GeminiJets marketing and QC issues

[OlliesCove]

I can’t help but notice that GJ has really had a slew of bad QC issues. This is purely anecdotal based on a few recent posts on Reddit complaining about recent particularly bad QC. I mean, look at this Facebook reel from like two days ago, the people behind GJ couldn’t even be bothered to film a proper model where the nose gear isn’t bent to shit. This is just laughably bad.

Aside from GJ making predominantly NA models, I really have a hard time comprehending why people even bother buying GJ 1:400 models. Practically all the moulds range from slightly off to not even resembling the real thing, they also suffer from a chronic disability to print cockpit windows where they’re supposed to be along with shoddy QC amongst a litany of reasons. Seriously, someone please entertain me as to why they still buy GJ 1:400 aside from them making NA models?

 

[swagninja84]

Seriously, someone please entertain me as to why they still buy GJ 1:400 aside from them making NA models?

Because they are licensed. The other brands aren't and that's illegal as it violates federal trademark law.
You wouldn't download a plane would you?

But seriously,

1.They are currently the only ones who have the mould for the specific aircraft

• CRJ
• ERJ
• EMB
• Dash-8
• A220
• Saab 340

2. They have blind loyalty to GJ
3. They have an irrational hate for NG and Panda because they make a superior product.

 

[LorenzoLommus]

While you can blame GJ for having such a $hitty quality, you should realize who makes them. It's Johan Chan's JC $hity wings. If it's not broken gear, cracked engine mount, broken flaps, F'd up creased torn boxes, missing this missing that it's something else.

Take a look at these beautiful $hit below and let me know what you think. Don't you love them?

 

[pons399]

While you can blame GJ for having such a $hitty quality, you should realize who makes them. It's Johan Chan's JC $hity wings. If it's not broken gear, cracked engine mount, broken flaps, F'd up creased torn boxes, missing this missing that it's something else.

Take a look at these beautiful $hit below and let me know what you think. Don't you love them?

View attachment 44620
View attachment 44621

View attachment 44623
View attachment 44625
View attachment 44626
View attachment 44627
View attachment 44628
View attachment 44629
View attachment 44630
View attachment 44632

Pretty much this. JC’s garbage QC was the reason I stopped collecting 200 scale for a while, more models arrived with defects than without.

 

[LorenzoLommus]

Pretty much this. JC’s garbage QC was the reason I stopped collecting 200 scale for a while, more models arrived with defects than without.

Those beautiful $hit posted above are all 1/400

 

[pons399]

Those beautiful $hit posted above are all 1/400

If their 200 scale’s that bad, it’s not surprising 400’s similar or worse.

 

[OlliesCove]

Because they are licensed. The other brands aren't and that's illegal as it violates federal trademark law.
You wouldn't download a plane would you?

But seriously,

1.They are currently the only ones who have the mould for the specific aircraft

• CRJ
• ERJ
• EMB
• Dash-8
• A220
• Saab 340

2. They have blind loyalty to GJ
3. They have an irrational hate for NG and Panda because they make a superior product.

Sorry yes I did forget to mention their licensing. I mean personally bugger the licensing, I want the most accurate model available. I’ve been trying to get a hold of a Qantas A220 and Qantaslink Q400 for a while now and since I’ve seen the mould from GJ, I’ve just decided against having it altogether.

 

[BHD]

A wee while ago I bought a Gemini jets Flybe Q400 reg G-ECOE, and the left engine was fully detached and the props fully disconnected from the engine. I accidentally forgot to take pictures but it’s ridiculous the QC at Gemini jets haven’t bought a model from them since last spring.

 

[MIAv8Diecast]

View attachment 44576View attachment 44577
I can’t help but notice that GJ has really had a slew of bad QC issues. This is purely anecdotal based on a few recent posts on Reddit complaining about recent particularly bad QC. I mean, look at this Facebook reel from like two days ago, the people behind GJ couldn’t even be bothered to film a proper model where the nose gear isn’t bent to shit. This is just laughably bad.

Aside from GJ making predominantly NA models, I really have a hard time comprehending why people even bother buying GJ 1:400 models. Practically all the moulds range from slightly off to not even resembling the real thing, they also suffer from a chronic disability to print cockpit windows where they’re supposed to be along with shoddy QC amongst a litany of reasons. Seriously, someone please entertain me as to why they still buy GJ 1:400 aside from them making NA models?

View attachment 44576View attachment 44577
I can’t help but notice that GJ has really had a slew of bad QC issues. This is purely anecdotal based on a few recent posts on Reddit complaining about recent particularly bad QC. I mean, look at this Facebook reel from like two days ago, the people behind GJ couldn’t even be bothered to film a proper model where the nose gear isn’t bent to shit. This is just laughably bad.

Aside from GJ making predominantly NA models, I really have a hard time comprehending why people even bother buying GJ 1:400 models. Practically all the moulds range from slightly off to not even resembling the real thing, they also suffer from a chronic disability to print cockpit windows where they’re supposed to be along with shoddy QC amongst a litany of reasons. Seriously, someone please entertain me as to why they still buy GJ 1:400 aside from them making NA models?

While you can blame GJ for having such a $hitty quality, you should realize who makes them. It's Johan Chan's JC $hity wings. If it's not broken gear, cracked engine mount, broken flaps, F'd up creased torn boxes, missing this missing that it's something else.

Take a look at these beautiful $hit below and let me know what you think. Don't you love them?

View attachment 44620
View attachment 44621

View attachment 44623
View attachment 44625
View attachment 44626
View attachment 44627
View attachment 44628
View attachment 44629
View attachment 44630
View attachment 44632

I have never received a JC Wings model that wasn’t broken, scratched or bent my first time ordering them. Always takes me about 3 returns to finally get one in good condition.

 

[MIAv8Diecast]

If their 200 scale’s that bad, it’s not surprising 400’s similar or worse.

Trust me their 400 scale is worse…

 

[MIAv8Diecast]

Sorry yes I did forget to mention their licensing. I mean personally bugger the licensing, I want the most accurate model available. I’ve been trying to get a hold of a Qantas A220 and Qantaslink Q400 for a while now and since I’ve seen the mould from GJ, I’ve just decided against having it altogether.

Gemini would have you believe you’re at an advantage for purchasing a collectible licensed product. In reality who cares… I don’t. Gemini also has a cult following that believes they’re the best thing since sliced bread. At this point I only purchase Gemini models that are on molds the competition doesn’t have such as the MD-90, Regional jets, props. I have been burned too many times by their QC to not be a mindful consumer of their products.

 

[Gazontipede]

Yeah, I just sourced a GJ Qantas A220, as they are the only manufacturer with an A220 mould ATM(!), it was missing the sat dome. Again sterling work by GJ on their licenced product.

 

[MIAv8Diecast]

Yeah, I just sourced a GJ Qantas A220, as they are the only manufacturer with an A220 mould ATM(!), it was missing the sat dome. Again sterling work by GJ on their licenced product.

If you need a new sat dome Gemini would probably refer you to Qantas costumer service.

 

[EnterpriseH]

My friend come and said her friend wanna buy some model, asked what's the different between JC and GJ and which one is better.

Me: They're essentially the same now, and are both $hit. Just Run.



Edit: Oh and, please JC Wing, can you just don't insist on your "detailed" landing gears? Literally every single JC Wings model I got have their landing gears basically just a bunch of poorly twisted metals, and the suspension is completely useless, sometimes I have to just simple glued them completely so they won't came loose. Just stopped making these "scattered" landing gears and you might pay more attentions on your QC, maybe even have your price cheaper for a few dozens because of the simplified of the technique!

Edit again: Plus, there's always one or two shops on Taobao that selling "remaindered" JC/GJ models with QC issues at a very low price (less than ￥200), most often blistering and dirts on painting. There could always be some products that have to being sell at bargain price, but by far JC/GJ is the only brand I saw that always have a lot of them to do so. Some even said they have "an entire batch" of products that all have QC issues and have to sell at low price!

