Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Teup  | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2019 13:24 | | Subject: | Re: Why can't I enlarge pics anymore? | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, QA_Rachel writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | So you used to be able to click on the picture of a piece in the catalog, sort
of a quick view. You'd see the years it was made, any sets/minifigures the
piece was in, etc. You all know what I'm talking about. Well, a few days
ago I couldn't do it anymore. I've tried three different devices.
Why would they make such a horrible change for? I rely on that heavily when listing
minifigure parts to make sure I have the correct listing. This is going to make
this job twice as long now.
|
The zoom-in bug was fixed a few weeks ago but it seems that a recent site update
may have reverted the fix. I'll forward the information to someone on our
development team to take a look. I'll let you know once we've resolved
the issue.
Thank you!
|
|
|
 |
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jul 26, 2019 11:19 | | Subject: | Re: Either a bonafide brain-fart, or a seizure... | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, cycbuild writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, cycbuild writes:
| | Sylvain has spent a lot of time familiarizing himself with BrickLink, and is
a frequent contributor here. There's no need to be so relentlessly dismissive.
|
I agree. But in all fairness we can't ignore the question in the back of
our minds: When is this guy finally going to buy some more LEGO? 
|
|
My wallet has the reverse question
Though getting around 700€ of LEGO for around 15€ thanks to coupons and destocking
made us both quite happy a couple months ago 
|
Wow!  Then my question changes... Why is this guy not selling any LEGO?
|
What, with all the problems you sellers continuously whine about on the forum?
Besides, MY precious, MINE!
|
You're here discussing its problems out of your own free will, who's
silly now?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jul 26, 2019 10:08 | | Subject: | Re: Either a bonafide brain-fart, or a seizure... | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, cycbuild writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, cycbuild writes:
| | Sylvain has spent a lot of time familiarizing himself with BrickLink, and is
a frequent contributor here. There's no need to be so relentlessly dismissive.
|
I agree. But in all fairness we can't ignore the question in the back of
our minds: When is this guy finally going to buy some more LEGO?
|
|
My wallet has the reverse question
Though getting around 700€ of LEGO for around 15€ thanks to coupons and destocking
made us both quite happy a couple months ago
|
Wow! Then my question changes... Why is this guy not selling any LEGO?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jul 26, 2019 09:09 | | Subject: | Re: Either a bonafide brain-fart, or a seizure... | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, cycbuild writes:
| | Sylvain has spent a lot of time familiarizing himself with BrickLink, and is
a frequent contributor here. There's no need to be so relentlessly dismissive.
|
I agree. But in all fairness we can't ignore the question in the back of
our minds: When is this guy finally going to buy some more LEGO?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jul 25, 2019 18:36 | | Subject: | Re: Either a bonafide brain-fart, or a seizure... | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | Wayne's post and others like it, https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1150409
brings to mind an idea that briefly visited my headspace some time ago:
A type of reverse want list. That is, a way that sellers could peruse the current
want lists to specific buyer's needs, to then as a seller, proactively engage
members like Wayne with offers on items they have on their want list.
Kinda like amping-up the want list and selling process, by getting the sellers
more involved in increasing their sales by actually selling
It's just a rough draft of an idea. Limitations, restriction and other refinements
of the idea, expected.
But hey, BL shot-callers, it speaks directly to upping the sales numbers!
-Cory
|
As long as I could opt out of it, I would be all for it. I don't need sellers
spamming me with offers of things on my want list.
|
Of course, always the ability to opt-out, I agree.
Very good input, Randy
|
I think it would rather be on an opt in basis, because doing it by default would
be privacy violation. Reminds me of the trouble Amazon is in over looking into
its sellers sales data. Anyway, not a bad idea, when it's based on buyers
explicitly choosing to publish their wanted list.
Anyway, seller tools was cancelled, so there's not much chance for this
or any other smart suggestion over the past years to see the light of day. Better
to try it over at BO, they certainly like to discuss such ideas and look into
options of implementation.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jul 24, 2019 06:50 | | Subject: | Re: Plant 2417? | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Biscuit_head writes:
| | Sustainability: avoidance of the depletion of natural resources in order to maintain
an ecological balance.
They're using less crude oil by no longer using it to make plant peices.
They could possibly make all of the parts from plants instead of oil once they
find enough sugar cane farms that can keep up with the demand.
|
I guess producing crude oil generates a lot of emissions. But I wonder how much
less emissions their new production process really involves. I guess it kind
of stands or falls with that.
The end result is the same: polyethylene, which is basically a polluting substance.
But that's if you throw it away, of course, and thankfully LEGO is far from
single use. But the amount of parts LEGO pumps out of their machines per day
is staggering and it has to go somewhere eventually.
I would be more impressed if LEGO invested in degrading plastic. Not making parts
that degrade, I mean, but degrading the durable high quality parts with some
special process. I don't know about ABS but scientists already discovered
caterpillars that are able to digest polyethylene. If LEGO had some scheme you
could send in old and broken parts in exchange for some VIP points of whatever,
and they'd degrade or recycle it, then we'd be talking.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jul 23, 2019 17:47 | | Subject: | Re: Plant 2417? | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, TallyToyBricks writes:
| | How are the 2417 plant leaves different from the "plant based" 2417?
Thanks
|
It's the same plastic: Polyethylene. It's just made from fresh plants
rather than from dinosaurs (oil). But it isn't biodegradable in any way and
as far as I can see doesn't have much merit in terms of sustainability or
the environment.
"The new sustainable LEGO elements are made from polyethylene, which is a soft,
durable and flexible plastic, and while they are based on sugar-cane material,
they are technically identical to those produced using conventional plastic."
(and a bit of marketing blabla about sustainability)
https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/news-room/2018/march/pfp
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jun 11, 2019 19:25 | | Subject: | Re: Have all members pay BL $1 to buy and/or sell | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, skybound13 writes:
| |
As a recent new member, would I have paid $5.00 (or whatever) for a lifetime
BrickLink membership? The concept would have bothered me a little at first,
but yeah, I would have paid because I wanted buyer privileges. If that fee were
refunded back after so many orders, great, if not, not a big deal really.
Hmm, as I think more about it, such a payment would at least confirm that a buyer
is a real person and has a means by which to pay for orders online.
|
I think you may be pretty exceptional in this. While you are right it could be
a good decision to pay it, I think that the vast majority of people will not
realize it and be turned away by it. The current situation with so many consumers
unwilling to sign up for Bricklink is bad enough as it is.. even creating an
account and learning to navigate the site is already too much for alot of regular
consumers. Let's not make Bricklink's weak point even weaker. People
want to find their products and then buy them by clicking on them and entering
their address. Not go through some strange process of paying a fee for "being
a member" of something they don't (yet) care about..
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jun 11, 2019 19:19 | | Subject: | Re: Have all members pay BL $1 to buy and/or sell | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, firestar246 writes:
| | Don't agree with this at all. This will do nothing except make a lot of people
mad. Ever since I set up instant checkout about a year ago, I've had only
2 NPBs I can think of; one of them what an international buyer, that when I contact,
said that the shipping was too high so I cancelled. The other I never got a response.
So non-paying buyers aren't really a big deal if you have your store set
up correctly.
|
Agreed. It sounds absurdly consumer unfriendly and frankly hard to take seriously.
Imagine going to the supermarket and being charged $1 upon entry that will not
be refunded. In the EU, consumers can cancel or return purchases for full refunds.
It's considered a vital part of commerce. It would certainly scare off buyers
if they were forced to agree to this. Also, it would require new buyers to set
up a PayPal account and send money to it before placing their first order, which
they are just not going to do.
And yes, NPB's are just not really a big deal. All stores have to deal with
returns, it's part of business. Wanting to eliminate it 100% sounds like
lazy thinking from the seller's perspective. What's next? "Let's
trap all buyers inside of this mall so they don't go out without buying our
products"
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | May 13, 2019 14:45 | | Subject: | Re: Fair, safe and legal trading = BL principles | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | | |
- Full acceptance of cancellation without penalty and without reason required
|
This issue has been around for years (as has the thread!). There is no legal
right to cancellation without penalty. The buyer has a right to cancel,
but that does not mean that they can order, then cancel. Order, then cancel.
And so on without penalty. If a buyer becomes a problem for a store (whether
on BL or elsewhere), the store is legally entitled to stop selling to them. It
is the same with feedback - feedback does not affect the right to cancellation.
