BrickLink Discussion Forum

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Hello
Can you put somewhere quantity (Qty), shown on item search page, on catalog item
page?! See pictures.
That would be very useful!
Thank you.
Cheers,
Marko

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Jan 3, 2020 03:43

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

68 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

When you just get
told that you have this long to fix it or your listing will just evaporate, I

Listings evaporating would be totally unacceptable though, and would finally
cause the people who are accusing BL of inventory gremlins to be right. If such
a system was implemented it would cause me to write software to evade it. Because
to me, if there is one thing that's unacceptable about selling, it's
parts physically taking up space in my home that are dead weight and I will never
discover it. It's a number that can only grow over time, unless I would count
all of my million parts which - call me lazy - I won't do

Much better to simply make (older) "undetermined" parts not appear in the list
when browsing a store's items. Or undetermined items forced into stockroom
(with clear notification). The seller's inventory management should always
be 100% accurate and not suffer from a pressure means to improve listings. That's
a very principal thing to me, and for some sellers there's even a tax report
aspect here.

But yes, I understand your sentiment, and it shouldn't be too difficult for
Bricklink to focus the incentive on "buyability" and not on messing up administration.

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

When a new variant is introduced after
something was listed, then logically the listing is the old variant and does
not need to be undetermined.

That's actually not logical. Sometimes it is a while before a variant is
recognized. It is not at all uncommon for it to go unnoticed for 6 months by
which time a lot of people have the new one for sale, listed as the old one.

I added

42876 Turkey Drumstick, 22mm with Oval Opening on Back
Parts: Food & Drink

to the catalog when someone on the forum reported that there
was a new variant. I happened to have it and got a quick picture. This happened
Sept 23, 2019. Last year's advent calenders brought the attention to it.
But it has now been found in 7 sets from 2018. You had over a year to part
out one of those sets and have a listing that claimed to be the old variant and
was actually the new variant.

Many more stark examples can be found among the Clikits. Little attention has
usually be given to them. [p=clikits004a] and [p=clikits004b] masqueraded as
the same part for ELEVEN YEARS before Woutr noticed they were distinct and there
are a dozen other Clikits pieces with the same situation. Now the listings are
littered with the undetermined piece and there is no way for the Bricklink computers
to determine which is which. It's pretty easy to do in person once you learn
what you are looking for, but you have to actually have the pieces in your hand.

True, and I wasn't saying that it could account for *all* listings. But it
would already help a great deal if the items that are certainly not of the newer
type, weren't turned into undetermined. Even in your 11 year example, they
could still leave listings that are older than 11 years (and not added to in
the meantime). Maybe not so many listings left that qualify in such an extreme
case, but still, all bits help.
I think for most items we have a pretty good grasp on what year they were released.
If I recall right, several lots in my inventory have turned "undetermined" that
hadn't been created or added to for quite some time, and there was no reason
to make them undetermined because of a much more recent type.

Anyway you're right it's not a *solution*... just something that'd
help. Along with clear communication about new types to sellers that have them
listed when a new one is discovered, and simple interface options to manage types.
I think type listing deserves some attention for improvement, as many problems
buyers run into with sellers have to do with type errors.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 20:53

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

It would definitely be nice if the system automatically notified you. But in
trying to clean up the Clikits listings I have often directly asked people to
check their undetermined pieces so the undetermined listings can be deleted.
The result has now and then been that they do it. Mostly it is ignored. Some
people will actually have a back and forth a few messages and then not do it.
One person just told me that I am not an admin and I can't make them. It
is hard for me to understand. It's really easy to fix once someone has pointed
it out.

So I like what Russell said about a time limit and when it is backed by real
authority instead of someone just trying to work things out. When you just get
told that you have this long to fix it or your listing will just evaporate, I
think people will take the couple of minutes to fix it.

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

When a new variant is introduced after
something was listed, then logically the listing is the old variant and does
not need to be undetermined.

42876 Turkey Drumstick, 22mm with Oval Opening on Back
Parts: Food & Drink

Author:

62Bricks

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 18:17

Subject:

Re: Part Variants

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

In Suggestions, StormChaser writes:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

listing strength

Could you explain this term in more detail? I'm genuinely not sure what
it means. I've gone back through and reread all the forum posts where it
is used and I'm still not sure of the definition.

If an entry with 400 lots is split into two entries, you may see 250 listings
go to one variant and 300 go to another. That would mean that effectively 150
of those lots were also split.

What this means for the buyer is that they now only have 250 or 300 lots to
choose from, not 400. This may not seem like a big deal, but when you narrow
their options down to domestic shipping, and add the complexity of finding a
few dozen other parts from their wanted list in the same store, it becomes a
significant issue, and it could cost them more in shipping charges and higher
part prices.

Looking at it another way, if you have 5000 parts listed in various lots under
an entry, and the entry is split, 2000 may go to one variant and 3000 would then
go to the other.

And in both these examples, if there is an undetermined entry that needs to be
retired, that splits things in three ways instead of two, at least for a year
or so.

Listing strength is one of the advantages that BrickLink has over its competition.
If you look at any given part, there is a greater quantity available from more
sources than on any other site.

Of course, listing strength isn't a big deal if you are only out to buy one
or two parts. But for most of our users, getting the most parts from the fewest
number of sources is likely one of the biggest challenges they face when dealing
with the constraints of thier building budget.

the fewest possible entries

eliminate some variants that don't really need to be distinguished by the majority
of buyers and sellers.

Fair enough. I always thought there must be some way to structure the catalog/site
so that all variants could be distinguished without affecting commercial interests.
I still feel like that would be the best possible outcome. It would allow the
site to serve all users equally.

But I understand that some variants really are unimportant and I see the chaos
that variants have on inventories. And I haven't heard anyone propose a
solution that would work well. I'm not sure that one exists.

But if we are going to make a distinction (and the site already does) between
important and unimportant variants, it would probably be helpful to clearly define
that distinction in writing so that everyone knows where the line is drawn.

Absolutely. Nothing like this will be done behind closed doors.

give a fixed, reasonable length of time for sellers to
deal with undetermined entries in their stores, instead of waiting until all
items have sold out.

Yeah, maintaining hundreds of Marked for Deletion items for years is not the
best policy.

Leniency on sellers in this respect was done to appease folks who thought the
catalog was going too far in the direction of the collectors and specialists.
But I really do believe if we can come to a compromise on this issue, sellers
will gladly relinquish their grip on those old entries.

For variants that share a part number and are distinguished by a suffix, it would
be possible to add a "pseudo" entry on the parts browsing page that would lead
to search results for all variants. For example, on this page:

https://www.bricklink.com/browseList.asp?itemType=P&catString=27

could be an entry for, say, "Plate, Modified 1 x 1 with Clip Vertical - All variants"

with a list of colors like the other entries. The links would lead to a wildcard
search for that part number in that color, as in:

https://www.bricklink.com/search.asp?viewFrom=sa&itemBrand=1000&colorID=9&q=4085%2A&searchSort=P&sz=25

Additionally, it would be a matter of a few minutes to add a checkbox to the
item search page at https://www.bricklink.com/searchAdvanced.asp?utm_content=subnav
that said "Show all variants" and that would append the * wildcard to the part
number entered.

These are things that could be done now, with no underlying changes to the catalog
or functionality. They would allow buyers to see all the variations in one set
of results.

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 17:14

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

When a new variant is introduced after
something was listed, then logically the listing is the old variant and does
not need to be undetermined.

42876 Turkey Drumstick, 22mm with Oval Opening on Back
Parts: Food & Drink

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 17:00

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

86 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, dearlydeparted writes:

Catalogue Variants: One of the most frustrating moments and arguments happened
years ago concerning part 4070 and the addition of 4070a. Many argued it was
the same part but had the slot due to the mold or level of plastic fill - others
said it was a separate mold. I spent days looking through all my 4070's and
separating into 4070a - almost going blind. Then, if I remember correctly, the
4070a was abandoned and all parts had to be compiled again. What a waste in effort
and time - I never separated them out again when the variant reappeared. Does
anyone remember this? Can we avoid such waffling in the future P-L-E-A-S-E!

Truth be told, 4070 was never "the part without the slot". You should have just
left them unsorted. 4070a was created so that if people wanted to trade the version
with slot, they could do so. But 4070b was never created.

However, that is actually a perfect example of a variant entry that needed to
go away. I agree - a huge waste of time for everyone.

Author:

dearlydeparted

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 15:37

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

59 times

Topic:

Author:

axaday

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 13:57

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

67 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

When a new variant is introduced after
something was listed, then logically the listing is the old variant and does
not need to be undetermined.

42876 Turkey Drumstick, 22mm with Oval Opening on Back
Parts: Food & Drink

Author:

hpoort

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 13:43

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, mfav writes:

[...]

You fail to present the interface side of the issue. At one extreme you have
grandma who wants to get grandchild a replacement piece to hold an antenna...and
she doesn't understand lego, and she doesn't understand variants, and
she can barely manage to navigate a web site to begin with. On the other extreme
you have the uberAFOLs who want to get extremely granular with the specifics.
The user interface for grandma is going to need to be decidedly different than
the interface for uberAFOLer. Grandma needs a drill-down; UberAFOLer wants a
dense form.

True, although I envisioned the interface side it in my mind, I did not present
the interface side. My idea is to simplify the interface for the grandma that
does not know nor care about variants, while still allowing the uberAFOLer to
specify a particular variant. This should indeed not be done by a new trick,
simply by the webform having a checkbox and/or dropdown showing the available
variants if any.

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).

True again. Maybe no user entry then. It is just an implementation suggestion
that would allow the programming to be limited to one line of code.

The better solution is to make a search page with a series of checkboxes and/or
popups where you pick what you want from a fixed list. Potentially allow for
an open search box or boxes, but restrict a single search box to a specific
field within the database. Allow the user to also specify the boolean...whether
something equals (LIKE) or contains (LIKE%...%) a value or values.

Then there's the whole issue of having to explain to the user how to use
the search function or make sure it's simple and obvious how to use it...which
the current search function is definitely not.

Agreed; the search function should be more obvious.

All the elements of the database structure, data, forms (UI/UX), and programming
need to work in concert. You've addressed parts of some of these and none
of others.

Would your proposed change be helpful? Probably. But it's moot...at least
short term...because it can't be implemented in a useful way without a very
large amount of work. You have something here in embryo that's good/it's
not fully developed yet.

Thanks for your support.

Author:

hpoort

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 13:20

Subject:

Re: Part Variants

Viewed:

50 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

In Suggestions, StormChaser writes:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

listing strength

Could you explain this term in more detail? I'm genuinely not sure what
it means. I've gone back through and reread all the forum posts where it
is used and I'm still not sure of the definition.

If an entry with 400 lots is split into two entries, you may see 250 listings
go to one variant and 300 go to another. That would mean that effectively 150
of those lots were also split.

Russell,

Since my suggestion was not about splitting, but about unifying the search methods
instead, I am not sure that you have completely understood the implications of
my suggestion. What I am suggesting would allow both sellers not to distinguish
their listings if they don't want to (and some already don't), and buyers
to get what they want without having to distinguish their searches (most new
buyers already don't).

[...]
Listing strength is one of the advantages that BrickLink has over its competition.
If you look at any given part, there is a greater quantity available from more
sources than on any other site.

With an extended wanted list feature, you would increase the number of lots that
can be found, not decrease.

[...]

Hans-Peter

Author:

bagelboybugle

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 12:45

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

Commercially yes, but BL's core appeal is the depth of its catalog.

