Is Revell watching this thread, too???

[george 53]

Welp, again I ask, WHO decides what we're gonna get? I've never filled out a request form for a new kit idea, so WHERE do the ideas come from? Where do the companys get their model requests from? Who says "this is the next kit"? I'd like to know how it's done. Not that it'll make any kinda difference,they'll pop what they wanna pop, but WHO or WHAT commitee makes the FINAL decision on WHAT we'll get???

[James Flowers]

Welp, again I ask, WHO decides what we're gonna get? I've never filled out a request form for a new kit idea, so WHERE do the ideas come from? Where do the companys get their model requests from? Who says "this is the next kit"? I'd like to know how it's done. Not that it'll make any kinda difference,they'll pop what they wanna pop, but WHO or WHAT commitee makes the FINAL decision on WHAT we'll get???

I asked those questions already .I guess that the few insiders on here seem to have all the answers. So lets not ever want new tooling. The companies will not listen to you because they always know what we want. Just like the big three car companies knew what we wanted. What happened to them?

[Harry P.]

The kitmakers get their marketing info from various sources, and in various ways... but it seems to me that one of the most obvious ways to get customer feedback would be to get it directly from their customers! Wow, what a concept!

That's why I proposed a "Suggestion Box" be added to all the kitmakers websites... so that they could gather customer desires directly from the customer, and in one centralized location (their website). See the "I'll tell you what I Want" thread for more...

[ismaelg]

My random thoughts:

1. I'm tempted to make a Facebook group: "I hate '32 Fords, especially in scale"

2. Anyways 99% of my new model kits money go to Fujimi, Tamiya, Aoshima etc. for MODERN cars. My last domestic new kits were the Revell C6R, Cadillac STS-V and Snap concept Camaro (all excellent kits by the way), all over 2 years ago.

3. I'm considered a very small minority for building modern sports cars so who cares.... wait, the foreign model companies do.......

4. But I consider I DID my part by sending Revell a properly written formal email (not a demanding request or a dumb threat) suggesting the release of a model of a ZR1 and GT2 C6R with my reasons to believe it is a good idea. I got a response saying my email was been forwarded within the company for further evaluation.

5. I'm also tempted to delete this response because it doesn't contributes much.........

Thanks,

[Harry P.]

Ken, I understand marketing as well as the next guy... maybe better, seeing as how I create marketing pieces, corporate ID, etc. for companies all the time. Spare me your explanations, please. I've been in the marketing business for most of my working life.

My point is simple: the kitmakers, as part of their "fact finding," could add a Suggestion Box to their website and use it as a centralized source for buyer feedback, in addition to monitoring web forums. It's a no-brainer... next to nothing in additional cost, and a very simple and effective way to directly gather customer feedback. Much easier and more direct than "monitoring" dozens of websites.

And believe it or not, I also understand that just because 12 people want a model of xxxxx, that doesn't necessarily mean that it will be produced. That's not what I suggested or implied.

I simply suggested that an online suggestion box, on the manufacturer's own websites, would be a valuable tool to gauge buyer's wants.

[Buildsince93]

My random thoughts:

1. I'm tempted to make a Facebook group: "I hate '32 Fords, especially in scale"

2. Anyways 99% of my new model kits money go to Fujimi, Tamiya, Aoshima etc. for MODERN cars. My last domestic new kits were the Revell C6R, Cadillac STS-V and Snap concept Camaro (all excellent kits by the way), all over 2 years ago.

3. I'm considered a very small minority for building modern sports cars so who cares.... wait, the foreign model companies do.......

4. But I consider I DID my part by sending Revell a properly written formal email (not a demanding request or a dumb threat) suggesting the release of a model of a ZR1 and GT2 C6R with my reasons to believe it is a good idea. I got a response saying my email was been forwarded within the company for further evaluation.

5. I'm also tempted to delete this response because it doesn't contributes much.........

Thanks,

+1 I agree it would be nice to see modern cars, also I would at least like some reissues of some everyday cars from when I grew up I'm 24 and have been into building and had an interest in modeling ever since I was 3 and I saw the 80's tamiya nissans and hondas my uncle built, I'd just like to see the stealths and probes and gran prix's heck even the chevy citation kits again as well as the truck kits, cars that I saw driving around growing up and that mean something to me.

Sure I've built my fair share of 60's and 70's muscle cars and I have nothing against the 32 ford guys because they're building the cars that they got to see and that mean something to them, the problem is that nothing from the 20's-50's really means anything to me or captures my attention.

To me cars from the 50's all look the same just like cars today look the same to some older folks, bottom line if they would just release something like a pontiac G8 or a nissan altima or a late model truck anything thats current I think they'd have less of these threads the problem I see is that they cater to a certain crowd and leave others hanging which IMO is why this hobby is slowing down I see the logic on both sides but alienating part of your consumer base just doesn't really seem like a sound business decision to me but thats just my opinion

[93Z34]

OK...noone can argue the popularity of the '32 Ford kits...RIGHT NOW. But, let's look a few years down the road, shall we? Eventually people are going to get tired of building nothing but '32 Fords. Now, to me it seems like NOW is the perfect time for Revell to start looking at other subjects to model, either re-issues or new toolings while they are enjoying the wave of popularity of their new kits. If Revell waits until the sales of their current new toolings fall off to develop new subjects to market, their window of opportunity will most likely have passed simply due to the falling off of sales with their current market line. We've seen this before by other manufacturers and many are long gone from the scene now. When sales fall off, that's NOT the time to start scrambling trying to put out new subjects. By that time it's too little too late.

As for who decides what is marketed, it seems pretty obvious that a select few have the ears of Revell and the other manufacturers when it comes to what should be kitted and sold. We have people here complaining about alot of cars and trucks posted that we would like to see kitted, yet I've seen a few hit the market that left me scratching my head asking "Why in the world did they market this thing?" Case in point is Revell's "new" '70 Challenger. I had high hopes that car would surpass the vintage modling Monogram put out back in the late 80's. Imagine the disappointment when the box was opened and I was greeted with nothing more than a diecast repopped in plasdtic and shoved off on us like it was some awesome kit. While some may rant about that kit, compared to the original Monogram kit, it's junk. So it's got a stock hood, so what? It's a toyish model and compared to the vintage Monogram kits, it looks like junk.

As for the '70 Cuda, I agree there are some pretty obvious discrepancies when it comes to body proportions and so forth. But, as was posted in the "other" thread, a REAL modeler should be able to correct any flaw that kit has in order to make it look realistic and accurate. So, rather than whine, gripe and complain about it, we should be able to correct the flaws it has and turn out an accurate representation of the 1:1 vehicle.

I think the real "gripe" here is that we are seeing too many variations of the same kit being marketed and crammed down our throats. We want to see some REAL diversity and not just the same kits packaged in different boxes with different colors. Personally, I would love to see some mid 50's Chevy Panel Trucks, and some NEW Woodies of various years from the 40's and 50's. These subjects would lend themselves to many different building options if done right.

And this is a direct statement to the powers that be of Revell. Don't insult our intelligence by taking a diecast kit and converting it to a cheap plastic kit in the hopes of trying to pass it off as something of quality. You failed miserably with the '70 Challenger and as was stated before in this thread, it was wrong and it's stupid moves like this that will cost you customers in the long run.

[Harry P.]

Ken, you obviously missed the point of my original post about online suggestion boxes. Go back and read it again... you're reacting to things that I never said or even implied. It's fine for us to disagree on things, but let's at least be clear on what exactly we disagree on. Again, read my post. You'll find that I mentioned nothing about what kit should be produced, or how the kitmakers should respond to our requests. All I suggested is that they offer an online suggestion box as another way to gather information on consumer desires. Nothing beyond that. What's with the dismissive attitude?

[James Flowers]

Your statements would have a lot more credence if not for all the newly tooled kits Revell has recently released or has in the pipeline. I won't go over those again since I've already listed them once in this thread. Sorry there's nothing there you like. Have you considered taking up another hobby? I hear fishing is very relaxing!

