Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | WoutR  | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2024 14:46 | | Subject: | Re: Variants & Contests | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Contests | |
| In Contests, noid55 writes:
| | Not a snowspeeder...I'm betting it would be a rebellion side set...how about
an x-wing?
|
That, or the Milennium Falcon
|
 |
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2024 11:30 | | Subject: | Re: How do I get my double paid VAT back?? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
| - BrickLink collects the tax (1)
- Buyer pays the tax
- Customs does not receive that electronic number, so they collect the tax again
(2)
- Buyer has to pay tax again, with an additional administrative fee
- BrickLink does not know that taxes were already paid, so BrickLink transfers
the tax amount. The customs office now has received payment 1 and 2.
- If the seller refunds, he is out of money without possibility of being reimbursed.
- Then the buyer gets a refund, pays taxes only once but could be out of the
extra fee.
- BrickLink is has paid the taxes, so they are at 0. BrickLink is the only party
who can claim back the second payment to customs, but they don't have a system
to do this.
- Customs office remains with the double paid tax unclaimed.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2024 11:22 | | Subject: | Re: How do I get my double paid VAT back?? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
| In Taxes, zorbanj writes:
| | Attached is a screenshot of shipping information I must fill out for an international
shipping label. The black box is where the Bricklink IOSS number must be entered.
If the number is not entered, the buyer will probably be charged VAT again. It
doesn't matter if there's a VAT invoice included in the package or if
I write in the IOSS number on the label by hand.
Yes, this is for US shipping but the idea is the same. If your seller didn't
enter the IOSS number electronically then that is the reason you were charged
VAT again. If the seller is unable to enter the IOSS number electronically they
shouldn't be selling to EU buyers.
So again, you must get the original VAT back from the seller. If you feel bad
ask for half of it back, but you aren't going to be refunded by Bricklink
or your country. If the seller did in fact complete the shipping label correctly
and there was a glitch they will have to pay you and then take it up with their
post office.
In Taxes, Poncke writes:
| |
seller was very cooperative, but says he did everything correctly, also has the
VAT invoiuce which says IOSS was enterered correctly.
So someone messed up, but I can only get vat back from BL. And VAT is no one's
profit or revenue, so there should be no issue sending it back me. Its just one
big confusing dark hole and I dont know who or where to turn to get my VAT back
|
|
Even when the seller makes an error, the seller is not the one who can correct
the mistake because he does not hold the money.
BrickLink holds the money. BrickLink can refund, and in turn does not have to
pay those taxes. The net result for BrickLink is 0 (+ takes, - taxes), they only
pay for the labour involved. This is how the system was designed, and this is
how BrickLink shoudl comply.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2024 10:20 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, NoGravitasHere writes:
| | Interesting. Does it still apply to the same colour, and process of creation?
If it's identical to the later 309 parts, I'll probably leave it. It
shows up in most databases as 309, and if I start splitting hairs there people
might get a bit confused.
As an aside, there's an unlisted Light Grey Hau under the chrome! I'll
have a dud one in hand this week to strip and provide evidence of, it's the
last Mata mask I need (aside from prototypes).
|
For all practical purposes, it is identical.
You might want to include a note that it originally was seen as a decoration
on that Light Gray base, not a separate color in itself. Just in case someone
builds a color timeline based on your notes and this one does not fit in or distorts
everything.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2024 08:36 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, NoGravitasHere writes:
| | Mahri shoulder piece is 131 v2. Hydruka armour piece is 315. Couple
of mates had them lying around, tested 'em against confirmed iterations of
those colours. Neither fit the timeline at all. Just when I thought I had things
ironed out...
I did at least finish rewriting the silver overview thing I work on for my Parts
Guide:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1we0sW-jnigQxDkBpY3hUn2n3IEGLX6ZyM08-3sXsfZI/edit?usp=sharing
I doubt there's anything new to you there, it's just nice having an overview
put together.
|
309 is probably not technically correct for the 2001 Hau. That color number was
introduced later. At that time, the chrome silver was seen as a surface decoration
pattern that did not get its own (ink) color number.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 20:15 | | Subject: | Re: Variants & Contests | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Contests | |
| In Contests, popsicle writes:
| | In Contests, WoutR writes:
| |
A first set should have been Dulpo
|
As you would natural would think if you didn't know my son. Very intelligent
from an early age, who would've been bored with Duplo -
|
I think that depends on which age you start. No point in waiting until a child
is 3 years old, but you also don't want them eating all the smallest parts.
| | Another hint dropped
|
A small success achieved!
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 20:03 | | Subject: | Re: Variants & Contests | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Contests | |
| | Or, even better, DUPLO 😉 |
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 20:02 | | Subject: | Re: Variants & Contests | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Contests | |
| In Contests, popsicle writes:
| | The lengthy and sometimes lively debates over the recent catalog procedural change,
illustrates to me dedication to and strength of, community. As though that which
in one sense or another, gathered us, the BL catalog, continues to demonstrate
how it also helps in the forming of community.
Plenty of strongly held opinions with pushing n’ pulling of thoughtful and often
times impressive arguments. Consider that this would not take place if those
‘gathered’ were indifferent to one another... As I see it, plainly emblematic
of a healthy sense of community.
It’s the free exchange of ideas and thoughts that helps us to grow and improve
individually, but also collectively.
As posted, the cost of this contest is dedicated to those that have taken the
time to encourage and express their appreciation:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1451388
Enough introspective sappiness on my part Let’s have some fun!
The prize is a fairly rare LEGO Star Wars item
New/Sealed, that contains
with his chrome-silver hilted weapon
The contest: Guess the first LEGO set I ever purchased?
Clues: The purchase was for my son’s (unspecified) birthday in Sweden. He is
currently less than 30 years of age.
Contest Rules:
- One entry per 24 hour period, posted here without limit to number of entries.
- If two entries are identical, the first wins.
- For transparency all entries must be posted here as reply
- All our fellow BL members worldwide are welcome to participate, though we'll
cover domestic shipping only should you win.
- Otherwise, no further restrictions
Goofing-off and banter encouraged
~ConstrucToys
|
A first set should have been Dulpo
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 19:40 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, here4bricks614 writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
Those are actually the easiest. The fact that 221 has been reformulated so many
times is what makes this difficult. Any part in 22 looks identical to modern
221, but almost nothing like original 221. The best time to address this was
2004.
|
I think we can probably separate them in the inventories. But if a seller finds
some parts in a lot of used bricks, can he identify them correctly?
I'd love to get the history correct and have all the accurate information
in the catalog, but I think that there are to many challenges to make this work
in Bricklink stores.
| | It's disappointing to hear that its odds are low, especially given the fact
that it is very much doable and is backed up by extensive research. The concerns
behind its addition are understandable, however.
Still hoping for 225. 
|
It is a rare color, but one that should be in the catalog.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 19:20 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, 1001bricks writes:
| |
So, it's Red, so there's no problem?
I guess you've already seen Yellow Technic almost orange?
Again, sorry if I read too fast the whole.
|
It is a similar situation, with a different cause.
Some Light Gray parts also have this problem
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/15210696207/
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 19:16 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| |
I would say it has a better chance than 22 which will almost surely never be
added. I just know that 296 is going to be a very hard sell with the direction
the site is moving in.
|
I think that the difference between 22 and 221 will be extremely difficult for
most sellers. Especially for the parts that were made during the transition period
that appear in both versions.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/14777415117/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/14988645798/
296 will be a challenge, but considering the amount of questions on the forum
and the increasing interest in Bionicle, I think that BrickLink should separate
them. I think it will increase catalog accuracy and reduce confusion. It might
take a lot of comparison photos though...
| | The next one we are going to get moving on is Rose. I just need to find some
time to contact you all and discuss some things that I would then bring back
to the team for further discussion. In this case, the addition has already been
agreed to, but I need to have a plan of action in place along with all of the
required data and images ready to go.
|
Good to hear! This is one of the remaining color groupings that is bugging me
most.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/14931522786/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/14776964407/
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 19:00 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, 1001bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, here4bricks614 writes:
| | | | | | Big shame that 296 wont be getting an official colour listing any time soon,
but c'est la vie. Any chance of getting some distinction between the older
and newer 131 formulations?
|
Nope. That is a complete non-starter, unfortunately. BrickLink does not recognize
variations of colors or reformulations.
|
Are these grandfathered in? We have enough data to confirm that these are just
a crappy red.
|
|
Wow - I hear discussions about rust color since I registered on BrickLink!
Unbelievable.
|
This is not about ALL Rust colored parts.
