|
|
Forums - News / General |
For General modelling or hobby-related topics that are not covered by any other specific forum. Please keep to topics concerning the hobby. |
| Topics | 3048 |
| Messages | 23078 |
|
|
| Subject: | Why it is so....... |  |
| Date: | Aug 18, 2005 |
| From: | Steve Campbell | |
Hi all and thanks for your input.
The reason for my outburst/speculation was two fold; one is that I needed something to keep my awake on last night’s graveyard shift. The other is an article/review in issue 116, June 2005, TMMI (and BTW Cromwell Models that’s a mighty fine looking Churchill kit and, Alex H., I’d love to see you build and paint one here at TL).
I’ll quote you the start and finish of the “review” as these are the bits that attracted my attention for their stereotypical nature.
“….., WWII German armour remains massively popular as a modelling subject, or at least it is perceived to be so in the eyes of mainstream manufactures who allow the topic to all but overwhelm their current catalogues and future release schedules.
Naturally, if that’s your favourite modelling area then this is a good thing, and of course newly tooled kits of all subjects are welcome, but no-one can deny that this phenomenon is to the detriment of Allied machinery.”
And this bit at the end
“…., and their choice of subject hits the right note, at the right time. You never know, it might just tempt some of the followers of German armour to come across to the “other side”…”
For the editor of a reputable mag like TMMI to come out with this shows that he’s out of touch with the mainstream INTERNATIONAL modelling public. The “if you build it they will come” attitude is erroneous in that, I’m sure, DML/Trumpeter/Tamiya (plus numerous others smaller manufacturers) know full well that Axis German WWII kits outsell Allied ones. Using Alex H’s example on the gallery here you can see that the largest single block of kits submitted are German WWII subjects.
It’s not about talent or quantity but the pleasure of the hobby and there just seems to be some spiteful comments that are nothing but derogatory towards those who don’t fell the need to build Western Alliance WWII topics just yet.
Parts of the quote that lit me up from ear-to-ear
“or at least it is perceived to be so in the eyes of mainstream manufactures”
I’m sure they are not labouring under the same perceptions as TMMI.
“allow the topic to all but overwhelm their current catalogues”
A lighting fixtures manufacture has a catalogue full of items that sell or they wish to sell. The market then determines the outcome not the manufacturer.
“Naturally, if that’s your favourite modelling area then this is a good thing”
Too true, I along with many others totally agree with this.
“no-one can deny that this phenomenon is to the detriment of Allied machinery”
Phenomenon is to the detriment? Please this has been going on for over 30 years and it’s about time that people face up to the fact that the German Axis topics is the single most popular range of armour kits across any scale.
“their choice of subject hits the right note, at the right time”
At ten times the cost of the “Sturer Emil” I don’t think so TMMI and that should tell you something about the expected returns on production cost.
“You never know, it might just tempt some of the followers of German armour to come across to the “other side””
Talking of temptation has anyone told TMMI about the Flak88’s, Tiger I’s and the other “allies” tanks like the KV’s? There is a range of new kits that should keep us happy for years to come.
So in the end all I can say is that money talks the talk.
Steve
(BTW if you wish to see one of the finest examples of building and painting on display here or anywhere else then go to this link http://www.track-link.net/gallery/images/b_2804_4.jpg |
| |
|
|
 | Ying/Yang-Allied/Axis - Steve Campbell - Aug 17, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Ying/Yang-Allied/Axis - RC Hill - Aug 17, 2005 |
| . . . Hmmm...... - Kevin Johnson - Aug 17, 2005 |
| . . . Not true. - Yc. Wang - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Re: Not true. - Frank Blanton - Aug 19, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Re: Not true. - Rodger Cole - Aug 30, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Totaly not true. - Steve Campbell - Aug 31, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Totaly not true. - Paul A. Owen - Aug 31, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Ying/Yang-Allied/Axis - Alex Hill - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Ying/Yang-Allied/Axis - Bob Wells - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . Why it is so....... - Steve Campbell - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . . . . TMMI - Alex Hill - Aug 19, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Re: Why it is so....... - Al Bowie - Aug 20, 2005 |
| . . . Re: "eKampfGruppe' forum - Paul A. Owen - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . . . . "You should try and join" - Steve Campbell - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: "You should try and join" - Paul A. Owen - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . opps, sorry mate :-). - Steve Campbell - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Ying/Yang-Allied/Axis - Ed Schauer - Aug 18, 2005 |
| . . . more diversity - Mike Bedard - Aug 19, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Ying/Yang-Allied/Axis - Eric Scurlock - Aug 20, 2005 |
|
|
