Subject:
|
Re: Hypothetically Speaking...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:46:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1028 times
|
| |
|
|
"John Neal" <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:3A33E582.4335F947@uswest.net...
>
> Mike Walsh wrote:
> >
> > I'd prefer them to stay 6-wide. Moving to 8-wide would likely mean at • least
> > a 33% more bricks to build a train which means the cost would go up a • fair
> > amount. There are a lot of good 6-wide designs, I not sure I see any • real
> > benefit to TLC for moving to 8-wide. I suspect that staying with 6-wide
> > will be a better business decision for TLC and allow them to serve a • larger
> > market. When "toys" get in the three digit price range there are a lot • of
> > people who won't even consider them as a purchase. Now if TLC wants to • go
> > after the model railroading market then changing to 8-wide probably • makes
> > sense but that would be a divergence from their primary business.
>
> This is my whole point! Are people happy with TLC producing "toy" trains, • or
> would people like to see a move on the part of TLC to go to the next level • of
> detail and sophistication in the trains theme! I hear a lot of people • saying
> that they want a larger radius curves, DCC, motorized points, etc. But if • you
> are satisfied with LEGO trains as "toys", why desire "model railroad"
> appointments? This seems a little inconsistent to me.
As someone who builds 'toy trains', I don't think it's inconsistent.
Controlling trains is not about having a 'model railroad' but doing what
trains are created for: to ride the track. It doesn't matter if the trains
are realistic or not, the ability to control the train's movement is what
everyone likes!
What about this: someone likes castles and trains and decides to mix the
themes and creates a medieval fantasy steam train (much like Jeff Johnston's
excellent steam powered fantasy style mecha:
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/sakura/moc/castleworld/cornelius/cornelius.htm
l )
Far from 'model railroad' but it would still be great to use DCC to run the
trains! Maybe it's a far fetched example... oh well.
> And BTW, I am not considering the benefits or "business decisions" of TLC; • I am
> asking about what is most beneficial *to us* as consumers. If it is a
> divergence from their primary business, it will be because that is what • *we*
> wanted, not what *they* want.
Hmm. Sorry to put it this way but, I'm not sure if '8 wide and lot's of
prototypical details' is what *all* of us want. It's what *some* of us want.
Since it's a matter of personal tast I fail to see how the choice 6 or 8 is
benificial to *us*. As long TLC produces parts, people can decide themselves
what format they're confortable with.
-Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Hypothetically Speaking...
|
| (...) This is my whole point! Are people happy with TLC producing "toy" trains, or would people like to see a move on the part of TLC to go to the next level of detail and sophistication in the trains theme! I hear a lot of people saying that they (...) (24 years ago, 10-Dec-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
