soooo, what was this big announcement MTH was going to make...

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by nblum

The appeal has been filed some time ago. I believe routine, mandatory court sanctioned attempts to settle the case before an actual hearing of the appeal are underway or about to get underway.

There will be a settlement very soon with Mike Wolf getting control of Lionel. The Wellspring clients want a fast settlement without further litigation. They already owe 41 mil plus legal fees and damages.

[Anonymous]

Well, *** Maddox left Lionel because he knew he couldn't compete with MTH. He's now at Atlas and he's found out that Atlas O isn't flying. MTH has them beat hands down.

[nblum]

The appeal has been filed some time ago. I believe routine, mandatory court sanctioned attempts to settle the case before an actual hearing of the appeal are underway or about to get underway.

[nblum]

Neil Young isn't a CTT advertiser and doesn't call attention to himself, whereas Mike Wolf is an advertiser and does an excellent job getting his message across? I also believe Richard Kughn had as important or more important an impact on three rail O gauge in the last twenty years as Mike Wolf. Like Mike Wolf he doubled the size of the market, and reinvigorated the interest in three rail O gauge, pretty much saving Lionel from its doldrums in the mid-1980s. I'd rank Mike Wolf tied with Kughn or third after these two guys in terms of importance.

[cjcrescent]

The disscussion of how much money owed to MTH by Lionel still hasn't really been decided has it. Didn't Lionel appeal the verdict? If so nothing has really been decided until the appeals court hears the case and decides. And doesn't this just lead to possibly another appeal and even longer time delays in settlement?

[Anonymous]

Well, why did CTT magazine name Mike Wolf as the most significant person in O gauge since JLC? I believe it was in CTT's 15th anniversary issue. I believed every word I read and so did most open minded people. Even Jerry Williams will praise Mike.

[nblum]

Neil Young will never owe Mike Wolf any money because Lionel is a corporate entity. Mr. Young is insulated from any claims Mike Wolf might make on him. On the other hand Mr. Young is probably distinctly peeved at Mr. Wolf for trying to take away his property with a lawsuit of dubious merit. In any case, Mr. Young, in my opinion, has contributed more importantly to the hobby than Mike Wolf ever will. He was the driving force behind bringing command control and high quality sound to three rail locomotives with his company Liontech. Mike Wolf's company followed that with DCS, six years later, and benefiting from the presence of one of the members of the TMCC design team who went to work for him on DCS.

[Anonymous]

nblum,

I think it would be best that a guy with toy trains in his blood gets ownership of Lionel. Wellspring is nothing but a bunch of bean counters. Neil Young would have to play a lot of concerts and release a dozen albums to pay Mike off.

[nblum]

Mr. Wolf's legal verdict counts pretty much for zero in the purchase price of Lionel. None of Lionel's owners are on the hook for this sum in any case. Wellspring does not own Lionel by the way, they manage the investment. Lionel is owned by the estate/family of Martin Davis, Neil Young and Richard Kughn. I wouldn't take everything Tony Lash says about these issues as gospel. Sometimes he is just blowing smoke :).

In any case, the consolidation of Lionel and MTH may be Mr. Wolf's fondest wish, but it would in all likelihood accelerate the already underway contraction of the three rail train hobby for all sorts of reasons. It would be the saddest day in the history Lionel since the sale of the original company to Roy Cohn's people in the late 1960s, and have similar influence on the industry. So you'd better pray it never happens. If it does there are going to be a lot of dealers out of business over the next five years.

[Anonymous]

I don't think Mr. Wolf will need to borrow any money to get the Lionel name. They already owe him 41 mil plus legal fees and damages. Wellspring will be glad to hand Lionel over to MTH to avoid anymore litigation.

[nblum]

If Mike Wolf actually winds up owning the Lionel name and puts DCS in Lionel locos, he will practically guarantee going bankrupt in the next five years, given the amount of money he would almost certainly need to borrow to own the Lionel name.

[Anonymous]

nblum,
I don't think TMCC will be around much longer according to Tony Lash. My understanding is that Mr. Wolf is prepared to agree to a settlement for the Lionel name and some compensation for the damages to MTH due to the blueprints stolen by Lionel and the Koreans. I would think he would incorporate DCS into any future Lionel engines.

