 | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) How many of those "collectors" went out and said they had hundreds at 200 USD each for sale? Personally I'm not sure I have a lot of sympathy for collectors that want to buy up multiple copies of a new set and thus make it harder for others to (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX) !!
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Larry I can recall only one...Precious Princess in particular, and having more than the limit of 5 is what I find disturbing about that. I think Johannes is right...many people probably WERE hooked by the prospect of getting a Rare and Limited (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) No. I've never said that. In fact I myself have sold sets above MSRP. Just not while they were still on sale from S@H, while hiding that fact from my ebay buyers, or while trying to corner the market, or while giving the false impression that (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.market.theory, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Irrelevant. TLC made a promise. They are willfully breaking that promise. (...) Perhaps, but that still doesn't change the fact that TLC is purposefully breaking their word. And unnecessarily so. Why not use the extra Maersk blue pellets for a (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| Sorry for two replies here to the same post. (...) Maybe. Wouldn't bother me too much. (...) I have more sympathy for wanting multiple copies of the set for parts than I do for those that want to buy it up, not caring about it as a set, and resell (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Um, because their big and important customer asked them to do so, and paid for the pellets specifically to produce this particular set, not so you, John Neal can have your fantasy GP38s in a color scheme never seen on a GP38 in the wild(and (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Hi, very poor try of irony, Larry, you normaly write better ones ;-) To make a serious theme out of this: It's for sure a good deal for TLC when Mearsk wanted them to re-release the ship. But that they now decided to make the same model again (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) That would be an incredibly stupid business decision. (...) Number 1 isn't correct as Maersk wouldn't get their set now. They would have to wait while TLC developed a new set and got approval for it from Maersk, developed new instruction (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| Hello! (...) For me (for me) Maersk blue was always quite useless, in terms of building. Before 10152 this colour was virtually not available at all, and through 10152 we got only a small range of parts that was also declared never to be enhanced in (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) I'm not bothered either way how many Maersk blue 10152s are made and for how long (I might even get one this time round, its a cool set and I was flat broke last time!). However Its the DARK blue one I was waiting for, it not regular blue. Tim (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Agreed 100%. I don't wander out of the woodwork too often these days (and this is liable to change very soon--glory of glories, I get my collection back in MI close to New Years', and will have all 1400lb. in one place again), but the (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) I fear the end of the wrld is coming my friends, because I actually agree 100% with John here. But I think it's not surprising coming from TLC that they broke their promise. We've seen a change of corporate attitude in the last years that aint (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Wait, I'm lost here. Can someone please point me to where Lego promised (in writing) that they would never reintroduce this set? Or did they simply say (at the time) that there wasn't a business case to produce more 10152 once their original (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Well put Spencer. I want to see that as well. By the way, I posted a message to .off-topic but forgot to FTX it. If you have time go read it. It concerns my take on collectibles and collecting in general. "What Makes A Collectible" Steven (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Hey Larry. Just to say that it is not just you. 100% agreed. Thanks for putting my feelings in so well written words. Best regards, Paulo Renato (20 years ago, 20-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| In lugnet.lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) Well, this has nothing to do with Jake and AFAIK you are the only one who has made that connection. Ironic? JOHN (20 years ago, 20-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) I thought I made it clear I don't condone the practice as you are putting it here. I'm not talking about cornering the current market, I'm talking about resale years down the road. (...) You said it..."everyone that wanted some had their (...) (20 years ago, 20-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Um, no, there was some and is some bashing elsethread. But maybe I pre-empted some or most of it, which would be nice, with my prediction. (20 years ago, 20-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| |