I have always believed that scrapping undetermined was a bad idea. My argument
links very directly to set inventory - typically, when a part is changed (e.g.
a lip added to reduce the amount of plastic used to make a part) we may be able
to identify through inventory change requests which sets those parts were first
and last seen in, all the sets in between, because of how the parts mix at the
factory or old molds still may be in use, we literally cannot determine which
variant should be in a set. Thus, taking away undetermined made the BL catalog
less accurate.

The insistance by the catalog admins of removing all the undetermined entries,
especially for parts worth only a couple of pence, made it difficult for me as
a seller to offer those parts, it was simply too inefficient to invest the extra
30 minutes on a part out to individually check 1p parts for minor variances.
This played a big factor in my decision to wind up my store as a business and
only sell items that are excess from my own collection.

Perhaps a good way is to use a single entry, which is by default `undetermined`
for buyers and sellers alike who only wish to deal in one entry with variants
identified through a check box or drop down menu (3001old etc), the part out
and wanted screens wouldnt need to look too much different, undetermined options
could select as default, its then easy to select the correct/preferred varient.
It would be valuable if the price guide was also seperatable by the same parameters,
so that those who do choose to sell or buy a specific variant can search appropriately

Author:

manganschlamm

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 12:25

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, mfav writes:

While I champion the desired functionality change, I question the means to get
there.

The underlying catalog database needs to be reenvisioned from the ground up to
effect the type of change you suggest.

You've cherry picked one example out of hundreds where there is some underlying
catalog issue, so this is a piecemeal approach to a problem. The "solution" to
this one particular problem most likely will not be the same "solution" required
for some other element.

The database likely needs to be reconsidered to have these at least fields, probably
more:
- a part number ( e.g., 4085 )
- a mold variant value ( I'd guess three digits would do it...1000 variants
ought to handle it for our lifetime)
- a decoration value ( 7 digits would give 10 million possibilities)

This scheme would allow for
- 4085, 4085.1, 4085.2, etc.
- 973.1.0000001, 973.2.0000001, etc.

You could then WantList 4085 and have stores return 4085, 4085.1, 4085.2, 4085.3,
4085.4
or
Wantlist 4085.2 and have stores return 4085.2

...this is as opposed to...

The idea of a single field with 100 characters. It is too complicated and
too restrictive. This is the same problem we now have with the name/description
field. It is too short and populated too inconsistently for it to be useful.

You fail to present the interface side of the issue. At one extreme you have
grandma who wants to get grandchild a replacement piece to hold an antenna...and
she doesn't understand lego, and she doesn't understand variants, and
she can barely manage to navigate a web site to begin with. On the other extreme
you have the uberAFOLs who want to get extremely granular with the specifics.
The user interface for grandma is going to need to be decidedly different than
the interface for uberAFOLer. Grandma needs a drill-down; UberAFOLer wants a
dense form.

There are already too many "undocumented tricks" required to use the site search
as is. Needing to know to append an asterisk to the end of a search string to
return the variants is number one. Having to put quotes around search strings
is number two.

Statements like this...d'oh! Have a search field that's entirely open
for somebody to put whatever they want into it and at the same time don't
let them put anything bad into it. That's just way too broad an expectation
and impossible to code. With open search fields you have the problems of matching
strings, misspellings, punctuation, the frikkin' ampersand, and on and on.
Open search fields are, generally speaking, just plain bad.

The better solution is to make a search page with a series of checkboxes and/or
popups where you pick what you want from a fixed list. Potentially allow for
an open search box or boxes, but restrict a single search box to a specific
field within the database. Allow the user to also specify the boolean...whether
something equals (LIKE) or contains (LIKE%...%) a value or values.

Then there's the whole issue of having to explain to the user how to use
the search function or make sure it's simple and obvious how to use it...which
the current search function is definitely not.

All the elements of the database structure, data, forms (UI/UX), and programming
need to work in concert. You've addressed parts of some of these and none
of others.

Would your proposed change be helpful? Probably. But it's moot...at least
short term...because it can't be implemented in a useful way without a very
large amount of work. You have something here in embryo that's good/it's
not fully developed yet.

This all boils down to one important question: Will TLG as the new owner put
more resources into this site (i.e. more people)?

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 12:09

Subject:

Re: Part Variants

Viewed:

91 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, StormChaser writes:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

listing strength

Could you explain this term in more detail? I'm genuinely not sure what
it means. I've gone back through and reread all the forum posts where it
is used and I'm still not sure of the definition.

the fewest possible entries

eliminate some variants that don't really need to be distinguished by the majority
of buyers and sellers.

Absolutely. Nothing like this will be done behind closed doors.

give a fixed, reasonable length of time for sellers to
deal with undetermined entries in their stores, instead of waiting until all
items have sold out.

Yeah, maintaining hundreds of Marked for Deletion items for years is not the
best policy.

Author:

mfav

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 11:47

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

50 times

Topic:

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 11:47

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

62 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

At the same time, we need to start enforcing listing rules
more stringently, and give a fixed, reasonable length of time for sellers to
deal with undetermined entries in their stores, instead of waiting until all
items have sold out.

I think that is only fair if Bricklink also improves the system. Because right
now it has turned a lot of parts that I had in fact determined, into undetermined
parts (thinking of jumper plates now). When a new variant is introduced after
something was listed, then logically the listing is the old variant and does
not need to be undetermined. At the very least I'd like to receive a message
when a new variant is added and a confirmation option to mark my existing stock
as the old variant. Because right now things become undetermined without me know
it, then they are ordered, a random variant gets picked, and the result is inconsistent
inventory that needs to be recounted. That's a bit off putting.

I agree, we need to do a better job of communicating with our sellers. Perhaps
we could have sellers sign up to be notified when a variant relationship is added
to a part they have in stock.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 11:44

Subject:

Re: Part Variants

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

listing strength

Could you explain this term in more detail? I'm genuinely not sure what
it means. I've gone back through and reread all the forum posts where it
is used and I'm still not sure of the definition.

the fewest possible entries

eliminate some variants that don't really need to be distinguished by the majority
of buyers and sellers.

give a fixed, reasonable length of time for sellers to
deal with undetermined entries in their stores, instead of waiting until all
items have sold out.

Yeah, maintaining hundreds of Marked for Deletion items for years is not the
best policy.

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 11:14

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 11:02

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

83 times

Topic:

My idea is a bit different. I feel that the marketplace needs to be unified,
and that standards should be set to gain maximum listing strength with the fewest
possible entries, while still providing enough entries for important variants.

In order to bring everyone together, we need to do some housecleaning and eliminate
some variants that don't really need to be distinguished by the majority
of buyers and sellers. At the same time, we need to start enforcing listing rules
more stringently, and give a fixed, reasonable length of time for sellers to
deal with undetermined entries in their stores, instead of waiting until all
items have sold out. Keep in mind that not all undetermined entries involve variants.

I do believe there can be a middle ground on some variants, where sellers have
a choice to be general or be specific, but this would be better implemented with
a checkbox system, where sellers would check the variant they have confirmed
(or not check any variant) and then buyers who want a specific variant can easily
search for them. This could replace many of the notes that are currently written
in listings.

But compare these three entries:

3001 Brick 2 x 4
Parts: Brick

3001old Brick 2 x 4 without Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

3001special Brick 2 x 4 special (special bricks, test bricks and/or prototypes)
Parts: Brick

For the sake of the marketplace, these entries SHOULD NOT be confused by sellers,
and every seller should sort their parts accordingly. It is a foolish thing to
give an option to uneducated buyers to buy either 3001old or 3001special when
they are looking for the modern 3001.

