[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

(erielack) Rights to EL Name

The difference however, using the RS-3 as example, is that we still drink
Coke, but there is no longer a D&RGW. It's one thing for a corp'n to license
it's existing name/logo (short-sighted but at least there's some logic to
it), but quite another to require a fee to use a defunct image that has no
relevance to the transportation business. Where does it stop? How about fees
for Oregon Short Line or Chicago & Galena Union RR?

It may be no coincidence that the two RR's currently pursuing this
foolishness (UP & CSX) have been the poorest performers among the
Class I's. Management time expended chasing after model railroaders might be
better utilized in figuring out how to run trains.

Paul Brezicki

The money going back IS earned profit off a trademark that they own. For
example, Athearn has to cough up $$$ to Coke to make Coca-Cola delivery
trucks. Nowadays, companies are VERY controlling of their image and the fact
that they can license it as an additional revenue stream. So technically, it
*IS* "earned profit."

	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS