 | | Another piece I'd like to see
|
|
A 1x1 plate with eyelet oriented vertically instead of horizontally. Dave (20 years ago, 15-Apr-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: On sale or not on sale
|
|
(...) Ah I see - that sounds like one of those "value package" price dealie things then. A packaged value is not really a 'sale' perse I would agree...but it is a 'reduced' price compared to buying all of the sets separately. Bob (20 years ago, 14-Apr-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: On sale or not n sale
|
|
(...) I see the same problem in the UK although I'm not sure what the laws are like here. I guess they mean (*discount bundle price* rather than *sale price*). Tim (20 years ago, 13-Apr-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: On sale or not on sale
|
|
(...) Hi Bob, Yes, it is right that if you calculate that way that the price is 15% off. The problem is that the K10022 set NEVER was priced 2098.25 DKK. It was always priced 1784 DKK and therefor it is not on sale. The price of 2098.25 is simply (...) (20 years ago, 12-Apr-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: On sale or not n sale
|
|
(...) This does look like a potential mistake. I will send it to our EU team to address when they get in tomorrow. Thanks for pointing it out. --Jarid Jarid Lukin E-Commerce Business Manager LEGO Shop At Home (URL) (20 years ago, 12-Apr-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: On sale or not n sale
|
|
(...) When I put this item in my cart set to Denmark, I get this: "Item#: K10022 Ages: 10+ Pieces: 1173 Price: DKK 2098.25 Sale Price: DKK 1784.00" So according to that, it is on sale for about 15% off the listed original price of 2098.25. HTH, Bob (20 years ago, 12-Apr-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | On sale or not n sale
|
|
Hi Jake, The K10022 set is on sale in the Danish part of (URL) for 1764 Danish kroner. The problem is that it is in fact not on sale, it is the same price as before the so-called sale. That is illegal according to Danish law. I sent a comment to (...) (20 years ago, 12-Apr-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
(...) One reason that the boxes are too big is that technic parts overall have gotten smaller, which means that more pieces fit in a smaller area. The actual amount of pieces in each set has increased since almost all technic sets are studless. I (...) (20 years ago, 24-Mar-05, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
Keith, I know. I buy 90% of my parts from all over the world. My whole point of the my post was just to show how we must pay high international costs to get what we want because items are not readily availible to us. I meant my post as more of a (...) (20 years ago, 24-Mar-05, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
(...) While you're paying through your nose, insist on having it posted by airmail. It's worth it. (...) Only if Lego made their boxes smaller. Amen. (...) Relax, some Australian and Italian Bricklink stores seem to have nice collections too. Keith (20 years ago, 24-Mar-05, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
While Lego may be torturing Lego enthusiasts, they are helping out the internet hurting postal workers by making all of us pay high international postal rates to get the sets that are not availible to us. I know I save at least $5.00 a month paying (...) (20 years ago, 23-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
(...) I dunno. Debatable I spose. Limiting yourself to a certain area does admittedly lessen your losses if the theme flops-- which some recent themes have done. And assumably if the theme does really well, you bring it over to the markets it's (...) (20 years ago, 22-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Gary Tabener wrote: <snip> (...) And whereas I'd probably buy a few Viking sets should they become available, the cost factor in sending both series 'across the pond' and other related issues, such as marketing and such, someone (...) (20 years ago, 22-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
"David Eaton" <deaton@intdata.com> wrote in message news:IDrHBJ.tru@lugnet.com... (...) three (...) reason (...) quarter of (...) it's (...) anxious (...) eager (...) get (...) Europe for (...) this (...) the (...) Attack' (...) fan of (...) In all (...) (20 years ago, 22-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
(...) It's probably the earliest they could fit it into production. But I think it's expected to hear about the sets now. From my understanding, everyone's anxious to get their toys shown at the Toy Fair (in Q1) so that manufacturers are eager to (...) (20 years ago, 22-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts?
|
|
Dear Lego, Why do you torture Technic enthusiasts? First, we get a preview of three very cool looking Technic sets (8421, 8420, and 8416), but for some reason the release dates of these sets are clustered together in the 4th quarter of 2005. Then, (...) (20 years ago, 22-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: A few requests to enhance the System
|
|
"Brian Davis" <brdavis@iusb.edu> wrote in message news:IDHwn5.114G@lugnet.com... (...) stud. Do (...) Indeed we do! Thanks for discovering the error in my description. What I meant to say was that if you place a studless beam next to a studded beam (...) (20 years ago, 18-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | 18 March 05 - International Day for LEGO Enthusiasts
|
|
Greetings, Earth-Mortals! Once again this year, I've declared 18th March to be the International Day for LEGO Enthusiasts - IDLE time! Please build responsibly, and call for a ride to a friend's toybox if needed. Thanks! Peace and Long Life, (...) (20 years ago, 17-Mar-05, to lugnet.fun.holiday, lugnet.announce, lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A few requests to enhance the System
|
|
(...) I must be missing something here. When I place a studless beam beside a normal Technic beam, the inter-hole spacing is exactly the same - one stud. Do you have the same parts I have? (20 years ago, 17-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A few requests to enhance the System
|
|
(...) are (...) Good question! It's because on the studless beams the holes are right next to each other, whereas on the studded beams the holes have a much larger space in-between. Dave S. (20 years ago, 17-Mar-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