The issue of variants has been hashed out many times in the Forum, and I would
suggest you go back and read some of those threads, so that you will see that
not all variants are of equal significance. BrickLink's great strength is
selling brand new parts, and it's important that when someone comes here
for replacements, they are directed to the newest, latest mold variant of a given
part.

In Suggestions, hpoort writes:

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:

cosmicray

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 07:42

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

A long time ago, I made a comment (possibly even a suggestion) that multiple
types of basic parts should be handled by the catalog with a virtual roll-up.
IOW, If you have type-1, type-2, type-3,and undetermined, they should all live
by themselves (in unique catalog entries), but the net effect of all of those
should also be visible under an 'umbrella' catalog entry (for lack of
a better term) that would allow a buyer who does not care about the specific
variant to see all of the specific variants virtually merged into one list. That
would give buyers the Shiite of buying the 'general' part of the 'specific
variant' part as their building needs dictate. Sellers would not be able
to list under the umbrella, but would have to pick one of the participating catalog
entries, know that regardless of which they chose, it would still sow up in the
umbrella listing.

Nita Rae

In Suggestions, hpoort writes:

Author:

hpoort

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 07:07

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:

But but but… The Price Guide!?!!!

Yes maybe that might give some differences between sellers who do and who do
not distinguish. I'd figure the price guide would record the items actually
be sold, whether they be determined or undetermined variants alike.

The actual change would merely be a change to the wanted list feature allowing
for patterned searches instead of exact matches.

Hans-Peter

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

Jan 2, 2020 06:49

Subject:

Re: Policy change - Undetermined versus Unknown a

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

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]

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:

71 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:

123 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:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

Author:

Teup

Posted:

Dec 24, 2019 13:10

Subject:

Problem/bug with shipping minimum order

Viewed:

74 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Author:

tsystem

Posted:

Dec 20, 2019 14:28

Subject:

XML drag and drop

Viewed:

57 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Hi,

I'm working a lot with xml file (bricklink structure), but with only copy
past, it's really a constrained task.... Why it's not allow to drag and
drop xml file like io or ldr or lxf ?

Thanks

Mr

Author:

Nato73

Posted:

Dec 16, 2019 14:55

Subject:

Location and Delivery Addresses

Viewed:

107 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Hi guys

I am writing this both as a buyer and seller.

I am using an international Depot in Germany when purchasing goods from Central
Europe.
The reasons behind this are few, but are not subject of the current topic.

I think it will be very useful to add a different address field for delivery
so I don't have to change my address when purchasing.

Thank you
Best regards
Nato

Author:

cosmicray

Posted:

Dec 16, 2019 10:52

Subject:

Re: Where are our Paypal notifications?

Viewed:

56 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, sancho10 writes:

Please, Bricklink give us back the Paypal notifications.
Or please notify us in any way that the payment is done.

Those who have switched to Paypal Marketplace are not receiving the notifications.
Many users are complaining about that in other posts.

This suggestion has been changed to 'Implemented'. I am not receiving
PayPal email notifications for payments that occur via Instant Checkout. I receive
PayPal payment notifications from other venues tho. How do I cause payments on
BrickLink to generate email notifications.

These notifications are essential because they are the only place that PayPal
gives me the 'Receipt number' for customers who use direct payment from
payment cards (i.e. PayPal Express). Those Receipt Numbers do not appear on the
PayPal payment detail page.

Nita Rae

Author:

Kongzilla

Posted:

Dec 15, 2019 04:39

Subject:

Suggestion: order prices display default

Viewed:

80 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Add another column to the orders page display that tells you the price of your
orders in one currency, of your choice. Good for budgeting, and estimating your
spending. Can be an approximation, if it needs to be, it would really just be
a tool to help you work out how much you've spent. Otherwise you have to
do it manually, or in your head.

Author:

ADBrick

Posted:

Dec 14, 2019 21:31

Subject:

Global Marketplace Link

Viewed:

125 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]