Sunday, August 28, 2011 - 01:00 AM UTC
Cyber-Hobby, have re-announced a model which many may see as little more than a reaction to ANOTHER announcement we made here on Armorama
Announced with little in the way of marching bands, fireworks or happy crowds thronging the streets (at the Japan Show a few months ago) was this:

6715 - MB Typ G4 Partisanenwagen

Now, it has been re-announced prompting some minor head-shaking and some real questions.

Now, those who know me from my work here on the Site, realize that I don't often do it, but there ARE times when some minor editorializing is called for.

Now, to bring you up-to-date with the story, ICM not only announced the same vehicle, but have regularly updated us with In-Progress shots of the vehicle. So, for one second truly believing in the Power of the Press, I feel it may be worthwhile asking some pointed questions...

1) The first, is the most obvious. Does the market REALLY need a second Typ G4? This is a vehicle which was produced in small numbers, only served the needs of VERY senior members of the 3rd Reich and would rarely be seen beyond ceremonial occasions.

2) Is this REALLY part of Cyber-Hobby's release program? Previously (with the exception of the widely-produced Opel Blitz) the company has released a series of VARIANTS on existing models - prototypes, one-offs and even hypotheticals have been the company's stock-in-trade. Why now announce a vehicle of this type?

3) Is it competion or a 'spoiler'? Competition is the life-blood of the hobby. Without it, one company would be dictating all releases, the technical improvements in models spearheaded by such as Dragon Models or Bronco would be inexistent. They compete to sell the best product - that's the world we live in. However, when a company like DML announces the SAME New Release, it can look like a 'Spoiler' against a smaller, less 'visible' company. There have been a couple of 'coincidences' recently that have caused more eyebrow raising than you'd see at a convention of Vulcan psychiatrists.

4) The 'i'll wait for the release by Company X'? Some companies know all too well that if a smaller, less visible company announces a particular release and a larger 'Hi-Vis' company announces the same, then people WILL wait for the release by the bigger manufacturer. Brand Loyalty, proven confidence, call it what you will, but it IS a factor.

5) Where IS the Threat? Now, if we were living in cloud-cuckoo land, we could argue that the high profile companies such as ICM get here, on Armorama, damages the business of DML. The latter STILL sell, get the headlines and generate more interest than the former. They've a bigger catalogue, a (longer) proven track-record of technical excellence than almost anyone else. So why, does it (at least from where I'M sitting) seem that DML get nervous at every other release by every other company? If it was a Panther, I could understand it. A staff car though?

Yes, my thoughts which may be shared by some (and rejected by many more), but an announcement like THIS does raise a series of curious questions....
Click Star to Rate
8 readers have rated this story.
Get a daily email with links to all our latest news, reviews, and features.

