To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.starwarsOpen lugnet.starwars in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Star Wars / 9590
9589  |  9591
Subject: 
Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.starwars
Date: 
Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:14:50 GMT
Viewed: 
692 times
  
Nicholas Fezie wrote:

Actually, Lego did say that in an interview over at FBTB (for the link go to
http://news.lugnet.com/starwars).  And I think this is an imperial year.
There are no rebel sets (besides the escape pod which isn't from Episode 1
by the way).  So the year couldn't get any more Imperial.  You need to
remember that they have to save some of their license for the next year.
(That's probably why we haven't seen an AT-AT or a Jawa Sandcrawler or more
UCS sets.)

Their license runs to 2007, doesn't it?

We'll probably see Ep4-6 sets for the remainder of that time, with sets
for the new movies being promoted more heavily just after release of the
movies.

And the bigger sets seem to come later in the year, for the first season
the Mos Espa Pod Race didn't appear until May, admittedly with the rest of
the Ep1 stuff but still some months after the release of the initial
batch. This year, the Falcon appeared way after the first 2000 sets.

If they follow this schedule, we should be able to expect bigger stuff
towards mid 2001... Again, hopefully including some UCS stuff.

And it's obviously the Imperial year: DSDK (well...), shuttle, TIE, AT-ST
(admittedly with Chewie, probably both for cost and marketing reasons),
the Technic stormtrooper. There are a few recognizable imperial ships left
to do, but not that many. Now, if TLG could only produce playsets more
consistently... It would be great with smaller DS playsets that could be
combined to create bigger dioramas...

T.
--> thomas weigle  |  w.i.m.p.
    web: http://www.ya-ba.net/
------------------------------>
  .iMMersE your soUL in LOVE.



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
 
(...) <snip> (...) Yeah! That would be very cool. Maybe 4 or 5 small sets with Technic connectors, and perhaps one larger set with a "landing bay" for the Falcon or TIEs. ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
  Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
 
(...) I'm convinced that we're going to see a UCS A-Wing, maybe even next. Compact design. Maybe 700 pieces. Can be done in red and white, so cheap to produce with existing stock. Not many new molds necessary; maybe just a canopy. James (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
 
(...) Actually, Lego did say that in an interview over at FBTB (for the link go to (URL) And I think this is an imperial year. There are no rebel sets (besides the escape pod which isn't from Episode 1 by the way). So the year couldn't get any more (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)

14 Messages in This Thread:





Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

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