See the latest UP Heritage locomotive...

[dinwitty]

bring back shteeeam...8-P

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dgwinup

"UP has the right to charge, but is it right?"

Amen to Big Boy 4005!

Darrell, not being quiet enough....for now

Where does it become wrong? Do you realize that if all the stolen licensing illegally copied products by other countries, we wouldn't run a trade deficit? Maybe Microsoft and these people being stolen from don't have any right to charge in the first place? Should any company be able to protect their name? With out licensing, I could use the Katy logo as Katy railroad and might even fool people.
James[C):-)]

[grandeman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

UP has the right to charge, but is it right?

If it's their logos and it's legal, how can it be wrong? Do the MR consumers like it? That's the only question and the heart of the matter. Now, I'd rather not pay higher prices either, but I'm not going to demonize one of our finest RR's because of this. Just my 02. [:)]

[dgwinup]

"UP has the right to charge, but is it right?"

Amen to Big Boy 4005!

Darrell, not being quiet enough....for now

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by grande man

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

It's a very pretty engine, but it is being used to justify a very ugly practice. Does anyone honestly think that UP would do this if there wasn't money in it?

Most corporations are only about one thing, making a profit. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. They employ our people and fuel our economy. They are not something evil.

UP is no different. If there were no profits, there would be no trains, jobs or service to the customers.

The Heritage locos are an advertising move but also a great salute to our railroading history from one of America's premiere roads. I applaud UP for making them a reality. My only question is..... Where's the Grande????

I won't argue the fact that businesses are motivated by profit. I don't have a problem with it, up to a point. When it becomes excessive or abusive, I balk and complain.

Railfans are not railroad's customers. Shippers are railroad's customers. Some railfans take exception to this concept of suddenly being charged for something that was always free in the past.

I will not buy any licensed products from hobby stores, which for me is really not much of a sacrifice, since I haven't bought any new trains in 3 years, and don't have the money to do so anyway. It is a matter of principle.

UP has the right to charge, but is it right?

[grandeman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

It's a very pretty engine, but it is being used to justify a very ugly practice. Does anyone honestly think that UP would do this if there wasn't money in it?

Most corporations are only about one thing, making a profit. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. They employ our people and fuel our economy. They are not something evil.

UP is no different. If there were no profits, there would be no trains, jobs or service to the customers.

The Heritage locos are an advertising move but also a great salute to our railroading history from one of America's premiere roads. I applaud UP for making them a reality. My only question is..... Where's the Grande????

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by loathar

I wonder if they'll want $10 dollars extra for the model of it.

If the model company produces less than 20% UP to get a charge of $10 the model would probably cost over $670 dollars, so no UP doesn't charge $10 bucks for the scheme. If the model company produces 20% or more UP equipment, you would probably have to pay $4,000 or more, for UP to make a measly $10.

To other people I think that it would probably take years of licensing charges to pay for the buying and painting of the loco, if UP keeps these cleaner as they might try it will cost more for these locos in the long run. I don't know, since at 14 I haven't gotten a job on UP's public relations team, but it might be for protecting the logos from model companies putting out phony schemes, or low quality models. Of course UP can change the paint scheme.[:D]

Where are the BNSF basher, why isn't BNSF greedy and evil? Talk about screwing around with paint schemes and calling them heritage.
James[C):-)]

[Gluefinger]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan.

BNSF does charge extra for their Logo, You just don't know it.
Allan.

I read from BNSF themselves that they require licensing, but not for a fee. They don't go after people unless they use the logo without permission.

[espeefoamer]

At least they're honest about why they are doing the Heritage paint jobs.That's one point in thier favor.
[8)][}:)][:(!][xx(][:o)][}:)][:(!][xx(][:o)][}:)][:(!][xx(][:o)][}:)][:(!][xx(][:o)][}:)][:(!][xx(][:o)][}:)][:(!][xx(]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: I don't have a problem with them doing it for the money if they would be honest about it. Don't tell me this is a kind-hearted gesture from an old friendly railroad. It's the money.

