Hi Dalkowski and FACT,
Thanks for the welcome. I'm a subscriber not a "cherry-picker." I can't see the sense in spending all that money and only having 75% of a set, but each to his own, I guess. If GE Fabbri are watching this and need a suggestion for a free gift for the subscribers, how about a proper display case and diorama for both the T55 Tank and Little Nellie. Little Nellie fits into a standard display case (just) with it's blades open but the Tank would need something special. We haven't seen the Bondola yet so don't know if it would fit into that sized case. I know diorama's have been designed by some "members" but this suggestion wouldn't cost GE Fabbri much and would give us subscribers just a little lift.
Hi Dalkowski and FACT,
Thanks for the welcome. I'm a subscriber not a "cherry-picker." I can't see the sense in spending all that money and only having 75% of a set, but each to his own, I guess. If GE Fabbri are watching this and need a suggestion for a free gift for the subscribers, how about a proper display case and diorama for both the T55 Tank and Little Nellie. Little Nellie fits into a standard display case (just) with it's blades open but the Tank would need something special. We haven't seen the Bondola yet so don't know if it would fit into that sized case. I know diorama's have been designed by some "members" but this suggestion wouldn't cost GE Fabbri much and would give us subscribers just a little lift.
It's not that we've not seen it yet, it's that you've not seen it yet because New Zealand is behind in subscriptions. It's made by car-centric manufacturer Ixo, and is unfortunately in 1/72 scale with no Roger Moore figure.
Hi Dalkowski and FACT,
Thanks for the welcome. I'm a subscriber not a "cherry-picker." I can't see the sense in spending all that money and only having 75% of a set, but each to his own, I guess. If GE Fabbri are watching this and need a suggestion for a free gift for the subscribers, how about a proper display case and diorama for both the T55 Tank and Little Nellie. Little Nellie fits into a standard display case (just) with it's blades open but the Tank would need something special. We haven't seen the Bondola yet so don't know if it would fit into that sized case. I know diorama's have been designed by some "members" but this suggestion wouldn't cost GE Fabbri much and would give us subscribers just a little lift.
I think being a 'cherry picker' comes from years of experience as a collector. When I was a kid I collected bubble gum type cards and had to have every one in the set, having 99 out of a set of 100 wasn't good enough. But as an adult and when it came to die-cast models like Corgi Classics, Corgi Aviation, Matchbox Dinky or Minichamps I soon realised I had neither the space or the money necessary to try and get the lot. I don't know if you've ever seen photos in mags of people who have collected everything in these ranges but they tend to be very rich guys who keep their collections in enormous storage areas like exhibition rooms. So the only answer seems to be cherry picking applied to any source of item that's of interest, including the JBCC.
I guess if the JBCC is pretty much all you collect then having the lot wouldn't be too much of a problem, but if it's only part of what you collect then some of us have to be a bit more discerning, especially where wanting to stay married is concerned!
Custom display boxes for the specials is a great idea BTW and probably easy for Fabbri to create.
I was looking at the LTK Maserati the other day and thinking why don't Fabbri use the same line of thought with some of the new models without figures? The Maserati has 3 movie characters portrayed on the diorama backing card which look great - surely showing Largo standing behind the Turkey-Bird would have helped, wouldn't it? It would have been so easy to do.
I was looking at the LTK Maserati the other day and thinking why don't Fabbri use the same line of thought with some of the new models without figures? The Maserati has 3 movie characters portrayed on the diorama backing card which look great - surely showing Largo standing behind the Turkey-Bird would have helped, wouldn't it? It would have been so easy to do.
Definitely anything to enhance this 'poor excuse' of an issue. As a loyal subscriber this Blunder Bird has really peeved me off and whats annoying is I will buy as it is part of the collection as I need to have each one. I have said quite alot on this model but really how did this one slip the net and get signed off. Come on GEfabbri I am one of your loyal subscribers and looking forward to the thought of 20 further models but many like me will be disappointed if this is an example of what we have in store. I will say again and apologies if i do sound like a broken record, i don't like being taken for granted. Each issue should be treated, presented as if it is the first . I remember as a small boy being given a WW2 battle set. Cheap plastic tanks etc in a polybag. Even at a young age I noticed the tanks were the same for each side (same plastic cast) but in a different colour. I remember asking my father why both the allies and the axis or British and Germans had the same tanks. This is probably acceptable in 1970's Pocket money toy costing 50p but not in a collection such as this. You cannot release the same model as a different issue albeit minor tweaks and expect serious collectors not to notice.
Hi Dalkowski110,
Sorry my "We haven't seen the Bondola yet..." was from the Kiwi perspective.
Hi MovieCar Fan,
Well put. I hadn't looked at it from that aspect. This is the only full collection, of anything that I've been involved with for decades.
I also have a collection of over 100 models of Alfa Romeos but on those I am a "cherry picker."
I've worked with Alfa Romeo for over 30 years so have picked up many rare and now obsolete models. It's great to see a few Alfas amongst the JBCC.
I also worked for 3 years at a Lotus dealership in London (1976 to 1979) and got to sit in one of the white Lotus Espirits that they used in the making of TSWLM. It had had a very hard life but still drove well.
I pity the idiot who may buy it and get fooled into thinking it is part of a different collection ) ) )
"Western Models"??? If someone were to buy this then you can easily make a claim against the seller for misrepresenting the item. It's Universal Hobbies - not Western Models!
The seller was probably inspired by another "rarity":
I pity the idiot who may buy it and get fooled into thinking it is part of a different collection ) ) )
"Western Models"??? If someone were to buy this then you can easily make a claim against the seller for misrepresenting the item. It's Universal Hobbies - not Western Models!
The seller was probably inspired by another "rarity":
I pity the idiot who may buy it and get fooled into thinking it is part of a different collection ) ) )
"Western Models"??? If someone were to buy this then you can easily make a claim against the seller for misrepresenting the item. It's Universal Hobbies - not Western Models!
The seller was probably inspired by another "rarity":
It's possible the seller has accidently put up the wrong photo for the Western Models 109 Aston - it should look like this:
Don't know if it's worth that sort of money though.