BrickLink Rust is a group that currently contains:
LEGO 13 Red Orange / Fabuland Red
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/14960664342/
LEGO 216 Rust
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/15139390746/
"Crappy red" (LEGO 21 Bright Red, but softer material with poor color
matching. These parts are a color variation.)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/15077477860/
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 16:52 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, NoGravitasHere writes:
| | Sorry again mate, self-righteousness blinded me to how big an ass I was being.
Frustration does not look good on me, and that's entirely my fault. Even
worse, I was wrong! Mainly just have to swap some names around, but I do have
a bunch of part/colour versions that are missing
|
These colors are complicated, especially because of the reformulations, different
materials and that fact that we did not have ANY official information before
2010.
I hope you gained some understanding about the catalog history here. People did
their best, with the knowledge they had. In addition, the catalog has to keep
a delicate balance between for example the available information, historical
accuracy, the needs of sellers, buyers and several different types of collectors
and specialists and the time available for the volunteers.
Look at how much the catalog colors changed since 2022:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogColors.asp?sortBy=N
The amount of catalog changes made, all requiring manual work and verification
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogLogs.asp
Or simply the amount of items that are added daily:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp
The workload is huge, so the volunteers have to prioritize. Our personal priorities
might be different sometimes, but we owe them much grattitude and appreciation
for their time and effort.
| | Big shame that 296 wont be getting an official colour listing any time soon,
but c'est la vie.
|
Best we can do for now is:
- collect reliable information and make that available
- take photos comparing the different versions. We could try to get them into
the catalog as alternate images (if the catalog admins agree).
- Add catalog notes to the parts (if the catalog admins agree).
- try to make https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1096 as helpful as possible
| | Any chance of getting some distinction between the older
and newer 131 formulations?
|
If a seller only has a few parts, how is (s)he going to identify which one it
is?
I think this will not be possible for an average seller.
| | I sent a couple of emails btw, mind letting me know if they actually arrived?
Their info was mostly obsolete, and I've killed the link I included while
I fix the content, but there are a couple of things that definitely aren't
recognised and (total guess on my part) would be pretty easy to add to the catalogue
without any major issues.
First off, 131 'v2' leaked into the early Hero Factory stuff before the
big switcheroo to 315. Here's a Surge weapon in both colours, which I'm
guessing could just be added as an alternate part?
|
Have you seen
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogAdd.asp
You can add catalog items, photos of new colors or request inventory changes.
If you are certain, you can submit a catalog or inventory change request. Volunteers
will look at this, so it can take some time before they get to it. Depending
on their workload it can take weeks, but they will get to it. Note that requests
can be denied if there is insufficient proof, keeping the catalog reliable is
a huge challenge so the admins can be very strict about proposed changes. They
catch a lot or errors and mistakes this way.
Note that there are different teams of volunteers for the Catalog items and the
Inventories.
Please read the help files, to meet the catalog requirements and to make things
easier for the volunteers.
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=21
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=38
| | Secondly, and slightly more important, is the missing Kraahkan: the Pearl Black
4-Hole. This mould is 2 years older than BrickLink's catalogue recognises,
and originates in 2003 with Makuta Teridax. On its right is the noticeably darker
Black 4-Hole, from Makuta Icarax in 2008. You thought silvers were bad? Now we
have to deal with different blacks.
The catalogue does recognise the different blacks (see Bomonga vs Vorahk
heads), but this instance has been missed somehow. See, I'm not entirely
full of shit lmao
|
The color is in the catalog since 2022, thanks to randyf
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 15:35 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| |
You have now been hit by two of the people that have become major resources for
me over the course of my role here. Along with a couple of other amazing AFOLs
(h/t Rylie and Dan), their work on colors and getting this information compiled
occurred over much more than the four years you put in and has been corroborated
by a lot of official data straight from the mothership. I am happy to know their
work still stands the test, but I am also happy to know that you are happy.
|
We probably all started like NoGravitasHere. Noticing a problem and trying to
figure it out.
I have no doubt that NoGravitasHere wil be a better expert on Cool Silver than
I am soon. Once everything is identified properly, he has a much better set of
data than I have.
I hope NoGravitasHere and here4bricks614 can compare notes. That could help to
sort out things here, when the time comes to start that project.
| | And this is why I said that I was going to have to ask you for a lot of proof
of your findings in my last message. People here that have been in the hobby
for a long time know things that the general LEGO fan community doesn't.
We know when colors were used, what parts were manufactured when, when colors
were reformulated, what materials are used for most parts, etc., etc., because
a lot of detailed work has been done and confirmed by official LEGO data sources
and is not just speculation. Once again, the problem we have is getting a chance
to get all of this information into BrickLink. But if you ask any of the people
communicating with you here, they will hopefully agree that we have made some
significant progress on things over the last 3-4 years and I will do all that
I can to continue that work.
|
Absolutely! A HUGE amount of progress has been made.
| | Stick around. There is a lot to learn about this toy that we all are passionate
about! 
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 14:55 | | Subject: | Re: Unknown yellow bird part | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| In Catalog Identification, Northwinds writes:
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 14:39 | | Subject: | Re: How do I get my double paid VAT back?? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
| In Help, 1001bricks writes:
| | | | That only moves the problem… and the buyer doesn’t have their LEGO!
|
Frankly, need of LEGO shouldn't make you to accept to pay twice the taxes.
Apart if he didn't know he already paid (or he had to pay again, which I
doubt), then it's a wrong decision, IMO. How can you complain about something
you agreed to?
|
It is how this system was designed. Buyer pays twice and gets a refund from the
marketplace.
Only problem is that BrickLink has not implemented this yet...
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 08:19 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | P.S. There is no current plan to separate BrickLink Pearl Dark Gray into its
two unique colors, but it is something that may be considered in the future.
|
I hope so, because some parts were made in both colors. For example:
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 07:56 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, NoGravitasHere writes:
| | I meant 2007, but that's moot. You're right, goddamn you. This changes
everything.
|
It changes the names/color numbers. Probably not the groupings you made.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 07:47 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, NoGravitasHere writes:
| | Oooooh that's good data, where'd you get the official name from?
If that's accurate, then I've absolutely got some names mixed up. However,
that doesn't change the fact the the silvers from 2001 and 2007 do not match,
and to a degree that isn't just colour variation. That would mean we're
looking at either a significant, and unrecorded, reformulation of 131 into its
2006-2010 version, or still a whole a new silver. The problem remains.
|
Directly from LEGO customer service.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 07:46 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| The 150 parts NoGravitasHere identified and the 144 here4bricks614 identified
could be a pretty good match also. I suspect both are 296 Cool Silver.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 07:41 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | The thing you are calling 150 looks to be 296. The thing you are calling 296
is another variation of either 131 or 296. 296 was only used in early 2006 with
few exceptions.
|
I agree. I think you are confusing 150 and 296.
Confirmed 296, in rubbery material (polypropylene ?) because of the LEGO part
name "Wing W. Holes Ø 4,84 296/191"
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 07:04 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | Maybe this helps (I don't have the best set up for taking pictures :c)
|
Can you upload a higher quality version of this image?
(Rotate 90 degrees if rescaling of the image by BrickLink causes the low resolution,
rotated text is less of a problem than low resolution)
|
Sure, I just uploaded it in full resolution to Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/168347127@N06/53506310595/
|
Also useful:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/17768155498/
where we could add these notes (9 years later):
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 06:44 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | Maybe this helps (I don't have the best set up for taking pictures :c)
|
Can you upload a higher quality version of this image?
(Rotate 90 degrees if rescaling of the image by BrickLink causes the low resolution,
rotated text is less of a problem than low resolution)
|
Sure, I just uploaded it in full resolution to Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/168347127@N06/53506310595/
|
Thanks
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2024 06:28 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle is handled incredibly poorly | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | Maybe this helps (I don't have the best set up for taking pictures :c)
|
Can you upload a higher quality version of this image?
(Rotate 90 degrees if rescaling of the image by BrickLink causes the low resolution,
rotated text is less of a problem than low resolution)
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 28, 2024 17:03 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| That would be illegal here.
You, as seller and sender, are resposible for the delivery of the goods that
your customer ordered and paid for.
You are the person who contracted the postal service for that delivery. You are
responsible to resolve matters if the postal service cannot fullfill their contract
with you, causing you not to fullfill your contract with your buyer. As sender,
you have to refund your buyer and can then try to claim reimbursement from the
postal service.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 28, 2024 10:35 | | Subject: | Re: Add figure for 71411 mighty Bowser | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
| In Catalog Requests, Give.Me.A.Brick writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Saitobricks.ca writes:
| | Please add Bowser figure for set
And please remove parts for bowser from the set inventory.
|
What about these?
|
they are getting exactly the same treatment as Bowser.
The entire set is in the catalog, there is not part or subset for the figures.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 28, 2024 06:09 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | | | The design change was intentional, LEGO introduced new part numbers for it.
|
The same is true for other parts where there is an obvious difference and LEGO
have used a new number, yet they are merged.
|
True.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 21:42 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 80 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I just made some photos of the hinges with 7 and 9 teeth. They show why they
click into the same positions.
I read a comment here on the forum that the 9 teeth hinge might be able to carry
more weight, as it makes a better connection.
The design change was intentional, LEGO introduced new part numbers for it.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 18:14 | | Subject: | Re: Various Threads | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
| |
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 18:07 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
|
I would be very interested to know if there are definitions of high/medium/low
level variations that are currently being used for the BrickLink catalog, as
guidance for accepting or rejecting new variants and for the proposed mergers.
Getting more clarity on those definitions and resulting policy could remove some
confusion (although there will always some discussion about how the classify
some parts).
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 17:58 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | My initial post on this subject earlier this month has garnered almost 700 replies,
|
I would like an official response on why the website is choosing not to implement
the suggestion many have recommended for years. Many of us would like
to see a redesign of basic catalog functionality which allows everyone to be
served equally.
Selectable variants is a long-term solution which demonstrates there is a vision
for the future of this website and a care for all members. What are the difficulties
with implementing a visionary solution? Not enough money? Not enough staff?
Not enough vision at the top?
Looking forward to a quality response to this question which many of us have
asked.
|
We do have replatforming coming up soon and a better handling of variants is
definitely on the list of things we are looking to improve when it comes to core
catalog functionality.
Selectable variants (we have called this the Checkbox Solution internally) would
help in cases with medium level variants. We could implement this in both the
marketplace and the inventory system, at the very least.
However, there are many variants the catalog forces on the marketplace as a general
standard, and these are not optional. In the same way, there are many variants
that are so insignificant that BrickLink would never allow them to be distinguished
with a checkbox system.
So the answer is yes, in part.
But the variants we are merging as part of this current project would fall into
the last category. Maybe the "middle ground" could be expanded to include
them at some point, but from where I'm sitting now, I don't see that
happening.
|
Good to hear that there are some ideas on how to better deal with variants.
From my point of view, the more details the catalog can provide about historically
correct inventories the better. I do however also recognise that there needs
to be a balance. I also think that the catalog will never be perfect for everyone.
For that, the mentioned difference between high/medium/low level variants is
interesting.
I assume that variants with functional differences are high level.
Personally, I think that every time LEGO introduces a new part number for a part
that should at least be medium level variants. Those are significant for
historic reasons.
Probably part versions that have a clear visual difference (but not functional)
when using them in building should be medium level also. Those are significant
for MOC builders.
Low level would be differences in mould details, that do not lead to visual
or functional differences.
Several of the variants that are now proposed for merger would fit the high level
(32064c, on hold) or medium level (7 or 9 teeth hinges, chair with/without sprue
mark, ...). With this proposed merger, we would lose information on these high/medium
level variants.
As I read the comments, the proposed merger of parts that would conform to my
definition of high and medium level variants gets a lot of resistance, and parts
that are more low level get less.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 15:36 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| It is the same as the vertical ridges inside Duplo bricks. In this photo, you
can see how they match the position and size of the studs.
Because of their size, the Duplo bricks always have "thin" walls and
vertical ridges.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 12:03 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| |
Ah, alright! That makes sense. That still would mean they are the same as the
"thin" wall opaque bricks, and so to be consistent, the opaque ones should
be sorted as such too...
|
The visual difference is important for some builders, so separating them could
be a choice.
For consistency we could separate the thick and thin walled bricks, but the difference
only noticable when building using the transparent bricks. Separating them for
all colours might be to much of a burden for sellers while also most buyers would
not care.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 07:12 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | And we’ve never been able to settle on
a reason for these peculiar markings. Some have suggested they are simply the
same patterns one would find on solid color bricks of the same era. Whatever
they are, though, this type of variant is typically found only in sellers’ notes
and not reflected in standalone BrickLink entries.
In fact, it is a peculiar thing that these entries were only for Transparent
versions of the part. We don’t really do that on BrickLink. Normally, all the
colors are placed under one entry.
|
The "frosted" appearance is caused by increased roughness of the inner
surface of the brick. During moulding, bricks can stick on the wrong half of
the mould when the mould opens and cause problems with the release of those parts.
The rough surface adds friction and helps to prevent that.
In some cases, moulds started out with a smooth surface and the inner surface
was modified during maintenance later. In other cases, moulds were made with
that rough inner surface from the start.
As far as I know, the frosting was included in the catalog only because of the
visual appearance. Smooth transparent bricks often look better.
Images:
- Two versions of 3001 brick with mould number 214-2
- Inner surface of a broken "brittle blue" brick.
Both these bricks would look "frosted" if they were transparent.
|
Aren't the "frosted lines" like on 3004f2 just internal support structures,
though?
|
Not exactly.
When you connect two bricks, the inner wall of a brick connects to the side of
a stud. When a brick clamps the studs on the brick beneath by connecting in at
least 3 places, a stable connection is formed.
The brick walls can be either "thick" or "thin".
Thick walls fill the entire distance between the side of a stud and the outside
surface of the brick.
I believe thin walls were introduced to save materials. (Possibly in response
to the oil crisis in the 1970s). The vertical ridges inside the walls make that
wall "locally thick" again, so the wall connects to the studs in those
places.
Because the thinner walls are more flexible (reducing clutch strength), these
thin walled bricks are usually designed with cross supports (increasing clutch
strength by reducing the amount of deformation of the wall). I believe the main
reason that the vertical ridges run the entire height from the top of the brick
to the bottom, is because of the moulding process. If this was not a continuous
shape, the brick would get stuck on the mould during production. They do add
some stiffness (internal support) though, helping to maintain clutch strength.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2024 05:59 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | And we’ve never been able to settle on
a reason for these peculiar markings. Some have suggested they are simply the
same patterns one would find on solid color bricks of the same era. Whatever
they are, though, this type of variant is typically found only in sellers’ notes
and not reflected in standalone BrickLink entries.
In fact, it is a peculiar thing that these entries were only for Transparent
versions of the part. We don’t really do that on BrickLink. Normally, all the
colors are placed under one entry.
|
The "frosted" appearance is caused by increased roughness of the inner
surface of the brick. During moulding, bricks can stick on the wrong half of
the mould when the mould opens and cause problems with the release of those parts.
The rough surface adds friction and helps to prevent that.
In some cases, moulds started out with a smooth surface and the inner surface
was modified during maintenance later. In other cases, moulds were made with
that rough inner surface from the start.
As far as I know, the frosting was included in the catalog only because of the
visual appearance. Smooth transparent bricks often look better.
Images:
- Two versions of 3001 brick with mould number 214-2
- Inner surface of a broken "brittle blue" brick.
Both these bricks would look "frosted" if they were transparent.
|
Thank you for contributing these details to the conversation! Do we have your
permission to use the images in a Help article?
|
Yes.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2024 17:41 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 121 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | And we’ve never been able to settle on
a reason for these peculiar markings. Some have suggested they are simply the
same patterns one would find on solid color bricks of the same era. Whatever
they are, though, this type of variant is typically found only in sellers’ notes
and not reflected in standalone BrickLink entries.
In fact, it is a peculiar thing that these entries were only for Transparent
versions of the part. We don’t really do that on BrickLink. Normally, all the
colors are placed under one entry.
|
The "frosted" appearance is caused by increased roughness of the inner
surface of the brick. During moulding, bricks can stick on the wrong half of
the mould when the mould opens and cause problems with the release of those parts.
The rough surface adds friction and helps to prevent that.
In some cases, moulds started out with a smooth surface and the inner surface
was modified during maintenance later. In other cases, moulds were made with
that rough inner surface from the start.
As far as I know, the frosting was included in the catalog only because of the
visual appearance. Smooth transparent bricks often look better.
Images:
- Two versions of 3001 brick with mould number 214-2
- Inner surface of a broken "brittle blue" brick.
Both these bricks would look "frosted" if they were transparent.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2024 17:06 | | Subject: | Re: Variant Merges and BL Moving Backwards | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Announce | |
| In Announce, Tracyd writes:
| | In Announce, tec writes:
| | we need more variants really, like other platforms do! but any discussion is
useless, they already decided it in 2023 without asking.
|
They don't have to ask. It is their website, not mine, not yours, not ours.
They own it, lock, stock and both smoking barrels. How many other websites listen
to their users as Bricklink does? They do listen a lot, but in the end, they
can make unilateral decisions regardless of your or anyone else's opinions
or desires. In life you either evolve and adapt or you go extinct. If you choose
to go elsewhere because of this then I wish you luck, if not you will learn to
adapt to the new normal. That goes for everyone. I think quite a few of the
older sellers will continue to keep variants separate and sell them correctly,
others won't care, right now I guarantee there are plenty who don't care
and it won't affect them at all.
This is being done to streamline the listing and buying process for the vast
majority of the people who use this site. You don't hear them because they
aren't in the forums, they just want to buy and/or sell, they aren't
interested in anything else.
I wish I could remember the user who I used to talk to here who would get upset
because Daniel wasn't interested in listing the older non-brick items in
the catalog. This is not a Lego history site; it is a marketplace.
|
As a collector of part variations, I think that most (but not all) of the variants
that are now being merged are not more significant than variants that are currently
not separated in the catalog (such as CA/ABS, different IP protection marks,
hollow pins, split tubes and several more)
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 16:19 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | That said... I tried to collect a sample of all [unprinted]... just because I am interested
in variations like these.
|
I still have not found this sub-version of 3626b
[p=3626b]
After the merger, that will become even more challenging...
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 16:07 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, 1001bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, stevetq2 writes:
| | Many people want to know the difference between tiles with grooves as the ones
without...
|
Fun stats, mine are literally: zero asked for any without groove, while
40K buyers bought the ones with groove.
|
I have bought both. Without groove to restore old sets, with grooves to build
and play. They are both useful.
| | I'm sorry to tell you, LEGO is mainly used to play, create and build.
|
True. It is a toy.
| | Collectors, specialists of the brand history and sellers/buyers for old Sets
(on eBay?) are really really a tiny tiny minority.
|
And they use BrickLink because it has the best catalog.
Ever wonder why the pre-1965-ish sets don't sell well here? It is simply
because the catalog is not accurate and detailed enough to help collectors find
what they are looking for.
| | It's not vain or stupid, at the very contrary.
It's just 99.99% of people wish the current version.
While this, some sellers like one I talked to, in France, has 1000x+ 3001old
New (brand New) which are just NOT (neither old or New). Same for 3068a New which
aren't.
That also is much a problem.
|
Some sellers don't know their product, provide poor service or just make
a simple human mistake. It happens.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 15:49 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, leggodtshop writes:
| | Will there be a list of all changes/mergers available?
Or is it already available?
In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
|
Somewhere hidden in this thread
|
More complete list: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2629 (linked in
the mail too ).
That’s the list of all the entries that will disappear (and the texts you can
add to your comments, manually, one by one…).
|
Thanks, I had missed that.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 15:46 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, leggodtshop writes:
| | Will there be a list of all changes/mergers available?
Or is it already available?
In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
|
Somewhere hidden in this thread
|
Most of these changes make some kind of sense.
The transparent frosted parts use the same moulds as bricks with solid colors.
The frost is simply hidden on the inside wall in those cases. Even as a 2x4 collector,
I don't think the BrickLink catalog needs to have these versions.
The smooth slopes are a variation and I think that there are some intermediate
versions also.
The parts with connections between the studs are also a design improvement/variation.
Interesting, but I can understand the merger.
The chair with sprue mark is a similar part design variation.
Torsos with ribs... Double feelings about this. It feels important to distinguish
between original versions and re-issues even when there is no difference in print.
Parts with inside support.
32064c currently on hold (I think it should remain separate)
10247 looks like an insignificant variation,
46212 probably also...
The x-shaped axle holes can also be seen as a variation. There are a few versions
of the axle holes and we don't separate all of them. Different shapes can
be used for decorative purposes though.
The merger of the hinges with either 7 or 9 teeth just feels wrong. Those
have different part numbers and are not difficult to identify. Here we lose catalog
detail and accuracy.
Duplo brick with bottom tube also interesting but ultimately insignificant.
Parts with blocked or vented studs. Functionally the same, so probably it's
justified to merge them...
Renaming/renumbering those last few parts makes things easier. I don't have
an issue with that as long as the older versions still exist in the catalog.
----
That said... I tried to collect a sample of all... just because I am interested
in variations like these.
In many cases, when LEGO introduces a new version of a part with a new part number,
I think that BrickLink is to quick in merging them into existing variations.
I'd keep them separate until I am certain that they can be merged, instead
of trying to split them later.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 15:44 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, stevetq2 writes:
| | So somebody has decided that having a distinction between tiles with and without
grooves is UNIMPORTANT, well I can tell you IT IS, if I send one without a groove
to the majority of people I WILL GET A COMPLAINT. Nobody in the BrickLink community
(and those are the important people) has asked for this to be done.
|
The parts will be renamed, but the version without groove will remain in the
catalog.
The initial message about what changes were intended was just poor, so everyone
got a lot more confused than would have been needed.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 15:21 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 81 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, leggodtshop writes:
| | Will there be a list of all changes/mergers available?
Or is it already available?
In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
|
Somewhere hidden in this thread
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2024 14:40 | | Subject: | Re: Someone stepped on a LEGO, ouch. | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
| In Off Topic, Saitobricks.ca writes:
| | (Personally I don’t find stepping on LEGO painful)
|
That is what I thought...
until my feet got oversensitive due to nerve damage...
suddenly ALL THE MEMES WERE TRUE!!!!
(Feeling a lot better now, but still don't want to try that again. It really
hurt!)
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 12:30 | | Subject: | Re: Is it fake? | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, a101cn writes:
| | Hi all!
I have a part 60583b and i cant find it marked with LEGO. Is it fake?
Normaly you will find the marked LEGO in the hollow stud, but it’s missing. I
have severel parts 60583b from diffrent batches and the all missing the LEGO
marked.
Best regards
Haakan
|
The injection point is inside that stud.
I would expect them to look like " L dot O "
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 15, 2024 15:55 | | Subject: | Re: Trying to post a subject line that is longer than 45 characters - I can! I have the power! | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
| In Off Topic, PlanetEarthToys writes:
| |
so by your standards, all Gummy posts are ok if someone calls them 'having
fun' & they are posted in the off-topic section of the Forum...
ok... gotchha
|
No. Absolutely not. There are a few important differences here:
1) Posting off-topic on the forum is not the same as spamming
2) Nobody is trying to sell me something I am not interested in
3) The people posting are BrickLink members who are actually contributing to
the community here
So yeah, I can tolerate that and might even smile when I see some of the responses.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 15, 2024 13:50 | | Subject: | Re: Trying to post a subject line that is longer than 45 characters - I can! I have the power! | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
| In Off Topic, PlanetEarthToys writes:
| | In Off Topic, peregrinator writes:
this thead is no different than the gummy posts.. both are done to annoy & clog
up the Forum.
this is intentional spamming.
|
No, this is people having fun in the Off Topic section of the forum.
If it annoys you, adjust your settings here: https://www.bricklink.com/messageFilter.asp?viewFrom=P
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 14, 2024 13:52 | | Subject: | Re: Forum Resident Stats | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | General | |
| In General, PlanetEarthToys writes:
| | In General, WoutR writes:
| | In General, PlanetEarthToys writes:
| | not wanting to say some members live in the forum... but here is the top 10 running
total stats
#1 slot goes to Nubs
8990 post in 36 months
Nubs average: 1 post every 3 hours for 36 months straight
10 members encompass 22.8% of the conversations
|
It is very easy to become part of the top 10..
Just joining in a few discussions every day, that is very normal behavior.
|
the difference between the #1 slot & the #10 slot is a 3x multiple, that is out
of 15,700+ members. 10 members = 22.8% of the posts
i think the keyword in your response is "everyday", & you just reinforced
the notion of members being 'Forum Residents'...
so .. thanks
|
I think that it mainly means that the forum is not very active.
You can spend a few minutes a day here and be in that list. Doesn't need
to be every day either.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 14, 2024 08:14 | | Subject: | Re: Forum Resident Stats | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | General | |
| In General, PlanetEarthToys writes:
| | not wanting to say some members live in the forum... but here is the top 10 running
total stats
#1 slot goes to Nubs
8990 post in 36 months
Nubs average: 1 post every 3 hours for 36 months straight
10 members encompass 22.8% of the conversations
|
It is very easy to become part of the top 10..
