Are you here to satisfy a personal collecting need or have what the others don't have ???.
I couldn't care less if they made 1 million of them, like I don't care about Omega's idea of 10000 'limited' edition, I am just glad I can have the items...if 1 million people can have their needs satisfied, so be it.
But I like the idea of people being 'fu....' as they bought stuff in numbers just to make a quick buck on Egay. This really amuses me, so please RD, Barbour, BR and all the others continue issuing limited editions.
Well firstly and personally I have not bought it as not interested in collecting it so I have no agenda here. I'm just stating its a poor sales pitch for a company to use limited edition and not stick to it. It's a term which makes people rush out and buy a product thinking they have something fairly unique.
Again I must add I'm glad it's reissued so Bond fans can get there hands on it (same as Billy Reid) but I just find the term limited edition annoying unless it really is limited. I'm more curious out of anything to what management says on the matter.
Believe it or not people buy things due to it being "limited" and not just simply to markup and put on eBay hence feel they have something rare and special not mass produced. It's simply false advertising.
We are complaining about our own inability to resist; a) Market forces (represented by Ebay), and b) marketing (Represented by Royal Doulton).
Its a $70 item that's been made since 1920/30/40 from an organisation whose purpose is to generate value for shareholders.
There are no surprises here.
That would be one view.
My point is that regardless of availablity, or indeed even what the item in question is, Royal Doulton have originally misleading initial buyers by describing the item as 'limited'.
I think its great that others can now get their own Jack, and I am honestly happy for them.
I just thought when I bought a 'limited' item, it would indeed be limited.
We are complaining about our own inability to resist; a) Market forces (represented by Ebay), and b) marketing (Represented by Royal Doulton).
Its a $70 item that's been made since 1920/30/40 from an organisation whose purpose is to generate value for shareholders.
There are no surprises here.
That would be one view.
Very true, just thought Royal Doulton were a fairly reputable company so surprised gone back on their word!!!
Now if Taschen were to release another 1000 Gold limited books at £650 a pop I'm sure the **** would really hit the fan lol
Agreed. That would sting, but I bet neither have defined 'limited', in writing, as being forever and ever amen.
It would hurt Taschen's reputation more as they trade off exclusivity. RD, not so much, the original was a limited run, as will be the next, and next, ultimately 'limited' only by its success. I do think it is a value for money piece though. When I looked at it I thought it was too cheap for what it was, which is why I bought a few for xmas gifts.
The 1940's one are nice, and weightier.
Dont wait for your ship to come in. Swim out and meet the bloody thing.
Agreed. That would sting, but I bet neither have defined 'limited', in writing, as being forever and ever amen.
Collins dictionary states;
Limited: having a limit; restricted; confined.
It's not up to RD to choose what they mean by 'limited', and in my mind have in the past described the doggy as something it wasn't.
They also fail to mention that it's the medium sized vintage doggy, and not the new re issue that's used in the film....
Yeah I know I'm being slightly picky, but it's the principal of the matter. They originally sold it as limited, it turns out that was misleading, which could also be a criminal offence.
I don't think they called it limited to entice anyone in or increase sales, as with the JB connection it'd fly off the shelves anyways.
What I do think has happened is demand largely outnumbered supply, RD have decided to make more coin out of the situation (what business wouldn't?) and done another run.
It's just a shame that they listed it as limited in the first place and lacked the hindsight that it'd be a very popular item. It's caused them to mislead customers and possibly break the law. Ooops.
Agreed. That would sting, but I bet neither have defined 'limited', in writing, as being forever and ever amen.
Collins dictionary states;
Limited: having a limit; restricted; confined.
It's not up to RD to choose what they mean by 'limited', and in my mind have in the past described the doggy as something it wasn't.
They also fail to mention that it's the medium sized vintage doggy, and not the new re issue that's used in the film....
Yeah I know I'm being slightly picky, but it's the principal of the matter. They originally sold it as limited, it turns out that was misleading, which could also be a criminal offence.
I don't think they called it limited to entice anyone in or increase sales, as with the JB connection it'd fly off the shelves anyways.
What I do think has happened is demand largely outnumbered supply, RD have decided to make more coin out of the situation (what business wouldn't?) and done another run.
It's just a shame that they listed it as limited in the first place and lacked the hindsight that it'd be a very popular item. It's caused them to mislead customers and possibly break the law. Ooops.
) Break the law. ) It was limited by its production run. As will be the next. And the next. That meets all definition of limited, unless further defined, which it isn't.
They have been around since 1815, I think they know the game.
You think M's bulldog is the large? Hadn't occurred to me, but your probably right.
Dont wait for your ship to come in. Swim out and meet the bloody thing.
I don't particularly have an agenda either in that I have the first new issue from last year and also a 1940s original. I am however 100% behind those who say that 'Limited' should mean Limited. How would we all feel, and I'm just using this as an example Barry, if FE decided that they were a bit short of cash and decided to re-release the SE GG, how much excrement would be flung into the revolving air circulator then?
I think this a poor show by RD and they should have at least re-released without the packaging and stamps. Bad form X-(
It's examples of dishonourable behaviour such as this that pushes EON/Danjaq into withdrawing licences and when that happens we ALL lose out.
It is really limited when it is individually numbered - like our GG or the Archive Gold Edition
But all products are really limited runs anyway as they are not to be produced forever - at some point the runs will end and years later value could go up when it reach vintage or hard to find status.
If you really want to buy really limited edition - stick with limited numbered edition and not just the word "limited" as it applies to everything
Agreed. That would sting, but I bet neither have defined 'limited', in writing, as being forever and ever amen.
It's just a shame that they listed it as limited in the first place and lacked the hindsight that it'd be a very popular item. It's caused them to mislead customers and possibly break the law. Ooops.
) Break the law. ) It was limited by its production run. As will be the next. And the next. That meets all definition of limited, unless further defined, which it isn't.
In the UK it is illegal to gain trade by describing services or goods in a misleading manner.
I'm certainly no solicitor, but there's the sales of goods act, and i think there's something like the misleading descriptions act as well.
So yeah, as daft as you might think it sounds, RD may have broken the law by originally describing the item as limited but continuing its production run. By labelling something as limited, it gives the piece more appeal don't you think? So on that premise alone, you could say it would help sell an item.
This doesn't mean that I'm gonna take RD to court, or even demand compensation for 'mental anguish' 8-) as many people seem to do these days, I was just saying it's a bit crap, that's all.
No doubt if many people complained to Trading Standards, they might look into it, but even then, they don't have to take action or anything. Lets face it, it's more annoying than anything, and no one is out of pocket over this.
My initial point, as it always has been, is that above all, RD have been rather misleading in the way they originally sold the dog.
An interesting thread! As someone also responsible for some "false info", I rang RD back in Oct to enquire on availability and they clearly stated that once sold, they would continue to produce but without the packaging. So I bought one. I therefore concur with other posters that they have now backtracked.
The solution? I think they should have continued to produce, including the Skyfall packaging etc, but somehow differentiated from the first run, just as they do for books. It then becomes the second edition. That way everyone is happy and RD can produce as many editions as they want, ensuring the goods are marked accordingly. That way, everyone knows where they stand. My view only - right or wrong!
"The distance between insanity and genius is merely success"
I just ordered mine, was just wondering why someone here on "our" very own board said back then when these sold out, that the re-issue won't have SF sleeve etc. :v Why spread false information
Errrr excuse me Teppo before you jump down my bloody neck that was the information I was given! I'm based in Stoke-on-Trent where Royal Doulton head office is based. My mothers husband works at RD and that was the information I was given direct from source! Maybe the demand for the 007 packaging was so high? Who knows?! I have nothing to gain by saying the re-issue won't have the SF box. I already have one!
My brother ordered one in November direct from RD and he was told that his reissue will not have the SF packaging or backstamp.
I'm over the moon that it has the backstamp and packaging and when I saw David's post this morning I rang my brother straight away and he was over joyed!
I don't take kindly to one of "our" very own board members saying that I'm spreading false info without the full story. Next time get all he facts first before making someone look like they are spreading ****. I just come on here to enjoy my passion for 007 and share information with like minded individuals.
Ok Chris, admittedly I didn't read all your post regarding this matter, but first of these said that Feb release won't have stamp and sleeve (see your post #140 which I'm referring to), it did felt kinda mixed bag as RD gave me totally opposed information from their sales representatives. I'm guilty as charged if I was too harsh by saying "spreading false info"
No harm done here and despite I'm the a$$hole here - i hope you accept my point of view with my apologies :007)
No harm done. Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated.
I'm just happy that my little brother can get a Skyfall dog and the info i had was wrong.
An interesting thread! As someone also responsible for some "false info", I rang RD back in Oct to enquire on availability and they clearly stated that once sold, they would continue to produce but without the packaging. So I bought one. I therefore concur with other posters that they have now backtracked.
The solution? I think they should have continued to produce, including the Skyfall packaging etc, but somehow differentiated from the first run, just as they do for books. It then becomes the second edition. That way everyone is happy and RD can produce as many editions as they want, ensuring the goods are marked accordingly. That way, everyone knows where they stand. My view only - right or wrong!
Exactly! This is what RD should have done.
If RD had done the next run without the sleeve or the backstamp then it would have been a lot better.
As I've said repeatedly (but some seem to miss this bit ) ), I don't have any issue over others being able to now get their own doggy, and it's not about the item, or really the company involved. It's the principle of the matter. RD originally sold the dog with it featuring "a limited edition 007 backstamp and box sleeve."
So what's RD's definition of 'limited edition'?
We wait in anticipation to find out.....
Thanks to draxhugo, welshboy and GM amongst others for seeing it from my point of view -{
I've been emailing RD about this and have finally got to the bottom of it.
According to RD, a 'limited edition' would mean that the item is numbered and once supplies had run out, it would no longer be available.....
However, RD also state that the bulldog was originally described as featuring a "limited edition 007 backstamp and box sleeve" because the Skyfall logos etc are exclusive to the bulldog and no other RD item.
Make sense to you?
They also stated that the restock in Feb WILL feature the 007 stuff, exactly like the original item available last year.
It would appear that they'll continue to produce the bulldog in its current form for as long as demand is there.
I've been emailing RD about this and have finally got to the bottom of it.
According to RD, a 'limited edition' would mean that the item is numbered and once supplies had run out, it would no longer be available.....
However, RD also state that the bulldog was originally described as featuring a "limited edition 007 backstamp and box sleeve" because the Skyfall logos etc are exclusive to the bulldog and no other RD item.
Make sense to you?
They also stated that the restock in Feb WILL feature the 007 stuff, exactly like the original item available last year.
It would appear that they'll continue to produce the bulldog in its current form for as long as demand is there.
MG -{
Did you undertake a citizens arrest?
Dont wait for your ship to come in. Swim out and meet the bloody thing.
I've been emailing RD about this and have finally got to the bottom of it.
According to RD, a 'limited edition' would mean that the item is numbered and once supplies had run out, it would no longer be available.....
However, RD also state that the bulldog was originally described as featuring a "limited edition 007 backstamp and box sleeve" because the Skyfall logos etc are exclusive to the bulldog and no other RD item.
Make sense to you?
They also stated that the restock in Feb WILL feature the 007 stuff, exactly like the original item available last year.
It would appear that they'll continue to produce the bulldog in its current form for as long as demand is there.
I've been emailing RD about this and have finally got to the bottom of it.
According to RD, a 'limited edition' would mean that the item is numbered and once supplies had run out, it would no longer be available.....
However, RD also state that the bulldog was originally described as featuring a "limited edition 007 backstamp and box sleeve" because the Skyfall logos etc are exclusive to the bulldog and no other RD item.
Make sense to you?
They also stated that the restock in Feb WILL feature the 007 stuff, exactly like the original item available last year.
It would appear that they'll continue to produce the bulldog in its current form for as long as demand is there.
MG -{
Thanks Microjiff however can you enlarge on an earlier comment which is the Bulldog Jack seen in Skyfall is larger than RD's Limited/Not that Limited licensed replica which to me is the real stinker in this current pot of pooh practices thread
It's my belief that the reissue IS the same size as the vintage doggy used on screen. What I was getting at is the RD site states that the new version is used in the film, and fails to mention the fact that the one in the film is indeed a vintage doggy made back in the 1940's.
I know a guy who is in the collectables business and as far as the industry is concerned "limited edition" means that the run is maximum of 500
Well the first production run of the SF doggy before Christmas was a run of 400, so I think they'll pass the 500 stage very soon, if they haven't already done so.
If the only thing 'limited' was RD's use of the SF logos, then I dunno why they didn't say it was used 'exclusively' instead.
RD stated that they don't believe they have been misleading )
I guess that's up to you guys to decide for yourselves.
Comments
Well firstly and personally I have not bought it as not interested in collecting it so I have no agenda here. I'm just stating its a poor sales pitch for a company to use limited edition and not stick to it. It's a term which makes people rush out and buy a product thinking they have something fairly unique.
Again I must add I'm glad it's reissued so Bond fans can get there hands on it (same as Billy Reid) but I just find the term limited edition annoying unless it really is limited. I'm more curious out of anything to what management says on the matter.
Believe it or not people buy things due to it being "limited" and not just simply to markup and put on eBay hence feel they have something rare and special not mass produced. It's simply false advertising.
Its a $70 item that's been made since 1920/30/40 from an organisation whose purpose is to generate value for shareholders.
There are no surprises here.
That would be one view.
Very true, just thought Royal Doulton were a fairly reputable company so surprised gone back on their word!!!
Now if Taschen were to release another 1000 Gold limited books at £650 a pop I'm sure the **** would really hit the fan lol
My point is that regardless of availablity, or indeed even what the item in question is, Royal Doulton have originally misleading initial buyers by describing the item as 'limited'.
I think its great that others can now get their own Jack, and I am honestly happy for them.
I just thought when I bought a 'limited' item, it would indeed be limited.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
It would hurt Taschen's reputation more as they trade off exclusivity. RD, not so much, the original was a limited run, as will be the next, and next, ultimately 'limited' only by its success. I do think it is a value for money piece though. When I looked at it I thought it was too cheap for what it was, which is why I bought a few for xmas gifts.
The 1940's one are nice, and weightier.
Collins dictionary states;
Limited: having a limit; restricted; confined.
It's not up to RD to choose what they mean by 'limited', and in my mind have in the past described the doggy as something it wasn't.
They also fail to mention that it's the medium sized vintage doggy, and not the new re issue that's used in the film....
Yeah I know I'm being slightly picky, but it's the principal of the matter. They originally sold it as limited, it turns out that was misleading, which could also be a criminal offence.
I don't think they called it limited to entice anyone in or increase sales, as with the JB connection it'd fly off the shelves anyways.
What I do think has happened is demand largely outnumbered supply, RD have decided to make more coin out of the situation (what business wouldn't?) and done another run.
It's just a shame that they listed it as limited in the first place and lacked the hindsight that it'd be a very popular item. It's caused them to mislead customers and possibly break the law. Ooops.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
They have been around since 1815, I think they know the game.
You think M's bulldog is the large? Hadn't occurred to me, but your probably right.
I think this a poor show by RD and they should have at least re-released without the packaging and stamps. Bad form X-(
It's examples of dishonourable behaviour such as this that pushes EON/Danjaq into withdrawing licences and when that happens we ALL lose out.
www.justgiving.com/inMemoryOfLewisCollins
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
But all products are really limited runs anyway as they are not to be produced forever - at some point the runs will end and years later value could go up when it reach vintage or hard to find status.
If you really want to buy really limited edition - stick with limited numbered edition and not just the word "limited" as it applies to everything
-{
In the UK it is illegal to gain trade by describing services or goods in a misleading manner.
I'm certainly no solicitor, but there's the sales of goods act, and i think there's something like the misleading descriptions act as well.
So yeah, as daft as you might think it sounds, RD may have broken the law by originally describing the item as limited but continuing its production run. By labelling something as limited, it gives the piece more appeal don't you think? So on that premise alone, you could say it would help sell an item.
This doesn't mean that I'm gonna take RD to court, or even demand compensation for 'mental anguish' 8-) as many people seem to do these days, I was just saying it's a bit crap, that's all.
No doubt if many people complained to Trading Standards, they might look into it, but even then, they don't have to take action or anything. Lets face it, it's more annoying than anything, and no one is out of pocket over this.
My initial point, as it always has been, is that above all, RD have been rather misleading in the way they originally sold the dog.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
I don't blame them for reproducing it as its money etc however interesting to see diff between various companies etc and the way they value the term!!
As mentioned earlier its a relatively low value item anyhow not like a St Dupont, Omega etc
Anyhow back on topic...
The solution? I think they should have continued to produce, including the Skyfall packaging etc, but somehow differentiated from the first run, just as they do for books. It then becomes the second edition. That way everyone is happy and RD can produce as many editions as they want, ensuring the goods are marked accordingly. That way, everyone knows where they stand. My view only - right or wrong!
No harm done. Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated.
I'm just happy that my little brother can get a Skyfall dog and the info i had was wrong.
Exactly! This is what RD should have done.
If RD had done the next run without the sleeve or the backstamp then it would have been a lot better.
As I've said repeatedly (but some seem to miss this bit
So what's RD's definition of 'limited edition'?
We wait in anticipation to find out.....
Thanks to draxhugo, welshboy and GM amongst others for seeing it from my point of view -{
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
I've been emailing RD about this and have finally got to the bottom of it.
According to RD, a 'limited edition' would mean that the item is numbered and once supplies had run out, it would no longer be available.....
However, RD also state that the bulldog was originally described as featuring a "limited edition 007 backstamp and box sleeve" because the Skyfall logos etc are exclusive to the bulldog and no other RD item.
Make sense to you?
They also stated that the restock in Feb WILL feature the 007 stuff, exactly like the original item available last year.
It would appear that they'll continue to produce the bulldog in its current form for as long as demand is there.
MG -{
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Piss off.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
It's my belief that the reissue IS the same size as the vintage doggy used on screen. What I was getting at is the RD site states that the new version is used in the film, and fails to mention the fact that the one in the film is indeed a vintage doggy made back in the 1940's.
MG
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Well the first production run of the SF doggy before Christmas was a run of 400, so I think they'll pass the 500 stage very soon, if they haven't already done so.
If the only thing 'limited' was RD's use of the SF logos, then I dunno why they didn't say it was used 'exclusively' instead.
RD stated that they don't believe they have been misleading
I guess that's up to you guys to decide for yourselves.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Received Jack's earlier today
TIS - "The moment you think you got it figured - you're wrong"
Formerly known as Teppo
TIS - "The moment you think you got it figured - you're wrong"
Formerly known as Teppo
seems legit
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!