Where are the Model Trucks?

[Aaronw]

Aaron, I think I can answer some of your questions.

A lot of the pickup truck tooling in the 60's & 70's was based on promo tooling for the "Big Three", thus most of the tooling was already bought & paid for when AMT or MPC would modify it to produce the annual truck kits, just like the annual car kits. If GM wanted a promo of the 68 Chevy pickup, they would order enough copies of it for resale to justify the tooling costs required for AMT/MPC to tool it up, & then AMT/MPC could modify the already paid for tooling for the annual kit version. What wasn't based on promo tooling was budgeted into the costs of the annual tooling, in order to provide a deeper product line of annuals, (such as AMT offering in the 69 annual line the following Chevies: Impala, Chevelle, Corvair, Corvette, Camaro & pickup), something that is no longer profitable for the model companies to do. In those days of far higher sales & profits, AMT could afford a sales "loser", (comparatively speaking), like a 68 Chevy pickup or a 68 Lincoln Continental four door, because the loss was offset by the profit margins on the 68 Camaro or 68 Mustang annual kits that were flying off the shelves. They could afford more sales duds because other kits would make up the margins.

Reissues were based on the tooling that was already paid for, or that already had it's tooling costs amortizied over the years, so if the tooling was just sitting around, why not run a reissue/modified reissue of it to hopefully generate more profits?

If you discount the trucks that have been continuously popular among rodders & restorers, (53-56 Ford F 100, early Ford trucks as two examples), over the years, & the trucks based on promo &/or annual tooling, you'll actually see a scarcity of truck kits in comparison to the rest of the market. Sad fact is that trucks are an extremely small niche of the overall model car market, (which isn't the same as the 1/1 car market), & thus don't generate enough profits to make them as viable overall.

Just facts from over the years. I'd personally love to see more vintage pickup trucks, (& a few new ones), tooled up myself!

[Eshaver]

Mark , don't know how tal you are and I guess it's irelevent . I'm 6'3 and I have a wail of a time squeezing myself into my wifes 87 Mustang . Before I had the 78 Ford F-100 that I enjoy driving noiw , I had the 1997 Chrysler from hell and a 1978 Ford van that was in constant need of something . Now years ago A M T did do a fabulous model of the van . I have a built example I bought years ago . Do I think A M T / Round 2 will re-release it , UMMMMM , doubt it serioiusly . Do I think A M T will re- release their TIRED OLE 63 Ford Galaxy , heck yeah !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ed Shaver

[James Flowers]

So I guess its 57 Chevy's and 32 Fords and chopped 49 Mercury's are all we will ever get. I have not bought a one and I will not. So when all of us old modelers die, I guess the hobby will die also. Because no one will want what they sell Now.

Edited September 20, 2009 by mustanglover1951

[MikeMc]

So I guess its 57 Chevy's and 32 Fords and chopped 49 Mercury's are all we will ever get. I have not bought a one and I will not. So when all of us old modelers die, I guess the hobby will die also. Because no one will want what they sell Now.

[Aaronw]

It's true that nearly all new tooling from the mid 70's on isn't promo based, but again, look at a lot of what was tooled up, (if not the majority), especially in the late 80's to late 90's; newly tooled kits of vintage trucks, (50 Ford, 50 Chevy, 55-57 Chevy, 60 Chevy, & 64-65 Chevy). Other than the Dodge Ram concept truck that Revell tooled up, the only other Dodge Rams we got were promo based curbside kits. There were newly tooled full detail kits of Fords, Chevys & even a few GMC trucks through 1999 or so, but it slowed to a trickle, (comparatively speaking), by the mid 90's. The vintage subjects are the ones that have been reissued, as they are a "safer bet" for sales overall.

Again I just have the feeling that it's all based on overall sales numbers, & more modern trucks just don't have/aren't perceived to have the kind of sales that the model companies think justifies a new tooling investment.

[Modelmartin]

That still leaves the 41 Chevy, 50 Ford, 50 Chevy, 60 Chevy, 64/65 Chevy, multiple 70s Dodges, Fords and Chevys, 70s Blazers (72 & 75?), 84 GMC, 80s Toyota and Datsun pickups, 80s Bronco, 80-90s Ford F150, F250, F350, 80-90s Chevy 1500 & 3500, 1994 Dodge 2500 & 3500, 1996 Tahoe, 1997 Expedition, 1999 Chevy, and the handful of more recent luxury SUVs. I won't even get into all the big rigs we got in the 70-80s.

