Private Bidding???

[KShine]

27 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

Why would LEGO want sets to depreciate?

It would discourage re-sellers (which they clearly do not like, whether reasonable or not).

By placing random landmines, LEGO has removed the relative safety which we have all generally enjoyed.

[Ed Mack]

42 minutes ago, KShine said:

It would discourage re-sellers (which they clearly do not like, whether reasonable or not).

By placing random landmines, LEGO has removed the relative safety which we have all generally enjoyed.

Slippery slope wanting your product to depreciate in order to battle resellers.  I don't buy it.  It won't end well.  Where does the depreciation stop if the company initiates it?  Maybe someone with more business knowledge than me can give me examples of why having your product be worth less is a good thing in a market with little competition?

[KShine]

3 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

Slippery slope wanting your product to depreciate in order to battle resellers.  I don't buy it.  It won't end well.  Where does the depreciation stop if the company initiates it?  Maybe someone with more business knowledge than me can give me examples of why having your product be worth less is a good thing in a market with little competition?

When banning the biggest buyers of your product is seen as a good thing - who really knows.

[Ed Mack]

1 minute ago, KShine said:

When banning the biggest buyers of your product is seen as a good thing - who really knows.

They have relaxed that policy.  Maybe their view of resellers is changing.

[Val-E]

When the number of sales lost to fakes is big enough, they could take the nuclear option. They know how 2016 went for them, we will see the PR BS adjusted figures in 3 weeks, If it is bad and the court case is not favourable, be prepared and scared.

[minicoopers11]

39 minutes ago, Val-E said:

When the number of sales lost to fakes is big enough, they could take the nuclear option. They know how 2016 went for them, we will see the PR BS adjusted figures in 3 weeks, If it is bad and the court case is not favourable, be prepared and scared.

The nuclear option is a losing option. Think about it....who invests WAY more in design, marketing, production, and distribution?! Knock-off overheads are FAR, FAR lower. 

[Phil B]

6 minutes ago, minicoopers11 said:

The nuclear option is a losing option. Think about it....who invests WAY more in design, marketing, production, and distribution?! Knock-off overheads are FAR, FAR lower. 

IMHO, if the court case goes bad, if I were LEGO, I'd write down my Chinese investment and close shop there. Ultimately that is the source of all the knock-off trouble - before TLG started planning the factory, knockoff quality was poor. Then the factory setup procedures started  and suddenly the cloners have access to molds that are identical in quality to TLG's. No coincidence in my book.

Downside of such an action is that the molds are already copied, so it would basically mean that TLG surrenders the enormous Chinese (and Asian) market to the cloners. But over time they can create sets that use new pieces for which the Chinese don't have the molds, and the cloners are limited in their options. That, combined with action against importers of counterfeited goods would probably stem the bleeding in areas outside of Asia.

[Val-E]

2 hours ago, minicoopers11 said:

The nuclear option is a losing option. Think about it....who invests WAY more in design, marketing, production, and distribution?! Knock-off overheads are FAR, FAR lower. 

But if you prevent people from selling the knockoffs on mainstream platforms you localise the problem and contain it.

[Guest TabbyBoy]

23 minutes ago, Val-E said:

But if you prevent people from selling the knockoffs on mainstream platforms you localise the problem and contain it.

eBay won't do as they are greedy and need the fees. This is why they allow MS Office 2016 to be sold for around £10 even though Microsoft said it was illegal when I grassed up a rude eBay seller to them. Money talks, scruples walks!

[LegoMan1212]

On 2/8/2017 at 3:46 PM, LegoMan1212 said:

Update thus far on what prompted this thread...

I sent a message to the seller just simply in as nice a way as possible that I look forward to receiving my purchase but that I question it slightly as he is listed from Vietnam, the product is said to be in Canada (multi-store).  He responded back 2 days later with, I don't understand your question or concern.... today a get emailed a tracking number under USPS that has an origination (supposedly) of Kansas.  The tracking has been created but the item has not been picked up yet.  I am actually sort of surprised the tracking number registered.  

This is just different.  To be continued...  and not that it will even matter, but I do plan on video-taping me opening the package completely to verify the contents immediately.  Not that it would matter much because it's not like I couldn't have opened it previously.  The seals better all be tight!

Item arrived, awful looking box and terrible tape job (there was a massive hole in the box too) but the set was all there. I think I had very good reason to be skeptical, other buyers are now responding with comments such as " Listed and sold a product he never had and could not get. Refund issued"  I think I just got lucky in the end on this one.  Won't be buying from that person again even with the delivery of the product.