Bug in dimension system (real one this time :) )

Teup

Someone just placed an order in my store with the following item:

http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-medium-stone-gray-power-functions-battery-box-aaa-non-rechargeable-64228

This item is registered as being 32mm in its smallest dimension. This customer managed to select Priority Airmail, even though I have clearly set the limit for this kind of shipment to 31mm. This item does not have any dimensions that would fit in 31mm, so this must be a bug, right?

I'm not sure I'm a fan of the automatic shipping cost calculations.. might switch to only quotes altogether.

steendorp

Hi Teup,

This is not a bug. The dimensions are wrong. See the dimensions below:

Stud Dimensions: 8 x 4 x 1
Dimensions (LxWxH): 6.4cm x 3.2cm x 1.1cm

1.1 cm will fit easily in an envelope with a max height of 3.1 cm.

So the height has to be adjusted of this item.

Frank

Teup

Oh, my bad! I thought it read 112.0 mm, but it's actually 11.20 mm. The person who entered it must've thought the same

Bad news is that this problem is now harder to fix than I thought. Something like this is bound to happen again and as a customer I wouldn't be very happy if a seller asked me to send him an additional €15.-...

I will add an extra warning in the shipping method description, hope that helps a bit.

steendorp

I just adjusted it.

I still use the automatic shipping calculations. It works great for me. Just the minifig standard dimensions are too high for the Dutch weight band sizes. That's a pitty. So you always end up with a quote or a package (over 10 EUR for just a minifig), while it will easily fit in an envelope with a max of 20 grams: shipping 64 cents for domestic mail or 1.05 EUR for overseas shipments.

Frank

Teup

Don't you have the problem of people buying items without dimensions and the shipping costs turning out €10 too high? That keeps happening to me.
As for the minifigs, for now I've set the limit to 31mm, so they fit.

Strange that minifigs have standard dimensions, when the admin clearly stated that that is not ging to happen for parts because they want all dimensions to be added. That's why parts are assumed to have infinite dimensions. Rather make that apply to minifigs too then, maybe gives some incentive to add the proper dimensions. I wonder if minifig dimensions could be auto calculated. Take the torso's width, the headpiece's width and length, and you have something that is at least more accurate than the current standard dimension estimate.

Lawrence

I don't believe I have stated that parts have infinite dimensions? All items in the catalog have default dimensions that err very much on the side of caution.

Teup

Oh, I thought what you meant was that parts that haven't got any entered dimensions will automatically make the order disqualify for any volume restricted shipping methods.

So, parts and figs both have pessimistic default dimensions, I get it now (I wouldn't know, both scenarios cause order to be boxed parcels for me :P )

CastleBricks

Strange that minifigs have standard dimensions, when the admin clearly stated that that is not ging to happen for parts because they want all dimensions to be added. That's why parts are assumed to have infinite dimensions. Rather make that apply to minifigs too then, maybe gives some incentive to add the proper dimensions. I wonder if minifig dimensions could be auto calculated. Take the torso's width, the headpiece's width and length, and you have something that is at least more accurate than the current standard dimension estimate.

There are some minifigs that have very different dimensions to a regular minifig. So if they are given approximate dimensions, a seller will have the same problem as you at some stage - a part bigger than one of their shipping bands allows.

Teup

Strange that minifigs have standard dimensions, when the admin clearly stated that that is not ging to happen for parts because they want all dimensions to be added. That's why parts are assumed to have infinite dimensions. Rather make that apply to minifigs too then, maybe gives some incentive to add the proper dimensions. I wonder if minifig dimensions could be auto calculated. Take the torso's width, the headpiece's width and length, and you have something that is at least more accurate than the current standard dimension estimate.

There are some minifigs that have very different dimensions to a regular minifig. So if they are given approximate dimensions, a seller will have the same problem as you at some stage - a part bigger than one of their shipping bands allows.

But how far off could it be if you take the dimensions of the parts the minifig consists of? Minifigs are added constantly so it will remain a constant problem if there can't be a smart calculation like this. Plus, it would save a whole load of redundant measuring. Right now the same hair pieces and helmets are measured over and over again.

Headgear dimensions, bodywear dimensions, torso width, torso+legs+headgear height, and you should be good for pretty much all minfigs I can think of.

Besides, worst case the minfig will have to be shipped disassembled, in which case it's guaranteed to fit. (thinking about figs like Doc Ock)

CastleBricks

And for minifigs with large parts like the CMF Medusa?

Teup

Oh, clever In that case, leg length should be added to the list of things to check.

It would auto calculate that medusa is pretty big in all 3 dimensions, while in reality you could take her apart and make it fit. Auto calculation would still be on the pessimistic side, just the way the admin wanted.

robernat

@teup (and others): put a force quote on all your figs, it's better then to have extremely high shipping costs displayed... If people lack submitting sizes, then it's gonna take a while before we can count on auto calculation of orders including minifigs

In case of unusual sizes of figs when submitting (like Medusa or Doc Ock): submit a 'packed size' by putting the parts in the smallest baggie possible and all sellers will benefit from it. It's not ideal as it doesn't represent a correct size for the fig in builded condition, but it is more conveniant for selling.

Just a reminder (or a tip): many figs have the same dimension: for example: all figs with cowboy head 3629 have a dimension of 26x18x46 regardless of the color of their torso/legs/head/cowboy head (and regardless wether they have a bandana or not). So if you measure 1, submit the size for all of them (I've been doing for figs with this hat) ;-)

There are hundreds of examples like that (standard helmets, standard caps, standard hairs) and one can gain a lot of points by taking sizes from 1 fig and re-enter them for other figs in the same combination, regardless of colors ;-)

Cheers, Eric

Stragus

In case of unusual sizes of figs when submitting (like Medusa or Doc Ock): submit a 'packed size' by putting the parts in the smallest baggie possible and all sellers will benefit from it. It's not ideal as it doesn't represent a correct size for the fig in built condition, but it is more convenient for selling.

RobErNat, I know you have a ton of experience with catalog editing, so I would really appreciate your insight on this point.

I fully agree on specifying "packing dimensions" rather than "built dimensions" for minifigs, it obviously makes a lot of sense. In the past, I have tried submitting both approximative built dimensions and "packing dimensions", but they were rejected. I was told in private that minifig dimensions should be exact built dimensions, neither approximative or packing dimensions.

You have 43162 catalog points, so you obviously know how the system works. Did you have catalog submissions for "packed size" dimensions accepted?

Lawrence

We don't accept "approximate" submissions. In the absense of having separate packing dimensions fields, we sometimes accept packed dimensions for the extreme cases.

Teup

Those are some neat tips Eric, but it's still sad it has to come to this. I mean, it's cool you can gain a lot of points that way, but it's pretty redundant work.
If my previously mentioned solution is for some reason not possible (I think it should work fine for all minifigs), treating them as part lots will be the best way. Not as an estimate packed size, because I agree with Lawrence that that is undesirable, but by considering minifigs a collection of parts that all have their dimensions.

Collectible minfigs aside, if Lego brings out 10 new headgears and a couple of new bodywears in 100 new figs, just adding the dimensions for those few new parts is automatically generating the packed size of all of the new figs. And, all new minfigs that just have standard helmets or whatever other readily existing headgear will not require any work at all. Prints can all be disregarded.

Most of the time, the seller will have the freedom to assemble the minifig if he likes, but in tight cases shipping the minifigs in parts will always be an option because the system has calculated that that would fit. Shipping a minifig in parts is completely uncontroversial so I can't really see any down sides.

Lawrence

I should add, The concept of automatically calculating the minifig dimensions based on the parts dimensions is on the list, it was suggested by Robernat a few months ago. However, there are still many minifig parts without dimensions. Ultimately, with any system, we get out what we put in. If we want a nice automatic shipping system, it requires the community to put in work.

Teup

Ah, good to hear it's on the list! I am aware we get out what we put in. But I'm glad to hear it's on the to do list because it improves the ratio of what we get out a lot. I am quite busy but once I'm in calmer waters I'll go and do some measuring.

robernat

I only submit 'builded' sizes for minifigs when at least 1 size is less then 30 mm (normally good for all countries in the world), and this covers most likely 95% of figs (if not more). Once you get a size that can cause serious discrepanties in shippingcosts like Medusa for example, it is better to submit a 'packed' size IMHO.

I just submitted size (and weight) for about 80 figs, seems like nothing, but it represents 1.17 % of all figs, it took me about an hour and 1/2 and I only took 12 figs to do so, by randomly taking a torso, legs a head and the specific accesoires for those figs (in a random color). Nobody has to actually take new parts for that, I think most people have dozens of used figs and just by combining the needed parts in any color is enough to take measurements. 10 people doing so for 4 hours, and half of the figs will have a size ;-)
I will continue to do so offcourse, but as a seller I also have my store to manage...

