry licensing standards. For example, on a $10 item royalty rates are pennies.
Continuing support of licensees with graphic standard compliance and new product introductions.
Access to trademarks and service marks of the Union Pacific Railroad Company and other railroads that are now a part of the modern Union Pacific system, which are among the oldest and most valuable trademarks in the nation.
The opportunity to benefit from Union Pacific's increased investments in public awareness advertising and programs.

[;)]Now that I have seen this I am shocked why they make pennies or on hundreds of dollar items even "gasp" dollars, what greed. And look what we are paying for how dare you charge modelers for this! The last time I saw greed this bad was with bush and his oil buddies.[;)]
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, August 7, 2005 11:10 AM
Nice bit of "selective citation" there, Lotus! Try reading and citing the entire agreement, not just a few pr quotes that support your position. There's a whole lot more involved than just the royalty fees (and when was the last time you ever saw a $10 item in O gauge?).

Licensing arrangements have been around for many years. Most folks are already aware of that. But doesn't the obvious fact that this new UP policy has created a widespread furor in the ranks of hobbyists, raifans, and the supporting industry itself give you at least a hint that something about the UP policy is very different from the norm? Do you truly believe that industry leaders, the NMRA, the hobby retail industry, and a good number of railfans and hobbyists have generated all this discussion simply because they don't like the UP? [:-^]
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, August 8, 2005 1:36 PM
First of all that is every thing on the UP website I have read it all; while licensing fee is normal an extra royalty fee of a few pennies isn't going to make a big deal. Even at O scale prices a few pennies won't be more than a few dollars. How has UP caused all of this, since most people have licensing? I think all the hubbub is caused by people who assume anything UP does is just for greed, UP is out to get modelers, and UP is evil. People spreading this idea are giving UP a bad reputation. UP is not doing anything wrong.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month