|
Post by waynew on Jul 5, 2018 0:11:33 GMT
I don't think you understand the concept of "crowdfunding" here, either that or you're not really serious about wanting the British cavalry or... you're living up to your nom de plume. One might ask the question is why should HaT go out on a limb risking their personal funds to manufacture a set that might or might not sell enough quantity to meet their expenses, much less make a profit? Yeah, I know that's the "fun" of running your own business but crowdfunding to me is a great way HaT reduces their risk enabling them to stay in business and continue producing those sets we all desire so much while getting us those sets. Personally, I want to start a campaign to crowdfund Pommeranian Piccolo Players at long last. Who's in? These dragoons have been asked for more than 10 years. Going further on your line of thought, why would they ever release anything and risk personal funds? You make a good point but seem to miss mine. Crowdfunding was a way of making the event happen and getting the set done at minimum risk. It's not like those of us who participated weren't going to get anything from our investment - if the project didn't get off the ground we lost nothing as our money would be refunded (as happened with previous crowdfunding efforts). BUT - if HaT went through all the trouble of reproducing this set a second time after the previous FUBAR and for whatever reason there wasn't demand enough to defray expenses they would lose their investment. I really can't blame them for playing it safe and crowdfunding any project. I couldn't blame them if they went the crowdfunding route from here on out, but I also see the limitations for truly growing their company and market. But no one is holding a gun to anyone's back and forcing them to participate in any crowdfunding effort. You are welcome to sit back and complain from the comfort of your keyboard about this or that set not being available. I don't know all the why's and wherefores of why HaT crowdfunded this or that set; I do know I'm glad they did to make this set available and I am happy to help make it possible; and I will certainly enjoy the sets I helped crowdfund when they come in. They will be kind of special to me because I feel I had a sense of participation in the process - something we don't get too often.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jul 4, 2018 23:49:55 GMT
At the same time, wear and sun would bleach the almost black of the original "Navy" to a lighter hue. I know that even with improved modern dyes with my duty and field uniforms I couldn't "mix and match" different uniforms because my older sets would be faded and the trousers might be lighter and darker than the jacket unless I found the right one. If a jacket or pair of trousers became torn or otherwise unserviceable it often meant having to buy a completely new set to replace it - I imagine the same would be even more true back then.
A neat idea would be to have varying shades and hues of the same blue in ranks or regiments to differentiate "old vets" from newer recruits.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jul 4, 2018 23:41:48 GMT
Now, THOSE look like some of Bobby Lee's boys... (or Joe Johnston's for that matter). "Just when I thought I was out..." LOL
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jul 4, 2018 23:39:30 GMT
I've something like thirty thousand or so pieces painted over the last 30 or so years since I started painting, but have literally cases of figures bought over the years and placed back for "as soon as I get this project done..." but there seems to always be something that gets in the way so...
And a few years back I started in on my 1/32 scale collection (another fifteen thousand or so figures accumulated since 1961 at last count) that puts me even farther behind the power curve. The thing is, I had intended to back out of painting and collecting 1/72 what with age, retirement, and my aging eyes but then all these great new Nappy sets started being released after years (it seems) of zilch and... like Michael Corleone, "Just when I thought I was out - the DRAG me back in..."
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jul 4, 2018 7:00:10 GMT
Crowdfunding? Why should we pay your costs? The figures are expensive enough. I don't think you understand the concept of "crowdfunding" here, either that or you're not really serious about wanting the British cavalry or... you're living up to your nom de plume. One might ask the question is why should HaT go out on a limb risking their personal funds to manufacture a set that might or might not sell enough quantity to meet their expenses, much less make a profit? Yeah, I know that's the "fun" of running your own business but crowdfunding to me is a great way HaT reduces their risk enabling them to stay in business and continue producing those sets we all desire so much while getting us those sets. Personally, I want to start a campaign to crowdfund Pommeranian Piccolo Players at long last. Who's in?
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jun 25, 2018 2:02:01 GMT
1. Pommeranian Piccolo Players 2. Bavarian Bassoonists 3. Viennese Violinists 4. Assorted Tavern Wenches for Morale Support
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jun 19, 2018 16:39:27 GMT
I can handle that - as long as forward progress is being made with getting those guys in my hands...