Even discounting the trucks from the 50-60s as "hotrodable, lowridable etc" we generally have at least one or two examples of each big 3 truck until the mid 90s, then nothing. Most of the existing model trucks are way to detailed to be promos, so I don't really think the lack of promos has much to do with it.

[Aaronw]

That sounds like a lot of kits to me!!!

There are quite a few, and since I really do prefer the older stuff, and several resin casters have filled in some of the holes I'm not too grumpy about the state of truck models.

However I do agree with those saying there is a big hole in modern trucks, and there are several older trucks we could really use.

1920s-1950 Ford rules the truck model world (1925, 1929, 1934, 1937, 1940, 1950, 1953, 1956) the 1941 Chevy is the only non-Ford truck model in the period.

1957-1972 Chevy has all the truck models (1957, 1960, 1964, 1965, 1972) There is a Ford in there 1960, 61? but it is not easy to find or cheap.

The early 50s isn't bad, 50, 55, 57 Chevy, 50, 53, 56 Ford, no Dodges though.

The 70s wasn't too bad either with all 3 of the big 3 fairly well represented.

So we could really use some pre 70s Dodges, and a Chevy or two older than the 1941.

Since the '48-50 Ford and '41-46 Chevy are two of my favorite trucks, and at that time there was little difference between a 1/2 ton or 2 ton truck I'm not doing too bad. Since I've bought 6-8 of each of these kits, nobody can blame me if the sales are not high enough.

[Aaronw]

AMT had kept making promos through the 90's, just not like they used to & the Dodge Ram was promo based. Same with the "Snap Fast" Plymouth Prowler, (the curbside version that came out first, circa 1995 IIRC, not the full detail kit that AMT later tooled up). They also did Corvette promos through the 80's-90's as well as the Geo Storm, (or was it a Saturn?), promos, & some "retro promos", (66 Ford Fairlane GT, 70 Corvette LS1), also.

I did not know they were still making Promos that late, I just though they went with snap tite for those kits because they were going after kids in that period.

I'll take snap kits, better than no kits. I don't really like building motors anyway.

Edited September 21, 2009 by Aaronw

[abedooley]

I still haven't heard anyone comment on advertising!?!? And I keep hearing that they base alot of what they make by what is selling in the 1:1 market........................... WHAT ABOUT THE LAST 8 OR 9 YEARS (except the last 2) WHEN THE TRUCK MARKET WAS BOOMING??????? I work in the automotive market and I know what was selling and what wasn't. I don't remember any 32s being made in the last, uhhhhhh, 77 YEARS!!!! I know, I know, thats based on their numbers, not 1:1 before anyone blows a gasket over a joke. And what do i really know???????? I don't work at Revell or AMT....... HELL, I've only spoke to someone once on the phone at Revell, and that was ordering replacement CRAPPY CHROME parts. I know it doesn't happen very often, but what I recieved was just flat out unexceptible. I've got about 10 years of injection molding experience and I know that that doesn't happen without SOMEONE noticing.

I don't have ANYTHING that has the sprue location in an inconspicuous spot on the chrome. Just like American auto manufacturers, they're behind the curve. If and when Tamiya, Aoshima, or the other Japanese companies wise up to our liking, I'm afraid they'll blow right by the companies asleep at the wheel. And I REALLY don't wanna see that happen. Their aftermarket is getting crazy over there as well. They're not exceeding us now, but give it time, we may be raving over the new 32' Ford Sedan by Tamiya before Revell even realises they made the tooling. I know in some places over there, the hotrod scene is getting heavy!

I respect Tim and ART VERY VERY much, and I agree/believe with everything you guys are saying. I just dont like cold hard facts like most ppl. because most of the time its a buzz kill, but thats what is needed, SOMETIMES. It looks good on paper, but you never really know until you get your feet wet.

P.S. Its not that ppl aren't still attracted to big ol' gas guzzlin' TRUCKS........... because ppl still are........... they just can't afford to gas 'em up everyday. I personally refuse to drive anything smaller than my Blazer.

