Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Miro78  | | Posted: | Mar 6, 2022 11:49 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Purple Classic Space Torso ID Convention | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, peregrinator writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | Ok, I hope this is evidence proof that this is not a new print, but merely a
printing artifact. See image below.
|
I still see the light golden highlight. And I don't see why there would be
any bleedthrough - at least in the classic logo, the white print goes on first
(this is obvious when the gold fades) and I've never seen another dark-colored
torso with his sort of highlight.
|
That could be due to thinner layer of the gold in this minifigure print batch.
Lego quality used to be better in the past, but their production is done in various
places around the world with differing quality at times. My image clearly shows
that it is a print artifact and not an intentional gold highlight. The darker
gold is due to the dark color beneath. I have seen this whenever they tried to
print a lighter color over dark colors in other minifigures. Eventually Lego
corrects it, but they won't do that for this minifigure as the CMF line is
a short production run.
Miro
|
 |
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Mar 6, 2022 11:38 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Purple Classic Space Torso ID Convention | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | The Dark Purple Classic Space torso for the CMF22 series figure 11 (Space Creature)
pictured below contains a classic space torso given a new print ID of 973pb4514c01,
with the emphasis on the print pattern of ID of 973pb4514*, which does not follow
the classic space print torso convention of 973p90* which is used on classic
space torso prints.
|
"New" denotes that it is for a reissued minifig, so that you can tell whether
you are listing or buying the vintage or reissue version of a torso. It is possible
that "973p90new" should have had a new number, since its vertical centering made
a pretty obvious difference, but it was for a reissue of an old minifigure.
"973p90new2" was an improved reissue of 973p90. You can tell it apart only from
the ribs inside. It is really 973p90, but delineated so people can keep the
vintage and reissues separate.
973pb4514 is a different case. It was not made for a reissue minifigure and
it is not the same print.
|
So the slightest highlight of the print is what is causing BL to assign it a
new print ID? What if Lego continues on with classic spaceman figures like the
orange one and updates the print to include the new highlight? Will it then cause
for a new print convention for the series? At the time of the original writing,
I did not catch the slightest highlight on the print.
Miro
|
New patterns on torsos are given new identifiers. The dark purple torso in question
is a new pattern from the older ones, so it gets its own number. If LEGO use
this exact pattern on another torso, then it will get numbered beginning with
973pb4514, also. And if LEGO issues yet another take on the logo, it will get
yet another new torso number. It really is that simple. 
|
Ok, I hope this is evidence proof that this is not a new print, but merely a
printing artifact. See image below.
Miro
|
Lastly, this may not even warrant a the "new3" name (973p90new3c11) but quite
rather a "new2" (973p90new2c11) name since this is not likely a new print, but
rather a printing artifact.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Mar 6, 2022 11:34 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Purple Classic Space Torso ID Convention | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | The Dark Purple Classic Space torso for the CMF22 series figure 11 (Space Creature)
pictured below contains a classic space torso given a new print ID of 973pb4514c01,
with the emphasis on the print pattern of ID of 973pb4514*, which does not follow
the classic space print torso convention of 973p90* which is used on classic
space torso prints.
|
"New" denotes that it is for a reissued minifig, so that you can tell whether
you are listing or buying the vintage or reissue version of a torso. It is possible
that "973p90new" should have had a new number, since its vertical centering made
a pretty obvious difference, but it was for a reissue of an old minifigure.
"973p90new2" was an improved reissue of 973p90. You can tell it apart only from
the ribs inside. It is really 973p90, but delineated so people can keep the
vintage and reissues separate.
973pb4514 is a different case. It was not made for a reissue minifigure and
it is not the same print.
|
So the slightest highlight of the print is what is causing BL to assign it a
new print ID? What if Lego continues on with classic spaceman figures like the
orange one and updates the print to include the new highlight? Will it then cause
for a new print convention for the series? At the time of the original writing,
I did not catch the slightest highlight on the print.
Miro
|
New patterns on torsos are given new identifiers. The dark purple torso in question
is a new pattern from the older ones, so it gets its own number. If LEGO use
this exact pattern on another torso, then it will get numbered beginning with
973pb4514, also. And if LEGO issues yet another take on the logo, it will get
yet another new torso number. It really is that simple.
|
Ok, I hope this is evidence proof that this is not a new print, but merely a
printing artifact. See image below.
Miro
|
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Mar 6, 2022 11:10 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Purple Classic Space Torso ID Convention | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | The Dark Purple Classic Space torso for the CMF22 series figure 11 (Space Creature)
pictured below contains a classic space torso given a new print ID of 973pb4514c01,
with the emphasis on the print pattern of ID of 973pb4514*, which does not follow
the classic space print torso convention of 973p90* which is used on classic
space torso prints.
|
"New" denotes that it is for a reissued minifig, so that you can tell whether
you are listing or buying the vintage or reissue version of a torso. It is possible
that "973p90new" should have had a new number, since its vertical centering made
a pretty obvious difference, but it was for a reissue of an old minifigure.
"973p90new2" was an improved reissue of 973p90. You can tell it apart only from
the ribs inside. It is really 973p90, but delineated so people can keep the
vintage and reissues separate.
973pb4514 is a different case. It was not made for a reissue minifigure and
it is not the same print.
|
So the slightest highlight of the print is what is causing BL to assign it a
new print ID? What if Lego continues on with classic spaceman figures like the
orange one and updates the print to include the new highlight? Will it then cause
for a new print convention for the series? At the time of the original writing,
I did not catch the slightest highlight on the print.
Miro
|
New patterns on torsos are given new identifiers. The dark purple torso in question
is a new pattern from the older ones, so it gets its own number. If LEGO use
this exact pattern on another torso, then it will get numbered beginning with
973pb4514, also. And if LEGO issues yet another take on the logo, it will get
yet another new torso number. It really is that simple.
|
Do we really think this print is different or is it just an effect of the
dark purple bleeding through the background giving it the appearance of light
and dark gold. It looks like the "highlight" portion of the gold is where it
overlaps with the white in contrast to the "darker" gold where there is dark
purple underneath it. Perhaps Lego did not apply enough gold paint to overcome
the dark purple color beneath.
I am looking at all of the colored versions of the classic space prints and I
feel like we are being way too discriminating on this one, whereas there are
print variations on other figures that get ignored.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Mar 5, 2022 13:45 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Purple Classic Space Torso ID Convention | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | The Dark Purple Classic Space torso for the CMF22 series figure 11 (Space Creature)
pictured below contains a classic space torso given a new print ID of 973pb4514c01,
with the emphasis on the print pattern of ID of 973pb4514*, which does not follow
the classic space print torso convention of 973p90* which is used on classic
space torso prints.
|
"New" denotes that it is for a reissued minifig, so that you can tell whether
you are listing or buying the vintage or reissue version of a torso. It is possible
that "973p90new" should have had a new number, since its vertical centering made
a pretty obvious difference, but it was for a reissue of an old minifigure.
"973p90new2" was an improved reissue of 973p90. You can tell it apart only from
the ribs inside. It is really 973p90, but delineated so people can keep the
vintage and reissues separate.
973pb4514 is a different case. It was not made for a reissue minifigure and
it is not the same print.
|
So the slightest highlight of the print is what is causing BL to assign it a
new print ID? What if Lego continues on with classic spaceman figures like the
orange one and updates the print to include the new highlight? Will it then cause
for a new print convention for the series? At the time of the original writing,
I did not catch the slightest highlight on the print.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Mar 5, 2022 13:36 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Purple Classic Space Torso ID Convention | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | The Dark Purple Classic Space torso for the CMF22 series figure 11 (Space Creature)
pictured below contains a classic space torso given a new print ID of 973pb4514c01,
with the emphasis on the print pattern of ID of 973pb4514*, which does not follow
the classic space print torso convention of 973p90* which is used on classic
space torso prints.
Even the CMF Rocket Boy from the CMF series 17
or the other reissues of the Classic Space figures follow this convention torso
973p90 ID convention.
I highly suggest changing the 973pb4514c01 to be renamed to 973p90new2c11 which
is the next sequential available color number. Ideally the # ID after the "c"
should be BL color ID, but alas that would be a huge undertaking for the Catalog
system. Here is the list of the current 973p90new2* catalog entries: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?pg=1&q=973p90new2%2A&catLike=W&v=1
Miro
|
Upon closer inspection, perhaps this warrants a "new3" subclassifications due
to the print on the planet containing light gold highlight, so actually 973p90new3c11
would be better fitting. I will submit this request with a link to this post.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Mar 5, 2022 13:17 | | Subject: | Dark Purple Classic Space Torso ID Convention | | Viewed: | 132 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| The Dark Purple Classic Space torso for the CMF22 series figure 11 (Space Creature)
pictured below contains a classic space torso given a new print ID of 973pb4514c01,
with the emphasis on the print pattern of ID of 973pb4514*, which does not follow
the classic space print torso convention of 973p90* which is used on classic
space torso prints.
Even the CMF Rocket Boy from the CMF series 17
or the other reissues of the Classic Space figures follow this convention torso
973pb90 ID convention.
I highly suggest changing the 973pb4514c01 to be renamed to 973p90new2c11 which
is the next sequential available color number. Ideally the # ID after the "c"
should be BL color ID, but alas that would be a huge undertaking for the Catalog
system. Here is the list of the current 973p90new2* catalog entries: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?pg=1&q=973p90new2%2A&catLike=W&v=1
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Sep 14, 2021 10:44 | | Subject: | Buyer from region I don't want to sell to | | Viewed: | 129 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| So I just had an order from a new buyer from a country that I specifically chose
not to do business with because I have been a victim of theft of my custom MOC
instructions in the past. However, this buyer created a new account from USA
to side-step my store rule. There is plenty of evidence which I do not want to
reveal here on the forum that proves to me this to be true. In order to protect
my custom MOC instructions that I sell on this site, I do not want to purse with
the order and just refund the buyer and cancel the order. I specifically chose
to use BL for select MOCs to be sold here on BL because it gives me more control
over this problem, compared to Rebrickable site which has not been able to stop
MOC instruction theft. Waiting on BL customer support e-mail.
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Mar 6, 2021 11:22 | | Subject: | Re: 40450 Amelia Earhart - add to catalog?? | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, popsicle writes:
I love this GWP set. I pulled the trigger, ordered the Porsche 911, cashed out
some of my VIP points and I look forward to both of them. I rarely build sets
and display them, but these 2 will be nice. I may be tempted to build an upscaled
version of the Vega 5B "Red Bus" in scale to the Sopwith Camel that I have built
and have on display.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2021 18:13 | | Subject: | Re: Friends accessories pin vs bar classification | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SteveTheBrick writes:
| | Here's the the 5 in the 'I think these also' list. All have thin
pins:
Steve
|
Excellent. Thanks Steve and Peregrinator. I'll await to hear back from Catalog
admin to see how they want to handle it.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2021 10:50 | | Subject: | Re: Friends accessories pin vs bar classification | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | This pertains the difference between Friends accessories flowers and other accessories.
There appear to be 2 classifications in regards to connections. 1) thin pin and
2) bar thickness pin.
The catalogue descriptions don't differentiate them but it affects how they
can be connected. It would be great if the descriptions reflected the difference
as the thin pin accessories can mainly be connected to hair pieces with holes
and and the like, and the bar thickness accessories can be connected to broader
parts with bar holes, including grasping by hands.
Style 1 (thin pin) are these
* | | 18853 Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Flower with Pointed Petals and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
* | | 93080h Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Flower with Serrated Petals and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
* | | 93080g Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Flower with Smooth Petals and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
* | | 93080m Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Tiara with 5 Points and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
I think these also
* | | 11618 Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Bow with Heart, Long Ribbon, and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
Style 2 (bar thickness with pin hole on the bottom)
Miro
|
Update: Some of the Style 2 items don't have pin holes on the bottom (fish,
seahorse), and I am uncertain on the style 1 under the "I think these also" section
above, which would need to be verified.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2021 10:47 | | Subject: | Friends accessories pin vs bar classification | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| This pertains the difference between Friends accessories flowers and other accessories.
There appear to be 2 classifications in regards to connections. 1) thin pin and
2) bar thickness pin.
The catalogue descriptions don't differentiate them but it affects how they
can be connected. It would be great if the descriptions reflected the difference
as the thin pin accessories can mainly be connected to hair pieces with holes
and and the like, and the bar thickness accessories can be connected to broader
parts with bar holes, including grasping by hands.
Style 1 (thin pin) are these
* | | 18853 Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Flower with Pointed Petals and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
* | | 93080h Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Flower with Serrated Petals and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
* | | 93080g Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Flower with Smooth Petals and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
* | | 93080m Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Tiara with 5 Points and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
I think these also
* | | 11618 Friends Accessories Hair Decoration, Bow with Heart, Long Ribbon, and Small Pin
Parts: Friends |
Style 2 (bar thickness with pin hole on the bottom)
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Aug 6, 2020 10:17 | | Subject: | Re: Orange Classic Space minifigure | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, Tracyd writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | Lastly, the orange Classic Space minifigure (not really sure it would be considered
reissue it being a new color)
|
He is going to look like an old Classic Space figure, but be orange and have
a hollow stud head and a torso with inner ribs, so he'll be a reissue.
|
How can something that was never issued be reissued? Thant makes 0 sense. This
needs some better verbiage, and no I don't currently have any.
|
"Modern" works, at least for now. In 20 years it will not be so meaningful.
Worse still if they make new ones in future, they'd need a new term. Although
same with a reissued reissue. Maybe "issue 1" and "issue 2" would be better.
|
The orange space minifigure was never released in the past, so there should never
be any confusion of buyers being misled. I personally don't care if they
call it "reissue". The term modern is confusing as time goes on. I personally
think the term "Classic Space" refers to both original space theme and style
of the original space theme. The BL catalog will show that this figure was released
in 2020, so there should be no confusion.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Aug 5, 2020 21:52 | | Subject: | Re: Orange Classic Space minifigure | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, peregrinator writes:
| | In Catalog, peregrinator writes:
| | In Catalog, peregrinator writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | Lastly, the orange Classic Space minifigure (not really sure it would be considered
reissue it being a new color)
|
He is going to look like an old Classic Space figure, but be orange and have
a hollow stud head and a torso with inner ribs, so he'll be a reissue.
|
I'm guessing the new thick chinstrap helmet too with the sprue mark on top.
|
Although the helmet in the OP's picture looks different, more like the "classic
thick chin strap" version
|
Ah, there's the explanation: "The orange is photoshopped from a red spaceman,
though."
|
Not a photoshop.
Miro
|
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Aug 5, 2020 18:20 | | Subject: | Orange Classic Space minifigure | | Viewed: | 239 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| It has come to my attention that Benny minifigures do not contain the wording
'Classic Space' which all the other versions of the classic space minifigure
do contain that. Some of the re-released classic space minifigures are from The
Lego Movie and hence their 'tlm' minifig prefix. Is there are reason
why Benny does not get the honor of having the 'Classic Space' description?
When searching for 'Classic Space' minifigures other town figures come
up with the classic space figure helmet or spaceman or whatnot on their shirt.
I guess what I am saying is that it would make it more uniform to have all of
them have the Classic Space designation in their title description so that they
can all be found since they are scattered across Space, The Lego Movie, and Town
categories.
Lastly, the orange Classic Space minifigure (not really sure it would be considered
reissue it being a new color) is coming out in October, and from looking into
other DK books, it looks like it will have the 'sp' prefix. I have the
figure on hand. Just let me know if you want me to take a photo of it for the
catalogue. I do not have the book.
figure reference: https://www.brothers-brick.com/2020/01/03/new-orange-spaceman-joins-the-classic-space-lego-minifigure-lineup-news/
The book is not out until October 13th in US, October 1st in UK through Amazon.
My photo of the gang (minus the gray space guy, I am awaiting his helmet)
Miro
|
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Aug 3, 2020 10:35 | | Subject: | Re: Super Mario - Minifigs vs Animals | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, jonwil writes:
| | How was it decided which enemies should be minifigs and which should be animals?
|
I'm not a fan of waiting, but I was waiting patiently for this topic to arise.
Fortunately, I was not required to wait long.
I originally had them all categorized as figures. I would like to see, by the
way, all figures eventually categorized that way whether they are animal or human
figures. It would solve problems.
Then I moved most to animals based on the new sorting criteria. I discovered
that the new criteria didn't help too terribly much. Or, to put it differently,
they didn't assist as much as I would've hoped.
To answer your question, the ones I left as figures were those that had seemed
to play some kind of role in the series as characters, especially with speaking
parts. My selection might not have been perfect, I'll admit. We can move
animals to figures or figures to animals as deemed necessary.
| | A Monty Mole for example seems very much like an animal to me because it is a
mole and not sentient in any way
|
I was definitely undecided about Monty Mole. It was a tough one. But this was
a playable character in at least four Mario games. In one game a Monty Mole
was an ally to the main characters. In another game a Monty Mole operated a
tank and in a different game a three-barreled cannon.
|
Oh no, what a mess. I know they do not fit the classic definition of a minifigure
anyway, but for the sake of a lack of a better category (fictional character
or something like that) I would just keep them all under the minifigure. For
example Mario Bob-omb is not an animal in any shape or form. It's a fictional
character. Bombs with feet are not land animals.
After all there are many minifigures from Ninjago that are snakelike and are
included in the minifigure category. Keeping all of these characters together
will just make for an easier chore in finding and purchasing them.
[p=mariobobomb01]
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Jul 18, 2020 13:49 | | Subject: | Re: Missing large/high quality images in catalog | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
Thanks. I missed this thread. Glad to hear that the admin team is already on
top of this. I also agree that the images should be official images.
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Jul 18, 2020 13:36 | | Subject: | Missing large/high quality images in catalog | | Viewed: | 74 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| A lot of old Lego sets have very small images in the Bricklink catalog. They
look like they were obtained from printed sources from the printed catalogs that
used to be included with those sets back in the 80s/90s. My suggestion is to
see if better quality and higher resolution images can be obtained from The Lego
Group for the Bricklink catalog. After all, Lego owns Bricklink. What does the
admin team think of this? Perhaps I am assuming too much and a convenient archive
of these images for all of these old sets does not readily exist for Bricklinks
use. It's worth checking into it. Are there any objections?
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Jul 13, 2020 12:51 | | Subject: | Re: Add feature of minimum FB for listings. | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | Some of the best buyers I've had the privilege of welcoming in my store have
been zero/low feedback users. So while I understand the rationale for this and
of course it being elective, I personally think that all users have to start
somewhere, so it is maybe not in the best interest of stores to needlessly limit
the buying experience.
Laws are not the same everywhere, so I guess we are fortunate that no order is
legally binding until I as the seller have acknowledged it. If I am really uncomfortable
with the buyer or what he/she is ordering, I reserve the right to cancel the
order, demand the buyer use a shipping method with insurance and tracking or
to demand another form of payment. If the buyer cannot agree, that is a red flag
and it will strengthen my reasons for cancelling.
For fraudulent chargebacks, use the NPB process and negative feedback, else such
buyers just get a free pass to go do the same thing to the next seller. We cannot
prevent fraudsters and scammers anyway. And in my personal opinion, the feedback
system is not a fair guide to good or bad users, which is why I hardly ever look
at it. So for me personally, this would not be a help at all and might just make
some buyers wary of placing orders in the first case. Some users might feel different,
but the idea that the site should limit the buying experience beyond already
having minimum buys, minimum lot averages, NPB and the one-sided right to cancel
for sellers, does not sit well.
|
I have no stake in this as I stopped selling parts and sets long ago, but I don't
see the harm this would cause if it's executed properly (meaning invisibly).
It's no different of a feature than minimum buy, bulk lot price limits, or
restricting countries that can purchase from you, and if it's opt in, than
the sellers that don't want to participate will have less competition from
other sellers. Buyers will be oblivious to it, so they won't know.
It's no different than how Bricklink stores operate now. Bricklink is a marketplace
with thousands of stores with their unique inventories and rules (minimum buys,
lot limits, speed/efficiency of operation, etc). Just another tool. The question
really becomes, is there enough interest from sellers for this feature for Briclink
to be bothered with implementing and what other coding/database issues this would
cause (Price Guide listing and sales data).
Miro
|
|
| Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Jul 13, 2020 12:31 | | Subject: | Re: Add feature of minimum FB for listings. | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | Presumably any items that get hidden behind a minimum feedback would also need
to be hidden from anyone not logged in too.
|
Yes, that would have to be case then. Perhaps those wanting this feature would
just need to accept that and live with it.
Miro
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
USA, California
