I would suggest that you send the message to both Eaglemoss registered office and database factory. Database factory are just a fulfillment company dealing with the systems needed to take orders and despatch goods take phone calls provide web site etc. BUT they may have a procedure for passing on comments into right people in Eaglemoss who probably all work from home anyway.... Sending anything to the registered address is a hit or miss business could be just a small office doing accounts and legal stuff.
If they dont reply to you in US I'll re-send in UK for you if you want.
If they dont reply to you in US I'll re-send in UK for you if you want.
Maz, I have your email address and this would save me a LOT on postage costs. I'll give you free rein to use my name, the final letter I'm sending to Eaglemoss and Database Factory, and even my signature (slightly altered from its normal form, but it will be mine). Let me know if this is acceptable to you.
I got a replacement Country Squire yesterday. The first two I received damaged. Since I had cancelled the subscription months ago I even forgot I was waiting for this replacement. The lettering on the base is indeed silver, not white.
If they dont reply to you in US I'll re-send in UK for you if you want.
Maz, I have your email address and this would save me a LOT on postage costs. I'll give you free rein to use my name, the final letter I'm sending to Eaglemoss and Database Factory, and even my signature (slightly altered from its normal form, but it will be mine). Let me know if this is acceptable to you.
That's fine. I suggest I put in a letter explaining that I am acting as a relay but that I 100% agree with your sentiments and ask them to reply to my address and I will relay reply - will scan what I get back to pst and forward it.
If they dont reply to you in US I'll re-send in UK for you if you want.
Maz, I have your email address and this would save me a LOT on postage costs. I'll give you free rein to use my name, the final letter I'm sending to Eaglemoss and Database Factory, and even my signature (slightly altered from its normal form, but it will be mine). Let me know if this is acceptable to you.
That's fine. I suggest I put in a letter explaining that I am acting as a relay but that I 100% agree with your sentiments and ask them to reply to my address and I will relay reply - will scan what I get back to pst and forward it.
Sure! I need to get to bed now, but will have it to you by morning US Eastern time.
Maz, I tweaked it a bit and sent it to you via email. I also included the name of someone whose name I had to get permission to use. I'd be surprised if they've not heard of him...well, Ixo anyway. DBF and Eaglemoss probably never have.
Sorry to interrupt the covert dealings going on here (it all sounds very secret spy-ish - very apt for a James Bond forum!) Seriously, it'll be interesting to hear what sort of response you guys get to the letter.
There's another pic of the GF Merc on eBay, overhead this time, giving a few more clues as to the diorama layout.
Click to enlarge
Hopefully it won't be too long before someone posts some decent photos of it.
Sorry to interrupt the covert dealings going on here (it all sounds very secret spy-ish - very apt for a James Bond forum!) Seriously, it'll be interesting to hear what sort of response you guys get to the letter.
Heh, just had to get permission from a guy I know to use his name in a letter about Ixo's use and reuse of moulds. I know a few people that are a bit more noticeable than my VVM Models contact. One mostly hears second-hand stories from his boss (who he does translations for...but ), and while I know his boss does boatloads of business with PCT, I've exchanged exactly two emails with him...but the other? If Ixo denies having heard of him to EM, then they're basically denying the existence of at least two of the partworks they supply models to (he has the inside track on a third partwork, at least, but he's pretty often hit or miss regarding the order in which the vehicles are released...I know he blew the lid off a future issue that's probably quite far away because he confused two similar cars).
There's another pic of the GF Merc on eBay, overhead this time, giving a few more clues as to the diorama layout.
Click to enlarge
Hopefully it won't be too long before someone posts some decent photos of it.
That's interesting. And seemingly quite odd. Ixo seems to have changed the bumpers to a slightly later model 180 (one which we see in the film). I've no idea if they put yellow-orange headlights in place, but after taking a look at the first photo...Ixo did NOT totally recycle the mould of the car I posted. Look VERY carefully and you'll see that the car has both front and rear bumper overriders and underriders. This is faithful to the GF 180, despite Ixo's previous "flat bumpers" model being more prevalent in real life (at least that I know of...Rainier Wolfcastle, feel free to correct me if that's wrong). I wonder...is Eaglemoss supplying the photos/descriptions and then Ixo is working from there? They've done that before on a number of the East Bloc partworks as well as the French Cars partwork by Altaya.
Also, it could just be me, but I think you get the Mercedes-Benz logo on the trunk, NO NUMERIC DESIGNATION, and then the numberplate. Once again, this seems to be true to both the 180's AND 190's from the film (although not the 220S). I'm wondering...is this is more Eaglemoss' fault than Ixo's?
That's interesting. And seemingly quite odd. Ixo seems to have changed the bumpers to a slightly later model 180 (one which we see in the film). I've no idea if they put yellow-orange headlights in place, but after taking a look at the first photo...Ixo did NOT totally recycle the mould of the car I posted. Look VERY carefully and you'll see that the car has both front and rear bumper overriders and underriders. This is faithful to the GF 180, despite Ixo's previous "flat bumpers" model being more prevalent in real life (at least that I know of...Rainier Wolfcastle, feel free to correct me if that's wrong).
Always happy to correct you, Dalko! :v (It's possible far too seldom though )
First, I want to say that I don't know much about Mercedes details, I don't even have one single book about the marque and the following info is solely based on the wisdom of Wikipedia (I've used the German page http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W120 as there is much more info here than on the English version). The JBCC 180 is an earlier version. It looks as if the JBCC car does not have vent windows (correct for the 180's in the film). Vent windows were added to the 180 in August 1958 (the 190 had them at all times), and "for the 1959 IAA [Frankfurt Auto Show, August-September 1959] the four-cylinder Pontons were revised. They got a wider radiator grille, and the front bumper overriders were omitted." What happened to the rear overriders is left open but front and rear photos of a white 180 suggest that the rear overriders were retained.
The 180's in the film are early production (pre-August 1958), so the JBCC model seems to be correct with regard to vent windows and bumper overriders. I don't know which bumper version was more common in real life but it is clear that later produced cars would be around for a longer time than the earlier.
BTW, output of the 180 was not a whopping 85 HP as I wrote earlier (that was the rating of the 220) but rather 50 to (from 1957) 65 HP, with the 180D Diesel ranging from 40 to (from 1955) 43 HP! So I am now even more convinced that we don't see any Diesels during the chase.
The 180 script would be located to the left of the number plate, so it could still be on the car but just not visible on the photo from above - like on Minichamps' dealer model:
I think it is only fair that when they include three or four figures with one issue then another has to be produced cheaper to level out the expenses.
Although I've nothing save track record and the going out of their way to edit out any and all depictions to back me up...what if it's not a matter of money? What if it's a matter of "we can't legally do this because EON only let us use depictions in the magazine" (which is technically printed by a different company and therefore subject to different rules and regulations)?
You were talking of issues 36 to 50 where just 8 of these contained figures. There was no problem depicting the actors as figures or as a picture on the cardboard (even Craig on the CR Range Rover Sport background). And as cars like the Toyota Crown, Peugeot 504, Ford Taunus containing three, four figures came afterwards I found it acceptable to have some issues without figures. (Although a car like the Jeep would have benefitted by one or two figures.)
But still I can't believe that Fabbri would have the permission to use photos for the mags but not for the cardboard diorama background. Technically, it is a GE Fabbri magazine, so Fabbri would be responsible to get permission of Eon and the car companies to use their trademarks. It wouldn't be enough if Ixo or UH has the permission to use Ford's logo if Fabbri didn't have permission to use "Ford" on the magazine. No, except for CR and QoS figures I don't think it is a general problem with the licence - but perhaps they have to pay extra for every single photo ...
What I also find strange is that the same models are sold with different manufacturers.
No, not really. It even has precedence. I hate to invoke the former East Bloc yet again, but there's a Russian series called Nash Avtoprom that's made by both Ixo and Hongwell. And they also managed to get more than a few addresses wrong. If you look hard enough on the KIM-10-50 (first Hongwell car) boxes, you'll find a few with Ixo addresses on them. It's like Maz said; once those Ocean Metal Factory blisters start getting scarce, they're pretty much just using up any spare (as in, never used or packed in any way) blisters they happen to have around.
