
Posted by GE
![]()
on 11/10/2009, 2:52 am, in reply to "Re: It is the process used"
71.162.41.108
We're very concerned about the cost issue, and the greatest expense CSC faces is labor. I am not sure what can be done about that. The reason the models were produced overseas was to reduce labor costs -- but as the standard of living improves -- so too must the wages paid in order to retain good artists. Quite frankly, I fear where all this will lead. I'm not sure it's possible to use a monobloc casting mode given te pewter alloy. It would lower some of the casting and assembly costs, but makes painting more difficult. No easy answers -- and I sure wish there were.
George
--Previous Message--
: I agree that CSC models are extraordinarily
: fine. However, all modeling involves
: artistic choice as to representational
: outcome. CSC's outcome is great but I
: personally prefer a broader range of
: subjects at a lesser price point.
: Irrespective of costs, economic turmoil, and
: currency factors, when individual models hit
: $300 I pretty much lose interest.
:
: Here's some additional background facts
: regarding my own purchase history in this
: genre:
:
: Between 2003 and 2009 I purchased 29 Classic
: Ships waterline models (all bought new).
:
: The minimum paid was for OPDR Las Palmas
: (CSC 78) -- $114 in 2006.
:
: The most paid was for Color Fantasy (CSC 82)
: -- $274.95 in 2007.
:
: The average paid for the 29 CSC models was
: $203.
:
: I have also purchased about 95 Carat models
: between 2002 and 2009 at an average price of
: about $123 per model.
:
: As an aside, the dollar peaked at about 1.2
: Euros in 2000 and dipped to 0.63 in July of
: 2008, currently resting at about 0.67. So,
: admittedly, it has lost on average about 1/3
: of its value, arguably a little more. The
: economy has also declined steeply and with
: it personal discretionary wealth.
:
: Anyway, I don't really have a point here,
: just some background to my commentary.
:
:
:
:
:
Message Thread:
![]()
« Back to thread