 

[jkim1123]

View attachment 44576View attachment 44577
I can’t help but notice that GJ has really had a slew of bad QC issues. This is purely anecdotal based on a few recent posts on Reddit complaining about recent particularly bad QC. I mean, look at this Facebook reel from like two days ago, the people behind GJ couldn’t even be bothered to film a proper model where the nose gear isn’t bent to shit. This is just laughably bad.

Aside from GJ making predominantly NA models, I really have a hard time comprehending why people even bother buying GJ 1:400 models. Practically all the moulds range from slightly off to not even resembling the real thing, they also suffer from a chronic disability to print cockpit windows where they’re supposed to be along with shoddy QC amongst a litany of reasons. Seriously, someone please entertain me as to why they still buy GJ 1:400 aside from them making NA models?

Oof, big yikes on the front landing gear. The nose profile already looks different from the actual aircraft, but when combining that with a very bent nosewheel, it makes me super glad that I bought NG's version instead.

 

[MIAv8Diecast]

Here are a few from Gemini/JC.

 

[Transnat]

Yeah, I just sourced a GJ Qantas A220, as they are the only manufacturer with an A220 mould ATM(!), it was missing the sat dome. Again sterling work by GJ on their licenced product.

The flight deck windows are inaccurate. The engines cowlings are incorrect. Aside from that it's a nice model

 

[bakejobb_23]

The flight deck windows are inaccurate. The engines cowlings are incorrect. Aside from that it's a nice model

the landing gear simply ruin that mould for me. I have a -100 and -300 and they look really good but the nose gear especially is just crazy huge. I’d rather get static gear that are the right size for it than what we have now

 

[JJ Skippy]

While the discussion seems to be mostly negative in that people are getting models broken (especially from GJ), I’ve had less models come with detached pieces in my experience. I’ve only gotten one broken Gemini in the last three years, and that was an easy fix. Overall I’ve only had two, maybe three, broken models in that same timespan accounting for all the brands I’ve bought.

I will say that while the criticism is justified, especially on paint and decal applications, I don’t think 100% of the blame should go on the manufacturer for the broken pieces. Shipping is very cruel to these models so pieces can get dislodged and sometimes it’s pretty severe, for example the Qatar A380 with the paint chip on the wing. Of course it’s hard to verify whether shipping is *the* reason for broken models, but given the distance they travel from China to anywhere the world I’d say it’s likely.

I’m not trying to defend broken pieces by the way (though if there was no paint chipping I say apply some glue and it’s good as new), just trying to provide a different perspective to the discussion.

 

[bakejobb_23]

While the discussion seems to be mostly negative in that people are getting models broken (especially from GJ), I’ve had less models come with detached pieces in my experience. I’ve only gotten one broken Gemini in the last three years, and that was an easy fix. Overall I’ve only had two, maybe three, broken models in that same timespan accounting for all the brands I’ve bought.

I will say that while the criticism is justified, especially on paint and decal applications, I don’t think 100% of the blame should go on the manufacturer for the broken pieces. Shipping is very cruel to these models so pieces can get dislodged and sometimes it’s pretty severe, for example the Qatar A380 with the paint chip on the wing. Of course it’s hard to verify whether shipping is *the* reason for broken models, but given the distance they travel from China to anywhere the world I’d say it’s likely.

I’m not trying to defend broken pieces by the way (though if there was no paint chipping I say apply some glue and it’s good as new), just trying to provide a different perspective to the discussion.

Agreed. Most my issues stem from mould problems which are another discussion had many times.

Shipping feels like the biggest issue. perhaps packaging and the plastic sleeves couple be better designed? But unless you’re ordering more than 5-10 models at a time these packages are extremely light all things considered. even a 2-3ft drop on the doorstep could do ANYTHING. These postal workers (while naturally should take pride in taking care of packages) just don’t have the time to baby every single little package unless it’s highly marked as fragile - which most in my experience don’t have any stickers of the sort to tell them that. It’s all luck of the draw imo for the most part.

luckily I don’t think i’ve had any arrive extremely broken or unfixable except for an AA A320 which i kinda ruined trying to fix. Plus, it came from ebay which i’m SOL there mostly regardless. Blessed to have the luck I do compared to some others