Just that they are not using up left-over UH blisters - as I said before these are different in size and typography:
I got a replacement Country Squire yesterday. The first two I received damaged. Since I had cancelled the subscription months ago I even forgot I was waiting for this replacement. The lettering on the base is indeed silver, not white.
You didn't think I was imagining things? Here a pic to show the difference between silver and white:
What happened to the rear overriders is left open but front and rear photos of a white 180 suggest that the rear overriders were retained.
While looking for rear photos of 180's (and believe me, I looked through a ton), I found about half a dozen (two could have been the same car at different points in its existence...they seems to have exactly the same bent grille bar) that had flat rear bumpers. Of the five or six that had the flat rear bumper, three (possibly two) were 180D's. I wonder if they changed stylistically before the regular 180's?
The 180 script would be located to the left of the number plate
Sometimes...but I saw plenty of cars while looking for flat rear bumpers that had the "180" either not present or where we usually picture it...the latter is a bit hard to explain, so I'll just post the picture...
Note that the car is a 1956 model; consistent with the years the Bond cars were made.
You were talking of issues 36 to 50 where just 8 of these contained figures. There was no problem depicting the actors as figures or as a picture on the cardboard (even Craig on the CR Range Rover Sport background).
Sort of. I was speaking of these issues, but not in that context. Basically, I wanted to convey the idea of a changing, flexible contract. The second sentence of your quote supports this.
But still I can't believe that Fabbri would have the permission to use photos for the mags but not for the cardboard diorama background.
But what if Ixo and UH started printing the diorama backgrounds a while back? That would change things. For example, we know that Fabbri has permission to print the Rolls-Royce logo in its magazines. But neither UH nor Ixo have permission to use it on the cars, to provide one example.
but perhaps they have to pay extra for every single photo
Again, a strong and distinct possibility. I'm just wondering why, for example, UH actually edited out the French Gendarme in the painful Issue 111. He'd have been cheaper to keep in the photo.
Just that they are not using up left-over UH blisters - as I said before these are different in size and typography:
This is correct. However, again going back to the Hongwell KIM-10-50, those I know for a fact were brand new boxes and not reused boxes. Even with a different typeface, they could still be printing obsolete information. For example, "G.E. Fabbri Ltd." no longer exists. It last renewed its trademark in 2010. It's now "Eaglemoss Collections".
Here a pic to show the difference between silver and white
In that case, I guess mine is silver after all. It still had "Ocean Metal Factory" on the packing, but it is silver.
Does anyone know where I can get the cardboard boxes that the cars come in????? -{ :007)
Didn't know they came in cardboard boxes! In Oz they are sent in white plastic bags.
In the UK we get them in plain brown cardboard boxes like Amazon's - usually sufficiently protective enough to send the smaller model boxes but hopeless for the taller ones, they tend to arrive cracked. If it's these we're talking about, I don't think they're commercially available other than in bulk, but it's possible Staples might have something that will do. When I sell any spare/unwanted models, I get empty six-bottle boxes for free from the local wine shop and send them in those. They're bigger and stronger than the 'official' boxes but cost the same to ship.
If in the UK you get sent your models in boxes AND their cases still do get cracked, then it is a real miracle that in Oz most models arrive undamaged! The white plastic satchel does nothing to protect them. When I had asked Bissett Mags to send in cardboard, they replied that I should complain to my local post office because perhaps they didn't handle the models with enough care, plus there was no point switching to boxes as the collection was about to reach its end. Of course since then there was another extension and I cancelled my subscription, but it was only last week that I received my last replacement (took a few months to get it), and naturally there was no box.
A plastic bag would be useless in the UK, I think our postal system enjoys 'testing' parcel packaging a bit too much - a quick game of footie in the sorting office anyone?
A plastic bag would be useless in the UK, I think our postal system enjoys 'testing' parcel packaging a bit too much - a quick game of footie in the sorting office anyone?
