What a difference in attitude between Lionel and MTH

Wow. Well at least consider yourself lucky that you got any response at all. When I wrote to Lionel a while back and then followed up with them questioning their decision to scrap their best-in-class die-cast sprung trucks and couplers with hidden uncoupling tabs, which they had installed on their scale freight and passenger cars and appropriately touted in their catalogs for many years, and to substitute for them inferior and less functional non-sprung trucks with ugly thumb tack couplers thereby disenfranchising their core 3-rail base, I did not even receive the courtesy of an acknowledgment, much less any substantive response.

While this was obviously terrible customer service to a loyal customer who had purchased many thousands of Lionel products over the years, in a sense it vindicated my position, as it confirmed my conclusion that their decision was indefensible.  

Now that is a big difference

ehkempf posted:

I submitted the following to both MTH and Lionel:

Would you consider bringing out a Santa Fe F7 or F9 in both the Blue Bonnet and Yellow Bonnet paint scheme. A ABA set . As far as I know this is something you have never produced and they would make great collector pieces.

I got the following response from Lionel:

Thank you for mailing us your idea. However, we are unable to accept your submission in its current state. Our submission policy states the following: 

IT IS LIONEL’S POLICY THAT WE DO NOT SOLICIT FOR OR ACCEPT ANY UNSOLICITED PRODUCT IDEAS OR SUGGESTIONS INCLUDING ANY CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET OR PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. If you provide to us anything, including all ideas and suggestions, you agree that what you provide is neither confidential nor secret, that it may be freely used by us and others in any manner and for any purpose, that it neither infringes the rights of anyone else nor uses anyone else’s confidential information, and that you are providing it freely and with a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, edit, modify, enhance, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display it, and to incorporate it in other things and works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed.

If you have a simple suggestion about a product, we will forward it to our Product Development department. If you have a more involved "product idea" that you are wanting to formally suggest to Lionel, you will need to first have your idea patented, to protect yourself and Lionel. Then contact us and we will send to you a packet of information that will explain to you how to formally send us your idea. Please know that we only accept ideas for trains, no other types of toy products. 

Please be aware you will only get an additional response if we have further questions or clarifications on your submission. 

Should you wish to resubmit your idea, please reach out to us for the appropriate submission protocol once your patent application is complete. 

We greatly appreciate your interest in our brand and our future product production.

Here is the reply from MTH:

Thank you for your suggestion about our future product lines. We're always happy to hear from our customers, so we know what you want and can continue to provide the variety of interesting products people ask for. As you may know, we get many of our ideas from folks like you who take the time to write in and tell us what you want. We've put your request with others for our marketing and product development teams to evaluate when planning future product lines. Keep an eye on upcoming catalogs - you may see what you’ve asked for in the future! Please feel free to contact me with any other questions or concerns you may have.

 

What a difference, I think Lionel needs to re-think its policy toward it's customer base.

 

 

if it was me I would forward both to Howard Hitchcock.

Ah, lawyers.  Clearly Lionel’s are paid by the word.  😏

Curt

Actually, Lionel's letter sounds like some of the ones I wrote to them in the 1970's, but now on 'droids.  Maybe they migh sell more product if they imported stuff the customer wanted!

LOL.  Well, Lionel did get caught red-handed stealing MTH's technology so I think their response is appropriate.  Maybe their still on probation so they have to be on their best behavior from now on. 

"Well, Lionel did get caught red-handed stealing MTH's technology so I think their response is appropriate. "

That's not true.  MTH had no technology to steal, for one thing .  The lawsuit was about designers in Korea using the same plans as MTH's Samhongsa facility.  Boiled down to MTH's expert witness saying the screwholes were in the same place so "intellectual property" was stolen, more or less.   Just one of many lawsuits MTH initiated during their earlier history, and this one turned out, temporarily at least,  a little bit better than most because of a not very knowledgeable jury and a judge who allowed unscientific testimony to be accepted.  Reversed on appeal as you might know.  The only folks who really came out ahead are the lawyers who represented both companies.  No one wound up with much more money than they started with, except the guys in three piece suits,  is my guess. Terrible waste of time and resources in retrospect.

That said, the response above from Lionel is unduly verbose, misses the point,  and is not customer friendly.  Someone should do something about that at Lionel.  I'm sure, by the way, you could find equivalent unfriendly, missing the purpose,  or unresponsive letters from almost any manufacturer at some point in time.  These are people, not robots.  Sometimes they make flawed decisions. 

If you think this episode is somehow indicative of overall Lionel or MTH customer service, I have a bridge for sale at a great price between lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. A really great price.

Just when I thought I was out . . . . . . 

LOL. Ok Landsteiner, keep telling yourself that.

Ps.. Mike Wolfe sued for $3 million and was awarded $40 million.  What's that tell you?

Lionel’s response is very open, honest, and clear. I’m not sure how one could find fault with it.  It spells out in detail how to go about submitting ideas for consideration. A similar response would be received from the websites of many/most sophisticated industrial companies. 

Pss.. From the MTH website: " The action was filed against Lionel LLC for patent infringement pertaining to Lionelﾒs inclusion of certain patented features found in M.T.H.ﾒs sound and train control technology."

 I am a big fan of MTH and have a lot of their engines. They welcome comments that I have made in the past and have been fair with me. That said, I have had very good communications with Lionel as well. They have always answered any question quickly and fully. I do own many of their products as well.

 So, I have to believe that you received an auto type reply and I personally wouldn't read so much extra into it. What prompted them to make such a full type reply seems like it maybe just a generic one that covers them and saves time?

 Now as far as stirring up the old L vs. M war.... I'm out!

I'm out too.  Was kinda making a half-hearted joke.  I forgot about the level of blind allegiance some have for Lionel and the level of soreness some folks have for MTH and vice versa.  Didn't mean to hijack the forum.

Interesting response. I've contacted MTH twice regarding new items. Once through Email and once through Facebook. Both responses were short and friendly. Both items were eventually produced. Coincidence? I think not! Ok it probably was but I like to think they actually listened to me.

In their legalize response, Lionel does appear to be the more "corporate" entity, whereas MTH seems more user friendly with their gracious and personal response.

TrainGuyMcGee posted:

LOL. Ok Landsteiner, keep telling yourself that.

Ps.. Mike Wolfe sued for $3 million and was awarded $40 million.  What's that tell you?

Landsteiner is correct.

Consider the realities of the legal environment today.  A hobbyist's "suggestion" to a company for a widget may (or may not) have any connection to plans already in progress or subsequently developed to manufacture a new widget. However, if/when a new widget is introduced in the marketplace, the hobbyist may feel certain that HIS suggestion was ripped off by the company. He might believe the company owes him a hefty royalty.

The standard corporate defense against such claims is to automatically return (usually unopened) all product suggestions with a "thanks, but no thanks" note written by lawyers.

Mike M.   (ritrainguy)

On the surface, MTH's response is more customer friendly.  I'm guessing that all train manufacturers have items in their pipeline for a couple years before they appear in a catalog.  Items we see in a catalog may have been conceived a year or two or more before the catalog is released.  So an item we may want may already be planned for a future release.  Or  it may appear in years beyond that.

I have a list of trains I'd like to acquire that I've vocalized to a few train manufacturers.  The bottom line is, if I like or want an item from any company at a price point I like I'll buy it, no matter who makes it.  If they don't I keep my money in my wallet.  So my requests are challenges to the train manufacturers to get the money from my wallet.  

There is one brand that has a substantial lead in my inventory.

I've sent ideas in to both companies for a particular roadname and such.  I've never received a response like was posted above.  My responses from both were on the line of the MTH response.  I won't pretend to say what triggered it but I have a feeling that it could have been an error. 

Then again maybe not.  I went to their website for another matter and what you posted above is basically plastered all over the website as well.  I don't know if that's new but I don't recall seeing so much of that before.

"Pss.. From the MTH website: " The action was filed against Lionel LLC for patent infringement pertaining to Lionelﾒs inclusion of certain patented features found in M.T.H.ﾒs sound and train control technology."

Not the most objective source .  MTH's sound and train control at the time was PS1, which was, shall we say, an annoying kludge compared with what Lionel had, TMCC and Railsounds.

" Mike Wolfe sued for $3 million and was awarded $40 million.  What's that tell you?"

Tells me you are unfamiliar with the actual details of the case. The $40 million award was reversed on appeal.  The above is not correct.  No one knows the exact details of the settlement in bankruptcy court, but rumors were that it was 12 million, of which about 33-40% probably went to the lawyers, netting MTH about 8 million dollars.  Not chump change, but probably less than Lionel's legal fees in this abomination of a lawsuit.  A pyrrhic victory, and soon after this, MTH stopped suing people left and right.  What does that tell you?

Not a question of loyalty to Lionel, but honoring the facts and justice.  You're free to believe what you like, but these are a broad outline of the facts.  And there is no "e" at the end of Mike Wolf's name .

Four years ago Lionel cataloged 4 Southern Pacific AC12 Cab Forwards. The catalog showed one in black, one in Daylight colors and two had no picture but listed different cab numbers. The one in black was lettered in the later post 1944 scheme using large lettering on the tender.

I emailed them to ask if either of the ones without pictures would be lettered in the as built version with the small tender lettering.

The reply was almost identical to the one the OP got though not as verbose telling me they don't release information on upcoming products. What?!!!!

Since I model the earlier era I never ordered one and as it turned out all the black versions came with the late style lettering.

Ironically the fantasy Daylight engine came with the earlier lettering so obviously the plate for the ink pad was already made. Zero effort or cost would have been incurred to put a black tender in the jig vs a red/orange one. No secrets would have been compromised.

Compare to MTH which typically produces both versions of SP steam and passenger cars at the same time when doing a run.

The policy described in Lionel's letter is nothing new.

Pete

Well if that's the response, someone is definitely out of touch.  I understand the legalize is needed but I don't see any harm in putting a little more effort in thanking someone for a suggestion and have them look for it in an upcoming catalog.  I'm sure the lawyers had a lot to do with this.

This post was not intended to start a fight as to brand loyalty. I own both Lionel and MTH and would and will most likely buy from both again should they offer what I am looking for. My intent was only to ask for a variation on a paint scheme, as both companies have offered F7’s in the past (not sure about F9’s). I only posted because I was a little in shock by Lionel’s response, as it was not what I expected. In my opinion any company offering a product should try to fill a niche based on customer needs and desires. All I want is a Blue Bonnet and Yellow Bonnet to add to my collection of War Bonnets

" I was a little in shock by Lionel’s response, as it was not what I expected"

Let me suggest that the response you received was from an inexperienced, perhaps new employee who has no idea about the difference between a suggested prototype model (as you requested) and a request for a new technologic feature (which might appropriately trigger the blast of legalese).  I wouldn't read too much into the response, since it doesn't likely reflect anything corporate, but rather the misjudgment of a single employee who isn't very knowledgeable.

New employee?  That is no excuse, if an employee is that new, and unschooled in company policy and how to respond to a customer letter, then an experienced person should be reviewing his/her response before it is sent.

A poor response is very likely to appear somewhere in the world of social media, making the company look bad.

It just means MTH has a friendlier robot.

Gene Anstine

Lionel is corporate owned and MTH is owned by the founder.  That's the difference in responses.  I'll bet anything your suggestion went in one ear and out the other with both companies.

Really?! You have to talk to the right people at Lionel. Otherwise, of course you are going to get the legal canned statement...

 If you have some good ideas with DATA and photos to back it up talk to Dave Olson or Ryan Kunkle, if production time allows, they will listen and try to get it in. If the idea makes money, and it makes sense of course they will try to accommodate.

If its a new product and investment cost is necessary, you have to realize that you only get so much money to play in the sandbox... I could name 10 products right now MTH and Lionel could make w/o any investment tools and they would sell like hot cakes.

The key is salt the gold mine enough to keep the attention to the new catalog and make a profitable return on your budgeted monies for the year.  Ever have to play that game to make the investors happy? Its a challenging one.

superwarp1 posted:

Lionel is corporate owned and MTH is owned by the founder.  That's the difference in responses.  I'll bet anything your suggestion went in one ear and out the other with both companies.

Right.  I got the same canned response from MTH back in 2008 when I suggested the Russian decapod be offered in Frisco.  After all, there's 5 Frisco decapods still in existence and one that is operational at IRM.

The second run came and went with no Frisco, but included a rerun of Santa Fe with the same number (the only one of the 3 ex-KC,M,&O the Santa Fe had that didn't have the European smokebox front) as the first run...

Rusty

Mike H Mottler posted:

Consider the realities of the legal environment today.  A hobbyist's "suggestion" to a company for a widget may (or may not) have any connection to plans already in progress or subsequently developed to manufacture a new widget. However, if/when a new widget is introduced in the marketplace, the hobbyist may feel certain that HIS suggestion was ripped off by the company. He might believe the company owes him a hefty royalty.

The standard corporate defense against such claims is to automatically return (usually unopened) all product suggestions with a "thanks, but no thanks" note written by lawyers.

Mike M.   (ritrainguy)

This response hits the nail on the head. I’ve practiced patent law for almost 25 years and most commercially sophisticated companies have a policy similar to the one Lionel’s email robot spit back for exactly this reason. Hence, my earlier comment that Lionel’s response shouldn’t be troubling at all.  Numerous cases have been litigated under the exact scenario  similar Mike M suggested - individual approaches a company with an idea the company already has in the pipeline and then feels ripped off when they see it on a shelf later on. I generally don’t work for individual inventors, but often will provide some thought starters and general advice to them when referred my way - the first item on the list is to reach out to the significant players in the relevant industry to see if they will even meet with an outsider about a potential product idea. Unlike Lionel who at least has some terms and conditions for receiving an idea submission, many companies won’t receive them under any conditions. 

Norton posted:

Four years ago Lionel cataloged 4 Southern Pacific AC12 Cab Forwards. The catalog showed one in black, one in Daylight colors and two had no picture but listed different cab numbers. The one in black was lettered in the later post 1944 scheme using large lettering on the tender.

I emailed them to ask if either of the ones without pictures would be lettered in the as built version with the small tender lettering.

The reply was almost identical to the one the OP got though not as verbose telling me they don't release information on upcoming products. What?!!!!

Since I model the earlier era I never ordered one and as it turned out all the black versions came with the late style lettering.

Ironically the fantasy Daylight engine came with the earlier lettering so obviously the plate for the ink pad was already made. Zero effort or cost would have been incurred to put a black tender in the jig vs a red/orange one. No secrets would have been compromised.

Compare to MTH which typically produces both versions of SP steam and passenger cars at the same time when doing a run.

The policy described in Lionel's letter is nothing new.

Pete

Yep, that AC-12 deal was a huge fail. Especially when they had the "tool" to do it! It is like making the "Southern Pacific Lines" lettered AC-9 and then painting the circus looking white wall tires. Saved us a lot of money in both cases!!

All good points.  Again I understand and get the legalize but a few more words at the front end that are less robotic would be in order.  I think they could have some text there that wouldn't jeopardize them in the legal sense and make the consumer feel like they were heard without violating some kind of contract.

Lionel's response is not unlike the response if you submitted an idea for a movie to a studio.

If they are working on a specific model/roadname/engine and you make the unsolicited suggestion, when it comes out, you may think you are entitled to a payment for your idea.

This happened with Lionel's Universal Remote that was in the planning, testing and finalizing stage.  Several people suggested it to Lionel.  (Universal remotes existed for your TV, not an unreasonable expectation with Lionchief products and their remotes.)  When the Universal Remote appeared, more than one person was unhappy with Lionel for not appreciating their suggestion.

Submit a completed script for a movie or tv show to a studio, and it will be returned to you unopened.  

Lionel is protecting themselves from the charge of stealing and profiting from "your" idea.  

Actually, MTH has already made a Yellow Bonnet F7 ABA set. It was a DAP set whose item number is 20-80006A. 

Those here trying to justify Lionel's response because they are trying to protect themselves is implying that MTH is now in legal jeopardy for their response. Really? Common sense may be dying but its not dead. MTH is showing it still has it.

Pete

Yes - and MTH may, just may have to deal with a forum member whining here that "They stole my idea!"

Or the other version:

"I'd just be happy if they used my idea. . . "

followed by:

"MTH should pay me for this."

BMT-Express posted:

Yes - and MTH may, just may have to deal with a forum member whining here that "They stole my idea!"

 

Or the other version:

"I'd just be happy if they used my idea. . . "

followed by:

"MTH should pay me for this."

Wow, I must admit that I am surprised by some of the responses. Are we not all train hobbyists? I can understand the response when a totally new idea is being introduced that may require a patent. As hobbyist we all like to have paint schemes in the railroads that we model or collect. Suggesting a paint scheme that is not currently available, but was once used by a specific railroad is not a new idea. It is simply asking to fill a void. No one should feel cheated if that scheme becames available, instead they should feel good that someone finally listened.

Considering MTH is currently running a freight car decorating contest, this certainly shows they are a lot more receptive to customer feedback on what to produce.  With that said, I'm sure there will be some "paperwork" for the winning designer to contend with...….

Who cares. Have a forum sponsor paint one of your engines to your liking and be done with it.