In the long run Lawrence may be able to autocalculate size and weight based on a no-color fig in that combination, but to be able to do so, as he stated, most sizes must be 'in' to start with.

@Stargus: yes I have a lot of points, about 36.000 have been earned with pictures, a lot of new pictures, but also a lot of copies of what I did in the past (and a lot will need improvement in the long run). But it's not the amount that counts, it's the periodical upload of data that makes it grow, wether it is a lot or not is not important, even the smallest effort helps ;-)
Besides, I mainly do so to get something back in the long run by redeeming the points (hint hint Admin, new prices would be more then welcome ) , so thats nice as well

@Hoddie (since the other thread has been closed): Building a fig to take measurements and selling it in 'builded' condition does not devaluate your fig, just put in the comments the fig was builded for storage purpose and you can still sell at the same price... No buyer expects from all sellers that figs are unbuilded, some buyers even prefer 'builded' to avoid frictional marks... So your theory of devaluating your fig with 30% for taking measurements is just plain nonsense (sorry to say it like that).

Eric

robernat

@Stragus: forgot to say: I'm in favor of sizes of figs in 'builded' condition where possible, as in the long run people will also sell more 'used' figs (usually builded) . Packed sizes would cause issues: for example if a packed size would include a cape in a little white box making the volume bigger IF we use a 'packed size' for such: It is easier to remove the little white box if you have a size or weight issue with an order of a new figs, but there is no reason to disturb the future when selling 'used' figs ;-)

Hoddie

@RobErNat, to be fair it's only your opinion that it doesn't devalue the fig. I for one would consider any assembled Lego to be used. So not 'plain nonsense' at all, just an opinion, as valid as yours. I'm not sure why everyone seems to be so emotive about this issue.

Stragus

@Admin and @RobErNat: Ah excellent, the system finally makes sense!

To summarize the guidelines, assuming I understood them correctly:
We should enter built minifig dimensions, except in cases where all three dimensions would exceed 18mm and lead to incorrect shipping calculations. In such "extreme cases", we must use packed dimensions.

I believe the threshold for "too large" dimensions really should be 18mm, not 30mm as previously mentioned. 20mm is the mail thickness threshold in Canada and other countries.

Now that the system finally makes sense again, I'll be able to resume the submissions to the catalog. We all benefit from clear guidelines, it would be great to read about such details in a catalog edition guide! Thanks.

robernat

@Hoddie: In the past TLG has made sets with either fully assembled, either partially assembeld minifigs and they still do in sets like http://www.brickowl.com/search/catalog?query=4638572 (just 1 example). So if a buyer would buy the set, he would tell LEGO that it's not a new set :? Or if a seller here would open the set and sell the figs individually (in builded condition by TLG) they would suddently be 'used' :? It is the reason why sites like this allows figs to be builded and still be 'new'. Maybe you buy figs and prefer them to be unbuilded (I buy a lot of them and prefer unbuilded as well, but it doesn't bother me if they are), but the vast majority of buyers just want the fig in perfect condition (unplayed with), regardless wether builded or not. The price you ask for a fig on a site like this does not depend on the fact wether it's builded or unbuilded, it depends on the availability, regional and overal competition and on what you have in your store (a used fig may just as well sell higher then a new fig example:http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-hoth-rebel-trooper-minifigure, check the price guide and you will see 2 used ones have sold for more then the lowest 'new' one ). I hope you don't buy many figs here, as a big number of sellers probably do build the figs they are selling and don't even indicate it (I usually do for example), if as a seller you prefer storing and shipping in unbuilded condition, then that's real nice and good for your buyer, but don't expect that your competition does the same thing (and I doubt they will have less sales, lower prices or complaints). If you want to have the edge (or try to) over other sellers, I strongly suggest to indicate in your listings that they are unbuilded, maybe buyers will pay a little extra for unbuilded ones, but I doubt ;-)

@Stragus: The threshold in Canada is quite low, didn't remember it was (but I read it in the past), I think for a lot of figs you will need a 'force quote' because a large headgear (like the musketeer hat) will cause a fig to have 2 sizes larger then 20 mm, while it perfectly fits 20 mm in (partially) unbuilded condition. As the overview page of a fig shows the dimensions (well, once they have been entered offcourse), it will be easier for you to determine wether to put a force quote or not. I currently have a force quote on all my figs, as a lot of dimensions are missing and I don't want my buyers to end up with (or even see) a package rate, while I, as a seller can determine better with a quick glance wether a fig fits my local Postal limits or not by shipping unassembeld (or partially unassembeld).