Just joining in a few discussions every day, that is very normal behavior.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jan 6, 2024 19:26 | | Subject: | Re: Have to pay VAT twice. What can be done? | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
| In Taxes, 1001bricks writes:
| | The Seller should have done a correct work. But then it's Indonesia... maybe
they don't know, or don't understand our laws/language, or they can't
or even don't want to, who knows?
BrickLink (as what I read recently) may have to refund you the VAT paid twice.
But frankly, I've doubts.
|
I contacted the Dutch postal service about this on an earlier order.
When the parcel arrives without that digital code, they have to charge the import
taxes and will not refund, they refer to Bricklink for that.
Bricklink should have a procedure where they refund taxes when the buyer can
prove they paid twice. Bricklink in their turn, then does not have to pay those
taxes on that order either.
Sounded like to much of an headache to me, so I didn't even try to ask Bricklink
the refund. It has made several orders more expensive though...
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Dec 17, 2023 08:21 | | Subject: | Re: Is this a LEGO brick? | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
| In Problem, Saitolegos writes:
| | randyf, thanks for the catalog listing, but I looked at the top of it and the
logo on the studs is different.
|
That logo was used on LEGO bricks made in license by Samsonite.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2023 14:25 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 1306-1 | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, WoutR writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, TakeAbricK writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 4 Part 27bc01 White Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip with Trans-Clear Glass (match ID 6)
* Delete 1 Part crssprt01pb02 White Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'VW GARAGE' Large Pattern (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Delete 1 Part crssprt01pb05 White Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'VW SERVICE' Pattern (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Delete 1 Part crssprt01pb76 White Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'GARAGE VW' Pattern (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Change 4 Part White 27ac01 Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass {Alternate to Regular} {match ID 6 to 0}
* Change 1 Part White crssprt01pb33 Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'VW LEGO' Pattern {match ID 1 to 0}
Comments from Submitter:
No hollow stud windows in 1957 and no German, English Bricks in a set that is only released in Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
Please adjust match-id's
|
I agree that the solid stud version should be the main part, but I don't
know if the hollow stud version should be deleted. Would the hollow stud versions
not have been used as alternate in later (1958) issues of this set?
|
Ignore that, that later version is
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2023 14:24 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 1307-1 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, WoutR writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, TakeAbricK writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part 27bc01 White Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip with Trans-Clear Glass (match ID 3)
* Delete 2 Part 33bc01 White Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Right (match ID 2)
* Change 2 Part White 27ac01 Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass {Alternate to Regular} {match ID 3 to 0}
* Change 2 Part White 33ac01 Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Right with Solid Studs and Fixed Glass {Alternate to Regular} {match ID 2 to 0}
Comments from Submitter:
No windows / doors with hollow stud in 1957.
|
I agree that the solid stud version should be the main part, but I don't
know if the hollwo stud version should be deleted. Would the hollow stud versions
not have been used as alternate in later (1958) issues of this set?
|
Ignore that, that later version is
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2023 14:04 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 1306-1 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, TakeAbricK writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 4 Part 27bc01 White Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip with Trans-Clear Glass (match ID 6)
* Delete 1 Part crssprt01pb02 White Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'VW GARAGE' Large Pattern (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Delete 1 Part crssprt01pb05 White Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'VW SERVICE' Pattern (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Delete 1 Part crssprt01pb76 White Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'GARAGE VW' Pattern (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Change 4 Part White 27ac01 Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass {Alternate to Regular} {match ID 6 to 0}
* Change 1 Part White crssprt01pb33 Brick 1 x 8 without Bottom Tubes with Cross Side Supports with Blue 'VW LEGO' Pattern {match ID 1 to 0}
Comments from Submitter:
No hollow stud windows in 1957 and no German, English Bricks in a set that is only released in Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
Please adjust match-id's
|
I agree that the solid stud version should be the main part, but I don't
know if the hollow stud version should be deleted. Would the hollow stud versions
not have been used as alternate in later (1958) issues of this set?
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2023 14:00 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 1307-1 | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, TakeAbricK writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part 27bc01 White Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip with Trans-Clear Glass (match ID 3)
* Delete 2 Part 33bc01 White Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Right (match ID 2)
* Change 2 Part White 27ac01 Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass {Alternate to Regular} {match ID 3 to 0}
* Change 2 Part White 33ac01 Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Right with Solid Studs and Fixed Glass {Alternate to Regular} {match ID 2 to 0}
Comments from Submitter:
No windows / doors with hollow stud in 1957.
|
I agree that the solid stud version should be the main part, but I don't
know if the hollwo stud version should be deleted. Would the hollow stud versions
not have been used as alternate in later (1958) issues of this set?
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2023 12:09 | | Subject: | Re: Old window versions not listed | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
| In Catalog Requests, TakeAbricK writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | Long ledge, hollow stud, without glass
I am not sure yet where the version without glass fits in. All of these might
simply be incomplete parts, missing their glass. I have seen no proof that any
of these was actually used in sets.
|
Reading the Catalog notes, these could be part of Samsonite assemblies. Apparently,
they came with unglued windows.
Then there would be a
- glued version (production in Europe)
- unglued version (production in North America), as an assembly containing:
---- version without window (production in North America)
---- unassembled window (production in North America)
|
Thanks Wouter, but I already researched everything and I am working on it.
Diana
|
I expected so,
but I thought I'd better share waht I found in case I noticed variants that
you did not know yet.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2023 08:50 | | Subject: | Re: Old window versions not listed | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
| In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | Long ledge, hollow stud, without glass
I am not sure yet where the version without glass fits in. All of these might
simply be incomplete parts, missing their glass. I have seen no proof that any
of these was actually used in sets.
|
Reading the Catalog notes, these could be part of Samsonite assemblies. Apparently,
they came with unglued windows.
Then there would be a
- glued version (production in Europe)
- unglued version (production in North America), as an assembly containing:
---- version without window (production in North America)
---- unassembled window (production in North America)
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2023 08:43 | | Subject: | Re: Old window versions not listed | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
| In Catalog Requests, TakeAbricK writes:
| | I am working on this already, including more differences. Because we probably
have to split windows and doors from this period, it will take some time though.
Thanks in advance for your patience.
Diana
|
I have been looking into these variations some time ago, but sadly I have not
yet been able to complete it. Hopefully this helps you with your puzzle:
The BrickLink catalog basically distinguishes 5 versions:
1956 - long ledge, solid stud, without glass
1956 - long ledge, solid stud, with glass
1958 - long ledge, hollow stud, with glass
1958?? - long ledge, hollow stud, without glass (were these intentional, or are
they incomplete?)
1970 - short ledge, hollow stud, with glass
Many of these do currently not include the full range of doors and windows that
were available in the series. I have included the macro tags below, so the missing
parts will show up without image. Also, several of these include minor variations.
I strongly believe that all parts in these series were released in the same year,
but the catalog inventories are currently a bit confusing. I think the earliest
moulds for these doors and windows made all parts at once. Later (when production
volume increased), each part got their own mould.
Long ledge, solid stud, without glass
* | | 27a Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, no Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 29a Window 1 x 1 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Stud, no Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 31a Window 1 x 3 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, no Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 32a Door 1 x 2 x 3 Left with Solid Studs, without Glass
Parts: Door |
* | | 33a Door 1 x 2 x 3 Right with Solid Studs, without Glass
Parts: Door |
* | | 39a Window 1 x 1 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Stud, no Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 453a Window 1 x 4 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, no Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 645a Window 1 x 6 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, no Glass
Parts: Window |
| | 646a Window 1 x 6 x 2 with Shutters with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, no Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 7026a Window 1 x 2 x 2 with Extended Lip and Hole in Top and Solid Studs, no Glass
Parts: Window |
Date: 1956
Material: CA
Studs: Solid
Glass: Without
Lip/ledge: Extended
Prongs (between studs): Without groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): Pins for glass on the inside are unbroken,
no glue remains.
Remarks: Sold in Denmark only
Date: 1956/7?
Material: CA
Studs: Solid
Glass: Is there a version without glass that was moulded without pins (pins
removed?)
Lip/ledge: Extended
Prongs (between studs): Without groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): Pins removed from mould
Remarks: Was this version sold in Denmark, or only made to be released with
glass?
Long ledge, solid stud, with glass
* | | 27ac01 Window 1 x 2 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 29ac01 Window 1 x 1 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Stud, with Fixed Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 31ac01 Window 1 x 3 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 32ac01 Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Left with Solid Studs and Fixed Glass
Parts: Door |
* | | 33ac01 Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Right with Solid Studs and Fixed Glass
Parts: Door |
* | | 39ac01 Window 1 x 1 x 1 with Extended Lip and Solid Stud, with Fixed Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 453ac01 Window 1 x 4 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 645ac01 Window 1 x 6 x 2 with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 646ac01 Window 1 x 6 x 2 with Shutters with Extended Lip and Solid Studs, with Fixed Glass
Parts: Window |
Date: 1956
Material: CA
Studs: Solid
Glass: With
Lip/ledge: Extended
Prongs (between studs): Without groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): Glass inserted in hole in top, placed
on pins and glued on underside.
Remarks: Were the earliest windows already glued, or initially only mounted
on the pins?
Date: 1956/7?
Material: CA
Studs: Solid
Glass: Glass inserted in hole in top, glued on underside. Pins removed from mould,
but glass still with holes.
Lip/ledge: Extended
Prongs (between studs): Without groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): Pins removed from mould
Long ledge, hollow stud, with glass
[p=604bc01]
Date: 1958
Material: CA
Studs: Hollow
Glass: Glass inserted in hole in top, glued on underside.
Lip/ledge: Extended
Prongs (between studs): Without groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): Pins removed from mould
Date: 196x (1963)
Material: ABS
Studs: Hollow
Glass: Glass inserted in hole in top, glued on underside.
Lip/ledge: Extended
Prongs (between studs): Without groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): No pins inside the window, hole in
top remains.
Date: 196x
Material: ABS
Studs: Hollow
Glass: Glass inserted in hole in top, glued on underside.
Lip/ledge: Extended
Prongs (between studs): With groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): No pins inside the window, hole in
top remains.
Long ledge, hollow stud, without glass
I am not sure yet where the version without glass fits in. All of these might
simply be incomplete parts, missing their glass. I have seen no proof that any
of these was actually used in sets.
* | | 31b Window 1 x 3 x 2 with Extended Lip and Hollow Studs
Parts: Window |
* | | 32b Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Left, without Glass
Parts: Door |
* | | 33b Door 1 x 2 x 3 Hinge on Right, without Glass
Parts: Door
Marked for Deletion |
[p=604b]
[p=645b]
* | | 646b Window 1 x 6 x 2 with Shutters with Extended Lip, no Glass
Parts: Window |
* | | 7026b Window 1 x 2 x 2 with Extended Lip and Hole in Top, no Glass
Parts: Window |
Short ledge, hollow stud, with glass
[p=31c01]
[p=32c01]
[p=33c01]
[p=453c01]
[p=645c01]
[p=646c01]
[p=7026c01]
Date: 197x
Material: ABS
Studs: Hollow
Glass: Glass inserted in hole in top, glued on underside.
Lip/ledge: Short
Prongs (between studs): With groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): No pins inside the window, hole in
top remains.
Date: 197x
Material: ABS
Studs: Hollow
Glass: Glass glued
Lip/ledge: Short
Prongs (between studs): With groove
Pins and hole in top (to mount the glass): No pins inside the window, no hole
in top.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 20, 2023 17:13 | | Subject: | Re: Request to add Warm Yellowish Orange | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
| In Catalog Requests, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, crimson30 writes:
| | FYI, there have been hundreds of q elements in TLG 225 coming out of Legoland
Florida.
|
Coming as in it is happening now?
|
In the past 15 years or so. Very few at first, more of them in the past few years.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 19, 2023 11:04 | | Subject: | Re: Color Of The Milky White (Allianz Arena) | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, LocuraHobbies writes:
| | Any way we can get a deferent color name for the Allianz 3001 bricks? like...
"Satin Milky White" or something? Makes it difficult trying to order
Milky White bricks when you arent sure what you are going to get.
|
If it doesn't come in the little box, then I'd assume it's not one
of the originals.
David
|
I believe these bricks were distibuted in 3 ways:
- the gift box, probably for people invited to an event only,
- a zip-lock bag with the same certificate,
- loose bricks
A LOT of the milky white bricks on BrickLink are the Allianz Arena glitter version.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 19, 2023 11:01 | | Subject: | Re: Request to add Warm Yellowish Orange | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
| In Colors, cosmicray writes:
| | (...) Was this an intentional color or was this something that just happened.
|
This was an intentional colour. LEGO's official colour number and name are
225 Warm Yellowish Orange.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 15, 2023 02:32 | | Subject: | Re: Silver chrome 3001 variants | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
| In Colors, rylie_aitch writes:
| | In Colors, robertomcevoya writes:
| | Hi
I recently sold a silver chrome 3001 which the buyer is not happy with saying
its an anniversary edition. Does anyone know of any specific variants?
I naively thought a silver chrome 3001 was a silver chrome 3001.
Cheers
Rob
|
They were all released in 1998–1999, so there shouldn't be much of a difference
if any among different chrome silver bricks apart from condition:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=3001&colorID=22&in=A
The Chrome Gold one can look a lot more silverish than the chrome gold keychains,
I wonder if there's some confusion with that... otherwise I've no idea
what the buyer could mean.
|
These are my chrome silver "anniversary" bricks. Mould number 06 inside.
I don't understand which other chrome silver 3001 your buyer could have wanted.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 25, 2023 17:28 | | Subject: | Re: Second hand or new Legi | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | General | |
| In General, Erikschoneveld writes:
| | Hi there,
A question. I store my Lego in boxes sometimes not in bags. Sometimes I have
to search for items, so I touch my new bricks more then ones. Now I have a client
who is not happy with the Lego I have sent him. He says it is not new, he can
see fingerprints and scratches. All my Lego is new, never used, but touched sometimes
a lot of times. Almost every piece comes from a a set. Is this Lego second hand,
or new? What would you say to your client?
Greetings Erik
|
New is not the same as mint. There will even be some small scratches as bricks
tumble against each other during production, packing and shipping. A seller can
take some precautions to reduce the amount of scratches, but avoiding them completely
is impossible.
As buyer, I don't expect sellers to wear gloves so they don't leave fingerprints.
I most cases, a part must be pretty new and shiny before the fingerprints even
show up. Then they can be simply wiped off also.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 25, 2023 17:25 | | Subject: | Re: seller has got my buying privileges revoked | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Buying | |
| In Buying, jonsogel2fun writes:
| | In Buying, electricbaer writes:
| | In Buying, jonsogel2fun writes:
FOUND OUT BUYING PRIVLAGES WERE REVOKE DUE TO MY USER NAME HAVING THE WORD LEGO
IN IT SO THERE BACK UP AND RUNNING. THIS SELLERS COMMITS ARE SLANDEROUS
Given the title of this post and the truth to the matter revealed here - pot
calling the kettle black it seems...
|
|
| | DOES NOT MATTER WHAT YOU THINK WRONG IS WRONG AND THIS SELLER SENT BAD PARTS.
|
This discussion would become a LOT easier to read if you make sure you start
typing your response on an empty line, without any text in front of it.
Maybe you think that the seller send you bad parts, but taking photos of even
worse parts and complaining about those does not help your case.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2023 15:28 | | Subject: | Re: $50,000+ Of Fake Deadpools Sold On BrickLink | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | General | |
| In General, MadiganStation writes:
| | I know this is a VERY uncomfortable conversation to have for a lot of sellers
on BrickLink, but it has to be addressed!
The vast majority of Deadpool (SH032) figures sold through BrickLink over the
last 5+ years have been Fake/Reprinted. If you bought any in that time frame,
look at these pictures to determine if your figure is genuine.
The figures seem to be printed on "official" Lego parts, though the parts
may not have been produced legitimately, as was addressed by Russel recently
on the topic of questionable torsos flooding the market.
Also, there is precedent for VERY high quality fake prints hitting the market,
which was also addressed by Russel when the email came out about the fake Luke
and C3PO figures.
If the forum downgrades the image quality when they are uploaded, just message
me and I can send higher quality images directly.
Nate
|
As far as I know, LEGO has confirmed that that torso variation is real. There
was a message about that on this forum earlier.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2023 08:54 | | Subject: | Re: Vented stud slat(?) broken, junk? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
| In Selling, Ngtevan writes:
| | In Selling, Nubs_Select writes:
| | In Selling, Ngtevan writes:
| | Hey everyone, so I did some searching and can’t find anything on this so I figured
I’d ask. If it’s a noob question and I should know better to flame me too hard.
I’ve got a few used vented stud pieces that have broken slats(?). I’m not sure
if that’s what they are called. I’m not sure if listing them as used would be
a no-no since that cross piece is broken so I’m checking in with people to get
some input.
|
No worries it’s always best to ask! To the best of my knowledge those are
made like that but if I’m wrong others will let you know but those should be
fine
|
I have these as well and they are intact so that’s why I’m unsure.
|
Both versions are common. It is just a variation that occurs during production
of these parts.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 18, 2023 15:22 | | Subject: | Re: Do we need a note for this diffetence? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, 1977_mauro writes:
| | "Do we need a note for this diffetence?"
|
I always appreciate the notes and additional catalog images for variations like
these.
I also think those will help BrickLink buyers and sellers, because too many people
seem to claim a part is "fake" when the mould version is just a bit different
than what they are used to.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 18, 2023 05:52 | | Subject: | Re: mod head mssing print/ test print? Need help | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| |
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 18, 2023 05:47 | | Subject: | Re: mod head mssing print/ test print? Need help | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, matthi writes:
| | In Help, Nubs_Select writes:
| | most likely is from them as lego will often do sub-layers of print so the colour
is more visible so even if the "top" colour isn't white it still
can be a layer
|
I know they put each color print in steps but it doesn't make much sense
to me to make a layer that on the end product isn't visible, not sure how
under a tan print a white print can make the tan print "more" tan. But
these days much weird things going on in the world we don't understand :'
But thx for the assist tho
|
The pink colour would otherwise shine through the tan, so the resulting effect
would be a pink-tan colour mix. This effect is reduced by the white layer underneath.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 14, 2023 13:30 | | Subject: | Re: Misprint? | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | General | |
| In General, dlaw1_lego writes:
| | It's stamped without ink which is why you can see print outline on the torso
happens when the printed runs out of silver ink!
The silver is the first layer of print so its pretty cool that the remaining
print was completed and quality control didn't notice
I added a pic of the different print stages from my collection.
list it for $75ono
|
The chances of finding BOTH the torso and legs without print must be astronomically
low. They are not printed as an assembled figure.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 11, 2023 09:18 | | Subject: | Please add alternative item number | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | | For: | Catalog Associate | | Status: | Completed | |
|
Please add alternative item number 3274pb0107. My head has number 3274 inside.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2023 17:13 | | Subject: | Re: Got fake, but realised too late | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, KAZINOFIVE writes:
| | In Help, MadiganStation writes:
| | Correct. First photo is 100% legit, 2nd photo is questionable.
| | As I can see Dradpool form the sealed set is on the first photo and possible
rreprint in the second, am I right?
My Deadpool has same thin black lines on the pockets on the legs just like on
the second photo.
Thank you for the information, it is very important for me.
|
|
I have found used 6866 set in good condition in my country. Already paid for
it and waiting for delivery. Those Deadpool's prints looks like yours from
the first photo. I will upload it and my fake when I get the package.
By the way the seller answered me that Deadpool is legit. But I'm sure this
one is not from the set
|
I still think your "fake" is not fake, but genuine.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2023 17:12 | | Subject: | Re: technic parts. fake or not | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, galeatter writes:
| | I have noticed some changes in technic liftarm pieces. There is still a Lego
part number on the items but the gaps between the pin holes are triangular instead
of dog bone shaped. anyone noticing this? are these Lego?
|
Mould variations are common, so they probably are genuine LEGO.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 4, 2023 19:01 | | Subject: | Re: Got fake, but realised too late | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, peregrinator writes:
| | In Help, Nubs_Select writes:
| | likely the parts are from when the lego factories in China from way back when
(like 10 years ago) were making figure parts as lego outsourced some figure production
there and much of it seemed to be made at a lower quality compared to other lego.
for example many magnet sets were made there so the torso
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1418691
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1418692
looked and felt quite different compared to normal lego parts from other factories
|
Remember the multi-colored Friends heads?
|
No. Which heads were those?
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 2, 2023 17:08 | | Subject: | Re: Problematic Super-Heroes Minifigure ID's | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, stickbug29 writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, stickbug29 writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, stickbug29 writes:
| | Hello Bricklink!
I have a small rant with solution. On Lego.com and every database, "Marvel
Super-heroes" and "DC Superheroes" are listed as two completely different
themes. I can search the database by Marvel and see all the Marvel sets, or
search the database by DC sets. This makes sense, Marvel and DC are two different
companies and brands.
The problem, however, arises with the minifigure item ID's. Despite being
two different companies, both minifigures receive the same item code: 'sh'
(sh001, sh002, etc.). This makes browsing the database much more difficult.
If someone like myself has little interest in DC but a large interest in Marvel,
there is no easy way to look at only Marvel entries in a store. I can search
by each individual subcategory, but there are so many of those that it becomes
quite a hassle. It also complicates collection sites, as you cannot search for
missing Marvel figures. If I try to look up the minifigures that I am missing,
I can only search "Superheroes", which will show me that I am missing
hundreds of DC figures that I have no intention of collecting.
I propose a recoding of minifigures, and already typed out a document with the
new ID's for both Marvel and DC (screencap included in post). If the sets
are two separate themes, it only makes sense that the minifigures should be separate
themes as well. Thank you for your time in reading, and for all the work that
goes into maintaining this database!
|
I am very doubtful that this will happen, but it would be more likely to happen
if they could keep the same numbers and then count up from there. I mean sh031
becoming mvl031 and leaving the gaps. That way stores and things that may have
labeled things will just having to remember that sh may have changed to dc or
mvl.
|
I'm doubtful too, but if there was ever a time to change it it would be now.
The more years go by, the more difficult things will be to update. Makes a
number of things difficult having the minifigures listed under one theme while
the sets are listed under two. Just changing the letters and leaving the numbers
as you suggested would leave big gaps but would also work.
I dream of a slow transition where the minifigures have two alternate ID's
for a while, as some bricks have, and we slowly wean off the old shared ID's.
|
You have no idea how much work this entire reorganization would take. I can tell
you that it is an absolutely monumental task for a small admin team that can
barely keep up with the new stuff the LEGO Group releases every month. In other
words, the chances of this happening are very small.
You can search by cobranded items though.
For Marvel minifigures (choose "Minifigures" in the dropdown):
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?pg=1&promoCatID=283&v=1
For DC minifigures (choose "Minifigures" in the dropdown):
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?pg=1&promoCatID=247&v=1
Cheers,
Randy
|
I have some idea, I work as a database administrator for a living. It would
be a huge undertaking and I would volunteer services if I could, I've already
got the time to make a massive rebranding spreadsheet just for my own use. I've
looked at the cobranding, the only issue is that it does not work in store searches
and does not transfer to other database websites. I agree that the chances are
small, but they grow smaller with each passing year as more and more Marvel/DC
minifigures get merged under one roof.
|
Can you not use that cobranding list to create a wanted list, and use that when
browsing stores?
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2023 16:39 | | Subject: | Re: Promotional brick red 2x4 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| In Catalog Identification, donja_nl writes:
That odd zip-lock bag is the original packaging. I have seen more.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 30, 2023 07:23 | | Subject: | Re: Brick 2 x 4 hollow studs - pat. pending | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
| In Catalog Identification, Stuart9 writes:
I agree.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 15, 2023 05:50 | | Subject: | Re: Part 58176 please add note to catalog entry | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | Do we need a better photo?
|
Yes, please.
|
This is the best I can do right now.
Element 6448948, design 4278, black.
I assume it should be a new part, because we can use the hollow pin to build
the world's smallest rocket
|
We will not be creating a new part unless the part is specifically used in an
official set in that manner.
|
I have also uploaded the image to be used as an alternative image now. That at
least preserves the mould variation information.
If we group with the existing entry, the alternative part number needs to be
added and the catalog note should be expanded.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 13, 2023 09:11 | | Subject: | Re: Why is there noone to talk to? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, Kaje007 writes:
| | Why is there not someone one can contact to complain about vendors not leaving
feedback? They expect it of purchasers! I also have one vendor who hasn't
even changed the detail for our exchange from "paid"! I want to get these
moved off, so can someone just speak to me?
|
Don't worry about it. Remember you bought LEGO, not feedback.
Your feedback score as a buyer is high enough. If the LEGO arrived as expected,
there is not really problem.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 13, 2023 09:01 | | Subject: | Re: Part 58176 please add note to catalog entry | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | Do we need a better photo?
|
Yes, please.
|
This is the best I can do right now.
Element 6448948, design 4278, black.
I assume it should be a new part, because we can use the hollow pin to build
the world's smallest rocket
|
If we create a new part, maybe
should become 4278pb01
[p=4278pb01,108]
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 13, 2023 08:53 | | Subject: | Re: Part 58176 please add note to catalog entry | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | Do we need a better photo?
|
Yes, please.
|
This is the best I can do right now.
