BrickLink Discussion Forum

But but but… The Price Guide!?!!!

Author:

hpoort

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 03:51

Subject:

Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

221 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

With the takeover by TLG, it may be time that some fundamental changes to the
site get implemented. Hence the posting of this idea - that has been bothering
me for years.

— requires programming and website extension —

Currently in the Bricklink catalog are parts that signify ‘undetermined variant’,
commonly marked for deletion or already deleted, and corresponding parts that
represent the specific variants of these. The current system requires sellers
to determine the specific variant type – even if they would prefer not to distinguish.
The same system requires buyers to exactly specify which variant they are interested
in buying – even if they don’t actually care which is commonly true. My suggestion
would be to distinguish the two concepts as are the processes: the process of
specifying what is for sale (which may be undetermined) and the process of specifying
what you want to buy (which may be ‘don’t care’). Both processes are already
separate on Bricklink (store inventory and wanted lists), but the concept of
‘undetermined’ is not.

For the catalog policy
• Keep all undetermined variants in the catalog and even add undetermined
variants for those parts that are similar. This information may be extracted
from the relation type ‘part is similar to’.
• Drop the deletion marks for all the undetermined entries and solely use
this marking for wrong or outdated entries.

For sellers
For sellers to don’t want to distinguish between part variants: list these parts
under the undetermined entry only. The BL system should be modified to show these
entries amidst the specific variants for any non specific search as through wanted
lists.

For buyers
For buyers it should be possible to specify an undetermined variety or in
effect a search pattern instead of a single part number. If a buyer does not
care whether a p=4085 is of type a, b, c or d, the buyer should be able to add
p=4085* to his wanted list and the search engine should have no trouble in matching
4085a, 4085b or 4085d with this. Similarly to the 0 color (labeled N/A or Not
Appicable while in this context it actually means Irrelevant).
Buyers should be assisted by the website to specify a specific variant if applicable,
but default to the don’t care form.

For the Bricklink website
• Add a feature to the ‘Add to Wanted List’ and ‘Edit Wanted List’ forms
to allow adding of (a) this specific variant only or (b) include variants. Then
populate the wanted list with the appropriate search pattern instead of the single
part number. This would take the form of either a complete enumeration of all
varieties like ‘4085|4085a|4085b|4085c|4085d’ (plate 1x1 with clip) or the more
general entry of ‘4085*’ or ‘4085@’; I would think the enumeration is more robust,
as it would also allow ‘3794|3794a|3794b|15573’ (jumper 1x2) and would also
allow manual exclusion of one or more variants.
• Adjust the ‘Items for sale’ pages or page fragments that show all matching
parts to include all variants when searching for the don’t care variety.

For the Bricklink database
• Widen the field WantedListItems.ItemNumber to allow for longer patterns.
100 chars would be enough for most enumerations of varieties I can think of.

For the Bricklink search engine
• For matching wanted lists with store items: presume that wanted list entries
may contain a search pattern instead of a single entry. Change the SQL from ‘=’
to ‘LIKE’ wherever necessary or drop the quotes around the field. (But make sure
no malicious code may be entered through this field).

Extra
• A similar feature might be implemented to search for approximate colors
such as ‘any gray’ or ‘any green’, similar to how Studio groups the colors.

Any thoughts of whether this would be helpful for you as a seller or for you
as a buyer?

Author:

Gaston.La.Brick

Posted:

Dec 30, 2019 14:52

Subject:

Re: Don't set "Ready" as default order status.

Viewed:

56 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, C0lsanders_ writes:

You can manually set it to paid. Bottom of the order page 'Edit page',
then 'Payment status'.

I know: you are referring to "Payment status".
However, sometimes the order status is set to "Paid". And that is not logical,
if you know there is a separate status field for payment status.

I have to manually set it as not paid sometimes, when an "idiot" buyer set it
as paid, without having actually paid. I may then message them, as they usually
think they have paid (but didn't).

Miles (C0lsanders_)

Author:

Gaston.La.Brick

Posted:

Dec 30, 2019 14:50

Subject:

Re: Don't set "Ready" as default order status.

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

My reason is two-fold:

1) to keep track of orders that need to be processed
2) I actually had the situation where the (recurring) buyer requested to pickup
and he was under the impression it was picked already. So when the buyer showed
up on a Sunday at 9 AM, it was clear (to me) the status "Ready" gave an incorrect
perception.

Author:

C0lsanders_

Posted:

Dec 30, 2019 08:45

Subject:

Re: Don't set "Ready" as default order status.

Viewed:

59 times

Topic:

You can manually set it to paid. Bottom of the order page 'Edit page',
then 'Payment status'.
I have to manually set it as not paid sometimes, when an "idiot" buyer set it
as paid, without having actually paid. I may then message them, as they usually
think they have paid (but didn't).

Miles (C0lsanders_)

In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:

After a user places an order, it gets the default status "Ready".*
This confuses buyers: they think the order was processed and is ready for shipping.
I would like to suggest setting the default order status always to "Pending".

*(Unless they pay at once using BL, it is set to "Paid" automatically. I can't
set it to that status manually. This is confusing since there is a payment status
as well. So that's double info and I would remove that possible value for
the status.)

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Dec 30, 2019 07:52

Subject:

Re: Don't set "Ready" as default order status.

Viewed:

54 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:

In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:

Hi there

Don't use IC so do not have this problem . but I think it is worth noting
that lots of sellers use the status indicator for different situations.

For example - in our store we see Pending as order placed. We change that status
to Processing when we pick the order up and send out our acknowledgement to the
buyer. When the order is picked and pre-packaged the status changes to ready,
and when it is invoiced it goes to packed. We don't change it to paid - we
ship within 24 hours of being paid and change it then to shipped. So paid is
not something we use and we change the status at various times throughout the
process to match our processes. That seems to work well for us but it probably
would not suit others. Just depends on whether you use IC or bother with the
status at all. I don't believe Bricklink should get involved with changing
the status automatically in most cases - that should be left to the stores and
when appropriate the buyers.

Bill @ Calsbricks

IC orders that come in not yet paid (or verified) come in as "ready", so in your
routine it's the same issue as that I have: Some of your "ready" orders would
be picked and pre-packed, while others would be completely newly received IC
orders. There are 2 possible solutions:

1. Invoice manual orders before picking them, so that all "ready" orders
mean "need to be picked" (disadvantage: if they're manual because of a shipping
cost question you may want to pick and test it first)

2. Change manual orders to "packed" once you picked them, so there's no risk
you pick them twice (disadvantage: you can't see when the buyer sent the
payment and buyers can't make additions anymore)

However, since 99% of my orders are IC, it's not difficult for me to deal
with this anymore as I can remember the status of such individual cases. So I'm
not complaining, but I agree the OP's suggestion would be an improvement.
However, I am not sure about the OP's reason for it - I haven't had any
buyers that were confused by it - just me

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

Dec 30, 2019 06:05

Subject:

Re: Don't set "Ready" as default order status.

Viewed:

52 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Dec 30, 2019 05:26

Subject:

Re: Don't set "Ready" as default order status.

Viewed:

55 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:

Agree, posted this before. It's also ambiguous for me as a seller, as I can't
distinguish new orders from the ones I have sorted and invoiced. Especially when
you work together with someone else it is messy and has already resulted in several
orders being picked twice.

Author:

Gaston.La.Brick

Posted:

Dec 30, 2019 05:10

Subject:

Don't set "Ready" as default order status.

Viewed:

133 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Dec 29, 2019 20:09

Subject:

Re: Add Approval Step "Released"

Viewed:

72 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

I realize as a non-admin I may be speaking out of turn and it will make little
difference to most people. I suggest that we add a step where an item is approved
in the catalog, but may still be awaiting release for sale. I get inspired to
make this suggestion every time I work up a set of CMF, but it would surely be
similar for other people who do catalog work on unreleased items. Sets are usually
"on hold" pending for at least a month before the official release. They could
be weighed and often they could be inventoried when they actually hit the catalog
for sale, but in the current system nothing can be done. Weight of a set can
be entered, but not weight of packing or instructions. I have over 100 items
pending in the catalog and I really wish I could get it organized, but I can't.
Would Lego object to us having information in the catalog for upcoming items?
I think they just want the sale dates respected.