@Admin: maybe it's time to have that second field for package dimensions for minifigs ;-)

Hoddie

I understand the point you make but I still don't agree. Building a figure when parting out a set and selling it as new is inherently dishonest in my opinion. How would a buyer differentiate between these figures and figures that have been displayed for several years by a collector - or would it be fine to sell both as new in your opinion? If so, what's the point of the Used (Like New) option?

If I bought a figure and it turned up assembled, it would be sent straight back to the seller and I'd be seeking a repayment. Assembled Lego is not new. Otherwise what's to stop someone selling a built set as new? It's just silly.

Lawrence

Please don't turn another thread into a personal disagreement between members. Whether to ship minifigures assembled is a matter of opinion where people have different vews, let's keep this forum friendly please.

robernat

Lawrence, is it an option to have a thickbox to indicate wether a fig is assembeld or not when listing them?
Might be an extra indicator (if data is kept and shown) wether buyers prefer assembeld or not

Hoddie

I don't understand why all debate on this forum is seen as some kind of personal disagreement. I have never personally insulted anyone in any thread and nor do I feel anyone has ever personally insulted me. Such debates as this are pertinent to the site as a whole and are very worthwhile in my opinion. Perhaps because English isn't the first language of all contributors that sometimes people are seeing things that aren't intended.

RobErNat, I'm not sure what your suggestion would bring to the table in all honestly. Even if 90% don't mind it when minifigures have been assembled, that does not mean the other 10% must accept that it's legitimate for something sold as 'new' to have actually been used. What would be better, in my opinion, is for an explicit guide as to what 'New', 'Used (As New)', etc. means, so that there's consistency between sellers rather than buyers having to deal with different interpretations between stores. That would make much more sense to me.

steendorp

To go back to the topic of this thread:

The dimensions of this item: http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-medium-stone-gray-power-functions-battery-box-aaa-non-rechargeable-64228

are still wrong.

The changed dimensions are accepted in the catalog, but the system still shows the stud dimensions as 8 x 4 x 1. The dimansions in cm are changed an right at the moment.

Hope it will adjusted soon in the system.

Frank

robernat

@Lawrence: I agrea with Hoddie that disussions about opinions serve a purpose and might indeed also bring information for future guidelines and actually may contribute to getting another view for newer (or long date) sellers as to 'how' buyers desire to receive certain items.
@Hoddie: I strongly suggest to contact a seller prior to making a purchase of minifigs, it would be wrong to expect from all sellers that they ship unassembeld figs, particulary since a number of sellers have double inventories on other marketplaces which already might have a guideline with (long time) reasoning behind it. It would be wrong for you (IMHO) to make a purchase and then ship it all back because it doesn't meet your requirements, while from the sellers point of view there is nothing wrong with assembeld minifigs (and neither for the site afaik). The purpose of a thickbox would be usefull as it would avoid buyers having to ask wether a seller leaves a fig disassembeld or not and would allow to make statistics (do buyers pay more for unassembeld figs? / do they buy more of them? ). It would also avoid discussions like this between buyers and sellers 'after' delivery.
One of the counterarguments (and it is not my argument) is that unassembeld figs might have more frictional marks from being moved around in storage (unless you individually wrap every subpart of the fig), and moving they do, as I assume you don't store 1 fig in 1box each time. So if you have 20 or 50 in a box and sell one, the other ones will need to be tossed out to find that 'sold one'. This 'tossing' might cause friction between the subparts and therefor giving it a 'less' new appearance then a builded one. If one moves minifigs fast (to recoup on purchases of sets) it might be minimal, but a seller that keeps around figs for years (and many do) before listing them might have more issues in unassembeld condition then in assembeld condition.
If you really want to go 'diehard' on it, then no fig in the world is 'new' when it leaves the factory, as the main subpart is the torso. Well if you know with what pressure arms are being put on, then you would need to conclude all figs are 'used', just look at your brand new figs out of the box: 50% of them (if not more) have hairline cracks in the torso, right under the arms, usually over 1 to 3mm ;-)
The guidelines (even if not written) are good and clear, the general consensus is that minifigs may be assembeld regardless of personal preference of you (and me) and the other 10 % (where does that figure come from?) of buyers who prefer 'not'. I suppose they will need to find the sellers who do not (and so a thickbox would be usefull), personally (allthough I prefer unassembled ones) it does not bother me and I would not pay (30%) more for an unassembled one ;-)
So the arguments are valid both sides, but to conclude a seller is dishonest by assembling figs for storage and transportation because it is more practical or safer would be wrong. Or that they loose value because of it, is certainly not a proven fact, as I doubt buyers would pay 30 % more for an unassembeld one. Do the test: buy 10 minifigs twice, list 1 copy with a description ' in assembled condition', list the other copy for 30% more with a description 'in unassembled condition'. A buyer comming to your store will see both copies and will make a choice. After selling the 20 tell us which ones generally sold first ;-)

This guideline is offcourse not valid for figs that have been displayed for months or years, as they would be 'used' indeed, but then it comes down to the honesty of the seller. No guideline can prevent that...

Teup

To go back to the topic of this thread:

The dimensions of this item: http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-medium-stone-gray-power-functions-battery-box-aaa-non-rechargeable-64228

are still wrong.

The changed dimensions are accepted in the catalog, but the system still shows the stud dimensions as 8 x 4 x 1. The dimansions in cm are changed an right at the moment.

Hope it will adjusted soon in the system.

Frank

This could be my fault. I also submitted the correct dimensions to fix this problem, but I hadn't touched the stud dimensions (as I was not 100% sure whether vertical studs are supposed to be measured in brick heights, or stud widths). Maybe the admin approved my submission and discarded yours which was better than mine.


Interesting, I just packed a supposed boxed parcel order that turned out to fit in an envelope.
- All of the parts had their correct dimensions in the system and fit in the limits
- The envelope is within all of the constraints that I have entered in the priority airmail shipping method (all 3 dimensions I entered, plus the max dimensions added up number that I picked)

Although I did make use of empty space within the parts, I think it also would've fit without that. I guess my packaging skills beat the BO packaging algorithm This should not be a super common problem though as for most orders it's obvious what it's gonna be, but still interesting.

Edit: Or, the buyer picked boxed parcel manually, however it had no tracking, nor my recommendation and it's expensive, so that is less likely.

Hoddie

We'll just have to agree to disagree In my book Lego is new until assembled at which point it's used. We have to accept that 'new' does not necessarily mean 'mint' because as you rightly point out, even new Lego from a set bought at a Lego Store will not always be in mint condition, but it would still be new simply because it's never been built.

At the moment you see some sellers listing collectable minifigures as 'New (Sealed)' even though the additional text states 'assembled in zip bag'. The mind boggles.

steendorp

Sometimes it happens that a parcel is calculated when it fits in an envelope. In that case I contact my buyer and ask what he wants: a parcel with according high shipping rates or an envelope (small box with maximum lettersize) with lower shipping rates.

Almost every buyer wants the items to be shipped as a letter. In those cases I refund the shippingprizes.

Frank

robernat

Hoddie, we are not disagreeing, but there is a consensus about minifigs (for over a decade) and it needs to be maintained so that sellers can keep their inventory synchronised (different set of rules between sites would cause a lot of trouble for some sellers). If one seeks a better service for buyers (who enjoy building them) by not assembling them, then it is a good thing that you and a number of sellers do so, but it simply cannot be expected from all sellers, just because inventories need to keep 'matching' when synchronising, and there is also the fact TLG assembles figs (or part of them) in factory (so you might encounter them as well when selling), so expecting the site (or it sellers) say: always disassembled would cause quite some issues, example: http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-unnamed-space-minifigure-301256, I would not be allowed to sell this one 'new' then.

The ultimate option is to have a thickbox 'assembled' and 'not assembled' for those who keep a seperate inventory or do not synchronise with other sites and want to give buyers nicer options, but my arguments are only about the fact you claim it devaluates them 30%, but there is no data that supports that in any way, particulary since there are no 'indicators' that allow for such statistics to be made (and the data from one, or even a few stores is not representative). Statistics can only be made if hundred of sellers list hundred of figs in several subconditions (undetermined/builded/unbuilded) and it would still take at least a year or 2 before the data becomes somewhat representative. Maybe BO can be the site to do that, but in the mean while the consencus about it must be maintained.