Actually if you read the trains.com article that accompanies the photos, you will read that UP's PR guy does talk about protecting their copyrights and licensing fees. It did seem pretty straightforward to me. I guess I understand their policy even though I'm not in total agreement with it.

[okiechoochoo]

Amen Grayfox,
I model the transition era and back then Katy was all red. I love this new unit. In fact I like them all but this one is my favorite. I don't model any of the roads nor the UP but I think I will buy models of all the hertiage schemes just to sit on the wall

[grayfox1119]

That is one sweet locomotive!!!!! Now I ask you , what do people do who are modeling another era, ie 1950, or eastern RR's?? I'll tell you what I would do, I would buy it. It is "my" RR, and I can do what I want...SO THERE !!!!

[dgwinup]

Maybe I came on too strong. I am not bashing the UP. It is one of my favorite railroads. I grew up with huge UP publicity photos on my walls thanks to my Dad's business with the railroads (expecially UP).
I don't know the cost of re-painting a locomotive. Big Boy 4005 estimates $10,000 and I can't dispute that. And he's also right that these re-paints are just a way of protecting the name.
Are these paint jobs nice? You bet! I wish ALL railroads would do the same. Are they doing this to be 'nice'? No way, Jose! They are doing it for the money, plain and simple.
I don't have a problem with them doing it for the money if they would be honest about it. Don't tell me this is a kind-hearted gesture from an old friendly railroad. It's the money.
So how do I really feel about this? Really sad. A great railroad is wallowing in the mud of greed and trying to cover it up with altruistic pronouncements. Come on, be honest. We get enough spin doctoring from our government and the news media.
I still think UP would have been better off going about this differently (see my previous post). Do it because it is a good thing to do, the right thing to do and the public relations thing to do. Do it for the kids! But don't do it just so you can squeeze more money from someone.
That's enough from me.
Darrell, back to being quiet......for now

Quote: "If you always tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." Ben Franklin

[gvdobler]

Jonathon

My point is that if all UP wanted to do was preserve the names so they could soak the rich model train guys as has been suggested by some that continually bash UP, they could do it a lot cheaper than by painting a whole engine in a very nice paintjob.

I think the paint jobs are very goodlooking and UP is not Satan.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gvdobler
Then why don't they just paint KATY on the side of any old paint job.
I know it's the UP trying to control our lives-Yikes.
Get a grip.

Because maybe that thought it'd be nice to do a rendition of an older scheme! I can't believe how cold-hearted some people are about all this.

[gvdobler]

QUOTE: Remember, this is not about pleasing railfans. This is about keeping dead railroads alive, to get money out of railfans. Without these one off beauties, the law says anyone can use the name for free. Use it, or lose it.

Then why don't they just paint KATY on the side of any old paint job.
I know it's the UP trying to control our lives-Yikes.
Get a grip.

[Anonymous]

BNSF does charge extra for their Logo, You just don't know it.
Allan.

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffshultz

QUOTE: Originally posted by JPM335

One of the guys in my train club works at the san antonio engine servicing facility. At the last meeting he brought pictures of the new MKTs, WPs, hmmm there was another one I cant remember... Anyway, its too bad theyre only doing that to get royalties off it.

You really think the royalties they are going to get off of models and t-shirts are going to compensate them for what it costs to paint these one-off wonders?

Very much so. The annual revenue from licensing is at least enough to buy a couple of those locomotives, painted of course. Locomotive price tag is a little over a million, I think. A paint job is cheap by comparison. Probably under $10,000.

Remember, this is not about pleasing railfans. This is about keeping dead railroads alive, to get money out of railfans. Without these one off beauties, the law says anyone can use the name for free. Use it, or lose it.

[jeffshultz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JPM335

One of the guys in my train club works at the san antonio engine servicing facility. At the last meeting he brought pictures of the new MKTs, WPs, hmmm there was another one I cant remember... Anyway, its too bad theyre only doing that to get royalties off it.