A model database (worth browsing if you have a few days to spare) has a gold plated presentation Corgi 269 SWLM Lotus with an explanation (click on more details - it was a movie premiere special) but no gold painted version that I could find. It is remotely possible that gold painted versions were given to people who worked on the movie, maybe someone else here knows?
Hi Dalkowski110,
Sorry my "We haven't seen the Bondola yet..." was from the Kiwi perspective.
Hi MovieCar Fan,
Well put. I hadn't looked at it from that aspect. This is the only full collection, of anything that I've been involved with for decades.
I also have a collection of over 100 models of Alfa Romeos but on those I am a "cherry picker."
I've worked with Alfa Romeo for over 30 years so have picked up many rare and now obsolete models. It's great to see a few Alfas amongst the JBCC.
I also worked for 3 years at a Lotus dealership in London (1976 to 1979) and got to sit in one of the white Lotus Espirits that they used in the making of TSWLM. It had had a very hard life but still drove well.
Alfas rock - loved them in QOS. I just wish I had the nerve to run one bearing in mind how temperamental they can be! I bet the SWLM Esprit was an eye opener, moviemakers aren't too careful using these cars and it really shows when you see them up close in person - scrapes, bits hanging off, duck tape and loose wires seem to be mandatory
Hi Dalkowski110,
Sorry my "We haven't seen the Bondola yet..." was from the Kiwi perspective.
Hi MovieCar Fan,
Well put. I hadn't looked at it from that aspect. This is the only full collection, of anything that I've been involved with for decades.
I also have a collection of over 100 models of Alfa Romeos but on those I am a "cherry picker."
I've worked with Alfa Romeo for over 30 years so have picked up many rare and now obsolete models. It's great to see a few Alfas amongst the JBCC.
I also worked for 3 years at a Lotus dealership in London (1976 to 1979) and got to sit in one of the white Lotus Espirits that they used in the making of TSWLM. It had had a very hard life but still drove well.
Alfas rock - loved them in QOS. I just wish I had the nerve to run one bearing in mind how temperamental they can be! I bet the SWLM Esprit was an eye opener, moviemakers aren't too careful using these cars and it really shows when you see them up close in person - scrapes, bits hanging off, duck tape and loose wires seem to be mandatory
Alfas are temperamental like most italian cars. But that is all part of the charm. I have owned a Alfa 145 and also Lancia Thema both fantastic cars. Go for it! Nearly bought a lotus end of last year but opted for a Jag XK instead in platinum silver. Bond like and often confused with the aston DB7/DB9. :-)
Don't know if it's worth that sort of money though.
As a collector of Western Models, I can tell you right now that it's the sort of car that you buy about once a month and absolutely blows you away. They're worth every cent The LATEST Western Models vehicle I have, however, is a 1969 American Motors AMX. I'm a detail-freak about the AMX...it's my FAVORITE muscle car. The ride height is a little low (although I was told by a fellow collector that ride height varied VERY slightly inbetween certain models and the AMX was one) and the side mirror (which you can remove) is painted the same color as the body of the car, but otherwise, it's about as close to flawless as you can get an AMX model.
Sorry my "We haven't seen the Bondola yet..." was from the Kiwi perspective.
No need! In fact, for a good list of the cars, check wikipedia. When you're done with that, check eBay, since they usually have pictures. If the car is unavailable, go to your sidebar and where it says "location", check "Worldwide". You now have access to any and all models of that car. Hope that helps and I hope you enjoy the rest of the collection! As for myself? I JUST got 108 and 109 and can't WAIT to have them in my hands, comparing them to the real thing.
Hi MovieCarFan,
My current Company Car is an Alfa 159 1750 Turbo TI Manual and it's little beauty. I have had plenty of the 159 3.2 V6's. The block and heads are cast by GM in Aussie but the Italians have done their magic and turned it into yet another great Alfa engine. The 3.2 would be the model that they used in QOS because nothing else makes that kind of noise, when it's neck is being rung-to-the-max ! For awhile I was driving a black one of these and people really took notice of it because it looked like it had just "escaped" from the QOS film set, especially when it was dirty. A mate at Alfa Italy told me that there was a bad accident during the filming of the car chase scene at the start of QOS and they wrote off a number of 159s and one of the stunt drivers was very badly injured. Filming was delayed for awhile.
Yes, you well understand what a car looks like after it's been used in making movies. Collectable, only for that fact and not for it's pristine condition.
Diecast 007: "Alfas are temperamental" You have to give them tender love and care just like an Italian Woman. Then when you want performance - take a firm grip and hang on !
Dalkowski110: I often view the JBCC list on Wikipedia, so know what's coming. It's always good to see the first photos on this site and see the comments. There is certainly some amazing knowledge out there both on models and the real thing.
Here's something I discovered. Make of it what you will, but I'm wondering if Ixo's talks with Fabbri regarding figures will have been in vain.
I went back, looked, and found that every issue of the JBCC going back to 101 (both UH and Ixo) has lacked not only figures, but also any people in the background of the diorama with the exception of people who were obvious extras (such as was the case with the Bondola). I think we may have been looking in the wrong place; to wit, Ixo could likely produce figures perfectly. The problem seems to be that not only figures but also images don't seem to be allowed. And it's no longer Daniel Craig; it seems to be ANY Bond. Perhaps Fabbri ran afoul of the powers that be and had their license to produce anything BUT dioramas (sans figures) and cars that appeared in James Bond films? It's complete guesswork, but definitely something to consider, especially because nobody except extras have appeared in the super-easy-to-produce cardboard backgrounds since 101, either.
Maybe Fabbri have to keep going back to Eon or whover owns the rights from time to time and found that at a certain point the price for image rights kept getting bumped up with it finally getting bumped up to the point it would hit profits?
If licencing rights/costs are the root cause then it doesn't matter if IXO can make brilliant figures or possibly even dioramas we wont get any anyway.
