Revell 4Q 2020

[Modelbuilder Mark]

I also want the new it releases, and try to encourage younger builders, like my grandson by building with him and my young son using Airfix Quiclbuilders, or Snap kits of Batmobile or Scooby Mystery Machine etc. I buy both new releases when available that I have interest in (much of the Moebius line), but I am happy to pick up some of the old kits because they may be something I missed years ago, or they fill a gap, or I can part them out for other projects. Long story short, there is room for both.

I do agree that Round2, if they want to think really long term, must start working in more new tooling over time. However, it may simply not be a long term goal of theirs. I have no first hand knowledge, but not all business models are intended to be Long Term. Think about the sheer number of products that you see released "as seen on TV' for example, that will fad away in a VERY short order. They intend to take what profit they can, while they can. They are clearly generating enough revenue to justify continuing the release based on the tools they have. This also includes tooling up new parts, decals, tampo tires etc., so if everyone likes it not, enough people are clearly pleased enough to keep the stream flowing. This may have been addressed by Round2, but I do not recall seeing if they ever intend to tool a lot of new kits. The are not exclusively a model company after all. 

There are MANY folks on here that have a bucket list item or "holy Grail" kit they are looking for that is certainly far below what new tooling is capable of, but that does not stop us from seeking those out. 

[keyser]

The Star Wars and armor/plane guys pay up. That’s where the money is as Willie Sutton said. R2 and R-M need that to pay for new tools that move. Landy and Etype are great starts, more to come. 
Ive yet to see topic stay on track completely in any forum. Learning stuff is one of the points of intarweb. 
Be well. Actually live long and prosper ?

[Fabrux]

43 minutes ago, keyser said:

The Star Wars and armor/plane guys pay up.

And Star Trek. And trucks.... ?

[niteowl7710]

1 hour ago, Fabrux said:

And Star Trek. And trucks.... ?

I dunno about truck guys, there's an entire separate fit being thrown one forum down over the costs of the next two AMT reboxed Italeri kits.

[slusher]

59 minutes ago, niteowl7710 said:

I dunno about truck guys, there's an entire separate fit being thrown one forum down over the costs of the next two AMT reboxed Italeri kits.

Those kits are way too expensive for the average modeler in my opinion..

[Fat Brian]

3 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

I dunno about truck guys, there's an entire separate fit being thrown one forum down over the costs of the next two AMT reboxed Italeri kits.

The reason that particular fit is being thrown is that those are the same wrong kits that have been around for 30 years, it's the accuracy of the kit for the money that has peoples hackles up. If they would put as much effort into a new semi kit as they do the sci-fi stuff they'd sell. It baffles me that no one has done a Pete 379 or Kenworth W900L, if someone would do an accurate version of those they couldn't keep them on the shelves even at that price.

[niteowl7710]

4 hours ago, Fat Brian said:

The reason that particular fit is being thrown is that those are the same wrong kits that have been around for 30 years, it's the accuracy of the kit for the money that has peoples hackles up. If they would put as much effort into a new semi kit as they do the sci-fi stuff they'd sell. It baffles me that no one has done a Pete 379 or Kenworth W900L, if someone would do an accurate version of those they couldn't keep them on the shelves even at that price.

Yes well there are plenty of inaccurate 30 year old kits floating around, and then never get any cheaper when they get reissued.  To that end it's not reasonable to expect that Italeri is going to allow AMT to sell kits for less than Italeri themselves sell it for, that's a bit of cutting off one's nose to spite their face.  

Shouldn't be baffling, a new tool truck kit would be pushing 3/4 of a million dollars to get to market, you wanna sell 10k of those then Round2 would have to charge $75.00 at wholesale to get their money back, which would put the MSRP up around $135.00.  Neither the 379 or W9 share enough parts with each other or anything else in their respective line ups to do multiple versions from the same base tooling like Moebius did with the LoneStar/ProStar.  Moebius also has the cautionary tale where the ProStar which was expected to be the big volume seller of the two took over 5 years to sell out the initial run of kits and that's with part of the production run being sold to RevellAG to rebox in Europe.