Edited September 22, 2009 by abedooley

[The Red Ranger]

I respect Tim and ART VERY VERY much, and I agree/believe with everything you guys are saying. I just dont like cold hard facts like most ppl. because most of the time its a buzz kill, but thats what is needed, SOMETIMES. It looks good on paper, but you never really know until you get your feet wet.

My sentiments exactly!

I guess my point is this. Back in the day before there was a 32 ford, or a 57 chevy kit someone had to suggest that it'd be a smart idea to make them, right? Well did they say "No we will only keep doing what we know will sell". I mean my whole point is.... no one knows if modern trucks would sell or not because there hasn't been a single attempt. Why not try just ONE of these modern trucks and see the success. Is one new model really going to sink Revell? Is there ever a model that NEVER sells? So really, people can say all day long "They stick with what sells" but that means nothing because they have no clue if a new truck would sell or not.

This is a hobby that thrives itself on being new, creative, taking risk and to see the model companies not reflect that is slightly discouraging, I'm sorry.

Can anyone give me a reason why a single new model truck, say the new Super Duty Ford, since it sells pretty well, would not sell? Does anyone think there would be absolutely no interest in this model? Of coarse not. As it's been said before many people get into this hobby to initially recreate their 1:1 Rides and it grows from there. "Wow, that wasn't that bad. I've always wanted a First Gen Camaro, oh hey I can build one!"

I don't deny at all that the 57 Chevies, 32 Fords and 49 Mercury kits out there are a huge part of the hobby.. I'm just saying there is a completely separate side of the hobby that has been ignored for a while and I think if Revell started keeping a decent modern library of kits to sell alongside the classic must haves the hobby would only benefit.

I think it is partially cowardly to not attempt to try something new because there is risk in it. Thats all it is when people say "No the money is in 32 fords, 57 Chevies and 49 Mercs so we will only release those is some updated way cause thats what has made money in the past." I know they are a business but to only do what has proved to work because you don't want to take a chance. That's weak sauce.

[Harry P.]

I agree!

I'm one of the biggest supporters of the idea of releasing new kits of new subjects never before done. But what we get instead is perpetual rehashes of '32 Fords, '57 Chevies and of course everyone's "favorite" , the incredibly overdone Mercury. All three nice cars to be sure, and no offense to their fans, but they've all been done and redone and redone again many, many times.

If only they would have taken the money spent on reworking and retooling all the versions of these same three kits and put it towards creating a new kit of a previously never done subject...

It looks like circumstances (the economy, the actual number of model kit buyers) have caused the kitmakers to rely more on the "sure things" in their stable instead of giving us more new kits. I can't really blame them for playing it safe, but it sure would be nice if more all-new kits of never before done subjects would see release instead of rehashing the same old subjects yet again.

[tim boyd]

I agree!

I'm one of the biggest supporters of the idea of releasing new kits of new subjects never before done. But what we get instead is perpetual rehashes of '32 Fords, '57 Chevies and of course everyone's "favorite" , the incredibly overdone Mercury. All three nice cars to be sure, and no offense to their fans, but they've all been done and redone and redone again many, many times.

If only they would have taken the money spent on reworking and retooling all the versions of these same three kits and put it towards creating a new kit of a previously never done subject...

It looks like circumstances (the economy, the actual number of model kit buyers) have caused the kitmakers to rely more on the "sure things" in their stable instead of giving us more new kits. I can't really blame them for playing it safe, but it sure would be nice if more all-new kits of never before done subjects would see release instead of rehashing the same old subjects yet again.

Harry...I've taken the liberty to copy my post from the '32 thread here as it addresses your point, based on my understanding of the economics of the hobby industury. Here it is:

Doing a kit variation (the subject of Ken's original thread on the '32 Fords) IS NOT the same as doing an all new tool. Or stated another way, you are not missing out on all new tools of your favorite subject because Revell tooled up a five window coupe with a new Hemi engine, all new interior, additional exterior options, and a new decal sheet. Let me explain....

