Bachmann withdraws support for online 'Website based publications'

13233 Views 77 Replies 26 Participants Last post by Doug, Sep 20, 2006

Doug

Discussion Starter · Aug 26, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

I
received an email at the close of business yesterday afternoon that stated the
Bachmann will no longer provide press, news and announcement facilities to
website based publications

This has come about after a series of arguments and 'mud slinging' on
RMWeb,
another British online model railway hobby forum.

Bachmann say that they will continue to provide information to paper based model
railway publications. I suppose that advertising revenues play a part in that
argument.

I am personally rather saddened that one loosely moderated online forum has
caused a major manufacturer to turn it's back on the fastest growing method of
communication and a large segment of it's client base

I am even more saddened that Bachmann, instead of trying to find a solution to
this, is just 'sticking it's head in the sand'. It's shortsighted in my opinion
as the Internet is not going away and even the readers of the magazines will
turn to the Internet to find more detailed information about their hobby.

So Pat Hammond's
MRE Mag,
our forum and a few others will now have to trawl for info on Bachmann products.
Right now I'm not inclined to do so. I hope that whoever made this decision at
Bachmann has a good re-think over the long week-end and changes his mind next
week.

See less See more

Status: Not open for further replies.

41 - 60 of 78 Posts

Dennis David

· #41 · Aug 29, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

QUOTE RM web has been closed was a thread that's in the queue but was based on erroneous information.

I think the problem is that we are being comapred to magazines and currently we are not formatted that way. There will always be problems until we separate news from comments, articles from the forum. But heck what do I know?

See less See more

Pennine MC

· #42 · Aug 29, 2006

Thanks for that, Dennis, I was wondering if the intermittent server problems on RMweb were causing some confusion

Gary

· #43 · Aug 29, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

Lets face it rmweb is not about to vanish into thin air any more than MRF and mremag. Each site has its own format and style which allow their members and contributors to interact.

If we use the paper press as an analogy.

mremag has a "Railway Modeller" style (strong on the club and society and prototype side)

MRF has a "Model Rail" style (strong on the DCC, "How to..." and international side)

rmweb has a "British Railway Modelling" style (strong on the British model locomotive and rolling stock side)

Its nice to know that Hornby are still happy to provide feedback to the online community, having noted Simon Kohlers "We have the pictures!" comment at mremag today in connection with the M7 lining debate.

Happy modelling
Gary

See less See more

nickhp

· #44 · Aug 29, 2006

If there is one internet resource I could keep for British Railway modelling, I would choose RMWeb. If threads drag on or degenerate, it's your choice to either stop reading the thread or just deal with it. I have found that forum nothing but an excellent source of information. The standard of modellers on that forum also speaks a lot about it - Neil Ripley, Jeff Taylor, Steve Jones, Steve Flint, Iain Rice, the list could go on. It is also a very active site and one where you can even have some fun, god knows I enjoy some British humor after 11 years in the USA with no sign of a chance to return!

I personally would rather see Bachmann keep their information elsewhere than to see RMWeb go. Yes, the forum is not tightly moderated, but the information there is without equal, as is the quality of many of the members and their modelling.

Long live RMWeb!

Nick
Wichita, KS, USA

See less See more

Dennis David

· #45 · Aug 30, 2006

Wichita, KS

See less See more

3

nickhp

· #46 · Aug 30, 2006

QUOTE (Dennis David @ 29 Aug 2006, 20:10) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Wichita, KS

Rather be in Wichita than California. At least we can see the tornadoes coming (though having been here for too long I now go out after these things instead of going into the basement - see my tornado photos). Would much rather have that than earthquakes. On top of that, we have numerous aviation companies in town, which makes finding a job MUCH easier.

Still, take me back to England any day. I'm working on it, can't stand living in the States any more. Been here almost 12 years. What a waste of my life.

Nick

See less See more

3

neil_s_wood

· #47 · Aug 30, 2006

I think the issue has arisen with web based forums due for two reasons.