They must have retained Bond rights for the cars since none of the cars have car maker licencing on them - RR would never have licenced the Shadow for example it wouldn't meet their quality standards. Owners of car brands have vigilent lawyers who make sure they get their pennies worth and the only way these models can come our without car brand licencing is if Eon or whoever licence them as Bond film images because they got the rights from makers as part of product placement.
How about another explanation: We know that Fabbri realised – possibly around issue 100 or a little earlier – that the collection was appealing more and more to car-centrics. To most of them a Bond diorama is an unnecessary extra, which in Fabbri-speak means a waste of money. At the same time, they also had a core of loyal Bond-centric subscribers. By this time Fabbri could be almost sure that the subscribers they retained would be interested in having a complete collection. After all, they did swallow quite a number of “turkeys” and even if they complained, they did not cancel the subscriptions in significant numbers. So why not make a strictly financial decision – from now on only plain dioramas and no figures. In the long run that must have saved them a small fortune in production cost. I wish Fabbri could explain their many incomprehensible decision to us, but as partwork publishers are very secretive, they just won’t.
How about another explanation: We know that Fabbri realised – possibly around issue 100 or a little earlier – that the collection was appealing more and more to car-centrics. To most of them a Bond diorama is an unnecessary extra, which in Fabbri-speak means a waste of money. At the same time, they also had a core of loyal Bond-centric subscribers. By this time Fabbri could be almost sure that the subscribers they retained would be interested in having a complete collection. After all, they did swallow quite a number of “turkeys” and even if they complained, they did not cancel the subscriptions in significant numbers. So why not make a strictly financial decision – from now on only plain dioramas and no figures. In the long run that must have saved them a small fortune in production cost. I wish Fabbri could explain their many incomprehensible decision to us, but as partwork publishers are very secretive, they just won’t.
Jag, the reason I disagree is because not only the ease with which the paper backgrounds are whipped up, but also because in the Turkey-Bird's diorama, especially, but also the Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow II from AVTAK and Ford Consul from DN, you actually have to go out of your way to delete the people on the cardboard. In other words, it would be easier and cheaper to keep them there. Deleting them is the actual waste of money. Yet, they're not there.
Maybe Fabbri have to keep going back to Eon or whover owns the rights from time to time and found that at a certain point the price for image rights kept getting bumped up with it finally getting bumped up to the point it would hit profits?
Possibly. They could even have hit a proverbial bump in the road and tried to negotiate their way out of it but failed...or failed with UH and passed with Ixo, since after all, Ixo owns the rights to the moulds of the cars it's produced so far, seemingly...basically, we'll need to see what the first post-110 Ixo model is. Since what I heard was that Fabbri was ONLY negotiating with Ixo for figures and better dioramas...maybe this is indeed the case?
If licencing rights/costs are the root cause then it doesn't matter if IXO can make brilliant figures or possibly even dioramas we wont get any anyway.
They must have retained Bond rights for the cars since none of the cars have car maker licencing on them - RR would never have licenced the Shadow for example it wouldn't meet their quality standards. Owners of car brands have vigilent lawyers who make sure they get their pennies worth and the only way these models can come our without car brand licencing is if Eon or whoever licence them as Bond film images because they got the rights from makers as part of product placement.
Correct. I genuinely wonder if one of the other reasons Ixo came aboard was because they had a boatload of existing contracts with various automakers and, as you point out, there's no way Rolls-Royce lets its badging be used on models of such sub-par quality as UH's (well...I guess they could have signed off on the Phantom III Sedanca de Ville, though it is regardless missing the logo...). The last UH model to actually feature the real logo was the Ford Edge...way back at Issue 91. Not even the "Turkey-Bird" is badged as a Ford!
Dalkowski110
Jag, the reason I disagree is because not only the ease with which the paper backgrounds are whipped up, but also because in the Turkey-Bird's diorama, especially, but also the Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow II from AVTAK and Ford Consul from DN, you actually have to go out of your way to delete the people on the cardboard. In other words, it would be easier and cheaper to keep them there. Deleting them is the actual waste of money. Yet, they're not there.
You may well be right. But then again, the diorama pictures look to me like pictures based on the movies rather than actual stills taken from the movies. If that is the case, then it would be cheaper to pay the artist to create the background only and no figures
On another note, models 106 & 107 were shown on the Bissett website as planned for despatch on 5 August. Today the information changed and it says they should be despatched on 19 August. That's a 2-week delay and about 6 weeks since the last installment. Bissett actually called me (without being asked) to apologise and explain that they were waiting for one more model to arrive (presumably 107, as I already saw 106 - Ford Consul at a newsagent's). Looks like we may be entering a distribution bottleneck, probably because of catching up with the UK where the majority of subscriptions are.
Here's something I discovered. Make of it what you will, but I'm wondering if Ixo's talks with Fabbri regarding figures will have been in vain.
I went back, looked, and found that every issue of the JBCC going back to 101 (both UH and Ixo) has lacked not only figures, but also any people in the background of the diorama with the exception of people who were obvious extras (such as was the case with the Bondola). I think we may have been looking in the wrong place; to wit, Ixo could likely produce figures perfectly. The problem seems to be that not only figures but also images don't seem to be allowed. And it's no longer Daniel Craig; it seems to be ANY Bond. Perhaps Fabbri ran afoul of the powers that be and had their license to produce anything BUT dioramas (sans figures) and cars that appeared in James Bond films? It's complete guesswork, but definitely something to consider, especially because nobody except extras have appeared in the super-easy-to-produce cardboard backgrounds since 101, either.
A reasonable theory, but then would this also make the magazine redundant. I would argue that the permissionto use protected material would have covered both the magazine and indeed the model issue.
Dalkowski110
Jag, the reason I disagree is because not only the ease with which the paper backgrounds are whipped up, but also because in the Turkey-Bird's diorama, especially, but also the Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow II from AVTAK and Ford Consul from DN, you actually have to go out of your way to delete the people on the cardboard. In other words, it would be easier and cheaper to keep them there. Deleting them is the actual waste of money. Yet, they're not there.