You really think the royalties they are going to get off of models and t-shirts are going to compensate them for what it costs to paint these one-off wonders?

[dgwinup]

For what it's worth, my opinion is that UP is doing this ONLY to protect their royalty copyrights.
That in itself is not bad. As pointed out above, many groups charge fees for the use of their logos (NFL, MLB, NCAA, you name it). You can't use those logos without permission and you can't profit from the use without paying the royalties.
In the case of UP, however, they did nothing to protect their copyrights until some obscure bean counting lawyer decided that UP could squeeze some more money out of someone by charging for the use of their logos. In the case of the UP logo, I have to agree with UP. It's their name and they can determine how it's being used and who can profit from its use.
When it comes to 'fallen flags', UP is just being greedy. When UP took over these fallen flag lines, they made NO effort whatsoever to preserve the marque. Locomotives (and rolling stock) were repainted just as fast as the airbrushes could move. UP wasn't interested in the old logos, they were interested in the revenues associated with the acquisition. Only now, at a much later date, did the UP decide that the old logos needed "protection" from mis-use by those greedy, self-absorbed model railroading companies (and others).
This is poor judgment on the part of UP, and a dismal public relations nightmare. How much better it would have been if the UP (and others) had decided to charge a nominal fee for the use of their logos, past and present. A one-time or annual fee charged to a manufacturer is a minimal expense and the UP could have touted their 'benevolence' in banner headlines, honoring the 'fallen flags' logos and at the same time promoting good will. Imagine the favorable publicity if UP had promoted their actions as preserving the heritage of American railroads AND giving the kiddies of the world something recognizable to play with!
Question: Do the railroads charge fees for the use of their logos in any other areas, such as clothing, ashtrays, etc.? I don't know, but I imagine that they would. And if they hadn't thought about it, they soon will. More money!

Darrell, going back to being quiet......for now

Quote: "More pies, more pies!" Jack Lemmon, The Great Race

[mpcaboose]

Agree that the red Katy is a great choice ... I think this is the best one yet. The MP version sucks eggs, unfortunately.

As for the SP, Daylight makes a lot of sense. But Black Widow fans shouldn't despair ... it's the Cotton Belt to the rescue! That should provide the opening that we need. Or at least I hope...

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ShaunCN

CSX still has a C&O loco goign around, NS painted up a southern engine, BNSF well they have tons of Santa Fe units and BN units left. UP was the only railroad to no have a mopac or a WP engine or a katy engine still goign but the do now!

Yes Shaun, but I haven't seen the BNSF painting units for any of the fallen flags that have come under their umbrella. No NP, no GN, no Frisco, no CB&Q, etc. Oh yeah, and no licensing fees. (yet)

Some bean counter at BNSF is probably kicking himself, because nobody thought of this back in 1970.

[ShaunCN]

CSX still has a C&O loco goign around, NS painted up a southern engine, BNSF well they have tons of Santa Fe units and BN units left. UP was the only railroad to no have a mopac or a WP engine or a katy engine still goign but the do now!

[IRONROOSTER]

Personally, I like it. Now if we could just get one in Pennsy green with pinstripes...
Enjoy
Paul

[loathar]

I wonder if they'll want $10 dollars extra for the model of it.

[RMax1]

I for one am glad that it is not Green and Yellow. The Katy of my memories is red with the shield logo. I like it. UP didn't have to go to as much trouble to retains rights. The publicity has been great.

RMax1

[Anonymous]

I always liked and appreciated the power and presence of locomotives, however I never thought they looked particularly attractive. Having said that, I think this one looks real purdy.

Trevor[:)]

[Trainnut484]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Stuckarmchairing

Swing and a miss.

Actually it's three strikes and YER OUT!!

(Also referring to the other heritage schemes)

Russell

[Virginian]

NS locos are already painted in "Heritage" colors.