Airfix Marketing

[denstore]

Den, I was not trying to "steer the dicussion towards the contents", I was making the point that I personally would rather see resources put into the plastic and decals rather than repackaging. Likewise with the comments about marketing, I've tried to point out the work that the marketing people are doing.

And I was making the point that I get better plastic, decals AND repacking in Tamiya and Hasegawa boxings, and that reviewers as well as buyers tend to be more forgiving about Airfix than other brands. Something that has serious advantages when it comes to marketing as well.....

But of course, why should we compare anything at all?

Great contribution there Den, any more in the bag or are you done now?

Yes, I have loads, but I´m not sure it would be good to make them here. I can make one though. I used to have a good deal of respect for you, but it disappears really fast.

[denstore]

But those exmaples were hardly "blind" were they? Every kit company has its yay and nay lobby, that's never going to change.

Have a trawl through the Nimrod posts here on BM, I don't think you'll find many "blind" modellers here, the difference is that they highlight problems and then set about tackling them.

I wasn´t saying that the examples were less objective than others. I was saying that people tend to be more or less forgiving about things, because they expect more or less from certain companies. If Tamiya makes a mistake, the kit is unbuildable, just because people expected that it would be almost perfect.

The above mentioned reviewers expected to find worthless decals, possible sinkmarks and weak interior in the new Airfix kit, so they accepted it.

[Gary West]

Before Mike closes this thread, why don't you two just move on.....please for the sake of everyone else that wants their say.

[Mike]

Before Mike closes this thread, why don't you two just move on.....please for the sake of everyone else that wants their say.

Well said that man! Anymore of this arguing & there will be "awards" dished out. Clear?

[entlim]

Here we go again...........

[thx6667]

Personally speaking, I always thought Matchbox's packaging from the 70s was superb and was a triumph of invention over economy - they packed so much into so little.

1 - Great box art paintings, lots of action.

2 - Historical blurb at the bottom telling you about what the box art was about.

3 - Mini painting guide on the sides and flap ends (making the best use of all the space)

4 - Thumbnails of other kits in the range, that fired you up for the next shopping trip.

5 - Colour schemes on the back, which gave you an instant idea on what decal and variant choices there were in the kit.

6 - Compact, informative instruction sheet.

From every angle it was total genius and obviously gave Frog and Airfix a headache back then, both of whom then set about trying to revamp their packaging. Much of the action artwork got replaced in the 80s, but the core of the packaging remained pretty much the same until the 90s when Revell acquired the license to produce the kits.

Given the first Matchbox kits appeared 35 years, their packaging is still a marvel today. As an exercise in marketing a kit, it was near perfection.

[Gary West]

Given the first Matchbox kits appeared 35 years, their packaging is still a marvel today. As an exercise in marketing a kit, it was near perfection.

Totally agree - one of the things that drew me toward the model shelves. They got it spot on!

[phoenix]

Here's my two bob's worth.

cdplayer, old adage:

yer pays yer money, yer takes yer choice!

Can see (i think) what your driving at, but have to agree with Jonathan,

making the point that I personally would rather see resources put into the plastic and decals rather than repackaging.

Every company and individual has a wish list,

most will wither and die in the cold light of the commercial world, try running a company for a while

then you'll get an idea of what i'm talking about.

You can spend money ONCE, so where best to spend it?

Mmmm? thats right, on whats IN the box.

Of course if you have contacts in the manufacturing trade, and they can:-

1. Meet / exceed the spec. layed down by Hornby.

2. Meet the quantities specified by Hornby, and just check on the various sizes.

3. Meet with Hornbys time scale.

4. Get the packaging where it needs to be, WHEN it needs to be there.

Thats 4 out of probably 40

Before the brickbats start flying, i have no "axe to grind" nor am i on the payroll of ANY manufacturer,

or periodical publication, just someone who has been model(l)ing for more years than i care to think about,

strives for superb and falls frighteningly short, ('tis a Javelin, honest Guv!)

Am a member of I.P.M.S. and also a member of my local branch, Cleveland.

Grew up when you couldn't GIVE Tamiya or Hasegawa kits away,

well remember the awful Revell boxes?!!! and Monogram!!! (DON'T put one at the bottom of the stash!)

Frog, Airfix, Matchbox, Aurora, Hawk, and Lindberg, and have brought, at some time,

every English language modelling mag. These make interesting reading, given time i can find shed loads of

great reviews of English produced kits, 'cause they were / are the "only game in town".

In the greater scheme of things,it's a way of getting the product into our hot sticky little hands

after all it's only a BOX!!!!!

Paul

[Dave Fleming]

What bugs me when it comes to Airfix, is that people tend to be blind about problems they wouldn´t accept in other brands. Here´s some I´ve picked up in reviews so far:

(Fotios Rouch, Cybermodeler accepts some things that never would be accepted on a Big T kit)

"The surface detail is great and I noticed no sink marks on the plastic except maybe on the upper wing parts over the landing gear bays and even then they are barely noticeable."