You may well be right. But then again, the diorama pictures look to me like pictures based on the movies rather than actual stills taken from the movies. If that is the case, then it would be cheaper to pay the artist to create the background only and no figures
On another note, models 106 & 107 were shown on the Bissett website as planned for despatch on 5 August. Today the information changed and it says they should be despatched on 19 August. That's a 2-week delay and about 6 weeks since the last installment. Bissett actually called me (without being asked) to apologise and explain that they were waiting for one more model to arrive (presumably 107, as I already saw 106 - Ford Consul at a newsagent's). Looks like we may be entering a distribution bottleneck, probably because of catching up with the UK where the majority of subscriptions are.
I am in the uk still waiting for 108/109 and my card was debited some time ago now.
On another note, models 106 & 107 were shown on the Bissett website as planned for despatch on 5 August. Today the information changed and it says they should be despatched on 19 August. That's a 2-week delay and about 6 weeks since the last installment. Bissett actually called me (without being asked) to apologise and explain that they were waiting for one more model to arrive (presumably 107, as I already saw 106 - Ford Consul at a newsagent's). Looks like we may be entering a distribution bottleneck, probably because of catching up with the UK where the majority of subscriptions are.
Cheers for the info Jag. Hopefully they arrive Monday as I leave for a 3 month trip then. I'd like to make sure they are in A1 condition before I go. Did they say anything about the Aus extension?
Here's something I discovered. Make of it what you will, but I'm wondering if Ixo's talks with Fabbri regarding figures will have been in vain.
I went back, looked, and found that every issue of the JBCC going back to 101 (both UH and Ixo) has lacked not only figures, but also any people in the background of the diorama with the exception of people who were obvious extras (such as was the case with the Bondola). I think we may have been looking in the wrong place; to wit, Ixo could likely produce figures perfectly. The problem seems to be that not only figures but also images don't seem to be allowed. And it's no longer Daniel Craig; it seems to be ANY Bond. Perhaps Fabbri ran afoul of the powers that be and had their license to produce anything BUT dioramas (sans figures) and cars that appeared in James Bond films? It's complete guesswork, but definitely something to consider, especially because nobody except extras have appeared in the super-easy-to-produce cardboard backgrounds since 101, either.
A reasonable theory, but then would this also make the magazine redundant. I would argue that the permissionto use protected material would have covered both the magazine and indeed the model issue.
The magazine uses existing agency images which would have their own set charges, apart from the illustration of the vehicle which only has issues if the licence plate is shown. If you are creating a background diorama image that uses a recognisable actor/character or prop from a movie it becomes a brand new piece of copyrightable material that would generate its own specific licence and payment agreements. (I think I've got that right, I've been in the advertising/publicity business for over 20 years) If it's a non-descript background such as the new Impala has for instance then there'd probably only be a token licence agreement/ payment specifically related to it i.e. use of a scenic screenshot.
I think personally, as has already been suggested, that either the actor/character licencing agreements have run out, or more likely, Fabbri are trying to save money in order to keep the unit prices the same. Production, shipping, storage, delivery costs will have all gone up in the years this series has been running so their profits must be falling. I think they are saving money by dropping recognisable character figures and/or images that would incur extra licencing fees. I just hope that in the same way we are still getting themed backgrounds we'll still see less licence-costly generic figures like 'driver figures', 'military staff' or 'passengers'.
I'd also say to Fabbri, don't penny pinch on the models, drop the damn magazine instead! Failing that, why not commission sets of unpainted supplementary figures from existing moulds that we can buy and add ourselves? Or, sell the moulds to a third party who can then supply the figures.
On another note, models 106 & 107 were shown on the Bissett website as planned for despatch on 5 August. Today the information changed and it says they should be despatched on 19 August. That's a 2-week delay and about 6 weeks since the last installment. Bissett actually called me (without being asked) to apologise and explain that they were waiting for one more model to arrive (presumably 107, as I already saw 106 - Ford Consul at a newsagent's). Looks like we may be entering a distribution bottleneck, probably because of catching up with the UK where the majority of subscriptions are.
Cheers for the info Jag. Hopefully they arrive Monday as I leave for a 3 month trip then. I'd like to make sure they are in A1 condition before I go. Did they say anything about the Aus extension?
To be honest, when they called this time I didn't ask about the extension. I suppose they will have to send us something soon, if they just charge my card and send issue 111 then I will have to make a complaint.
Here's something I discovered. Make of it what you will, but I'm wondering if Ixo's talks with Fabbri regarding figures will have been in vain.
I went back, looked, and found that every issue of the JBCC going back to 101 (both UH and Ixo) has lacked not only figures, but also any people in the background of the diorama with the exception of people who were obvious extras (such as was the case with the Bondola). I think we may have been looking in the wrong place; to wit, Ixo could likely produce figures perfectly. The problem seems to be that not only figures but also images don't seem to be allowed. And it's no longer Daniel Craig; it seems to be ANY Bond. Perhaps Fabbri ran afoul of the powers that be and had their license to produce anything BUT dioramas (sans figures) and cars that appeared in James Bond films? It's complete guesswork, but definitely something to consider, especially because nobody except extras have appeared in the super-easy-to-produce cardboard backgrounds since 101, either.
A reasonable theory, but then would this also make the magazine redundant. I would argue that the permissionto use protected material would have covered both the magazine and indeed the model issue.
As a non-subscriber I get my Bond cars ordered from Forbidden Planet shop and just yesterday (17th Aug.) picked up 109-The Chevrolet Impala coupe. I get a 2nd one for a friend and he orders 2 copies of 007 magazine and we do a swap! Car-£8. Mag-£11.50(inc postage) so I owe him £3.50.
The mag shows the 110-damaged DBS in the back, but no news of the extension yet.(to 130).
I thought the main colour of the car was black, but actually it's a dark inky blue. (with white roof.)
Lately seem to get the car in the middle of the month whereas it used to be at the end of the month.