Element 6448948, design 4278, black.
I assume it should be a new part, because we can use the hollow pin to build
the world's smallest rocket
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 7, 2023 16:20 | | Subject: | Re: Rating Services | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, yorbrick writes:
| | In Help, CTKLJ95 writes:
| | In Help, yorbrick writes:
| | In Help, CTKLJ95 writes:
| | Hi,
I'm looking at getting some of my old Star Wars lego minifigures rated and
I was wondering if anyone knew any good and reputable rating services? I'm
based in the UK.
Thanks
|
Why do you want them rated? Different companies will do different things, such
as encasing them in perspex so they cannot be removed, for different prices.
What service you pick depends on why you want the rating.
|
Thanks for getting back.
I have an old cloud city Boba Fest mini figure with printing on the arms and
legs from when I was young and I'm aware that it's worth a bit of money.
I figured that it would be a good indication of value to get it rated. I wanted
to protect it and just see if the figure was in good shape (for a collector).
I'm working out what the best thing is to do is with it and figured getting
it rated would be a good starting point.
|
It costs something like £35 to get a figure graded. Whether getting it graded
adds that much to the price is debatable. Especially if it is a used figure,
a lower grading might actually lower the value.
|
In addition, how many buyers are looking for an encased minifigure?
It can't be easily displayed with their other, not-encased, figures.
Encasing might reduce the value, because there might be fewer interested buyers.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 7, 2023 16:09 | | Subject: | Re: View Active Color Palette by Year | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, ha2772a writes:
| | It would be awesome to filter the color palette by year to see what colors were
active. The introduced and retired data is already available on most colors in
the color guide, and it would be a cool way to browse the history of lego parts.
Would also really help in trying to collect particular eras of lego.
|
Because of the way our catalog deals with alternative parts and sets that were
sold for a long time, the dates shown are not always accurate.
See https://flic.kr/p/q5ie2w
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 4, 2023 04:57 | | Subject: | Re: New mold for 88489 | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | The B's are common in parts made in China.
There is also a J now.
|
And don't forget the X.
|
I have not seen any X yet.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2023 16:28 | | Subject: | Re: New mold for 88489 | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, normann1974 writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, normann1974 writes:
| | Part has a new mold 3091 sold on pick-a-brick. The differences are
minor (new version on the right):
Inside octagonal hole is more clearly defined
The edge of the outside hole seems to be slightly thicker
The new mold is slightly texturized while the old mold is blank
The top is ugly
In fact, the new mold looks like a fake brick. There, I said it.
Please add this new mold or tell me to create a new part.
/Jan
|
What are the mold numbers inside the two parts shown? (Not the design numbers,
but the actual mold numbers.) These look like the kinds of differences that are
seen in molds that are used in China versus molds that are used elsewhere.
Thanks,
Randy
|
88489 01-B02
3091 04-B01
These tiny numbers are very hard for me to read, even through a magnifying glass.
Maybe the B's are 8's.
/Jan
|
The B's are common in parts made in China.
There is also a J now.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Sep 1, 2023 17:58 | | Subject: | Re: Part 58176 please add note to catalog entry | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | Just received element 6448948, design 4278.
It has a hollow pin. Again, no part number on the part itself.
|
|
Wonderful! The wait is over!
Now we can finally move on from this one.
Thanks a bunch, Wouter.
|
Do we need a better photo?
The USB microscope does not take nice 3D-images, but I can take my camera
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 31, 2023 18:24 | | Subject: | Re: Part 58176 please add note to catalog entry | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
| | Just received element 6448948, design 4278.
It has a hollow pin. Again, no part number on the part itself.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 31, 2023 18:16 | | Subject: | Re: Part 58176 please add note to catalog entry | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Just received element 6448948, design 4278.
It has a hollow pin. Again, no part number on the part itself.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 29, 2023 14:28 | | Subject: | Re: Please separate 99206 and 4304 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Thanks!
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 29, 2023 10:22 | | Subject: | Re: Please separate 99206 and 4304 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, WoutR writes:
Fascinating! I love that website soooo much.
~Jen
|
Yes, they are awesome when they discuss part design.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 29, 2023 04:01 | | Subject: | Please separate 99206 and 4304 | | Viewed: | 105 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Please separate part 99206 and. 4304.
Earlier this year, part 4304 was introduced. In our catalog it is seen aa an
altenative for 99206.
I think that New Elementary does a good job at describing why it is intentionally
functionally different.
https://www.newelementary.com/2023/08/lego-brickheadz-sonic-review-sets-40627.html
Looking at the images in the article, the bottom side is different so the parts
can be distinguished easily.
Because the part was recently introduced, it should be easy to correct the set
inventories, and hopefully there will not be many problems with store inventories
for recently parted out sets.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 24, 2023 15:54 | | Subject: | Re: New mold for 88489 | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, normann1974 writes:
| | Part has a new mold 3091 sold on pick-a-brick. The differences are
minor (new version on the right):
Inside octagonal hole is more clearly defined
The edge of the outside hole seems to be slightly thicker
The new mold is slightly texturized while the old mold is blank
The top is ugly
In fact, the new mold looks like a fake brick. There, I said it.
Please add this new mold or tell me to create a new part.
/Jan
|
Does it have the same number inside?
If so, I think that a new catalog entry is not needed, but including the additional
images in our catalog will avoid confusion in the future.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 22, 2023 16:33 | | Subject: | Re: Part 58176 please add note to catalog entry | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, BUC writes:
| | part 58176 Bar with Light Cover (Bulb) / Bionicle Barraki Eye
PLEASE ADD NOTE TO CATALOG ENTRY:
Old and New variations are noticeable in trans- colors. Older has a hollow cap
and longer pin, newer has filled top cap
Trans- colors can vary from lighter to darker.
|
* | | 58176 Bar with Light Bulb Cover (Bionicle Barraki Eye)
Parts: Bar |
I see the item numbers 58176, 28624, and 29380. Can we identify them and replace
"old style" and "new style" in the image with their item numbers,
and add it as an additional image? Using those numbers would be more informative
than "old" and "new".
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 19, 2023 07:37 | | Subject: | Re: Difference between 98138pb262 and 98138pb381 | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Searching, M_R writes:
| | In Searching, Tundi4lego writes:
| | What is the difference between:
- 98138pb262 - Tile, Round 1 x 1 with Orange Slice Pattern
- 98138pb381 - Tile, Round 1 x 1 with Orange Fruit Slice Pattern
They look quite similar to me. Can someone explain the difference or make a picture
from both parts side by side?
|
[P=98138pb381,110]
|
They do have different LEGO elementnumbers and design numbers.
ELEMENT 6361440
DESIGN 80060
FLAT TILE 1X1, ROUND, NO. 177
2022
ELEMENT 6435103
DESIGN 103352
FLAT TILE 1X1, ROUND, NO. 259
2023
One print smaller, and the other covering the entire tile?
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 16, 2023 08:32 | | Subject: | Re: color of Part ID: 58247 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Help | |
| In Help, Nubs_Select writes:
| | probably from the stolen goods from the one factory in Asia that were made by
employees without permission and then sold like crazy a short while back same
place as all the transparent figures that have been on the market for a while
now
|
I think it was initially a bit from China, and then a LOT from Mexico.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 16, 2023 04:00 | | Subject: | Re: Need 6 Million Pounds Per Month | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Buying | |
| In Buying, Stuart9 writes:
| | 😂
Best of luck.
In Buying, brentbust writes:
| | Hi! I need six million pounds of Lego sets per month. Can anyone help? Thanks!
|
|
Maybe you can list one set per month with a 6.000.000,00 GBP price?
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2023 16:50 | | Subject: | Re: ⚠️⚠️EVERYTHING ON SALE!!!⚠️⚠️ | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Sales | |
| In Sales, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Sales, WoutR writes:
| | […]
Do you think you will get a better response if you post so many times?
|
Considering the 7 messages were posted in the same minute and in the same topic,
it’s more probable it was a glitch (maybe “helped” by the poster going back or
reloading the page after posting).
Benefit of the doubt and all that
|
There was one in a second topic.
Thanks for deleting the extra messages.
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2023 16:28 | | Subject: | Re: ⚠️⚠️EVERYTHING ON SALE!!!⚠️⚠️ | | Viewed: | 86 times | | Topic: | Sales | |
| In Sales, pindow2 writes:
| | Everything is on sale for the day and I have the best cheapest prices you will
find check it out!!
|
Do you think you will get a better response if you post so many times?
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)