"The decals look very complete with all kinds of stencils and warnings but the solid big single color areas like the blue and red/pink of the national insignia might not appeal to some. I have three Nimrod decal sets from Model Alliance on order and that should rectify my concerns."

(Brett Green, Hyperscale find the positive side of having to scratchbuild the interior)

"The lack of interior detail will be viewed as a shortcoming by some, but others will be pleased to be free of the extra time involved with fitting out a cockpit and cabin that will never be seen. "

Not that the reviewers are wrong, but would they write the same if it said Hasegawa or Tamiya on the boxes? I really don´t think so.

Interesting points, but I have to disagree on a certain level - There are often faults in Tamyia or Hasegawa (or Revell!) kits, or other manufacturers which are glossed over by reviewers (Classic Airframes kit on Hyperscale for example! ). Everyone has their own reasosn and agendas!!

I thought the double box lid on the Nimrod was an interesting attempt to make up for a flimsy top box.

Edited March 11, 2008 by Dave Fleming

[denstore]

Interesting points, but I have to disagree on a certain level - There are often faults in Tamyia or Hasegawa (or Revell!) kits, or other manufacturers which are glossed over by reviewers (Classic Airframes kit on Hyperscale for example! ). Everyone has their own reasosn and agendas!!

I thought the double box lid on the Nimrod was an interesting attempt to make up for a flimsy top box.

Sure, I agree, especially when it comes to reviews where the kit was given by the manufacturer. I´ve seen the same phenomena in computer hardware.

But my point is that everybody´s so happy that Airfix are back on their feet, that we tend to forgive anthing. But it doesn´t mean that I say that it´s a bad kit.

But the same thing of course happens to other brands too. It´s just hard to be objective if you have been getting something you´ve been longing for.

Edited March 11, 2008 by denstore

[Fea]

Ayup All...

Just my 2 cents...

I think that the Canberra boxart, whoever did it, is awful. I concede timeframe for Hornby, (grudgingly) but the Illustration, certainly of this first one, stinks royally to high heaven, and for me, even if i was ten again, wouldn't sell the kit to me, however good. the artwork that SHOULD have been used should have been the 'vertically' oriented illustration used in the magazine ads, it's BRILLIANT! and a great change from a boring 'horizontal' illustration. For me, the canberra flying 'down' out of the page is evocative of the vertical aspect 1/24th Stuka, when it first came out, which is and has always been SENSATIONAL! how that awful line drawing got past the Marketing MD is beyond me, a rendition to say the least...

A lot of you out there may think that 'pack Mechanicals' aren't important, but they are. Exciting Illustrations make people (like me) think about whether they should give the kit a go, if its something out of the usual, and sturdy boxes themselves are needed to keep sprues and sub assemblies safe (up to a point), and the contents safe in a stash... that isn't money for kits wasted, but something that enhances the whole kit experience, and keeps Airfix/Hornby at the front of my mind.

Again, i suppose it's nothing to hang Hornby up for yet, but it IS something they need to consider afresh, seriously. the 'toy-like' packaging given to the Dr. Who stuff may work for ITS intended audience, but for 'Classic ' Kits needs better execution...

Edited March 11, 2008 by Fea

[bentwaters81tfw]

Personally, I don't buy a kit for the box art. Point in question, my Formaplane Hastings, yes the original, crudely drawn in shades of blue. Nobody else did one back then, and the box gets recycled when it's served it's purpose. What it DOES give me is a Hastings. I don't care if it came in a polybag from Tesco's. What's the beef????

[Jon Kunac-Tabinor]

Ayup All...

Just my 2 cents...

I think that the Canberra boxart, whoever did it, is awful. I concede timeframe for Hornby, (grudgingly) but the Illustration, certainly of this first one, stinks royally to high heaven, and for me, even if i was ten again, wouldn't sell the kit to me, however good. the artwork that SHOULD have been used should have been the 'vertically' oriented illustration used in the magazine ads, it's BRILLIANT! and a great change from a boring 'horizontal' illustration. For me, the canberra flying 'down' out of the page is evocative of the vertical aspect 1/24th Stuka, when it first came out, which is and has always been SENSATIONAL! how that awful line drawing got past the Marketing MD is beyond me, a rendition to say the least...

A lot of you out there may think that 'pack Mechanicals' aren't important, but they are. Exciting Illustrations make people (like me) think about whether they should give the kit a go, if its something out of the usual, and sturdy boxes themselves are needed to keep sprues and sub assemblies safe (up to a point), and the contents safe in a stash... that isn't money for kits wasted, but something that enhances the whole kit experience, and keeps Airfix/Hornby at the front of my mind.