Nor would plastic bags work in the US. I have a number of horror stories related to the USPS, including an envelope containing a 1960's Topps baseball card (yes, baseball memorabilia is another hobby) in near mint condition where the envelope HAD A VISIBLE SHOEPRINT ON IT! Thankfully, the card was undamaged, but I'd never dealt with the eBay seller before. He was horrified and apparently gave his post office absolute hell. And then, when I used to live in NY, the mail delivery guy was fond of depositing packages ON MY LAWN...
I can easily imagine post office staff walking over a few envelopes lying on the floor. After all, if it is only a letter, it is flat anyway! )
I recently had a few parcels left on the ground next to the letterbox outside, but luckily they were still there when I arrived back from work. Some posties can't be bothered to walk up the stairs to my door, which is up on the first floor (second floor if you are in the US! ).
I can easily imagine post office staff walking over a few envelopes lying on the floor. After all, if it is only a letter, it is flat anyway! )
I recently had a few parcels left on the ground next to the letterbox outside, but luckily they were still there when I arrived back from work. Some posties can't be bothered to walk up the stairs to my door, which is up on the first floor (second floor if you are in the US! ).
yep, know what you mean.....i send quite a few parcels all over the world and in my experience the absolute worst thing i can do is to stich a "FRAGILE---HANDLE WITH CARE" sticker on the parcel
it seems to get misinterpreted......in the USA, it translates as "basketball"
in italy it translates as " please lose all traces of this gift"
in australia it translates as " barbecue fuel"
in UK it translates as " this sticker has the specific intention of annoying the postal staff...please disregard at all costs........and just put the boot in.....if you can be bothered"
sorry to appear cynical, but red rag/bull scenario seems apt
i get boxes from tefkaf( the establishment formerly known as fabbri) that look like they have been through a wringer............had over a dozen cracked cases in my time.......VERY annoying
To shift discussion back to the Mercedes-Benz 180 that Eaglemoss is calling a 220S, there's an auction on eBay right now with the same photo as that first guy who posted his, but larger and in seemingly higher resolution. It's still difficult to make much out of the car and actually raises more questions than it answers...
-The wheels on the lower-resolution image seemed to be "skimping it" with all-silver plastic hubcaps. However, upon closer examination, this appears to be a problem with the photo's resolution being reduced as well as the angle the photo was taken at. With the higher resolution image, the center of the hubcap looks like it has paint and the MB logo on it. That's actually fairly easy to tell. But there also appears to be black paint in the recesses of the hubcap. This last feature was true to the movie 180, but it's still too poor a photograph to tell.
-The tires appear to be whitewalls, which once again is true to the movie. However, I can't make out if the white paint is on the wheel (which wouldn't look too good...) or the tire (which would look fine, of course).
-The headlights may indeed be colored yellow or orange, as was seen in the film. However, the way the photo was taken, the entire thing looks like it was tinted (unintentionally). Until I see the model outside its blister (since I've not seen any outside their plastic blisters, diorama box or not), there's basically no way of telling what kind of headlights the car has.
-Ixo seems to have worked on the front the car a bit compared to the "flat bumper" 180's and 180D's they were doing. The fenders seem a bit more rounded, in particular. Yet again, however, this could simply be an optical illusion due to the angle at which the photo was taken as well as the lighting.
-The car doesn't appear to be on the ground, which helps reduce the ride height discrepancy. Yet again, however, the photo is blurry where the front wheels (the only ones REALLY visible enough to make any kind of call about how high the car is sitting) are.
If anyone knows of any other photos of the car (since it was supposed to be released March 21 in the UK), please post them here!
To shift discussion back to the Mercedes-Benz 180 that Eaglemoss is calling a 220S, there's an auction on eBay right now with the same photo as that first guy who posted his, but larger and in seemingly higher resolution. It's still difficult to make much out of the car and actually raises more questions than it answers...
-The wheels on the lower-resolution image seemed to be "skimping it" with all-silver plastic hubcaps. However, upon closer examination, this appears to be a problem with the photo's resolution being reduced as well as the angle the photo was taken at. With the higher resolution image, the center of the hubcap looks like it has paint and the MB logo on it. That's actually fairly easy to tell. But there also appears to be black paint in the recesses of the hubcap. This last feature was true to the movie 180, but it's still too poor a photograph to tell.
