General Discussion : 13240


General / 13240

Re: Has any one else noticed this lately? —Tamyra Teed

I've noticed this too.. more because I got a box without looking that someone apparently had opened, taken out what they wanted, and the GLUED it shut again and returned it. I'm not sure if they'll believe me if I take it back though... so I (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Kevin Salm

The issue of poor packaging for retail Lego sets has bothered me for some time. I remember the days gone by ('cause I still have all the boxes) when TLC packaged the larger sets in styrofoam-lined boxes with plasic insert trays. These were the good (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Jason M. Normand

(...) As far as i have seen TLC has been slow to respont to many of thier "problems" as of late. (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Steve Wooster

(...) agreed. (...) I picked up 4 Mos Espa sets this week on clearance at Target. Every set had been torn in at least one or two places, mostly at the lid corners, as if someone was trying to get the box open. Some tears were 6-8 inches long. I only (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Rob Hendrix

(...) As I recollect, the 8247 came in concentric boxes. -Rob (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Christian Gemuenden

Kevin Salm <kdsalm@dreamscape.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: FnxyvD.DuF@lugnet.com... [snip] (...) adhesive (...) be a (...) [snip] Are you sure only those two sets were available with strong paperboard in the US? I have boxes with strong (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Kevin Salm

The two numbers I listed were not meant to be all inclusive. Those just happen to be the first two set numbers that popped into my head while writing the post. Yes, there have now been several sets packaged with the heavier layered paperboard, but I (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —James Simpson

(...) An important part of my Pre-Dark Ages Lego experience was enjoying the box. I remember fondly those substantial boxes from the 70's with the deep trays and wonderful Alternate designs on the back and inside lid. I loved the way classic space (...) (25 years ago, 1-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Mike Poindexter

James Simpson <jsimpson@rice.edu> wrote in message news:Fp9xAJ.J47@lugnet.com... [snip] (...) box. I (...) and (...) classic (...) were (...) long- (...) dark-ages (...) was my (...) Dark (...) the (...) said (...) hearty, (...) grew up (...) whole (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Gary R. Istok

(...) I too liked the 70's boxes. But they were no match for some of the very heavy early boxes from 1957-68. The European Town Plan sets (700, 810) were heavy wooden boxes. The USA/Canada Samsonite Town Plan (725) and Junior Constructor (717) were (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Tony Priestman

On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, James Simpson (<Fp9xAJ.J47@lugnet.com>) wrote at 23:01:31 (...) Too true. I really have to steel myself to open some of the old stuff that I've got. But I bought it to build it, as well as enjoying the packaging :-) Last year, I (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John Robert Blaze Kanehl

(...) I am envious, I remember my excitement over an LL 924 on my Birthday (geez was that the 70's-oh my = ) I always wanted the Galaxy Explorer (LL 928) .....One of the Holy Grails I dream of.....more so than a BSB or Yellow castle..... (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Paul Baulch

John Robert Blaze Kanehl wrote in message ... (...) Yeah, I felt like that, EXACTLY like that, for nigh on twenty years... then late last year I bought a used one in an auction. It was complete and in mint condition, just perfect. I built it, and (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Tony Priestman

On Sun, 6 Feb 2000, Paul Baulch (<FpGL9E.GrL@lugnet.com>) wrote at 01:21:47 (...) Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. There isn't anything special about it, it's just a bigger version of 924. It's very nostalgic to build with just the original Space (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Paul Baulch

Tony Priestman wrote in message ... (...) Yes, that's right. In fact, looking at the picture of 924 (I don't own the set), it looks like one might actually be able to construct the 924 only using parts from 928. Now, more than ever, I can see why (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Tony Priestman

On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Paul Baulch (<FpIGtJ.FvA@lugnet.com>) wrote at 01:41:06 (...) I don't own 924 either. Wish I did, though. (...) Sounds a bit mathematical/philosophical to me. Not at all baroque :-) (...) Absolutely. But 928 just doesn't have any (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Dunno, but it's a great saying. Paraphrasing a famous CS type: "Inside every large, clunky program there is a small, elegant one struggling to escape..." (...) Hmm, I thought this posting of member numbers was something Todd kinda was trying (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Tony Priestman

On Sun, 6 Feb 2000, Larry Pieniazek (<389D9C09.F2F4CF16@...ager.net>) wrote at 16:06:33 (...) Call me a tired old cynic, but no, sometimes there isn't :-) (it's already five years old, and frolicking on a mountain pasture somewhere) Does anyone know (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Nothing new (was Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC )) —Richard Parsons

Tony Priestman wrote in message ... (...) Wasn't it Solomon (Nihil novi sub sola)? And wasn't he a bit not Ancient Greek ;-) Then again, perhaps you shouldn't listen to me at all - let's not forget that I'm the guy who spells river with an f from (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.pirates)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) Hebrew. The author of the biblical book of Ecclesiastes. Generally attributed to Solomon, but that's not for sure certain. Of course, someone probably said it before him. Steve (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Paul Mison

x-post added to .space (...) Hey, what's wrong with 918? It's the only one I had of the original trinity of spaceships, and it's great, although I've just noticed that if you put too much in the storage space at the back and swoosh too much it (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Damian Garcia

"Paul Mison" <lego@songtwo.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:389EC63C.ED9860...n.co.uk... (...) spaceships. Those "open air" space craft *really* bug me too. -- ---D M Garcia (URL) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Jeffrey Baldwin

How do you feel about the 928? I think it is kinda plain. (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Gene C. Weissinger

I love these 'type' space LEGO. they always seem to remind me of what sci fi was like in the fifties... :) EC (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Jeffrey, (...) (Oh No! Scott is getting on his Space Soapbox!) I can appreciate sentiments of this type. However, since Space is probably my favorite theme, and have been collecting it since I was 4, and I have most of the sets since 1984. I think (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Mark Sandlin

In lugnet.general, Scott Edward Sanburn writes: <snip> (...) I like the clunky, non-aerodynamic "outer space" utilitarian look you have going there. I think a lot of us have a tendency to make our spaceships look like airplanes. The smooth, sleek (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Mark, (...) Thank you, Mark. When I built my ADF-800, I was trying to figure out how to have some kind of wing, and I just built the sides on it. These ships can go through atmospheres, but only because of the shields they run. A lot of ships look (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) I'm with Jeffrey. I think a lot of people get very nostalgic for Classic Space, and rate it higher because of their history with the line. Personally, I get nostalgic for the Explorien Starship, because it was the first big set I bought (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —John J. Ladasky, Jr.

