i dreamed[zzz] being the presedent of lionel last night and i thuoght it would be fun if i really was! im wondering what you would do…[^]
If I owned Lionel; I would own a summer house on Mackinac Island, just like the previous Lionel [:-^]owners enjoyed.
Advertise and try to buid market by selling QUALITY entry level sets in retail chain stores. With the sets concentrate on current railroads that kids can associate with. For steam use tour lines as a basis.
I’m afraid as our generation, +50’s, dies off that there’ll be less and less interest in trains as they now stand.
i think they should put tv commercials for trains on saturday morning cartoons. they should make them look like o scale is awesome![8D]
Jerry, the question should really be “if you owned your own new train company…”
Of course it’s fun to speculate and think about this kind of stuff. But in the case of Lionel, they’re owned by Wellspring. A lot of money changed hands in that transaction and you can bet that Lionel is accountable to Wellspring to show a return to Wellspring’s liking. And that the management of Lionel does have to answer at some point to Wellspring. Neil Young is a minority owner (as is Richard Kughn). I’m sure there are things done that Neil doesn’t like, but can’t do anything about either… except maybe write a song or put on a new flannel shirt [:D]. Which is also exactly what I would do [:D].
Lionel is also a bigger company than the others, even with the loss of the Mt. Clemens production/manufacturing facility. I would imagine there’s more bureaucracy too… more people to run ideas by… more approvals that are needed before anything gets done.
And I won’t comment on it now - maybe later - but the editorial piece in OGRR magazine by Lionel CEO John Brady was terrible. Absolutely terrible. I could have done better (IMHO [B)]). If Lionel dealers had a rough year, maybe Lionel should be more supportive of their dealers (I constantly hear they aren’t) and offer better wholesale prices… offer the blowouts to dealers large and small across the board, instead of a select few. But then again, maybe these kinds of things are easier said than done with the internal structure and constraints of being a bigger company with outside owners.
After he doubted any train company made money last year, you read the pieces by Weaver’s Joe Hayter and Sunset/3rd Rail’s Mort and Scott Mann - they said they had a good year. Even better than good. Also sounds like Atlas did well from Tom Headrich, who also wrote the best piece of all. Even Larry Harrington of Williams stayed upbeat while commenting on some of the current realities of the train market.
And no one else mentioned "coll
I would say keep the products competitive, detailed, simple and reliable.
I would have a super layout and test all new products fbefore they were released. I do think the “big store sales” thing mentioned above would help. Remember “Miracle on 34th Street”? Macey’s had trains. When I was a kid, Sears had trains. Penny’s had trains. Every big store had trains. Since I have retired, I’ve been doing spring shows at Bass Pro Shops. Maybe a national train super store chain. [#oops] There goes our local train stores. They are valuable. That is what has happened to the local tackle and hunting stores. Bass Pro Shops, Cabela’s and Gander Mountain has put them out of business. One thing, they sell a lot of sporting goods at good prices. A thought.[?]
Actually, ‘jerry’s’ idea of commercials on TV isn’t all that unrealistic. I’m sure that
with the money that Lionel commands, they can afford to place a few well-selected
commercials on TV a few times a year, like when school is almost over, around
Thanksgiving, and Christmas. This would spark interest in the younger market.
And considering that most youngsters are now very tech-savvy, and have a good
disposable income of their own, this would make good sense from a sales stand-
point and thus the company could recoup the expenses for the commercials very
easily. Lionel has had TMCC in production long enough now that costs shouldn’t
be so high that they can’t offer an affordable (to youngsters/preteens) set featuring
some of that new-tech that kids enjoy, like wireless control, basic sounds and
remote uncoupling. That and featuring operating accessories and cars like the old
days and I really believe that you would have a viable new market to add to today’s
maturing market base.
i think that is what k-line needs to do in order to get more buisness
Hey Jerry don’t take this wrong but how about running your posts through spell checker. Sometimes they are a little hard to read. You have good ideas just take time when writing them down.
theres a spell-checker? i didn’t know that, where is it? [%-)]
I think they are doing a fine job. Look at all of the offerings they are giving. Some items are too pricy for me but others are bargains relative to 10 years ago.
I think overall, however, that we are paying way too much for toy trains. For instance a G-scale SD-45 is actually less expensive than one in 3-rails that has all the electronic gizmos.
I thinks that 3-railers are richer and have more lavish spending habits overall.
