 | | Re: IBLTC
|
|
John Gerlach wrote in message ... (...) layouts (...) assistance? Maybe there are two things getting tangled up together here - the existence, membership and purpose of an IOLTC group, and assistance from Lego negotiated by such group. It seems to (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Hmm. Well, as a fellow NELUG member, I have to admit that I am rather counter to the idea of a "meta-group" representing NELUG when facing any other organisation, espeically TLC. I am certainly not opposed to seeing some kind of forum where (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) All good questions. I guess my answer would be that I "expect" nothing. If something is worked out so that we got some sort of discount then all the better but I expect nothing. (...) I think you answer yourself later on this but here are my (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: TeenLTC?
|
|
Amy, (...) My point is that there has been no posts or ideas that would organize it. I posted several weeks ago, and no response at all, Amy. No one is dictactor or anything, I was simply trying to get some control over this Kai situation. If you (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I would agree. LTC's are a subset of LUG's (or, rather, a special type of LUG -- rather than being a general LEGO users group, they're tailored toward train stuff and with a serious agenda). So it's a conventional label. --Todd (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
