 | | More train ranting (sorry) —John Neal
|
| | | The service pack thread has my undies in a bunch. Why? Because it is as if we are asking for *so* much, when in reality it is *so* little. We are asking (practically begging) TLG to create a product from which they will make *a lot* of money. What (...) (26 years ago, 25-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Tom McDonald
|
| | | | | (...) (so said the Smartest Man in the World, "The Princess Bride" :) (...) That would be the only place where you would be off-base, that it would be their biggest seller. No doubt it would be big, but biggest? IMO, that's stretching it. But "I (...) (26 years ago, 25-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —John Kelly
|
| | | | | I have never known LEGO to ever use anything other than their own internal ideas for what might sell. Set design and process has always been done in Demark (But as some of you know that has changed with the restructure of Futura...) One of the guys (...) (26 years ago, 25-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Christopher Masi
|
| | | | | | | Hey! I'm 10+ years removed from LEGO Systems Inc. Did you work in Enfield? I was a factory grunt; how about you? Chris (...) (26 years ago, 23-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —John Kelly
|
| | | | | | | | I was in Enfield as a model builder. Went back for a reunion, and a week later they laid off 2/3 of the department. Bad time to be working for LEGO, but I did hear that the severence was good.... -john (...) was a (...) about (...) occurred (...) (...) (26 years ago, 26-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Christopher Masi
|
| | | | | | | | Cool job. To bad so many people had to lose their jobs. (...) (26 years ago, 24-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) No, J3, as sick and wrong as it sounds, you are prolly right:-( And therein lies the venom and frustration. -John (...) (26 years ago, 25-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Eric Brok
|
| | | | (...) There's a new train canopy this year. (However used in some other themes). Eric Brok -------- Visit LEGO ON MY MIND: (URL) Submit your own link: (URL) section: (URL) (26 years ago, 26-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | (...) That means it is not unique. The last time I can think of was 1995, with the Freight Rail Runner's windows and Sliding boxcar doors. Jeff (26 years ago, 26-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —John Neal
|
| | | | | I was thinking it was around that time as well. That's coming up on 5 YEARS. How pathetic. (...) (26 years ago, 26-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Eric Brok
|
| | | | Jeff Stembel wrote in message ... (...) the (...) Come on, uniqueness is not the point. It's about new parts that were designed for trains. If they use the same piece in other themes as well; so much the better. Point in case is whether you (...) (26 years ago, 27-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Christopher Masi
|
| | | | | (...) I agree, I do not think uniqueness is the point, but I also do not think that canopy was designed for trains. It doesn't resemble any trains. After all how many trains have a large glass popup (or not popup) canopy on the engine. That canopy (...) (26 years ago, 25-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | (...) Well, actually, uniqueness is the point. John Neal asked when the last *unique* train element was made. And besides, how do you know that the canopy was designed for trains first? Because it is used in other themes the first year of (...) (26 years ago, 27-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Agreed. (...) Are we talking about the 4561 canopy??? I'm not sure... But if so I do NOT see that as designed for trains. (1) At least, not US ones. Don't get me started on a wishlist of parts that I wish they'd design, I don't have time and (...) (26 years ago, 27-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Eric Brok
|
| | | | (...) I said designing *for* trains, not designing *after* trains. :-) As many people regret, these are very different things with current LEGO developments. Eric (25 years ago, 31-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) I'm gonna go by what someone else said. Since it appears in at least one other set in a different theme introduced the same year, not necessarily designed for the train line. (In an argumentative mood today) (25 years ago, 31-May-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More train ranting (sorry) —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | (...) In fact, it appears in several non-train sets: 6433, 6435 and 6453. I would say that claiming that it is designed for the train line is a bit controversial. But then again, I don't have the insight in the TLG design process that others may (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jun-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