Edited November 5, 2020 by niteowl7710

[stavanzer]

I hear you, James. 

One Thing though. After spending over 10 years in the trucking industry, I have to say, I've seen about Six LoneStar trucks in person. I had to go lookup photos of the ProStar to refresh my memory. I've never seen One of them, except in photos. That may help explain the Sell-Through Issue. The W900 is still selling in huge numbers. The company I work for bought 9 of them in 2019, and 11 so far this year. And they were a small carrier. They bough 6 Petes too, all Classic Long Nose trucks.

I think a new tool W900 would sell. Given all the Sleeper and chassis variations that could be built into the tool from the beginning, a modular approach (like is now done with Modern Armor and Airplane Kits) could yield a plentiful number of sales options. Done right, even the Slope Nose & Heavy Haul Trucks  could be done off the same Chassis/ Engine tooling.

I do agree with you on the costs of developing Modern tooling. But, the 750,000.00 investment will Payoff. Just not in 5 years. However, Neither Revell or Round2 maybe able to justify a commitment that takes 10-15 years (at a minimum) to pay for itself.

Edited November 5, 2020 by alexis

[tim boyd]

9 hours ago, alexis said:

I hear you, James. 

One Thing though. After spending over 10 years in the trucking industry, I have to say, I've seen about Six LoneStar trucks in person. I had to go lookup photos of the ProStar to refresh my memory. I've never seen One of them, except in photos. That may help explain the Sell-Through Issue. The W900 is still selling in huge numbers. The company I work for bought 9 of them in 2019, and 11 so far this year. And they were a small carrier. They bough 6 Petes too, all Classic Long Nose trucks.

I think a new tool W900 would sell. Given all the Sleeper and chassis variations that could be built into the tool from the beginning, a modular approach (like is now done with Modern Armor and Airplane Kits) could yield a plentiful number of sales options. Done right, even the Slope Nose & Heavy Haul Trucks  could be done off the same Chassis/ Engine tooling.

I do agree with you on the costs of developing Modern tooling. But, the 750,000.00 investment will Payoff. Just not in 5 years. However, Neither Revell or Round2 maybe able to justify a commitment that takes 10-15 years (at a minimum) to pay for itself.

Here in the upper Midwest, ProStars seem to be probably the most common commercial tractor application next to the Freightliners....or at least that was the case when to Moebius ProStar first hit the market.  As for the Lonestar... my experience is about the the same as Alexis....maybe sightings about once a year ...  TIM 

[niteowl7710]

I think the ProStar thing might be a Western States vs. East of I-35 thing because there are still several companies with the follow up ProStar (now called the LT) including Crete, Knight/SWIFT and Western Express.

The uphill battle you face is that sure you can make the kit modular for various WB and sleeper lengths, but I think for the average modeler - who is gonna be who supplements the actual sales of these things, truck builders are a niche of a niche inside a niche - is going to want a 379 Pride & Class or a W9 84" Studio. The same way there's a handful of people who want slant 6s, or Biscaynes, or whatever base/low trim. But to sell a volume of kits they need to be Impalas, GTOs, and Hemi Cudas.

[martinfan5]

Ive seen a lot of Prostars out here in the west, the only Lonestars I recall seeing in person ever are the ones that were used by some NASCAR Cup teams.

Edited November 6, 2020 by martinfan5

[Fabrux]

I see all kinds of LoneStars, new and old, ProStars, and LTs. ?‍♂️

[the other Mike S.]

With all the doom and gloom being thrown around here concerning making a good business case for new tooling at Round 2, maybe they should close up shop after getting all the old reissues out and just make Chinese widgets or something.  I mean, come on.  Model companies are in the business of making models and creating a market for them.  Creating a new tool won't bankrupt the company and it would get new builders/buyers into the market. Once you acquire most of the old tired reissues that you want, the desire to have models that were never done or perhaps destroyed during the original annualization/nascar/funny car period increases.  It does for me. 