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jun 16, 2018 13:36:34 GMT
Great job on some nice figures. Looking forward to these sets being released and your pics only increase the anticipation.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Jun 2, 2018 15:08:32 GMT
NOT LATE BRITISH COLONIALS! I HATE LATE BRITISH COLONIALS! I would never buy them and don't think anyone else should when I've been asking for Pommeranian Piccolo Players for years and never gotten any. I can't believe ANYONE would want a set I don't want. Why waste time?
Rant over.
Seriously now, I think it's a great idea and those who want them should get behind it.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 24, 2018 3:28:26 GMT
That is great news; after I figured how Grenzers grenzed and the other uses for similarly uniformed troops I realized I needed more of them. Can't have too many Grenzers grenzing I say...
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 23, 2018 2:51:49 GMT
A point about smaller figure numbers per set for those of us who have to order our figures online due to the fact of brick and mortar hobby shops disappearing. We who can't buy directly from a store have an added cost of shipping and handling fees that are often multiplied with each unit (set) we buy. There are some sellers out there who charge almost as much for shipping as they do for a box of figures. I try to avoid those. So the more boxes we have to buy the greater our cost and the fewer sets we can buy.
I tend to shop carefully to reduce my expenses as much as possible. Even so, I know because of less income available to spend on toy soldiers due to retirement I find I buy fewer boxes of a given set than I used to.
I paint, but generally manage to do a mass production technique where I can manage one or two hundred figures of a given type at a time - but if my costs (often close to doubled by S&H) are tripled by having to buy more boxes with fewer figures...
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 22, 2018 1:41:35 GMT
Beautiful; kind of epitomizes a great deal of what this hobby is about for me. It reminds me of the big battles I dreamed of and tried to recreate as a boy.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 21, 2018 23:58:51 GMT
That is certainly great news! You have to have large numbers of marching troops in almost any Napoleonic (or musket-era) scenario.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 14, 2018 15:50:16 GMT
The title says it all, I think; except that I was (as the old folks used to say) "tickled" (pleased) to receive a couple test shots of the new 1/32 Grenadiers, thus fulfilling my wish to "get my brush" on them. I think a picture is worth a thousand words. FRONT BACK COMPARISON SHOTS WITH OPPOSING FORCES: COMPARISON SHOTS WITH OTHER COMPANIES
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 13, 2018 5:26:48 GMT
Claus, I can't believe you are still trying to ride this dead horse. How long did my explanation of my previous post go without a response? I am still trying to figure out how you took offense at anything I've said. 1) I can't speak as to HaT's reliability or lack thereof where Ancients are concerned. It's no skin off my back whether they make them or not - as I said, I have more than enough to keep me busy for a lifetime and that has nothing to do with you or anyone else, nor was it meant to be and I don't get where you took that comment personal. It was an attempt to let you know it wasn't personal. 2) My suggestion to recommend a crowdfund project was meant as a helpful suggestion - I will be polite as to my suggestions as to what you can do if you took it otherwise. I only got my hackles up when you seemed to take it as some sort of personal affront. I made no comment as to whether you participated in any crowdfunding projects as I didn't know and had no way of knowing, nor could I care less. My point, which I believe is valid, is that if enough Ancient fans got together maybe you could get it off the ground and I think I wished you best. 3) As far as being cleared up - I could care less. You feel you ancient collectors are being ignored by HaT? Well, I'm sorry about that. Since when is a valid suggestion - one that has worked for other projects - considered a beat-down? We are obviously having a failure to communicate here.
And after some more time i'm coming again - sorry.
I have just a maybe silly question from an interested, but not really "skilled" collector: Am i wrong, it's not me who can start a crowdfunding, this is up to HäT? But how can i get that started, because i would led my money lie, i haven't just the opportunity.
Thanks.
No problem; I'm not an expert on the subject myself - but I would think if we could get enough interest shown in the project it might persuade our friends at HaT to get it off the ground. I know the Etruscans and Spartans are sets that have come up frequently on the forum. I can understand if HaT doesn't want to revisit the thing after so much trouble, but it doesn't hurt for the customers to ask, I think. Perhaps start a thread or use this one to gauge genuine interest in a crowdfund project and then see if HaT finds it practical. Again, we don't know how much of the previous work remains with all that has passed these past few years. Then again, I've been lobbying for Pommeranian Piccolo Players for over twenty years...