Again, i suppose it's nothing to hang Hornby up for yet, but it IS something they need to consider afresh, seriously. the 'toy-like' packaging given to the Dr. Who stuff may work for ITS intended audience, but for 'Classic ' Kits needs better execution...

Fea- couldn't agree more with everthing you wrote, AND that canberra box art is just not good. Wrong angle for the subject, too flat a view.

Also - I'd like to state that with over 30 years of modelling under the belt - box art IS still important to me - I like to browse in a shop or online for models - and sometimes,a good bit of box art will seize the imagination and lead me into a modelling project that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

We live in a very visual age, where consumers expect a high quality of packaging (and thats different from over-packaging, or using recycled materials - I have a degree in fine art and over 15 years in design and print, so I'll back that up with a technical bor-athon if anyone wants one).

The Nimrod artwork - IMHO fails for 3 main reasons:

1: Composition: good general view of the beast but it sits within too much background, and too centrally.

2: Orientation: - the aircraft is flying towards the left - flip it and looks a lot better, plus place the aircraft in this flipped view slight further to the right and the dramatic affect is improved - this now looks like a fast airborne hunter going places, trailing flares behind it.

3: Choice of lighting and colour scheme on the box art. So you want an exciting pic on your box art? - so don't portray an aircraft in an overall lo-vis scheme in a twilight setting. The camo is designed to make these birds hard to spot at the best of times - by portraying the aircraft in this scenario, the artists tonal range is going to be mostly greys and dark pastel colours - now that may work on the original painting, where the colour pigments add a bit of life, but when its scanned in to print, and converted into CMYK process colours, any life in the artists pigments will dull out - hence the dramatic sunset looks sludgy, the sea is grey and the Nimrod itself is trapped by its own camo betwixt dull red grey and dull blue grey. ergo - dull box art.

I'd rather have had the same pose of aircraft but flipped as I mention above, in its original hi-vis white over grey scheme with red/white/blue roundels, banking over the QE2 on a glorious day in the western approaches, the sun glinting off the airframe, the sea flecked with white horses etc etc - does that sound better? yes it does? - why, 'cus its just a better imagineering of the concept.

Either the brief to the artist was awry here, or the artist failed to consider some of these things.

I don't know what the cause was- but the box art on the Nimrod is not well thought out. The execution of the style is a matter of taste, but the composition and ideas behind should have been thought through better. You can apply most of this to the Canberra too.

Just my thoughts, of course, and whatever the crappy boxart looks like - roll on those Canberras.

Cheers

JonKT

[Rowan Broadbent]

Jon and Fea, bang on the money - especially Jon's erudite critique.

Good box art and - not quite as important, but important nonetheless, good quality packaging materials DO help to sell. Hasegawa's art and boxes have always been great as have Tamiya's and just a look at the evolution of Eduard's boxing, it now shrieks quality - of course it helps if the kit whithin is good as well........Revells ghastly end-opening boxes actually disuade me from an impulse purchase - have you seen what happens if you stack them too high????

Hornby have missed a trick here and whilst economics have something to do with it, an extra 50p on the cost of a £30+ kit makes little difference to the purchaser and if it increases sales (which I am sure it would do), it might even be possible to swallow the packaging cost increase, if it was thought neccesary.

I still harbour a dream that there will one day be a "deluxe" Airfix range, with tasty packaging, added etch and real quality mouldings - it works for Eduard. Their clever marketing and high quality really do show the way. And Hornby have a quality name for their railway stuff. How about it Airfix? you could start with a state of the art Hawker Fury and then a Tempest.....well a man can dream, can't he?

Edited March 11, 2008 by Rowan Broadbent

[Jon Kunac-Tabinor]

Jon and Fea, bang on the money - especially Jon's erudite critique.

Erudite? - I've never needed to take viagra yet...

I would ask how the Gaunt... but I wont. PM me if you want a brief chinwagette.

cheers

JonKT

PS Drakens are up next - jet thingys, and foreign. I fear for my own sanity.

[denstore]

Drakens are up next - jet thingys, and foreign. I fear for my own sanity.

No need to fear, it´s a Haseawa box, Koike Shigeo boxart.....

And when it comes to photos of the original, I´m sure there are plenty of people who have whats needed. People are already warming up over here.

[miduppergunner]

Personally, I don't buy a kit for the box art. Point in question, my Formaplane Hastings, yes the original, crudely drawn in shades of blue. Nobody else did one back then, and the box gets recycled when it's served it's purpose. What it DOES give me is a Hastings. I don't care if it came in a polybag from Tesco's. What's the beef????

