BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Catalog, randyf writes:

Dear BrickLink members,

In May of this year, the LEGO Group plans to release a new color, and this has
implications for the BrickLink catalog and marketplace. The new color being introduced
is 375 Transparent Black, and we believe it will eventually replace LEGO color
111 Transparent Brown.

As most of you know, the greater fan community has for many years referred to
LEGO color 111 Transparent Brown as "Trans-Black". Up until now, this
name has served us well because there was no official LEGO color known as Transparent
Black. Now that the LEGO Group is introducing a color officially known as Transparent
Black, it will cause alignment problems to have the same name being used for
two different colors.

We anticipate that the introduction of this color will cause some disruptions
over the short term, but we have created a plan of action to minimize those disruptions.

The first thing we will do is change the name of the current Trans-Black color
to "Trans-Brown (Old Trans-Black)". This change is scheduled to
take place at the beginning of April. This will ensure that the name change will
be very noticeable within the catalog, set inventories, BrickLink stores, order
summaries, etc., so that the majority of BrickLink users can adjust to the change.

Next, the new color will be added to the catalog as "Trans-Black (2023)"
to make it very obvious that this is a new color and should not be used for older
set inventories and older parts being listed for sale. This addition is expected
to happen at the beginning of May when set 75346 is released and inventoried:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1398124

After a 6-month transition, we will remove the text in parentheses from both
color names. The older color will then be "Trans-Brown", and the
newer color will be "Trans-Black". This will complete the transition.

Why not just keep the text in parentheses? Seemed like a reasonable plan going
forward. But why not just keep the text in parentheses instead of removing it
after 6 months.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The question arises, why have we decided to go the route outlined above rather
than leaving "Trans-Black" aligned to LEGO color 111 Transparent Brown
and creating a new color name for the new LEGO color 375 Transparent Black? There
are several reasons.

First, we want to make sure that we do not create long-term confusion between
these colors, since we believe the new LEGO color 375 Transparent Black will
become the standard color and LEGO color 111 Transparent Brown will become just
another part of the history of the brick system we all know and love. As time
goes by, the older color will not be seen as often and the newer color will be
everywhere. And after what we hope is a relatively short period of time, BrickLink
users will adjust naturally to the change.

Second, coming up with a name for a new color is not an easy task. Although it
looks darker than the current LEGO color 111 Transparent Brown, it doesn't
look much different from what most people would say is some type of "transparent
blackish gray" color. Typically, new color names grow longer over time to
help distinguish from existing colors, so we could end up with something like
"Trans-Very Dark Bluish Gray".

Longer names are something we have come to accept in a catalog that covers the
entire history of LEGO colors, but it helps lower the entry barrier to BrickLink
when we can use simpler names at least for the most common colors. Using the
relatively short names "Trans-Brown" and "Trans-Black" are ideal
instead of retaining "Trans-Black" for the earlier color and creating
a longer name for the new color.

Finally, aligning the names of the two colors with the official LEGO color names
helps us future-proof the BrickLink catalog. By aligning these color names now,
we make sure that any other colors the LEGO Group may introduce within this range
in the future would not cause any further issues.

Thank you for your patience as we make this transition.

The BrickLink Catalog Administrative Team

Author:

pitz8008

Posted:

Mar 18, 2023 22:04

Subject:

Re: What's the correct process - bogus chargeback

Viewed:

86 times

Topic:

In Help, FigBits writes:

A buyer placed an order in my store in January. I shipped it out. A month later,
they file a chargeback with their credit card company, saying they did not authorize
the payment. (NOT that the item didn't arrive, but that the payment itself
should never have been charged to their card.)

Another month later, Paypal sides with them, and reverses the payment and charges
me a $20 fee on top of it.

I looked at their feedback today, and it appears they have done this to at least
one other seller recently.

Too much time has passed for me to file a non-paying buyer (and the rules seem
to indicate that it would be removed even if it was still in the timeframe).
It's too late to change my feedback for them.

What is the official process for me?

yannbellucci if anyone is curious.

Author:

pitz8008

Posted:

Mar 9, 2023 18:31

Subject:

Re: Drop shipper

Viewed:

53 times

Topic:

In Help, Zixx writes:

As long as they provide the correct address for the label on Paypal, you're
fine. If you have a store, you're trying to makes sales, right?

And don't include an invoice. They kindly asked you not to and you are getting
an extra sale from their efforts to sell on a different platform. One could view
it as someone finding customers for you. Personally, I'd prefer to have their
repeat business as a seller than to "make a point" and get no sales from
them.

But hey, that's just my three cents . . .

+1,000,000,000

In Help, ImperialFleet writes:

Someone has now placed an order 3 times over the course of a couple months, but
all with all different accounts. There previous ones got deleted. The address
is different, but the account name is the same, along with the same message of
pls don't use invoice. Idk what to do? Report them for multiple accounts?
I can't prove it, but it's not a coincidence with same name and note

Thanks
mba

Author:

pitz8008

Posted:

Feb 22, 2023 10:58

Subject:

Re: Lying store owner!

Viewed:

82 times

Topic:

In Help, pcthurman writes:

In Help, wildchicken13 writes:

In Help, pcthurman writes:

Unless your business is the selling of said kid's toys and the income from
said toys is needed to pay the bills. It has been 8 days now not 3 or 4 and still
my order has not shipped. So honestly, when is it too long?
On top of this order, I have an order from the UK that shipped on the 10th of
January that still has not arrived and I am not even sure it has left the Royal
Mail shipping center yet.

So, John, you may have a very laid-back perspective of kid's toys, but my
life depends on them, and I think TLG would agree that kid's toys are kind
of important.

Cass T

Patience is a virtue but eight days is a long time. Reach out the seller and
ask them for an update on the status of the package.

The status of the package is "Feb. 19 12:15am Shipping label created, USPS
awaiting item" as of 5 minutes ago.
I did send a message to the seller this morning asking if there was a problem
with my order since it has not shipped yet and I am awaiting a response.

Cass T

Not all packages get scanned in nowadays. And, yes, are you drop shipping these?

Author:

pitz8008

Posted:

Feb 16, 2023 15:52

Subject:

Re: US buyer using freight forwarder to Russia

Viewed:

74 times

Topic: