Subject:
|
Re: 10152 Update
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:01:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7847 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Ray Sanders wrote:
| |
In lugnet.lego, John Neal wrote:
|
| |
| |
I don’t think anyone is complaining that there will be more of these sets in
order to purchase. It was the fact that consumers were led to believe that
the color maersk blue would never again be produced and thus the sets
containing that color would have value beyond their face value. I think the
whole matter would be solved in a nano second if TLC simply changed the
number or somehow made the new run tangibly different from the original.
This would require minimum effort and make everyone happy (except those
who were really hoping for the dark blue version, which may or may not
appear).
|
Except that Maersk wants more 10152’s. So TLC is going to make another run of
10152, and split the production between Maersk and S@H.
|
I think that I didn’t make myself clear. All I am asking for is that the new
run of 10152s be numbered “10153” or something. This simple change preserves
the collectiblity of the 10052s. I wasn’t suggesting any more radical change
than that. Again, I’m glad that there will be more Maersk blue available on
the market! But I agree that it would be nice if the run was a different set in
order to provide a greater variety of elements colored Maersk blue, but
saylavee.
| |
I would be most
pleased if there were enough pellets to do the production run and reissue
something else from the collection of past Maersk sets (e.g 1552 or 1831). I
would suspect that part of the higher pellet cost is a one-shot setup fee. If
so, then it might make more sense to order extra.
| |
| |
Many people are looking at it from the standpoint of “LEGO is producing
collectibles, so they need to honor the implied promise of limited
availability.” Does LEGO look at their products that way? I don’t know, but
I doubt it.
|
If they had never said that Maersk blue would be gone forever after the last
run, I don’t think people would have any expectation of limited
availability. Therein lies the rub.
|
My take is that TLC assumed that the existing stock of pellets would be
sufficient to meet everyones needs. The only thing that might change that
(unlikely back then) was for Maersk to ask for more. Guess what happened ? So
they could just make some for Maersk and ignore us (i.e. S@H) or do it this
way. This makes more sense to me (but is sure to honk off the
collectors/proffiteers).
|
It might bum out parts resellers, but doesn’t necessarily have to affect MISB
collectors.
JOHN
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) If you purchase something at full retail, as a collectable, then someone's P&L statement is going to look pretty good. If enough people do that, then there has been created a 'demand' that had more to do with the profit motive than the desire (...) (20 years ago, 20-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
|
|
|
|
