Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Disturbing Twit from Dragon Models
arpikaszabo
Joined: February 13, 2006
KitMaker: 674 posts
Armorama: 637 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 18, 2018 - 11:48 PM UTC
THX
Kevlar06
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
Armorama: 2,052 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 12:06 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextIMO Dragon is on the way out. They have steadily reduced the quality of their releases while drastically increasing prices on old re-releases. They used to be THE manufacturer but not any more. The local hobby shop I used to work for carried hundreds of armor kits at any one time but only a handful were Dragon brand. The lack of new kits and absurd pricing killed the brand in our market.
Many of you newer modelers won't remember the detestable fella that used to handle their marketing on social media many years ago.. He was absolutely hateful to anyone who spoke down on Dragon in any way. It very well could be a marketing ploy but I don't think it matters one way or another, they're getting beat to death by newer, better kit makers.
My 2 cents.
Yup! I remember that twit, very load and very aggressive.
/ Robin
I also remember him, from when I worked in a LHS several years ago. Dragon's tactics at sales and marketing were some of the worst. And I have several first hand horror stories about them. Two I can remember clearly involved the Thor and Loki 1/35 Scale mortar close outs back in 2011. My boss at the LHS ordered one of each on a closeout (they were deplorable sellers-- way too expensive and not high in demand, but the sale price was about half wholesale) imagine our surprise when 10 each (20) kits showed up at our door-- with an invoice for 20 kits at wholesale price, which was twice the sale price advertised. We were informed that "sale" price (below wholesale) was for private customers only, not "wholesalers". When we protested that we'd only ordered one of each, they told us we were responsible for return shipping!! We eventually negotiated the deal back to the "sale price" but ended up with 20 kits we had to unload at cost. The other tale involves the 1/6 scale Panzer I kit-- we ordered one and got two-- at MSRP rather than wholesale. We went round and round with them, eventually getting them at wholesale-- it wasn't worth the cost of return shipping. We were a Dragon distributor, and had a warehouse full of Dragon kits beginning in 1996, but they constantly treated us like private customers after 2007, which is to say they wanted MSRP for everything-- we had to provide our business license for every order to prove we were a distributor. And trying to get replacement sprues for customer complaints was a nightmare-- basically they'd tell us they were "sold out". But as I mentioned in my earlier post-- they said they were going away from the scale model line and into the toy and collectible line several years ago-- so again, thier "close outs" and accuracy in recent kits really do appear like they are following thier stated preference.
VR, Russ
Pak_40
Joined: August 12, 2003
KitMaker: 392 posts
Armorama: 281 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 12:46 AM UTC
I wonder if Dragon-Models could be re-tooling since Takom and Rye Field Model just raised the bar with their Panthers. That is what I would do. Maybe they will be doing interiors since they have already mastered slide-molding. Pure speculation on my part.
There has also been a dearth of new figure sets and one wonders why they ceased producing the excellent Gen-2 series.
Tamiya seems to be upping their game as their new offerings show vast improvements.
Chris
There has also been a dearth of new figure sets and one wonders why they ceased producing the excellent Gen-2 series.
Tamiya seems to be upping their game as their new offerings show vast improvements.
Chris
Jagdleopard
Joined: December 15, 2015
KitMaker: 30 posts
Armorama: 26 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 01:25 AM UTC
I highly doubt Dragon will be retooling any of those. They already have another King Tiger rebox out despite discontinuing all the rest of the boxings. http://dragonusaonline.com/item_detail.aspx?ItemCode=DRA6900
ivanhoe6
Joined: April 05, 2007
KitMaker: 2,023 posts
Armorama: 1,234 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 02:47 AM UTC
My $.02 worth : Dragon will sell off the molds and the kits will live on under another "flag".
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 07:12 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I wonder if Dragon-Models could be re-tooling since Takom and Rye Field Model just raised the bar with their Panthers. That is what I would do. Maybe they will be doing interiors since they have already mastered slide-molding. Pure speculation on my part.
There has also been a dearth of new figure sets and one wonders why they ceased producing the excellent Gen-2 series.
Tamiya seems to be upping their game as their new offerings show vast improvements
Chris
interiors are a waste of time when building a model
TheLilPeashooter
Joined: March 04, 2018
KitMaker: 71 posts
Armorama: 59 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 10:03 AM UTC
Quoted Text
interiors are a waste of time when building a model
Not when your vehicle is open topped....
