NittanyLion ATLANTIC CENTRAL NittanyLion The only distinction I'll draw is it makes sense when a guy in his garage making small production says "I'm retiring, buy while you can" and leading with that. To me, having employees means you probably should be leading with finding a buyer first. Leaves an awkward elephant when your retirement puts others out of work. Besides, retirement doesn't mean you have to cease operating. Just now you're the owner while someone else gets the heartburn managing. So if you own a business where the fixed assets are valuable with or without the company, and possibly the value of those fixed assets is a major portion of your retirement fund, your suggesting that rather than take your money out, by selling the business or shutting it down and sell off the assets, you are some how obligated to trust someone else to run it and guard your retirement money for you? Sheldon Obligated? No. Your company, do what you want to do within the bounds of the law. But that still makes me think it is vaguely selfish to put your own company out of business and a few people out of work so that you can retire, if there's an avenue open to do otherwise. And if I'm injecting my own personal perferences it there, I can't imagine starting a business knowing and intending that it will end with me.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL NittanyLion The only distinction I'll draw is it makes sense when a guy in his garage making small production says "I'm retiring, buy while you can" and leading with that. To me, having employees means you probably should be leading with finding a buyer first. Leaves an awkward elephant when your retirement puts others out of work. Besides, retirement doesn't mean you have to cease operating. Just now you're the owner while someone else gets the heartburn managing. So if you own a business where the fixed assets are valuable with or without the company, and possibly the value of those fixed assets is a major portion of your retirement fund, your suggesting that rather than take your money out, by selling the business or shutting it down and sell off the assets, you are some how obligated to trust someone else to run it and guard your retirement money for you? Sheldon
NittanyLion The only distinction I'll draw is it makes sense when a guy in his garage making small production says "I'm retiring, buy while you can" and leading with that. To me, having employees means you probably should be leading with finding a buyer first. Leaves an awkward elephant when your retirement puts others out of work. Besides, retirement doesn't mean you have to cease operating. Just now you're the owner while someone else gets the heartburn managing.
The only distinction I'll draw is it makes sense when a guy in his garage making small production says "I'm retiring, buy while you can" and leading with that. To me, having employees means you probably should be leading with finding a buyer first. Leaves an awkward elephant when your retirement puts others out of work.
Besides, retirement doesn't mean you have to cease operating. Just now you're the owner while someone else gets the heartburn managing.
So if you own a business where the fixed assets are valuable with or without the company, and possibly the value of those fixed assets is a major portion of your retirement fund, your suggesting that rather than take your money out, by selling the business or shutting it down and sell off the assets, you are some how obligated to trust someone else to run it and guard your retirement money for you?
Sheldon
Obligated? No. Your company, do what you want to do within the bounds of the law.
But that still makes me think it is vaguely selfish to put your own company out of business and a few people out of work so that you can retire, if there's an avenue open to do otherwise. And if I'm injecting my own personal perferences it there, I can't imagine starting a business knowing and intending that it will end with me.
What do you do for a living?
I restore historic houses. I only have one direct employee. I have taught a lot of people a lot about my craft.
I have been self employed most of my life. But I have no interest in employing a lot of people or leaving a "legacy".
My legacy will be the houses I saved, and the knowledge I passed on.
But my "company" will end when I retire........
Perhaps if someone steps in to continue the line they willl fix the products to use DCC instead a stand alone system that doesnt really work.
And they say MILLENIALS are entitled.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
My father had a mens store and when he died after a brief and tragic battle with cancer, my mother sold it to the manager, who didn't have the money to buy it outright. He was supposed to buy it over time. In clothing, you have to buy several months in advance, what you think people will want to wear next season. He didn't have that skill. The store, with my father's name still on it, did less and less business. We witnessed the quality, formerly associated with our name, disappear.There were other variables, the rise of Men's Warehouse and the deterioration of the neighborhood. But bottom line, all the employees were laid off, my mother never got the full value of the businees and Rite Aid expanded into the space so customers had to go somewhere else.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
I guess to some, a business venture is soley created to earn money. And once you want to leave said business, you take everything legally yours with you.
Others want to leave a legacy, to see what they've spent years building continue to expand.
Obviously Wolf has every right to just shut down MTH, but I guess in the "apparent current view" that John describes about current business practices, it just seems a harsh way to squeeze as much money out of your retirement as possible. If Bill Gates decided to simply destroy Windows 10 and everything Microsoft owned if he decided to retire, it would strike up a lot of controversy. Obviously comparing a small business to something as major as Microsoft isn't fair, but having MTH just fall off the face of the Earth would not only lead to employees loosing their jobs and benefits, but also customers loosing warrenty, parts, and new locos. But as others have stated very clearly, his company, his decision.
