Garga - see the thread I started on the apparently increasing overlap between Rubicon and Italeri/Warlord:
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=147.0 While noone really agreed with me, I think there is a major issue brewing here, with a strong likelihood that we'll end up with virtually every vehicle available from both.
a) italeri products are in my view inferior to yours with respect to quality of design and options but they are still high standard products. I have just bought a couple of their tanks from warlord and i should say that are not bad and in particular far better than resin counterparts.
I think the level of quality is pretty close. I've bought all of the Italeri vehicles released so far, and they tend to be accurate and well detailed, although they aren't as easy to assemble. Their smaller components are often more accurate that Rubicon's. I don't like their approach to the tracks and running gear though - I think Rubicon are ahead of them - but kits like the Panther Ausf A and Puma are very nice. Assuming Italeri actually release their announced Panzer III and StuG III, we'll get a direct comparison. Warlord's own kits are inferior to Rubicon's. Look at their new T-34/76 compared to Rubicon's.
b) For modeller higher quality counts but for many wargamers has a smaller value (at least in friendly games items may be proxied a little so not much relevant if the muzzle is precise or you have the beautiful detail in the wheels). I am not saying that is not good or required i simply say that for a specific market that may not be very important.... Of course yours have many variations and more details but also more pieces to assemble ...
Again I do not know whihc is your target market but i think that wargamers are an important part of your sales base…
Like Italeri, Rubicon are still trying to have it both ways - aiming at the wargamers while also trying to appeal to modellers. That's why we still get components in kits by both manufacturers that are frankly too fragile for wargaming. I don't see why wargamers should settle for inferior quality, or historical inaccuracy, but they are generally happy to accept compromises in detail/number of parts in exchange for useful options and durability.
c) Italeri products may be competitive price-wise with yours (clearly non taking into account the quality). 3 panthers from psc come at 54 GBP + 15% post and the warlord platoon costs 55 GBP so there is a 15% difference and similarly this is the difference for others but the tiger the difference is higher 3 tigers come at 62 + 15% vs 55... However if you get them directly from Italeri the difference is even higher since in their sice the tiger is at 19 EURO vs almost 30-35 with the unfabourable change we have now... In some cases cost may have a role in the chichi.
I'm finding Italeri cheaper than either Warlord or Rubicon.
a) not a big issue if you have overlaps with other producers. it is important to have the best selling like pziv or stug rather than obscure variants.
I agree up to a point, but when it becomes a competition over every release then we're losing out in variety. To be honest, it looks to me more as though Italeri/Warlord are dogging Rubicon in this regard, with a string of kits announced on the heels of Rubicon's.
b) keep high quality since this is a distinctive feature but perhaps go in the direction of offering more kits of the same model: i already pointed out that with the sherman you cannot have a separate turret so hae two models with one of your boxes. his could be nice and also will be liked by some.
for example the t34/76 and 85 could have been combined so that you may interchange simply the turret. I know that the ring was larger and placed differently but perhaps simple solutions could be done to circumvent. I don't know if this means more sales for you …
I agree - I've been saying that Rubicon need to offer more distinct variants. So, providing the 75mm and 76mm turrets in the M4A3 kit is very useful, while providing the 1941 and 1942 turrets in the T-34/76 kit is far less useful. Judging by some of the threads about Rubicon's planned kits (e.g. the M5A1/M8) they're getting much better at this.
c) ask your reseller to keep postage cost low... basically thse make an artificial 15-20% cost increase of your models
Probably too much to ask. Retailers have to make money too!
d) keep us informed about your production plans... that may be useful for us as well... I wanted to buy the t34/85 from warlord but i refrained when i saw you announced yours... (and i am egerly waiting them!!!)
Me too! Warlord's T-34/85 is pretty average, and I'm sure Rubicon's will be far superior. That's where some competition is a good thing. It cuts both ways though; I'm sure Italeri's announced Panzer III will be better than Rubicon's.
