To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.market.theoryOpen lugnet.market.theory in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Marketplace / Theory / 2711
2710  |  2712
Subject: 
Re: 10152 Update
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.market.theory
Date: 
Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:27:25 GMT
Viewed: 
7049 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. (...) (...) (19 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR