Subject:
|
Re: 10152 Update
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Dec 2004 02:55:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7927 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
Sorry for two replies here to the same post.
In lugnet.lego, Justin Pankey wrote:
| |
In lugnet.lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
Maybe Lego should re-release the numbered Santa Fe Super
Chiefs starting with the number “1” again ;o)
|
Maybe. Wouldn’t bother me too much.
| |
| |
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 get copies. (Precious Princess, call your office!) Or for collectors
that make decisions about what they collect based on percieved scarcity.
Collect because you like the set!
|
So no set should should ever be sold above it’s MSRP?? I agree with Lego’s
policy limiting 5 to each buyer. I don’t agree that a few people should be
able to corner the market and leave other AFOL’s and kids alike wanting.
That said, the fact of the matter is anybody who wanted one of these during
the first run could have purchased one (or 5). Everyone knew about them and
they where available for at least a month. Is it somehow o.k. that you
purchased more than 5 simply because they were for your own personal use?
|
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
it to suckers that didn’t know better while it was still available, yes.
|
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.
| |
Yes, I know it is the duty of all good capitalists to ensure that fools and
their money are soon parted.
| |
Didn’t you also make it harder for others to get more copies?
|
Well, not really, because I waited for the mad rush to subside, and only
then, after everyone that wanted some had plenty of time to order some, did I
canvass and get more. After I got all I wanted, S@H still had some left, for
quite some time, in fact. I’d say everyone that wanted some had their chance.
Also, since I offered to pay, and in some cases, paid more than MSRP for the
ones I bought from my friends, how is that different than just buying them
from a reseller, which you seem to be OK with?
|
You said it...“everyone that wanted some had their chance.” So enter the
speculator (limited to buying 5) ready to make a purchase....I just don’t see
how you can say there’s any wrong in that. Precious Princess Palace having 20
or 200 YES.
| |
| |
Like it or not, Lego is NOT just a toy anymore it is a Collectable. This is
obvious to anyone taking even a cursory look at the current Brickink prices
of the original Star Wars sets, old used Town/Space sets, etc. This is a
free capitalistic society and if somebody out there wants to make a purely
financially based decision to buy a set that Lego swears it will never make
again, God love ‘em and shame on Lego for changing it’s mind.
|
I don’t see this as an arbitrary or capricious change on LEGO’s part. I see
it as a significant change in circumstances, as Jake explained
So I’d say, shame on THEM for deciding that LEGO saying that it was not
likely they would get more ABS in Maersk blue meaning that *nothing* would or
could possibly change that, *nothing* would cause it to be a good thing to
bring out another run, even after Maersk asked them to and agreed to fund the
ABS needed.
|
Agreed as I explained...but Lego didn’t say it was “unlikely.” They said “we
are using the last of the Maersk Blue.”
| |
Saying you have sympathy for those speculators is somewhat like saying you
have sympathy for the people that bought Enron at 120 and rode it down to
0.25.. it sounds nice but it’s not sound economic policy.
|
That’s a ridicilous comparison. Furthermore, It’s not a sympathy issue, it’s a
keeping your word issue. I used to collect coins. If the U.S. Mint promised to
make a limited run of 1 million pieces and then later that year ran a million
more, The buyers of the first million would be rightly outraged. Simple as
that.
| |
| |
It is not a reason to celebrate for the many who were counting on having
this set produced in a different color. I was looking forward to having
more than Maersk Blue ships in my Harbor.
|
That I’ll buy. But maybe LEGO will change their mind. And also you can build
a number of different hull colors already. (just not the dark green or dark
blue we were hoping for)
| |
| |
But that’s just me, I guess. This is going to be another “bash Jake”
string, I just know it. I blanch at the very thought. Why? Why must we go
there every time Jake brings us news?
|
Agreed! Jake shouldn’t get a bad rap for being the messenger. And even
though I STRONGLY believe Lego should keep it’s promises when it says “Final
Limited Edition,” I understand their desire for profit and the need to
respond to Maersk’s request for more sets...they just shouldn’t release
anymore to the public IN PLACE of what we all voted on!
|
That too I’ll buy. But maybe LEGO will change their mind.
|
That’s really the only point I was trying to make...so maybe we’re on the same
page after all :o)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
257 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