[simon1966]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bangert1

QUOTE: Originally posted by dinwitty

Reading about the HO K4, it has DCS and is DCC compatible.

thats a step in the right direction.

I would be interested in reading the details about the HO K4, but the information has not been posted.

Where did you find out any details and the promise it will run on both DCC and DCS or DC???
Thanks

It was in the literature that they were handing out at the National train show. The HO line was not exactly prominent on the booth, if you walked past the booth without going into the center of it, you would have missed it. The fact that the K4 HO is not mentioned on the MTH web site and the lack of prominence given to the locomotive at the NTS would suggest that any formal marketing effort has not started as yet.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dinwitty

Reading about the HO K4, it has DCS and is DCC compatible.

thats a step in the right direction.

I would be interested in reading the details about the HO K4, but the information has not been posted.

Where did you find out any details and the promise it will run on both DCC and DCS or DC???
Thanks

[nblum]

"The negative stuff you read about MTH are lies. They'll do well in the HO market once people see the high quality of their products and the advantage of DCS."

They said the same about Stalinism :). DCS has many disadvantages too, which is why when a survey was done on the OGRR Forum last year, of the those using command control, 80% were using TMCC only, 10% DCS and TMCC and 10% DCS only. A great testimony to being second to market six years late with a quirky system.

[dinwitty]

Reading about the HO K4, it has DCS and is DCC compatible.

thats a step in the right direction.

DCC is a control system and I could custom make my own, and there are some websites describing just that.

I think we hobbyists are mad because for one BLI had a cool thing in their lokie and it got removed by MTH litigation concerns.

I sometimes grow tired of these lawsuits and its the hobbyist that loses out.

They should find a solution so we can all party and have fun with the trains.

[Anonymous]

Advantage of DCS?

I'm sorry, but I can't see any advantage from where I'm sat - I can buy DCC equipment from any number of manufacturers and it'll work together. I've had no problems with understanding the wiring or the operation of the system. I fail to see how a proprietory system can be advantageous compared to an open standard like DCC. I've not noticed any European manufacturers even mentioning it. Surely if it was as good as it is claimed to be Fleischmann et al would be working like crazy to make their models compatible? All I see right now are more and more models either DCC ready (with a socket) or with a factory-fitted decoder.

[Anonymous]

The negative stuff you read about MTH are lies. They'll do well in the HO market once people see the high quality of their products and the advantage of DCS.

[jfugate]

QUOTE: Originally posted by billoberst

Why not just put all the personal feelings aside and lets see what MTH does in respect to selection and quality models.

Bill:

I'm all for that, as long as said manufacturer doesn't pay shills to keep coming on this list and posting hyperbole.

It's one thing to have us modelers debating the ins and outs of MTH and their product announcements. It's another to have MTH plants keep coming on here and trying to club us over the head with their hype.

If MTH would just *back off* and let the forum discussion continue unfettered, I think we would all appreciate it more.

My 2 cents.

[Anonymous]

Why not just put all the personal feelings aside and lets see what MTH does in respect to selection and quality models. It seems to me the more manufacturers we have producing HO trains the more completive prices will be, not to mention possibly a better selection of models and more competive prices. ( Example) When MTH announced they were going to do the diecast K4 BLI reduced the dealer cost of their K4 to the approximate same dealer price as the MTH model around $50.00) this allowed the dealers to sell the BLI K4 for less. Look what competition has done in the last 2 years for DCC. It's hard to belive we would have the selection we have now in DCC if only a couple of companies were sharing the HO market. MTH has a rep for doing models in the "O" gauge hobby that some other company's were not willing to take a chance on, they know they will have to impress a lot of tough HO hobbyist to make a dent this market and I'm willing to bet we'll see a lot of good models from them in the next couple of years. What do we care who enters HO if it means better selection and prices. If MTH produces poor models that flop the market will take care of them and they will go away as far as HO is concerned.. Thanks Bill

[IRONROOSTER]

QUOTE: Originally posted by AntonioFP45

Bostonrock,

Rely on the U.S court?????

In the past, perhaps but look at what happened recently with the "Eminent Domain" issue thanks to the way the liberal judges on the Supreme Court voted! Downright scary! Even Judge O'Conner had a hissy-fit. ....

Actually, it was more of a conservative vote. The court said it was up to the local jurisdictions (i.e. the states) to decide what the law should be as long as there is just compensation as the Bill of Rights calls for. This is a pretty big win for conservatives who want a strict narrow interpretation of the Constitution and decentralized government . I would have preferred a more liberal result outlawing the use of eminent domain in cases like this one.

As someone once told me - the only thing you get for sure in court is a decision.
Enjoy
Paul

[AntonioFP45]

Bostonrock,

Rely on the U.S court?????

In the past, perhaps but look at what happened recently with the "Eminent Domain" issue thanks to the way the liberal judges on the Supreme Court voted! Downright scary! Even Judge O'Conner had a hissy-fit. If it were possible, Thomas Jefferson would be spinning in his grave. Courts and juries are less predictable than ever and their judgements may or may not be wise or fair. Outcomes seem to be based on how well lawyers can manipulate and twist the facts and the rule of law.

But here, (forgive me for repeating) the MTH vs. Lionel issue is not what has HO and N modelers upset. It's MTH vs. QSI, and all the smelly laundry that came along with it. [B)][V]

There have been some very good posts here, and it's interesting how some of the posts seem to criticize DCC's shortcomings. Fair enough.

Let me look at this as a newbie customer's point of view: (yes I'm still a DCC newbie)

(1) DCC is no longer a new, unproven gimmick.
(2) Its popularity has greatly increased.
(3) Has been around some years now and is more user friendly today.
(4) Well supported by its manufacturers. (Look at TCS's "no questions asked" warranty)
(5) Available for G thru Z scales.
(6) Excellent sound possibilities. New Sound products are hitting the market.
(7) Loads of written info in books and on the web available to help newbies with DCC.

A model railroad club (huge HO layout) that I visited 2 years ago, overall, had virtually "zero" interest in DCC. A lot of old timers saw no use for it. Today, you can walk into that club as a visiting modeler, a member will hand you a DCC wireless controller and let you run his sound equipped locomotive complete with lighting effects. You can blow the horn, and activate the ditch lights while hearing turbo-chargers and dynamic brakes howl as those locomotives struggle with that long train. That's what DCC is all about. [:D][8D]

As a customer, in my opinion, I've seen DCC at work (as well as the occasional glitches). I'm still very impressed by it and will buy the products.

As for DCS in HO? I may be wrong, but based on what I've read:

(1) Haven't seen it yet.
(2) Read of its potential possibilities.
(3) Offers more in sound, such as "Train Station" announcements.
(4) Conflicting arguments posted by O Scale DCS owners on forums: DCS units can operate on dirty track. Other DCS owners say it DCS acts "freaky on dirty track. Which is it?.
(5) DCS, overall is much more expensive than DCC.
(6) It too has its occurences of "electronic glitches".
(7) There are compatibility issues with DCC.
(8) In time, MTH may start incorporating DCC style algorithms or features into DCS, thanks to DCC being "overall" an open platform technology.

So again, in not thinking about MTH's litigation actions, but as a customer at an LHS loaded with DCC items, what incentive would newbie's have with investing in the expensive DCS?

The argument that DCC is too complex for newbie's to understand is rapidly falling by the wayside.

Just my thoughts.

[nblum]

A bit excessive? $40 million dollars represents the entire profits of MTH for a few decades at current rates. Even if you believe the theft of trade secrets story (which many do not), there is no way a few high end locomotives by Lionel caused anything remotely like 40 million dollars in losses to MTH, IMO. The jury was snozzled by MTH's lawyers and Lionel's lawyers obviously did poorly by comparison. MTH's losses of the late 1990s and early 2000s were entirely self-inflicted related to their very, very late addition of command control (in 2002, six years after Lionel), and their poorly managed transition between their PS1 and PS2 locomotive systems. Shot themselves in the foot and are trying to use the courts to bail themselves out, IMO.