Lawyer1
Joined: July 22, 2015
KitMaker: 72 posts
Armorama: 67 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 01:30 PM UTC
My two cents worth, I have to agree with Nick that complete interiors for tanks are a waste of time - for me at least. What I would love to see is what Verlinden used to do at one stage with their "Through the hatch detail" and that is to give you only the parts that you can see through open hatches. IF DML were to do that at a reasonable price then they might tap into an entirely different market.
The new Takom and Meng kits look great but I would be reluctant to shell out a not too inconsequential amount of money for a kit where I will not be using the interior.
The new Takom and Meng kits look great but I would be reluctant to shell out a not too inconsequential amount of money for a kit where I will not be using the interior.
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 02:37 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Textinteriors are a waste of time when building a model
Not when your vehicle is open topped....
nope when you do any of the tank destroyers like a M10, M18 or a M36
you need the interiors bot not on a tank
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 02:55 PM UTC
Quoted Text
My two cents worth, I have to agree with Nick that complete interiors for tanks are a waste of time - for me at least. What I would love to see is what Verlinden used to do at one stage with their "Through the hatch detail" and that is to give you only the parts that you can see through open hatches. IF DML were to do that at a reasonable price then they might tap into an entirely different market.
The new Takom and Meng kits look great but I would be reluctant to shell out a not too inconsequential amount of money for a kit where I will not be using the interior.
Mengs WW1 FT17 light tank and Mk.V heavy tank have full interiors and neither kit has opening hatches, in fact on the Mk.V all the hatches are molded closed
andymacrae
Joined: September 01, 2005
KitMaker: 409 posts
Armorama: 402 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 04:49 PM UTC
Your Meng FT-17 must be different to mine then as mine has the option of leaving all the hatches in the open position? Having checked so does the MK.V?
Bravo1102
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 05:52 PM UTC
Quoted Text
My $.02 worth : Dragon will sell off the molds and the kits will live on under another "flag".
Everything will be reissued in a Cyberhobby orange box with some kind of extra and the unused bits snipped off the sprues.
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Monday, March 19, 2018 - 10:14 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Your Meng FT-17 must be different to mine then as mine has the option of leaving all the hatches in the open position? Having checked so does the MK.V?
I ment feely that you can open and close on a whim.
When I built my FT17 I threw out all the interior parts and glued all the hatches closed and plan to do the same when I build their Mk.V heavy tank
JamesL27
Joined: June 02, 2013
KitMaker: 202 posts
Armorama: 199 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 - 02:51 AM UTC
Quoted Text
interiors are a waste of time when building a model
To you they may be, but there's a significant portion of builders that like them. Destroyed vehicles, cutaway models, factory and repair dioramas, etc... are all easier to do when an interior is included. Then there's people who just like to build it for the sake of building it, happy knowing it's there. I know that as I get better, I'm liking interiors more and more.
Quoted Text
...neither kit has opening hatches, in fact on the Mk.V all the hatches are molded closed
Quoted Text
I ment feely that you can open and close on a whim.
That's pretty disingenuous
lightningdon
Joined: May 06, 2002
KitMaker: 79 posts
Armorama: 50 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 - 04:01 AM UTC
Quoted Text
interiors are a waste of time when building a model
I like full interiors even if I am buttoning up the tank. I like the 3D educational aspect. You can look at all the pictures you want but the ability to see it all go together in 3D is very satisfying. Maybe if I am building 4 different versions of a Sherman tank, only 1 full interior will suffice and the others without.
Kevlar06
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
Armorama: 2,052 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 - 05:21 AM UTC
Here's the deal on open hatches-- most tankers operate with them open-- 85% or more of the time. The only time hatches would be closed is when under fire or in highly inclement weather (and not even then if you are traveling); when parked in the motor pool; or perhaps on the firing range to limit the effects of concussion. Having served in multiple Armored units over a 30 year career, that's my experience. One of my biggest "pet peeves' with tank models is that so many depict the TC sticking out in a relaxed position, while the driver's hatches are closed "tooling down the driveway". This simply is not done when traveling--it invites accidents and mires (unless its in combat, and then the TC would have his head in "full defilade too). Driver(s) do typically close their hatches when on the firing range, so as to avoid the effects of concussion, but then the tank should be configured in a "range scenario".
VR, Russ
VR, Russ
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 - 07:50 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Textinteriors are a waste of time when building a model
I like full interiors even if I am buttoning up the tank. I like the 3D educational aspect. You can look at all the pictures you want but the ability to see it all go together in 3D is very satisfying. Maybe if I am building 4 different versions of a Sherman tank, only 1 full interior will suffice and the others without.
I dont like dwelling on a build too long the faster i get it done the faster I get started on my next
brekinapez
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 2,272 posts
Armorama: 1,860 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 - 08:14 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted Textinteriors are a waste of time when building a model
I like full interiors even if I am buttoning up the tank. I like the 3D educational aspect. You can look at all the pictures you want but the ability to see it all go together in 3D is very satisfying. Maybe if I am building 4 different versions of a Sherman tank, only 1 full interior will suffice and the others without.
I dont like dwelling on a build too long the faster i get it done the faster I get started on my next
Yeah, I can see that being an issue for you. I myself care neither way as I have kits with and without, but since I also have several figure sets I'm biased as I'd like to use them someday. It would be great to have the option--if it is indeed that when it comes to being able to finish the kit. It is better to have and not need than need and not have. Whether one needs an interior is relative, of course.
Now, as long as the turret interior is passable enough with a crew figure seated in the hatch blocking most of the view, I can allow a pass on low detail inside a turret; I'm not going to constantly take the figure in and out to show off the highly detailed Pz IV interior my guest wouldn't comprehend to begin with, but I do need the big bits you'd see if some tanker dude was actually blocking your view inside during tank week at Bovington, like Dragon seemed pretty consistent on.
brekinapez
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 2,272 posts
Armorama: 1,860 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 - 08:30 AM UTC
Dragon needs to take time off to consolidate all than many sprues they have, and see what they can make from the newer, better stuff.
They should also consider releasing multi-variant kits, having all the parts necessary to build all the different kits they were once releasing. So, FOR EXAMPLE instead of ten different Pz III Ausf F kits, make a very few kits splitting production where simply adding the parts for particular variants. With the Pz III, they would have a box for the short-barrel and another box for the long-barrel variants. That way, Dragon only produces two different Pz III kits but anyone who wants to do a variant can just buy another of that kit. Probably been considered, but I really think they were flooding their own market a little with kits that were very little different from each other in many cases, other than markings and an extra sprue of Something Distinguishing.
They should also consider releasing multi-variant kits, having all the parts necessary to build all the different kits they were once releasing. So, FOR EXAMPLE instead of ten different Pz III Ausf F kits, make a very few kits splitting production where simply adding the parts for particular variants. With the Pz III, they would have a box for the short-barrel and another box for the long-barrel variants. That way, Dragon only produces two different Pz III kits but anyone who wants to do a variant can just buy another of that kit. Probably been considered, but I really think they were flooding their own market a little with kits that were very little different from each other in many cases, other than markings and an extra sprue of Something Distinguishing.
jbilbrey01
Joined: January 03, 2012
KitMaker: 24 posts
Armorama: 24 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 - 08:41 AM UTC
I wasn't going give this topic a second thought until couple nights ago when I was looking at Dragon USA Online and noticed something interesting. Under 1/35 kits, they have 1266 kits listed [excluding future releases]. But, the number is 298 items if one is only looking at in-stock kits. The only reason I was there was that I was looking for an OOP figure set - which they had but was misspelled on their own website. Go figure...
Dragon appears to go in cycles. For a while, their big thing was 1/6 figures while they decreased the number of their 1/35 armor and figure sets. Then, they came back with their King Tiger series, but every series after that [for example, the Panzer IV's, Panther's, Sd.Kfz. 251's] had some minor and even a few major errors. I am not even going discuss the "Black Plague" or their new modern-era kits
I also have little doubt that they are feeling the pressure from Bronco, Meng, Rye Field Model, and Takom [not to mention Hobbyboss/Trumpeter] whose new releases are while may not be perfect are sometimes better researched, have more options, and filled with less "gotcha's" than the equivalent DML kits.
Finally, their attitude probably has rubbed more than a few modelers the wrong way. Whether it is their customer "service" policy or their attitude when a reviewer points out flaws in their kits, like when Terry Ashley pointed out that the Dragon 251 was too narrow. Their pricing probably also turns off some modelers. One can either pay $80 [MSRP] for DML's Panther Ausf. G or $100 for RFM's Panther and get more options in the box.
Dragon appears to go in cycles. For a while, their big thing was 1/6 figures while they decreased the number of their 1/35 armor and figure sets. Then, they came back with their King Tiger series, but every series after that [for example, the Panzer IV's, Panther's, Sd.Kfz. 251's] had some minor and even a few major errors. I am not even going discuss the "Black Plague" or their new modern-era kits
I also have little doubt that they are feeling the pressure from Bronco, Meng, Rye Field Model, and Takom [not to mention Hobbyboss/Trumpeter] whose new releases are while may not be perfect are sometimes better researched, have more options, and filled with less "gotcha's" than the equivalent DML kits.
