Subject:
|
Re: General Box #5
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.jambalaya
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Feb 2000 16:02:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
956 times
|
| |
|
|
Christopher Weeks wrote:
> So why do they make these? We should gather everyone's surplus and send
> them back to LEGO in a large crate.
Because it's cute and cheap? It wouldn't be so bad if they didn't come
in EVERY blasted Freestyle/Classic/Basic set. What would be best is if
they just put them into the smaller sets (then people who like them can
easily get some, and those of us who have no need for them won't buy the
little sets [I never do anywise, not enough value]).
> > Of course I'm never sure if what I'm putting in is reasonable, so
> > perhaps I should just go back to my corner.
>
> No. I'd rather foster conversation on the fairness of equivalency.
> When I sent out my box for the first round, everyone who reported their
> taking a and leavings seemed to have done so fairly, but when it left
> me, it was worth (using modern auction prices) far more than when it
> returned. Maybe everyone cheated a little, maybe a couple of folks
> cheated big, maybe a few people made honest mistakes. I tend to favor
> the last option, so we might want to provide more help to each other so
> that the boxes don't all degrade into wheels and smiles.
>
> > Box weight needs to be kept to the point that the parts you take out are
> > worth the shipping. If shipping goes much above $5, it's going to be
>
> I'd rather have a box that's $9-10 to ship because there's more of a
> chance that I'll get something I want. A $4.30 to ship box has to be
> pretty value/rarity dense for there to be anything I really want. I
> have a bag of fabuland stuff (not figs) waiting to add to a J-box, but I
> haven't seen one yet where the value would be appropriate given what I
> wanted to take out.
There is an inherent problem if you take the above two things in
perspective. If trades should increase the auction value of the box, and
it will cost $9-10 to ship, you are paying $9-10 for the priviledge of
reducing the auction value of your collection. Now of course some people
might not want to bother with auctioning of stuff they don't need, but
it seems like one would be better off putting up a notice in
buy-sell-trade.
This may be the problem with the whole Jambalaya idea. Lets assume that
on average, people take 1/10 the content of the box. This means that
we're paying to ship the stuff which is being traded at least 10 times.
We'd be better off having a giant web site where you put up the stuff
you don't need, and you indicate stuff you need. We can even track
auction prices of everything which is put up. So if you ante up $20
worth of stuff, you can pick out $20 worth of stuff. Everyone then ships
the stuff you want directly to you. Meanwhile, people who either hasn't
used up all their credit, or who ante up more stuff, will start making
requests for your stuff.
Once we get more LUGs going and meeting on a regular basis, the
Jambalaya box might work better since it can be shipped to someone just
before a meeting, everyone trades with it, and chips in to ship it to
the next group. Now we're down to $1-2 per person for shipping a
sizeable box, and assuming you take any quantity of stuff out at all,
you would have spent $1-2 on shipping your little trade to an
individual. Group participation would also make it more likely that the
trades would be generally fair.
> > hard to take out usefull stuff, and put in stuff which keeps the variety
> > in the box decent (I'm not sure we should be concerned with increasing
> > the value of the box, so much as keeping it interesting).
>
> What's interesting? Just a variety? Interesting to me is clear bricks
> and plates, fabuland figs, corner slopes, pink bricks and plates, raised
> baseplates that I don't have, plants, castle walls, the slope with the
> chicken from the recent Mcdonalds promo, silver bricks, old stuff that I
> can't get now, and some other stuff. Others will have a totally
> different agenda.
I think that rather than concentrating on auction values of stuff, we
should concentrate on stuff which we don't have a use for, but seem to
be in demand. From your list above, the McDonalds chicken slope is the
only one I wouldn't guess would be in demand, but heck, even one or two
of those would be ok.
Real good candidates are mis-matched parts since they don't have much
value by themself, but when they reach someone who has the other part,
dramatically increase in value.
> > GB#3 is very marginal right now. I pulled a lot of wheels out (some for
> > Larry, some for Tom, and some with discolored or abused hubs to be saved
>
> I wonder if I killed it with my wheels. I made a fair trade with the
> box and added the wheels on top of that, so my first reaction is that
> it's a good deal for the box. But it was kind of weak when I saw it and
> if the wheels changed how the people after me were trading with it, then
> it might have done some harm that way.
It definitely is a weak box. One problem I think is that when the boxes
started out, many of the parts may have actually belonged in a Junk Box.
The problem with the wheels was the disproportionate load they added to
the box. There were some nice older wheels and that's a good thing, but
the common currently available wheels were perhaps a bad thing. I know
the batch of stuff I have that I find useless after the eye/mouth bricks
is wheels. Every blasted Freestyle/Classic/Basic set also comes with
wheels.
I think we're starting to settle into realizing the boxes need to have a
more planned trek. That way, rather than shipping a buch of stuff no one
wants 20 times, we try and ship stuff to the next person interested in
what is about to go in. We could even have some sort of bidding system:
"I'm just got the box, and I've put in the 20 classic space guys I bid
earlier, I'm also adding in one of those classic space trans-dark blue
inverse canopies."
"I just parted out 50 6097s and have a ton of castle stuff to put in."
"I just stumbled on a box of forest maidens, but I don't think they'd
last very long on my moon base."
"I just found a Metroliner, but half the parts are missing."
Then people vote on which of these three should get it next.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: General Box #5
|
| (...) You tricked me! ;-) I read this at first and agreed that it wasn't your place, but that was foolish of me. The whole point of posting what I took and added was to include the community. Thanks Frank, your points are well taken. I've removed (...) (24 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
45 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
