Jonathan Mock

Built SFTB, great fun.

I'm slightly confused here because you seem to be saying you're aware of a "huge" (but unquantified) market out there for sailing ships but then are seemingly out of touch with the huge investment Hornby have made in new tooling by alluding to "regurgitating" old tools which simply isn't true. Besides which there is probably a very good reason why not many kit companies are heavily investing in sailing ships - Tamiya and Italeri being two notable examples - and that is simply they do not sell in large enough quantities when compared to aircraft and armour. I know it's hard on people for whom the sailing ships are their core interest, but at the end of the day model manufacturing is a business, not a service. If aircraft and tanks guarantee a solid return year in year out, then that's where the money goes.

No, it was there from the word go.

Indeed, one could take Fanderson for example, who's membership would no doubt like to see some new kits from Captain Scarlet or UFO. Then there's MAFVA, who's membership would probably support the idea of more small scale armour. Then there's the RPSB, who would possibily welcome some additions to the 1:1 bird range. The Britism Medical Council could possibility weight in with the need for more anatomical models given their uses in medicinal teaching and training. As David says, ask any interest group what they want and - surprise! - they want their interests respresented. But they don't have to sell them, the trade does. I'd also love an RO5 Eagle as dad served on her.

But seemingly not a large enough potential market to keep the relatively new 1:350 Trafalgar Class sub, HMS Daring and the standard (non-gift) HMS Illustruous releases in production. And that's the bottom line, it's all well to speak of potential markets but the arbitor of that market is whether something remains in production. If it doesn't... Theres your answer.

Those numbers tell me that the aircraft market is easier to cater for and the sales are more reliable. If that's where the money is, then you follow the money.

As I said in a previous post, it's not a one-size-fits-all market. Some companies have better traction with some subjects because of their retail reach or markets. Aoshima was mentioned - they clearly have more luck with ships than aircraft. Tamiya do ships, but they don't small small-scale armour like Dragon, Trumpeter and Revell. The list goes on, you will always find model companies that have areas and markets where sales and brand identity are strong for some subject matter but not others. I think they proved the "will" with the 1/350 new tool kits - the fact that they've mostly now disappeared from the range and have not been followed up with more of the same probably tells its own story. I don't think it's a case they didn't try hard enough, they clearly did, but if you've dipped your toe into a market and it's not bouyant enough to float, where is the business sense in investing more of the same. And, alas, model kit companies down the ages have been burned by modellers talking up subjects as being the sure-fire kit that everyone wants, only for it not to pan out that way. I'd suggest googling 'Fine Scale Modeler poll' and the stories behind the /148 Catalina, Ju 52, Vigilante and 1/72 Stratocruiser. Me personally? I'd love to see the 1/600 range expanded because Airfix have provenence in this scale, but you know people will then say that it should have been 1/700 or 1/350. Somewhere down the line there will always be the "ah but, it would have sold if only...". Hate to say it, but the aircraft modellers are most probably more consistent in their purchases, and 1/72 and 1/48 are easier scales to cater for. And when it comes to business decisions, this whole Field of Dreams thing about "make them, and they will come" doesn't really make good business sense when you've already done that and they didn't come. Plus, long story short, the trade know what sells better than any anecdotal conjecture on any modelling forum. If the trade are saying "those ships of yours didn't shift, can we have more aircraft?" the response isn't "no, you'll get more ships until the market appears", because no sane retailer is going to take on more stock they had trouble shifting in the first instance. If the ships have gone but the aircraft dominate, it's because the aircraft modellers and market is more easier cater for, more relaible and - more crucially - more profitable. And ultimately, it's a business, not a service. John points out that the manufacturers have the appropriate research on which to base its decisions. Yet, I can recall never having seen a survey from Airfix about ship choices, let alone sailing ships. Indeed, I have seen many surveys about desired ship models, none of which asked about sailing ships. I sincerely doubt that there is real research that pertains with this topic. There is ample evidence that wood sailing ship kits sell regularly for over $1,000. For example, the Amati HMS Vanguard has been selling at around $1,350.00 for almost ten years. The Caldercraft "Nelson's Navy" kits continue to sell for that kind of price as well. I'm sure that many would like to have the opportunity to purchase these ships in plastic for around $50.00, but no manufacturer has asked us. Well to to be fair, Airfix do run a suggestions list each year at Scale Model World, and there is a wishlist section on these forums, so there's clearly some avenue of feedback, maybe you've missed that. And kit companies do a lot of market research into new products across broad range of factors - just because they haven't consulted you or anyone you know personally, doesn't mean they don't do thorough market research.But, as I said earlier, kit companies are usually guided mostly by the trade, by sales because that's the sharp end, that's where opinion has to give way to fact, i.e. the numbers being sold and the profits therein. And if the trade don't reorder items because they are slow to move off of shelves, that's usually the precursor to them being dropped from a kit range. I didn't accuse or bellitle anyone and I'm far from denying any "thorough research", but we who are the "we" and "us" to be consulted? You see the context there is that far from any "small circle" being irrelevent, every small circle is relevent and it's as relevent as the next small circle - but there's a lot of small circles all competing for attention, all demanding that kit companies listen/consult them because their particular interests or scales are where the investment should be poured into. I've worked in the industry now for nearly thirty years, my "assumptions" are based on first hand experience. There is a simple formula in all this - sales equals more of the same, lack of sales means less of the same. That's it. And that's all dependent on individual kit companies budgets, economies of scale and how *their* markets work for *them*. I go back to my original point and that is that the lack of ships most probably reflects a lack of interest from the trade because of a lack of sales. That's it. I'd personally love to see more 1/600 stuff to flesh out the range, but if you're looking at R&D budgets, weighing up how many bankable sellers you'd have to bounce in order to risk some more ships, whilst looking at the sales from the last attempt to stimulate a market, and the trade aren't asking for more ship kits anyway...

