|
|
 | | Re: IBLTC
|
| (...) If this gets off the ground, it seems fairly likely to me that it will either claim to be (or even more likely, be perceived as) speaking for all LEGO train displayers - at which point there is a certain responsibility for the org to give any (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | Re: IBLTC
|
| I dont think the need for the IOLTC would be dealing with LEGO as a group, but more for dealing with show promoters as a group. I think once shows catch on that we are talking with each other and such, then we're in a better position to negotiate (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | Re: IBLTC
|
| (...) That is a question that I've been wrestling with. Someone farther up the thread put forth the idea that the IOLTC would be used for contacts and negotiations with LEGO and LEGO Direct. What sort of negotiations? What would any potential IOLTC (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | Re: IBLTC
|
| (...) I would tend to agree, I suspect Steve's intent was to be inclusionary not exclusionary. But if any of the following are true, I would think that the club may not have a compelling need to belong (other than for informational reasons): - The (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | Re: ICLTC
|
| ...snip... (...) ...more sinpage... Absolutely. Last time I checked this was your site. I guess I'm a little confused by this. Why is what we're getting paid from GATs a secret in the first place? I have to admit that I have no idea what we get from (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
|
