 | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) Indeed. I have wondered why the same names keep popping up over and over with respect to TLC negativity. Almost feels a bit like a psy-ops campaign. Free speech is one thing. Excess indulgence is another. fut to .off-topic.debate ( shame we (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Rob Hendrix wrote: <snip> (...) Yeah, as soon as I saw those, I thought of the pain you'd be feeling. After checking yout your wonderful work at BF this past summer, this one from TLC has got to suck. Well, don't forget you got the (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message news:I8xw3s.KoJ@lugnet.com... (...) Thanks Jake. Thanks for bringing us this news in person so we can be prepared before the actual event occurs. As for the rest of you, hmm, let's see (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) Hmm. More sweeping statements, with absolutely nothing to back it up. Again. (...) If you're aware of the ratio between LEGO soliciting opinions and acting on opinions, then you must have some data to back it up. Show it. Put up or shut up. My (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) Hi John, I wasn't actually referring to you personally... more the continuous TLC-bashing I've seen from some people, and not just on this subject. Makes you wonder why some people bother frequenting LUGNET, or buying LEGO, at all, if they (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) Perhaps there are different connotations of the term "limited"? "Limited" in that we will purposefully limit production to X number of units to create collector demand, and will never produce them again, thus protecting their collector's (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
(...) At the time, it was. Does that negate new contracts with Maersk? Dave K (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure that the 10152 wasn't either. This whole thing seems to turn on a mistranslation more than anything else. That's pretty funny at one level, actually. Most of the rest of the difference appears to be cultural, we seem to have a (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
(...) Wrong. TLC stated that they had old Maersk Blue pellets and 'wouldn't it be nice to give the AFOL a really cool set and use up the pellets at the same time'. Why should that negate future contracts? It was a business decision made at the time (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure the duck wasn't marketed as a "limited edition of 10,000". It really matters not what their excuss is if they changed their mind they could have changed the model. Their move was compleatly unethical and problably leaves them (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
(...) Rene presented them in his post, just one level above Bens posting: (URL) Quotes: “The edition of this set is likewise limited, there is a total of 14,000 copies” “This is your last chance to buy Maersk blue bricks” Yours, Christian (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Interesting point of view, Rene!
|
|
(...) Wrong end of the line. Imagine what car (or other companies) go through when they promise something in their advertising, and don't keep it. E.g. if the any car company advertises a car to run 100km with 3 litres (The task of calculating the (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) around the Transition Team a few months back. Not sure what effect it had or how to "fix" some of the things (one of his theories is that some things are fundamentally unfixable)... (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Kelly McKiernan wrote: <snip> (...) I just want to make one thing clear. Merely because I have a gripe about a particular decision made by TLC, that doesn't mean I am throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. I love LEGO (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
(...) Wait... Other than the arguable "limit of 5-per-customer" thing, what Jake said in that quote turned out to be perfectly accurate! - The run that they did used up all of their Maersk blue. It did. True fact. - Litterally no Maersk blue ABS (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) I promised myself I wouldn't continue fanning the flames here, but I couldn't resist one more... The gist of the complaints against TLC I'm hearing is they've made a business decision that "changed" from an earlier "promise" (neither of which (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
(...) Gary, the problem is that from Jake's mouth: Quote: I do know, however, that there will be 5 set limit per customer on this set (Troy,are you listening? J). Why you ask? This set uses …drum roll please… Maersk blue! In fact, the run of this (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) MAJOR SNIPAGE (...) The problem doesn't lie within the community it lies within the company. Proof of this is that they are dumbfounded as to why with all of their efforts they are still loosing money. I missed The whole Marsk debate but let's (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) For your amusement: (URL) #203 (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
(...) To clarify: "collectibility", by your explanations, is based purely on your own *speculation* (and others who share your thinking). TLC's "assertion" (as you call it) had nothing whatsoever to do with making the set "collectible", since, as (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