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 7, 2018 22:41:17 GMT
Have you never heard the concept of "don't throw good money after bad?" Precisely because they've lost money on this project and I don't know how much more work and money it would take to do the project - so I can't really tell you for sure the why's and wherefores of such a decision. My suggestion wasn't meant as a slam for or against the Etruscan set. Many moons ago when both the Etruscans and Spartans were first floated I was all in for them. Since then, age, time and sheer volume of sets being produced made me rethink my collecting and narrow my focus. As I type this I have literally cases of figures from all eras I've bought over the years waiting for my brush. Some I know I will never get to because I am in my 60s and there's not just enough time left for me on this earth to get to them all. And new sets come out that catch my eye that shove some to the back of the line. Having said that let me tell you I really have no dog in this race (as we say around here). I try not to get my pants in a wad over any set - there are just more important things in life to get upset over. As I grow older that list gets shorter. I no longer collect ancients; I've really debated selling off the untouched sets still in box - I backed off 20th Century conflicts - but I've had no heartburn because there has been a lack of Napoleonic or other 18th & 19th Century sets recently in favor of World War I and Zulu Wars. Actually, it gives me time to catch up on my backlog. I say all this to let you know my suggestion was NOT to slam Etruscans or downplay their importance in the plastic figure scheme of things. It was meant as a helpful suggestion to see your dream come true. You mentioned if they were a Napoleonic set there'd be a cry for them. Perhaps. But let's look at the most recent Napoleonic releases - Prussian Landwehr - waitaminute! It seems to me a WHOLE BUNCH of us Nappie freaks put up our money to see these sets come to fruition. And HOLD IT! WE DID THE SAME THING FOR THE BRITISH PENINSULAR CAVALRY! And guess what? Those of us who want to see HaT get back into 1/32 scale figures are doing the same thing with the 7YW Austrians. My point is this - if I have to explain it. Too often we customers want a maker like HaT to gamble THEIR money and THEIR time to give us sets we may or may not buy in quantity enough to support. For all its prolific output, Hat - and other makers these days - tend to be what we call in the USA "Mom and Pop" operations. Their profit margin is narrow (THAT I HAVE learned in my conversations with makers) - they really can't afford to throw large amounts of money after projects. I don't know how much money they lost, on sculpts (that are probably lost) and molds - but I imagine it's in the tens of thousands of USD. I know I can't afford that much money or I'd be doing it myself. At the same time, you mentioned having artists and sculptors who have experience in this subject. We really don't know that, do we? Have you noticed the different styles of HaT sculpts over the years? Could that be because there are different artists doing the work? Could it be they're retired or dead? Or maybe they just don't work with HaT anymore. But Hat COULD go out and hire another artist - again, staring all over again. More time, more money... It's not that easy. So I suggest if we are to help this hobby, which is facing a shrinking market and higher overhead costs, to survive, there may be times we have to put our money where our mouth is if we really want to see this or that set instead of getting snarky. The Nappy and musket folks have. Heck, to see the thing get done I might even throw in a few bucks. I really loved those old sets when they were first proposed. Sorry I ran so long, but hopefully this clearly explains my position on the matter. Right, so you asked me to read you entire message, and lo and behold I have. Firstly, if they had decided that they wanted to make a set of etruscans they should follow through. Not only because they already made the decision that this set was going to make them money (if they hadn't made that decision, why start at all), but also because of consumer confidence. Right now the consumer confidence for HaT when it comes to ancients is very small. They did not follow through on several ancient sets, and the ones they did follow through on took years (more than 3) to complete (I am looking at you sassanids). The suggestion that I and other ancient collectors don't have BOXES upon BOXES of figures they haven't painted up is laughable. I have more than I'd like to think about, and just like you I want more. I have so many cases of unfinished stuff that I most likely won't be able to finish it in my lifetime either. So stop that comparison right there, and stick to the subject. Also the idea that we (the ancient collectors) should band together and "force" HaT into action is laughable. Why? Because HaT unwisely has chosen to crowdfund sets that get the most backing. This means hordes of Napoleonic sets. And the idea (that you imply) that I have not participated in any crowdfunding is plain wrong, as I was one of the first to back the