Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Bobflip  | | Posted: | Apr 26, 2024 14:19 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 76908-1 | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part 15068pb538L White Slope, Curved 2 x 2 x 2/3 with Headlight and Blinker Light, Orange Rectangle with Black Outline on Light Bluish Gray Background Pattern Model Left Side (Sticker) - Set 76908 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 15068pb538R White Slope, Curved 2 x 2 x 2/3 with Headlight and Blinker Light, Orange Rectangle with Black Outline on Light Bluish Gray Background Pattern Model Right Side (Sticker) - Set 76908 (Counterpart)
|
 |
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Feb 28, 2024 17:58 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 42066-1 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part 32316pb080 Medium Blue Technic, Liftarm Thick 1 x 5 with Black Airplane, Arrows and 'VTOL' Pattern (Sticker) - Set 42066 (Counterpart)
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 18:47 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 1001bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, 1001bricks writes:
| | | | | | Of course, depending on how exactly it's implemented - I'm think/hope
you wont feel ANY (bad) change in your sales.
|
Again, I'm not highly specialized. I have a huge inventory.
|
Having "everything" is a specialization in itself.
It's called the "long tail" in Marketing, IIRC.
|
The long tail in marketing is catering to many niche markets at the same time.
That is far different from having "everything". 
In other words, what I think you meant to say is that specializing in many niche
markets is itself a specialized niche.
|
It's more a business Term (sorry), cf. Wikipedia:
This is used to describe the retailing strategy of selling many unique items
with relatively small quantities sold of each (the long tail) — usually in addition
to selling fewer popular items in large quantities (the head).
I meant, on the 15,000 opened shop, about 1% or less have more than 20,000 lots.
Maximum I've seen is over 90,000 lots!
But if you remove the duplicate lots that's maybe only the half of them which
have really 20,000 different ones.
One German shop has 292 Lots of Technic Pin 2780 - a buyer's nightmare
So, those with a huge number of lots represent maybe 0.5% or 0.33% - a third
of a percent!
It's a (very tiny) niche
A tiny niche of huge inventories.
|
I dislike and back out as soon as I see a store doing that... Not spending time
going through dozens of identical lots, haha!
Would love something to be done about it
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2024 18:04 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, WOLKsite writes:
| | While I am one who would advocate for variants, the line has to be drawn somewhere
reasonable as they get out of hand quickly otherwise. However, for many of these
there's a lot of inventory data that has been gathered for years now that
would be lost... However, this is also a marketplace, not a data center.
That aside, looking at the specific cases, I hold no qualms with most of these
except:
1. "with groove". At least in my opinion, that one is a substantial functional
difference. The groove is a very noticeable visual difference, and obviously
it also serves a function. I don't forsee many cases where one would be ordering
and be happy with either or, nor any cases where this would make cataloging difficult
given how obvious the difference is. As a buyer, I would value this distinction.
2. Reissue prints, as they are new, separate prints typically separated by several
decades. Separating the originals from the copies I believe is important.
I would also propose a merge of:
As much as I would like to investigate the switch to 89652, I believe the difference
is ultimately meaningless for most buyers.
|
Agree all round, but especially those two Bionicle pieces - I've been selling
completed sets on eBay for years... I store those as the same part, and not once
has anyone mentioned a set came with the wrong ones!
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2023 15:38 | | Subject: | Re: Request - Separate parts 48183 and 91094 | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Bobflip writes:
| | I've just received in the post a replacement "Wedge, Plate 3 x 4 with
Stud Notches" that I was missing from set 7959.
Unfortunately it’s the wrong type, and will fall off the build at step 7. It’s
not the seller’s fault, as 91094 appears as an alternate item number to 48183,
and 48183 is the one listed in the set inventory.
As the two parts aren't 100% interchangeable, please can the two be separated?
|
Because the build uses many other parts to hold those two parts in place, probably
not, but it can be discussed by the admin team. My guess is that it will not
get split.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thanks for the reply. Yeah, it gets held in afterwards, but I’m completing the
set to sell and wouldn’t want to pass it on to a customer with an incorrect part
that makes the build harder.
If not changed, is there be any way to ensure I get the right one delivered outside
of messaging potential sellers first?
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2023 10:42 | | Subject: | Request - Separate parts 48183 and 91094 | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | | For: | Catalog Associate | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I've just received in the post a replacement "Wedge, Plate 3 x 4 with
Stud Notches" that I was missing from set 7959.