I am sorry that you do not like what I say. That is your problem not mine. For the new tooling there is not much I like. I want modern cars and trucks.I think a lot of other people do also. What is wrong with that? The die cast makers seem to not have a problem with making all sorts of odd modeling subjects. They must make money on them to keep making all those odd ball cars and trucks? I guess they don't have tooling cost? Have you considered becoming a politician? I hear it is a good line of work.

[Harry P.]

The '32 Ford thread wasn't mine... that's why I started the thread about the suggestion boxes. It was a related idea, but didn't really belong on the '32 Ford thread.

I don't understand your attitude. Is nobody allowed to have an opinion that may not mesh completely with yours? I really don't see where all the animosity is coming from. Hey, if you disagree with anything I've said, I welcome your input. That's what a "forum" is all about. My opinion is just that, my opinion. Nothing more. It's not carved in stone anywhere. You're welcomed (and encouraged) to disagree if that's the case. Just make sure your comments accurately reflect what I said, not what you think I said.

This place has a lot of members... there's no way we're all going to sing Kumbaya all the time. Disagreement is part of the deal, but it's nothing personal... it's just part of the normal give and take.

[Harry P.]

I don't see where you explained how a suggestion box would be unworkable.

[James Flowers]

So, let's see ... the '09 Challenger, the '06 Dodge Magnum SRT-8, the Dodge Viper SRT-10 (roadster AND coupe), the '06 Mustang GT, the Shelby Mustang Hertz Edition, the '08 Bullitt Mustang, the Shelby GT500 KR, the Corvette C6 and ZO6, the Subaru WRX STi, the Audi R8, the Ferrari 430, 599 GTB and Superamerica, the Cadillac Escalade, the Hummer H2 ... NONE of those count as modern cars? OK then!

And, if you'll be patient, I'd be willing to bet we'll see full-detail kits of the '10 Camaro, Mustang and Corvette ZR-1 announced at next month's iHobby show. No insider info; just a gut feeling.

Seriously, man, I am not trying to disrespect you and it's not that I "don't like what you say." I'm just trying to get a handle on why you're so unhappy with your hobby and why you never seem to contribute anything positive here!

It's a hobby, my friend, not a bloodsport! Lighten up!

######, did it again ...

That's what it is a hobby. I don't think I am unhappy about it. Sorry I never contribute anything positive here. No it is not a blood sport. I have to agree with Harry about your attitude though. Your list of new tooling? Only two interest me.

[Buildsince93]

That said, what it comes down is that a company like Revell cannot be all things to all people, It simply is not feasible. And, if Revell tried to to make it by catering strictly to your wants and needs and the wants and needs of people who share your likes and dislikes, it would not survive. Again, no slam, only truth.

but in a buisness like they happen to be In isn't what the customer wants to a degree important?

I mean let's face it this is a hobby, they live off us spending our money on their product so couldn't they take our wants into consideration to a degree? Yes bending to the every whim of every builder is never gonna happen but seriously come on you mentioned like 10 different variations of the mustang alone why do we need that?

They could easily box the 5 parts that differ and sell it as a 3 in 1

I understand all the buisness politics that go into what gets built but that doesn't make it any better bottom line I'm gonna keep building and there's a huge back catalog for me to dive into because from the current look it seems like ignoring a new generation of vehicles and builders is the industry standard

Edited September 21, 2009 by DanteJayG

[LVZ2881]

Ok, so lets give Revell a list of other tools that we would want to see variations of...along the lines of the '32 tooling variations

'68 Firebird-----into '69 Firebird with Trans Am options..

'69 Camaro----into '67-'68 Camaro, w/ Z28 parts

'69 Nova---- '70 Nova w/ Yenko Duece options

'55 Bel-Air-----'56 Bel-Air

'90 Firebird Formula----'88-'90 IROC

'86 Monte Carlo---'86 Cutlass w/ 442 option & lightning rod shifter

'70 mustang---'69 Mach 1 and/or Boss 302

'70 Torino----'70 Cyclone

'69 Dart---'70 Dart Swinger 340

'71 GTX---'71 Roadrunner

[shlajh02]

Maybe we should start an online petition?