Zulu project, because it would allow me to make some generic africans with spears. So don't come here and patronize me about that. So, did that clear up a few things for you. We, the ancients collectors, are being ignored (or at least feel ignored) because of the way crowdfunding sets are chosen, and we cannot get HaT to produce the sets we want, or so it seems, cause they are a "moms and pops" operation. And when we try to come in and say, this is a problem, people like you (who have no interest in ancients) beat us down saying we should just crowd-fund. Is it any wonder we are putting our wallets where our mouths are and buying sets from other manufacturers, who don't seem to have this: we produce the things that are the most popular attitude. Claus, I can't believe you are still trying to ride this dead horse. How long did my explanation of my previous post go without a response? I am still trying to figure out how you took offense at anything I've said. 1) I can't speak as to HaT's reliability or lack thereof where Ancients are concerned. It's no skin off my back whether they make them or not - as I said, I have more than enough to keep me busy for a lifetime and that has nothing to do with you or anyone else, nor was it meant to be and I don't get where you took that comment personal. It was an attempt to let you know it wasn't personal. 2) My suggestion to recommend a crowdfund project was meant as a helpful suggestion - I will be polite as to my suggestions as to what you can do if you took it otherwise. I only got my hackles up when you seemed to take it as some sort of personal affront. I made no comment as to whether you participated in any crowdfunding projects as I didn't know and had no way of knowing, nor could I care less. My point, which I believe is valid, is that if enough Ancient fans got together maybe you could get it off the ground and I think I wished you best. 3) As far as being cleared up - I could care less. You feel you ancient collectors are being ignored by HaT? Well, I'm sorry about that. Since when is a valid suggestion - one that has worked for other projects - considered a beat-down? We are obviously having a failure to communicate here.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 25, 2018 19:43:37 GMT
Have you never heard the concept of "don't throw good money after bad?" ... Good money after bad? It's not like they are cursed or something. As elegantly put before this post, if you look at it as a new set, with a lot of research already done, it really isn't a bad deal. Obviously the hype was there back then, and people are still clamoring for it, at least every once in a while. So why not? Also if we used the good money after bad analogy, should they ever produce a new set, once one has failed? ... Why don't you try reading the entire post? Geez...
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 20, 2018 4:01:17 GMT
A nice idea, I think; but considering the masters and/or molds were either lost or destroyed (can't remember which) we would be talking about starting all over from scratch after some serious financial losses on the project. Perhaps they would be a good subject for crowdfunding projects? Not sure I get the logic on this comment. You already made the research, you have a sculptor familiar with the subject (or at least had 10 years ago), and you have people asking for it frequently. If this was a Nap. set, I bet people would be all over it, demanding this would be made (even if it was just the Danish defenders of Copenhagen, to go with the Rocket Troops)... So explain how financial loss on this set makes you NOT want to complete it? You already lost the money, and starting over, will cost you less than before. Have you never heard the concept of "don't throw good money after bad?" Precisely because they've lost money on this project and I don't know how much more work and money it would take to do the project - so I can't really tell you for sure the why's and wherefores of such a decision. My suggestion wasn't meant as a slam for or against the Etruscan set. Many moons ago when both the Etruscans and Spartans were first floated I was all in for them. Since then, age, time and sheer volume of sets being produced made me rethink my collecting and narrow my focus. As I type this I have literally cases of figures from all eras I've bought over the years waiting for my brush. Some I know I will never get to because I am in my 60s and there's not just enough time left for me on this earth to get to them all. And new sets come out that catch my eye that shove some to the back of the line. Having said that let me tell you I really have no dog in this race (as we say around here). I try not to get my pants in a wad over any set - there are just more important things in life to get upset over. As I grow older that list gets shorter. I no longer collect ancients; I've really debated selling off the untouched sets still in box - I backed off 20th Century conflicts - but I've had no heartburn because there has been a lack of Napoleonic or other 18th & 19th Century sets recently in favor of World War I and Zulu Wars. Actually, it gives me time to catch up on my backlog. I say all this