| 41 messages found. Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies | Author: | Erikmax  | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2021 07:24 | | Subject: | Bricklink invoices attached to letters to the | | Viewed: | 129 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| I had to ship a small sticker to the GB.
To do this, I need to make a adress sticker in the PostNL sysyem, indicating
the value.
And I got an invoice from Bricklink to attach ON the shipment. On this invoice
the payment of the Britsch VAT is indicated.
PostNL has plastic envelopes to attach invoices to the shipment, These have a
A4 format.
So I have to use a 80 gram A4 box or very large envelope, and even then I can't
attach both the sticker and the invoice on one side. This meanspostage is 4x
what normally should have been.
I hope customs understand the combination of the value indication on the adress
label and the attached document that VAT has been paid.
I wonder if this all goes smoothly and if there are cases of double taxation.
|
 |
| Author: | TheBrickGuys | | Posted: | Jun 25, 2021 16:23 | | Subject: | Re: Lego Stores get AFOL makeover? | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| In LEGO, LegoLDK writes:
The above highlighted story also has a link to another story about how Lego has
made bricks (2x4 bricks for now) from recycled plastic bottles and hopes start
including them inside sets in around 2 years. Very Interesting!
Jim.
|
|
| Author: | Stuart9 | | Posted: | May 31, 2021 07:25 | | Subject: | Selling collectable minifigures | | Viewed: | 110 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| Looking for views on collectable minifigures.
I have a large number of these, estimated at 1000+ in new condition, plus others
in used.
These are from nearly all series so far including series 1 unopened and opened
Team GB.
Just accumulating them at present.
Too many to check individually on the sales info, certainly at the moment for
me due to relocation.
Do these still sell well ?
May start listing some when I reopen in 2022.
|
|
| Author: | iprice | | Posted: | May 18, 2021 23:07 | | Subject: | Re: A chance for new Ecto-1?? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | New Sets | |
|
| In New Sets, Morph writes:
| | With Ghostbusters Afterlife being delayed a few times and finally set to release
this fall; do you think we might see a chance for a “regular” ecto to align with
the movie?
I have the other two and was hoping for the third, but was a bit disheartened
after seeing release the monster sized one.
|
There's always a chance for a version with minifigs (like the previous two)
and Lego have the license. I will probably depend on how well GB: Afterlife does
at the box office and online and perhaps what other sets they can produce that
will go with it.
|
|
| Author: | DeLuca | | Posted: | Jan 10, 2021 15:59 | | Subject: | Re: Please Change Name of Part (973pb4140c01) | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I usually try to keep names
as similar to their original versions as is possible
|
Really no need to worry about that. You do good catalog work. If you can improve
on a title, go for it.
|
Thank you. 👍
I utterly despise inconsistency, however, so I will either make a single
small change to one entry, or I will rework the names for all related
parts. Additionally, I dislike having to reformat names that I have already changed,
because I find that the style that I used on one part/Minifig does not work on
the related ones. 😕
| | | | In this case, "Classic" is part of the search term "Classic Space", which is a recognised subtheme of Space.
|
Right, but it shouldn't be. Because classic is classic, but to whom? In another 40 years, Galaxy Squad will be classic space. As, at some point, will Star Wars.
|
The difference, to me, is that those other themes actually have TLG-given names,
while "Classic Space" never did (the first properly-named Space theme was Futuron
(though Blacktron was the first to have their name explicitly stated in a catalogue,
from what I have seen, so "Futuron" may be somewhat of a retcon)).
| | Classic Space, Classic Town, Classic Castle, etc. were poorly-thought-out terms by short-sighted people focusing solely upon themselves and their own experiences with LEGO toys.
Instead, what should have been done is to frame the era by year. So:
Classic Space
becomes
Space, 1979-1988
|
While I agree, I think that the name "Classic Space" is now so firmly entrenched
(more so than "Classic Castle"/"Classic Pirates"/"Classic Town") that changing
it to "Space, 1979-1988" would make these items more difficult to find.