Unfortunately it’s the wrong type, and will fall off the build at step 7. It’s
not the seller’s fault, as 91094 appears as an alternate item number to 48183,
and 48183 is the one listed in the set inventory.
As the two parts aren't 100% interchangeable, please can the two be separated?
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Nov 10, 2022 07:23 | | Subject: | Re: Bionicle Flat Silver Parts Changed? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
|
| Hmmm, it’s definitely good news that this is being sorted, similar problems came
up on Rebrickable too!
Though as I primarily deal with Bionicle, merging these two colours this will
cause problems until Cool Silver is implemented, as it’ll be pot luck whether
the part I buy will be either PLG or CS. It’ll also come up for a while afterwards
(some sellers may not update their inventory, so CS will be fine but PLG will
be a gradually diminishing ratio of PLG and CS).
In Catalog Identification, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, leovaliant writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, here4bricks614 writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, SandKing writes:
| | Many Bionicle Parts that were Flat silver have been defaulted to Pearl light
Grey? its a big mistake to change that in my opinion...
|
Nope! That was done to fix Flat Silver and Pearl Light Gray. Bricklink had been
wrong for over 20 years in labeling Pearl Light Gray parts as Flat Silver. All
is well and accurate. 
|
It's not accurate, but a step in the right direction. We're dealing
with three specific Lego colors not two. Hopefully they'll add a color to
represent 296 Cool Silver to the catalog.
Lego color 131 Silver
Lego color 296 Cool Silver
Lego Color 315 Silver Metallic
James
|
After the dust settles from the recent changes to these colors (let's say
at least 6 months to a year), we will definitely be looking at adding Cool Silver
back into the mix.
This was a long-term project that needed steps to be taken in a certain order,
and we are now much more than halfway through that project. It involved a lot
of image cleanup, PCC cleanup, inventory cleanup, etc., but we really needed
to get Flat Silver shifted completely to the modern color that is still being
used (315 Silver Metallic), and that has been completed to at least 95%. The
Cool Silver addition would be the last step needed to get a 1-to-1 color correlation
with all of the silver colors.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Aug 30, 2022 03:46 | | Subject: | Re: Change 970c00pb0218 name to match related | | Viewed: | 12 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| Thanks, and my mistake! Had looked around for a submit change option but now
I'm less tired it's *really* visible, hahah
In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Bobflip writes:
| | This part's name uses 'wrappings' instead of 'wrapping' used
by the three similar parts from the same wave (970c00pb0217, 970c00pb0219, 970c00pb0205),
meaning it's tricky to find in the search if you don't know! Though not
sure if it should be plural or not...
Also the part uses the format
'Hips and Legs with Red Sash and Knee Wrappings, Gold Buckles Pattern'
while the others use this format:
'Hips and Legs with Blue Sash, Silver Buckles and Blue Knee Wrapping Pattern'
|
The names have all been updated:
Next time, please use the standard form to submit name change requests:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogReq.asp?itemType=P
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Aug 29, 2022 14:01 | | Subject: | Change 970c00pb0218 name to match related | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | | For: | Catalog Associate | | Status: | Completed | |
|
| This part's name uses 'wrappings' instead of 'wrapping' used
by the three similar parts from the same wave (970c00pb0217, 970c00pb0219, 970c00pb0205),
meaning it's tricky to find in the search if you don't know! Though not
sure if it should be plural or not...
Also the part uses the format
'Hips and Legs with Red Sash and Knee Wrappings, Gold Buckles Pattern'
while the others use this format:
'Hips and Legs with Blue Sash, Silver Buckles and Blue Knee Wrapping Pattern'
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 26, 2022 17:54 | | Subject: | Re: Auto-select not prioritising cheaper item | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Buying | |
|
| Hmm, what bits have you read that hints at those extra parameters? The auto select
button brings up this message before you start the search:
“BrickLink will select a recommended combination of stores that can complete
your Wanted List at an optimal total price including shipping cost.”
It says “optimal total price”, there’s nothing to say that it’s taking anything
like seller rating into account, (or why it isn’t giving the optimal total price!)
Postage isn’t a consideration for me as there’s often enough other parts I need
anyway.