How items are added to the catalog is something we are going to be looking at
closely in the future. On one side of the coin, we have pre-release work that
could be done (as you suggest) with a pending release date. On the other side,
we have inventories, parts, etc, that are sitting around well after the release
date, and in these cases maybe we could consider provisional entries that are
based on official data.

Thanks for the suggestion, and we will consider it.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

Dec 29, 2019 19:52

Subject:

Add Approval Step "Released"

Viewed:

97 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Author:

yorbrick

Posted:

Dec 26, 2019 17:21

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

91 times

Topic:

. Finally, specialized parts
like printed parts and minifigure parts from licensed sets are never available
at B&P.

They are. They shouldn't be, but they are. Less so these days, but it is
often still possible to buy some licensed parts.

Author:

62Bricks

Posted:

Dec 26, 2019 09:25

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

70 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:

Hello,

While I favor buying other people's unwanted pieces, I always check the price
of each piece on "BRICKS & PIECES" (Lego website), in an attempt to avoid buying
on bricklink pieces I could get cheaper and brand new from Lego.

This is the reason why I would love to see in bricklink if pieces are available
on "BRICKS & PIECES", and at which price, without having to search.

Best regards

I don't sell new parts, so I have no dog in this race, but it does make me
imagine what might happen if Lego put links to the BL listings from the Bricks
and Pieces site.

This is what Amazon did when they bought and then integrated Bibliofind, a used
book site. That is when they started offering items from independent sellers
alongside the ones being sold directly by Amazon.

Lego's customer support has already been sending people to Bricklink for
years to find parts they no longer offer themselves. What if they started linking
directly to them from the Lego site?

I might be able to predict what could happen - the same thing that happened when
Amazon did it. For a while, individual used book sellers made good money. The
added exposure resulted in lots of sales. A brand new book with a sticker price
at $25 was being sold by Amazon for $20, and booksellers could list (and sell)
a used copy for $15.

But then market forces rolled up. People realized that by increasing efficiency
and accepting tiny margins, you could commodify used books. They bought them
up in large remainder lots and from the stock of stores that were closing, set
up software that let them easily scan the barcode and manage large inventories
of stock, and bots that would scrape price information and automatically set
and adjust prices. That $15 used book was now being sold for 99 cents (the minimum
price Amazon allowed at the time). They were making mere pennies per sale, but
they were making thousands of sales every day.

I don't think we have much to fear by pointing Bricklink buyers to Lego,
but I fear what might happen if Lego started pointing people here.

Author:

Dino

Posted:

Dec 26, 2019 08:53

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:

When B&P opens a shop here, the prices are included in the price index. If not,
the B&B prices have no business here.

Author:

infinibrix

Posted:

Dec 26, 2019 07:52

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

70 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:

1- This does not account for volume limits on B&P so while a store here may allow
a higher amount than the qty LEGO allows- some people would pay a little more
to buy a higher QTY from one shop.
2- This does not account for a certain variety that a store here may have that
LEGO might not have that would be more favorable to the buyer to buy in one place.
3- This does not account for VAT that may be charged on LEGO but not here.
4- This does not account for speed, some buyers are willing to pay a premium
for faster service.
5- This does not account that many sought after pieces run out quickly on B&P
or simply go out of production and then you'd have a buyer comparing between
a BL store and a non available MSRP.
6- B&P is not available for all countries but BL is available for most.
7- last but not least: You are asking sellers on this platform (those who actually
pay the dues that maintain the operation of BL) to support a proposal that would
siphon traffic and business away from BL- that would not go very well.

What your proposal fails to comprehend is that there are many added values (like
the ones i mentioned above) to shopping at Bricklink VS. LEGO S@H beyond just
price.

Therefore, if you don't see or agree with the idea that there is an added
value to support this community- why would you expect this community to support
your idea?

I think you still have to appreciate why from a buyers perspective they would
wish to see Lego B&P prices among the price comparisons on Bricklink. It may
not exactly be the ideal scenario from a sellers point of view but if were to
assume you are correct with the points you are making then sellers like us should
have little to fear after all Lego only offer current generic bricks with minimal
availability of themed bricks and minifig parts

Either way if Lego decide they want to have an official Lego B&P’s BL account
it will be out of our hands anyway plus those that managed to find their way
here to Bricklink probably already know about Lego B&P’s so could we really just
be talking about a more efficient market place comparison site rather than a
path that leads to Lego taking extensive business away from its BL sellers?

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Dec 26, 2019 04:48

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

64 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:

I get why this would be a useful feature for an independent comparison site to
have. But on Bricklink itself that makes little sense, for reasons others
have mentioned. Maybe propose this at a site that is not a marketplace, such
as Rebrickable? I don't know Rebrickable very well but they do have a channel
through which you can buy on BrickOwl (maybe als on Bricklink?). It'd sound
like the best place for that helicopter overview where it's OK to compare
apples and oranges, just like sites for comparing retail prices of sets from
different sources.

Author:

manganschlamm

Posted:

Dec 26, 2019 02:35

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

77 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:

Right now, I do see both BL and B&P as complementary sources for new pieces.
Some pieces that came out very recently are considerably cheaper at B&P, while
at BL it may take a while for the prices to come down. Shipping costs for orders
from B&P within Central Europe are also mostly lower (except for very small orders).

On the other hand, many parts are simply not available at B&P, there is also
the 200 pieces limit, and prices for many standard parts that have been available
for quite some time are significantly lower at BL. Finally, specialized parts
like printed parts and minifigure parts from licensed sets are never available
at B&P. And availability of parts on B&P can change quickly.

So in conclusion, I think it is worthwhile to check both BL and B&P regularly.

Author:

Heartbricker

Posted:

Dec 25, 2019 23:40

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

84 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:

Author:

Heartbricker

Posted:

Dec 25, 2019 23:13

Subject:

Do not erase comments on checkout mode change

Viewed:

84 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

While checking out in one of the stores here, i needed to leave a comment for
the seller, the order was on 'onsite' payment mode.
After i wrote the message, i changed to 'request an invoice' mode and
was annoyed that my message was erased and i needed to rewrite.

So i'm suggesting that when we change modes of shipping/invoice/etc. - of
there was a message written prior to changing that mode: i'm hoping that
message can remain intact and not be erased.

It's a small thing, obviously not a priority, but would be a time saver if
implemented.
Seasons greetings.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Dec 25, 2019 20:34

Subject:

Re: BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

124 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:

BrickLink tried listing the MSRP for sets a few years ago, but it didn't
go over very well and the feature was removed.

Author:

Tholwin

Posted:

Dec 25, 2019 20:31

Subject:

BRICKS & PIECES availability and price

Viewed:

212 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Author:

kaat

Posted:

Dec 24, 2019 14:41

Subject:

Re: Problem/bug with shipping minimum order

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, kaat writes:

Agree it makes no sense to set it lower than the store minimum buy (part 1 of
what you say).

However, it should not be completely removed (part 2 of what you say). For example,
I use this to offer free shipping from a certain order amount. So that's
not "without any side effects"

Well I didn't intend to remove it completely, just remove the (pointless)
rule that a shipping method MUST have a minimum order at least as high
as the store minimum. So, in your example you can still enter that minimum you
want. You are just no longer forced to enter a minimum value for a shipping method
if you don't want to. If you want, you can leave it on zero while your store
minimum is €10, so that "bypassers" are able to use the method. Or you can set
it to €10 so that they can't.

Ok clear, then we agree

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Dec 24, 2019 14:31

Subject:

Re: Problem/bug with shipping minimum order

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, kaat writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

I've never quite understood why you are not allowed to set the minimum order
of a shipping method lower than the minimum order of your store. It's annoying
because if you have 10 shipping methods, then anytime you want to change your
minimum order, you need to also change it 10x in your shipping methods, for no
real reason, because the "master setting", the store minimum order value, should
determine it already.

However, it seems it's also causing another problem: Buyers can use the bypass
password to get around the minimum order, but it does not help them go
around the minimum order of the shipping methods. The result is that anytime
a buyer used the bypass password, they are able to order but unable to select
any shipping methods. So there will need to be a manual invoice.

I'd propose removing the restriction for shipping methods to have a minimum
order value that is higher than or equal to the store minimum order value - in
fact, I'd propose for shipping methods not to need a minimum value at all.
That should solve everything I described without any side effects.

Author:

kaat

Posted:

Dec 24, 2019 13:46

Subject:

Re: Problem/bug with shipping minimum order

Viewed:

31 times

Topic: