I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
If you see an item with "Like New" in the description, report it (whether
New or Used).
New is definitely restricted to items that have never been used in any way, displayed,
or played with. The only exception (which I oppose) is that New minifigures can
be assembled.
New should only be New as described so as others have said, rpeort any new that
are not.
I am not sure why Like New cannot be used (pardong the pun) as a description
of Used though.
That would seem a fiarly normal way to classify used parts.
Like new cannot be used because “new” and “used” describe a state of being. Not
a condition. Nothing is capable of being similar to “not played with” or “not
displayed”. It either has or has not.
In Buying, v100Bricks writes:
New should only be New as described so as others have said, rpeort any new that
are not.
I am not sure why Like New cannot be used (pardong the pun) as a description
of Used though.
That would seem a fiarly normal way to classify used parts.
Like new cannot be used because “new” and “used” describe a state of being. Not
a condition. Nothing is capable of being similar to “not played with” or “not
displayed”. It either has or has not.
In Buying, v100Bricks writes:
New should only be New as described so as others have said, rpeort any new that
are not.
I am not sure why Like New cannot be used (pardong the pun) as a description
of Used though.
That would seem a fiarly normal way to classify used parts.
And something that is similar to another thing, but not the same, can be like
that thing.
When I see something listed as "used - like new," I (and every other
native English speaker reading this) know exactly what that means. It's much
clearer than "excellent" or "very good used condition" or the
other stuff that buyers have to put up with today.
So my vote (if I had one) would be that 'like new' should obviously be
allowed. It helps buyers!
Used parts can have a variety of descriptions as they can vary dramatically.
Descriptions I tend to use are:
Excellent, almost new looking. The type of part that looks new but cannot be
personally verified as 'new' as it was not sourced from a new set, reputable
seller, etc.
Excellent - a part that may have been used once or twice with no flaws.
Very good - a part that may have been used multiple times with maybe a flaw or
two.
Good - a part that looks good still, but have visible signs of wear with a nick
or two.
Fair - Usable, but has wear, nicks, slight damage and signs of discoloration.
Poor - Very used, like above description but more so. Only best used for cheap
source for mocs, like bricks for instance.
'New' can be difficult description when you open a set and the instruction
book or sticker sheet is damaged (and sometimes, but rarely actual parts)! Most
sellers who part out sets have come across this. Yes, they are new but I would
not list as new even though they are technically speaking. But discernment says,
best to list them as used . Unless you are asking for trouble .
Brett.
In Buying, v100Bricks writes:
New should only be New as described so as others have said, rpeort any new that
are not.
I am not sure why Like New cannot be used (pardong the pun) as a description
of Used though.
That would seem a fiarly normal way to classify used parts.
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
New or Used... simple
Simple and useless. 'Used' describes both the pieces of my Eldorado Fortress,
that I just assembled tonight and that could be disassembled tomorrow and you'd
never know, *and* the pieces in that bin over there on the floor, that have been
rattling around in my Lego suitcase since about 1984 such that you might struggle
to identify which color they used to be.
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
New or Used... simple
Simple and useless. 'Used' describes both the pieces of my Eldorado Fortress,
that I just assembled tonight and that could be disassembled tomorrow and you'd
never know, *and* the pieces in that bin over there on the floor, that have been
rattling around in my Lego suitcase since about 1984 such that you might struggle
to identify which color they used to be.
And that's why used parts should have a photo to show the item instead of
a stock photo
Simple and useless. 'Used' describes both the pieces of my Eldorado Fortress,
that I just assembled tonight and that could be disassembled tomorrow and you'd
never know
I would easily be able to tell that the pieces were used.
Used and New have specific meanings on Bricklink, and neither is a description
of appearance or quality. A Used piece may be in excellent shape, and a New piece
may have dings in it. That's why sellers should use descriptions that actually
give the buyer useful information.
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
New or Used... simple
This is from somebody that is a like new to Bricklink!
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
Bricklink is one of the few marketplaces in the world where NEW does not necessarily
equal MINT.
99 times out of 100, when you find damage on NEW pieces, it is because the seller
isn't storing their pieces properly, which is causing damage, or they are
listing used as new.
LEGO isn't to blame. Despite anecdotal accounts to the contrary, I have never
opened up a brand new set and found damaged parts. (besides the obvious brittle
fiasco)
I don't know why we can't have graded categories like they do on Amazon.
1. New
2. Used - Like New
3. Used - Very Good
4. Used - Good
5. Used - Acceptable
I've been on the platform for 20 years, and I will continue to complain for
the next 20 or until this is fixed.
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
Bricklink is one of the few marketplaces in the world where NEW does not necessarily
equal MINT.
BrickLink grade is perfect and factual (the most it can).
New has never been used, that's it.
And no, it doesn't mean Mint, neither mean Used is crappy.
Because all other sort of grade "like new, a few scratches" is so subjective
that it doesn't mean anything.
Selling used you're free to describe its condition, like "used very few,
a very few up to no scratch at all".
LEGO isn't to blame. Despite anecdotal accounts to the contrary, I have never
opened up a brand new set and found damaged parts. (besides the obvious brittle
fiasco)
I've often found scratched or scuffed
- windscreens
- tiles
- panels
out of the box. Yes, this is anecdotal, but my guess is that if we took a survey
we'd find a lot of sellers have similar experiences.
LEGO isn't to blame. Despite anecdotal accounts to the contrary, I have never
opened up a brand new set and found damaged parts. (besides the obvious brittle
fiasco)
I've often found scratched or scuffed
- windscreens
- tiles
- panels
out of the box. Yes, this is anecdotal, but my guess is that if we took a survey
we'd find a lot of sellers have similar experiences.
I am not a seller, but I find new scratched parts in sets quite often. Especially
on large, flat, glossy surfaces. What do people expect when TLG makes parts by
the bin-load that are all stored together straight from the mold and then dumped
into sorting machines for packaging? It's not like that is a gentle journey.
99 times out of 100, when you find damage on NEW pieces, it is because the seller
isn't storing their pieces properly, which is causing damage, or they are
listing used as new.
Not being snide here, but how are you validating this 99% fault rate?
LEGO isn't to blame. Despite anecdotal accounts to the contrary, I have never
opened up a brand new set and found damaged parts. (besides the obvious brittle
fiasco)
I have to respectfully - yet vehemently - disagree. Maybe you aren't opening
enough sets and have a small sample size or you aren't paying attention but
QC has been a big issue lately. Certain pieces and certain colors seem to have
issues.
When multiple people report white stress marks on brand new pieces that are all
in the same color, there's an issue (Dark red come to mind?) on LEGO's
end because it's statistically impossible for so many people to (somehow)
store the same piece - in the same color - wrong.
I parted out five 21344's which comes with 4x of both 43967/42819 doors for
a total of 40. Nine of the doors were scuffed to the point I just tossed them
in to the bulk box.
Most recently I opened a brand new set direct from LEGO that had no damage to
the box but two bags were tore open. But not tore open along the usual perforations
on the edge, these were jagged rips right the middle of the bag. That's
a sign of mishandling at the factory.
I have to respectfully - yet vehemently - disagree. Maybe you aren't opening
enough sets and have a small sample size or you aren't paying attention but
QC has been a big issue lately. Certain pieces and certain colors seem to have
issues.
👆👆👆** YES! I constantly unbox new parts that are very marked up.**
When multiple people report white stress marks on brand new pieces that are all
in the same color, there's an issue (Dark red come to mind?) on LEGO's
end because it's statistically impossible for so many people to (somehow)
store the same piece - in the same color - wrong.
I parted out five 21344's which comes with 4x of both 43967/42819 doors for
a total of 40. Nine of the doors were scuffed to the point I just tossed them
in to the bulk box.
Most recently I opened a brand new set direct from LEGO that had no damage to
the box but two bags were tore open. But not tore open along the usual perforations
on the edge, these were jagged rips right the middle of the bag. That's
a sign of mishandling at the factory.
LEGO isn't to blame. Despite anecdotal accounts to the contrary, I have never
opened up a brand new set and found damaged parts. (besides the obvious brittle
fiasco)
Maybe you're lucky. I rarely buy new sets nowadays and I have found damaged
parts when opening sets. There are many, many posts about this all over the place,
and it seems to be a growing problem.
I don't know why we can't have graded categories like they do on Amazon.
1. New
2. Used - Like New
3. Used - Very Good
4. Used - Good
5. Used - Acceptable
Because it's subjective and there's no getting around that.
LEGO isn't to blame. Despite anecdotal accounts to the contrary, I have never
opened up a brand new set and found damaged parts. (besides the obvious brittle
fiasco)
Maybe you're lucky. I rarely buy new sets nowadays and I have found damaged
parts when opening sets. There are many, many posts about this all over the place,
and it seems to be a growing problem.
Right around the time I started getting in to this (early 2021?) there was announcement
of a new plastic formula for the bricks (I think). Was that new plastic rolled
out and if so, do we think there may be any correlation to it being more prone
to damage from incidental rubbing?
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
Some sellers here, give into the temptation to do something shady, which violates
the clearly written rules. Like new is not new, it is a seller trying to pump
up your hopes that something might be what it is not.
Some sellers here, give into the temptation to do something shady, which violates
the clearly written rules.
The rules can be changed. It would be better if they were changed, IMO.
Like new is not new, it is a seller trying to pump up your hopes that something might be what it is not.
NR
What do you mean? If you say something is "like new," you and I both
know what that means. If you send me junk instead I will feel ripped off. That's
just the same as any other inaccurate description.
I have been seeing a lot of sellers list their items as 'NEW' with the
description "...like new..."
There are even some sellers listing items as "Like new, and hairline crack
on torso is only beginning to form."
I feel that BL should either create categories as 'NEW', 'Like New',
and 'Used', or the first category be restricted to items that have never
been played with and without any current damage.
If a seller lists a minifig as "New" and then puts "like new"
in the description, it isn't new, its used.
For both new, and used minifigs "like new" is really a meaningless description
that gives no definitive information. If in fact the minifig is without scratches,
or dents, or has a clean surface, why not just say so instead of leaving it up
to the buyer's imagination?
USA, Washington
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
United Kingdom, Scotland
Australia, New South Wales
. Unless you are asking for trouble 
.
United Kingdom, England
Canada, Ontario