As for brand new tools of modern vehicles, I'm sure a new tool of a modern fullsized truck would be financially successful due to all the variations you make with it.  Also, updating their older modern tools like the 2010 Challenger and the 2017 Camaro to reflect the top of line Hellcat/Demon and ZL1 models would be a no brainer.  However, nothing has been update since 2010 and 2017 respectively.

On a similar note, I do want to see Round 2 restore more old tooling like they have done with the upcoming Nova station wagon.  However, you can only so far with that before the cost gets greater on old decrepit tooling that needs a ton of investment, like having to create an all new body, to reach production.  New modern tooling will have to be considered at some point as well.  Before Revell was restructured (or whatever you want to call it), they were coming out with some great releases, both old and new.  The '83 Hurst Olds, old and new version F-150 Raptor, Starsky and Hutch Torino, '68 Chevelle, '15 and '18 Mustang and others.  Revell seemed to be on a winning streak.  They were making investments in both old and new kit tooling.  So, I guess the so-called "business case" to make new stuff was there for them.  I think Round 2 should follow a similar approach  

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by the other Mike S.

[mrm]

17 minutes ago, the other Mike S. said:

With all the doom and gloom being thrown around here concerning making a good business case for new tooling at Round 2, maybe they should close up shop after getting all the old reissues out and just make Chinese widgets or something.  I mean, come on.  Model companies are in the business of making models and creating a market for them.  Creating a new tool won't bankrupt the company and it would get new builders/buyers into the market. Once you acquire most of the old tired reissues that you want, the desire to have models that were never done or perhaps destroyed during the original annualization/nascar/funny car period increases.  It does for me. 

As for brand new tools of modern vehicles, I'm sure a new tool of a modern fullsized truck would be financially successful due to all the variations you make with it.  Also, updating their older modern tools like the 2010 Challenger and the 2017 Camaro to reflect the top of line Hellcat/Demon and ZL1 models would be a no brainer.  However, nothing has been update since 2010 and 2017 respectively.

On a similar note, I do want to see Round 2 restore more old tooling like they have done with the upcoming Nova station wagon.  However, you can only so far with that before the cost gets greater on old decrepit tooling that needs a ton of investment, like having to create an all new body, to reach production.  New modern tooling will have to be considered at some point as well.  Before Revell was restructured (or whatever you want to call it), they were coming out with some great releases, both old and new.  The '83 Hurst Olds, old and new version F-150 Raptor, Starsky and Hutch Torino, '68 Chevelle, '15 and '18 Mustang and others.  Revell seemed to be on a winning streak.  They were making investments in both old and new kit tooling.  So, I guess the so-called "business case" to make new stuff was there for them.  I think Round 2 should follow a similar approach  

 

This! 100% agree.

[niteowl7710]

5 hours ago, the other Mike S. said:

With all the doom and gloom being thrown around here concerning making a good business case for new tooling at Round 2, maybe they should close up shop after getting all the old reissues out and just make Chinese widgets or something.  I mean, come on.  Model companies are in the business of making models and creating a market for them.  Creating a new tool won't bankrupt the company and it would get new builders/buyers into the market. Once you acquire most of the old tired reissues that you want, the desire to have models that were never done or perhaps destroyed during the original annualization/nascar/funny car period increases.  It does for me. 

As for brand new tools of modern vehicles, I'm sure a new tool of a modern fullsized truck would be financially successful due to all the variations you make with it.  Also, updating their older modern tools like the 2010 Challenger and the 2017 Camaro to reflect the top of line Hellcat/Demon and ZL1 models would be a no brainer.  However, nothing has been update since 2010 and 2017 respectively.