I find it very likely that Wolf will find a buyer, but the message has a tone that sound like his retirement date is more important than the fate of his company, which implies that he doesn't care much about MTH itself. (not to say that retirement isn't important)
Everyone already stated their clear opinion on the matter, so Im not sure why some are trying to change others' opinion. At the end of the day, our opinion on the matter is irrelevant.
Whatever Wolf decides to do, I hope he finds value in continuing the company, the company with his own name, the company he spent decades building.
--------------------
Im sure there are more patents expiring, but I couldn't find any more, with my limited knowledge on patent searching. I am very interested in how other companies may incorperate certain characteristics of MTH engines they previously couldn't due to patents.
Charles
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling the PRR & NYC in HO
Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/@trainman440
Instagram (where I share projects!): https://www.instagram.com/trainman440
Overmod What does the '278 patent have to do with exhaust synchronization, other than modulating exhaust to a signal (which was not novel in 2001)? Surely he's not going to try claiming he invented modulating a smoke machine with a digital signal? BLI is welcome to a patent -- or an infringement without suit -- for 'chuff' sound generation proportional to motor voltage but not timed prototypically to correspond with actual valve-gear actuation. (I, among others, have documented prior art for using a synthesizer or bank of tapes to produce exhaust sound proportional to speed, load, and valve-gear position.)
What does the '278 patent have to do with exhaust synchronization, other than modulating exhaust to a signal (which was not novel in 2001)? Surely he's not going to try claiming he invented modulating a smoke machine with a digital signal?
BLI is welcome to a patent -- or an infringement without suit -- for 'chuff' sound generation proportional to motor voltage but not timed prototypically to correspond with actual valve-gear actuation. (I, among others, have documented prior art for using a synthesizer or bank of tapes to produce exhaust sound proportional to speed, load, and valve-gear position.)
From posting back at the time, I thought the main contention with QSI/BLI was the inclusion of BEMF and the scale speed option to make the loco go a specific speed at a given speed step, rather than just arbitrary numbers. IE< on DCS, if you set the control to 30, the loco goes 30 smph, not whatever speed it happens to run on step 30.
But using BEMF - that one was just another example of the broken patent system in this country. BEMF was used to control motor speed long before MTH - he just added "for a model train control system" and got it patented like it was something novel.
And indeed - timing the chuff to the drivers is old hat. And not just when using synthesized tapes ala PFM sound system - there were onboard sound systems pre-DCC that did it too. If anyone invented chuff cams, it's probably Herb Chaudierre. His early experimental systems are what evolved into the commercial PFM sound system.
That's surely not the ONLY MTH patent expiring soon - there must be some patents on DCS as well.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Tinplate Toddler ATLANTIC CENTRAL Lionel developed NORTH AMERICAN 3 rail O gauge. Although not quite sure, I´d even go beyond that. If I am not wrong, Lionel introduced electric (model) trains as early as 1903, long before Märklin or Bing did. O gauge electric trains were made by either manufacturer starting in the post WW I-era.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Lionel developed NORTH AMERICAN 3 rail O gauge.
Although not quite sure, I´d even go beyond that. If I am not wrong, Lionel introduced electric (model) trains as early as 1903, long before Märklin or Bing did. O gauge electric trains were made by either manufacturer starting in the post WW I-era.
Bing, at least, was doing O gauge as early as 1895. Märklin sometime between 1895 and 1901. So they probably both beat Lionel to the punch.
ATLANTIC CENTRALLionel developed NORTH AMERICAN 3 rail O gauge.
Happy times!
Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)
"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"
wjstixAs someone mentioned, MTH took over a major S-scale line a few years back, if no one takes that line over I believe it could be a major loss for S-gaugers.
MTH never really promoted or developed S. What they did was rerun the SHS track and some of the SHS rolling stock and engines, in some cases with new road names. But they never developed new products. So while I don't like to see them go, the real loss was SHS going out of business.
Paul
If Mike really wanted his employees to have the company he could have found a way. The announcement would have read, I am retiring in 2021 but in the meantime have sold the company to a loyal group of employees. Where there is a will there is a way.
Reality is, he can and will do what he wants and is entitled to that because he is the owner. No matter what folks feel about "socially" conscious business very few of those succeed. He is following what is acceptable business practice and as been said prior, he could shut down before Xmas as is his right. If he was in Wisconsin and I am sure some other states and is over a certain employee count he would need to give either a 60 or 90 day warning to his employees. At least he is not using Covid19 as an excuse but I am sure if he is an astute business owner took the perks given out during the pandemic.
life is tough but no where is it written a business owner has to be a good guy.
TomO
wjstix ATLANTIC CENTRAL Lionel invented O gauge, now it will be just them and Bachmann pretty much. Actually, Marklin invented 0 ('zero' or 'zed') gauge c.1900. There are a fair number of O scale manufacturers. Atlas makes engines, track, cars etc. for both two- and three-rail O scale. There are other two-rail manufacturers too, O gauge isn't all three-railers. As someone mentioned, MTH took over a major S-scale line a few years back, if no one takes that line over I believe it could be a major loss for S-gaugers. Jeff Otto, whose HO gauge Minnesota iron ore hauling railroad has been in MR, Great Model Railroads etc., has said that his MTH DMIR Yellowstones are the best engines he's ever owned.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Lionel invented O gauge, now it will be just them and Bachmann pretty much.
Actually, Marklin invented 0 ('zero' or 'zed') gauge c.1900.
There are a fair number of O scale manufacturers. Atlas makes engines, track, cars etc. for both two- and three-rail O scale. There are other two-rail manufacturers too, O gauge isn't all three-railers.
As someone mentioned, MTH took over a major S-scale line a few years back, if no one takes that line over I believe it could be a major loss for S-gaugers.
Jeff Otto, whose HO gauge Minnesota iron ore hauling railroad has been in MR, Great Model Railroads etc., has said that his MTH DMIR Yellowstones are the best engines he's ever owned.
No fooling. Ok, if you want to nit pick, Lionel developed NORTH AMERICAN 3 rail O gauge.
I know all about all the other O gauge manufacturers and 2 rail O, etc, etc.
Remember. I have been at this 50 years and sold model trains for a decade.
Glad Jeff likes his locos. That's just one item.
That's all for now, I could say a lot more, busy making money....
ATLANTIC CENTRALLionel invented O gauge, now it will be just them and Bachmann pretty much.
BigDaddy Changing the subject away from where it is headed. What do the patents cover? I would think an individual model would be a copyright, not a patent.
Changing the subject away from where it is headed. What do the patents cover? I would think an individual model would be a copyright, not a patent.
Im sure they had more than one, but the one you can find all over the internet is this one(because of the bli lawsuit):
https://patents.justia.com/patent/6280278
Basically covers chuff sync and smoke production...
Issued in 2001, It expires in 20 years, so 2021.
As for the current topic:
Cheers!
ndbprrI may be wrong but when you enter a market using lawyers and the courts I will never support you.
MTH resp. BLI were not the only ones. Some years ago, Märklin sued Piko for copying their ICE3 model. Märklin lost the case and certainly a number of customers.
ndbprr I may be wrong but when you enter a market using lawyers and the courts I will never support you.
Wikipedia has a discussion of this, for those who were not in the hobby at the time, like me. I didn't know there was that much money in train manufacturing.
Getting back to the original topic I have never bought and. Would never consider anything by mth. I may be wrong but when you enter a market using lawyers and the courts I will never support you. My way or the highway works in both directions.
Attuvian Sheldon, ... responsible businesses do not just provide jobs and products or services, but are morally beholden as servants to the will and needs of both employees and customers...
Sheldon,
... responsible businesses do not just provide jobs and products or services, but are morally beholden as servants to the will and needs of both employees and customers...
If he does think that way, it's very unfortunate. Businesses can only be self-serving. The very best serve themselves by being smart about the way they recruit, train, and retain their human resources. The only moral conviction of a business should be to be successful in their service or market. There's no 'beholden' about it...at all. At best, it's a successful negotiated settlement between the needs and druthers of a propsective client or employee and what the company needs to succeed.
Attuvian ...This is the apparent current view as is readily evident in growing corporate response to current events...
...This is the apparent current view as is readily evident in growing corporate response to current events...
More is the pity because they aren't often aware that they do themselves, and those who accuse them of a perceived slight, more harm than they understand. In fact, and I won't be dragged into a debate about this, their "penitential" actions are patently racist, so much so that it's embarrassing to those of us who do understand.
Attuvian ...The notion of an owner not requiring at least the tacit approval of either group prior to making a business decision is becoming passe. Fasten your seatbelts! John
...The notion of an owner not requiring at least the tacit approval of either group prior to making a business decision is becoming passe. Fasten your seatbelts!
John
Not approval, tacit or overtly stated, but agreement in principal if the negotiated settlement I mentioned earlier is to withstand the changes about to be imposed on all concerned. However, a plant can be closed willy nilly (unless the current authority forbids it by law). Fair play/being 'nice' would require some notice, but it could be closed a full three days prior to Christmas, announced at noon on the third day, and it would be entirely within the company's purview to do it.