Dalkowski110
Jag, the reason I disagree is because not only the ease with which the paper backgrounds are whipped up, but also because in the Turkey-Bird's diorama, especially, but also the Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow II from AVTAK and Ford Consul from DN, you actually have to go out of your way to delete the people on the cardboard. In other words, it would be easier and cheaper to keep them there. Deleting them is the actual waste of money. Yet, they're not there.
You may well be right. But then again, the diorama pictures look to me like pictures based on the movies rather than actual stills taken from the movies. If that is the case, then it would be cheaper to pay the artist to create the background only and no figures
On another note, models 106 & 107 were shown on the Bissett website as planned for despatch on 5 August. Today the information changed and it says they should be despatched on 19 August. That's a 2-week delay and about 6 weeks since the last installment. Bissett actually called me (without being asked) to apologise and explain that they were waiting for one more model to arrive (presumably 107, as I already saw 106 - Ford Consul at a newsagent's). Looks like we may be entering a distribution bottleneck, probably because of catching up with the UK where the majority of subscriptions are.
I am in the uk still waiting for 108/109 and my card was debited some time ago now.
Just rec'd mine today..Both badly damaged... X-( X-( -{ :007)
On another note, models 106 & 107 were shown on the Bissett website as planned for despatch on 5 August. Today the information changed and it says they should be despatched on 19 August. That's a 2-week delay and about 6 weeks since the last installment. Bissett actually called me (without being asked) to apologise and explain that they were waiting for one more model to arrive (presumably 107, as I already saw 106 - Ford Consul at a newsagent's). Looks like we may be entering a distribution bottleneck, probably because of catching up with the UK where the majority of subscriptions are.
Cheers for the info Jag. Hopefully they arrive Monday as I leave for a 3 month trip then. I'd like to make sure they are in A1 condition before I go. Did they say anything about the Aus extension?
To be honest, when they called this time I didn't ask about the extension. I suppose they will have to send us something soon, if they just charge my card and send issue 111 then I will have to make a complaint.
That's is what they are going to do...Quote: When we announced that the JBCC was coming to an end at issue 110 we met with an unprecedented response. There have been countless requests for specific models that many thought had to be included as part of the collection in order for it to be complete. We are delighted to announce that the collection will be extended so we can include the most demanded models. These models will include Locque's Merc 450SEL from FYEO, the laser-carrying Dodge M-43 ambulance from Goldfinger, the VAZ-2106 from Goldeneye & several more besides.
The publication date for issue 111 will be the 5th October 2011. If you subscribe there is no need to do anything, your issues will still be delivered to your door.
Once again, thank you for your valued custom and we hope that you continue to enjoy the JBCC.
The Publishers
PHEW!!!...that is the full letter issued with 108/109... -{ :007)
apart from the illustration of the vehicle which only has issues if the licence plate is shown.
I believe the US is exempted from this in terms of illustrations and photos...but not models, I don't think. Go figure! However, for everything else, you're absolutely correct. Further, the magazine is printed by a different company than the car is manufactured by. Translation: the magazine could still retain rights to all images, but the modelmaker could be denied use to said images. And whilst I know the modelmaker is doing it for the company printing the magazines under contract, it doesn't matter. If UH or Ixo has to pay seperately OR, alternately, if Fabbri has to foot the bill for UH or Ixo's depictions of the characters (since, as we'll get to in a second, they're NOT stock images, even though they're close), then they might either not be willing to pay a ludicrous licensing fee or alternately be too cheap to pay a reasonable one.
You may well be right. But then again, the diorama pictures look to me like pictures based on the movies rather than actual stills taken from the movies. If that is the case, then it would be cheaper to pay the artist to create the background only and no figures
From what I understand, they're CGI'ed stills based on actual images from the film. Although they have to move various things around, deleting things altogether presents a problem because it's more space you need to fill with other shots. If it's something like a car unrelated to the Bond films in the background or the like, then you have to do it for reasons of licensing. However, if it's the characters themselves, you're better off either just moving them or even having them in a (slightly) wrong position...the latter actually being the cheapest way to do it, I believe. But flat-out deleting them makes little sense and in hindsight, the Turkey-Bird and AVTAK Roller are the two biggest head-scratchers with this one. These two are based on shots in the film where we clearly see characters in the shot (Largo and the Gendarme and Q, Bond, and Pam, respectively). In fact, going back to the LTK Roller, we shouldn't just see them, we should see them from the EXACT same angle. Deleting them in this particular case makes absolutely no sense at all unless you ran afoul of the powers that be. Basically, while it's true that you're using a hybrid of CGI and film to get the cardboard inserts, deleting something in CGI where it is indeed based off of the original film screenshot is not as easy or cost-effective as it sounds. The more frames you work with, the more time you spend editing the shot. But the more time you spend (which you need to delete the figures in their entirety to capture what's behind them), the more money you spend. It just doesn't add up to me as to why this is happening unless they're having licensing issues.
I'd also say to Fabbri, don't penny pinch on the models, drop the damn magazine instead! Failing that, why not commission sets of unpainted supplementary figures from existing moulds that we can buy and add ourselves? Or, sell the moulds to a third party who can then supply the figures.
Although I completely agree with your sentiments (as my magazines so usefully collect dust in one of my many bookcases...), there is absolutely no way that will happen. Fabbri, by definition, is a magazine publisher. If they stop issuing magazines, then we don't get the cars either. So no-go on that. However, your second suggestion is quite interesting and I really hope SOMEONE does this. I'd be willing to help if they don't, at least in terms of providing painting guides (for Tamiya...Dad uses water-based paints on Preiser and Plasticville) and telling you what my Dad does to make his custom figures, plus opining on what figures to re-use if the opportunity is there. Selling sets of re-used, unpainted moulds is definitely the best way to go. Besides, it'd give me an excuse to buy about 50 of the Czechoslovakian Verejna Bezpecnost to convert into Soviet Militisa...but I digress. A third party might be problematic if costs are involved here, as I believe they are. I say might be because Fabbri might be a bunch of cheapskates on the one hand, but on the other, EON may genuinely be asking WAY too much. In that latter scenario, a third party is just another company you have to pay, unfortunately.
