[aeroeng]

Originally Posted by CLLCTR5

...I'm hugely biased in favor of The Franklin Mint.

Me too .

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by CLLCTR5

Youse gotta remember...this is like...like...

look at it this way.

Your favorite football/baseball/hockey team has not won a championship in years. All of a sudden they change rosters almost completely made up of the very best free agents possible. They even find a way to circumvent the rules and play with an extra player or two. You wouldn't complain about the old QB or goalie when he wasn't even suited up anymore...would you?

And the season hasn't even started yet. We won't know for another year whether or not they will make the next playoffs. Got it?

Not sayin', just sayin.

Got it, you made your point. Now only the future will tell.

All I can say is I hope your optimism is justified. I want more 1/48 models out there, and of high quality.

FVD

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by CLLCTR5

It's true it's true...I'm hugely biased in favor of The Franklin Mint. I know all the people there from directors down to the design down to the shipping department. When I compare their employees to other manufacturers and wholesalers I can't help but root for their side. I've collected their models for 8 years now. I love the end result of what they have created. Some of their images I do not care for...some of the F-104's that came out at the time of the TFM/Armour purchase were terrible looking imo. As were some of the 109's. Right now I am really delighted by their latest offerings both in image and high quality. I also am privy to what is coming down the pipeline (not to beat a horse) but that greatly excites me as a collector...and...ok I know I am way too fanatical about my pov now so I will shut up. Flame away.

CLLCTR5, at least you're prepared to admit that you have a bias towards Franklin Mint - absolutely nothing wrong with that as I also like a number of their models such as the P47, Hurricane and FW190 .

That said, a little objectivity would not go amiss insofar you appear to overlook legitimate criticism of some of Franklin Mints' less than stellar attempts at die-cast production (such as the P51D) . By so doing you run the risk of damaging your credibility when you recommend a particular model from Franklin Mint, which I'm sure is the last thing that you intend doing ...

[FormerViperDriver]

Very well put, Cardinal.

FVD

[CLLCTR5]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

CLLCTR5, at least you're prepared to admit that you have a bias towards Franklin Mint - absolutely nothing wrong with that as I also like a number of their models such as the P47, Hurricane and FW190 .

That said, a little objectivity would not go amiss insofar you appear to overlook legitimate criticism of some of Franklin Mints' less than stellar attempts at die-cast production (such as the P51D) . By so doing you run the risk of damaging your credibility when you recommend a particular model from Franklin Mint, which I'm sure is the last thing that you intend doing ...

LOL!!! If you knew me better... you would know that to me, credibility is like the lost ark! I'm like a bad politician...I waffle on a lot of things...I see both sides...I'm biased but I completely understand diverse points of view, opinions, priorities in diecast detail (some like paint, some hate screw holes, some hate cradle stands, some love movable flaps, some only care about proper livery, etc).

I like TFM's P-51's!

I don't like their F-104's and ME-109's...to me most of them (but not all) look like toys. I already mentioned this and I very mildly resent the fact that it was ignored or skimmed. To incorrectly accuse me of not mentioning less than stellar attempts in one sentence, and then beg for credibility in the next is kinda cute, in fact. Anyway, I hate their mosquito's. Can't get the canopy to fit.

I think B11E200 (the oversized cross ME-111) is one of the most handsome models they have ever done. At least one poster here thinks it is utter crap. And you know what? We're BOTH right!

Again, to me...I'm almost as credible as I am edible. And you can put that salt shaker away because I'm way too fattening.

I love these message boards...but sometimes we have to sit back and realize that we are all just normal dudes with opinions...including me. I've been around military, private, and commercial aviation my entire life. OK so I'm only 40 years old next month but I literally refuled almost every single aircraft that ever touched down at both Peterson Field in Colorado Springs and the little strip on USAFA. I've seen 'em and I know they don't look like a bicycle. I also have seen just about every diecast model ever made in the last 10 years.

I'm also aboout 18 months of way too much partying in college away from having a 190 IQ. I know this because I often take the shorter test to keep myself sharp and register in the 170's...sometimes I'll get lucky and nail 190. I also enjoy it when I mention this and people actually end up on the floor gasping for air laughing too hard. Because IQ smarts are NOT real world smarts. That's why I read all of your posts before I write my repetitive meandering novels.

The only credibility that I can brag about is that I understand difference in opinion and eventually everyone will know it whether they like it or not. I also understand grossly exaggerated cynicism...it usually comes from plain old anger. And as a TFM dealer (along with about 30 other lines of collectibles) I don't want collectors angry at TFM. They aren't hardly the same people at all anymore starting this year. And most of their models are very nice. And WILL get a lot nicer.

Anyone see thie thing on PBS last night about stealth? Good stuff loved it. Especially the SR-71. There's nothing I will forget about standing on top of a refuel truck at the tank farm and having that sucker launch directly over my head at night. I thought it was the end of the %$%& world!

[Ara1]

Hi CLLTR5,

You've certainly contributed to the board the past month. I've enjoyed your posts. But I also enjoy iced tea in the wintertime so who the farg am I.

Regarding your positive opinion of the Mint's P-51. Have you seen Eagle International's methodic photo comparison of FM's P-51 and their own C version? It is an eye-opener. The FM P-51 is a low for the Mint line and should be discountinued with an apology to all who bought one. I am no Mustang fan. But I respect the plane, who made it, and what it did. There are a lot of Americans who would pick that one plane as the diecast to own. FM picked the wrong model on which to skimp, simplify, and overlook detail.

To use a Spinal Tap analogy:

On what day did Franklin Mint create their P-51, and couldn't they have rested on that day.

[CLLCTR5]

Originally Posted by Ara1

Hi CLLTR5,

You've certainly contributed to the board the past month. I've enjoyed your posts. But I also enjoy iced tea in the wintertime so who the farg am I.

Regarding your positive opinion of the Mint's P-51. Have you seen Eagle International's methodic photo comparison of FM's P-51 and their own C version? It is an eye-opener. The FM P-51 is a low for the Mint line and should be discountinued with an apology to all who bought one. I am no Mustang fan. But I respect the plane, who made it, and what it did. There are a lot of Americans who would pick that one plane as the diecast to own. FM picked the wrong model on which to skimp, simplify, and overlook detail.

To use a Spinal Tap analogy:

On what day did Franklin Mint create their P-51, and couldn't they have rested on that day.

Ara,

Thanks for the response.

Caution: I'm about to piddle around with a few excuses that won't change anything or make anyone happy.

If I am correct about this...the P-51 is not a TFM tooling. It was purchased by TFM along with the entire Armour catalog of toolings at a time when Armour was probably the most popular diecast collectible military aircraft line on earth. The tooling is so old that at one time it was considered to be "new technology" and more accurate than anything that had ever come before it. The original tooling probably cost way WAY over 6 figures to create and was probably purchased for slightly less than it cost to develop. And that is development cost only...we haven't even started with material and manufacturing costs, marketing, distribution, shrinkage, etc. None the less we are talking about a whole boat load of money invested at a time that can now be considered prehistoric in terms of diecast technology. Nonetheless it would not be a smart business plan to scrap it and start all over until investment and reinvestment dollars were fully recouped.

I told you this wouldn't make anyone happy.

I've said it way too many times...but for the last 2 years I have displayed several EI P-51's right next to TFM P-51's for dozens and dozens of P-51 fans to see. They have all seen the real P-51...some of them flew the darn things. In that time I've sold over 100 P-51's by TFM and exactly (3) EI P-51's. One of those P-51's was sold to a gentleman who will NOT pass on any Tuskeegee P-51 he sees...no mater the quality or cost. Recently I had to have a clearance sale on EI in order to justify inventory on items that I know will sell.

I wholly understand EI from afar. A very good friend of mine was a Franklin Mint dealer and thought that their Chevrolet Impala could really use massive amounts of improvements. He decided to start his own company at http://www.wcpdi.com . He spent all of his life savings...and then he really started to invest. His models are spectacular...an absolute standard in the industry now with twice as many seperate parts and miles worth of accurate upgrades. But TFM still sells many many more of their Impalas than he does. Part of that is collectible brand awareness. Another part of it is a slight difference in retail price (TFM's are less). Both are very relative to the EI/TFM situation.

I applaud EI. They are doing a great thing. Call me and my friends/customers suckers if you want to...call us easily impressed, gullible, lemmings...what have you. We like TFM's P-51's. They are OK in our book. One day TFM will probably be able to justify a $$$ new tooling that will rival EI's. And then 15 years from now an upstart company will create a tooling that makes them both look like absolute imposters. TFM/Armours main flaw is that they invested their money 1st when technology was raw. To have been 1st in the precision diecast induustry...the 1st to take a huge chance investing millions of dollars where no one had invested before was risky and well received. Now it is borderline archaic. But it has to run its course...that's just the way it goes.

Thanks for reading all of that I hope it made sense. I hope I don't come off as too fanatical this whole thing is just very interesting to me. I'm not on a crusade for any one company...I'm only on a crusade to help myself understand this stuff. If I can take anyone along with me I will be pleased.

Best Regards,

Randy

[PappyB]

Originally Posted by CLLCTR5

Ara,

Thanks for the response.

Caution: I'm about to piddle around with a few excuses that won't change anything or make anyone happy.

If I am correct about this...the P-51 is not a TFM tooling. It was purchased by TFM along with the entire Armour catalog of toolings at a time when Armour was probably the most popular diecast collectible military aircraft line on earth. The tooling is so old that at one time it was considered to be "new technology" and more accurate than anything that had ever come before it. The original tooling probably cost way WAY over 6 figures to create and was probably purchased for slightly less than it cost to develop. And that is development cost only...we haven't even started with material and manufacturing costs, marketing, distribution, shrinkage, etc. None the less we are talking about a whole boat load of money invested at a time that can now be considered prehistoric in terms of diecast technology. Nonetheless it would not be a smart business plan to scrap it and start all over until investment and reinvestment dollars were fully recouped.

An insightful and thoughtful -- and realistic -- post, Randy, thanks.

I concur with your assesment with only one major question -- ain't it about time for FM/FM loyalists to start saying "enough's enough" with that P-51 mold. I mean, wasn't the CDC brand purchased in 2000? Or 2001? How many different P-51 liveries have been released and sold since then? I'd say they have to have made their $ by now. ??

And, to go with another analogy, how much do you think it takes to design, produce and market an automobile? Should Ford keep selling an Explorer Mark I until it's recouped its investement -- even if it takes 10 years -- without updating it? That would be certain death to the company...

I like FM, I have several models, I don't mind the P-51s as much as some folks because to me the most important thing is collecting the era, the history, owning a little bit of tribute to the pilots -- not that the model is accurate down to the last rivet. I remember when I got my first FM -- the Fickle Fanny P-51 -- I thought I had really hit the diecast "bigtime". It WAS the cream of the crop, it was the Benz, but it hasn't aged well at all -- it's time to put it under the knife and give some much needed lifts and tucks.. Dollar signs be damned -- FM's product range is broad enough, and apparently selling well enough worldwide, that they should be able to "eat some profits" to keep their fanbase happy, no?

Retooling the P-51 would send a statement that they are indeed serious about pleasing serious collectors, and justifying their price points. It's time for a couple moving parts and opening canopies.. a bit more "etching" (not sure if that's the right term) in their molds.

That's a sad story you tell about EI, and it must come down to price point and branding -- hopefully the result of FM"s price increases going forward will be that more folks look at EI a bit harder.