Absolutely - yes nice box art is nice - just that - but why so important - and in fairness to Airfix/Hornby I think they know what they are about. As I discard my boxes as soon as I can (as I suspect do most others) I feel that it is a waste if too much money is spent in that direction. May I suggest that there is an understandable bias here by some but without considering the viability from the business point of view. Hence I say that box art by Taylor Trudgian Shepherd etc al would be lovely - and certainly worth keeping to frame for example - but such expenditure is surely a very low priority, and rightly so.

[Rowan Broadbent]

PS Drakens are up next - jet thingys, and foreign. I fear for my own sanity.

Saw some sprue shots of the Dragon, I might well be tempted....

PM on its way

[miduppergunner]

An after thought - all the indications are that the local model shop will vanish and we will all be buying on line (an awful lot of people do already it seems) so the opportunity to browse box art will vanish as well.

[AnonymousAA72]

I couldn't care less what the box art was..it could come in a plastic bin liner for all I cared - its the contents that matter.

As for Hornby.....look at how they market their model railways......EVERYTHING comes in standard sized glossy red boxes. The only artwork is a line illustration (normally a photo), this has been their standard for a long , long time now...

I'd say their marketing is spot on.......

An after thought - all the indications are that the local model shop will vanish and we will all be buying on line (an awful lot of people do already it seems) so the opportunity to browse box art will vanish as well.

A very good point....

[Jon Bryon]

Interesting points, but I have to disagree on a certain level - There are often faults in Tamyia or Hasegawa (or Revell!) kits, or other manufacturers which are glossed over by reviewers (Classic Airframes kit on Hyperscale for example! ). Everyone has their own reasosn and agendas!!

...

I agree. How many reviews have a go at Tamiya for extremely annoying and difficult to remove ejector pin marks on their P-47 and F-16s? Or at Revell for their generally hopeless and error-strewn instructions? Or Eduard for their slipshod QC on the Mirage kits? This is hyperbole, but the point is no kits are perfect, even the very good ones. All have faults glossed over. I can't remember the last 'negative' review of a kit I'm interested in on three of the 'Main Four' sites (HS, Cybermodeler, and ARC, although, to be fair, ARC doesn't really do reviews; MM seem to have a little more of a maverick streak). I don't see any evidence that some manufacturers have an easier time than others; they all get positive reviews. Now on the forums...that's another matter.

And I'm in the 'don't care what the box looks like as long as it's strong' camp

Cheers

Jon

[darson]

I couldn't agree more that it's the quality of the kit inside the box that's the most important part, however (for me anyway) attractive artwork can certainly peak my interest in a kit.

Take for interest the boxart of the upcoming Eduard FAA Hellcat that I saw the other night. Wow it looked hot and I thought to myself, self I reckon I should get one of those babies.

As for reviews and or criticisms on kits that you find in forums, there are normally so many opposing points of view and contradictory statements that I take very little if any notice of them. Case in point the great Hellcat chin scoop debate on HS recently.

Cheers

Edited March 14, 2008 by darson

[Nev]

Well, put me in the "likes nice boxart" group.

Yes, most on here are amongst the more, er, discerning part of the market, and as such are much more interested in accuracy, fit, detail etc than in the actual packaging.

HOWEVER

How many times have we heard the argument that the "discerning modeller" makes up only a fraction of the market, especially for brands such as Airfix? That most kits are sold to great auntie Maud buying a Spitfire for little Jonny's birthday?

And ironically its the people who have pushed that argument the most who are in this thread saying that box-art isn't important

I've been disapointed by Airfix's box-art for quite some time, very uninspiring, and I have often wondered how this would tempt the casual buyer to be interested in their products. Why do we say "don't judge a book by its cover"? Precisely because people DO judge a book by it's cover. Packaging IS important when trying to sell to the non-discerning customer (and even occasionally to the discerning one )

Perhaps Hasegawa quality box-art is a pipe dream, but please can we at least rise above Trumpeter quality box-art? Like (Mental?) said, many an old Hasegawa dog has been sold because it has stunning box-art.

ps Thought Jonathon made a great point about having colour profiles of the kit options on the box.

Edited March 14, 2008 by Nev

[George Norman]

Hi all,

Just seen an emtpy Nimrod box on E-bay for sale....

Only messing!!!

George.

[AnonymousAA72]

That most kits are sold to great auntie Maud buying a Spitfire for little Jonny's birthday?

From experience of running this little emporium, I have to say that Auntie Maud wouldn't know the difference between decent, indifferent or crap artwork.

Auntie Maud comes into the shop, and she wants a Spitfire.....she has the choice between Airfix, Hasegawa and Academy... she will ask for an Airfix kit, and no amount of persuasion that the other kits may be better, would sway her. The artwork counts for nought - it the brand name that matters.............to Auntie Maud.

Look at the Hornby branding; plain red boxes for almost everything......the public KNOW Hornby, they don't know Bachmann - who are in certain areas superior to Hornby , and the plain red boxes win every time.....................