Though as expected it hides any stores you’ve added to your dislike list.
| | So you need to test different options (like finding the rare or more expensive
parts first, prioritizing your WLs…) to see if you can give a little help to
the algorithm.
|
Ohh, I’m well into that already - I have multiple wanted lists, and this set
of instructions is in my ‘PRIORITY’ list. (I figure focussing on the rare parts
will mean the common parts will naturally come along for the ride). Heck, I even
knocked it down to searching for just this one part to track down the issue.
Before auto-select came to Bricklink, I was using that Python script from someone
on BrickSet’s forum, which only went by price, but indeed did take a long while
with some searches.
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 26, 2022 16:14 | | Subject: | Re: Auto-select not prioritising cheaper item | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Buying | |
|
| In Buying, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Buying, jennnifer writes:
| | […]
Does the old Wanted List give the same skewed results?
Jen
|
To be clear: OP is talking about Auto-select: the automatic selection of stores
from the list of stores that can cater to your wants.
And there’s no Auto-select on the “classic” WL.
Then, AFAICT, the stores are listed in the same order on the Buy Page and the
“classic” By Shop (for the searches you can do on both, as Buy Page can do more
complex searches  ).
|
That's it
As it stands, I can't tell if the auto-select is actually selecting the best
prices for me. I could tell in this instance as it's a rare item with a wide
range of prices across the three listed, but this could have been giving me higher
priced items for years! :-/
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 26, 2022 12:23 | | Subject: | Auto-select not prioritising cheaper item | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Buying | |
|
| There's a set of instructions on my wanted list, which is listed by three
sellers in the UK. They all show up in the filters, I have all the exclusions
unchecked and leave the minimum buy caveat enabled, but auto-select is selecting
the most expensive seller. The only difference I can tell is that the two cheaper
stores don't have a postage estimation, and the third store does. If I add
the most expensive one to the cart, auto-select now ignores it and it goes to
the cheapest one on the list.
So it seems the lack of a postage price is negatively affecting the results,
is there a way to disable it from being taken into account?
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | Jul 28, 2021 21:09 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 3559-1 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 2 Part x151 Black Rubber Band Extra Small (Square Cross Section) (Extra)
* Change {4 to 2} Part Black x151 Rubber Band Extra Small (Square Cross Section)
Comments from Submitter:
two of the bands are spares and not required for the build
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 21, 2021 09:38 | | Subject: | Re: Am I being too picky with used parts? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
|
| Tbf, yeah - if it still 'works' then it'll go in a crate for someone
else - kids don't mind so much about damage and teethmarks cause they're
usually the ones that put them there, haha!
But I'm not paying for parts to go in the 'damaged' box, that's
ridiculous.
In Problem Order, rab1234 writes:
| | In Problem Order, axaday writes:
| | In Problem Order, Bobflip writes:
| | When ordering, I'm aware that used parts can have a bit of wear and tear,
but recently received this part part in an order.
I felt that these marks were too much, but the seller initially only wanted to
refund if I returned it and paid for postage, saying the part wasn't broken.
As a seller of complete sets, I wouldn't dream of allowing a part like this
through - certainly not without mentioning it - but am I being too picky? I kind
of want to leave negative feedback (they also seemed a bit annoyed that I felt
it was damaged more than should be, though did refund in the end) but want to
get some other opinions.
|
In my opinion, used parts should be similar to new parts unless the description
says they are not. If it has a bunch of nicks, you should not put that in the
description. You should put that in the trash.
|
Some people like discounted used parts. If there's a demand for something
well played with, I'll sell it to you. I recently had someone buy a completely
destroyed star wars trooper torso that would normally go for a few dollars for
25 cents. Maybe they wanted an injured trooper in their MOC... who knows?
That being said, it's financially not worth the time to try to sell common
parts that are badly damaged so they do go in the garbage.
-Blockbusting Bricks
|
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 21, 2021 09:16 | | Subject: | Re: Am I being too picky with used parts? | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
|
| Yeah, it should be somewhat close. I definitely give some leeway, but not a whole
bunch of nicks like that!
In Problem Order, axaday writes:
| | In Problem Order, Bobflip writes:
| | When ordering, I'm aware that used parts can have a bit of wear and tear,
but recently received this part part in an order.
I felt that these marks were too much, but the seller initially only wanted to
refund if I returned it and paid for postage, saying the part wasn't broken.
As a seller of complete sets, I wouldn't dream of allowing a part like this
through - certainly not without mentioning it - but am I being too picky? I kind
of want to leave negative feedback (they also seemed a bit annoyed that I felt
it was damaged more than should be, though did refund in the end) but want to
get some other opinions.
|
In my opinion, used parts should be similar to new parts unless the description
says they are not. If it has a bunch of nicks, you should not put that in the
description. You should put that in the trash.
|
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 21, 2021 07:34 | | Subject: | Re: Am I being too picky with used parts? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
|
| Thanks!
But yeah, it can be tricky. There's an established grading system for records
on Discogs which works pretty well. Obvs some sellers shirk it a bit and list
things as Mint when they're more like VG, etc. But then I (and surely many
other sellers) err on the side of caution and if it's sitting between two
grades I'll go for the lower one and mention in the comments. I believe it's
better a customer is unexpectedly happier with their purchase than the alternative!
In Problem Order, MrPetovan writes:
| | I'm not sure there can be a universal level of wear and tear that you and
the seller could agree on, but for what it's worth, I agree with you, I would
refuse this part and I certainly wouldn't sell it in my store, either as
is or as part of a completed set.
In Problem Order, Bobflip writes:
| | When ordering, I'm aware that used parts can have a bit of wear and tear,
but recently received this part part in an order.
I felt that these marks were too much, but the seller initially only wanted to
refund if I returned it and paid for postage, saying the part wasn't broken.
As a seller of complete sets, I wouldn't dream of allowing a part like this
through - certainly not without mentioning it - but am I being too picky? I kind
of want to leave negative feedback (they also seemed a bit annoyed that I felt
it was damaged more than should be, though did refund in the end) but want to
get some other opinions.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 21, 2021 07:18 | | Subject: | Re: Am I being too picky with used parts? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
|
| You are correct, she did fully refund in the end, but she didn't agree with
my reasons for being unhappy with the part.
In Problem Order, Grego writes:
| | In Problem Order, MrPetovan writes:
| | They are conditioning the refund on the return of the part paid for by the buyer,
so I would definitely leave a negative feedback if the part price was too low
to justify filing an NSS alert.
|
He did say "the seller initially only wanted to refund if I returned it and paid
for postage ..." ...so it certainly sounds like they came to an agreement on
a refund without having to ship it back. The word initially in that sentence
leads me to believe this. I could be wrong
| |
In Problem Order, Grego writes:
| | In Problem Order, Bobflip writes:
| | When ordering, I'm aware that used parts can have a bit of wear and tear,
but recently received this part part in an order.
I felt that these marks were too much, but the seller initially only wanted to
refund if I returned it and paid for postage, saying the part wasn't broken.
As a seller of complete sets, I wouldn't dream of allowing a part like this
through - certainly not without mentioning it - but am I being too picky? I kind
of want to leave negative feedback (they also seemed a bit annoyed that I felt
it was damaged more than should be, though did refund in the end) but want to
get some other opinions.
|
If they ended up refunding then Negative is too harsh.
Would you expect to receive a Negative if you took some time to pay for an order
? In these days of almost everybody using instant checkout it is a moot point,
but in the past when buyers needed time and/or prodding to *finally* pay ...would
you think it OK to Neg them since it wasn't a perfect transaction?
And a lot also depend on the value of the damaged part. A $0.01 part damaged
or not I wouldn't stress about it. If it was a rare $10.00 part, then yeah
I would be chasing them to make it right ...but if they did refund I certainly
wouldn't turn around and slap them in the face by Negging them. ...just my
$0.02
|
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 21, 2021 07:15 | | Subject: | Re: Am I being too picky with used parts? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
|
| In Problem Order, firestar246 writes:
| | That kind of wear can be easier to miss. However, if I did catch it, I would
make a note in the listing. If I missed it and the buyer complained, I would
refund them for the piece.
So I'm on your side. If there wasn't any mention of the damage in the
description, the seller should do better than what they're already doing.
|
Yeah, it can be. The initial reply said "I'm sorry your not happy with the
piece you mentioned however it was listed as used. I didn't pick up that
there was lots of nicks on it as comparing with the stock image (and not knowing
the range) I thought this was relatively normal.
(although imo it should've been clear those dents were not normal!)
No mention of the nicks on the listing, and the price was even a little higher
than the average - 90p instead of 70p.