-The tires appear to be whitewalls, which once again is true to the movie. However, I can't make out if the white paint is on the wheel (which wouldn't look too good...) or the tire (which would look fine, of course).
-The headlights may indeed be colored yellow or orange, as was seen in the film. However, the way the photo was taken, the entire thing looks like it was tinted (unintentionally). Until I see the model outside its blister (since I've not seen any outside their plastic blisters, diorama box or not), there's basically no way of telling what kind of headlights the car has.
-Ixo seems to have worked on the front the car a bit compared to the "flat bumper" 180's and 180D's they were doing. The fenders seem a bit more rounded, in particular. Yet again, however, this could simply be an optical illusion due to the angle at which the photo was taken as well as the lighting.
-The car doesn't appear to be on the ground, which helps reduce the ride height discrepancy. Yet again, however, the photo is blurry where the front wheels (the only ones REALLY visible enough to make any kind of call about how high the car is sitting) are.
If anyone knows of any other photos of the car (since it was supposed to be released March 21 in the UK), please post them here!
YEP, SMALL DELAY AT DISTRIBUTION STAGE THIS WEEK......EVERYTHING OK NOW.....HERE IS A SLIGHLY BETTER PIC UNTILL SOMEONE POSTS A BETTER ONE
Looks like you've got a flattened MB bonnet ornament there Yourmovemrbond Thanks for the pics though! On the car itself - no whitewalls, no front quarter lights, I don't think the interior was red, wrong caption but other than that it's not looking too bad I reckon. The licence plates look good and it's got the grilles either side of the radiator.
no whitewalls, no front quarter lights, I don't think the interior was red
The whitewalls thing should be an easy fix, thankfully. The flattened hood ornament hopefully won't rear its ugly head a bunch of times. The interior? It likely depended on the car being used, although I can't recall one with. However, the quarter glass thing is correct. What Rainier Wolfcastle meant when he said the car was correct in its lack of vent windows was that early models of the 180 lacked quarter glass completely. Here...
We see cars with and without vent windows throughout the chase; basically, there is no right or wrong when it comes to this due to continuity errors.
Also, as a bit of model trivia, this mould is one of Ixo's oldest. It was, to my knowledge, designed by Vitesse and then bought up by Ixo when they purchased a number of the Vitesse moulds when the company went under (the Vitesse you see now is owned by a different company).
Still no response from database warehouse or eaglemoss to the Dalkowski Letter -- maybe they are just taking time finding the right person to answer. Or maybe they are working hard on dioramas and negotiating figure rights... No its not April 1st yet.....
Still no response from database warehouse or eaglemoss to the Dalkowski Letter -- maybe they are just taking time finding the right person to answer. Or maybe they are working hard on dioramas and negotiating figure rights... No its not April 1st yet.....
Thanks for the update, Maz! I honestly wonder what we'll get when we finally see the VAZ-2105. I'm guessing a great car since it was everyone's favorite Zhiguli in USSR AvtoLegende/was really detailed and well-done. The real question is "what do we get after that?" If it's the Mercedes-Benz 220D (W115) from FYEO, then once again, they can use an existing mould without any worries. But if it's a "partially recycled mould", I wonder what happens.
Ixo's output for even the East Bloc partworks has slowed down as a result of over-extension. I'm thinking that save the Scaldia-Volga (because they'd be insane to alienate the East Bloc hobbyists that ONLY collect those vehicles), regarding the "partially re-used" car moulds, we may have to hope for the best and expect the worst...
no whitewalls, no front quarter lights, I don't think the interior was red
The whitewalls thing should be an easy fix, thankfully. The flattened hood ornament hopefully won't rear its ugly head a bunch of times. The interior? It likely depended on the car being used, although I can't recall one with. However, the quarter glass thing is correct. What Rainier Wolfcastle meant when he said the car was correct in its lack of vent windows was that early models of the 180 lacked quarter glass completely. Here...
We see cars with and without vent windows throughout the chase; basically, there is no right or wrong when it comes to this due to continuity errors.
Also, as a bit of model trivia, this mould is one of Ixo's oldest. It was, to my knowledge, designed by Vitesse and then bought up by Ixo when they purchased a number of the Vitesse moulds when the company went under (the Vitesse you see now is owned by a different company).
I have to say that despite its various problems, I'm glad EMFabbri made this particular model rather than Oddjob's Merc. That's not to say that IMHO there isn't room in the collection later on for another version of it as Oddjob's wheels.
I reckon 119 will probably be the FYEO Merc or something equally easy to issue for the time being.
Looking at the pics it appears that the "diorama" is still far from what UH were able to offer - the crates look rather toy-like and plasticky. So perhaps now it's the time to code 1 them instead of the car itself?
Comments
If they dont reply to you in US I'll re-send in UK for you if you want.
Maz, I have your email address and this would save me a LOT on postage costs. I'll give you free rein to use my name, the final letter I'm sending to Eaglemoss and Database Factory, and even my signature (slightly altered from its normal form, but it will be mine). Let me know if this is acceptable to you.
That's fine. I suggest I put in a letter explaining that I am acting as a relay but that I 100% agree with your sentiments and ask them to reply to my address and I will relay reply - will scan what I get back to pst and forward it.
Sure! I need to get to bed now, but will have it to you by morning US Eastern time.
No rush I will get it out at the weekend as long as you get me your words by then
There's another pic of the GF Merc on eBay, overhead this time, giving a few more clues as to the diorama layout.
Click to enlarge
Hopefully it won't be too long before someone posts some decent photos of it.
Heh, just had to get permission from a guy I know to use his name in a letter about Ixo's use and reuse of moulds. I know a few people that are a bit more noticeable than my VVM Models contact. One mostly hears second-hand stories from his boss (who he does translations for...but ), and while I know his boss does boatloads of business with PCT, I've exchanged exactly two emails with him...but the other? If Ixo denies having heard of him to EM, then they're basically denying the existence of at least two of the partworks they supply models to (he has the inside track on a third partwork, at least, but he's pretty often hit or miss regarding the order in which the vehicles are released...I know he blew the lid off a future issue that's probably quite far away because he confused two similar cars).
That's interesting. And seemingly quite odd. Ixo seems to have changed the bumpers to a slightly later model 180 (one which we see in the film). I've no idea if they put yellow-orange headlights in place, but after taking a look at the first photo...Ixo did NOT totally recycle the mould of the car I posted. Look VERY carefully and you'll see that the car has both front and rear bumper overriders and underriders. This is faithful to the GF 180, despite Ixo's previous "flat bumpers" model being more prevalent in real life (at least that I know of...Rainier Wolfcastle, feel free to correct me if that's wrong). I wonder...is Eaglemoss supplying the photos/descriptions and then Ixo is working from there? They've done that before on a number of the East Bloc partworks as well as the French Cars partwork by Altaya.
Also, it could just be me, but I think you get the Mercedes-Benz logo on the trunk, NO NUMERIC DESIGNATION, and then the numberplate. Once again, this seems to be true to both the 180's AND 190's from the film (although not the 220S). I'm wondering...is this is more Eaglemoss' fault than Ixo's?
First, I want to say that I don't know much about Mercedes details, I don't even have one single book about the marque and the following info is solely based on the wisdom of Wikipedia (I've used the German page http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W120 as there is much more info here than on the English version). The JBCC 180 is an earlier version. It looks as if the JBCC car does not have vent windows (correct for the 180's in the film). Vent windows were added to the 180 in August 1958 (the 190 had them at all times), and "for the 1959 IAA [Frankfurt Auto Show, August-September 1959] the four-cylinder Pontons were revised. They got a wider radiator grille, and the front bumper overriders were omitted." What happened to the rear overriders is left open but front and rear photos of a white 180 suggest that the rear overriders were retained.
The 180's in the film are early production (pre-August 1958), so the JBCC model seems to be correct with regard to vent windows and bumper overriders. I don't know which bumper version was more common in real life but it is clear that later produced cars would be around for a longer time than the earlier.
BTW, output of the 180 was not a whopping 85 HP as I wrote earlier (that was the rating of the 220) but rather 50 to (from 1957) 65 HP, with the 180D Diesel ranging from 40 to (from 1955) 43 HP! So I am now even more convinced that we don't see any Diesels during the chase.
The 180 script would be located to the left of the number plate, so it could still be on the car but just not visible on the photo from above - like on Minichamps' dealer model:
You were talking of issues 36 to 50 where just 8 of these contained figures. There was no problem depicting the actors as figures or as a picture on the cardboard (even Craig on the CR Range Rover Sport background). And as cars like the Toyota Crown, Peugeot 504, Ford Taunus containing three, four figures came afterwards I found it acceptable to have some issues without figures. (Although a car like the Jeep would have benefitted by one or two figures.)
But still I can't believe that Fabbri would have the permission to use photos for the mags but not for the cardboard diorama background. Technically, it is a GE Fabbri magazine, so Fabbri would be responsible to get permission of Eon and the car companies to use their trademarks. It wouldn't be enough if Ixo or UH has the permission to use Ford's logo if Fabbri didn't have permission to use "Ford" on the magazine. No, except for CR and QoS figures I don't think it is a general problem with the licence - but perhaps they have to pay extra for every single photo ...
Just that they are not using up left-over UH blisters - as I said before these are different in size and typography:
While looking for rear photos of 180's (and believe me, I looked through a ton), I found about half a dozen (two could have been the same car at different points in its existence...they seems to have exactly the same bent grille bar) that had flat rear bumpers. Of the five or six that had the flat rear bumper, three (possibly two) were 180D's. I wonder if they changed stylistically before the regular 180's?
Sometimes...but I saw plenty of cars while looking for flat rear bumpers that had the "180" either not present or where we usually picture it...the latter is a bit hard to explain, so I'll just post the picture...
http://www.mbzponton.org/pax058/people/mb_180_1956_Kobus_2005_rear.jpg
Note that the car is a 1956 model; consistent with the years the Bond cars were made.
Sort of. I was speaking of these issues, but not in that context. Basically, I wanted to convey the idea of a changing, flexible contract. The second sentence of your quote supports this.
But what if Ixo and UH started printing the diorama backgrounds a while back? That would change things. For example, we know that Fabbri has permission to print the Rolls-Royce logo in its magazines. But neither UH nor Ixo have permission to use it on the cars, to provide one example.
Again, a strong and distinct possibility. I'm just wondering why, for example, UH actually edited out the French Gendarme in the painful Issue 111. He'd have been cheaper to keep in the photo.
This is correct. However, again going back to the Hongwell KIM-10-50, those I know for a fact were brand new boxes and not reused boxes. Even with a different typeface, they could still be printing obsolete information. For example, "G.E. Fabbri Ltd." no longer exists. It last renewed its trademark in 2010. It's now "Eaglemoss Collections".
In that case, I guess mine is silver after all. It still had "Ocean Metal Factory" on the packing, but it is silver.
Didn't know they came in cardboard boxes! In Oz they are sent in white plastic bags.
In the UK we get them in plain brown cardboard boxes like Amazon's - usually sufficiently protective enough to send the smaller model boxes but hopeless for the taller ones, they tend to arrive cracked. If it's these we're talking about, I don't think they're commercially available other than in bulk, but it's possible Staples might have something that will do. When I sell any spare/unwanted models, I get empty six-bottle boxes for free from the local wine shop and send them in those. They're bigger and stronger than the 'official' boxes but cost the same to ship.
Nor would plastic bags work in the US. I have a number of horror stories related to the USPS, including an envelope containing a 1960's Topps baseball card (yes, baseball memorabilia is another hobby) in near mint condition where the envelope HAD A VISIBLE SHOEPRINT ON IT! Thankfully, the card was undamaged, but I'd never dealt with the eBay seller before. He was horrified and apparently gave his post office absolute hell. And then, when I used to live in NY, the mail delivery guy was fond of depositing packages ON MY LAWN...