IN the meantime, no matter what improvements are made to teh P-51 and who else may come out with a D model in the scale, I'll hang onto my original FM/CDC's as I also like to see the evolution of the hobby in my collection. I guess I like the history of diecast, too, not just airplanes/pilots -- I think it's cool to park that Fickle Fanny next to my EI and see first hand what's possible now that wasn't 10 years ago (that FM P-51 mold is a decade old now, right?)

I look forward to seeing the "big things" in store from FM in '08 (from your hints).

My $.03

Cheers,

Steve

[CLLCTR5]

Originally Posted by PappyB

An insightful and thoughtful -- and realistic -- post, Randy, thanks.

I concur with your assesment with only one major question -- ain't it about time for FM/FM loyalists to start saying "enough's enough" with that P-51 mold. I mean, wasn't the CDC brand purchased in 2000? Or 2001? How many different P-51 liveries have been released and sold since then? I'd say they have to have made their $ by now. ??

Good and fair question. I don't have any inside info but I would wager that what the TFM P-51's stand for are one of the few images that is profitable amongst a bevy of newer and "still in the red" toolings and the P-51 is creating some very important cash flow for future development. If you were TFM...would you spend as much as $200,000 on an upgraded tooling of the P-51 or would you want to do an image that has not been done yet...by anybody...that would increase your ability to attract collectors interested in as many different images as possible in the same scale...?

I have met many friends who collect TFM almost entirely because they know they can go nuts and collect a whole bunch of different images all in the same scale from a company that they know is going to be around for awhile. At least they figure TFM has a better chance of still being around 10 years from now than a brand new company.

As for your automobile analogy...the only comparison I would make would be a toungue-in-cheek reference to perhaps the most successfully offered vehicle of all time...the seldom changing VW Beetle that lasted a good 20+ years without very many changes in a basic simple and workable design. I often still think about buying a refurbished one just for the reliability of a good if admittedly not spectacular automotive icon. Any current comparisons to the way that cars are manufactured today is kind of apples and oranges...too many government issues and future looking assesments of design and technology that would not be relevant in a comparison to upgrading a static image that only needs more additional tiny details to make it look more and more like the image of the P-51 that is only two or three different images (B C D) on the face.

That would be neat if they did an F-51 though...I would enjoy that.

[FormerViperDriver]

I really liked Pappy's last post. I, too, bought the evry first CDC/Armour model, P-51D Fickle Fanny, when it first came out in 1998. I loved it. At that time, it was unbelievably good diecast, compared to what else was available (wich really were toys, not collector's items). I have 3 CDC/FM Mustangs, and I'm not down on them as much as others on the forum. I'll never get rid of them. They have sentimental value. I do think like Pappy, though, that it's time for an update given the state of the art today, and the competition.

All this being said, though, let's not forget this thread isn't about a nearly 10-year old mould. It's about today: high prices and some recent new moulds which are definitely sub-par, even downright pathetic in the case of the Mirage III. Even on the F-22, would it have been too much to ask to paint the inside of the cockpit the right color (black)? And what about those bombs under the wings? Why spend money to make a model less accurate? And couldn't FM have gotten the landing gear right on their otherwise good MiG-17? Why cant they get the external tanks on an F-4 right? One can only shake one's head... Why, why, why? We want to buy FM models (we 1/48 collectors, that is). But we are not suckers and we've seen what the competition can do, better and at lower (or comparable) prices. That Mirage III mould makes the P-51D look like an examplar of diecast perfection in comparison...

Now, again, if Randy says this will all change for the better, that would be great. Everything the critics have written here is based on our much more limited knowledge of what;s going on internally at FM. We can only see what's going on now. And it ain't pretty, in large part (FM can still do some good work, as shown by their He-111). So Randy, excuse us if we appear skeptical. We don't have as much to go on as you do to gauge the true status of TFM.

So, a 1/48 SR-71, eh? Well, if they do a good job on it, that will be a smash hit for sure, even offered at a substantial price. I hope I'm guessing right...

FVD