As an illustration of how established "Classic Space" is as the unofficial-official
name of the theme: I Googled "Classic Space" (without any references to LEGO),
and got nothing but "Space, 1979-1988" and MOCs based on the theme: https://www.google.com/search?q=classic+space&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=sivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjboK_ynZLuAhWLslkKHS5zAdIQ_AUoAnoECA4QAg&biw=1024&bih=665&dpr=2
| | | | Additionally, what do you propose that the planet-with-ship-orbiting insignia
that appears on numerous non-Space pieces (torsos, particularly) be called, then?
|
Not entirely sure. But I recommend calling it what it is. That's what we try to do for most everything else.
|
I agree that the insignia should be described, but I think that "Classic Space"
should also be included, just as "Blacktron" is included in the descriptions
of pieces that contain said logo.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 9, 2020 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: Collecting the parts catalog | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
I've never visited, but from reviews I've read and pictures I've
seen this facility does not match the definition of a true LEGO museum in the
way we've been discussing.
That is, it does not display the entire range of LEGO products as pieces and
sets. In fact, from what I've seen in pictures, it doesn't even come
close.
|
There’s an onlive live tour (part 3 was today)
https://legohouse.com/en-gb/what-s-on/lego-house-live-tours/
Not sure if they will make them available for download sometime.
Anyway, I’d say you’re right on your assesment: it’s not a museum, just a few
toys.
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 04:54 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
Item numbers for figures are a mess. We're working on it.
See this forum post for a poetically eloquent description of the mess:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1187433
|
Yes I can see it’s definitely a challenge especially since many minifg codes
have become well established with people even though they may not make too much
sense structure wise!
I guess the reason I asked was mainly because I could see some Ideas codes had
been changed to Ghostbuster codes whilst Dimensions Ghostbuster minifgs and the
Ideas Pirate minifigs hadn’t been altered in the same way?
Either way I guess there would need to be a rule of thumb on want constitutes
a minifig range being given its own theme code abbreviation. For instance do
you start giving the ghostbuster minifigs the ‘gb’ code when there are at least
8 minifigs in the range for example?
On the other hand if there are only 2 or 3 ghostbusters minifigs do they perhaps
always just start off with a miscellaneous code which might also include everything
from Santa to ET?
Do we also start to catalog things not necessarily by Legos themes but by what
the community itself classes as the best match for Space, Castle, Pirates etc...
with anything that does'nt fit among the established themes classed as miscellaneous?
For instance do you envisage that stuff like Galaxy Squad might come under space
‘sp’? instead of ‘gs’?
|
As a huge minifigure collector who categorizes their entire collection by the
BrickLink item numbers, I would not be in favor of any renumbering of huge swaths
of the BrickLink catalog as it stands. Small sections, okay, but not lumping
Galaxy Squad into the Classic Space figures, etc. I think having minifigures
classified according to the themes they occur in is how they should be classified
for now, and the catalog manages to currently do that relatively okay for the
majority of the minifigures.
But, once again, this gets back to the database design. We are stuck in a system
that only categorizes things in a flat manner, so moving large amounts of items
around, renumbering large amounts of items, etc., would cause a nightmare for
anyone and everyone involved.
Having a system that allowed tags on items would allow minifigures to be categorized
in more than one way and then all figures could just be given sequential codes
starting from figure000001 all the way up to however many figures there
are and then into the future. So figure009866 might be classified as "Space",
"Galaxy Squad", and "Alien", whereas figure013022 might be classified
as "Licensed", "Space", "Star Wars", and "Alien". No more thinking about how
to structure item numbers, no more worrying about what *specific* category a
minifigure should go in, no more having users even think about numbering since
the system could just assign the next figure number automatically! This is really
where the whole system needs to get to.
Cheers,
Randy
|
To be honest I don’t have too much concern about stuff like Galaxy Squad remaining
‘gs’ and was more interested in other people’s opinions of where we think it
might go though I would just say that if the system remained as it is we could
potentially run out of abbreviations if we continue to use them on every sub-theme
like this but I guess I have bigger issue with the minifigs from both the ‘dim’
and ‘idea’ categories taking precedence over existing categories which are better
suited for them because to me it’s a bit like categorising a Star Wars minifig
from an advent calendar as ‘adv’ or from polybag as ‘pol’ when it should still
be ‘sw’?
On the same token if it goes the way your suggesting then I guess that would
blow everything out the water all together and whilst it could work the only
real issue I would have is with the length of the codes which would also take
away the ability to memorize them for instance without even looking I know that
sw0707 is Yoda and are we going to have more instances where we end up forgetting
which minifig code we came to pick once at the storage location?
As the current system shows a small abbreviation of letters + number combos allows
for codes to be shorter and more memorable
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 14, 2020 22:18 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
Item numbers for figures are a mess. We're working on it.
See this forum post for a poetically eloquent description of the mess:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1187433
|
Yes I can see it’s definitely a challenge especially since many minifg codes
have become well established with people even though they may not make too much
sense structure wise!
I guess the reason I asked was mainly because I could see some Ideas codes had
been changed to Ghostbuster codes whilst Dimensions Ghostbuster minifgs and the
Ideas Pirate minifigs hadn’t been altered in the same way?
Either way I guess there would need to be a rule of thumb on want constitutes
a minifig range being given its own theme code abbreviation. For instance do
you start giving the ghostbuster minifigs the ‘gb’ code when there are at least
8 minifigs in the range for example?
On the other hand if there are only 2 or 3 ghostbusters minifigs do they perhaps
always just start off with a miscellaneous code which might also include everything
from Santa to ET?
Do we also start to catalog things not necessarily by Legos themes but by what
the community itself classes as the best match for Space, Castle, Pirates etc...
with anything that does'nt fit among the established themes classed as miscellaneous?
For instance do you envisage that stuff like Galaxy Squad might come under space
‘sp’? instead of ‘gs’?
|
As a huge minifigure collector who categorizes their entire collection by the
BrickLink item numbers, I would not be in favor of any renumbering of huge swaths
of the BrickLink catalog as it stands. Small sections, okay, but not lumping
Galaxy Squad into the Classic Space figures, etc. I think having minifigures
classified according to the themes they occur in is how they should be classified
for now, and the catalog manages to currently do that relatively okay for the
majority of the minifigures.
But, once again, this gets back to the database design. We are stuck in a system
that only categorizes things in a flat manner, so moving large amounts of items
around, renumbering large amounts of items, etc., would cause a nightmare for
anyone and everyone involved.
Having a system that allowed tags on items would allow minifigures to be categorized
in more than one way and then all figures could just be given sequential codes
starting from figure000001 all the way up to however many figures there
are and then into the future. So figure009866 might be classified as "Space",
"Galaxy Squad", and "Alien", whereas figure013022 might be classified
as "Licensed", "Space", "Star Wars", and "Alien". No more thinking about how
to structure item numbers, no more worrying about what *specific* category a
minifigure should go in, no more having users even think about numbering since
the system could just assign the next figure number automatically! This is really
where the whole system needs to get to.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 14, 2020 21:46 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
Item numbers for figures are a mess. We're working on it.
See this forum post for a poetically eloquent description of the mess:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1187433
|
Yes I can see it’s definitely a challenge especially since many minifg codes
have become well established with people even though they may not make too much
sense structure wise!
I guess the reason I asked was mainly because I could see some Ideas codes had
been changed to Ghostbuster codes whilst Dimensions Ghostbuster minifgs and the
Ideas Pirate minifigs hadn’t been altered in the same way?
Either way I guess there would need to be a rule of thumb on want constitutes
a minifig range being given its own theme code abbreviation. For instance do
you start giving the ghostbuster minifigs the ‘gb’ code when there are at least
8 minifigs in the range for example?
On the other hand if there are only 2 or 3 ghostbusters minifigs do they perhaps
always just start off with a miscellaneous code which might also include everything
from Santa to ET?
Do we also start to catalog things not necessarily by Legos themes but by what
the community itself classes as the best match for Space, Castle, Pirates etc...
with anything that does'nt fit among the established themes classed as miscellaneous?
For instance do you envisage that stuff like Galaxy Squad might come under space
‘sp’? instead of ‘gs’?
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
USA, California
United Kingdom, England
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