Finally, their attitude probably has rubbed more than a few modelers the wrong way. Whether it is their customer "service" policy or their attitude when a reviewer points out flaws in their kits, like when Terry Ashley pointed out that the Dragon 251 was too narrow. Their pricing probably also turns off some modelers. One can either pay $80 [MSRP] for DML's Panther Ausf. G or $100 for RFM's Panther and get more options in the box.
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 - 02:50 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I wasn't going give this topic a second thought until couple nights ago when I was looking at Dragon USA Online and noticed something interesting. Under 1/35 kits, they have 1266 kits listed [excluding future releases]. But, the number is 298 items if one is only looking at in-stock kits. The only reason I was there was that I was looking for an OOP figure set - which they had but was misspelled on their own website. Go figure...
Dragon appears to go in cycles. For a while, their big thing was 1/6 figures while they decreased the number of their 1/35 armor and figure sets. Then, they came back with their King Tiger series, but every series after that [for example, the Panzer IV's, Panther's, Sd.Kfz. 251's] had some minor and even a few major errors. I am not even going discuss the "Black Plague" or their new modern-era kits
I also have little doubt that they are feeling the pressure from Bronco, Meng, Rye Field Model, and Takom [not to mention Hobbyboss/Trumpeter] whose new releases are while may not be perfect are sometimes better researched, have more options, and filled with less "gotcha's" than the equivalent DML kits.
Finally, their attitude probably has rubbed more than a few modelers the wrong way. Whether it is their customer "service" policy or their attitude when a reviewer points out flaws in their kits, like when Terry Ashley pointed out that the Dragon 251 was too narrow. Their pricing probably also turns off some modelers. One can either pay $80 [MSRP] for DML's Panther Ausf. G or $100 for RFM's Panther and get more options in the box.
So should I expect a screwed up kit when I get dragon's M48 AVLB if and when dragon releases it?
TheLilPeashooter
Joined: March 04, 2018
KitMaker: 71 posts
Armorama: 59 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 - 03:30 PM UTC
They posted again on Facebook, this time marking the ones that are sold out. Sadly, none of them are 'black labels'.
Rforand
Joined: July 14, 2013
KitMaker: 108 posts
Armorama: 89 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 - 05:44 PM UTC
If their new m 727 hawk missile launcher is what their new kits are going to be like it will be a long time before my next purchase.This kit is so basic no detail on the inside wheels no photo etch no detail on the door interiors like a door handle.Door is mounded shut.Its like a kit from the 80's .For 74 dollars not worth it at all.Whar ever happened to those beautiful kits with all that photo etch and track links all for around 35 dollars.It will be a sometime before my next dragon purchase if ever
tankmodeler
#417
Joined: March 01, 2004
KitMaker: 3,123 posts
Armorama: 2,539 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 - 06:26 PM UTC
Quoted Text
So should I expect a screwed up kit when I get dragon's M48 AVLB if and when dragon releases it?
Yes, yes you should.
Bravo1102
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 - 06:55 PM UTC
I think Dragon is just facing facts that with all the other Asian based 1/35 armor producers going full-steam there could be only so much engineering talent to go around. Meng, Takom, RFM, Trumpeter(and friends) and others could have sewn up all the talent leaving Dragon with the Black Plague third-stringers. So someone decided they might as well go for toys and reevaluate their stand in the 1/35 armor market.
They might go for value priced Orange box re-issues of everything. They sell well. The molds are paid for, time to under cut the competition and rake in the real money with licensed toys.
When was the last full new tool from Hasegawa in 1/72? Meanwhile they're doing full new tool anime aircraft and Macross. Bandai stopped doing historical military and has been laughing all the way to bank for 20 plus years.
And funny that Dragon's last few 1/72 all new kits are perfect tie-ins to Girls und Panzer to include a Centurion Mark I? Licensing has a built in market who aren't as nit-picky about models.
They might go for value priced Orange box re-issues of everything. They sell well. The molds are paid for, time to under cut the competition and rake in the real money with licensed toys.
When was the last full new tool from Hasegawa in 1/72? Meanwhile they're doing full new tool anime aircraft and Macross. Bandai stopped doing historical military and has been laughing all the way to bank for 20 plus years.
And funny that Dragon's last few 1/72 all new kits are perfect tie-ins to Girls und Panzer to include a Centurion Mark I? Licensing has a built in market who aren't as nit-picky about models.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.