First is the creation of continued variations of kits like the '32 Ford and the Shelby, Bullit, and GT500 versions of the '06 Mustang GT kit. These variations are of relatively low incremental cost to a company like Revell Monogram. Because they sell well and because 80% of the "tool" has already been paid off via sales of previous versions, they can put together the business case to do addtional, and relatively specialized, variations. It makes us modelers happy, they sell relatively well, and most importantly, it helps them remain a viable business enterprise that can someday invest in all new tools.

Second, and a completely different set of circumstances, is the creation of all-new or mostly new tools, which is what most of the suggestions in this thread are. These require an exponentially larger investment of engineering time and tool cutting for an entirely new kit. The subject must be of broad enough appeal to promise much higher sales than a variation of an existing kit, as the much larger investment must be paid off with much greater sales and income.

So it's not an equal choice for Revell to do another '32 body vs. an all-new kit of something else. They are completely different sets of business considerations. Or that your favorite idea somehow will never see the light of day because Revell does variations of other kits. It just doesn't work that way.

I personally hope that we continue to see variants of existing kits AND all-new tools. Just be cognizant that with today's economy and the very specialized (read, much lower sales volume) of our hobby these days, all new tools must comprise some pretty popular subjects to be a business success.

************

Harry, realize this is not what you want to hear, and it is certainly possible that my information is out of date. But it is an important distinction to make. Plus who knows, maybe we'll see a bunch of all-new tools announced at the Chicago Hobby Show that will make this whole subject irrelevant. How's that for a positive thought?

Best regards...TIM

[James Flowers]

My sentiments exactly!

I guess my point is this. Back in the day before there was a 32 ford, or a 57 chevy kit someone had to suggest that it'd be a smart idea to make them, right? Well did they say "No we will only keep doing what we know will sell". I mean my whole point is.... no one knows if modern trucks would sell or not because there hasn't been a single attempt. Why not try just ONE of these modern trucks and see the success. Is one new model really going to sink Revell? Is there ever a model that NEVER sells? So really, people can say all day long "They stick with what sells" but that means nothing because they have no clue if a new truck would sell or not.

This is a hobby that thrives itself on being new, creative, taking risk and to see the model companies not reflect that is slightly discouraging, I'm sorry.

Can anyone give me a reason why a single new model truck, say the new Super Duty Ford, since it sells pretty well, would not sell? Does anyone think there would be absolutely no interest in this model? Of coarse not. As it's been said before many people get into this hobby to initially recreate their 1:1 Rides and it grows from there. "Wow, that wasn't that bad. I've always wanted a First Gen Camaro, oh hey I can build one!"

I don't deny at all that the 57 Chevies, 32 Fords and 49 Mercury kits out there are a huge part of the hobby.. I'm just saying there is a completely separate side of the hobby that has been ignored for a while and I think if Revell started keeping a decent modern library of kits to sell alongside the classic must haves the hobby would only benefit.

I think it is partially cowardly to not attempt to try something new because there is risk in it. Thats all it is when people say "No the money is in 32 fords, 57 Chevies and 49 Mercs so we will only release those is some updated way cause thats what has made money in the past." I know they are a business but to only do what has proved to work because you don't want to take a chance. That's weak sauce.

Finally someone else gets it.

[James Flowers]

I agree!

I'm one of the biggest supporters of the idea of releasing new kits of new subjects never before done. But what we get instead is perpetual rehashes of '32 Fords, '57 Chevies and of course everyone's "favorite" , the incredibly overdone Mercury. All three nice cars to be sure, and no offense to their fans, but they've all been done and redone and redone again many, many times.

If only they would have taken the money spent on reworking and retooling all the versions of these same three kits and put it towards creating a new kit of a previously never done subject...

It looks like circumstances (the economy, the actual number of model kit buyers) have caused the kitmakers to rely more on the "sure things" in their stable instead of giving us more new kits. I can't really blame them for playing it safe, but it sure would be nice if more all-new kits of never before done subjects would see release instead of rehashing the same old subjects yet again.

I am glad you agree Harry.

[James Flowers]

Just out of curiosity, as the numbers quoted by Tim are based on the knowledge he's gained over the past 30+ years in dealing & interacting with the model car companies in general, & the new tooling costs I offered in my response came from a highly reliable source who has worked with the manufacturers very recently, (said numbers I quoted for new tools might even be a bit low compared to actual costs now), just because someone posts something that falls in line with your thoughts & wishes, (as opposed to the actual facts given by myself and Tim,), or Harry agrees with you, those of us with actual, verifiable facts are somehow "wrong"!?!