1 the mags need the advertising revenue and models for review so they have to keep the manufacturers sweet.

2 The ability of instant reply on the web allows any comment to go up on the screen.

It's a bit sad to see a major manufacturer "take his ball and go home" as this will inevitably damage their image as being unconstructive and unprepared to listen to customer feedback. I beleive this decision will be reviewed in the future as it benefits no-one.

neil_s_wood

· #48 · Aug 30, 2006

QUOTE Still, take me back to England any day. I'm working on it, can't stand living in the States any more. Been here almost 12 years. What a waste of my life.

Think yourself lucky, I got stuck with Australia.

See less See more

Dennis David

· #49 · Aug 30, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

QUOTE Rather be in Wichita than California

That's the craziest thing I ever heard but I'll leave it at that.

hoonsou

· #50 · Aug 30, 2006

[quote name='Gwent rail' date='27 Aug 2006, 09:47' post='11056']

Some posters are Blaming Bachmann for being over sensitive, some are saying less than complimentary things about other forums. --- So far nobody has really ripped into the real culprits, the originator/originators of the offending posts, so allow me. If you are a member of this forum, get the F*** out of here, we don't need you. If not allow me to give you some advice, DON'T JOIN, WE DON'T WANT YOU. To our members, may I say "don't blame the messenger", there is a place for all 3 forums and each bring a different and valid approach to the hobby.

I'm the originator of the post about Bachmann Couplings and don't see myself as a "culprit". I've said more than once before, if you bother to read it, that I wrote to Bachmann via their Website and didn't get a reply of any sort. That's the reason I posted. When I put that posting up, it was after I'd read it, I didn't insult anyone and don't see why I'm described as a 'Culprit'.
Also as someone else so rightly said, Don't post unless you're prepared to say the things you've posted face to face with the person you're talking about !
My Name is on my posting, if you'd bothered to check that, you'd have seen I am a member here as well.
Don't try and associate me with the Class 57 post. That was nothing to do with me.

pedromorgan

· #51 · Aug 30, 2006

The RMweb closed thread was not based on erronious information. but it turned out to be just a server glitch by the looks of things. it was offline from 12.30 untill about 12.44

Peter

Gary

· #52 · Aug 30, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

Bachmann withdraws support for online publications and yet right now there are 5 Bachmann stories and nil Hornby stories under discussion on page 1 of the list of Model Rail Forum news topics.

All this free publicity.

Almost 4500 views in 5 topics reinforcing the Bachmann brand at no cost to Bachmann.

Silly boys!

Happy modelling
Gary

See less See more

cig1705

· #53 · Aug 30, 2006

QUOTE (Gary @ 30 Aug 2006, 10:50) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Bachmann withdraws support for online publications and yet right now there are 5 Bachmann stories and nil Hornby stories under discussion on page 1 of the list of Model Rail Forum news topics.

All this free publicity.

Almost 4500 views in 5 topics reinforcing the Bachmann brand at no cost to Bachmann.

Silly boys!

Happy modelling
Gary

Do you want me to start one?

"Hornby revels in surprise 3rd quarter profits increase!"

Hornby's MD had this to say:

"Well, we've had some top sellers this year, like our Class 47, 9F steam engine and our vintage original Patriot. It just shows that the competition can't keep up with us!"

Meanwhile, Hornby's competitor, Bachmann Ltd., had a massive downturn in profits:

"It seems all our free summer publicity hasn't managed to couple up with increased profits!"

My tongue is firmly lodged somewhere beyond the known universe: in my cheek!

Back on topic, having seen the original thread develop from a 25lb practice bomb into a WE177 free fall nuclear bomb, I can defend Mr. Hoonsou thoroughly. The initial comments were made rather rashly as "Well, it's Bachmann-what do you expect" type replies, such as expecting a "horsedung" reply from Dennis Lovett amongst others.

Thus the original poster is not to blame!

CIG

See less See more

2

rb277170

· #54 · Aug 30, 2006

Bachmann have lost the plot. If they think they can turn their back on the internet web forums they are deluded. What co-operation are they withdrawing? All that will happen is that some one will review a model they have bought and it will be debated at length. By failing to respond Bachmann they lose their voice!

An organisation that doesn't value feedback from its customers..........not one that'll be around for long I think!

Russell

Pennine MC

· #55 · Aug 30, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

QUOTE (cig1705 @ 30 Aug 2006, 20:54) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Back on topic, having seen the original thread develop from a 25lb practice bomb into a WE177 free fall nuclear bomb, I can defend Mr. Hoonsou thoroughly. The initial comments were made rather rashly as "Well, it's Bachmann-what do you expect" type replies,
Yep, I think I should back you up there CIG. I think Hoonsou would admit he was angry when he first posted, but his OP was soon hijacked by people with other agendas. Hot on the heels of it came a thread with an extremely provocative title, which naturally attracted the same sort of comments, albeit about the class 57. The list of agitators IMO is quite a short one

but I'm pretty sure none of them are on this forum

(Andy Y has already summarised some/all of this, BTW, but I appreciate some readers may not want to go back-thread)

See less See more

hoonsou

· #56 · Aug 31, 2006

Thanks CIG and Ian. I reckon that post should be declared well and truly dead now, deaceased, no longer exists, expired, no longer draws breath, turned it's bleedin' toes up, and all that.

See less See more

Dennis David

· #57 · Aug 31, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

Hey no offense but why are you discussing that thread on this forum? Not that I really care just wondering. People always have agendas but I think as long as there are no personal attacks or threats of violence then it's not much above a nuisance.

pedromorgan

· #58 · Aug 31, 2006

Dennis. i think it counts as a current affair in the model railway world. i also find it interesting that many of the people that are defending RMweb seem to have joined in the last couple of days!!

"Lets face it rmweb is not about to vanish into thin air any more than MRF and mremag. Each site has its own format and style which allow their members and contributors to interact."
- if they get sued for half a million then they will dissapear into thin air!

Peter

tractor basher

· #59 · Aug 31, 2006

QUOTE (pedromorgan @ 31 Aug 2006, 09:36) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Dennis. i think it counts as a current affair in the model railway world. i also find it interesting that many of the people that are defending RMweb seem to have joined in the last couple of days!!

That's maybe because a link to here appeared on RMWeb! Also many who have just read bits on here, may have felt they should comment now they're being discussed!

QUOTE (pedromorgan @ 31 Aug 2006, 09:36) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>"Lets face it rmweb is not about to vanish into thin air any more than MRF and mremag. Each site has its own format and style which allow their members and contributors to interact."
- if they get sued for half a million then they will dissapear into thin air!

One person's website probably didn't help either. The debate concerning coupling heights is what kicked it off - another member mentioned problems with wagon coupling heights, saying that the problems can solved by mixing and matching using Bachmann's own components. Bachmann said that maybe the he could demonstrate or show them. his comments of "As much as I'd like to take Bachmann apart over this right now" probably didn't help. And saying that he returned to find "himself denied the right of reply to Bachmann's counter-claims" seems at odds becaudse the thread is still there and members can still reply to it.

See less See more

Gary

· #60 · Aug 31, 2006 (Edited by Moderator)

I agree with Dennis.

This thread has gone off topic and we are no longer discussing Bachmann's support for website based publications.

The place to discuss the rights and wrongs of Bachmann production is in the forum/website whose members and visitors wish to make an issue out of such things in a manner which has caused Bachmann to take the action that they have taken.

Right now it seems that this thread is being slowly hijacked by stealth by those who wish to push their own agendas.

Model Rail Forum does wish to development relationships with all manufacturers. If other websites do not want to develop similiar relationships then that is up to them and their site owners. All that we ask of Bachmann is that when Bachmann consider if it is worthwhile developing a relationship with the online community that they consider each website on its own merits rather than taking a broad general view resulting from the missguided actions of a few on one or two websites.

Happy modelling
Gary

See less See more

41 - 60 of 78 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.