 | | Re: Where in the world?
|
|
(...) I would say it's LEGOLAND Billund. GPLR Dave (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGOLAND sold to Blackstone
|
|
(...) (crossposting to the various Legoland groups) This looks like it will be good news - by reading this article: (URL) it looks like there may be new parks in the future and they want to make the park destination resorts - so this is good news. (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.legoland.billund, lugnet.legoland.california, lugnet.legoland.deutschland, lugnet.legoland.windsor, lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Twins accused of stealing and selling LEGO® sets on Ebay®
|
|
(...) It really bugs me when reporters can't get their facts straight. If you're not going to report the details accurately, then why bother? /rant -Bryan (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego and other brand trademarks
|
|
(...) Good point Dave, I have never seen any acknowledgement of trademarks on any of the old 50's-70's Esso or Shell items. Ditto for the 1:87 cars/trucks. No box or brochures (that came with these items) had acknowledgements either. On the 1:87 (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricklink frustration
|
|
(...) and that is the understatement of the century. Transport costs are already a goodly portion of the gross order billing. One year I calculated that 28% of remittances were for shipping/transport. Parts (unless the part is rare/desirable/low (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricklink frustration
|
|
Quoting David Eaton <deaton@intdata.com>: (...) Ok, so now we've also got the issue of near zero demand. *IF* demand was higher, costs could be split through multiple orders from the same original sellers, potentially. I would say that your average (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricklink frustration
|
|
(...) Bam. (...) Yep. In my experience, AFOLs are generally interested in saving more, not spending more. There are a bunch out there who *will* pay more, but in general, I think your average AFOL would much rather spend the time doing it themselves (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricklink frustration
|
|
Quoting David Eaton <deaton@intdata.com>: (...) The largest issue I've always seen with this was that the amalgamated carriage fees would very quickly pile up. Not only would the buyer pay for the first shipping fee to the middleman, but then the (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricklink frustration
|
|
(...) The biggest issue as I see it is probably the fact that it's not worth the primary seller's time in this example. The point of them instigating a minimum order is so that they don't have to deal with stuff that's "not worth their time". But (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricklink frustration
|
|
This is a pretty interesting idea. Here's a variation that might be slightly more likely to happen: A group of sellers could get together and form a company to sell new/used LEGO parts over the internet, in a network like you describe. Their online (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jul-05, to lugnet.general)
|
