 | | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
(...) Hey Ben, I think you know my feelings about crap bley and all of those silly excuses surrounding it. As you might have read elsewhere I didn't buy any new sets this year (except for bulk bricks at S@H), so you may have a clue of how I feel. In (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
(...) Because they are the only one that would be negatively affected by this so called "collectibility" of this set, now that it is not so rare. (...) I know tons of those, generally from the anime toy fandom. Some of them buy two of each action (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
(...) Not what I intended to bring across. I am saying that any type of investment, wether it be the stock market, or the toy market, is risky business. You take your chances on making or losing money. I have purchased shares in companys that were (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Steven D. Weiser wrote: snipped some text to reduce it to something I'am confused about (...) Hi, in this discussion on lugnet.com almost everybody who wrote about collectors wrote in a very negative way. It seems as if in the (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
Why can't LEGO do both, and keep almost everyone happy? That is, LEGO gets to re-release any set, as long as the box is physically different from the original. That way, sets remain collectible, but bricks don't. "Bill Ward" <bill@wards.net> wrote (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
"Bill Ward" <bill@wards.net> wrote in message news:I91w7E.1yL8@lugnet.com... (...) Now you (...) You (...) Why is it incredible? If LEGO was an airline, AFOLs would be the first class and business class frequent flyers, who bring in the most money (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | An open letter to TLG.
|
|
I am writing this because I wish to know why TLG are downsizing colors instead of thinking why can't they utilize mass-production of colors in more colors? It seems irrational that they would produce colors in certain rare element and production run (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update: What has TLC to do to bring YOU up against them?
|
|
(...) Sorry to correct you, Dave, but they did. Go read Renes posting. They called the set limited. And they announced it to be the very last chance to buy Mearsk blue. There are not 2 last chances in life. (...) If I call a product limited and give (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) That's a theory I buy into..., and until a "solution" is demonstrated, it's a safely self-satisfied theory. Conflict is human nature, and until the day we're all lobotomized, or extinct, it won't change. Keeps things interesting I s'pose. :] (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
|
(...) yeah, what sort of sicko would want one of those? ;-P Seriously this happens a lot in the model railway world, you scratch build a model of something not avaialable as a kit or RTR from the trade and just when you finish someone releases it. (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