Dave V
I would improve quality and compatibility. How many reviews have you read where the product had a latent defect? I have five Proto 1 engines and bought them without any idea tor clue that they had a latent defect in the design of their electronics.
I fortunately found out about this , however I must purchase an expensive “upgrade” for each engine which now significantly increases the cash laid our for the original product just to insure the electronics don’t fry. If I bought any appliance that was found out to fry itself after being unplugged for awhile, there would be a recall and it would be corrected that certainly would not be paid for out of my pocket, but by the maker standing behind it’s product. These are not inexpensive items.For example, some time ago I bought my son a Power Wheels
toy. Right on the box there was a toll free number that said "Got a problem? Call us I told them the battery was defective. They air shipped a new battery-no questions asked. If they would have told me hey look, you have to shell out $300 for an “upgrade” I would have been mad enough to call the FTC.My response has been to no longer purchase MTH products. I would rather switch than fight.
I have a whole room full of Large Scale products in storage. I bought this stuff only to find out these @#$%^! couplers don’t mate. Will I go back and research and retrofit all this stuff with new couplers? Why should I pay for the industry’s paranoid stance on standards? What if you had a shelf full of electronic equipment and none of it could be tied together to make a system? It’s absurd!
MTH should provide all of us Proto 1 suckers a J&W battery. Fair is fair. I am not going to spend any more money either upgrading a defect or sawing these things apart to put in a charging plug…
I can buy a top grade hunting rifle for less than a new toy loco and I can get food with my rifle if I need to. I can’t eat the toy loco. I use both for enjoyment and relaxation but I see more actual work put into the building of my rifle than my loco. So why does my loco cost more? My rifle is made in the USA and my toy loco is made in China where costs are supposed to be lower. Why don’t the makers of toys pass these savings on to us?
I’ve wondered the same thing too Pease. My understanding is that the typical hourly pay in China is in the neighborhood of 45-55¢ per hour… a far cry from the UAW wages Lionel had to pay for US production.
But one thing I can see, is that the companies are doing an unprecidented amount of new tooling and product development. Of course, along with labor, tooling costs are far cheaper in China too. But look at the vast amount of new totally new product MTH has put out in their short history. Even Lionel has put out quite a bit lately. As I mentioned, I’ve read that MTH has $3.5M into the development of DCS… that’s big money for a small company.
I’m not defending the high prices totally… just trying to understand. In Lionel’s case, they have an advantage over the others with name recognition and therefore the lucrative licensing program - which I’m certain generates some income for them.
Then there was Bracy’s comment on collectability. I’m sure Lionel is the one company that worries about the fall of prices in the collector market. They benefit from prices being solid and high, as it perpetuates the thinking that no matter what Lionel item you buy today, it’ll be worth much much more tomorrow. That thinking has been out the window in recent years. Much of what you buy today isn’t worth more tomorrow - it may not even work tomorrow.
Lionel in particular should focus on what their strength has always been. And I don’t think they’re doing that. Lowering prices to a more reasonable, acceptable market level would go a long way towards that end result. Of course, there are other issues at play. But I know for a fact the high prices do turn people away.
And if Williams can make a much higher quality GP-9 for $159 list (dual larger motors, flywheels, diecast trucks, couplers and fuel tank, sheet metal frame), I can see why people would turn away from a Lionel one single non-flywheel smaller motor, plastic everything except sheet metal frame version at
Couple of things guys:
Pease – I enjoy fine rifles and collectable military rifles for their history. I bet the maker of your hunting rifle sells many more examples of the same rifle than any of the toy train manufacturers will sell of a given engine. I imagine there is a lot more CNC automated machine work going into that rifle (both the metalwork and the stock) than the typical engine as well.
If I owned Lionel I would be checking consultants and racking my brain trying to come up with a bridge product or promotional show to carry a childs interest in trains from Brio wooden trains, through and past Thomas the Tank Engine. Most of the kids I’ve met through my soon to be 9 year old son had and loved the aforementioned items but lost interest when they felt they had out grown Thomas. They lost interest because for most people trains just are not a factor in their lives beyond having to stop driving long enough for the “darn train” to get through the crossing.
I would make strive to make sure every product worked when the box was opened. I left HO this past September and bought my first Lionel set the same month. The set worked fine but … the chicken car I bought new soon afterward did not make a sound … returned to dealer … the railroad control tower I just bought is a little balky … Now I’m not going to leave the hobby because of this but a child or someone older with a spur of the moment interest will.
