Hello. I have one of the Junior 99 yoyos from I think the 1930s. The ones which
are commonly... well, as commonly as these rare items are, sold on ebay as vintage
Lego items. There's a bit of evidence they were produced by Lego but IMO
it isn't conclusive. I was thinking of putting it in my store but I noticed
on the yoyo entry page
the pictures are of a slightly different type. They're the ones with handwriting
on them and no Junior 99 stamp that I can see. Within the community, these two
yoyos are seen as interchangeable but I don't want to get in trouble if I
put it in my store and an admin believes I'm acting in bad faith. Should
I take a photo of mine and use it for the listing, just so everyone knows what
they're getting? Also, I have written to Lego about this on multiple occasions.
In each case, they told me they would get back to me and they didn't. Once,
I believe I actually got through to the person who would have looked into it
but I guess I got lost in the shuffle. In any event, I gave up on that a while
back. Nevertheless, I have this yoyo and as much as I love looking at it on my
shelf, if someone wants it badly enough then I am willing to sell it. What should
I do? Thank you.
Oh and I just noticed the Upload Image option. I'll go ahead and do that
now.
Hello. I have one of the Junior 99 yoyos from I think the 1930s. The ones which
are commonly... well, as commonly as these rare items are, sold on ebay as vintage
Lego items. There's a bit of evidence they were produced by Lego but IMO
it isn't conclusive. I was thinking of putting it in my store but I noticed
on the yoyo entry page
the pictures are of a slightly different type. They're the ones with handwriting
on them and no Junior 99 stamp that I can see. Within the community, these two
yoyos are seen as interchangeable but I don't want to get in trouble if I
put it in my store and an admin believes I'm acting in bad faith. Should
I take a photo of mine and use it for the listing, just so everyone knows what
they're getting? Also, I have written to Lego about this on multiple occasions.
In each case, they told me they would get back to me and they didn't. Once,
I believe I actually got through to the person who would have looked into it
but I guess I got lost in the shuffle. In any event, I gave up on that a while
back. Nevertheless, I have this yoyo and as much as I love looking at it on my
shelf, if someone wants it badly enough then I am willing to sell it. What should
I do? Thank you.
Oh and I just noticed the Upload Image option. I'll go ahead and do that
now.
Yeah apparently that was a local retailer and that image is essentially an advertisement
for the yo-yos in their store. There's so little evidence for a lot of the
stuff in the Toy, Early section and this is no different.
Yeah apparently that was a local retailer and that image is essentially an advertisement
for the yo-yos in their store. There's so little evidence for a lot of the
stuff in the Toy, Early section and this is no different.
LEGO has always sold toys under their own name, so how are people explaining
the complete lack of LEGO branding? It feels like a forced conclusion to me.
Anecdotally speaking the Junior 99 yo-yos show up for sale at a regular frequency,
yet we know the actual LEGO yo-yo was only produced for a very short period of
time. Any leftover stock that didn't sell after the yo-yo craze was converted
into wheels for other toys, so that would further diminish the surviving population.
LEGO has always sold toys under their own name, so how are people explaining
the complete lack of LEGO branding?
If you mean the lack of branding in the advertisement, there's no reason
to expect that store to put the Lego name in their ad, especially when Lego was
just another toy company. If you mean the lack of branding on the yoyo, Lego
has made many things over the decades with no branding. Most of the HO line,
most of the Scala line, etc.
Anecdotally speaking the Junior 99 yo-yos show up for sale at a regular frequency,
yet we know the actual LEGO yo-yo was only produced for a very short period of
time. Any leftover stock that didn't sell after the yo-yo craze was converted
into wheels for other toys, so that would further diminish the surviving population.
That has no bearing on their legitimacy. I'm happy to accept that they aren't
legitimate, but if there's nothing but assumptions either way and the community
at large accepts them as legitimate then the deciding factor is the opinion of
the admins. I'll give this a couple more days and if there's no response
from someone in authority then I'm listing it.
LEGO has always sold toys under their own name, so how are people explaining
the complete lack of LEGO branding?
If you mean the lack of branding in the advertisement, there's no reason
to expect that store to put the Lego name in their ad, especially when Lego was
just another toy company. If you mean the lack of branding on the yoyo, Lego
has made many things over the decades with no branding. Most of the HO line,
most of the Scala line, etc.
Even their earliest bricks didn’t have their name on them.
Anecdotally speaking the Junior 99 yo-yos show up for sale at a regular frequency,
yet we know the actual LEGO yo-yo was only produced for a very short period of
time. Any leftover stock that didn't sell after the yo-yo craze was converted
into wheels for other toys, so that would further diminish the surviving population.
That has no bearing on their legitimacy. I'm happy to accept that they aren't
legitimate, but if there's nothing but assumptions either way and the community
at large accepts them as legitimate then the deciding factor is the opinion of
the admins. I'll give this a couple more days and if there's no response
from someone in authority then I'm listing it.
LEGO has always sold toys under their own name, so how are people explaining
the complete lack of LEGO branding?
If you mean the lack of branding in the advertisement, there's no reason
to expect that store to put the Lego name in their ad, especially when Lego was
just another toy company. If you mean the lack of branding on the yoyo, Lego
has made many things over the decades with no branding. Most of the HO line,
most of the Scala line, etc.
Even their earliest bricks didn’t have their name on them.
Anecdotally speaking the Junior 99 yo-yos show up for sale at a regular frequency,
yet we know the actual LEGO yo-yo was only produced for a very short period of
time. Any leftover stock that didn't sell after the yo-yo craze was converted
into wheels for other toys, so that would further diminish the surviving population.
That has no bearing on their legitimacy. I'm happy to accept that they aren't
legitimate, but if there's nothing but assumptions either way and the community
at large accepts them as legitimate then the deciding factor is the opinion of
the admins. I'll give this a couple more days and if there's no response
from someone in authority then I'm listing it.
LEGO has always sold toys under their own name, so how are people explaining
the complete lack of LEGO branding?
If you mean the lack of branding in the advertisement, there's no reason
to expect that store to put the Lego name in their ad, especially when Lego was
just another toy company. If you mean the lack of branding on the yoyo, Lego
has made many things over the decades with no branding. Most of the HO line,
most of the Scala line, etc.
Sure, but those other items were still marketed under the LEGO umbrella. These
yo-yos on the other hand were neither marketed as LEGO and the only physical
markings on them is the "Junior 99" moniker, when it could just as easily
have said LEGO, no? For instance when LEGO supplied tires to the Vibo toy company,
the tires were still marked LEGO.
Anecdotally speaking the Junior 99 yo-yos show up for sale at a regular frequency,
yet we know the actual LEGO yo-yo was only produced for a very short period of
time. Any leftover stock that didn't sell after the yo-yo craze was converted
into wheels for other toys, so that would further diminish the surviving population.
That has no bearing on their legitimacy. I'm happy to accept that they aren't
legitimate, but if there's nothing but assumptions either way and the community
at large accepts them as legitimate then the deciding factor is the opinion of
the admins. I'll give this a couple more days and if there's no response
from someone in authority then I'm listing it.
I'm just pointing something out that I found anomalous. If your story is
indeed true, then what are the chances that other toy companies might also have
acted as suppliers? A lot of people accepted that the Triton tractors were LEGO
made even though the historical record has proven that not to be case. That's
a good example of how a general consensuses isn't synonymous with having
actual proof.
As far as I know the LEGO Archives doesn't have an example in their collection
either. That being said, their standard of evidence is rather strict so this
shouldn't come as a surprise.
Yes, from what I've come to understand, sometimes TLG made wooden toys like
yo-yo's for OTHER companies to sell...hence why no brand name. I also own
this exact yo-yo and a couple others that I believe LEGO made.
And yes, there are many documented LEGO items that do NOT have the brand...but
like you, I'm very skeptical of any unbranded item as I have found MANY unscrupulous
sellers on eBay etc selling items as LEGO which were Hanse, German, etc...just
to get the most money.
Hope you are doing well my friend,
LM
In Selling, CBak writes:
In Selling, rprebel writes:
Yeah apparently that was a local retailer and that image is essentially an advertisement
for the yo-yos in their store. There's so little evidence for a lot of the
stuff in the Toy, Early section and this is no different.
LEGO has always sold toys under their own name, so how are people explaining
the complete lack of LEGO branding? It feels like a forced conclusion to me.
Anecdotally speaking the Junior 99 yo-yos show up for sale at a regular frequency,
yet we know the actual LEGO yo-yo was only produced for a very short period of
time. Any leftover stock that didn't sell after the yo-yo craze was converted
into wheels for other toys, so that would further diminish the surviving population.
Yes, from what I've come to understand, sometimes TLG made wooden toys like
yo-yo's for OTHER companies to sell...hence why no brand name. I also own
this exact yo-yo and a couple others that I believe LEGO made.
And yes, there are many documented LEGO items that do NOT have the brand...but
like you, I'm very skeptical of any unbranded item as I have found MANY unscrupulous
sellers on eBay etc selling items as LEGO which were Hanse, German, etc...just
to get the most money.
Hope you are doing well my friend,
LM
Hi LM!
Yeah, it's been a while! Hope you've been doing well also.
I'm not sure what examples you might be thinking of? I know LEGO supplied
tires to various toy companies, but those are easily spotted. Hanse acquired
the leftover wood stock after LEGO shut down their wooden toy division, so any
markings on their toys would just be happenstance. There are some theories floating
around about possible connections with BRIO and Tekno, but has anything definitive
ever been proven? I must admit you have me stumped here.
Of course there are also the toys that were made under license for LEGO, but
that's a slightly different arrangement.
USA, Texas
United Kingdom, England