fred67

Really? I'm a patient guy; I haven't complained or raised a stink about how they executed their project... but they are funding builds with capital they're making on sales now instead of on the money they got from the kickstarter project, which didn't adequately cover their costs. That's a huge mistake. They weren't planning on people not actually coming through with their payments. I feel bad for them, and I haven't been coming here to complain about the "pyramid" scheme they need to use in order to cover their backer's orders. I don't want to raise a huge fuss about it - I'd rather them continue what they're doing than go bankrupt and screw me out of my money entirely. I've ordered from them before (their last metal rails), I backed them this time, I also bought a variety of plastic rails after the fact to use for display; I sincerely hope they pull through this and become profitable, and that I get a chance to order more in the future. But I backed them to the tune of over $130 for metal rails... they got my money last fall. I haven't gotten anything, and there's no telling that I'll even get anything by the end of this year. I shrug and wait, but it's really not cool. Again, don't get me wrong - I'd rather have ME rails than not have ME rails, and I'm glad I could lend my support and that they actually got money from me as opposed to apparently a lot of people that reneged on their side of the deal - they have my sympathy - but in the future they should keep such things in mind.

Wow. You should post this on the forum at Bricklink instead of here.

Must be your Target... I was in a Target this morning (John's Creek GA) and they had nothing LEGO on sale. I think it must be a fairly affluent area that sells LEGO well, because I rarely see anything there on sale.

I don't like it very much when they do things like this; I remember being an old-school Star Wars fan and desperately trying to get a Chrome Vader. Just by chance, it's more likely some kid that doesn't even understand that he got something great wins it randomly. I understand why they do it, I just don't really like it. This is a little bit different - you don't have to buy anything. You can enter every day. They are trying to distribute the winners as fairly as they can with a simple set of rules (and I might add that you will never make rules that make everybody happy, so they do what they can fairly easily implement). There's also no exclusive figures - we'll all be able to make one from parts at some point. And mostly the idea isn't necessarily to get people to buy stuff, it's to sign up VIP members... it's not like being a VIP member is some sort of burden. So no, I don't really like it, but they have their reasons and their tactics work to get people to sign up, so it's hard to "demand" they do something so everybody can get one - that's the whole point; it's desirable, so people will sign up in order to get a chance to win one.

Just curious where you got this information from.

VERY NICE! Great Job! I also like how you photographed it to make it look like it was in a desert. Cool.

Well... again, price per piece is only a ballpark figure that ignores a lot of things.... a 1x1 tile isn't a 2x10 brick. Better is the weight of the set (an actual indication of the amount of plastic used), but the new set is too new and doesn't have weights available online to compare. But even then it's not comparable. A minifigure is worth more than it's weight in 2x4s, so are large plates. Very often it's easy to argue that price comparisons are simply not fair for those reasons.... But in THIS case, the comparison is quite easy - it's practically the same thing, only now it's WAY smaller (the older set is an 80% bigger model), with many fewer pieces (making it less interesting to build) AND it costs more... saying it's incredibly expensive compared to the older set is quite an objective statement, even given 4 years of inflation.

Well, I'm having fun beating dead horses lately (what a terrible expression!), so I'm going to continue on my thoughts... I do personally do believe LOTR killed Fantasy, but I'm willing to accept they never had plans to release an Elf faction for a couple of reasons - the first of which, it was already fairly late in the theme, given how long the themes generally last, and we hadn't had a single elf up to that point. Even if the theme went on another year, we'd have a ton of skeletons (which I hated - the only bad part about the Fantasy era IMO), lot's of humans, a good smattering of dwarfs and various orcs/trolls - and only one year of sets with elves? You'd hardly have any elves at all.... I mean, they wouldn't exclusively released elf based sets and nothing else to make up for it. Secondly, we often see (or at least hear) about things in production - there was never any indication they were making an elf figure (let alone sets); there were no pictures, no prototypes that were ever seen by anybody, there was just nothing. TLG is much better now at keeping things under wraps, perhaps, but they weren't as good back then - we saw (or at least heard) about stuff all the time. Still, I do not believe when some representative from the company tells a "story" about it like that. They are trying to make it so people aren't disappointed, so they aren't mad at the changeover to LOTR; it's an easier pill to swallow - if he'd said "yes, we were working on it, but then stopped for LOTR," then he'd get bombarded with "when will you do it? Is it still possible you'll do it in the future? If you already have something, couldn't you just release it now?" and a bunch of other questions they'd probably rather not answer. The guy was a community relations person, not a set designer who'd been working on it and probably would WANT to share what he was working on. This is simply how public relations work. Still, unless we actually had some concrete evidence, we can't know for sure. That's all I was saying. We simply don't know for sure that LOTR killed Fantasy Era or elves, but I do personally believe there is something to that sentiment.

acchhhh... I hate to beat a dead horse, but it's not just price per piece - when they give you big molded pieces, the price per piece is going to be more, but the built 10231 is 18 inches tall vs. the new one's around 10inches (with boosters). If they're going to cut back the number of pieces to give you big, bulky molded pieces, and charge more, it should at least be as big. It just feels like so much less for so much more money. No... I really, really can't get over what a rip off it is.

Yes, this is what a lot of us "figure," but that doesn't make it true - there was an insert that included elves, but there was never an ad for any set including them - never any evidence that there were plans or designs for any sets that did not get made, it's still just speculation that LOTR killed fantasy era. Still, personally, I am hoping for more fantasy in the future.

Jet Wasp. Not bad.

The RRP for both the Spaceport and Deep Sea Exploration sets are $120. Highway Robbery. I get that big pieces cost more, but that's absurd.... especially the Space Shuttle, where the $99 set's shuttle was nearly twice as big.

$120 for THAT?!?! I have the 10231 Shuttle Expedition, with over 1200 pieces, and it was $99 when it came out only four short years ago. $120 is highway-freaking-robbery! TLG is really losing me these days. Unbelievable.

I have just used the sterilite boxes (6qt and 16qt, depending on the set) and partially disassemble. I've also stored new sets in them (unboxed) to save space.

That was a much easier way to say what I was trying to say. They give us bits and pieces of what we want.

No, they really don't - they try their best to make the most profit. That's fine, they're a capitalist company operating in a mostly capitalist society, so they are free to operate how they want, but let's not pretend they give us what we want... they give us what we'll buy for the maximum profit. As a capitalist, that's OK with me, but it is what it is. While some of their decisions made sense: monorail, selling straight and curve train tracks separately (and abandoning 9V trains), many of them do not: they couldn't keep "Research Institute" on the shelves, and while they made a few extra runs, they never opted to make enough for demand - they didn't even give it six months. They don't sell curve train tracks at all anymore (except in full train sets), so while we wanted curves and straight separately, not only didn't we get that, but we can't even buy curves anymore. Castle builders - keeping in mind it's an "evergreen" theme, have never had a "castle bucket." The best they've gotten is some packs with various small amounts gray bricks, and not even that for over 10 years. All the time I hear people saying they would love buckets with just white, just black, just gray... they even jacked up the price of K-boxes by 33% IF they will even sell them to you at all. They reduce the variety on the PAB walls to some of the least interesting parts. Let's not even talk about selling us round, tapered containers to sell us PAB bricks. I honestly don't see anybody except you (and this is not meant as a personal offence) that has claimed TLG tries to give us what we want. Even back on subject, with Ideas, it seems they have made some very good choices, but it also seems as if they've rejected sets that would have been exceedingly popular. Sometimes there's a good reason (too big, adult themes), sometimes not. Why no Hubble telescope when other NASA/space/science oriented sets had completely sold out? Why do they not explain their decisions, especially when no license would have been involved? They don't have to, but it's what people want, so all we do is speculate and think we know why. Why don't they re-release sets that would obviously be hugely popular, like a lot of the science sets that sold out early on, back in Cuusoo days? That, to me, absolutely makes no sense, because they could make a ton of money on it; it just makes no sense at all. And those "rare" parts they put in things like the UCF Millennium Falcon, or the Cafe Corner? They could sell those parts for triple the profits of other parts they sell, and still undersell BL prices by 90%. Are you going to say people don't want that? I'm not even asking to rerelease the sets (in fact, I have the CC and don't care about the MF, but the subject comes up so much it's worth talking about). No, no, no... I like TLG, I really do, but let's not pretend their some sort of magnanimous gift givers, here, giving the people what they want. In fact, reading EB the last few years, it seems all anyone does is complain about new sets. Not always, perhaps, but more often than not, they're either not what people wanted, or not very good versions of what they are.