[jnichols]

davekelly,

I like your analogy, and I'm guessing it's in reference to the Lionel suit based on the language. I think my only problem with it is that the issue wasn't over a $1.25 picket from a fence, and I doubt a phone call to anyone at Lionel would've done much...

Like I said, your analogy is good, but consider when the picket costs several million dollars, a phone call is probably not the best approach (at least not if you want a new picket). Honestly I'm with most people here and elsewhere when it comes to how MTH has handled itself in the view of the public, poorly. I'm sure Mike would have done things differently if he had the benefit of foresight, unfortunately he doesn't, and so here we are. Only time will tell how things turn out.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by davekelly

QUOTE: Originally posted by bostonsrock

Do you all find the US Court contemptible in this case? Do you find the judge or the jury to be contemptible? It is sort of hard to figure out why if a US court finds for one side or the other that you all need to find the courts decision unaccectible unless you are willing to persue higher legal appeal. If you thought you owned something and someone took it and used it and made money with your property what would you do? Spelling errors are of course open to a whole new subject. But why beat up on MTH if a US court found in their favour? I would rather rely on the judgement of the court than public opinion.

Although not a perfect parallel, perhaps this would help explain my feeling:

One can win a case and be 100 percent in the right legally, but still be a jerk. Let's say you broke a picket on your neighbors fence. No big deal, you'll just fix it this weekend and let him know this evening on the way home from work. While at work you're served with a suit. The neighbor doesn't want to discuss it with you. It goes to court. You lose, after all you did break his fence. The court awards your neighbor $1.25 for a new picket, $25.00 to have a handy man install it, $60.00 court costs and $100.00 attorney fees. Plus you missed a day of work for the hearing/trial.

Of course the neighbor could have just given you call and the whole thing would have been taken care of for about $2.00 plus 20 or so minutes of work. But no, he went and did it this way. Of course he is 100 percent legally correct. His property was destroyed by you and he can legally pursue to right that wrong. Would you think he's being a jerk for doing what he is legally allowed to do?

If you think he is a jerk, does that mean you have contempt for the court? Of course not. The court finding (you broke his fence) is right on. The award is most likely within what the law allows. I have no contempt for the court at all. I do however, think the guy's a jerk for pursuing the matter this way.

I think this is what the fuss is about.

Nice summary counselor..

I think that some folks are confusing the legal issues between MTH and Lionel, MTH and QSI and the letters to the DCC manufacturers. I don't think anyone is beating up MTH for the suit against Lionel. Lionel's subcontractor did something wrong, they knew, proceeded anyway and got caught. Whether or not MTH had been using Lionel designs prior to that is immaterial. IMO many folks may think the damages awarded were a bit excessive, but that is a different subject.

What most of us object to is the perception, right or wrong, that MTH is forcing its way into the HO and DCC marketplace using litigation or the threat of, as a means to an end. How much time or money MTH put into 1 scale MPH increments, while seemingly a big thing to MTH, is a petty thing to the public (us) and appears to come across as heavy handed. The perception is that yet another proprietary system is being introduced , at a time when we the customers want more interoperability, even at the cost of some perhaps greater capabilities (ie the MAC/Beta vs. PC/VHS argument).

For me, MTH offers nothing that I desire. In the future, if they want me to switch to DCS then, it has to be compatible with what I have now (DCC / DC going to DCC) or be so inexpensive, reliable, available (from more than one manufacturer) and a future that I would want to trash DCC and switch.

The market will determine success or failure, but in the market as in anything else (cars, beer, soda) people have brand loyalties and perception is everything.

Dan

[davekelly]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bostonsrock

Do you all find the US Court contemptible in this case? Do you find the judge or the jury to be contemptible? It is sort of hard to figure out why if a US court finds for one side or the other that you all need to find the courts decision unaccectible unless you are willing to persue higher legal appeal. If you thought you owned something and someone took it and used it and made money with your property what would you do? Spelling errors are of course open to a whole new subject. But why beat up on MTH if a US court found in their favour? I would rather rely on the judgement of the court than public opinion.

Although not a perfect parallel, perhaps this would help explain my feeling:

One can win a case and be 100 percent in the right legally, but still be a jerk. Let's say you broke a picket on your neighbors fence. No big deal, you'll just fix it this weekend and let him know this evening on the way home from work. While at work you're served with a suit. The neighbor doesn't want to discuss it with you. It goes to court. You lose, after all you did break his fence. The court awards your neighbor $1.25 for a new picket, $25.00 to have a handy man install it, $60.00 court costs and $100.00 attorney fees. Plus you missed a day of work for the hearing/trial.

Of course the neighbor could have just given you call and the whole thing would have been taken care of for about $2.00 plus 20 or so minutes of work. But no, he went and did it this way. Of course he is 100 percent legally correct. His property was destroyed by you and he can legally pursue to right that wrong. Would you think he's being a jerk for doing what he is legally allowed to do?

If you think he is a jerk, does that mean you have contempt for the court? Of course not. The court finding (you broke his fence) is right on. The award is most likely within what the law allows. I have no contempt for the court at all. I do however, think the guy's a jerk for pursuing the matter this way.

I think this is what the fuss is about.

[jnichols]

Paul,

Dude you are taking this whole MAC/PC thing too far I think... But I like it... [:p]

[IRONROOSTER]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jnichols

Forgive me for another post, but I have a thought for all those who still think DCS is proprietary...

So I got out and buy an MTH DCS system. I am very happy with it's performance running my 3-rail trains, and I would really like to expand it's use to the other areas of my railroading currently operating under DCC control. I decide to purchase a cheap PLC with two communications ports on it and I write my own interface between the DCS system (through the provided DB9 serial connector mind you) and my Digitrax DCC system using a LocoBuffer box and very common ASCII protocol. So now I'm using a DCS remote to control my DCC decoder equipped locomotives, and I can still run my DCS equipped locomotives as well. How is all this madness possible I wonder? After all, DCS is proprietary.

The point behind my rant is that anything is possible, and lumping the DCS system into the "it's a niche product" category is a very narrow minded way of looking at things. The fact that DCC decoders from other manufacturers will work on competitors command control systems is great. So why isn't the DCS system just another competitive command control system? This has been the point of my various posts here from the beginning. It makes no sense to write off DCS as a proprietary system, when in fact all of the DCC systems are proprietary. Wouldn't you think that if I can write an interface to allow the DCS system to communicate to a DCC system, the engineers at MTH could...[;)]

So I go out and buy an MAC computer system. I am very happy with it's performance running my Mac software, and I would really like to expand it to use my other software currently operating under PC Windows control. I decide to purchase some cheap hardware with a PC bus on it and I write my own emulater/interface between the MAC system (through the DB9 serial connector mind you) and my PC peripherals system using a very common assembly language. So now I'm using a MAC to run my Windows software, and I can still run my MAC software as well. How is all this madness possible I wonder? After all, MAC is proprietary.

The point behind my rant is that anything is possible, and lumping the MAC system into the "it's a niche product" category is a very narrow minded way of looking at things. The fact that PC software from other manufacturers will work on any PC system is great. So why isn't the MAC system just another competitive PC system? This has been the point of my various posts here from the beginning. It makes no sense to write off MAC as a proprietary system, when in fact all of the PC systems are proprietary. Wouldn't you think that if I can write an emulater/interface to allow the MAC system to run PC software on PC peripherals, then anyone can...[;)]

Enjoy
Paul

[nblum]

"But why beat up on MTH if a US court found in their favour? "

Because in many people's opinion the judge's decisions and the jury's understanding of the issues left a lot to be desired. Like common sense. Many of the events and documents of the case are publicly available and to some people, the jury's interpretation of these events and documents is wrong headed and without merit..

[Anonymous]

There seems to be general contempt of this MTS legal judgement about MTS versus Lionel et al, hince the malevolence against MTS. Do you all find the US Court contemptible in this case? Do you find the judge or the jury to be contemptible? It is sort of hard to figure out why if a US court finds for one side or the other that you all need to find the courts decision unaccectible unless you are willing to persue higher legal appeal. If you thought you owned something and someone took it and used it and made money with your property what would you do? Spelling errors are of course open to a whole new subject. But why beat up on MTH if a US court found in their favour? I would rather rely on the judgement of the court than public opinion.