[Guest]

I'm with you Harry. Then again, I have been raked over the coals on this forum for wanting a factory stock version of a certain kit................

[george 53]

Ok these are all VERY interesting thoughts and ideas, an you guys mos'def know more about this stuff that I'll EVER know, BUT the fact remains to me,as WHO decides WHAT will come out next? Is there a commitee that sits down an haggles over what we want? WHERE are the polls taken? I've been to the Auto-Rama many times an haven't seen anyone there askin folks, I enjoy auto related sports, and I've NEVER seen anyone asking at those places( Milan Dragway, Cranbrook )So, Even though I know they 've NEVER polled ME, where do they poll at? I'll buy whatever they pop simply cas I LIKE to build models, an I really don't care if they pop another 32, but what is the deciding factor in HOW it's done, an WHO makes the final decision? If it's a group of guys who look at the bottom line(profit) or is it a bunch of modelers like us, who are eager to see ANY knew kit,( enthusiasim) or what? Considering the amount of money that goes into development and design of a new product, you'd think they would ask us, the final link in the chain,what we want. But like I said, I've never seen any kind of "Tell us what YOU want" type of questionaire. Maybe I'm jus stoopid an can't figger it out(which SHOULDN'T come as a big shock to you guys ) I really don't care what they pop,cause if it's not my speed I won't get more than one.

The different variations of new Mustangs don't do a thing for me.I got an 06 and that's enough of them for me, but I did buy one of each,cas I just don't want ta see my beloved models fade into obscurity. I'm REALLY glad the 66 Impala is comin out(did I mention that already?) and I'm sure we'll get a convertable outta that one too!( oh happy happy!!) But like I asked before, are we ONLY getting it cas they had the tooling for the 65 already? I for one, would like to know how it's done. If it's one guy,or a group of people? and how do we influence THEM? As far as I'm concerned it's all alchemy to me,and I'll probly buy/build whatever they pop.(Cept for that durn ol Pyro Triumph GT. I wasted my money on it OVER 30 years ago, an it WON'T happen again!) ( whose idea was THAT?) Now to get back to the crux o' da biskit, WHO makes the FINAL decision on whay we're gonna get? THIS inquireing mind(HA) would like to know!!!

[Harold]

This has been my gripe for a while, now. A flood of deuces and tri- five Chevys, and yet I have to scrounge and scratchbuild stuff because it isn't available in kit form. Would it be to hard to tool up an '85- '86 T- Bird body for a variant on the '87? Maybe a mid- '80's Grand Prix. As for the Olds....

[93Z34]

If you realistically look at the new models being released by the 1:1 car makers today, is there really anything worth modeling besides the new Challenger, Camaro, Mustang and a couple others? Of course it would be nice to have some newer pickups to build. Maybe someday we will get to see a few new truck kits. One can only hope. Personally though, I don't blame Revell for not trying to market much in the line of new cars though. As time goes on, I can see even less in the way of new cars being modeled simply because they aren't that appealing to the majority of the modeling market.

In defense of Revell, over the past few years they have tooled some very sweet kits, and some subjects I never really thought I'd see kitted. I know they aren't everyone's cup of tea, but the Tuner kits Revell put out are really sweet kits with many different building options available to the modeler. A choice of wheels, hoods, decals, etc. make these kits extremely attractive to those looking for choices in building options. The best part is, the modeler doesn't need to buy 3 or 4 of the same kit to be able to build the version they want. The same can be said for the custom chopper bikes they marketed a couple years ago. Again, different building options and styles attracted modelers who had never even touched a motorcylce kit before, myself included. It's marketing strategies like this that help a company like Revell succeed in a very tough market.