Comments

I've rarely 'slammed' DML criticised yes. In fact i've repeatedly stted that IMO, there is no-one comes close to them in what they do best - Axis. I like what ICM are doing in softskins. I doubt if i'd be as enthusiastic if they released a Tiger - THAT is DML Territory. I doubt anyone could come close to the DML Blitz. Not technical problems from DML - a lack of imagination? No, no ethical problems whatsoever. Hopefully YOUR conscience is as clear?
SEP 09, 2011 - 02:31 AM
How, exactly, is saying that another kit is very good 'slamming' DML? Jim didn't say it was better than DMLs, or that DMLs will be no good when it comes out, he just said the ICM one looked good Surely it is not outside the realms of plausibility that they (when the DML one comes out) couldn't (shock horror) BOTH be good
SEP 09, 2011 - 02:43 AM
Chris I think this is uncalled for and a very low blow. I would hope you are as quick to apologise if this product doesn't appear. I will also add that regardless of what you wish to say about Jim Rae I have never had reason to see him as biased on the grounds of what he may or may not be getting as a review sample.
SEP 09, 2011 - 02:56 PM
Folks, there are two issues here: the various levels of quality of the various manufacturers, and Dragon's tendency to release "ghost kits" that either take a long time to make it to market (their Sd.Kfz.7) or never make it at all. Are these spoilers to take some luster off the competition? Definitely, in my opinion. Is Jim right to call them on this? I think there's a case that can be made for that. The model business is highly competitive right now, and there's no question that manufacturers are looking for an edge against their competition. If Armorama doesn't point out the posturing, then doesn't that make us the stooges of these companies?
SEP 10, 2011 - 07:42 AM
I would like Armorama to keep pointing out " spoiler releases ,ghost kits , etc " . It wouldn't do my limited hobby budget any good to pick up a thirty plus year old LVT kit , thinking it was a finely crafted new kit . Do I think its a spoiler for AFVs forth coming kit , yes I do . And Dragon / Cyber Hobby are going to tick off more than a few unsuspecting modelers ( the local hobby shop guys didn't know ) not realizing its a repopped dog . A couple of high priced dogs like that from any one company would put me off them for life . True some companys do have kits that need a lot of tlc , but if you know that at time of purchase , then there's no problem .
SEP 10, 2011 - 04:19 PM
As long as you call everybody out who does it and not just one certain company. Would hate to look like a shrill. By the way, is there a time limit from announcement to release before getting flagged by the model release umpires. Roy
SEP 11, 2011 - 04:25 AM
Now, DML are (normally) excellent in that from the time of an announcemwnt to the actual 'Physical' Release is about 2 (maximum of 3) months. They ARE probably the quickest company out there announcing and then releasing. This is ONLY a single-image announcement. It's NOW nearly 5 months since this announcemnt was made. Yeah, I reckon SOME comment can be justified...
SEP 11, 2011 - 08:17 AM
One question What happend to the Bedford QL ? It was posted by one compeny then another and yet we still havent seen one! \\\but I dont lay the blame on the producers only why do the rivet counters constanly complaine when a company produces a kit we have all been waiting for\\\\\\\\\/
SEP 11, 2011 - 08:31 AM
Jim My ICM G-4 just arrived from Sprue Brothers; I must say that it looks OK, although the wheels and hubs are absolute rubbish! with this being said; we now need some aftermarket company to whip out some new wheels! Mrosko
SEP 15, 2011 - 09:56 AM
THIS STORY HAS BEEN READ 7,975 TIMES.
ADVERTISEMENT

Photos
Click image to enlarge
  • move
Cyber-Hobby.com ReviewsMORE
Panzer VIII Maus In-Box Review
by Mark
Sd. Kfz. 250/1 Built Review
by Jake McKee
Tiger I Early Production In-Box Review
by Russ Amott
Jagdpanzer IV L/48 In-Box Review
by Jacob Hederstierna-Johnse | of 1 ratings, 100% found this helpful
Flakvierling 38 Pz.Kpfw.II In-Box Review
by Dave Oliver
Flammpanzer III In-Box Review
by Rick Cooper
Maultier with Flak 37 In-Box Review
by Rick Cooper | of 3 ratings, 100% found this helpful
Sd.Kfz.250 NEU mit. 5cm PaK 38 In-Box Review
by Kevin Brant | of 2 ratings, 100% found this helpful
V2 Missile + Communication Set In-Box Review Video Review included
by Frederick Boucher | of 4 ratings, 100% found this helpful
Cyber-Hobby Pz. III Ausf. G In-Box Review
by Bill Cross | of 3 ratings, 100% found this helpful
Otto Carius Tiger I E Mid-prod In-Box Review
by Rick Cooper | of 7 ratings, 86% found this helpful
Panzer IIC Mineroller DAK In-Box Review
by Robert Blokker | of 3 ratings, 100% found this helpful
Orange Box LVT-4 In-Box Review
by Sal | of 2 ratings, 100% found this helpful
Sturmgeschütz III (Fl) In-Box Review
by Bill Cross | of 2 ratings, 100% found this helpful
Pz.III Operation Seelöwe Built Review
by Bill Cross | of 5 ratings, 100% found this helpful

ADVERTISEMENT