On a similar note, I do want to see Round 2 restore more old tooling like they have done with the upcoming Nova station wagon.  However, you can only so far with that before the cost gets greater on old decrepit tooling that needs a ton of investment, like having to create an all new body, to reach production.  New modern tooling will have to be considered at some point as well.  Before Revell was restructured (or whatever you want to call it), they were coming out with some great releases, both old and new.  The '83 Hurst Olds, old and new version F-150 Raptor, Starsky and Hutch Torino, '68 Chevelle, '15 and '18 Mustang and others.  Revell seemed to be on a winning streak.  They were making investments in both old and new kit tooling.  So, I guess the so-called "business case" to make new stuff was there for them.  I think Round 2 should follow a similar approach  

 

The only reason the Ford Build n Play kits exist is because Ford was footing the bill for those to be given away at the Detroit (and other large) Auto Shows to kids.  Then Revell turned them out as "kits" for their own sales.  After mediocre to miserable sales of their modern sports car lines we got a few things plop out as those "Pre-Paint" kits with the follow along unpainted release with much lower parts counts and simplified chassis at a much lower tooling cost.

While what you say sounds great it discounts the fact that the people running Round2 are running Round2.  They know what their sales figures show, and what is or isn't popular for them in terms of being successful.  Their Showroom Replicas were unassembled promos and had factory support, and the 2017/2018 Camaro had SEVEN releases in order to justify that tooling decision.  Clearly it didn't sell well enough to justify doing a ZL1, nor did Revell's Challenger move enough units to make a newer version or any of the Hellcat/Demon versions.

I'd love to see someone take a flyer on making a modern full size truck kit, but then it's not my $300,000.00 we're spending...

Edited November 10, 2020 by niteowl7710

[tim boyd]

5 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

The only reason the Ford Build n Play kits exist is because Ford was footing the bill for those to be given away at the Detroit (and other large) Auto Shows to kids.  Then Revell turned them out as "kits" for their own sales.  After mediocre to miserable sales of their modern sports car lines we got a few things plop out as those "Pre-Paint" kits with the follow along unpainted release with much lower parts counts and simplified chassis at a much lower tooling cost.

While what you say sounds great it discounts the fact that the people running Round2 are running Round2.  They know what their sales figures show, and what is or isn't popular for them in terms of being successful.  Their Showroom Replicas were unassembled promos and had factory support, and the 2017/2018 Camaro had SEVEN releases in order to justify that tooling decision.  Clearly it didn't sell well enough to justify doing a ZL1, nor did Revell's Challenger move enough units to make a newer version or any of the Hellcat/Demon versions.

I'd love to see someone take a flyer on making a modern full size truck kit, but then it's not my $300,000.00 we're spending...

Interesting comments above from Mike, Michael, and James.  

Not too surprisingly, I'm sure, I have a somewhat different view on some of these points.  Round 2's business model is nearly 15 years now since they took over licensing, and ten years on since they bought the tools.  Their business model is well established, apparently profitable, and it is certainly serving a part of the market.  

James' points on the new Camaro kit are exactly on point, too, but my view is that Round 2 placed their bet on the wrong car to kit.  With today's hindsight at hand, had Round 2 chosen the S550 Mustang  (2015 to present) instead of the Camaro, I believe the tool would have been far more successful for them.  I base that on the relative sales success and broader societal appeal differentials between the 1/1 scale cars, where the current Mustang has pretty much buried the current Camaro in sales with this latest generation of products between the two manufacturers.  The current Mustang is also sold globally now with considerable success, which would have surely enhanced overseas kit sales vs. the Camaro kit (by how much, however, is a subject worthy of debate, I suppose).  Finally, there would have been more potential derivative kits based on the number of derivative 1/1 scale S550 Mustangs over the last six years (Eco Boost 4, GT, GT Performance Pack 2, Bullit, Mach 1, GT350,. and GT500, as well as mid cycle freshenings and convertible versions of some of those).  To Round 2's defense, while all this is very clear now, it was not so clear back when Round 2 was choosing the subject of this kit series.  Ironically, it appears that one of the Round 2 considerations in choosing the Camaro over the Mustang was the already introduced Revell S550 Mustang toy kits.   I see these as entirely different hobby kit markets, but from Round 2's perspective and placing a bet on the subject, they apparently saw the two as overlapping too much tp justify both curbside and full detail Mustang kits of their own.      

I still believe that there is a reasonable chance we'll see one new tool kit from Round 2 in the next year or two; I know it is under serious consideration but do not know whether it has been committed to funding or cutting metal, as they say. 

As for Revell, yes I think agree that were on a modest bit of a roll, but I also know that a large portion of their tooling budget in recent years was diverted to projects that were targeted at pre-teens and producing replicas of mass appeal subjects like the latest Star Wars movie toys.  This was a strategic, long term bet by Revell's top executive to both build a new market for toy and kit replicas and to secure short-mid term sales spikes tied to mass market cultural events.  Whether it was successful I do not know, however I do recall reading that sales of all the latest Star Wars toy lines, regardless of subject or format, were very disappointing.   Historically, placing bets on hobby kits tied to mass market events like movies has been very much a hit or (primarily) risk proposition.  When it works (Monkeemobile, Dukes Charger, original Star Trek products) it is huge, but when it fails to gain momentum, the negative effects on the kitmakers have typically been far reaching and long term. Meanwhile, the Hobbico debacle and its aftermath has fundamentally changed Revell's present and future plans.   I do not believe we will see much new car and truck kit tooling from them as long as the current investors are in control, but we will see occasional further modifications of existing kit tools to broaden the product line.   The upcoming 1971 Mach 1 (and presumably, a Boss 351 to follow) kit(s) are the one exception to this conclusion, and if they sell well, it could open the financial spigots for other kit topics targeted primarily for the North American market.  

Finally, although I have been retired from Ford for seven years now, I am surprised to hear that they reportedly funded the "Build and Play" kits. James, do you have firsthand info that confirms this?  (Ford is a very big company, and even when I worked there, there was much I didn't know.)  Not saying this is not the case, just looking for how certain that info is, and what the source was.... 

Best all....TIM

 

[Justin Porter]

7 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

After mediocre to miserable sales of their modern sports car lines we got a few things plop out as those "Pre-Paint" kits with the follow along unpainted release with much lower parts counts and simplified chassis at a much lower tooling cost.

I'd love to see the data that supports that Revell's BMW i8, McLaren 570s, Audi R8 and R8 Spyder, Mercedes SLS AMG and AMG GT, and Porsche 918 and Panamera haven't been highly successful kits on global market? I mean, that's a lot of all-new tool exotics (nearly 1 a year since 2010) for Revell to have done so clearly they're not failing in competing globally with Aoshima and Fujimi in that genre otherwise they would be course correcting. 
 

[niteowl7710]

2 hours ago, Justin Porter said:

I'd love to see the data that supports that Revell's BMW i8, McLaren 570s, Audi R8 and R8 Spyder, Mercedes SLS AMG and AMG GT, and Porsche 918 and Panamera haven't been highly successful kits on global market? I mean, that's a lot of all-new tool exotics (nearly 1 a year since 2010) for Revell to have done so clearly they're not failing in competing globally with Aoshima and Fujimi in that genre otherwise they would be course correcting. 
 

No no, that's Revell of Germany, I mean the U.S. sports cars.  The Mustang/Camaro/Corvette/Challenger.  The 2010 ZR-1 was the worst selling Corvette kit they did (directly from someone at the former Hobbico), and the prior 2000s era ones weren't too popular either.  They really milked the heck out of the 2006-2008 Mustangs, and tried to do that again with the 2010-2013 ones.  But they suffered the same sort of "glutton of kits" problem that Moebius suffered from with the F-100s.  Simply how many of these effectively same kits does any one person buy.  You have to REEEAALLY like Mustangs to have bought all 8 of the glue kits, and the Snap-Tite Convertible.  The Coyote 5.0 should have sold Mustangs well enough on the engine alone, but all we ever saw of it was the simplified pre-paint kit with the 5 part engine. 

The '09 Challenger & '10 Camaros were one and done tools in the middle of peak Revell "everything needs 3 to 5 variants"?  They would have had to sell 16k of each of those kits downstream just to break even, let alone turn a profit.  It wouldn't totally surprise me if there isn't more to both of those tools, and we never saw them because of the confluence of the Great Recession compounded by slow sales ala the "Day 2" Jeep Wrangler that's been lurking in the Tomb Raider kit since 2004.