I wouldn't have bought if it had the note at any price!
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 21, 2021 07:09 | | Subject: | Re: Am I being too picky with used parts? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
|
| Ok, your example doesn't really have much equivalence with my experience.
Firstly, I wouldn't expect to receive a slow paying negative because I generally
don't take a few days to pay.
Secondly, it depends on the conversational interaction I had with the seller.
If the seller sent me a polite message asking when I could pay, and I told them
I wasn't late and they were being too impatient, then maybe yes - perhaps
I should receive a negative.
I also wouldn't suggest that I only pay what I want.
Transactions are often not perfect. Whenever there's been a damaged, incorrect
or missing part(s), I message the seller and it gets sorted. I still leave positive
feedback. Most of my feedback given is either 'Great!' (even if the transaction
required a follow up), and 'Perfect!' for when there's no error.
I don't penalise for a mistake. Mistakes happen, it's fine.
In this instance, the seller showed me a picture they'd taken of the part
which didn't show the damage as much because of the angle and on the least
damaged side (and I was very clear that I wasn't accusing them of doing it
deliberately!)
Their reply was
"My picture is held in a certain way to capture the part number and that is all
but it does clearly show no big chunks or loose pieces. It is a rubber edged
piece that has been played with and the marks reflect this. If I had thought
it was enough damage to be detrimental to the item then I would of certainly
put this in my item description - I do try to give an honest representation when
I believe there is excessive play-wear or alteration to the piece.
Clearly we are not going to agree with my terms as the item is not faulty and
you are returning by choice so on this occasion I will write the piece off and
refund it. You can choose to use it or place it in the bin."
Tbh I was pretty shocked at the way they handled it. It was a 90p part. Not expensive,
but not valueless either. Also, double the cost of postage, meaning half of the
refund would be taken by the price to send back.
Perhaps Neutral is the way to go instead though.
In Problem Order, Grego writes:
| | In Problem Order, Bobflip writes:
| | When ordering, I'm aware that used parts can have a bit of wear and tear,
but recently received this part part in an order.
I felt that these marks were too much, but the seller initially only wanted to
refund if I returned it and paid for postage, saying the part wasn't broken.
As a seller of complete sets, I wouldn't dream of allowing a part like this
through - certainly not without mentioning it - but am I being too picky? I kind
of want to leave negative feedback (they also seemed a bit annoyed that I felt
it was damaged more than should be, though did refund in the end) but want to
get some other opinions.
|
If they ended up refunding then Negative is too harsh.
Would you expect to receive a Negative if you took some time to pay for an order
? In these days of almost everybody using instant checkout it is a moot point,
but in the past when buyers needed time and/or prodding to *finally* pay ...would
you think it OK to Neg them since it wasn't a perfect transaction?
And a lot also depend on the value of the damaged part. A $0.01 part damaged
or not I wouldn't stress about it. If it was a rare $10.00 part, then yeah
I would be chasing them to make it right ...but if they did refund I certainly
wouldn't turn around and slap them in the face by Negging them. ...just my
$0.02
|
|
|
| Author: | Bobflip | | Posted: | May 21, 2021 06:45 | | Subject: | Re: Am I being too picky with used parts? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Problem Order | |
|
| It's this part: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=87806pb01#T=C
Scale is hard to see in the image without a reference but there's an axle
stalk and axle hole on the left of the part.
I've ordered a lot of these Bionicle parts over the years, the only time
they've looked like this they had teethmarks, and the sellers have refunded
every time.
In Problem Order, rab1234 writes:
| | Depends on what part that is. I can’t really tell. If you’re super zoomed in
on the tip of a sword or something that could have been missed. If it’s a super
old, rare part maybe that’s a typical condition. If it’s from within the past
5 years and common, that’s why probably unacceptable.
In Problem Order, Bobflip writes:
| | When ordering, I'm aware that used parts can have a bit of wear and tear,
but recently received this part part in an order.
I felt that these marks were too much, but the seller initially only wanted to
refund if I returned it and paid for postage, saying the part wasn't broken.
As a seller of complete sets, I wouldn't dream of allowing a part like this
through - certainly not without mentioning it - but am I being too picky? I kind
of want to leave negative feedback (they also seemed a bit annoyed that I felt
it was damaged more than should be, though did refund in the end) but want to
get some other opinions.
|
|
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