I'm probably out of line, I don't run the place, but having as many posts as I have and never getting a warning, I'm going to risk it because I think it's important and helpful... 1. Whether you want to sell or trade domestically or not, others might - I really don't know what to think when someone says something like "domestic trades only" and doesn't have their location filled in. Perhaps you don't care, you'll buy/sell anywhere - but I'm looking to buy domestically... and you're selling, but don't say where you are. I know people are paranoid about it for some reason, but narrowing it down to a country (or even region) isn't exactly giving away your identity. 2. I don't have the number of every set TLG ever made memorized. I doubt anyone does. You certainly shouldn't expect it. If you're trying to sell something, make it easy for the buyer - tell me the name AND number of the set, it's not hard... see: "10194 Emerald Night." It's not hard. It usually says it right on the package! Surely if you know the number, you know the name, too? I like this forum, I have many trades and a few purchases from here, but I think if people want to sell something, they should make it as easy as possible for the potential buyers - it just makes sense.

I argue that it's not retaliatory feedback, it's deserved, and you're doing others a disservice by not accurately reporting feedback - it's one of the reasons online ratings, especially ones where both buyer and seller leave feedback, cannot be trusted. I understand completely - and I have this argument with sellers on the BL forum (and have been stop listed at shops despite having perfect feedback). They argue that the buyers have more power (like claiming to paypal they didn't receive the merchandise), and I don't disagree, but they are the first ones to whine about buyers making a legal commitment to pay when they submit their order, and that they shouldn't be allowed to back out of it - but when the shoe is on the other foot, and it's like "uh... I don't actually have that part," they're the first ones to ask for leniency and it pisses me off... "it's just one 5 cent part, why should I receive a negative for that?" Because you made a legal contract by offering to sell it, too! It's worse when they have the part, and say "it's not worth it to me to send you what you ordered and paid for." If I was 5 cents short on my payment, you wouldn't send me the order... people don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot.

No. I don't get all obsessive when talking to non-LEGO fans, but I cringe when supposed LEGO enthusiasts use "legos," and I think it's an abomination when a journalist writing about LEGO uses the phrase "legos." Interesting points - I don't think they're necessarily "unpopular" positions to have, though. FWIW, I think there's far too few fire department sets relative to police. To complete a LEGO city, we need more emergency personnel, like Ambulances and drivers and so forth, too. I like the Grand Emporium. I had a good time building it with my kids, it was a good "family build" set. I don't use the extra "s" around non-fans, but I don't get all nerdy about it when they do (as above). I agree - I'd like better balance between men and women, but then I'm an adult and not a boy ages 7 to 12. Here's another one from me (venting is cathartic, isn't it?): I hate the term AFOL (even though I use it around AFOLs because they know what it is). I prefer ALE.

There's only one reason to manufacture in China - to increase profits. Why is it even a question?