Somehow I would be trying to reduce prices without reduceing quality in my traditional sized line. I don’t know about most of you but $200 is a lot for me to pay for an engine. It’s hard for me to see most parents giving giving their kids a $200-$300 train set, a $200+ engine, or even a $50+ car knowing full well that being a child the kid is going to truly play with the trains and put them through things similar to Gomez Adams. I’ve had to bite my tounge a few times with my own son to keep his interest going.
Hey, I may be wrong.
Steve, it’s been done. Yes, Lionel was always expensive. In the past, Marx Trains were the working man’s choice for his son. There were other companies at that time, like Kusan/AMT, but they couldn’t compete with Lionel.
Anyways, there have been things written on your last question. The wages of that time period were compared against the inflation index against today’s wages and the prices of the new trains. AND YES, for the vast majority - they are well ahead of the inflation index, meaning yes, they ARE more expensive.
I believe one of the train magazines did a story on this too. As I recall, some of the Lionel operating cars were on an even keel with inflation/wages. But most items were not. For example, from parents I’ve talked with on this very subject… they may gripe a little but most can see the merit of $60 for the operating Aquarium Car, especially the new motorized one: they can see there’s alot that goes into making the car. On the other hand, $60 for a flat car with a truck on it seems like highway robbery. And they say that in far less polite terms.
From talking with many parents, you are not alone in feeling $200+ is far far too much for a child’s train engine. Even $80 is too much when considering the low quality of the current starter Lionel RS-3 (all plastic, one motor).
And what is really ironic is that Lionel moved production from the USA to China stating they couldn’t compete with the other companies when their own labor costs were so much higher. So they fire their entire US manufacturing work force… they have their lower production costs now. So WHERE are the lower prices to reflect the MUCH MUCH lower costs of making things in China???
I wonder who John Brady thinks is going to buy a Lionel train set for his kid??? The father of a son who has been laid off from his US job because the company he used to work for can pay less in Bombay? Or the dad who used to make $40K a year and now makes $12K working at a big-box retai
brianel
My first toy train purchase in 1990 was the Lionel starter set. I had been in HO previously and was appalled when I took it out of the box, finding out that it only went in one direction and furthermore had no bell, no horn, AND, it couldn’t even pull 3 gondolas on level track without wheel slippage.
yeah, sure, I should have researched it beforehand to determine that it didn’t have the e-unit to reverse it, but who woulda thought that a $100 set doesn’t have reverse???
To make a long story short, that’s the last Lionel locomotive I purcchased. I know they have a high-end line but the experience left me sour.
IMO, a company with such prestige as Lionel shouldn’t put their name on something that is crap. It denigrates the whole company.
Would you want your name associated with something of inferior quality?
I would FIRE ALL THE LAWYERS! Then sink that money in R & D (doens’t matter which company) and QC.
David I agree with you. Some of those sets done in recent years like the Construction Set (that unpainted yellow shell reeked of cheapness) and the Safari Set were mistakes. If they’re going to do sets like these, they should make them DC sets and include a power pack other than the Bachmann/Tyco style one they use that has no real power what-so-ever. $80 is a rip-off for the Lionel stater RS-3. Though it’s a real super-duper value when compared to adding another $50 for the bonus of a sheet-metal frame to the otherwise features-identical Conrail or Western Pacific U36B.
Too bad Williams doesn’t make an identical-sized U36B.
Of course I understand the mindset against doing DC sets since the vast majority of product is AC oriented. But aside from the on-board sounds, DC power isn’t so bad. MPC certainly offered a number of DC low-end starter sets, as did Lionel during the Kughn era. And to be honest, for the price, these sets weren’t that bad other than the low-power DC power pack. Most newcomers with young kids aren’t going to be purchasing Railsounds or upper line stuff that needs the AC current to the track. I’ve found in my experience with ample DC power, the locos with DC can motors actually run better with DC current to the track.
Steve, I wouldn’t know the percentages, but I suspect a good chunk of change these days is going into R&D via new tooling and prouduct development. But ALL of this product is aimed at the adult scale operator market, other than the development of FasTrack - which as Lionel stated was intended for beginners and starter sets, yet the expansion of the line is aimed at the established adult operators (Y switches, 72 inch diameter curves), not beginners.
Not to mention the accidental development of “FasTrack Sounds 1.0 ®™”
I’ve also read that in considering the price of a brand new American made automobile, 1/3 of the list price covers the cost of all materials and assembly line labor. Makes you wonder where the other 2/3