Just because a buyer has a right to cancel, it does not take away the right a
seller has to leave feedback or file a NPB. Of course, if a buyer is responsive
and asks for a cancellation, then many decent sellers will allow cancellations
and they may be more lenient than if the buyer just doesn't pay. But if a
buyer orders then cancels, orders then cancels, orders then cancels, it wouldn't
surprise me if the buyer gets blocked from buying from that store.
|
Well, yes, you are right. The seller has to cancel when requested but is entitled
to taking any measures they like. Especially since this Bricklink world is slightly
different from regular online retail as a lot of labour goes into getting an
order together.
Maybe the "without penalty" part wasn't phrased to well. At least I would
like the language to change. Because right now some sellers write things in their
terms like "I don't accept cancellation requests" or "orders are legally
binding contracts" or stuff like that. I think there's an important distinction
between discouraging it / considering it rude or something like that on the one
hand, and making buyers believe they have no actual choice but to pay up on the
other hand. The latter is basically misinformation about the rights that consumers
have. I think vulnerable/naive consumers should be protected by at least being
offered store terms that don't obscure their rights.
| |
| | And last but not least:
- Being responsible for lost shipments - meaning full refund or resend if anything
goes missing
|
And no problem there, and this holds if the buyer pays with paypal anyway. Although
if BL start asking for proof of delivery routinely, this may change smaller orders
as sellers start charging for this.
|
I think Bricklink could do two things in all this: 1. Enforcing by being involved
with the actual transactions, which might be complicated and costly (although
that is not an excuse it is not needed - perhaps it is) and/or 2. Simply moderate
store terms ahead of any transactions a store may be involved in. That's
not too much manual work, and we live in an age where computers can recognize
actual people in photographs, so I'm pretty sure some algorithms can be put
together to spot illegal store term claims. Even with a simple search operation
it's easy to spot them.
I think the main problem has to do with stores having illegal terms more than
store having legal terms but not keeping to them. Once the store terms are sound,
buyers will be able to call out and spot bad sellers pretty easily whenever they
cause trouble that's not in line with their own terms.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | May 13, 2019 04:52 | | Subject: | Re: Fair, safe and legal trading = BL principles | | Viewed: | 103 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | This suggestion is a summary of my recommendations, plus input from others' many
private messages I received on this over the last few days that I would like
Admin to consider in the site upgrade.
BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION:-
The BrickLink site has always required its' members, both buyers and sellers,
to trade legally and fairly. This is an essential aspect of the site's reputation
which makes it an attractive venue for buyers and sellers to trade here with
confidence and safety. The continued success of the site and enjoyment of it
experienced by its' members both depend heavilly on this being maintained.
The site continues to grow rapidly and welcomes many mew members, both buyers
and sellers every day. The financial success of the site has indeed secured its'
future beyond the loss of its' inspired founder. In the early days, this site
was a small community and the founder members and early adopters clearly did
a great job in building the principles of the site and policing it in a self-regulatory
way. For the most part this still works today but, as is demonstrated in the
many threads recently, some (buyers and sellers) are falling short of those principles
and indeed the law! This may be driven by the vast increase in membership which
makes this place less "personal" for some and combined with this; the laws and
regulations covering internet trading become more and more complex as governments
focus on the explosion of such trading and their need to close tax loopholes
and try to protect their consumers from substandard trading and scams.
I believe the site and ALL its' members (except for any that come here to do
unfair or illegal trading) will benefit from a more developed policy on safe
and legal trading for both their own protection and for the reputation of the
site in general which should help promote its' continued growth and success.
The following suggestions are simply my thougths on "how" some of the issues
might be addressed taking into account the direct input I have had from several
other members as well as many forum threads over the years but some recent ones
in particular:-
SUGGESTION #1 - EXPAND ON THIS IN TOS:-
TOS #11 REQUIRES the following.
"General Compliance with Laws:
You shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations
regarding your use of our service and your listing, purchase and sale of items."
Whilst this "covers" the site in demonstrating to authorities its' intent not
to encourage illegal behaviour, in practice it does little or nothing to:
1. Help inform its' members about what those laws might be and where to find
out about them. Many of the problems here (for buyers and sellers) are caused
by a complete lack of knowledge on the relevent laws.
2. Provides no penalty for breaking them which unfortunately is the reason why
some of the intentional law breakers are comming here.
I suggest changing the TOS #11 to spell out some of the specific laws that members
need to comply with, namely:
Customs - sellers are required to complete customs documents as required by law
honestly and accurately which, for the purpose of selling here, means declaring
the sales value of the goods as stated on the invoice and NOT misprepresenting
commercial sales as gifts.
Compliance with local advertising, selling and consumer protection laws - sellers
are required to comply with all relevent laws applicable to their selling activities.
Taxation - prior to listing any items for sale, sellers are advised to check
the rules in their country relating to any taxation they may need to charge their
customers (e.g. sales tax, VAT as applicable) and any requirements to declare
to their tax authorities any sales activity they conduct on this site.
SUGGESTION #2 - MAKE CUSTOMS FRAUD A REPORTABLE OFFENCE:-
Just as we can report listings that do not comply with the TOS, have a similar
funtion where:
1. Sellers can report (with evidence e.g. private message) to Admin that a buyer
requested a fraudulent customs declaration.
2. Buyers can report (with evidence e.g. private message or something in sellers'
terms) that a seller is offering a fraudulent customs declaration.
3. If a penalty is given, just like an NPB or NSS, a buyer or seller can have
feedback removed if it was given in relation to a transaction subject to the
penalty.
4. A buyer or seller has the right to cancel an order without penalty if subject
to a validated request for customs fraud.
Validated reports would result in a penalty ranging from 1st warning, through
temporary suspension of buying or selling rights, to membership termination for
repeat offenders.
SUGGESTION #3 - HAVE A HELP GUIDE ON SAFETY AND THE LAW
Which members have to declare they have read before they can buy or sell on the
site.
Unlike eBay which has legal resources in many of its' markets, BL has a central
Administration which cannot be expected to be expert on these matter in all geographies.
Perhaps we cound have voluntary "country Admins" for this purpose who would be
responsible for maintaining content with an opening statement relevent to their
market and a number of (official government only) links to any laws relating
to internet buying and selling in their country and the official taxation and
customs sites for their country. This must have a legal disclaimer saying these
Admins and the site are not giving legal advice and it is the ultimate responsibility
of the individual member to ensure he/she complies with all applicable laws.
SUGGESTION #4 - HAVE SOME FUNCTION TO PROMPT BUYERS WHEN BUYING INTERNATIONALLY
-
When you put something in a cart of a store not in your country, you are prompted
to look at a page that says something like:-
"You are about to purchase from a store located outside of your country, you
are advised to check if you may be liable for any customs charges relating to
importing this item into your country WHICH ARE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY before committing
to this purchase. Purchasing from overseas may also limit your rights as a buyer."
Obviously, this needs some more thought! I would not want this message for EVERY
item I put in a store cart, maybe just the 1st one for example. Maybe give an
option "do not show this message again" after a couple of hits on it within a
certain time period.
SUMMING IT UP FOR ME:-
None of this changes anything that is not the intent of the current TOS.
It is not to differentiate between "private" or "business" sellers for any purpose
of promoting one above the other, although for UK at least and many EU countries,
Gareth's suggestion on that would help keep sellers on the right side of the
law so I still support that too. There does seem to be some differences of definition
on that between countries which would need to be addressed further.
This is intended to HELP buyers and sellers comply with their laws and avoid
some of the risks many are taking now through ignorance of them. Being reported
for falling foul of a law or being caught not complying with it in most cases
carries penalties that most people would be pleased to avoid if given a chance
and informing them better simply helps to avoid that possibility 
I would be happy to do more work on this if required as I am passionate about
keeping this a safe, respected place with trading standards that we can ALL be
proud of and enjoy.
CONGRATUALTIONS YOU GOT TO THE END OF THIS POST -
Thank you very much for your time!
Robert
|
I very much agree with your introduction, and I can't say I disagree with
the rest, but to me the issue of customs delcarations seems really minor and
anecdotal - people are usually talking more about the issue in theory than about
actual occurences of it, and I wonder how much money in the history of Bricklink
has been actually saved by inaccurate forms.
For me much more immediate concerns that comes to mind when reading your introduction
are the following, because when I go over various random EU store's terms
MORE THAN HALF of the sample is not legally compliant with at least
one and usually multiple ones of the following rules:
- Full acceptance of cancellation without penalty and without reason required
- Accepting returns and refunding the buyer including the postage cost and the
postage cost of sending it back
- Not charging more for transaction fees than the transactions actually cost
And last but not least:
- Being responsible for lost shipments - meaning full refund or resend if anything
goes missing
These laws apply to all EU stores, regardless of the legal form of the store.