Eric

Hoddie

Well yeah, the 30% figure is my own because that's what I'd discount a figure by if it was used. Perhaps a compromise might be to change it so you can have two types of 'New' ; 'New (assembled)', 'New (unassembled)', 'Used (as new)', etc... A tick-box would also work but would probably be harder to code.

robernat

The value for used items are generally based on the quality of the item, each seller has a different opinion about quality but I can't imagine you simply look at the price guide for 'new' then discount 30% for each and every fig. There are many more parameters to taxate a fig, like availability and location (regional availability), I regulary sell used figs for a higher price then new ones in the US, probably because the buyer doesn't want to buy abroad or because the buyer found other items in my store(s) and so finds it worthwhile to buy it along with the rest of the order
No, a thickbox wouldn't be hard, it exists for used minifigs, no reason why it could not be added for new ones if Lawrence finds it usefull to have these subconditions on Brickowl.

Hoddie

I work out what I would want for it if it were new, then discount by 30%. I take into account all the things you mention when working out what I'd want for it if it were new. I'm not sure what you mean about a tick-box existing already for used figs, it's not something I've ever noticed although I've only sold a couple of used figs so could have missed it. I'd be happy with either.

robernat

For used items there is a tickbox 'acceptable' 'good' and 'like new', a seller can set one of these conditions as default for his store (so when you list manually the default is 'good' for example). If there is such box for new figs, then the selection would be 'undisclosed by seller' (or something like that) 'assembled' and 'unassembled', the seller could have a predetermined setting to 'unassembeld' but still able to change towards another option offcourse.
That way, when importing data from elswhere the seller could select 'undisclosed' as default or if certain one of the other options. Personally I could use 'assembled' but change a bunch manually towards 'unassembled' (as I write both now in the description).

Stragus

@Stragus: The threshold in Canada is quite low, didn't remember it was (but I read it in the past), I think for a lot of figs you will need a 'force quote' because a large headgear (like the musketeer hat) will cause a fig to have 2 sizes larger then 20 mm, while it perfectly fits 20 mm in (partially) unbuilded condition. As the overview page of a fig shows the dimensions (well, once they have been entered offcourse), it will be easier for you to determine wether to put a force quote or not.

I thought the whole discussion was about avoiding having to force quotes? For minifigs with all three built dimensions over 18mm, we have to switch to "packing dimensions" instead, otherwise the system is still broken for us Canadians!

@Admin: maybe it's time to have that second field for package dimensions for minifigs ;-)

I fully agree, that solution would work.

Come on, I am not trying just to be an annoyance here, complaining all the time on this same topic. We really need a solution to this!

robernat

Personally I don't mind quotes, I hope that buyers ask them when the displayed cost seems high, rather then clear cart and move on In worst case it's just a confirmation of the displayed cost and in best case the quote sounds right for the buyers budget and an order follows (actually, when I look at the number of quotes given and the number of orders that come from it, I'm quite satisfied)

For now my figs remain 'force quote' as well, with all the missing dimensions I see no other option, so let's say we're sailing the same boat :-)

Don't think you need to consider this issue a 'broken' thing, after all it's better to having a force quote then buyers placing orders and then having to cancel because the shipping is added 'on invoice' and turns out to be 'too expensive' :P
Remember that these issues will arise 'elsewhere' as well, so BO is quite ahead, even if it's not 'perfect' (yet) ;-)

Stragus

Of course, BrickOwl has an excellent shipping system in place, no doubt about that! I am criticizing because I would like it to become even better, because there are flaws with many potential solutions.

Some potential solutions to the flaw being discussed:
- Add separate fields of "packing dimensions" for all minifigs and assemblies.
- Have the default dimensions for unknown parts be per-store settings, rather than some hidden global values.
- Have the catalog store "packing dimensions" for minifigs and assemblies when all three dimensions exceed 18mm.
- Compute packing for minifigs and assemblies as the sum of all component parts.
And so on...

Any solution will do really, there are many to choose from!

Teup

Of course, BrickOwl has an excellent shipping system in place, no doubt about that! I am criticizing because I would like it to become even better, because there are flaws with many potential solutions.

Some potential solutions to the flaw being discussed:
- Add separate fields of "packing dimensions" for all minifigs and assemblies.
- Have the default dimensions for unknown parts be per-store settings, rather than some hidden global values.
- Have the catalog store "packing dimensions" for minifigs and assemblies when all three dimensions exceed 18mm.
- Compute packing for minifigs and assemblies as the sum of all component parts.
And so on...

Any solution will do really, there are many to choose from!

^
Fully agree!

robernat

'Computing' packing sizes for minifigs is indeed an option I think (but I'm not a programmer, so I can't really tell), but the most important requirement for doing that is HAVING dimensions (and weights) for all minifig related parts, so you know what to do: measure and submit as much as you can
Standard torsos, legs and regular heads are 'in', so it all comes down to hair, headgear, capes and possible other small decoration parts (flippers and such) and special heads and legs.
I'm sure Admin has still a ton of 'to do things' on his list, but in able to have a new (or additional) feature that really works, the data must be there. I can't see him spendings hours of programming knowing it wouldn't work because 80% of the needed data isn't there...

To all: don't count on others to do all the work, if you want this to work, it can only be done 'together' !

Hoddie

" Have the default dimensions for unknown parts be per-store settings, rather than some hidden global values. "

Gets my vote

robernat

timestamp

robernat

hmm, nobody curious about me posting 'timestamp'. Well, it was for my own reference
Between my previous message and me posting 'timestamp' there was 1h 20min, I had diner (supper) for about 30 min, picked 2 orders (granted they where easy: 2 stickers, 4 CMF's) and packed them: about 10 minutes. Added 5 or 6 minifigs from the fariground mixer (about 10 minutes), and in the remaining time (30 min) I added the size for at least 46 (up to 52, as I may have miscounted) minifigs, added their weight, changed to male or female where needed and even changed category on some of them. I measured 2 lengths, 2 heights, 5 width's and calculated only 5 weights (because of different accessoires) and submitted it for at least 46 figs that only vary in color and accessoires. Really not that hard and at least 160 points pending .

Counting the ones I did yesterday, 2% of figs where done (size+weight), in less then 2 hours ;-)
If 10 people do so, it would take maximum a total of 24 hours to have 95% of figsizes and weights 'in'.
But I suppose most are waiting for others to do the job (tiny rant) (

Stragus

@RobErNat

'Computing' packing sizes for minifigs is indeed an option I think (but I'm not a programmer, so I can't really tell), but the most important requirement for doing that is HAVING dimensions (and weights) for all minifig related parts, so you know what to do: measure and submit as much as you can

I'll start measuring minifig parts (not built minifigs) as soon as we get a clear signal from Admin that this is indeed the preferred solution, and that it is being implemented, or is very near the top of the to-do list.

I see little point in measuring built minifigs, especially if all dimensions exceed 18mm.

robernat

I'm afraid Canada is one of the rare exceptions where a lot of minifigs (size in builded condition) don't fit, for most countries (EU/US/Asia) the limit is higher and so most of the time, at least 1 size fits, but oftenly 2 sizes do (the rest is done by 3D calculation by BO). So providing sizes for subparts is good and usefull (after all they are also sold seperatly) indeed, but for most countries the actual size of a minifig fits, and it is currently the only data that is used (as it is the only size that can be entered for minifigs). So while it not very usefull for you, it is still usefull for hundred of other sellers and so always worthwhile. It would be shelfish if one sticks to providing data that is only important for him/herself (or for his/her store). I typicly don't, I provide data also for things I have not for sale (and that I might never sell), as it's usefull for others (and usefull for the site). Providing data is a community thing

Stragus

Please, it's not just Canada. In the U.S., Large Envelopes also have a maximum thickness of 3/4" (19mm). I know I have seen thickness restrictions from other postal services in Europe too.

It don't think it would take much effort to have a system that works for everybody. Anyway... I feel my attempts to propose solutions (see 8 posts above) to improve the system are going nowhere, and that's why I don't contribute to the catalog. I'll just drop this topic from now on.

Teup

While the other day I had an order that automated shipping took to be a boxed parcel, tonight I have a big order that's never going to fit in an envelope and the customer somehow managed to check out for envelope shipping.. this is gonna cost me a couple of euros now.. Still very tempted to stick to only quotes. The automated check out is awesome, but it's a bit of a dilemma to use it when it doesn't work 100%..

Stragus

@Teup You need to reduce the volume allowed in your envelopes! Don't set the volumetric dimensions to exactly the envelope's physical dimensions, you must account for waste due to packing.

Over here, I reduced the volume of the physical dimensions by about 35%.

Teup

I guess yeah, I still need to do some tweaking. But like I said it's leaking both ways (wrong envelope estimation and wrong parcel estimation) so it can't really be fixed :P Although yeah I can possibly tweak it so that it should be accurate 95 to 99% of the time