to let you know my suggestion was NOT to slam Etruscans or downplay their importance in the plastic figure scheme of things. It was meant as a helpful suggestion to see your dream come true. You mentioned if they were a Napoleonic set there'd be a cry for them. Perhaps. But let's look at the most recent Napoleonic releases - Prussian Landwehr - waitaminute! It seems to me a WHOLE BUNCH of us Nappie freaks put up our money to see these sets come to fruition. And HOLD IT! WE DID THE SAME THING FOR THE BRITISH PENINSULAR CAVALRY! And guess what? Those of us who want to see HaT get back into 1/32 scale figures are doing the same thing with the 7YW Austrians. My point is this - if I have to explain it. Too often we customers want a maker like HaT to gamble THEIR money and THEIR time to give us sets we may or may not buy in quantity enough to support. For all its prolific output, Hat - and other makers these days - tend to be what we call in the USA "Mom and Pop" operations. Their profit margin is narrow (THAT I HAVE learned in my conversations with makers) - they really can't afford to throw large amounts of money after projects. I don't know how much money they lost, on sculpts (that are probably lost) and molds - but I imagine it's in the tens of thousands of USD. I know I can't afford that much money or I'd be doing it myself. At the same time, you mentioned having artists and sculptors who have experience in this subject. We really don't know that, do we? Have you noticed the different styles of HaT sculpts over the years? Could that be because there are different artists doing the work? Could it be they're retired or dead? Or maybe they just don't work with HaT anymore. But Hat COULD go out and hire another artist - again, staring all over again. More time, more money... It's not that easy. So I suggest if we are to help this hobby, which is facing a shrinking market and higher overhead costs, to survive, there may be times we have to put our money where our mouth is if we really want to see this or that set instead of getting snarky. The Nappy and musket folks have. Heck, to see the thing get done I might even throw in a few bucks. I really loved those old sets when they were first proposed. Sorry I ran so long, but hopefully this clearly explains my position on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 17, 2018 16:47:20 GMT
A nice idea, I think; but considering the masters and/or molds were either lost or destroyed (can't remember which) we would be talking about starting all over from scratch after some serious financial losses on the project.
Perhaps they would be a good subject for crowdfunding projects?
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 14, 2018 1:52:34 GMT
I would take a big box of Napoleonic British Artillery with line and Horse units in one box That too...
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 13, 2018 18:12:29 GMT
Pommeranian Piccolo Players
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 7, 2018 14:46:30 GMT
Only Revell made a truly complete British Arty set; Esci is okay if all you wanted was guns to represent them on a game board but if your rules are strict they are stuck in position without limbers - but four poses and one looking through a spyglass one-handed... ACTA was (notice I say "was" as I'm not sure they're still in production) a great representation of foot arty, but again, no limbers and four poses... Airfix did a pretty good job as far as that's concerned (and this is personal opinion here) but they are a bit dated and undersized and I hated the way they did their horse stands on the limbers. I never could get them to do right - even BEFORE the molds started wearing out.
If Revell sets were more available without having to pawn my mother to get a set I would agree the vacancy could be said to be adequately served. I don't really see that happening. My hopes they were going to release the set a few years back have been dashed. I think new sets of British Foot and Horse Arty might not be at the TOP of a list of new sets, but should be in an upper tier.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 6, 2018 20:47:55 GMT
I like your idea of having more crew members along with limbers. My own preference has been for four to six-gun batteries (that's from my own experience as a gun dog or cannon cocker, if you prefer). But I think a trade off having complete gun sections would be worth fewer guns in a box (after all, for me I can buy more boxes to fill out my preferred arty strength). As I said, I like having complete sections, but I would be willing to trade that off to have more poses if you sold the guns and crews separately.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 1, 2018 14:50:59 GMT
Just getting a good look at your pictures. It is an understatement to say your care, attention to detail, and results are impressive. What a beautifully realized picture of the battlefield. It would put many a museum's displays to shame. Thanks for sharing not only your results, but your process. A real treat and learning experience.
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Mar 30, 2018 2:32:55 GMT
Two sets are always better than one, I say.
|
|