 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Railroads / September 2005Red Jinty: What price now?
Bachmann have just announced a second batch of 500 Jintys in preservation livery, albeit with a different running number (16440) to the first batch (47357). I'm thinking that will seriously detract from the value of the first batch, some of which are yet to be sold. (kim) >Bachmann have just announced a second batch of 500 Jintys in preservation >livery, albeit with a different running number (16440) to the first batch >(47357). I'm thinking that will seriously detract from the value of the >first batch, some of which are yet to be sold. > >(kim) Bachmann are in businees to make a profit from selling locos, not to boost collectors' nett worth. If all those interested in 47357 have bought and Bachmann are left with a stock then the 'value' is going to remain below the new price until Bachmenn have remaindered their stock. Meanwhile Bachmann presumably see a demand for the alternative number which the sensibly propose to satisfy. Keith >>Bachmann have just announced a second batch of 500 Jintys in preservation >>livery, albeit with a different running number (16440) to the first batch [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > with a stock then the 'value' is going to remain below the new price > until Bachmenn have remaindered their stock. 47357 was never sold to members of the public. 150 were given away as promotional items and the remaining 350 were reserved for club members. Up until now it has been worth an astronomical amount. > Meanwhile Bachmann presumably see a demand for the alternative number > which the sensibly propose to satisfy. Cheltenham Model Centre commisioned the second batch, presumably to cash in on demand for the promotional item. (kim) >47357 was never sold to members of the public. 150 were given away as >promotional items and the remaining 350 were reserved for club members. Up >until now it has been worth an astronomical amount. Really? So who is paying the astronomical prices when Bachmann have unsold stock? Keith >>47357 was never sold to members of the public. 150 were given away as >>promotional items and the remaining 350 were reserved for club members. Up >>until now it has been worth an astronomical amount. >> > Really? So who is paying the astronomical prices when Bachmann have > unsold stock? Anyone who was desperate to own a red Jinty, who does not qualify for the Club offer and was unaware that a second batch of models was to be produced for Cheltenham Model Centre (albeit with Midland rather than BR markings). Even club members had to enter a lottery for the right to purchase one of the original batch. (kim) >Anyone who was desperate to own a red Jinty, who does not qualify for the >Club offer and was unaware that a second batch of models was to be produced >for Cheltenham Model Centre (albeit with Midland rather than BR markings). >Even club members had to enter a lottery for the right to purchase one of >the original batch. And in this situation why does Bachmann have stock left? Not enough entrants to the lottery perhaps. I don't yet see any evidence of any astronomical value. There doesn't seem to be anyone trying to sell them on ebay. Keith >>Anyone who was desperate to own a red Jinty, who does not qualify for the >>Club offer and was unaware that a second batch of models was to be [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And in this situation why does Bachmann have stock left? > Not enough entrants to the lottery perhaps. They have not been offered for sale yet. > I don't yet see any evidence of any astronomical value. Previous limited editions have sold for between £150 and £200. > There doesn't seem to be anyone trying to sell them on ebay. Only 150 have been given away so far, mainly to dealers. They wouldn't have any reason to sell them on eBay. (kim) >>Anyone who was desperate to own a red Jinty, who does not qualify for the >>Club offer and was unaware that a second batch of models was to be produced [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Keith Soon after the toyfair, when Bachmann gave them out to the dealers, they were plentiful on ebay - many with Buy-it-now's of £100. The sensible purchaser (such as myself!) waited, sure that Bachmann would eventually produce this as a regular livery, if it were really that popular. >>Anyone who was desperate to own a red Jinty, who does not qualify for the >>Club offer and was unaware that a second batch of models was to be produced [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >There doesn't seem to be anyone trying to sell them on ebay. Probably because they haven't got them yet. According to the Bachmann collectors' club newsletter the "lottery" isn't until next week, with them being sent out to the winners on receipt of the funds shortly afterwards. I consider this to be all of a non-event. The world must be saturated with Jinties made by Tri-ang and Hornby over the past 50 years or so. Now if it were something special, like a 2-8-0T or 2-8-2T ..... >Keith  SignatureJane OO in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html >I consider this to be all of a non-event. The world must be saturated >with Jinties made by Tri-ang and Hornby over the past 50 years or so. >Now if it were something special, like a 2-8-0T or 2-8-2T ..... I'm also interested to know on what prototype it is based. According to my Midland books, the last time a Midland 0-6-0 carried red livery was in the early Deeley period before WW1, so couldn't have carried the LMS and BR numbers noted earlier in the thread. Maybe I missed all the discussion earlier when it first came out :-) Jim. > On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 07:37:43 +0100, Jane Sullivan > <jane@yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > when it > first came out :-) The BR livery is ficticious and the MR livery was only ever carried on a preservation loco. (kim) > The BR livery is ficticious and the MR livery was only ever carried on a > preservation loco. I thought the BR red version replicated a preserved loco. John. >> The BR livery is ficticious and the MR livery was only ever carried on a >> preservation loco. > > I thought the BR red version replicated a preserved loco. It's the same loco with the wrong markings:- http://philtpics.fotopic.net/p3361749.html As far as I know 47357 never carried red livery in BR service. (kim) > As far as I know 47357 never carried red livery in BR service. It didn't, I thought it carried it for a while in preservation. John. >> As far as I know 47357 never carried red livery in BR service. > > It didn't, I thought it carried it for a while in preservation. Yes it did:- http://www.steamtraingalleries.co.uk/image/midland_railway_centre_001.jpg But the livery is still 'ficticious' in that it was never applied by BR. (kim) >> It didn't, I thought it carried it for a while in preservation. > Yes it did:- > > http://www.steamtraingalleries.co.uk/image/midland_railway_centre_001.jpg > > But the livery is still 'ficticious' in that it was never applied by BR. At the risk of sounding pedantic you said earlier 'The BR livery is fictitious and the MR livery was only ever carried on a preservation loco'. That to me suggests you were inferring that the BR livery never existed, not even in preservation - if you see what I mean? John. >>> It didn't, I thought it carried it for a while in preservation. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That to me suggests you were inferring that the BR livery never existed, > not even in preservation - if you see what I mean? Before I found that particular pic I didn't think it did. (kim) > Before I found that particular pic I didn't think it did. Ah well, guess that clears that up then. :-) John. > >> As far as I know 47357 never carried red livery in BR service. > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > (kim) <RANT> What about the umpteen other locos that carry "fictitious" liveries, or have "wrong" details on them in preservation?? If it carried the livery in use - whether in "real" BR or preservation,, then so what? Probably the biggest example of "fiction" is 4472. It never carried 4472 as an A3, it never carried a double chimney and Witte deflectors in LNER green, it never had air brakes etc. etc. But 4472 in apple green is a marketing man's dream. Put it in BR green as 60103 and no-one's bothered. (The double chimney is for efficiency, the deflectors are for safety and the air brakes are for operational reasons.) It was converted to an A3 after being renumbered 103. It even carries an ex-A4 boiler these days!! Who cares? It generates cash to keep it running and in the public domain. One of the nicest "fictional" liveries was the BR red carried by 46441. I even went to the trouble of painting my vaguely Hornby Ivatt 2MT in red, after spending hours on it with a Crownline conversion kit, because I wanted to model it in preservation guise. If an owner wants to paint it another livery, then great. It's their "train set" let them do with it what they want. Look at the interest 5972 "Hogwart's Castle" has generated. There are many people out there, that believe there really is an engine named "Hogwart's Castle". Is "Thomas" real? For gawd's sake, it's only a hobby. </RANT> Mick > But 4472 in apple green is a marketing man's dream. Put it in BR green as > 60103 and no-one's bothered. That's an over-generalisation. If 4472 in its current guise came to Hull I wouldn't bother going tothe end of our road to watch it pass, but if it was in BR green I'd certainly do a couple of hundred miles round trip to see it! John. > > But 4472 in apple green is a marketing man's dream. Put it in BR green as > > 60103 and no-one's bothered. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > John. Over-generalisation accusation accepted and I plead guilty M'Lud. Maybe I should have used the words "most people aren't" instead of "no-one" :-) Mick >> But 4472 in apple green is a marketing man's dream. Put it in BR green as >> 60103 and no-one's bothered. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > John. OK John, I'll bite. What sort of generalisation is not an "over-generalisation"? Surely all generalisations have exceptions, otherwise they would be universal truths and not generalisations? And you, being a man from the railway trade, are obviously the very exception that proves the general rule in this case! Cheers, Steve > And you, being a man from the railway trade, are obviously the very > exception that proves the general rule in this case! I might be from the trade, but first and foremost I'm an enthusiast, and one who saw 'Flying Scotsman' in British Railways' service in the late 50s and early 60s. The appeal to me, and I suspect many other enthusiasts too, is the prospect of nostalgia for what we remember from all those years ago. On the other hand how many people can honestly say they recall pre-nationalisation steam, and can therefore be similarly nostalgic for it? Sure they'll be some, but to be honest they'll be in decreasingly small numbers. I suspect that suggestions that 'Apple Green' is a marketing man's dream is pure fantasy. The public will generally accept whatever's served up in terms of livery - after all they know little different. John. > > And you, being a man from the railway trade, are obviously the very > > exception that proves the general rule in this case! [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Sure they'll be some, but to be honest they'll be in decreasingly small > numbers. I am interested in what era people choose to model and one curious thing I have noticed from looking at model railway magazines of various periods is that there never seems to have been a time when it was fashionable to model Early BR - say 1948 to 1957. For a long time the "Golden Age" seems to have been reckoned to be the 1930's, and this seems to have been superseded by the idea that 1958 to 1962 was the Golden Age (at least if you wanted to include steam). Then there seems to have been another quantum leap from about 1962 to the Blue Diesel era; I don't recall seeing any layouts set in 1965 or 1966, for instance. Andy KIrkham The message <1127404657.597860.242140@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> from "Andy Kirkham" <a.kirkham@LTScotland.org.uk> contains these words: > I am interested in what era people choose to model and one curious > thing I have noticed from looking at model railway magazines of various [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > era; I don't recall seeing any layouts set in 1965 or 1966, for > instance. It is interesting that 65-66 is not modelled much - the variety was tremendous then with some steam (very dirty and clapped out by then though) and all the prototype diseasels, most of which sank into oblivion within a few years. Not my idea of fun but I would have thought a Mecca for modelling! SignatureColin > It is interesting that 65-66 is not modelled much - the variety was > tremendous then with some steam (very dirty and clapped out by then > though) and all the prototype diseasels, most of which sank into > oblivion within a few years. Not my idea of fun but I would have thought > a Mecca for modelling! 1962 was the year when the real variety in steam power ceased with dozens of classes disappearing and vast quantities of steam locos going for scrap. Steam could still be seen working top link expresses on both East Coast and West Coast Main Line expresses along with those of both Southern and Great Western routes. Much of this had ceased by 1965-66 which is probably the main reason why that era is so little favoured. John. > I suspect that suggestions that 'Apple Green' is a marketing man's dream is > pure fantasy. The public will generally accept whatever's served up in > terms of livery - after all they know little different. > > John. But in BR green, it's just another engine.......... Apple green stands out from the crowd. I think it was FS's previous owner, Dr. Tony Marchington, who found out to his cost, the lack of appeal of a Brunswick green Flying Scotsman. The public "know" more than you credit them for. Flying Scotsman is "light green" when I asked a number of my non-railway enthusiast friends! Try this as a question. Put two pictures in front of them (the public, not an enthusiast). Make sure that they are not close enough to identify the name or number. If the two pictures are 4771 "Green Arrow" in apple green and 60103 "Flying Scotsman" in BR green, then ask them to point to "Flying Scotsman". I would like to take a bet on the result!! Mick > The public "know" more than you credit them for. > Flying Scotsman is "light green" when I asked a number of my non-railway > enthusiast friends! If they know more than I credit them, they should then be able to distinguish between 'Green Arrow' and 'Flying Scotsman' or are you just confirming my point? John. > > The public "know" more than you credit them for. > > Flying Scotsman is "light green" when I asked a number of my non-railway [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > John. No, maybe I didn't express my sentiments precisely - the public want an apple green loco. They are more likely to pick the picture of Green Arrow in apple green, than FS in BR green as "Flying Scotsman". The vast majority of people that go to see steam locos (and preserved railways) are not "enthusiasts". They *will* generalise. Every DMU will be "Daisy" - we know it's a 101, 110, 108 105 or whatever. Every small blue tank engine will be "Thomas". Every large apple green loco will be either Flying Scotsman or "Henry". Every steam loco with a sloping front is "Mallard" Every loco in BR green will be just another loco. Cheers, Mick >> I suspect that suggestions that 'Apple Green' is a marketing man's dream >is [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >Mick When Flying Scotsman visited Torbay and Dartmouth it was in BR green and many visitors refused to believe that it was indeed FS! SignatureJohn East > >> I suspect that suggestions that 'Apple Green' is a marketing man's dream > >is [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > When Flying Scotsman visited Torbay and Dartmouth it was in BR green and > many visitors refused to believe that it was indeed FS! My point exactly!! Cheers, Mick The message <dgs6n6$23m$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk> from "Mick Bryan" <mick@nospamplease.co.uk> contains these words: > For gawd's sake, it's only a hobby. Waddya mean "ONLY"...? SignatureDave, Frodsham > I consider this to be all of a non-event. The world must be saturated with > Jinties made by Tri-ang and Hornby over the past 50 years or so. Now if it > were something special, like a 2-8-0T or 2-8-2T ..... I wouldn't call this issue of a decent model of the Jinty (at long last) as a non-event even if it doesn't seem to have sold terribly well in my establishment. I've actually got three of the things (if you include the red one) but I'd have never entertained any of the previous Triang/Hornby offerings because of the poor mechanisms and indifferent scale authenticity. I think the new model is rather nice, but benefits from a little tweaking of the pickup wipers. Scale-wise it's an exquisit model, capturing the appearance of the 3F 0-6-0T to perfection. The non-event in my opinion is the obsession with 'limited editions', whether truly produced in 'very limited' quantities or just a label attached to a larger than standard production run with the simple intention of increasing sales. When the term 'limited edition' gets attached to stuff like chocolate bars then one has to realise that the whole shooting match has been played out. John. I agree and sometimes wonder about Limited Editions. Look how long Hornby and Bachmann took to offload the "Sir Ralph Wedgewood" and "Commonwealth of Australia" A4 Limited Editions. There were possibly more of them produced than non Limited Edition 4's. > > I consider this to be all of a non-event. The world must be saturated with > > Jinties made by Tri-ang and Hornby over the past 50 years or so. Now if it [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > John. >The non-event in my opinion is the obsession with 'limited editions', >whether truly produced in 'very limited' quantities or just a label attached >to a larger than standard production run with the simple intention of >increasing sales. When the term 'limited edition' gets attached to stuff >like chocolate bars then one has to realise that the whole shooting match >has been played out. I agree. I saw a "limited edition" cleaning cloth on sale in my local supermarket this morning. Needless to say I didn't buy any. SignatureJane OO in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html >>>Anyone who was desperate to own a red Jinty, who does not qualify for the >>>Club offer and was unaware that a second batch of models was to be [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > collectors' club newsletter the "lottery" isn't until next week, with them > being sent out to the winners on receipt of the funds shortly afterwards. I estimate the Jinties will go for about a tenner more than the asking price, likewise the Ivatt mogul. Personally I couldn't be bothered. On the other hand I think the Porterbrook purple 57 will sell for £100 which is quite a bit more than the asking price. (kim) > Really? So who is paying the astronomical prices when Bachmann have > unsold stock? I've seen a couple go on fleabay at around GBP75.00 which I wouldn't consider astronomical for a production run of just 500. John. >> Really? So who is paying the astronomical prices when Bachmann have >> unsold stock? > > I've seen a couple go on fleabay at around GBP75.00 which I wouldn't > consider astronomical for a production run of just 500. Thanks for that John. The price is even less impressive seeing as how only 150 are in circulation just now. I am thinking somebody got wind of the forthcoming offers and decided to dump their particular example while they still could. (kim) > Bachmann have just announced a second batch of 500 Jintys in preservation > livery, albeit with a different running number (16440) to the first batch > (47357). I'm thinking that will seriously detract from the value of the > first batch, some of which are yet to be sold. Well as mine cost me precisely ..................... err nothing, I don't think I'll be losing any sleep. Does seem a bit odd that they'd produce another similar lot if they've not been able to sell the full production run of the first batch. Mind you, we've still got stock of the first production run of keyhole Jinties, which suggests they've not been a roaring success. John. >> Bachmann have just announced a second batch of 500 Jintys in preservation >> livery, albeit with a different running number (16440) to the first batch [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Does seem a bit odd that they'd produce another similar lot if they've not > been able to sell the full production run of the first batch. The remainder of the first batch are due to be sold to club members but as their only attraction is being red and Cheltenham Model Centre offering a further 500 of their own, I can't see the point. (kim) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.