[niteowl7710]

4 hours ago, tim boyd said:

Interesting comments above from Mike, Michael, and James.  

Not too surprisingly, I'm sure, I have a somewhat different view on some of these points.  Round 2's business model is nearly 15 years now since they took over licensing, and ten years on since they bought the tools.  Their business model is well established, apparently profitable, and it is certainly serving a part of the market.  

James' points on the new Camaro kit are exactly on point, too, but my view is that Round 2 placed their bet on the wrong car to kit.  With today's hindsight at hand, had Round 2 chosen the S550 Mustang  (2015 to present) instead of the Camaro, I believe the tool would have been far more successful for them.  I base that on the relative sales success and broader societal appeal differentials between the 1/1 scale cars, where the current Mustang has pretty much buried the current Camaro in sales with this latest generation of products between the two manufacturers.  The current Mustang is also sold globally now with considerable success, which would have surely enhanced overseas kit sales vs. the Camaro kit (by how much, however, is a subject worthy of debate, I suppose).  Finally, there would have been more potential derivative kits based on the number of derivative 1/1 scale S550 Mustangs over the last six years (Eco Boost 4, GT, GT Performance Pack 2, Bullit, Mach 1, GT350,. and GT500, as well as mid cycle freshenings and convertible versions of some of those).  To Round 2's defense, while all this is very clear now, it was not so clear back when Round 2 was choosing the subject of this kit series.  Ironically, it appears that one of the Round 2 considerations in choosing the Camaro over the Mustang was the already introduced Revell S550 Mustang toy kits.   I see these as entirely different hobby kit markets, but from Round 2's perspective and placing a bet on the subject, they apparently saw the two as overlapping too much tp justify both curbside and full detail Mustang kits of their own.      

I still believe that there is a reasonable chance we'll see one new tool kit from Round 2 in the next year or two; I know it is under serious consideration but do not know whether it has been committed to funding or cutting metal, as they say. 

As for Revell, yes I think agree that were on a modest bit of a roll, but I also know that a large portion of their tooling budget in recent years was diverted to projects that were targeted at pre-teens and producing replicas of mass appeal subjects like the latest Star Wars movie toys.  This was a strategic, long term bet by Revell's top executive to both build a new market for toy and kit replicas and to secure short-mid term sales spikes tied to mass market cultural events.  Whether it was successful I do not know, however I do recall reading that sales of all the latest Star Wars toy lines, regardless of subject or format, were very disappointing.   Historically, placing bets on hobby kits tied to mass market events like movies has been very much a hit or (primarily) risk proposition.  When it works (Monkeemobile, Dukes Charger, original Star Trek products) it is huge, but when it fails to gain momentum, the negative effects on the kitmakers have typically been far reaching and long term. Meanwhile, the Hobbico debacle and its aftermath has fundamentally changed Revell's present and future plans.   I do not believe we will see much new car and truck kit tooling from them as long as the current investors are in control, but we will see occasional further modifications of existing kit tools to broaden the product line.   The upcoming 1971 Mach 1 (and presumably, a Boss 351 to follow) kit(s) are the one exception to this conclusion, and if they sell well, it could open the financial spigots for other kit topics targeted primarily for the North American market.  

Finally, although I have been retired from Ford for seven years now, I am surprised to hear that they reportedly funded the "Build and Play" kits. James, do you have firsthand info that confirms this?  (Ford is a very big company, and even when I worked there, there was much I didn't know.)  Not saying this is not the case, just looking for how certain that info is, and what the source was.... 

Best all....TIM

 

Tim,

Back when the first S550 Mustang was done for the Detroit Auto Show Revell had said that Ford paid them to produce it for them specifically for the give away and the originals were blazen with a giant tampo printed Ford logo on the chassis.  You might recall people went nuts on eBay trying to buy one, because at that moment in time there was no word that there would be a boxed "kit" version of it in the future.  The subsequent Ford BnPs were always brand new cars done in conjunction with the Auto Show the Ford GT and particularly the "2nd Gen" Ford Raptor were done before the 1:1 cars were even on sale.

I also think Round2 might have been leery of doing a compilation of Mustangs after watching Revell make a entire slew of them to diminishing returns as I mentioned to Justin.  Everyone might buy one or two, but you really have to be a fan of the car to have purchased them ALL.  You end up relying on the casual Hobby Lobby builder (no not people who use the coupon - calm down people, but people who buy a kit a month or so) to buy the latter versions, and eventually even HL is going to have 5 Mustangs on the shelf at the same time.  I like Camaros, but I've still only ever purchased the first of the Round2 kits.

[Justin Porter]

4 minutes ago, niteowl7710 said:

No no, that's Revell of Germany, I mean the U.S. sports cars.  The Mustang/Camaro/Corvette/Challenger.  The 2010 ZR-1 was the worst selling Corvette kit they did (directly from someone at the former Hobbico), and the prior 2000s era ones weren't too popular either.  They really milked the heck out of the 2006-2008 Mustangs, and tried to do that again with the 2010-2013 ones.  But they suffered the same sort of "glutton of kits" problem that Moebius suffered from with the F-100s.  Simply how many of these effectively same kits does any one person buy.  You have to REEEAALLY like Mustangs to have bought all 8 of the glue kits, and the Snap-Tite Convertible.  The Coyote 5.0 should have sold Mustangs well enough on the engine alone, but all we ever saw of it was the simplified pre-paint kit with the 5 part engine. 

The '09 Challenger & '10 Camaros were one and done tools in the middle of peak Revell "everything needs 3 to 5 variants"?  They would have had to sell 16k of each of those kits downstream just to break even, let alone turn a profit.  It wouldn't totally surprise me if there isn't more to both of those tools, and we never saw them because of the confluence of the Great Recession compounded by slow sales ala the "Day 2" Jeep Wrangler that's been lurking in the Tomb Raider kit since 2004.

Revell of Germany IS Revell especially in the now. You cannot throw out Revell of Germany simply because it doesn't prove your "modern sports cars by Revell don't sell" narrative particularly when these same kits ALSO end up in Revell US boxes and do quite well. 

As to the variant issue, would you care to hazard a guess as to exactly how visibly discernible the differences are between an Fw-190 A3, A4, A5, and A8 in 1/48th scale? I'll give you a hint, discernible enough to builders that Eduard felt it necessary to release kits in their Profipack line representing all of these variants, and each with 6 or more marking variations worth of decals inside. 

In all forms of building, you have casual builders for whom "looks like it" is enough and you have enthusiasts who want accurate representations of specific vehicles. Smart companies find ways to cater to both builders to nab as many sales as possible OR pick one or the other to cater exclusively to. Moebius caters exclusively to enthusiast builders who want detail and accuracy and they charge those builders accordingly so that they don't have to sell as many units.

[the other Mike S.]

4 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

 

I'm not a Mustang fan, but I bought several of the S550 Mustang kits. The '15 and '18 Build & Play versions and the older Snap-Tite convertible.  I did that to have a couple of late model performance cars in my collection.  With the 2016 Camaro, I bought the Fifty anniv. kit, two of them actually, the '16 and "1LE" snap kits, the prepainted red model kit and the blue promo edition.  So, people are indeed buying multiple copies of these unless it's just me. lol!  Updating the tooling to a ZL1 model or even the '19 update would've given more life to the tooling as I would have bought those as well.  Having the tooling sit static with no updates almost guarantees grim future sales.  The 5th gen was the same way.  They stopped at the '13 ZL1 coupe and convertible and that was it.  It would have been great if they continued on to the updated '14-'15 restyle including the Z28 model.  The Challenger would be even less expensive since that car hasn't really changed all that much in 1:1 scale over the years.  Updating it would create more interest with more kit sales if they did the Hellcat/Demon widebody variants.  Since Revell is unlikely to update their Challenger tool for the time being due to their limted business plan right now, Round 2 could get the jump in updating their own Challenger tool to the lastest model.