Here on Bricklink we sell in stores (selling through the forum is not even allowed).
Therefore, all of the above is applicable and in my opinion should be enforced
by Bricklink.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | May 2, 2019 04:40 | | Subject: | Re: Coral | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, qwertyboy writes:
| | FYI -
Just came across a bunch of these parts in color coral:
It looks like there are two distinct shades. One exactly matches coral color
for this part we have:
The other one is lighter - less saturated. TLG calls the new color "vibrant coral".
The lighter shade could almost be called "regular coral". Or of course another
instance of bad quality control.
I can see if I can make a pic later.
Niek.
|
Coral: What an unfortunate name for a colour. If there's one thing in the
world that can have every colour imaginable... it's coral. But apparently
that's just me, because Google tells me it's a thing. I'd go for
salmon or something like that.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Apr 22, 2019 12:06 | | Subject: | Re: Random Stockroom Items | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, antiquer88 writes:
| | Hi everyone,
I was wondering if anyone could tell me why random items show up as stockroom
items in my inventory. I have no items I have intentionally marked for retention
in stockroom, yet every Monday I go to my inventory and delete random items that
have shown up as zero count stockroom items.
Is this something I have done in error, or is it a system problem?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Stan.
|
It's one of those persistent problems that Bricklink is trying to fix. I
think something is really wrong in the bug fixing department, it seems their
ability to isolate a problem and target it effectively with a fix is really compromised.
Previously there was an issue with remark fields being deleted and it also took
a very long time and was also "fixed" in an "ok this time it really seems to
work but if you have problems let us know" way.
Several people have reported this issue. Hope for you guys they will do something
about it.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2019 09:32 | | Subject: | Re: What do the ! and * symbols mean under image? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Naughty_UK writes:
| | Thanks, yeah, I see those tips now when I view the 3D part in "Quick Help Tips:",
dunno how I missed them before... I was slightly confused before that though
because when I was looking at a set inventory, part 3023 in black had a ! beneath
it but the same part in light grey didn't have one...
|
How is it confusing? Everybody knows that an asterisk is the symbol for "large"
and an exclamation mark the universal symbol for 3D, right? Can't see why
new users complain Bricklink is not intuitive
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2019 05:41 | | Subject: | Re: Lengths in “L” and 18654 | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | I’m wondering what’s the rationale for having changed the name (and dimensions)
of
from “1 L” to “2/3 L”.
I can’t see where it’s 0.67L.
Especially if I compare it to
and their variants, or with
and other liftarms/beams, or all the connectors with “# L” in their descriptions.
In the same way, its new dimensions are 1 x 1 x 0.67. As it’s a cylinder, it
means the 0.67 is supposed to apply to its height. But its height is exactly
1 stud, which is 5/6th = 0.83 brick, not 2/3rd = 0.67, and, anyway, “L” means
stud, not brick, so 1 = 1.
Therefore, I strongly believe its name should have stayed “Technic, Pin Connector
Round 1 L” and its dimensions should be 1 x 1 x 0.83.
(Actually, its diameter is a shy less than 1 stud, so its dimensions should be
0.9something x 0.9something x 0.83 but all the liftarms have the same width and
are said to be 1 stud wide.)
Not filing a proper catalogue change request because I really would want to know
the reasoning here, not play ping-pong.
|
I don't really care too much right now about the dimensions of the part.
What I care about more is how it is named and categorized. I have never thought
of it as a "Pin Connector" because it actually can't connect pins at all.
It is basically a 1L bushing for pins in the same way
is a 1L bushing for axles.
Cheers,
Randy
|
How can factual correctness be less important than a choice of how to categorise
it? I'd say #1 is to get the facts straight, and after that, we can go and
organise it. But what SylvainLS points out here is a real mistake that should
be corrected. It's a small thing in itself, but the correctness of the catalog
is one of the core features that drive Bricklink. I'd say it's the main
selling point of Bricklink compared to BrickOwl.
Maybe someone thought it was 2 plates high, thus 2/3.. but it really raises the
question why it was ever approved.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 14:39 | | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Either
way, if you don't have principal characteristics of what constitutes a tile
or plate (for example groove = tile), any classification is going to be inconsistent
and a matter of opinion.
|
I like this sentence.
|
Me too.
Well, except for the example, as there are plates with grooves
and tiles/plates variants with and without groove
(And the jumpers too….)
|
Yeah... the fact that there's a variation that would span across categories
if you take the groove as the defining factor, kind of kills that idea pretty
effectively.
Anyway, in my opinion it's not a huge deal that it's not perfect. TileMod
and PlateMod are two fairly big categories, nicely sized if you ask me. God forbid
someone would decide to merge them together because there's no principal
distinction possible. I'd rather put up with a bit of inconsistency that's
very easy to learn, than one huge category that is difficult to manage, both
in terms of browsing it online as well as storing it for me and other stores
who have category based sorting..
And we have the forum for venting inconsistency frustrations, which works pretty
well too
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 14:15 | | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, edk writes:
| | why is a plate modified when is a tile modified?
|
There is no consistency, both could be either.
You could say the parent of 6576 is either a 4x8 plate or 4x8 tile, but the 4x8
tile doesn't exist so 6576 must be a modified plate.
Or you could say you add 12 studs to the tile or remove 20 studs from the plate,
so it is closer to being a tile than a plate.
For 88646, neither the parent tile or plate exist. You add 4 studs to the tile,
but remove 8 from the plate and also have to shift them. So does that make it
a modified tile rather than modified plate?
If so, then the 1x2 jumper should be a modified tile (add one stud, vs remove
and move one stud). Similarly a 2x2 jumper is definitely closer to a tile than
a plate but is still a modified plate. Worse still, this pack of jumper bricks:
contains no bricks at all.
is clearly a 2x2 plate with two studs removed, but it is a modified tile.
is also a modified tile rather than plate (compare to 6576).
|
Exactly, the jumpers always seemed much more tile-like to me than that "tile".
I guess the only relevant answer to this issue is: This was acknowledged by the
previous catmin Stormchaser, he said the concepts of plate and tile needed to
be principally redefined before these things could be classified properly. If
that's also what the new catalog management will do is not yet clear. Either
way, if you don't have principal characteristics of what constitutes a tile
or plate (for example groove = tile), any classification is going to be inconsistent
and a matter of opinion.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 28, 2019 09:33 | | Subject: | Re: Brickstock questions | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, calsbricks writes:
| | In Inventories, Teup writes:
| | In Inventories, calsbricks writes:
| | In Inventories, wilton1975 writes:
| | Guys,
Appreciate both your responses as they shed some much needed light. It is a little
strange that BrickStock doesn't seem to have a Help section explaining all
this.
|
HI there sorry I missed this thread earlier
Please bear in mind that Teup's comments do not really apply to the UK.
|
Well.... it does. I'm just saying that the averge price that you see here
in Bricklink is not equal to the average price in Brickstock. These do not match.
Parting out a set at average price on Bricklink will result in you having higher
priced items than parting out that same set at average price in Brickstock.
Whether you wish to match the price of other stores including VAT, or whether
you want to compare yourself to their prices ex VAT... yeah, here you're
right, those are all your own business decisions.
But the fact is that the Bricklink priceguide does not match the Brickstock priceguide.
It's important to be aware of this. Pricing at the Brickstock average is
pricing below the Bricklink average.
|
As I said or at least implied - average pricing in the UK includes VAT and once
you adjust the downloaded price in Brickstock it matches as close as can be expected.
Nothing is perfect and Brickstock could use work on this but so could Bricklink.
The currency conversion is a bigger issue than vat as it applies to all apart
from the USA. Bricklink could do a lot more there and haven't.
Do USA prices include sales tax ? That differs depending on whether you ship
in state or out of state. So the whole pricing scenario based on Bricklink is
a bit shaky - it should be used as a guideline only not a 'real figure'.
Do the last 6 months sales prices include tzes of any kind or is it net. If something
sells at 10p that is the price that should be reflected. If you are vat registered
and can claim back the vat go for it - but for the majority of UK sellers that
is not the position - what you see is what you pay and that is what your cost
is. Pricing needs to be based on cost + not some weird price guide which no one
fully understands. They can tell you how it works but when you look at it you
only see a single figure not how that figures has been made up.
Again for example 1000 units sold at 8p one month but 10p the next month so average
is 9p, but that is not remotely accurate. If the currency conversion rate has
fluctuated then they might be selling at a totally different price, or the same
price.
The price guide needs major re-working and I do not believe that is going to
happen. It currently is a very crude tool which has to be manipulated to get
anywhere near reality.