Pray tell, if I said that cow dung tasted better than prime rib, (or whatever particular culinary dish you savor), & Harry, (or anyone else), agreed with me, would that somehow make such nonsense I spewed "right" as well?

Again, please read the comments I made in my last post on this subject:

It's not a matter of them listening to hobby "insiders" in what they decide to tool, be it a variation on an existing kit or a new tool, it's a matter of what will work the best for them financially, & on that, they have plenty of research, data, history, knowledge, information & experience to base such decisions on.

Revell brought out a highly anticipated series of tuner kits a few years ago. The first one, a Honda Acura, did pretty well from all I've heard, but subsequent new kits in the series did worse & worse, most being absolute sales duds. Keep in mind they were being told this was a hot new trend & they needed to get into it to attract the younger, more casual modeler. How much do you want to bet that they have yet to show a profit on that series? For whatever reason, even most casual modelers tend to be attracted to what are considered automotive icons, such as the 55-57 Chevy, the 32 Ford, & others of that ilk, & more resistant to hot trends than we might realize. Time & evidence has borne this out.

Like I've said several times in this thread, I'd love some new tools of trucks, modern &/or vintage, so I'm not saying it's a bad idea. The thing is, trucks have always been a niche market in the modeling world, & the current economic climate isn't the same for the model companies as it was 30-40 years ago, when tooling & production costs were lower, & they had more working capital to play with in investing in tools such as AMT's American LaFrance fire trucks, (a great series of kits, & one I got all three reissues of a few years ago), but in today's business climate, such a new release would be sheer suicide.

I'm going to offer an analogy using some factual evidence from the music industry:

In 1968, Stax Records, out of Memphis, severed their distribution argreement with Atlantic Records. It turned out that the agreement had a clause in it that meant the ownership rights for everything distributed by Atlantic prior to the severing of the agreement reverted to Atlantic. In other words, Stax no longer owned nor controlled it's back catalog. Once they had a new arrangement with Gulf+Western, the owners of Stax simultainiously released 27 albums of new material at 1 time. Everyone involved with or knowledgable of the music industry & Stax Records considered this to be a major business disaster, for there was no way the market could absorb 27 albums from one label at once. There was also no way the label could market or promote them properly. It took seven years after that for the company to go bankrupt, but it's now generally agreed by all involved, (including the then owners of Stax that made this absurd business decision), that the seeds for that bankruptcy were sown that day they released 27 albums at once.

Just one mis-step can cripple a company financially.

You can't make logical business decisions based on nothing but "gut feelings", wishful thinking & conjecture. You have to have hard, practical data & information to back it up before moving ahead with it. If you can provide hard facts to Revell, Lindberg, et al, that can prove your case, they might be inclined to attempt such as you want. Just because 15-20 people on a model car message forum might want something doesn't mean that the vast majority of potential model buyers do. Remember the Revell tuners series!

BTW I do apologize for combining your two quotes into one, but given this forum's limit on two quotes per post, it was the only way I could do it.

When I started building models was around 1958 or 59 On the shelves were new models and promo's of the time period . Evey year they would update to the next years models. That is what got me in to building models. How many kids might do the same as I did today? They will never be given the chance to build what Mom And Dad drives today ?Because now you and others keep saying that up to date cars and trucks would not sell. Well I say to that B.S. The same models over and over is going to kill this hobby sooner than later. If a model company won't take a risk on up to date cars and trucks . Then I believe they are missing the boat and should close. What is up with your attitude? I don't have a right to say anything but you do?

[The Red Ranger]

Mark...

I understand what you are saying. I acknowledge there is no magical model tree, I understand that things cost money, but isn't that the whole business thing? Why bother doing it if you are too scared to take a chance? That's the thing that doesn't get addressed.

Back in 2005 Revell had to make the decision to tool the 2006 Mustang. Why did they bother then? I'm sure the same old kits were selling great then too. Yet they did it. Because that Mustang is arguably, generally, the most popular Mustang since the late 60's. It was clearly a decision made because the 1:1 car was hugely popular.

I guess my point is to convince Revell, Lindberg, Round 2, and whoever else that no one would loose money on building any number of trucks. Doesn't have to be all at once, obviously do one at a time and monitor it's progress if you are hesitant. I know for a fact that a Super Duty Ford or 2009 Dodge Ram would sell just as well as the new Mustang. It's not like I am asking for a really obscure vehicle, like a Neon or anything. I am asking them to make a kit of one of three of the highest selling vehicles on the road.

I guess I would like to pose a question to Mark or whoever would like to answer. Why did Revell bother making a new Mustang if they didn't know how well it would send. I mean as people have said just because it's popular in 1:1 scale it may not be a popular model. So why take the chance? Why not just update cars that they already have tooled since it costs significantly less?

[The Red Ranger]

To further add to Mustanglover's point, rehashing the same kits over and over will be the downfall of the hobby. As I have said before when I was 8 and modeling was extremely huge, model companies were putting out just as many modern vehicles as they were old school hot rods. Now, the hobby isn't what it was 15 years ago and there aren't many current day kits out there either. Co-relation? Coincidence?

[abedooley]

I think the real down fall of our beloved hobby will to be as nieve as to not ADVERTISE!!! ADVERTISE!! ADVERTISE!!! Especially with Wal-Mart and other big chains no longer selling the kits anymore! That had to play a great roll in their sales?!?!?! I would love to see their numbers before and after Wal-Mart quit carrying models. I just got back into the hobby in the spring of last year and went to Wal-Mart to buy a kit and found out they didn't carry them anymore. I almost took off for the closest HobbyTown 45 miles away before I realised that Hobby Lobby carried models at all. I had only been in there once before when my ol' lady dragged me in there for scrapbooking supplies. For HER, not me....... After that though, you couldn't pull me out of there. Kids nowadays will only want a kit when they're standing in front of one on a shelf. Especially if their parent(s) don't build models. How long has it been since you've seen a Revell or AMT commercial? I can't remember ever seeing one. Isn't that business 101??? ADVERTISING?!?!?!?! How great would be if they did do a little advertising and then had the extra cash flow to justify some ALL NEW kit, or kits over a few years even?? I understand that it would be logical to stick with what ya know, but where is that gonna get ya??? Some only build the 32, Merc, or Mustangs, but I'm a gearhead, I build it all, with a passion for trucks AND muscle cars. All I'm saying is, it can't hurt for them to make ONE kit that hasn't been done or of a newer model. They'll get their money back, maybe not as fast as some other molds, who knows, maybe they'll find a whole new market?? Never know until ya get yer feet wet.

[abedooley]

Thanks Mark. I always wondered exzactly why Revell and W/M split. I kinda figured it had something to do with W/M being pushy. They're known for trying to run other businesses to their wants with no mind for the customer. I hate going to W/M!!!!! I bet I have only been in a W/M TWICE in the last year. How, you ask? Simple, They aren't the only retail store that carries everything I need. Sure, I may have to go more places now, but they're not getting my $$ anymore. THAT PLACE IS EVIL.

Now, back to the subject. What about advertising? Can anyone who is close tell them we DO NOT want to see them slip away. I for one would love to see this hobby reach new heights. We could all benefit from Revell and others going mainstream AGAIN. Its not even a hobby to young kids anymore!! WTF is up with that?!?!?!?!?! I wasn't around when they were handing them out at the dealerships, but I can remember as a kid getting together with my friends and we would compete to see who could build the kit faster and better. Kids nowadays have no clue what a model is unless their parents build them. ###### video games!!! I don't let my kids play games unless they read for 2 hours first, then they only get to play for an hour. And my kids have built more models than I have in the last year and a half. Thats sad. I'm just a slow builder. Or too picky.

[abedooley]

Also,how do you know that Wal Mart dictated what Revell produced?? That's obsurd! They may have dictated the price they were willing to pay Revell,but I'm pretty sure they didn't tell Revell what to produce. I'm sure Revell produced what Wal Mart ordered,but how is that dictating? It wasn't like hobby shops weren't getting the same kits. I know they did work with AMT and Revell on some kits with different box art and snap kits. I saw some of the exact same kits in hobby shops also. The one exception being the basic builders kits.