By the way, if AND ONLY IF Fabbri is really having problems with money and is no longer capable of supplying images and/or likenesses, plus isn't willing to issue figure moulds, would you be willing to sacrifice dioramas for the presence of figures, since Fabbri is obviously paying for the dioramas themselves, as well? Just curious as to how you'd feel if you were forced to have a choice between one or the other.
Now on a serious note: I think, if it is really a choice between a car in a box without figures or nothing at all, think I might actually go for the latter and just buy the Merc when it comes along, because I want the model so badly. besides that one I can live with the 110 issues we are guaranteed to get in the Netherlands. Truth be told, if the quality/car choice proceeds on the Turdbird level I wouldn't be sad at all if we wouldn't get them...
Comments
Thanks for the welcome. I'm a subscriber not a "cherry-picker." I can't see the sense in spending all that money and only having 75% of a set, but each to his own, I guess. If GE Fabbri are watching this and need a suggestion for a free gift for the subscribers, how about a proper display case and diorama for both the T55 Tank and Little Nellie. Little Nellie fits into a standard display case (just) with it's blades open but the Tank would need something special. We haven't seen the Bondola yet so don't know if it would fit into that sized case. I know diorama's have been designed by some "members" but this suggestion wouldn't cost GE Fabbri much and would give us subscribers just a little lift.
It's not that we've not seen it yet, it's that you've not seen it yet because New Zealand is behind in subscriptions. It's made by car-centric manufacturer Ixo, and is unfortunately in 1/72 scale with no Roger Moore figure.
I think being a 'cherry picker' comes from years of experience as a collector. When I was a kid I collected bubble gum type cards and had to have every one in the set, having 99 out of a set of 100 wasn't good enough. But as an adult and when it came to die-cast models like Corgi Classics, Corgi Aviation, Matchbox Dinky or Minichamps I soon realised I had neither the space or the money necessary to try and get the lot. I don't know if you've ever seen photos in mags of people who have collected everything in these ranges but they tend to be very rich guys who keep their collections in enormous storage areas like exhibition rooms. So the only answer seems to be cherry picking applied to any source of item that's of interest, including the JBCC.
I guess if the JBCC is pretty much all you collect then having the lot wouldn't be too much of a problem, but if it's only part of what you collect then some of us have to be a bit more discerning, especially where wanting to stay married is concerned!
Custom display boxes for the specials is a great idea BTW and probably easy for Fabbri to create.
I was looking at the LTK Maserati the other day and thinking why don't Fabbri use the same line of thought with some of the new models without figures? The Maserati has 3 movie characters portrayed on the diorama backing card which look great - surely showing Largo standing behind the Turkey-Bird would have helped, wouldn't it? It would have been so easy to do.
Definitely anything to enhance this 'poor excuse' of an issue. As a loyal subscriber this Blunder Bird has really peeved me off and whats annoying is I will buy as it is part of the collection as I need to have each one. I have said quite alot on this model but really how did this one slip the net and get signed off. Come on GEfabbri I am one of your loyal subscribers and looking forward to the thought of 20 further models but many like me will be disappointed if this is an example of what we have in store. I will say again and apologies if i do sound like a broken record, i don't like being taken for granted. Each issue should be treated, presented as if it is the first . I remember as a small boy being given a WW2 battle set. Cheap plastic tanks etc in a polybag. Even at a young age I noticed the tanks were the same for each side (same plastic cast) but in a different colour. I remember asking my father why both the allies and the axis or British and Germans had the same tanks. This is probably acceptable in 1970's Pocket money toy costing 50p but not in a collection such as this. You cannot release the same model as a different issue albeit minor tweaks and expect serious collectors not to notice.
Sorry my "We haven't seen the Bondola yet..." was from the Kiwi perspective.
Hi MovieCar Fan,
Well put. I hadn't looked at it from that aspect. This is the only full collection, of anything that I've been involved with for decades.
I also have a collection of over 100 models of Alfa Romeos but on those I am a "cherry picker."
I've worked with Alfa Romeo for over 30 years so have picked up many rare and now obsolete models. It's great to see a few Alfas amongst the JBCC.
I also worked for 3 years at a Lotus dealership in London (1976 to 1979) and got to sit in one of the white Lotus Espirits that they used in the making of TSWLM. It had had a very hard life but still drove well.
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-43-Western-Models-No-WP109-James-Bond-Aston-Martin-/350483638561?pt=AU_Toys_Hobbies_Diecast_Vehicles&hash=item519a73e921#ht_569wt_1141
I pity the idiot who may buy it and get fooled into thinking it is part of a different collection
"Western Models"??? If someone were to buy this then you can easily make a claim against the seller for misrepresenting the item. It's Universal Hobbies - not Western Models!
The seller was probably inspired by another "rarity":
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200335140495&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
Tell him he's dreaming.
I just don't bother with Ebay AU anymore, its a rip off like most things in Australia.
It's possible the seller has accidently put up the wrong photo for the Western Models 109 Aston - it should look like this:
Don't know if it's worth that sort of money though.
A model database (worth browsing if you have a few days to spare) has a gold plated presentation Corgi 269 SWLM Lotus with an explanation (click on more details - it was a movie premiere special) but no gold painted version that I could find. It is remotely possible that gold painted versions were given to people who worked on the movie, maybe someone else here knows?
http://www.moviereplicars.net/search.asp?search=james+bond&page=18
I also came across this if anybody wants a great wallpaper shot - click on the photo twice, the image is huge!!
http://fossilcars.com/blog/collectible-cars/james-bond-aston-martin-sold-for-4-5-million/
Alfas rock - loved them in QOS. I just wish I had the nerve to run one bearing in mind how temperamental they can be! I bet the SWLM Esprit was an eye opener, moviemakers aren't too careful using these cars and it really shows when you see them up close in person - scrapes, bits hanging off, duck tape and loose wires seem to be mandatory
Alfas are temperamental like most italian cars. But that is all part of the charm. I have owned a Alfa 145 and also Lancia Thema both fantastic cars. Go for it! Nearly bought a lotus end of last year but opted for a Jag XK instead in platinum silver. Bond like and often confused with the aston DB7/DB9. :-)
As a collector of Western Models, I can tell you right now that it's the sort of car that you buy about once a month and absolutely blows you away. They're worth every cent The LATEST Western Models vehicle I have, however, is a 1969 American Motors AMX. I'm a detail-freak about the AMX...it's my FAVORITE muscle car. The ride height is a little low (although I was told by a fellow collector that ride height varied VERY slightly inbetween certain models and the AMX was one) and the side mirror (which you can remove) is painted the same color as the body of the car, but otherwise, it's about as close to flawless as you can get an AMX model.