Hi there, My two cents... followups set to lugnet.space only. (...) I never thought of the 928 (in the U.S., 497) as plain. Actually, it's a rather busy model, what with those big engines hanging out over the wings. (...) I have to agree with Scott. (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Damian Garcia

"Jeffrey Baldwin" <Heatwaaave@aol.com> wrote in message news:FpLxK9.IDp@lugnet.com... (...) I think its pretty cool. I like the simple, utilitarian design of the whole thing. As was mentioned in another post on this thread, it seems more functional (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) We all have our prefered pet peeves. I personally don't care that many LEGO space ships are not (physically) fully enclosed. But I know that annoys many spaceheads. Steve (25 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Duane Hess

(...) It doesn't bother me too much either, but I imagine an open cockpit would make atmospheric re-entry a little dicy :-) -Duane (25 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) :) That's assuming re-entry is achieved using the historic method of falling until the atmosphere is thick enough to support wings or parachutes. In fantastic settings, ships could use some more-controlled method of descent. Or have some (...) (25 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Mark Sandlin

(...) Actually, it's because LEGO people have really, really thick spacesuits. They're actually normally proportioned people, it's just the thick suits that make them look that way. The thick helmet visor distorts their features into the smileys you (...) (25 years ago, 11-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —John J. Ladasky, Jr.

(...) In the interest of providing a sense of realism, I always build fully-enclosed spacecraft. Even in a spacecraft the never enters the atmosphere, the crew needs to be protected from radiation. Our atmosphere, and Earth's electromagnetic field, (...) (25 years ago, 11-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Paul Baulch

Paul Mison wrote in message <389EC63C.ED98601D@s....co.uk>... (...) [...] (...) spaceships. (...) Hey Paul, I love 918!!! It and 462 Rocket Launcher were my very first ever Space sets, way back when I was about seven. I can still remember whooshing (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —James Simpson

(...) You know the phrase "You can never go home again" ? This is how I feel about the idea that has been kicked around regarding Lego reissuing Classic sets. I'm afraid that I would be disappointed. They might not be as exciting, as interesting, as (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Alan Gerber

(...) I found about half of one in my grandma's attic(along with about half of a set 400) Alan This message's random set is: 6554, www.lugnet.com/pause...query=6554 (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John Robert Blaze Kanehl

(...) The new packaging is a far cry from my "compartmentalized geeK (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John Robert Blaze Kanehl

(...) I apoligize for the last post.....cat on keyboard..... The new packaging is a far cry from the "compartmentalized geek" boxes I loved as a kid.....To this day I still have the boxes to Universal Building sets 745 (1976?) and 733 (1979?). They (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John DiRienzo

"John Robert Blaze Kanehl" <johnNYblaze44@webtv.net> wrote in message news:FpCLvJ.K12@lugnet.com... (...) the whole (...) Building (...) storage (...) frames.....an (...) I think the styroofoam is OK as long as you don't throw it away! Who could (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Christopher Tracey

(...) speaking of... My sister got me that new big ~800 piece basic set for Christmas. It's the one with six or seven smaller boxes of lego held together by a cardboard frame. It seems like a waste of packaging to me, especially the raised baseplate (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Jeff Stembel

(...) Was this the K-Mart exclusive? The one with the 32x32 light green baseplate like 5978's? I didn't have any trouble getting the boxes out of the two copies I got... :) Jeff (URL) (25 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Frank Filz

(...) No, I got my first copy at Zany Brainy. I think I've seen it at Wal-Mart, and perhaps TRU also. (25 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Has any one else noticed this lately? —Steve Campbell

(...) I had been keeping an eye on a single remaining 6761 Bandit's Hideout at a local TRU, waiting for it to go on clearance. Between the time that it was normal retail price and I found it on the clearance aisle (about a week) somebody had ripped (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Has any one else noticed this lately? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Agreed, CA is swell. But my question to you is, you asked for a discount and got it. Was that just to cover the hassle of getting the replacement parts? Or did you argue that because there were parts missing, you should get a discount for the (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Has any one else noticed this lately? —James Brown

(...) Nope.(1) However, I would consider it fair to go to CA, and offer to pay them for the missing parts. (assuming I thought the missing parts were worth it - otherwise, I'd just drop it). James (URL) then, I'm the kind of freak that corrects a (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Has any one else noticed this lately? —Frank Filz

James Brown wrote in message ... (...) them (...) it - (...) I'd agree with both of you. To be honest, I haven't even gone back to CA for pieces missing or damaged from used sets. The only thing I've gone to them for was stickers from a couple (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Has any one else noticed this lately? —Matthew Miller

(...) I agree with you. If you get compensated for not having the pieces, there's not much more to complain about. If you know in advance that you can call CA and get replacement pieces for free (which wasn't necessarily the case here), you (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Has any one else noticed this lately? —Tony Kilaras

(...) While it is true that Target's security is pretty bad, it is also true that Lego's packaging is substandard in terms of preventing theft. (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)