I recently had a few parcels left on the ground next to the letterbox outside, but luckily they were still there when I arrived back from work. Some posties can't be bothered to walk up the stairs to my door, which is up on the first floor (second floor if you are in the US!
it seems to get misinterpreted......in the USA, it translates as "basketball"
in italy it translates as " please lose all traces of this gift"
in australia it translates as " barbecue fuel"
in UK it translates as " this sticker has the specific intention of annoying the postal staff...please disregard at all costs........and just put the boot in.....if you can be bothered"
sorry to appear cynical, but red rag/bull scenario seems apt
i get boxes from tefkaf( the establishment formerly known as fabbri) that look like they have been through a wringer............had over a dozen cracked cases in my time.......VERY annoying
-The wheels on the lower-resolution image seemed to be "skimping it" with all-silver plastic hubcaps. However, upon closer examination, this appears to be a problem with the photo's resolution being reduced as well as the angle the photo was taken at. With the higher resolution image, the center of the hubcap looks like it has paint and the MB logo on it. That's actually fairly easy to tell. But there also appears to be black paint in the recesses of the hubcap. This last feature was true to the movie 180, but it's still too poor a photograph to tell.
-The tires appear to be whitewalls, which once again is true to the movie. However, I can't make out if the white paint is on the wheel (which wouldn't look too good...) or the tire (which would look fine, of course).
-The headlights may indeed be colored yellow or orange, as was seen in the film. However, the way the photo was taken, the entire thing looks like it was tinted (unintentionally). Until I see the model outside its blister (since I've not seen any outside their plastic blisters, diorama box or not), there's basically no way of telling what kind of headlights the car has.
-Ixo seems to have worked on the front the car a bit compared to the "flat bumper" 180's and 180D's they were doing. The fenders seem a bit more rounded, in particular. Yet again, however, this could simply be an optical illusion due to the angle at which the photo was taken as well as the lighting.
-The car doesn't appear to be on the ground, which helps reduce the ride height discrepancy. Yet again, however, the photo is blurry where the front wheels (the only ones REALLY visible enough to make any kind of call about how high the car is sitting) are.
If anyone knows of any other photos of the car (since it was supposed to be released March 21 in the UK), please post them here!
Looks like you've got a flattened MB bonnet ornament there Yourmovemrbond
The whitewalls thing should be an easy fix, thankfully. The flattened hood ornament hopefully won't rear its ugly head a bunch of times. The interior? It likely depended on the car being used, although I can't recall one with. However, the quarter glass thing is correct. What Rainier Wolfcastle meant when he said the car was correct in its lack of vent windows was that early models of the 180 lacked quarter glass completely. Here...
http://www.cars-pictures.net/var/albums/Classic-Cars/Mercedes-Benz_180_W120_1953.jpg
And then, in 1959...
http://www.carsbase.com/photo/Mercedes_Benz-E_Class_W120_mp35_pic_61135.jpg
We see cars with and without vent windows throughout the chase; basically, there is no right or wrong when it comes to this due to continuity errors.
Also, as a bit of model trivia, this mould is one of Ixo's oldest. It was, to my knowledge, designed by Vitesse and then bought up by Ixo when they purchased a number of the Vitesse moulds when the company went under (the Vitesse you see now is owned by a different company).
Thanks for the update, Maz! I honestly wonder what we'll get when we finally see the VAZ-2105. I'm guessing a great car since it was everyone's favorite Zhiguli in USSR AvtoLegende/was really detailed and well-done. The real question is "what do we get after that?" If it's the Mercedes-Benz 220D (W115) from FYEO, then once again, they can use an existing mould without any worries. But if it's a "partially recycled mould", I wonder what happens.
Ixo's output for even the East Bloc partworks has slowed down as a result of over-extension. I'm thinking that save the Scaldia-Volga (because they'd be insane to alienate the East Bloc hobbyists that ONLY collect those vehicles), regarding the "partially re-used" car moulds, we may have to hope for the best and expect the worst...
I have to say that despite its various problems, I'm glad EMFabbri made this particular model rather than Oddjob's Merc. That's not to say that IMHO there isn't room in the collection later on for another version of it as Oddjob's wheels.
I reckon 119 will probably be the FYEO Merc or something equally easy to issue for the time being.