W/M has been know to dictate what, how, and WHERE companies make their product. Thats why it is EVIL! Not everything was made in China and Taiwan until W/M CONTROLLED the market. They tell the companies they will not put their product on their shelves unless they follow their orders. They tell them to get their prices down to what W/M wants to pay and if the company can't they tell them to take their operations overseas. And if they don't think the product can be sold to EVERYONE they'll tell the company what to change or they won't sell it.

Just realized all my capitalized words spell out "WHERE EVIL CONTROLLED EVERYONE". Freaky.

[abedooley]

I get all gitty inside every time I read that they MAY be planning a new truck tool........ Must.........Not............Blow............Gasket!

[The Red Ranger]

Thanks Mark. I always wondered exzactly why Revell and W/M split. I kinda figured it had something to do with W/M being pushy. They're known for trying to run other businesses to their wants with no mind for the customer. I hate going to W/M!!!!! I bet I have only been in a W/M TWICE in the last year. How, you ask? Simple, They aren't the only retail store that carries everything I need. Sure, I may have to go more places now, but they're not getting my $$ anymore. THAT PLACE IS EVIL.

Now, back to the subject. What about advertising? Can anyone who is close tell them we DO NOT want to see them slip away. I for one would love to see this hobby reach new heights. We could all benefit from Revell and others going mainstream AGAIN. Its not even a hobby to young kids anymore!! WTF is up with that?!?!?!?!?! I wasn't around when they were handing them out at the dealerships, but I can remember as a kid getting together with my friends and we would compete to see who could build the kit faster and better. Kids nowadays have no clue what a model is unless their parents build them. ###### video games!!! I don't let my kids play games unless they read for 2 hours first, then they only get to play for an hour. And my kids have built more models than I have in the last year and a half. Thats sad. I'm just a slow builder. Or too picky.

Abe, great minds think a like man!

Earlier I started crafting my letter to send to Round 2 and Revell and I brought up another point that had yet been brought up here, which is kids only discover this hobby if their parents are in it, otherwise kids have no way or really any reason to seek it out.

I look at my two cousins who are 5 and 10 years younger than me and even in that small of an age difference their childhoods are completely different than mine.

I think the biggest point between kids getting into models and the lack of modern model trucks is this. When I was a kid I wanted to build cars I actually saw on a regular basis. My first, award winning, model was a 94 Dodge Ram because that was my, at time, dream truck. My second, also award winning, kit was a 94 Camaro, I'd still like to have one of those.

Fact is, in general, most younger kids really only associate with cars they see regularly. It really isn't until their early teens they start to develop the respect for old school rides. * I do acknowledge that there are exceptions to every rule, and anyone who has kids on this board has probably raised them with some sense and exposed them to the great old school rides earlier than general parents but the point is we can't expect our offspring to keep the hobby afloat, in order to be successful it has to broaden its audience to getting new people, outsiders, into the hobby.

The BEST way to do that is to have a pretty decent modern library of vehicles. Yeah the modern day auto world isn't as identifiable as it was back in the 50's 60's and 70's but the arguably the biggest customizable vehicles are trucks. You can Lower them, Bag them, Sport them, lift them, crawl them, romp them, bog them. Just saying.

[Aaronw]

I don't believe Walmart dropping models has anything to do with the reason Revell models increased in price. All of the companies made major price increases they blamed on high oil prices, both material costs and shipping. Hasegawa, Tamiya, Italeri, Revell of Germany all saw significant price increases and they never sold kits to Walmart.

Personally if the higher prices mean the companies are more profitable which in turn results in more new tools, I'm happy to pay the higher price. Even at $20-25 model car kits are a bargain. Try building airplanes, Hasegawa's new 1/72 Avro Lancaster has a retail price around $90.

Mark I think yor cost for tooling numbers are way off. From what I've read elsewhere it is more like $100,000 which by the way fits with the other claim I've seen that they need to sell 10,000 kits to break even. 10,000x $10 (I'm assuming the other $10 goes into retail mark up, distributor costs etc) = $100,000. If a new tool cost $500,000 they would have to sell way more than 10,000 kits even at full retail.