While there have been some neat suggestions for releases we'd like to see, I see a pattern where we still have more Mustangs, Camars and so forth on the list as well as some cars that I don't see as being a practical tooling option for Revell. Sure it would be nice to see a G Body Olds Cutlass modeled, but realistically, would a kit such as that appeal to the majority of the modeling market? I doubt it. Cars like that seem to have a cult following in the 1:1 world and I just don't see a kit such as this appealing to the masses in the modeling hobby. A case in point was the Monte Carlo SS Aerocoupe Revell issued a few years ago. It was a sweet kit to say the least, but didn't sell the numbers anticipated and hence it was pulled from their line not long after the release. Being an avid Monte Carlo SS enthusiast, I purchased several of the kits and still have several left to build in my collection. I'm glad I did buy as many as I did simply because that kit didn't stay on the shelves long.

There are alot of other cars that would lend themselves well to street rods and customs that we haven't seen kitted. That list could go on forever. I would simply hope that whatever Revell does decide to market, that it has the building options and appeal that kits like their Tuners and motorcycles did to so many people. It will be interesting to see just what does come down the pike in the coming months and years.

[James Flowers]

Given that, it would seem your interests are rather narrow. That's not intended as a slam; it's only the truth.

That said, what it comes down is that a company like Revell cannot be all things to all people, It simply is not feasible. And, if Revell tried to to make it by catering strictly to your wants and needs and the wants and needs of people who share your likes and dislikes, it would not survive. Again, no slam, only truth.

You mentioned diecasts in one of your earlier posts ... yes, it's true that diecast manufacturers tend to have more varied product lines, but diecast is a totally different ballgame from plastic. For one thing, it costs a lot less to produce a sparsely detailed diecast than it does a highly detailed plastic kit. And, diecasts are sold everywhere ... Wal-Mart, Target, Kmart, Toys-R-Us, even gas stations. Diecast producers move a lot more product than plastic kit manufacturers these days; thus their margin for error is much greater and they can afford to take chances. Revell is not in that kind of position, where it can afford to produce kits that will gather dust on retailers' shelves or in distributors' warehouses. That's why, as I mentioned earlier, you can rest assured that before a kit is green-lit by Revell, the company has done its homework to make sure it has least a reasonable chance of being a sales success.

I keep hearing that Revell has to move at least 10,000 units in order for a kit to be considered successful. Obviously, I have no way of knowing whether that's true or not, seeing as how I don't work for Revell. However, it seems reasonable enough to me.

So, therefore, I am asking you, without a trace of attitude or anything else ... what specific kits would you like to see produced by Revell that you believe would provide the company with those kind of sales numbers?

I am sincerely interested in your reply, and my guess is that Revell is, too.

I'm also genuinely sorry you haven't found more to like as far as new kits go. Look at this way, though ... Revell has rung your bell at least a couple of times. Be patient; the pendulum will likely swing your way again at some point in the future. And, when it does, please don't be shy about coming on here expressing your happiness over it!

When I say new cars or trucks? I mean what you see everyday on the road. My point diecast are sold everywhere. Plastic models are not . Result very limited sales.There for limited profit. Who says that every model has to be a full detailed kit? They could make snap kits or promo type models a lot more subjects. You can always scratch build a full detailed model from the snap kit or promo. We did this all through the early years of modeling. I believe we still do. I mean no ill will toward you at all. Just the way I see it.

[Buildsince93]

What you're doing here is making the same mistake a lot of people do ... assuming that "we" (and by that, I mean hard-core hobbyists, people who post on forums like this one) are the largest segment of Revell's target market. We aren't. True, we're a more dominant force since Wal-Mart made the decision to drop model kits. Still, if Revell tried to make it by catering solely to hard-core enthusiasts, it would go under in a matter of months.

Every business venture _ I don't care if you're talking about Revell, NASCAR, the NFL, whoever _ needs "casual" fans in order to survive and flourish, and that's why Revell has to try and appeal to consumers outside the "lunatic fringe" element. Look at this way ... if you took away all the "casual" NFL fans out there, what would you have? The NHL, that's what!

The "sweet spot" for Revell is products that appeal to both casual modelers and lunatic fringers _ like the aforementioned Mustangs. And, speaking of which, I have to wonder if you've ever built and or bought one, because your statement about how Revell could "easily box the 5 parts that differ and sell it as a 3 in 1" is seriously off the mark. There are a lot more than five parts that differ between the kits, and, as someone who's bought every version, I can attest that Revell went to tremendous lengths to ensure that the little details that distinguish each version were well catered to.

