 | | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
Suzanne- I acutally have to disagree with your comment here. If they wanted to keep this information confidential, then they would not have released ANY of the information given to us, by means of a thrid part correspondent, or by someone directly (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) I'll echo Jeremy's position. I know that TRU in Victoria has the retail catalog out on the end of the shelf. All it is is a full description of what a retail outlet can order from lego. The price sheet is -not- part of it, and that is the only (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) And I with yours, at least the last part... (...) I've purchased more LEGO in the last 6 months as an AFOL, than I did in 15 years as a kiddy. AFOLS _are_ a sizable portion of the market share. Afterall, who else is going to steer the (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Jeremy, with all due repect, you're missing the point. If heads of the LEGO Company wanted their retailer catalog to be publicly available, they most certainly could publish it online all by themselves. But first, I think they would distribute (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) There are layers of confidentiality, obviously. I believe this is a breach of the layer between the retailer and the customer. BTW, I wouldn't assume that sending out retailer catalogs qualifies as "releasing" information. Retailer catalogs (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Well, then all the more reason TLC should be happy that it has people all over the world (like Todd Lehman and Huy Millington) doing for free what they should be taking responsibility for: the timely release of set information on their (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) It's not about what we might think they wouldn't mind, but what they don't want us to see? Whatever reason TLC have is fair enough. (...) I agree with the feeling, but as we haven't heard from Huw, calling it "insipid behavior" isn't really (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Huy's scans contain the following information: i) set name ii) set number iii) picture of set This information seems to be exactly the same as what's in the consumer catalog. One notes that he did not post scans of the entire retailer catalog, (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) I think she was applying those words to the person who leaked the scans to Huw, not to Huw himself. Huw was only trying to be helpful. --Todd (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) I aggree with this. the hollywood news sites regularly post "insider gossip" on the latest hollywood films so why shouldn't we post pictures of this dealers catalog. If someone has scans then that is ok. -- Jonathan Wilson (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Hollywood "insider gossip" is a little different, Jonathan. Movie rumors and leaked trade secrets rarely infringe on copyrights at respectable sites. How many "Hollywood news sites" do you see with illicit movie scripts or leaked scans of (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) BTW, much of the so-called "insider information" and "rumors" on popular news sites is actually presented under license, with permission of the movie company. It's spoon-fed to the consumer as if it were some secret, because that makes it seem (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) I agree with you, in the general case. However, I think it's fair to state that Lego does not have a consistent policy regarding the dealer/retailer catalogue: (James Powell wrote:) (...) (Huw Millington wrote:) (...) (and) (...) (Todd Lehman (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
Ok, I haven't read the whole thread yet, though I've gone to the site, looked at the pictures, read a little more... looked a little more.. tell me just how is this any different than the pictures of the catalog we've already gotten a look at? the (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Maybe they shouldn't; I don't know. Suzanne's really the expert in this area, not me. But I certainly trust her opinion 100%, given what I know about what she knows. At any rate, my original point anyway was that scans of a retailer catalog (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Well, I don't care how the pics from the retailer catalog were obtained. What I care about is that I missed it. I've been out doing Christmas shopping all day and now the pics are gone. I know the first thing I would have done had I seen the (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Please email me the Adventurers pages if you get them. I would really appreciate it. Mark L (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
Suzanne D. Rich wrote in message ... (...) but I (...) years. But (...) keeping (...) They (...) etc. (...) Risking retaliation of some sorts here are my thoughts. I don't know if Suzanne is a retailer , I assume she is not and I apologize if I am (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) In retrospect, that probably would have been a much better approach. As a matter of habit (for better or for worse), my style is to point out things as public replies when something feels urgent, because the lack of a reply in a thread leaves (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) I have a copy of what I believe to be the 1993 dealer catalog. I can't read French, but the English part does not. That's the catalog book itself, I never saw the outside packaging, if any existed. The only thing is that the back of the (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
Hi Suzanne (and everybody else who cares), I mostly agree with you but there are some points I do not entirely understand. First can anybody tell me why we suddenly have such a discussion but we did NOT have one in october when "the nameless beast" (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Got 'em. No need for anyone else to send them. Appreciate the effort. And let me add, after seeing these, and especially considering these things will be seen in catalogs all over the world in the next few weeks or so, I don't see this as (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) This is a good argument for shutting down the Pause database here on Lugnet, Kevin's Brickshelf site, and the other similar Lego information sites out there. If TLC wanted old instruction scans or old set images, prices, etc. available on the (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Yeah, that's easy: Because Star Wars fans online make a living of trading leaked information every single day, and they'd laugh in someone's face if it was suggested that what they were doing made them look bad as a community. They also don't (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
R2 wrote in message ... (...) The reason (which I'm sure is "ok with TLC") that Suzanne has these catalogs is probably why she stated that she would not normally advertise the fact that she had them. I assume there is some form of sensitive (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Did you look at the site BEFORE or AFTER Huw pulled out the scans of sets that are NOT in the 2000 catalog scanned by Kevin Loch? Yesterday afternoon when Huw first uploaded his scans there were pictures of dozens of 2000 sets that have not (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) Please keep in mind that this is a family-oriented newgroup ;-) -John Van BTW, I'm with ya, Todd and Suz, at least 51%. (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) /s/loser/luser/ But I don't really see any need to do so. Jasper (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
|
(...) ---- (...) ---- From what little I know: retailers (the small shop kind) order from a typed list months in advance or else they prepare by requesting "one case of each of everything new ASAP." The pretty color catalog comes later, close to (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
