Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

mybricklog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 704 posts

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#361

Post by nine_k »

michaelt wrote: post #291
BobAliceInATree wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with consignment is that the consignor wants the maximum price but the consignee wants a quick sale because 10% of a few bucks more means very little and they have to hold the inventory.

Selling on consignment can be an absolutely great deal for shops, under the right conditions. If I'm a lego trader and I buy your set for $900 hoping to sell it later for $1000, in the meantime that's $900 I can't invest in anything else. And maybe I guessed the set's value wrong and I end up unloading it for $800, taking a loss. On the other hand, if I agree to sell that same set on consignment? Zero capital outlay,…

> just some shelf space

Unless the store owns its building and has too little inventory to cover the shelves, the cost of not filling the shelves with the right goods is quite serious. In a low-margin business like retail, "just some shelf space" reads almost like "just some gold bars".

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#362

Post by natureiskino »

ogig wrote: post #154
pinkmuffinere wrote: post #80

This YouTube video covers it with much more detail, and (imo) more entertainment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wscQpkcwgNU

That's the original material and indeed is entertaining, part 2 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZPfj8AlmY

Holy mother of God this seems like one of those landmark cases by the looks of what's going on. So much rot in there... Bro also fled to Mexico, they could even make a movie out of this.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#363

Post by IncreasePosts »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #353
IncreasePosts wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose if you advertise a job for $20/hr and a bunch of people show up and apply for the job, you're probably not going to start advertising the job for $40/hr instead. And whether $20/hr is a "living wage" depends entirely on your circumstances. If you're a solo adult you can probably swing it. If you have 3 kids you will probably be on food stamps. Should Amazon pay people with kids more? Or only hire single peo…

I agree the deal from when minim wage was established is broken. A wage you can't raise a family on is not a living wage, as it results in a dead/old age society, not a living society. As such, this part of the new deal should be reverted as well "We are relaxing some of the safeguards of the anti-trust laws. The public must be protected against the abuses that led to their enactment, and to this end, we are putting…

What's a family? Should it be 2-3 kids max, and then you're on your own?

A solo adult who doesn't want kids is going to have far lower expenses and "living wage" than a single mother with 6 kids.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#364

Post by wredcoll »

Theodores wrote: post #211
lvl155 wrote: post #10

Adults ruined LEGO. There I said it.

When I was ten, my mum questioned whether my sister and myself were 'too old for LEGO'. In Woolworths we had to reassure her that Set 376-2 Town House with Garden was what we wanted as it came with lots of lovely red bricks that we 'needed'. To be honest, at the time, I thought my mum was right, and that we were getting too old for LEGO, but we had sunk costs... For us, LEGO was all about ingenuity, improvisation and…

What a weirdly hypocritical post.

You played with legos as a kid. Congratulations, so did lots of other kids at the time, and so do kids right now. Nothing has actually changed. Legos are still sold in a box with instructions, just like they were 20 years ago and 40 years ago and so on and so forth.

The idea that adults can't play with or enjoy legos is, well, genuinely sad, as in, it invokes the emotion of sadness. Adults are allowed to have fun and play games, whether that be building race cars out of metal or out of lego or any other activity they find joy in.

> At secondary school (age 11 in UK), the LEGO was cast aside as a mere child's toy. We had moved on and the idea of 'still playing with LEGO' would have been a social faux pas.

I genuinely wish you had a better childhood. Maybe you would have grown up into a person who can feel empathy for others.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#365

Post by IncreasePosts »

antirealist wrote: post #288
IncreasePosts wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind you are getting one side of the story. The company seems to be claiming that the franchisee sold the sets and (perhaps) did not pay the consignor for the sales. And that the consignor moved his sets out of the store. > That said, after ownership of the Salem store changed, we thoroughly documented and assessed current inventory. A few days later, we became aware of the previous arrangement, and compared…

I read through all of this too. It just seems that 1. why would the consignor decline? 2. if he did decline, especially "in writing", then why not post proof? As you suggest, maybe the reason is more complicated, e.g. some was sold, consignor not happy to have what's left returned and no compensation for what was sold, so refused to just have the smaller amount of stuff returned. If so that could have been much more…

"why not post proof" - possibly because the company wants the issue to be resolved in real court and not in the court of public opinion.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#366

Post by HaZeust »

crazygringo wrote: post #360
HaZeust wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you actually gone through this process? Like sure, obtaining a writ is technically part of the same case, but it's pretty much starting all over again. And you'll still be paying filing fees, dealing with court clerks, and waiting weeks or months. Finding a corporation's bank is a whole separate issue, where you have to go back to court for a post-judgement discovery to force them to tell you. And even if they d…

No, but my point is that it does work. It's a lot better to be delayed by months and have to pay more but still get your money, rather than by delayed by years and not get it at all. This is a franchised retailer with over 300 locations, and this is a value of $200,000+ plus so this is way bigger than small claims. Like I'd definitely agree with you if we were talking about a $5K claim against a single location in sm…

I mean yeah, but only my final paragraph is about small claims. The accountability and enforcement mechanisms to collect your money from a ruling don't change between a $200K and a $2K lawsuit, it's the same PITA either way - just a few more zeroes on paper.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#367

Post by roywiggins »

solomonb wrote: post #172
ogig wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should watch the two videos if you haven't because it's full of jewels. The kind of conversations and plays recorded point to a pattern. This is not their first time doing something shady, they think they can get away with it, and they greatly underestimated Ben determination and resources. "are you stupid?", "you stole them", "i swear to god i'll return them if you send me first a false apology/confession" are s…

I'm not doubting the claims at all. I simply don't understand why a massive company would shoot themselves in the foot over something relatively small.

It happens, eg:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBay_stalking_scandal

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#368

Post by munk-a »

philistine wrote: post #283
munk-a wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, if I worked in a field where consignment was an option I'd refuse to do it - it's a huge headache. So I'd absolutely believe that the corporation has a policy against accepting consignment offers and might have a case to recover damages or something against the original franchisee. But the way they've handled this situation still appears to be atrocious. Lets say you consigned 200k at a 10% commission, 50k sold…

You clearly didn't read the article. The original franchisee's contract allows consignement.

I have read that article and a few other sources since the first few ways I heard about this story were heavily biased. I have not yet seen B&M confirm that the contract that was leaked is genuine - it is incredibly unlikely that they would, of course, but it still remains one the facts in this case that I tenatively believe but have some reservations around.

I thought it was interesting to, from the assumption that the corporation actually banned consignments, still work through how it doesn't free them from wrong doing. Even in the best light B&M has acted in bad faith.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#369

Post by roywiggins »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #365
antirealist wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read through all of this too. It just seems that 1. why would the consignor decline? 2. if he did decline, especially "in writing", then why not post proof? As you suggest, maybe the reason is more complicated, e.g. some was sold, consignor not happy to have what's left returned and no compensation for what was sold, so refused to just have the smaller amount of stuff returned. If so that could have been much more…

"why not post proof" - possibly because the company wants the issue to be resolved in real court and not in the court of public opinion.

They could have defended the small claims cases against them in that case?

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#370

Post by munk-a »

gowld wrote: post #263
BobAliceInATree wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with consignment is that the consignor wants the maximum price but the consignee wants a quick sale because 10% of a few bucks more means very little and they have to hold the inventory.

"Holding inventory" is only problem if the store is full.

It isn't - deprecation of held goods is always a risk and if you're working on consignment then that comes with weird financial liabilities. If there's a flood and you lose your inventory it sucks - if there's a flood and you lose an inventory of consigned values then suddenly you're potentially exposed to paying market value for a number of items in addition to all the site damage you'll need to address. Capacity is one aspect of the costs of holding inventory - but breakage is the much more expensive consideration and consignment just makes it even more expensive.
Post reply on HN