If the design of the system is anywhere near what it should be there is only
one table with prices and those are converted from an exchange rate table each
time they are displayed, Somehow I doubt that.
|
Well, I guess that's all true enough. Some take the priceguide as just a
guide, some ignore it, some take it as some holy prescription. I tend to be kind
of the latter type... but that's not because I think these numbers are inherently
all so correct (you pointed out some of its shortcomings) but I just remember
that when I was a buyer I'd check the priceguide on everything and buy things
depending on them being at or below average. So it's more a presentation
matter that I want my prices to line up with that reference than that I give
that reference any "scientific" credit. So the priceguide is my starting point
and from there I decide what to buy. Instead of first buying, and then based
on what I spent deciding what my prices should be.
But that's just a personal decision of course. You could invent any kind
of pricing policy for yourself and there are good arguments for all of them.
Maybe in some of them it is actually a blessing that Brickstock downloads the
ex.VAT value.
But in what ever case, no matter what your pricing policy is, and no matter whether
you are VAT registered, no matter if you're a buyer or a seller, if you live
in the area where Bricklink displays prices including VAT for, for all these
people, it is just important to know this difference: priceguide on BL includes
VAT, priceguide downloaded through Brickstock excludes VAT. Then you can do whatever
you want with that information. But knowing it is important as it prevents us
from sleepwalking into a race to the bottom.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 28, 2019 05:25 | | Subject: | Re: Brickstock questions | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, calsbricks writes:
| | In Inventories, wilton1975 writes:
| | Guys,
Appreciate both your responses as they shed some much needed light. It is a little
strange that BrickStock doesn't seem to have a Help section explaining all
this.
|
HI there sorry I missed this thread earlier
Please bear in mind that Teup's comments do not really apply to the UK.
|
Well.... it does. I'm just saying that the averge price that you see here
in Bricklink is not equal to the average price in Brickstock. These do not match.
Parting out a set at average price on Bricklink will result in you having higher
priced items than parting out that same set at average price in Brickstock.
Whether you wish to match the price of other stores including VAT, or whether
you want to compare yourself to their prices ex VAT... yeah, here you're
right, those are all your own business decisions.
But the fact is that the Bricklink priceguide does not match the Brickstock priceguide.
It's important to be aware of this. Pricing at the Brickstock average is
pricing below the Bricklink average.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 26, 2019 16:15 | | Subject: | Re: Brickstock questions | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, greenman writes:
| | In Inventories, wilton1975 writes:
| | Hello all,
I have a couple of questions on Brickstock which someone might know the answer
to.
My store uses EURO and in Brickstock I have ticked Currency, Use the local currency
$1 = €1.
I have changed my asking price in Brickstock to the Last 6 months sales (average).
Question 1: Is my setting local currency $1 = €1 correct? I am not trying to
convert my store currency as it is in Euro now and I wish it remains so.
Question 2: Is the revalued asking price the Last 6 month sales average in Euro?
I read other forum posts that stated that BrickStock only uses sales data in
USD to compute its averages.
Question 3: if indeed the above is correct (in relation to USD and sales data)
is there any means to determine the actual average 6 month Sales data for the
World or European market?
Thanks for any help with either of these queries.
|
The prices you see in BrickScout are in Dollars.
So, if you let BS set your prices to the Average, you see (with 1 = 1) Dollar
prices.
In BS under "edit"-"price"-"incr or decr" you have to lower your prices with
about 10% to come to the Euro prices, as shown in BrickLink.
....but it´s never as accurate as you would like it to be, the DollarEuro
exchange rate is fluctuating all the time.
Klaas
|
Brickstock prices are excluding VAT.. that is why I definitely recommend NOT
using Brickstock for pricing if you are in the EU. You'll never be able to
retrieve the true priceguide prices that you see on Bricklink, no matter what
conversion factor you enter.
(And I still have no response from the author of Brickstock about this....)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 21, 2019 06:45 | | Subject: | Re: Fine print regarding lot quanities | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, JONAK_Toys writes:
| | In Suggestions, wrightcrystal50 writes:
| | I just wasted 6 hours placing an order just find out fine print stated I could
only buy lots in quantities of a $1. If this is a stipulation of a seller I
shouldn’t have to sift through fine print to find it. Likely I will not use
this site again until this is fixed. I quickly learned (100) meant quantities
divisible by 100 and when I miss that I am warned which is great and very helpful.
It should be the same when sellers have a stupid rule similar to described.
If a seller wants to have a stupid rule so be it, but it should be more obvious
to the buyer when selecting quantities to purchase.
|
When a store has that option enabled, it will show up on that grey line next
to the green cart button. Even then, it is always best to read through a stores
terms before preparing a cart.
|
Sounds a bit like this store has the rule only in text without having the option
enabled :/
In that case, I would just go ahead and place the order in that case, screw them,
they can't just waste your time like that. They can choose to either process
or accept non positive feedback
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2019 07:25 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| It doesn't work, because not all items have the same distribution globally.
Some are prevalent in the VAT zone (closer to 20% difference with the BL priceguide),
some more outside of it (closer to no difference with the BL priceguide). Any
+% would be an estimation that will be off. Maybe not by a whole lot, but a 5
cent difference off the average can already make alot of difference in terms
of your place in the rankings and how fast the item will be sold.
It's not difficult at all, and there is no dilemma or tradeoff. The Brickstick
priceguide prices simply have to be identical to the Bricklink priceguide prices.
To do this, Brickstock simply has to access the priceguide including VAT. That
is a parameter that already exists. Either Brickstock has to perform a very simple
update, or, if this parameter is not available to them, Bricklink should make
it available in the API. It's really very simple.
I think it's very problematic doesn't even warn sellers, so they could
be underpricing without being aware of it.
In Suggestions, Thunor writes:
| | Why not update imported BrickStock prices using the +% feature?
It would be useless to business users if it included tax, with all the different
tax rates globally it wouldn’t work for anyone.
In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, MidwestBrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, HallBricks writes:
| | The "Part Out" tool feels very outdated, and is tedious to use. One accidental
click on a link, and you loose every data you have put in for each lot.
I know there are third party software used to upload parts to your inventory,
but think a much more powerful way to part out set should be offered by BrickLink.
Maybe a software you download to your computer, but it could also just be a massive
redesign of the existing tool online.
What I miss the most is easier ways to manage lots that already exist in my inventory.
I don't want to open a new page just to check the remarks for a certain lot,
because if I forget to open that link in a new tab I will loose all progress
made with the other lots. This information should be visible on the same page,
or I should be able to open it in a pop-up window.
When parting out huge sets with thousands of pieces, it would also be nice to
be able to save the progress and continue later. Maybe there should be one upload
button for each lot, so I don't have to go through the entire list first
and then submit all changes at once.
There are of course lots of different features that could be implemented to make
the Part Out tool even more powerful, like more advanced ways to set up automatic
prices, like 10% below average etc.
|
Brickstock. Best $20 I spent. Super Easy. Do I wish it did more, of course,
but it does enough to satisfy me.
|
Yep, Brickstock is US oriented so it works for you, not for us Prices exclude
VAT, so it renders it useless to me. I'd rather go through the Bricklink
part out process, have it crash, throw away my progress with a misclick, and
some other frustrations than to end up with prices that are off. It sounds like
everyone has slightly different wishes about what they like to see exactly in
the update, but making the BL part out process have all the benefits of Brickstock
would probably be a great place to start. That way European sellers can benefit
from all the benefits of Brickstock as well.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 17, 2019 04:53 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, MidwestBrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, HallBricks writes:
| | The "Part Out" tool feels very outdated, and is tedious to use. One accidental
click on a link, and you loose every data you have put in for each lot.
I know there are third party software used to upload parts to your inventory,
but think a much more powerful way to part out set should be offered by BrickLink.
Maybe a software you download to your computer, but it could also just be a massive
redesign of the existing tool online.
What I miss the most is easier ways to manage lots that already exist in my inventory.
I don't want to open a new page just to check the remarks for a certain lot,
because if I forget to open that link in a new tab I will loose all progress
made with the other lots. This information should be visible on the same page,
or I should be able to open it in a pop-up window.
When parting out huge sets with thousands of pieces, it would also be nice to
be able to save the progress and continue later. Maybe there should be one upload
button for each lot, so I don't have to go through the entire list first
and then submit all changes at once.
There are of course lots of different features that could be implemented to make
the Part Out tool even more powerful, like more advanced ways to set up automatic
prices, like 10% below average etc.
|
Brickstock. Best $20 I spent. Super Easy. Do I wish it did more, of course,
but it does enough to satisfy me.
|
Yep, Brickstock is US oriented so it works for you, not for us Prices exclude
VAT, so it renders it useless to me. I'd rather go through the Bricklink
part out process, have it crash, throw away my progress with a misclick, and
some other frustrations than to end up with prices that are off. It sounds like
everyone has slightly different wishes about what they like to see exactly in
the update, but making the BL part out process have all the benefits of Brickstock
would probably be a great place to start. That way European sellers can benefit
from all the benefits of Brickstock as well.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2019 14:30 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, HallBricks writes:
...
| | There are of course lots of different features that could be implemented to make
the Part Out tool even more powerful, like more advanced ways to set up automatic
prices, like 10% below average etc.
|
When I was selling here I was very strongly opposed to the idea of automating
pricing to undercut the Price Guide Average. My thinking then was that nothing
would increase downward pressure on prices or accelerate the "race to the bottom"
some sellers here engage in more than giving them a way to automatically, easily,
quickly and repeatedly price thousands and thousands of lots BELOW the Price
Guide Average. The tedious manual process was one significant check that reduced
the downward pressure on prices.
But since I am very unlikely to ever sell here again, and quite likely to resume
buying at some point, I would LOVE to see a feature that helps to reduce prices
even more. So I would vote yes if this were a formal suggestion.
Foster
|
Agreed. Actually, the system as it is is already working in your favour as a
buyer - thee part out system being so poorly designed and unstable drives alot
of sellers to use Brickstock. Brickstock retrieves prices WITHOUT VAT - which
means that for all European sellers, it retrieves prices that are significantly
lower than what you get parting out on the Bricklink website. The result is sellers
underpricing without being aware of it, fuelling the global race to the bottom.
|
Maybe, maybe not. There are a lot of sellers in that bottom end of the market
that make up prices with fees and charges. You cannot compare prices in the price
guide without factoring fees etc. If the average is 10c and the minimum price
is 7c, if one seller sells at 10c with no fees, he is no different to the seller
at the bottom at 7c with charges and fees that knocks the price back over 11c.
I had me one like that just last week: no fees on the terms page when I got the
invoice, fees and charges excluding shipping were 40% of the order value, knocking
all of the individual prices that seller was asking on those parts from the bottom
5% to way over the average price.
When you actually spend some time really looking at those prices, virtually all
of them are exclusive of fees and charges - meaning the price guide is actually
just false advertising since hardly any of those sellers are actually prepared
to sell at the price they have listed at. And those are just the ones that are
honest enough to tell you upfront about extra fees, there are still a large volume
of sellers who charge those fees included in the shipping charge, sometimes an
extra 50% over and above the actual shipping charge. They are very very aware
of where they are pricing, and it has nothing to do with a race to the bottom,
but everything to do with luring unwary buyers.
|
You're right, that issue of fees not being represented in search listings,
enabling sellers to pretend they are cheap, must be one of the factors in the
race to the bottom as well. Which factors are the biggest is hard to tell. But
what I find particularly worrying about Brickstock, is that any other factor
- like pretending to be cheap and then charging fees - is compounded and
amplified with the fact that Brickstock retrieves lower than average prices to
begin with, and presents them as average. So someone who already plans to undercut
is given a price guide figure that is already below average but presented to
them as "average", and the seller then undercuts on that, to push it down even
further.
And: it is a loop. Let's say I am the only seller of a €10 item and I update
my price to "stay average" many times. What happens? It just drops down and down.
The first time I list it at €10. Next I ask Brickstock what the average price
is. Brickstock, ignoring VAT, says it's €8. I say "OK, let's go with
that". Retrieve the price again. Now Brickstock, again ignoring VAT, says it's
now €6.50. You can see the downward spiral here. Imagine what happens if all
European sellers update their prices with Brickstock on a regular basis.. (I
get that they adjust to their liking, but if you start off modifying taking an
ever dropping price as the starting point, on the whole prices just drop and
drop)
(I know I'm a bit of a broken record on this topic, but I can't emphasize
it enough. And I did write the author about it. Hopefully he will act soon, or
I am going to remain a broken record for a while..)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2019 13:36 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, DallasBricks writes:
| | Bricklink as a whole has not left the hobby status. Although there are many
sellers that are business minded in their processes, scale, and earnings, they
are left using outdated hobby like business practices.
The parting out process is a dinosaur. It is fraught with failure potholes that
can cause you to loose a lot of work in an instant. It is difficult to update
and maintain your inventory. The whole alternate mold/part thing is still a
mess. It is very easy to screw up your inventory using BL tools or the ones
that try to interface with BL.
I don't see these things changing in the future. Bricklink made it clear
that the site would have a few changes but would not be updated to a professional
level. A few features that nobody wanted were added, (Moc shop, Brick arms,
Stud.io)
The payment and shipping side are still limping along after over 3 years of attempted
updates.
Bricklink is more trouble than it is worth for many sellers. I stopped selling
parts several years ago and am glad I did so. Now I have a huge inventory to
build with.
Oh, and don't get me started on the wanted list thing. It is improved, but
there are so many improvements that could be made. Large projects are incredibly
complicated and require spreadsheets, tools, and lots of time and effort. Bricklink
offers little in the way of effective tools.
But I'm still here buying and such.
David
|
+1 That's a very good way to put it - it's at hobby level. Nothing more
or less. This is why for all hobby users, Bricklink work fine and they are nothing
but glad to use it, and with good reasons. For professional users, it's incredibly
frustrating at times, and their complaints are poorly understood by the hobby
users. Since there are more buyers than sellers, the voice for people to stop
"complaining" is sometimes louder than the voice that wants change. That doesn't
really help development either (although BL hardly seems to read the forum, let
alone be influenced by it).
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2019 13:31 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToriHada writes:
| | In Suggestions, HallBricks writes:
...
| | There are of course lots of different features that could be implemented to make
the Part Out tool even more powerful, like more advanced ways to set up automatic
prices, like 10% below average etc.
|
When I was selling here I was very strongly opposed to the idea of automating
pricing to undercut the Price Guide Average. My thinking then was that nothing
would increase downward pressure on prices or accelerate the "race to the bottom"
some sellers here engage in more than giving them a way to automatically, easily,
quickly and repeatedly price thousands and thousands of lots BELOW the Price
Guide Average. The tedious manual process was one significant check that reduced
the downward pressure on prices.
But since I am very unlikely to ever sell here again, and quite likely to resume
buying at some point, I would LOVE to see a feature that helps to reduce prices
even more. So I would vote yes if this were a formal suggestion.
Foster
|
Agreed. Actually, the system as it is is already working in your favour as a
buyer - thee part out system being so poorly designed and unstable drives alot
of sellers to use Brickstock. Brickstock retrieves prices WITHOUT VAT - which
means that for all European sellers, it retrieves prices that are significantly
lower than what you get parting out on the Bricklink website. The result is sellers
underpricing without being aware of it, fuelling the global race to the bottom.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2019 05:37 | | Subject: | Re: We need a modern way to part out sets. | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, HallBricks writes:
| | The "Part Out" tool feels very outdated, and is tedious to use. One accidental
click on a link, and you loose every data you have put in for each lot.
I know there are third party software used to upload parts to your inventory,
but think a much more powerful way to part out set should be offered by BrickLink.
Maybe a software you download to your computer, but it could also just be a massive
redesign of the existing tool online.
What I miss the most is easier ways to manage lots that already exist in my inventory.
I don't want to open a new page just to check the remarks for a certain lot,
because if I forget to open that link in a new tab I will loose all progress
made with the other lots. This information should be visible on the same page,
or I should be able to open it in a pop-up window.
When parting out huge sets with thousands of pieces, it would also be nice to
be able to save the progress and continue later. Maybe there should be one upload
button for each lot, so I don't have to go through the entire list first
and then submit all changes at once.
There are of course lots of different features that could be implemented to make
the Part Out tool even more powerful, like more advanced ways to set up automatic
prices, like 10% below average etc.
|
You're completely right, it should have been redone many years ago. If you
compare the wanted list part-out screen with the seller's part-out screen,
it becomes very clear that sellers are the lowest of low priorities..
BL said however that seller tools are just around the corner, if this is true
then some update in the part-out system must be included as well. I guess it
just comes down to whether you believe that statement or not - some users do,
some don't.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2019 13:07 | | Subject: | Re: Allow AFOLs to "Bricklink" the ADP sets | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Suggestions, mhortar writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brick.Door writes:
| | There are no plans to do so, but I hope that once the regular sales period is
finished Bricklink allows the inventory of these sets to be added to the catalog
so people can add them to a want list and buy the parts they need to build them.
Since they use mostly common parts, I think many AFOLs would prefer to build
them with the parts in their own collection, and just buy any ones they are missing.
Not only would this generate revenue for Bricklink by increased sales, it would
be an olive branch to the sellers who have been completely excluded from this
promotion.
Bricklink has done so much to build the AFOL community and it has become a verb
within our vocabulary (much like Google has in the general population). It would
be a sad irony if the sets created by Bricklink to celebrate AFOLs cannot be
Bricklinked by AFOLs.
|
From what I understand from reading about these sets, these aren't going
to be officially recognized LEGO sets. If that's the case, I don't feel
like they belong in the catalog. Someone will post the inventory somewhere (from
what I understand, it happens with most popular MOCs), so there is nothing stopping
a buyer from creating their own wanted list and purchase the parts without having
the set in the catalog.
Josh
|
They're still more official than BrickArms, which is also in the catalog...
Plus, the whole "exciting" part about the whole project, according to BL itself,
is the fact that it's an official cooperation with the LEGO Group.
So yes, I definitely see the irony.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2019 10:51 | | Subject: | Re: Parting out | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SchmickBricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, SchmickBricks writes:
| | Is there any reason why a function to part multiple unique sets can't implemented?
For example it would save a huge amount of time if I could sort all the lots
from three copies of five different sets and pack everything away once, rather
than having to go through the whole part out process five times.
|
Perhaps you can change the way you work, because in my routine this is absolutely
no problem, and it's unlikely that Bricklink will change or upgrade anything.
|
In what way? For instance tonight I parted out three copies of two different
sets, which is done by sorting all the parts from each set into their individual
lots and then packing them away using the remarks system to tell me which drawers
the lots go into.
Is there an easier way than going through the whole process each time for each
unique set you part out? If there is I've been wasting a lot of time over
the past three years. I can't see why there can't be a function that
will allow adding multiple sets of multiple quantities to inventory at once without
having to rely on third party applications given there are almost always common
lots contained in different sets. The BrickLink catalogue knows what is contained
in each set, so surely it's just a simple matter of combining set inventories
much like it does when you part multiple quantities of the same set. In regards
to someone's comments on errors, what possible additional errors would occur
that don't already, besides possibly knowing which set any discrepancy came
from? In any case it's pretty simple to amend what you're putting into
inventory if you have more or less of something than what the BrickLink catalogue
suggests you should have.
|
Aha, it's because of remark based sorting.. I've never tried it and never
know how it really works. I always assumed people use software to generate the
locations or something because it seems like an awful lot of work to do it
manually. And I think you must be able to view where the part currently is located,
in case you already have it in you inventory... I'm sure there are tutorials
about this, since it's the first time I see this request, there must be a
work around.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2019 09:38 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback removal | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, mattkaupke writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, Bricks_NW_UK writes:
| | | |
It depends. If a seller charges $10 for postage through IC then it turns out
the actual cost was $2, I'd be pretty annoyed and would leave feedback reflecting
that. In that case the seller is not without fault, so why should the buyer have
their feedback removed in that case?
|
Because the buyer knew the cost of postage when he ordered. If he didn’t like
it he shouldn’t have continued with the order.
(By the way, we are totally against instant check out!)
|
Of course the customer accepted that would be the cost for postage, but then
later found out it was not true and that the seller is overcharging for postage
via IC. Should other buyers be warned about that? In my view, yes.
|
No warning is necessary through feedback as that information is available at
checkout. We’re all adults here and should be capable of making sound decisions
on our own. Additionally, I’d say the “actual” cost is rarely the actual cost.
The label may have cost $2, the baseline price is closer to $3.50 for USPS first
class,but there are certainly many more considerations when calculating shipping
(cost of materials, labels, tape, box or envelope, fuel and time to drop it off
(if I live 30mins from a post office my real costs may be higher than yours if
you’re close to a drop off)). Yes, $10 for shipping on a $2 label would probably
be excessive but we’re not talking about excessive here, nor should it matter
since it was what was agreed on with the buyer. Any poor feedback left is just
unreasonable.
|
Just because you are told something up front doesn't mean you shouldn't
comment on it.
For example, sellers often say something along the lines of "New doesn't
mean mint, new parts may have scratches" in their terms. If a seller sends out
heavily scratched new parts, should the buyer be allowed to comment via feedback?
After all, they agreed that parts may be scratched when they placed the order.
|
I must agree with what the others have said... you see what you pay, you can
agree or disagree. I don't see why your stance would shift from agree to
disagree if you found out that what you paid was spent relatively less on postage
and more handling than you had imagined.
If everything should be priced according to what it reasonably costs, you should
also argue that a Star Wars minifig priced €20 should be a reason for negative
feedback as it only costed the seller €1. I'm really not big on capitalism
at all, but in this case I really must say the added value is a product of the
market mechanism and as long as people are willing to pay it, that by definition
makes it a fair price for it.
A seller could make some contract with a company to somehow get totally free
postage, and that would leave him with no direct obligation to charge less or
nothing for shipping to the buyers. They could charge €5, just as a handling
fee, if they wanted.
I do see though how extremely high fees - while legitimate - frustrate the buying
process. Ideally, the search results would display the price of the part and
then directly underneath "have this part at home for ..."
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jan 15, 2019 20:39 | | Subject: | Re: Parting out | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SchmickBricks writes:
| | Is there any reason why a function to part multiple unique sets can't implemented?
For example it would save a huge amount of time if I could sort all the lots
from three copies of five different sets and pack everything away once, rather
than having to go through the whole part out process five times.
|
Perhaps you can change the way you work, because in my routine this is absolutely
no problem, and it's unlikely that Bricklink will change or upgrade anything.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jan 9, 2019 16:57 | | Subject: | Re: Request official BrickLink app | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, TheBrickGuys writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, KaanDurak writes:
| | Hi ,
I use my phone alot and I also use Bricklink alot , but the site on phone isn't
that great , so please. Bricklink create a phone app of Bricklink , it would
be easier for phone users.
I hope the staff will see this and an official bricklink app will be created.
Thanks for reading
|
It's in development https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1094209
|
wow, that post was 5 years old so it is still a work in progress??
jim
|
It's still a work in progress I think and it will be released at some point
when Bricklink feels like it.
But until they will add payment methods other than PayPal it's just a gimmic
to me, I am opting out for it and so are some other sellers. Of the remaining
sellers, only a small portion has Instant Checkout, so there is no real reason
using the Bricklink app if you get 10x as many results using a computer. To me
that's easily worth navigating a non mobile friendly Bricklink for.
So I guess the answer is, nope, "proper" Bricklink is not going to be mobile
friendly.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Jan 7, 2019 08:57 | | Subject: | Re: New Part Category | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Today I added a new category: Wheel, Accessory.
I moved 31 parts from Wheel to the new category.
|
That's a nice idea, thanks! And don't have to move anything around in
my alphabetical storage either
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Dec 26, 2018 12:17 | | Subject: | Re: Move header buttons to the left side screen | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | I agree it's way too wide. I have a large widescreen but even here "current
orders" and "filed orders" is off the screen. What you can at least do for those
two particular options (and perhaps others) is bookmark their links and add them
to your bookmark bar of your browser, so you can access them by clicking there
instead of having to scroll right.
I think before improving the interface, first of all a bug needs to be fixed.
This orders received display is way too wide because of all these columns. And
we cannot turn off columns such as additional charges, additional charges 2,
and insurance. I've never used insurance yet it takes up the center of the
display. These columns used to be mandatory for some mysterious reason and their
checkboxes were greyed out in "customize display", but now they have been enabled,
but modifying them doesn't do anything. You can check and uncheck them and
the orders display remains exactly the same. If this bug is fixed, we will be
able to cut down on the width of that page quite a bit, and it can bring a couple
of buttons back in sight. And it will make my list of received orders more comfortable
to look at, too.
In Suggestions, Pazzo writes:
| | Hi all,
when I am in my order page...all buttons are centered above the site.
But using an old fashioned 4/3 monitor, half of the buttons are outside my view,
and I need to use the sliding bars everytime I want to select one of them.
If all the buttons can be alligned from the left side of the screeen, this would
improve a lot.
Anybody has the same problem?
Be cool and have fun
Eric
|
|
I see now that besides this bug there's also another problem that recently
emerged. The orders pages used to have zoom levels that were independent from
the rest of the site. I remember requesting this in the past, this was done specifically
for making these pages fit. That, however, has now been undone again. All pages
have a single linked zoom level. That means you're forced to choose between
either an order list that fits but a Bricklink that's a narrow strip with
half of the screen blank, or a Bricklink that fills the screen reasonably well
but an order page that is cut off on the right side.
|
This still annoys me every single day but probably won't ever be fixed? I
need to choose between zooming down 30% from how I'd like to view the site
and stare at tiny letters like I'm doing right now typing this, or scroll
left and right through my orders.. I'd be OK with it if this problem wasn't
fixable but this was actually noted by the admins and fixed at some point..
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Dec 12, 2018 07:03 | | Subject: | Re: Coupons improvement | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, bricksofsweden writes:
| | Hi,
Not sure if this has been brought up in earlier suggestions but I am giving it
a go anyway.
I would like to see the possibility of creating a coupon which is valid for all
buyers. Right now this is only limited to a certain username.
Kind Regards,
Simon
|
You're not using instant checkout, so what you could do is mail an advertisement
to your store mailing list and tell them that you'll apply a discount if
they write some promotional code in the comment field when they place an order.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Dec 5, 2018 07:22 | | Subject: | Re: Automatic price while listing items | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, EpicBigG writes:
| | I hope bricklink sees this!
|
They do, but they won't do anything.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Dec 4, 2018 12:33 | | Subject: | Re: 40292 minifig error | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | Although they cannot sell it as a boy as depicted on the box, unless listed as
a custom minifig. No doubt in time people will wonder which minifigure they have
and not be able to match up the boy version with a minifigure in the catalogue.
|
Many questions come up in the forum to identify minifigures that have the wrong
hands, the wrong arms, the wrong legs, the wrong head, the wrong hair, etc. Such
is the nature of LEGO parts; they get played with and mixed up all the time.
Sellers are free to sell those minifigures as "customs", but it behooves them
to find a closely related minifigure in the catalog to sell under and either
sell it as incomplete or fix the minifigure they have to match the one in the
catalog. I don't see this scenario as being any different to that.
However, when it comes to adding minifigures to the catalog, the guidelines are
clear and were followed: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2477
If they weren't followed, we would have the inevitable question, "Why was
this boy minifigure added to the catalog when it clearly isn't shown in the
instructions?"
Cheers,
Randy
|
Well, I actually agree with yorbrick the "boy" should be added to the catalog.
I understand the Bricklink catalog follows the instructions and that is a good
and smart choice, but how far will we go? When I saw the set my first thought
was like "only a girl? oh wait a sec, there's the boy hair" and the box literally
has the boy on the side of the box. To me the hair seems off on the dad and he's
not shown that way either. Nor is it logical that a minifig has an extra piece
to make a marginally different minifig with no different meaning. The torso of
the child is clearly unisex (if not boyish) so in my opinion everything points
to the hairpiece being intended for the child.
If so, it begs the question if we really want to stick 100% to the instructions
in every case. I think at least adding minfigs that are shown on the box as alternates
is not such a stretch.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Dec 4, 2018 08:21 | | Subject: | Re: 40292 minifig error | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | […]
Haha that's crazy, seems the person making the instructions made the mistake.
I guess Bricklink follows the instructions and not the box, so probably it should
stay like this then... Although unless dad has a job as a hairdresser or fashion
designer I do think he looks a bit off with that kids/teenage haircut
|
Well, we’re assuming it’s a “dad”. It could be a “big brother” or a “young uncle”
too
And anyone can change the interpretation (and minifigs) to better represent their
own situation.
|
I guess if dad really is a hairdresser or fashion designer, the girl's hair
could be even better
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Dec 4, 2018 07:10 | | Subject: | Re: 40292 minifig error | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| |
LOL, so the Christmas giftset 40292 has a male and a female hairpiece so that
the child can be a boy or a girl (and they're both on the box). But someone
uploaded a picture where the alternate hair is put on the DAD's head, kind
of making it a dad's hairdo optionality feature
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=40292-1
|
Actually, it IS a “dad’s hairdo optionality feature”: there are two versions
of the instructions and each one uses different hair for the dad.
See https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1117220
|
Haha that's crazy, seems the person making the instructions made the mistake.
I guess Bricklink follows the instructions and not the box, so probably it should
stay like this then... Although unless dad has a job as a hairdresser or fashion
designer I do think he looks a bit off with that kids/teenage haircut
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Dec 4, 2018 06:32 | | Subject: | 40292 minifig error | | Viewed: | 130 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
|
LOL, so the Christmas giftset 40292 has a male and a female hairpiece so that
the child can be a boy or a girl (and they're both on the box). But someone
uploaded a picture where the alternate hair is put on the DAD's head, kind
of making it a dad's hairdo optionality feature
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=40292-1
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 26, 2018 07:43 | | Subject: | Re: Something I Just Threw Together | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I think "figures" is good, as in my understanding of English it refers more to
physical shape than "characters". "Characters" I expect to be animate, while
the category also includes trophy statuettes, game pawns, statues/sculptures,
skeletons etc.
In General, StormChaser writes:
| | In General, yorbrick writes:
| | The idea of using the name FIGURES is a good one. Although possibly CHARACTERS
is better
|
I don't think we need to be that technical with this item type. The casual
user needs a basic item type name which is immediately identifiable. Figures
would encompass a wide range of items and Minifigs inaccurately described
that section of the catalog almost from the beginning.
| | I think the definition of what it means to be a minifigure is very important to get right.
|
This page is not intended to define what a minifigure is. That is handled by
this page (updating it is on my list of things to do):
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
The list of figure types is only intended to be an informative overview of the
different types/sizes of figures which have been produced.
| | Droids - there aren't any!
|
To answer all of your questions: the list is just a framework right now and I'm
mainly interested in hearing whether members want it or not. We can worry about
the details later.
I will say that if such a list needs to become bogged down in minutiae beyond
the point of usability, then it was clearly not a good idea.
|
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 23, 2018 11:22 | | Subject: | Re: Part out value may not always be accurate | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, shovhans writes:
| | Dear bricklink development team,
Currently the "Part Out Value" page shows the value in average, which may not
be accurate if any seller posts an item with very high, or inaccurate price.
To better represent the part out value of a set, we need to add the following
additional metrics:
1. Standard deviation of the Average value shown
2. Median value
3. Breakdown list of all items with the above metrics for each item. Additionally
we would like to see the count for each item.
Thanks
shovhans
|
Way too much attention is paid to average prices as it is. Just consider what
the average sold price is...
across markets/ countries
all stores big and small
stores that price fairly and those that charge add ons
all orders - single lot/ multiple lot
It is also dangerous to purchase based on part-out sold prices anyway as many
parts might have sold for an average prixe of X but in some cases there are many
100's of times of the part for sale than have ever sold!
Focusing on making the average "more accurate" is IMO a diversion and not a good
way of optimising inventory investment decisions. If it was just a mathematical
excercise to determine what to buy this place would be even more swamped with
inventory and prices would drop further.
I always vote no to these enhancements to averages for these reasons, I think
these average values mislead many.
Robert
|
Agreed. And then there's VAT.... Even if Bricklink would have only 1 store,
that store could still find itself in a race to the bottom. They list things,
some sell with VAT, some without... so the L6MS average will be lower than their
own prices... so they mark down... again sell some parts without VAT... average
drops again...
The more we stick to the priceguide, the more we'll race to the bottom, even
without anybody trying to price under anyone else.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 12:18 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | But do you know that all the ones in Brick,Modified have a circular curve
and the ones in slope all have an arbitrary curve? Maybe that helps telling
them apart. The Brick,Modified ones you could hold a round 2x2 brick against
sideways and the curves line up. They're usually a quarter circles; the curve
starts at 0 degrees at the top, and ends at 90 degrees at the bottom. Therefore,
they're not slopes, as slopes start and/or end with a sloping angle.
|
How 'bout this one for an arbitrary slope? There will always be "discussion
items".
Niek.
|
Ok yeah.. that one is weird.. I didn't think about these But not a slope
either, just the most random shape ever.. I would say Wedge or Vehicle...
Same for these
None of them are even 1 Brick high, so I wouldn't mind if those were kicked
out of the BrickMod club.
I was just thinking about these:
(wow, new? cool)
To me these have a coherent story and relationship to one another and are very
understandable as BrickMod.
If memory serves, this Slope used to be something else than Slope, either BrickMod
or Vehicle? I don't think they look too well as Slopes, with their details
and multiple sides they kind of break the rules of slopes to me.
None of these things bother me personally though - I know where they are
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 11:52 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
I hope the part reclassification also considers some of the modified bricks
parts reclassification, as it has become a dumping ground. I often find myself
clicking back and forth between modified bricks and curved slopes
categories as there are several bricks with slopes that to me would make more
sense to be in the curved slopes category. There are many others, and
I am sure everyone has their own reclassification wants.
The problem lies in how one chooses to classify parts, as it's in human nature
to label and bucket everything, but in reality there is a lot of overlap. Ultimately
whatever Bricklink chooses to do, there were be complaining. You just can't
please everyone, and I think the majority will be from sellers, as they will
feel more of the burden of rearranging their inventory, if they try to match
the Bricklink categories. As such it would be considerate if Bricklink would
communicate these changes effectively to ease the pain for those that would be
affected the most.
Miro
|
To me Brick,Modified vs Slope,Curved is absolutely fine. I never have any doubts
or troubles with it. Brick,Round is round in the XY dimension, Brick,Modified
is round in the Z dimension, and all curves that are not circular are Slopes.
I'm surprised it's Slopes vs Brick,Modified that troubles you and not
Brick,Modified vs Brick,Arch. If the curved Brick,Modified parts were moved elsewhere,
my first thought would be Brick,Round, definitely not slope.
|
Brick arch do not confuse me because arches have voids beneath them. Just speaking
from experience of having to click in 2 groups because some curved parts are
in bricks modified and others in curved slopes. That's just scratching the
surface. There are others as well in other categories, but as I mentioned earlier,
human like to classify things and each person classifies things based on some
definitions that do not always agree from person to person. It's a slippery
slope and ultimately whatever it becomes will be just a nuisance to some degree
to us all. Can't please everyone, and in grand scheme, it does not affect
my life all that much.
Miro
|
But do you know that all the ones in Brick,Modified have a circular curve
and the ones in slope all have an arbitrary curve? Maybe that helps telling
them apart. The Brick,Modified ones you could hold a round 2x2 brick against
sideways and the curves line up. They're usually a quarter circles; the curve
starts at 0 degrees at the top, and ends at 90 degrees at the bottom. Therefore,
they're not slopes, as slopes start and/or end with a sloping angle.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 09:21 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| |
There is also the other / older style of technic cannon, which is probably why
the newer one is also classed as technic even though it doesn't appear in
many technic sets.
| | The Bar category is expanding a bit too rapidly to my taste, these items have
limited Bar-like constructional value, and they would do great in a Projectile
Launcher category, or called Shooters & Projectiles or something, grouping projectiles
together with the things that fire them, which are already in that category.
|
I guess the downside of this is if something is introduced as a projectile but
later becomes more widely used as something else. This is like the problem with
the technic cannons. They were originally used in technic sets so it made sense
at the time that they were classed as technic parts.
I wouldn't mind projectiles going in there, but of course many won't
as they will already be in other categories. So maybe it would be wise to have
a list of things that the shooter can shoot as part of the extra information,
just like windows have which glass fits with them, door frames have which doors,
and wheels have which tyres, etc.
|
Well, I think there's a fairly clear-cut difference between shooters that
shoot existing parts and shooters that have specifically designed projectiles
for them. But yes, some additional note about what they should could always be
useful.
The two projectiles I mentioned have specific hooks that can really only be useful
if you use them with the shooter, and I think few users will really be interested
in these parts for other purposes than projectiles. If that "Technic" shooter
would be moved, it would be awkward for its projectile to be left behind, so
at least those types of projectiles are probably going to end up there already.
So then we might as well have those two "bar" projectiles in there.
But I wouldn't go as far as proposing the 3L shooting pins there, as they've
become common non-shooting related parts.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 09:14 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
I hope the part reclassification also considers some of the modified bricks
parts reclassification, as it has become a dumping ground. I often find myself
clicking back and forth between modified bricks and curved slopes
categories as there are several bricks with slopes that to me would make more
sense to be in the curved slopes category. There are many others, and
I am sure everyone has their own reclassification wants.
The problem lies in how one chooses to classify parts, as it's in human nature
to label and bucket everything, but in reality there is a lot of overlap. Ultimately
whatever Bricklink chooses to do, there were be complaining. You just can't
please everyone, and I think the majority will be from sellers, as they will
feel more of the burden of rearranging their inventory, if they try to match
the Bricklink categories. As such it would be considerate if Bricklink would
communicate these changes effectively to ease the pain for those that would be
affected the most.
Miro
|
To me Brick,Modified vs Slope,Curved is absolutely fine. I never have any doubts
or troubles with it. Brick,Round is round in the XY dimension, Brick,Modified
is round in the Z dimension, and all curves that are not circular are Slopes.
I'm surprised it's Slopes vs Brick,Modified that troubles you and not
Brick,Modified vs Brick,Arch. If the curved Brick,Modified parts were moved elsewhere,
my first thought would be Brick,Round, definitely not slope.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 08:13 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
Thanks, ok, that makes sense - then my list is just for future reference
Personally I'd propose including the projectiles into the category, whenever
at least their first appearance was for the purpose of projectile.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 07:43 | | Subject: | Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 180 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| So.. what's the deal with the Projectile Launcher category? Currently has
one item:
I proposed this category so various shooters can be grouped together, since they
are now scattered across categories and in my opinion it's pretty arbitrary.
I assume this category is still a work in progress, but anyway I thought it could
be useful to post about it.
Just have a look, (I have left out variants and some projectiles just to keep
the post tidy)
This one is in Vehicle - did you guess that? Even though it also appears as a
fixed shooter.
These are in Minifig,Weapon - even though they cannot be held by a minifig
or are part of a weapon held by a minifig, unlike every single other entry in
this category.
These are in the generic Technic category - which probably is a category that
we want to reduce as much as possible in general, and these shooters are massively
more frequent in non-Technic sets. Actually I struggle to find Technic sets with
them.
This one is in Brick,Modified, even though it has pretty much exactly the same
characteristics as the one and only part that is currently in Projectile Launcher.
This one is in Plate,Modified - while that is not altogether unlogical, I still
wouldn't guess it, especially if a Brick,Modifidish part is already in Projectile
Launcher.
[P=19020c01]
The Bar category is expanding a bit too rapidly to my taste, these items have
limited Bar-like constructional value, and they would do great in a Projectile
Launcher category, or called Shooters & Projectiles or something, grouping projectiles
together with the things that fire them, which are already in that category.
What do you think?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 12, 2018 09:06 | | Subject: | Re: Mark a buyer as "Refunded due to non-arrival" | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | It happens a buyer says he didn't receive the items. When shipping using
an untracked medium, there is no way in verifying if the claim is legit. So I
usually make no fuss and either refund the total order amount (including shipping)
or re-send it (if I have the items in stock).
In these cases, I sometimes get the feeling the buyer might have done this before
and actually has received the items. But as I said: there is no proof, since
no tracking. Then I wonder: "has this buyer done this in the past before with
other sellers?". There is no way in knowing. And that's why I think a buyer
should get some sort of parameter/rating stating the number of orders that were
refunded due to non-arrival. It seems like a small feature. Not really that important,
but if it were there, it would give some extra statistics in the long run as
well.
|
Would this be legal? Having such a parameter also seems like a negative feedback
for a buyer. If a parcel genuinely doesn't arrive, then they get a black
mark against their name if they inform you it hasn't arrived. They may have
to decide whether to get a black mark for a low order value parcel going missing,
or just forget their consumer rights so as not to get a black mark.
|
I don't know about legal but BrickOwl has it and I think it's quite useful.
If it's not legal, it could at the least be recorded internally and scammers
could be blocked automatically.
Right now scamming is ridiculously easy - just place a couple of orders, say
none of them arrived, get money back, and have no negative feedback or any consequences
at all. I have not really had such scams, luckily, but in theory it's a walk
in the park.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 11, 2018 15:53 | | Subject: | Re: Mark a buyer as "Refunded due to non-arrival" | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | It happens a buyer says he didn't receive the items. When shipping using
an untracked medium, there is no way in verifying if the claim is legit. So I
usually make no fuss and either refund the total order amount (including shipping)
or re-send it (if I have the items in stock).
In these cases, I sometimes get the feeling the buyer might have done this before
and actually has received the items. But as I said: there is no proof, since
no tracking. Then I wonder: "has this buyer done this in the past before with
other sellers?". There is no way in knowing. And that's why I think a buyer
should get some sort of parameter/rating stating the number of orders that were
refunded due to non-arrival. It seems like a small feature. Not really that important,
but if it were there, it would give some extra statistics in the long run as
well.
|
It's again one of those features that BrickOwl has but Bricklink probably
never will because of lack of development. I would vote yes, but I've been
doing that for over a decade and how many suggestions were even looked at...
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Netherlands, Utrecht
