 | | Re: Is Neon sign with Lego logo OK to produce & sell
|
|
(...) Good catch, Gary. The sign seems like a simple slab of acrylic laser-etched with the LEGO lettering/font style. It's probably side-lit by a small flourescent bulb, and they're not shy about overcharging for shipping. It does look kinda cool (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Neon sign with Lego logo OK to produce & sell
|
|
On 14:16 12/22/2004, Gary Istok wrote (...) Now the conundrum... to bid or not... --- wubwub aka stephen f roberts wildbrick.com - Jain's Guide : Promoting more than just the MOC (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Is Neon sign with Lego logo OK to produce & sell
|
|
Jake (and others), I just came across this neon Lego sign (newly produced in Asia) that sports the official Lego logo. Does this violate any company copyrights? (URL) Istok (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) Can we please stop with the spin on the situation? There were no lies At the time, no contract with Maersk to make future sets and LEGO had these pellets to get rid of. Come out with nifty set and use up pellets--limited 'cause, as stated by (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
|
(...) SNIP (...) SNIP (...) No confussion here. They said through Jake M., SHO, and press releases that it was LIMITED TO 10,000. I don't care about collectability. I bought two the first time one for myself and another for a nephew. I may get (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