Unfortunately, it's becoming clear to me that even today, having automobile manufacturer support is critical to getting new tooling done.  So, building strong relationships and profitable alliances with them is a good idea for long term investment.  I do recall reading on here about the problem Revell had with GM when the C7 first came out.  I'm sure that didn't help the hobby in general and was probably another nail in the coffin for future promo contracts.  Of course, this all depends if the senario described earlier, short term gains with no future investment, is not true.  However, I do think the model compamies do want to stay in business and continue expanding the market for the hobby.  Well, I would at least hope so.

If the model companies are unwilling to take chances on new tooling of old and new models, preferring to just take the easy road with reissue after reissue after reissue until the tooling wears out, their business plan is basically a dead end senario.  I have enough '70 Chevelles to last me a lifetime with the Jack Reacher edition being the last version I bought.  I have enough 6th gen Camaros unless they release a ZL1 model, but I'm not holding my breath.   I also have enough C7's.  The C8 would be a gotta have for me right now.  Unfortunately, no business case exists for it according to many around here or on the Spotlight board.  So, I guess I will have continue using my money picking up old annuals and promos from the 'bay (and other places) to round out my collection.  If the model companies want my money, they need to start making investments in new kits which includes both old and new models.

Just my $.03.

Edited November 10, 2020 by the other Mike S.

[Ron Warner]

6 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

Tim,

Back when the first S550 Mustang was done for the Detroit Auto Show Revell had said that Ford paid them to produce it for them specifically for the give away and the originals were blazen with a giant tampo printed Ford logo on the chassis.  You might recall people went nuts on eBay trying to buy one, because at that moment in time there was no word that there would be a boxed "kit" version of it in the future.  The subsequent Ford BnPs were always brand new cars done in conjunction with the Auto Show the Ford GT and particularly the "2nd Gen" Ford Raptor were done before the 1:1 cars were even on sale.

 

Yeah. That makes sense. Build and Play kits were out when I built kits years ago too! I thought that Build and Play Crown Victoria cop car was a new kit by Revell but it must be the old Lindberg kit I had long ago. I wouldn't think Ford would pay them to do an all-new kit of a car that old! That would make the whole premise Ford paid for them wrong, and since you know people inside the kit companies that can't be. It's great to hear from people with real "I know the inner workings" firsthand knowlege like we have here.

[niteowl7710]

49 minutes ago, Ron Warner said:

Yeah. That makes sense. Build and Play kits were out when I built kits years ago too! I thought that Build and Play Crown Victoria cop car was a new kit by Revell but it must be the old Lindberg kit I had long ago. I wouldn't think Ford would pay them to do an all-new kit of a car that old! That would make the whole premise Ford paid for them wrong, and since you know people inside the kit companies that can't be. It's great to hear from people with real "I know the inner workings" firsthand knowlege like we have here.

I said they paid for the NEW cars that were given away at the Auto Shows. The old Vic wasn't one of those kits, and Ford clearly didn't pay for the Audi or the Jeep either.

[SSNJim]

The Lindbergh and Revell Crown Victorias are completely different. For starters, the Lindbergh CV is a police version (P71), and the Revell is a civilian version (P73) - the police cars have unique side moldings. I have both, and there are no shared parts between them. 

[Ron Warner]

42 minutes ago, SSNJim said:

The Lindbergh and Revell Crown Victorias are completely different. For starters, the Lindbergh CV is a police version (P71), and the Revell is a civilian version (P73) - the police cars have unique side moldings. I have both, and there are no shared parts between them. 

 

 

44 minutes ago, niteowl7710 said:

I said they paid for the NEW cars that were given away at the Auto Shows. The old Vic wasn't one of those kits, and Ford clearly didn't pay for the Audi or the Jeep either.

Oh. I thought the Crown Vic was a Build and Play. I figured they did it like that back a long time ago. When you said  "Ford BnPs were always brand new cars done in conjunction with the Auto Show" I thought you meant "always." You guys with those insider sources have a leg up on the rest of us!

Edited November 11, 2020 by Ron Warner