My comment was based off the the prospective of a casual builder and being someone that's been into the hobby for 20 years when I started out it was the snap kits of the regular cars that got me into it not 5 versions of chevelles or mustangs.

I understand that things arent as they were back then tooling costs have gone up sales have gone down etc but as was mentioned I'd even be happy with some snap kits of trucks or "regular" cars but again I fully understand why things are the way they are.

To touch on the mustangs yes I have in fact built them, what I said was just a hyperbole, you understand and I and I'm sure everyother person that's serious about this hobby knows there's more than 5 parts I was merely refering to the way the casual buyer would look at things,

to someone who is just getting into this it seems like having 8 variations ofthe samething either wouldn't matter or would jus confuse them to the point that they buy nothing at all (I've personally seen this happen) as you said the casual buyer makes up more of the market but let's face it the only people that are gonna buy every version of a kit are the hardcore builder.

Again Im indifferent in the sense that I'll just buy old models to get what I want to build and whatever they bring out I'll likely buy something from the current selection.

[Chuck Most]

Where are the mid-thirties Chevies and Plymouths? A Tucker? A mid-50s Buick or Pontiac? A late model pickup? A late model VW? A first gen. Barracuda? These are just a few random ideas off the top of my head, maybe some of these have been done, but you all see what I mean.

I agree Harry- where's the '32 Dodge or Plymouth... or even DeSoto, to go with the one '32 Chevy and the gaggle of '32 Ford kits out there? A '49-'57 Olds or Buick wouldn't exactly kill anyone, either. A Tucker would be sweet, or what about a Checker Marathon? Sheesh... even something like a Hudson Hornet, early Nash Rambler, or Bullet-nose Stude would seem like a 'no brainer' that would appeal to any hardcore modeler!

Personally, I could easily live with a few more versions of the '32 kit (perhaps next time with a side-steer setup, rear buggy spring, stock-style firewall, and an I beam axle in place of the round tube unit, though I'm sure we'll never get those items, well, from Revell at least). I'm still holding out hope for a Deuce pickup kit! I wouldn't even mind a Fordor highboy variant. There. I said it!

I'd much rather see Revell end it's love affair with the '57 Chevy (HOW MANY of those kit tools do they own now?) The 150 Black Widow? Come on! 'd have rather seen a late model pickup kit, or even a reissue of, say, the old Jeep Honcho kit, than this thing. And I'm scared to think how many times Revell will be reaching into the '69 Nova goody bag over the next few years.

[gasman]

I think it bears mentioning that Revell has a newly tooled '72 Olds Cutlass convertible kit that will be hitting hobby shop shelves very soon. The possibilities that particular tooling opens up are intriguing, to say the least.

an all new tool 1969 Chevelle would be a very nice usage of that tooling

[Harry P.]

Someone mentioned the "Pro Modeler" series of kits. Those were terrific kits, I have a few of them. They had everything a car modeler could want: accuracy, detail, even a few extra goodies thrown in. All in all, about as perfect a model kit as you could expect, yet I guess they must have sold pretty poorly because there haven't been any more.

I'm wondering why they didn't do better while they were available? I know they cost a bit more than the typical kit, but after all, they were marketed as "Pro Modeler"... seems to be they should have been a huge sales success.

[charlie8575]

Oh I can't wait.....I love 68-72 Cutlasses. Once out, I'm hoping some enterprising resin-caster with better fabrication skills than I possess will release either a roof or whole body for the Cutlass Supreme with the formal roofline. Click here for an example

Just think.....68-72 Chevelles, Skylarks, and Tempest/Le Mans/GTOs could all come off of this one tool! If someone decided to get adventurous....sedans could come from the aftermarket, maybe even a wagon or two. The resin thread for the fellow looking to cast the 69-72 Chevelle wagon, this could solve his problems for the Vista Cruiser he was also toying with doing.

Charlie Larkin