While I often complain about LEGO prices, the fact is that I understand that we in the U.S. have the overall best prices. That's actually quite a load of B.S.. I realize some LEGO person said it once, but that doesn't make it make sense. TLG makes a huge amount of profit in the U.S.. They price things to maximize profit. If they weren't happy with the profit they were making in the U.S., they wouldn't sell here. I doubt there's an individual country that makes more profit for TLG than the U.S.. Germany may sell more per-capita, but we're a lot bigger than Germany. What they meant to say is those countries are subsidizing LEGO's profit margins more than the U.S., because that's a much more accurate way to phrase it.

bricklink. In fact, you can post here and get an answer in an hour or a day, but you'd like get one there in minutes.... that's what they do. I've discovered a lot of the minfigures I had from bulk buys (mostly partially) by searching for the torsos in Bricklink's catalog, and then clicking on the links to find out what minifigures/sets the appeared in.

That's an unfair comparison, though; most complete systems - Apple, PC, or otherwise, cost less than if you go and buy all the components yourself for a number of reasons, including the fact that the companies are buying the parts in bulk, and can also cut profits on each part because they can capitalize on the fact that you're buying ALL the parts from them. When you also compare high end tablets, the fact is you really do get more with a Samsung; more features, multi-tasking and drag and drop; someone could accomplish a lot more with a Samsung Note than an iPad... but I have neither, because neither one is worth the exorbitant cost when you can get a bigger Windows tablet for less (no, not a big fan of Windows either, but until I see a Surface like tablet running Linux, it's the most bang for the buck). I'm not an Apple basher - I just don't own one, they ARE more expensive. They are TLG of the computer industry - premium prices for premium products. They offered me a Mac Mini at work, so I used one for about three months... and couldn't stand it. I don't understand why people think the UI is so great. Of course, at the same time, I don't use Windows either. What I found out about all the little issues I had (like tweaking mouse acceleration and having windows snap to maximize screen space) was that people would actually pay money for utilities that should have been built into the OS... but that's what Apple's user base is like - they are accustomed to paying. Non standard chargers? No problem! I don't mind paying twice as much! Remember when people stood in line just to buy the same damn thing they already had, just with a white case? So no, I won't buy Apple products - but that doesn't mean I don't realize they do make great products, and at least at one point were great innovators in design. I do like Samsung better - but their high end stuff is just as, if not more, expensive these days, so I'm not likely to buy any but low-end stuff from them anyway. Back on subject - Go Pros are great, and I think they've established themselves in their market. I hope competition can only mean good things, but I do think one of the strategies of a company like Apple is to announce something far ahead of time to get consumers to stop buying the other products... and most consumers are too dumb to ignore vaporware announcements. Give me a working prototype, and I'll believe it when I see it.

Ah... you're right, one is hiding behind the couch. That's still a lot more than two buckets worth. A LOT more. I'm reminded of the movie "Elf" where "Buddy" builds a replica of New York out of the parts from LEGO sets in the store's toy section. You couldn't have built what he built (given the colors, especially) with an entire LEGO Store, let alone with what some department store would have had.

I must have missed this back in February - it's not like it was a years old thread, so I don't mind it getting bumped. I agree with you - and it's impossible to make everybody happy, no matter what happens, but in this case I think the happy medium might be to stick with BURPs and panels, as they can much more easily be reused. I understand TLG's target audience is not me (although I think they underestimate AFOLs and parents, but that's just my opinion), but I think the problem is that they fall into that trap of having large molded specific pieces that people used to complain about. Unlike a plane or ship, castles really are (usually) built out of bricks or stones, brick by brick. A brick built airplane fuselage might have a hard time staying together under heavy play, flying around the room, thereby justifying the use of big molded pieces for kids - but a castle wouldn't have that problem. I also have the problem that TLG seems to be moving away from a lot of those baseplates to standard plates in many of their sets. Baseplates suffer from not lining up with regular plates (but that's a whole other can of worms). But by building up the castle on smaller plates it can be kept modular, like some of the more recent ones. As adult castle fans, we'd probably like TLG to just release gray buckets. But I think they know that, and they'd prefer us spending a lot more by building up our collections buying sets instead of the relatively cheaper buckets.