Attuvian Sheldon, With all due respect to our poster, perhaps he has become convinced by the spirit of the age that responsible businesses do not just provide jobs and products or services, but are morally beholden as servants to the will and needs of both employees and customers. This is the apparent current view as is readily evident in growing corporate response to current events. The notion of an owner not requiring at least the tacit approval of either group prior to making a business decision is becoming passe. Fasten your seatbelts! John
With all due respect to our poster, perhaps he has become convinced by the spirit of the age that responsible businesses do not just provide jobs and products or services, but are morally beholden as servants to the will and needs of both employees and customers. This is the apparent current view as is readily evident in growing corporate response to current events. The notion of an owner not requiring at least the tacit approval of either group prior to making a business decision is becoming passe. Fasten your seatbelts!
Not really a new idea, on January 5th, 1914 Henry Ford doubled wages in his factory over night, from $2.50/day to $5.00/day, because he believed he could actually make more money, better cars, and help the workers. He was right. The first Model T sold for $850 in 1908, the last one sold for $360 in 1927.
Companies don't exist without being responsive to customers and employees.
And don't get me started on what is wrong with corporate America today.......
But no matter how big MTH seems to some of you, like most every model train company, it is a small privately held business, and owners retire and close businesses all the time when they can't find people to purchase them at a reasonable price.
If Mike Wolf can get more selling off the assets than selling the "company", then that is what he should do - it is his, he built it.
I have my opinions about his business, only some of which I have shared in this thread.
But he does not owe anyone anything.
I'm 63 and I have been self employed most of my life. I chose to be in businesses where I had few or no employees. And if I count each "venture", I am on business number six. And I am in the process of getting out of venture #5, which has operated at the same time as venture #6 for the last 25 years.
Wolf359 riogrande5761 Well, what if the owner died and the company shut down? That ain't right either but the dead man will be unable to respond to charges of unfairness. And btw, what about the owner of the Chinese factory AFFA that suddenly closed it's doors at the end of July 2018 throwing a bunch of US model train companies out of ability to make trains? Unfair but it was his factory. That is true, but beyond the owner's control. (One can't exactly prevent oneself from dying if their time is up, or stop a foreign factory from doing something stupid) However, to willfully shutdown a successful company and put people out of work and make it harder on the consumer to get what they want at a reasonable price is wrong in my book. But, that's just my
riogrande5761 Well, what if the owner died and the company shut down? That ain't right either but the dead man will be unable to respond to charges of unfairness. And btw, what about the owner of the Chinese factory AFFA that suddenly closed it's doors at the end of July 2018 throwing a bunch of US model train companies out of ability to make trains? Unfair but it was his factory.
Well, what if the owner died and the company shut down? That ain't right either but the dead man will be unable to respond to charges of unfairness. And btw, what about the owner of the Chinese factory AFFA that suddenly closed it's doors at the end of July 2018 throwing a bunch of US model train companies out of ability to make trains? Unfair but it was his factory.
That is true, but beyond the owner's control. (One can't exactly prevent oneself from dying if their time is up, or stop a foreign factory from doing something stupid) However, to willfully shutdown a successful company and put people out of work and make it harder on the consumer to get what they want at a reasonable price is wrong in my book. But, that's just my
Nice post Tom!
Wolf359 That is true, but beyond the owner's control. (One can't exactly prevent oneself from dying if their time is up, or stop a foreign factory from doing something stupid) However, to willfully shutdown a successful company and put people out of work and make it harder on the consumer to get what they want at a reasonable price is wrong in my book. But, that's just my
So, did you miss the part in the announcement where he said he's working on a purchase by employees?Or should he just keep working in a situation he no longer enjoys, just to please you?We all get to retire. Good for him. If you don't like it, why don't you buy the company.
...and make sure that air bags will fully deploy.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Obviously you have never owned or run a business.
I've never owned an MTH locomotive but I did purchase their entire 10-car set of the '40 NYC 20th Century Limited passenger cars and they are terrific. I was hoping that MTH would release a few more with different car names so that I could acheive a 16-car consist w/o duplication. If another manufacturer purchased those dies and re-released them with the same quality and capacitor lighting module installed, I'd be all over that.
Tom
I'm sure many will be affected one way or another by MTH closing and Mike retiring, but for me it will be nary a ripple. He cut too wide a swath in the hobby, without reading it properly. What I mean is that, while he had been doing well in O as a competitor to Lionel and others, he hadn't kept up with recent developments and the culture in HO sufficiently to anticipate that he was going to rub a LOT OF US the wrong way by being so rigid about DCS. I can't say I know all the facts, but if his share of the HO market reached 5-8%, I'd be surprised. He'd have done much better if he'd simply inserted himself as Rapido did some years back, and maybe popped out a gee-whiz development every other year.
I don't know if it was outright hubris, or maybe he felt flush with both cash and success in his O Gauge enterprises and simply felt that he would do well in HO. Maybe some of both. Personally, I think the hobby would have been happier and better served had he taken a different approach. And for his fans in the larger gauge, lo siento.