Subject:
|
Re: 10152 Update
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:27:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7052 times
|
| |
|
|
moving thread to lugnet.market.theory
| |
| |
Seems to me the only folk truly upset about the re-release of this set are
| |
| |
the BL people capitalizing on the rarity of Maersk blue or of the set in
general.
|
|
|
Seems to me that you don’t know that aspect of collecting limited stuff.
|
(attn: spite what the following text reads, it isn’t sarcasm. You’d be right
in saying that I’m not primarily a collector. So help me out.(and others who
don’t understand this either)
So instead of having a box on your shelf that is
very very rare, it is now only very rare? It’s not as if this production is
going to be terribly big. I don’t understand why this is a big deal.
Or are
you saying that the potential of (not that they will) a full scale production of
Maersk blue ships will make your set undesirable?
| |
I wonder if TLC made the profit on their sale to Maersk as well as they did
with us. I do not doubt that Maersk pays for the upcoming cost - but TLC
needs to make profit on their products in order to survive.
|
I think this is where we differ. Unless someone posts the numbers we’ll never
know. But, I think in a way they did. Granted at 4000 vs 10,000 units it is
unlikely that comes from set sales. Taken
from Jake’s old post I wonder what other conditions existed in the contract?
For the new run Maersk must certainly be paying some of the cost for the product
run. They bought the pellets, I see that, but there are many other factors in a
production line. This is why Jake says, “The bad news is that this means we
need to postpone (and perhaps cancel) the dark blue 10152 version.” Whatever
Maersk in providing, it has to be of enough value to cause the delay or even
kill the production of a popular and anticipated set. And you’re gonna tell me
that you “doubt that Maersk pays for the upcoming cost” I think Maersk is
paying for the initial costs, thereby making the risk of selling the 10152 a
more “sure thing” for public sales by reducing the number of sales required to
produce a profit.
Mark
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| In lugnet.lego, Mark Neumann wrote: (snip) (...) In general, you're right. But not in this case. (...) ...and so do most of the other AFOLs I know, for sure. (...) plus, what tools TLC uses to sell those specific sets we're talking about. (...) (...) (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
|
|
|
|
