--- In [email protected], "Art Armstrong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am answering on the list also as I suspect I am not the only one
confused.
Hi Art...
No need to be confused. Let me clarify the muddy waters for you.
Listen up now.....
There are two concepts at work here and they are quite a bit
different from each other. One says "no competition allowed with
private sector manufacturers". The other says "stimulation of new
products is fine". Both concepts claim to help S scale -- although
in different ways. As Rollie just said, the line gets a bit fuzzy at
times.
Historically speaking, NASG brass projects (which originated with
Rollie) did prove to the world that expensive brass imports in S
scale could be sold and encouraged several established brass
importers to put their toes into S waters. Since there were no brass
freight cars prior to the NASG projects, there was no direct
competition. (Not counting NWSL's earlier tank car.) So S
benefitted and no manufacturer was 'damaged' and everyone was happy.
Similarly for NASG's project for plastic Pullman cars. There were
none being made at the time, now there are, nobody got hurt, it was
win-win for all. What is the problem here?
Regarding the citrus packing plant project, one might argue that
there were several existing manufacturers of structures that
were 'hurt' by this NASG project. But is that really the case?
Which of them was already producing a citrus packing shed? Which of
them had specific plans to produce one in the near future? Did they
have an opportunity to bid on the project? Was anyone really hurt by
this NASG project? I dunno, but I doubt it.
Now using the above-mentioned three NASG projects as examples, I
would opine that only one of them stimulated future new products.
The brass freight car project clearly stimulated future production of
many many other brass projects by several different companies.
However, did the citrus packing shed stimulate future production of
other structures? Did the re-runs of plastic Pullmans stimulate
future production of other passenger cars? My guess is that nothing
beyond the original product was stimulated by these particular two
projects. Is that good or bad? I dunno....but I do not complain.
I suppose if you wanted a plastic Pullman or a citrus shed, it was a
good project. If you didn't care about those two products, then
perhaps it doesn't matter to you. And that is OK as well.
So what is the problem with NASG projects? I don't see any
significant competition with existing products or manufacturers.
Except for the infamous NASG brick/concrete factory/warehouse product
if it ever gets finished. But since not one has ever been delivered,
how has it hurt anyone? In fact, it might be claimed that the mere
existence of the NASG project stimulated two other companies to make
similar brick industrial structures since the demand appeared to be
solid. So at least the NASG project stimulated others even though it
appears to be stillborn or aborted itself.
So which of the two opposing concepts is best? That, as Rollie
points out, is what NASG's Board of Trustees will decide decide each
time it votes on a potential project. Presumbably, the BOT will
weigh all the pertinent factors and make a wise decision. And that
is the way it is. Like it or not. Good or bad. Democracy at work!
Muddy waters clear now? Or maybe more muddy? Well, I tried.
Cheers...Ed L.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