No need! In fact, for a good list of the cars, check wikipedia. When you're done with that, check eBay, since they usually have pictures. If the car is unavailable, go to your sidebar and where it says "location", check "Worldwide". You now have access to any and all models of that car. Hope that helps and I hope you enjoy the rest of the collection! As for myself? I JUST got 108 and 109 and can't WAIT to have them in my hands, comparing them to the real thing.
My current Company Car is an Alfa 159 1750 Turbo TI Manual and it's little beauty. I have had plenty of the 159 3.2 V6's. The block and heads are cast by GM in Aussie but the Italians have done their magic and turned it into yet another great Alfa engine. The 3.2 would be the model that they used in QOS because nothing else makes that kind of noise, when it's neck is being rung-to-the-max ! For awhile I was driving a black one of these and people really took notice of it because it looked like it had just "escaped" from the QOS film set, especially when it was dirty. A mate at Alfa Italy told me that there was a bad accident during the filming of the car chase scene at the start of QOS and they wrote off a number of 159s and one of the stunt drivers was very badly injured. Filming was delayed for awhile.
Yes, you well understand what a car looks like after it's been used in making movies. Collectable, only for that fact and not for it's pristine condition.
Diecast 007: "Alfas are temperamental" You have to give them tender love and care just like an Italian Woman. Then when you want performance - take a firm grip and hang on !
Dalkowski110: I often view the JBCC list on Wikipedia, so know what's coming. It's always good to see the first photos on this site and see the comments. There is certainly some amazing knowledge out there both on models and the real thing.
I went back, looked, and found that every issue of the JBCC going back to 101 (both UH and Ixo) has lacked not only figures, but also any people in the background of the diorama with the exception of people who were obvious extras (such as was the case with the Bondola). I think we may have been looking in the wrong place; to wit, Ixo could likely produce figures perfectly. The problem seems to be that not only figures but also images don't seem to be allowed. And it's no longer Daniel Craig; it seems to be ANY Bond. Perhaps Fabbri ran afoul of the powers that be and had their license to produce anything BUT dioramas (sans figures) and cars that appeared in James Bond films? It's complete guesswork, but definitely something to consider, especially because nobody except extras have appeared in the super-easy-to-produce cardboard backgrounds since 101, either.
If licencing rights/costs are the root cause then it doesn't matter if IXO can make brilliant figures or possibly even dioramas we wont get any anyway.
They must have retained Bond rights for the cars since none of the cars have car maker licencing on them - RR would never have licenced the Shadow for example it wouldn't meet their quality standards. Owners of car brands have vigilent lawyers who make sure they get their pennies worth and the only way these models can come our without car brand licencing is if Eon or whoever licence them as Bond film images because they got the rights from makers as part of product placement.
Jag, the reason I disagree is because not only the ease with which the paper backgrounds are whipped up, but also because in the Turkey-Bird's diorama, especially, but also the Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow II from AVTAK and Ford Consul from DN, you actually have to go out of your way to delete the people on the cardboard. In other words, it would be easier and cheaper to keep them there. Deleting them is the actual waste of money. Yet, they're not there.
Possibly. They could even have hit a proverbial bump in the road and tried to negotiate their way out of it but failed...or failed with UH and passed with Ixo, since after all, Ixo owns the rights to the moulds of the cars it's produced so far, seemingly...basically, we'll need to see what the first post-110 Ixo model is. Since what I heard was that Fabbri was ONLY negotiating with Ixo for figures and better dioramas...maybe this is indeed the case?
Completely agree, unfortunately....
Correct. I genuinely wonder if one of the other reasons Ixo came aboard was because they had a boatload of existing contracts with various automakers and, as you point out, there's no way Rolls-Royce lets its badging be used on models of such sub-par quality as UH's (well...I guess they could have signed off on the Phantom III Sedanca de Ville, though it is regardless missing the logo...). The last UH model to actually feature the real logo was the Ford Edge...way back at Issue 91. Not even the "Turkey-Bird" is badged as a Ford!
You may well be right. But then again, the diorama pictures look to me like pictures based on the movies rather than actual stills taken from the movies. If that is the case, then it would be cheaper to pay the artist to create the background only and no figures
On another note, models 106 & 107 were shown on the Bissett website as planned for despatch on 5 August. Today the information changed and it says they should be despatched on 19 August. That's a 2-week delay and about 6 weeks since the last installment. Bissett actually called me (without being asked) to apologise and explain that they were waiting for one more model to arrive (presumably 107, as I already saw 106 - Ford Consul at a newsagent's). Looks like we may be entering a distribution bottleneck, probably because of catching up with the UK where the majority of subscriptions are.
A reasonable theory, but then would this also make the magazine redundant. I would argue that the permissionto use protected material would have covered both the magazine and indeed the model issue.
I am in the uk still waiting for 108/109 and my card was debited some time ago now.
Cheers for the info Jag. Hopefully they arrive Monday as I leave for a 3 month trip then. I'd like to make sure they are in A1 condition before I go. Did they say anything about the Aus extension?
The magazine uses existing agency images which would have their own set charges, apart from the illustration of the vehicle which only has issues if the licence plate is shown. If you are creating a background diorama image that uses a recognisable actor/character or prop from a movie it becomes a brand new piece of copyrightable material that would generate its own specific licence and payment agreements. (I think I've got that right, I've been in the advertising/publicity business for over 20 years) If it's a non-descript background such as the new Impala has for instance then there'd probably only be a token licence agreement/ payment specifically related to it i.e. use of a scenic screenshot.
I think personally, as has already been suggested, that either the actor/character licencing agreements have run out, or more likely, Fabbri are trying to save money in order to keep the unit prices the same. Production, shipping, storage, delivery costs will have all gone up in the years this series has been running so their profits must be falling. I think they are saving money by dropping recognisable character figures and/or images that would incur extra licencing fees. I just hope that in the same way we are still getting themed backgrounds we'll still see less licence-costly generic figures like 'driver figures', 'military staff' or 'passengers'.
I'd also say to Fabbri, don't penny pinch on the models, drop the damn magazine instead! Failing that, why not commission sets of unpainted supplementary figures from existing moulds that we can buy and add ourselves? Or, sell the moulds to a third party who can then supply the figures.
To be honest, when they called this time I didn't ask about the extension. I suppose they will have to send us something soon, if they just charge my card and send issue 111 then I will have to make a complaint.
As a non-subscriber I get my Bond cars ordered from Forbidden Planet shop and just yesterday (17th Aug.) picked up 109-The Chevrolet Impala coupe. I get a 2nd one for a friend and he orders 2 copies of 007 magazine and we do a swap! Car-£8. Mag-£11.50(inc postage) so I owe him £3.50.
The mag shows the 110-damaged DBS in the back, but no news of the extension yet.(to 130).
I thought the main colour of the car was black, but actually it's a dark inky blue. (with white roof.)
Lately seem to get the car in the middle of the month whereas it used to be at the end of the month.
Bleuville.
Just rec'd mine today..Both badly damaged... X-( X-( -{ :007)
That's is what they are going to do...Quote: When we announced that the JBCC was coming to an end at issue 110 we met with an unprecedented response. There have been countless requests for specific models that many thought had to be included as part of the collection in order for it to be complete. We are delighted to announce that the collection will be extended so we can include the most demanded models. These models will include Locque's Merc 450SEL from FYEO, the laser-carrying Dodge M-43 ambulance from Goldfinger, the VAZ-2106 from Goldeneye & several more besides.
The publication date for issue 111 will be the 5th October 2011. If you subscribe there is no need to do anything, your issues will still be delivered to your door.
Once again, thank you for your valued custom and we hope that you continue to enjoy the JBCC.
The Publishers
PHEW!!!...that is the full letter issued with 108/109... -{ :007)
I believe the US is exempted from this in terms of illustrations and photos...but not models, I don't think. Go figure! However, for everything else, you're absolutely correct. Further, the magazine is printed by a different company than the car is manufactured by. Translation: the magazine could still retain rights to all images, but the modelmaker could be denied use to said images. And whilst I know the modelmaker is doing it for the company printing the magazines under contract, it doesn't matter. If UH or Ixo has to pay seperately OR, alternately, if Fabbri has to foot the bill for UH or Ixo's depictions of the characters (since, as we'll get to in a second, they're NOT stock images, even though they're close), then they might either not be willing to pay a ludicrous licensing fee or alternately be too cheap to pay a reasonable one.
From what I understand, they're CGI'ed stills based on actual images from the film. Although they have to move various things around, deleting things altogether presents a problem because it's more space you need to fill with other shots. If it's something like a car unrelated to the Bond films in the background or the like, then you have to do it for reasons of licensing. However, if it's the characters themselves, you're better off either just moving them or even having them in a (slightly) wrong position...the latter actually being the cheapest way to do it, I believe. But flat-out deleting them makes little sense and in hindsight, the Turkey-Bird and AVTAK Roller are the two biggest head-scratchers with this one. These two are based on shots in the film where we clearly see characters in the shot (Largo and the Gendarme and Q, Bond, and Pam, respectively). In fact, going back to the LTK Roller, we shouldn't just see them, we should see them from the EXACT same angle. Deleting them in this particular case makes absolutely no sense at all unless you ran afoul of the powers that be. Basically, while it's true that you're using a hybrid of CGI and film to get the cardboard inserts, deleting something in CGI where it is indeed based off of the original film screenshot is not as easy or cost-effective as it sounds. The more frames you work with, the more time you spend editing the shot. But the more time you spend (which you need to delete the figures in their entirety to capture what's behind them), the more money you spend. It just doesn't add up to me as to why this is happening unless they're having licensing issues.
Although I completely agree with your sentiments (as my magazines so usefully collect dust in one of my many bookcases...), there is absolutely no way that will happen. Fabbri, by definition, is a magazine publisher. If they stop issuing magazines, then we don't get the cars either. So no-go on that. However, your second suggestion is quite interesting and I really hope SOMEONE does this. I'd be willing to help if they don't, at least in terms of providing painting guides (for Tamiya...Dad uses water-based paints on Preiser and Plasticville) and telling you what my Dad does to make his custom figures, plus opining on what figures to re-use if the opportunity is there. Selling sets of re-used, unpainted moulds is definitely the best way to go. Besides, it'd give me an excuse to buy about 50 of the Czechoslovakian Verejna Bezpecnost to convert into Soviet Militisa...but I digress. A third party might be problematic if costs are involved here, as I believe they are. I say might be because Fabbri might be a bunch of cheapskates on the one hand, but on the other, EON may genuinely be asking WAY too much. In that latter scenario, a third party is just another company you have to pay, unfortunately.
By the way, if AND ONLY IF Fabbri is really having problems with money and is no longer capable of supplying images and/or likenesses, plus isn't willing to issue figure moulds, would you be willing to sacrifice dioramas for the presence of figures, since Fabbri is obviously paying for the dioramas themselves, as well? Just curious as to how you'd feel if you were forced to have a choice between one or the other.
...
i'll get my coat.
Now on a serious note: I think, if it is really a choice between a car in a box without figures or nothing at all, think I might actually go for the latter and just buy the Merc when it comes along, because I want the model so badly. besides that one I can live with the 110 issues we are guaranteed to get in the Netherlands. Truth be told, if the quality/car choice proceeds on the Turdbird level I wouldn't be sad at all if we wouldn't get them...