As I said in a previous post, it's not a one-size-fits-all market. Some companies have better traction with some subjects because of their retail reach or markets. Aoshima was mentioned - they clearly have more luck with ships than aircraft. Tamiya do ships, but they don't small small-scale armour like Dragon, Trumpeter and Revell. The list goes on, you will always find model companies that have areas and markets where sales and brand identity are strong for some subject matter but not others. I think they proved the "will" with the 1/350 new tool kits - the fact that they've mostly now disappeared from the range and have not been followed up with more of the same probably tells its own story. I don't think it's a case they didn't try hard enough, they clearly did, but if you've dipped your toe into a market and it's not bouyant enough to float, where is the business sense in investing more of the same. And, alas, model kit companies down the ages have been burned by modellers talking up subjects as being the sure-fire kit that everyone wants, only for it not to pan out that way. I'd suggest googling 'Fine Scale Modeler poll' and the stories behind the /148 Catalina, Ju 52, Vigilante and 1/72 Stratocruiser. Me personally? I'd love to see the 1/600 range expanded because Airfix have provenence in this scale, but you know people will then say that it should have been 1/700 or 1/350. Somewhere down the line there will always be the "ah but, it would have sold if only...". Hate to say it, but the aircraft modellers are most probably more consistent in their purchases, and 1/72 and 1/48 are easier scales to cater for. And when it comes to business decisions, this whole Field of Dreams thing about "make them, and they will come" doesn't really make good business sense when you've already done that and they didn't come. Plus, long story short, the trade know what sells better than any anecdotal conjecture on any modelling forum. If the trade are saying "those ships of yours didn't shift, can we have more aircraft?" the response isn't "no, you'll get more ships until the market appears", because no sane retailer is going to take on more stock they had trouble shifting in the first instance. If the ships have gone but the aircraft dominate, it's because the aircraft modellers and market is more easier cater for, more relaible and - more crucially - more profitable. And ultimately, it's a business, not a service.

And that is it in a nutshell.

You are right. However, if I know 100 people, and someone else knows 100 people, and so forth, then there could be thousands of people who want new ship model kits. You are assuming that Airfix has done in-depth market research and that there are no ship modelers "out there" who want new products. The fact is that we exist, and we exist in numbers sufficient to generate profits for new products as evidenced by the profits being reaped by the other manufacturers. There would be no new kits if there was no market. Yet, we prove time and again that we do exist in more than sufficient numbers. I seriously doubt that Airfix has done thorough research. They do, in fact, keep releasing their tired old line of largely innacurate ships and expect us to keep buying them. Their releases help to create a self-fulfilling prophesy. Offer no new or newly tooled ships and there will be no buyers. Then assume that there is no interest, so there is no action taken to improve upon the 1950s-era primitive kits. I notice that Airfix keeps releasing newly-molded aircraft kits. I will make an assumption; if Airfix were to treat the aircraft modelers the same as they do ship modelers by doing nothing more than re-releasing the old 1950s-era kits, their sales would decline exponentially with the advent of competition around the world. They would go out of business. Bill Morrison I'd wager they most probably have "done thorough research" and it's based on numbers and feedback from the trade, rather than the vague anecdotal suposition of 100 modellers knowing 100 more etc... They did. They ventured into 1/350 and released the Trafalgar class sub, Type 45 Frigate and HMS Illustrious - of those relatively new kits, only Illustrious remains. Obviously no kit company drops kits that are making money, so where were the 100 who know a 100 that you seem to think is a sound basis for throwing money on more of the same? And this comes back to what I originally said, that the kits have gone away because there isn't a strong enough market - or perhaps one that associated Airfix with ship models - to support a larger range. And in that regard I'm sure that decision is based on the best research available - sales numbers. You're right that is an assumption and one wholly disproved by the fact that for the best part of a decade or more, Airfix had to do just that, rely on reissues of old aircraft kits and (suprise surprise) Airfix remained entirely profitable - Humbrol did go into recievership but that was a complicated matter involving legalities with Heller, Airfix had still remained profitable. Except they clearly haven't ignored it - they gave ship modellers subjects they wanted in the scale preferred and those kits are mostly no longer in production because, presumably, the market wasn't sustainable enough to keep those kits in production. And it's not unreasonable for any kit company to look at the numbers and think "well that didn't work out" and move onto more profitable subject matter. And yes, some kit companies have stronger markets for ship kits just like Airfix have a stronger market for aircraft kit than some of the ones you mentioned. It's not a one-size-fits-all market. It's not rocket science, William. Where have the ships gone? Back into drydock until the tides are more favouable because a beached ship goes nowhere.

Edit: I meant to say "No it's not unreasonable to ask..." But equally it's not unreasonable for any kit company to look at it's balance sheet and think "we'll invest in what sells rather than trying to chase a market we're told will appear if we make the right kits..."

I do "get it", but then I'm also looking at the numbers and - with the best will in the world - you knowing 100 people isn't really a strong basis for any kit manufacturer to invest hundreds of thousands into tooling. Plus you've answered your own question when you say "Trumpeter, Dragon, and the Japanese manufacturers have risen to the occassion and have given us new products, but the scope of those products seem to be limited to 20th century ships." There you go, if they thought the kinds of models wanted by you and the 100 people you know, would sell, they would make them because it's a business, not a service. No it's unreasonable to ask, but then again it's not unreasonable to ask whether you and the 100 people you know are a big enough market to take a punt on. Personally speaking, I'd say no. And kit companies have access to the numbers that tell them what sells and what doesn't. It's very easy for modellers of partiulicar genres or interests to paint the market in their own image and think they want/need/demand is somehow what everyone else wants and be profitable. Sadly, that isn't always the case. You wasked where have all the ships gone? They've gone away, because 101 people probably wasn't enough to suppport them when tens of thousands are buying aircraft.

This is my point. I can't tell you how often we ship modelers have been burned by reading the "New Kit" sections of the various modeling magazines only to discover that the new model we had been hearing about is yet another Bismarck, Missouri, Yamato, Victory, Cutty Sark, or Constitution. We have those ships! Why would we need another? Give me something new. Who is the "we"? The thing is, because it's not new to you, doesn't mean it's not new to someone else. The reason why kit companies recycle the same subjects is not only because they sell but there is - in my personal opinion - a higher turnover from the casual market than there is from modellers who say "got that, what's next?".

Jon, Airfix seem to release product for 3-4 years then withdraw it (apart from the staple diet). This includes aircraft kits and appears to be their strategy. Its not a Ship thing, but consistent with the entire range. But - barring tool failure - no kit company withdraws a product unless..? ;-)

It's also easy to look at other kits ranges and think "well company X does ships, why doesn't company Y?". Tamiya don't do 1/72 armour. Dragon, Hasegawa, Trumpter, Revell, Academy and Italeri do. Tamiya doesn't. Hasegawa don't do 1/35 armour. They did a couple of Kubelwagens, but that was it. Italeri and Revell don't do 1/24 aircraft. Etc etc... The point is that all kit companies have markets where they do well in some things, not in others. The answer to "where have all the ships gone" is "were enough people buying them to make them sustainable?'. End of the day, kit companies are run on sales, not ideas.

The answer to which is, where are the Type 45 Destroyer and Trafalgar Class sub? New tooling in the "right" scale (1/350), the Type 45 was a "much requested item" and yet has been withdrawn just four years after it was released.If there was such an "untapped market" out there, they'd still be in production. They're not.Why are they not in the range any more?

Where is the evidence that there is a whoel new market waiting to be "untapped"? As I said earlier, given the expense in researching, designing and tooling up ships, I'd suggest that it's the one modelling area where it would be the worst thing to take a Field of Dreams gamble on the basis of "make them, and they will come." I honestly don't think there is an untapped market out here just waiting for the right number of kits at the right scale and right price for them to start throwing money at kit companies. The history of kit manufcature has too many instances of this happening only for the market to not be what was promised - at which point the wise sages who'd proffered the promises of success then start saying that it was the wrong type of ship, the wrong scale, the wrong price... Faced with that, who can blame kit companies for sticking to what works and - more importantly - what brings in a capital return that can be reinvested, rather than waiting for the promise of a market that will pick up. It's easy for people to say this when it's not their hundred of thousands £$£$£ tied up waiting for payback. To go back to your original question "Where have all the ships gone?". More people were buying aircraft or tank kits, than were buying ship kits and the so the ships get mothballed. And in the case of older toolings, more people were buying the older aircraft kits or older tanks kits to keep them sustainable, while the older ship kits floundered. Retailers simply stopped order them because customers were not buying them. Long story short, as with any kit company, if products were making money they'd be on sale. If they're not, there's your aswer,

Plus multiple-choice aftermarket decal sheets - or indeed alternate kit markings - can influence a second or third purchase to use up the other options.

The number of people on the dozens of modelling forums and Facebook pages who buy multiple copies of the same aircraft kit would tend to fly in the face of that.

The alternative colour schemes and conversions of aircraft are far more tangible, especially for the layman. Knowing the differences in refits between RN battleships requires a certain amount of knowledge of the subtleties, whereas the differences in camo and markings for, say a Spitfire, are much more accessible - and cheaper. Something like a 1/72 Spitfire lends itself to repeat purchases simply because of the subject matter potential, size and price. Plus the aftermarket out there to do this is comparitively cheap when comapred to the sort of (excellent) upgrades that White Ensign do. As you say, ships aren't nowhere near as popular as aircraft - and kit manufacture is a business, not a service.

The question would be William, how much of the market is made up of people like yourselves? With aircraft there tend to be repeat purchases, they open themselves up to people wanting to finish them in alternative schemes or convert them.You're pretty much describing the ship model market as a one-shot deal. In which case there would have to be a lot of modellers out there to make each new release vialble if all they are doing is buying one kit, then waiting for the next one. Unfortunately, investing to chase a market ends up being a bit like Penelope's shroud. Bring two new ship kits out and the response will be if should have been four. Bring four new ships out and should have been eight. Bring eight new ships etc... All the while investment is being tied up in a Field of Dreams promise of "make them and they will come". I don't think it's a case of not trying hard enough to stimulate a market but rather there just isn't the market for it when compared to other subject matter. Your favourite modelling genre may just not be other people's. If aircraft offer the best investment out/profit in ratio, then there's your answer. Which gets disproved by the number of old kits that have soldiered on through the decades, bringing the readies in, like the old Spitfire IX, Sherman tank etc...

I would imagine only a few available because there's no market for the rest of them at the moment. Pre-ordering means that they'd have to have boxes, decals, instructions and kits in stock to be able to send them to order.

Which begs the question why the Type 45 and Trafalgar sub aren't in the range? At the risk of overusing a phrase, it's not rocket science. And the reasons aren't that a lack of new product isn't motivating the market, because some of those old OH/OO vehicles have been plugging away year in year out despite some modellers wishing they'd be retired in favour of new tools, and yet the ships come and go.

How large is the market for sailing ships compared to aircraft? What scale and retail price do you think new tool sailing ships should be? How many would you need to sell to cover the tooling costs? Perhaps more pertinent, how many kit companies have sailing ships in their range, how many do they currently have in their ranges and how many new-tool sailing ship kits have they produced in recent years?

The demographics, market and margins of the 60's and 70's is totally different to what it is now.