My biggest gripe with truck kits is the trucks that get done to represent the truck market. My peeve with the Trumpeter ALF, the first fire engine model done in years was they picked the wrong brand. ALF was Ford or Chevy in the 70s, but today they are Studebaker on a good day. Pierce, E-One and Seagrave are the big three in fire apparatus. You wouldn't sample the market for car models with a Hyundai Excel would you? No you would get in there with a Chevy Corvette or a Dodge Viper.

What was used to sample the market for modern trucks / SUVs, a Ford Super Duty, Dodge 3500, Chevy Suburban? No they gave us a Hummer H2 with big wagon wheels and not one but two different Cadillac Escalades (AMT & Revell so no savings on tooling cost). These were seen as the best options, really? A Cadillac Escalade donk kit will sell more than a Suburban 4 in 1 (stock, police, lowrider & donk with the simple additon of a few parts).

These are the reasons I don't believe good market research is being done.

[Buildsince93]

I may be wrong but if nothing else couldn't they at least update a few trucks with the tooling they have? For example on the 99 silverado, they could update it to the 03-06 front end/taillights, the body is the same and the work done to change it would be minimal doing this would also open up to the addition of the SS and also a 3500 HD version, again adding flares to the bed and a dually aaxle would not break them and could be done.

Another one would be at least the 99 body style F-250/350 the bed is the same thing as the F-150 that they have tooling for, they could update the cab iirc the 5.4 is the same as the F-150 and they could also make a dually version heck they could even just update the F-150 kit to the later years I don't remember the model but theres a regular bed version with the flaresides taillights

I would love to see Dodge trucks because they've been my favorite since I was a kid they've changed enough that new tooling would be needed for a current version but i'd be more than happy with them modding the vts pickup into a 2500 or 3500

I think they could definitely do something with the Chevys and fords and that could be their testing ground if it works move onto other truck subjects

[charlie8575]

A few things I've noticed.

Although we do seem to get a bit silly sometimes, in the long-term the airing of thoughts and opinions is good. We need to keep it civil, though.

I'm going to go back and touch on a few things I want to comment on.

1. Aaron, you're correct. An average tool is about $150,000. When you factor in research and design, it's probably closer to $175-200,000. I have several friends who work in the plastics industry and got this information from them.

2. Mark and Abe are both correct. From all accounts I've read, Wal-Mart will dictate what to make and how much they'll pay and sell it for. The greatly reduced profit margins have in fact driven production facilities overseas, combined with the tax and regulatory burden the brain-dead dweebs on Capitol Hill have placed on interesting. But, as much as Wal-Mart can help a company, it can destroy it just as fast.

3. Revell's prices skyrocketed in part because of increased raw materials price. But also because of the restricted distribution Hobbico has imposed. I was talking with a hobby shop manager a few months ago, and apparently Hobbico's great plan may be to re-enter mass merchandisers by jacking up hobby shop prices so high that they can stick it to Wal-Mart and still make a killing. Whether it's true or not, I don't know, but based on modern business practices, I wouldn't be surprised. This of course, comes with shortening the discount so each shop makes less per model, and an attempt to stop distribution by online-only hobby dealers, which appears to have failed.

The Hobbico ownership, as when Athearn (model train equipment) was bought by Horizon Hobbies, the prices went way up. If you have less distribution, your prices will increase because you attempt to monopolize it. Monopolies naturally tend to have higher prices.

4. Yes, advertising is very expensive. I was giving some consideration into giving manufacturing a shot, and started to put together the costs of a marketing campaign and it was staggering. As much as it hurts to not advertise, I can see where a lot of companies wouldn't be able to in non-hobby magazines. However, the model manufacturers need to start thinking outside the box and promoting themselves other ways. Car shows, different fairs and expositions. There are dozens of things they could do.

5. I agree that even if research is being done, it does seem somewhat slip-shod. I don't have any suggestions, because I need to see what's being done.

In the inention of the original spirit of this posting, I'd love to see Studebaker, Diamond-T and Mack, Jr. pick-ups, a Hudson pickup and a few I-Hs. A couple of 40s-50s era tractors would be nice, too.

For modern trucks, I think the new-for 2009 Ram is a very nice looking rig, and the present-generation Chevy isn't bad-looking either. I'd gladly buy any of the aforementioned.

Charlie Larkin