Well, I can't believe it, but we have to
return to the Blue Box Australians,
first though; I want to tell you a story about frauds, not the plural of
financial irregularities, but people who pretend to be something they're not.
Back in approximately 1971, I say
'approximately' because in '70 he'd only just taken command and in '72 the
excitement of the night was his kids locking themselves (and the duty-driver)
out of the Staff Car (at midnight), an Austin Maxi, but back then it might
still have been a BMC 1100 or something! However; I digress...
...back in approximately 1971, the Commanding
Officer of Depot Para (Browning Barracks, Aldershot) was entertaining various
dignitaries, local functionaries and other assorted flunkies and hangers-on to
an evening drinks-do and buffet dinner/dance type thing during Airborne Forces
Week, when his adjutant (Andy Dejinski?) muttered in his ear that 'one of his
old mob' was holding-forth on the Malaya campaign.
The C/O sidled over - after dealing with
whoever he'd been talking to - and listened in to the war'y Old Soldier, sure
enough; the guy was regaling the rapt group whose attention he had garnered to
a pretty accurate account of service in a brush-fire war zone.
The C/O stepped in and you might imagine
the conversation between these two old heroes of the past's uglier shadows: 'When
did you say you were there? Who were you with? Really? You must have been there
when Smudgy Brown got it for kicking the Regimental Goat? Yes, was it two weeks
jankers...and he lost a stripe didn't he? Wasn't it funny though? Still - must
circulate, flesh to press and all that...' [or something along those lines], C/O
beams a smile and wanders off.
He (the C/O) then took the Duty Officer to
one side and asked him get the Guard Commander and a couple of picket-sentries
with rifles (this was the height of (US Noraid-funded) IRA activity on the
mainland, and Aldershot's Brigade Mess would be fatally bombed (they killed a
cleaner) around the same time) to come into the posh function, with their
combats, webbing, boots; the full panoply; and arrest the guest who was
pontificating so believably.
After a night in the cells at the guardroom
and a swift check on him by RMP from the details on his invite, it turned-out
the chap was a Cadet Major (from Winchester I seem to recall); a civilian in
uniform! Who had never been further on 'active' service than Lydd & Hythe
.22 tube-range on annual 'camp' with his little group of Teen and pre-Teen charges!
But the C/O already knew as much, he's asked him things that guaranteed his
guilt.
The guy was a fraud, pretending to be
something he wasn't, using a little knowledge to weave a false persona and pass
himself off as something he'd never been, for kudos, for accolade, most of the
people listening being taken in, believing him and feeding his deluded ego.
===============================================================
That C/O was my father and he raised me not
to take shit from anal-speaking buttock-linguists, arseholes, fakes, phonies
and lazy gits who want the accolade without the effort.
A while ago, someone calling himself Erwin
came to my Blog and left a message on one of the Blue Box posts, in recent weeks he has been shadowing the Blog and
contradicting or . . . er . . . ahem! . . . 'adding' to my posts, elsewhere...the
rest of this post is about him. If you are one of the people who dislikes me
for posting things like the [redacted]
Yahoo group post I did a few years ago (I deleted it as I said I would); leave
now, as you won't like this one either.
So, on the 9th July last year (2015) I
received a comment on the Blue Box
British and Russians article
from someone calling himself 'agaist [sic] all banners'? Signed to an 'Erwin';
it said - and I'll quote him in full throughout, with his own words -
"I will like to suggest for 40-50 mm scale
Blue box original data picture to contact me if like x some update and
information, your link is interesting in many aspects but there some confusing
/mix data regarding BB company of which I owned most of their modern/western
and medieval/else sets.
The aussies listed as BB original are not BB.The one
marching poses is neither from original BB set of six poses.Rado did sold a
cloned full set of original BB aussies as you had listed.
BB partisan were done in 45-47 mm scale ;and few other
detail.
All my collection come from my childhood and is true
to the point.
I had done 3 visit in past to original HK facilities
of BB as well now Chinese factory and RADO office still in HK.I do travel to
china often and my main idea is to supply the right information base in my
experience. In past PW magazine had published several of my works/find base on
it and else. In case interested you may contact me as you like.
thank you best regards,
Erwin"
All pretty straightforward, if hard to read
and couched in 'factually' believable language - if correct - I think you'll
agree.
I replied as politely as I could muster,
given it appeared this person was A) calling me - at best - wrong; at worst - a
liar and B) appeared to be either a foreigner writing with English as a second
language; a semi-literate retard, or; a fantasist child...
"Hi Erwin -
I'm guessing something got lost in translation here! Thanks for the offer, but
I've pretty much covered Blue Box now until I get the boxes and sets out of
storage.
I've put the
original Australians (with the late Ri-toys [sic] copies) on a separate post, click Blue Box down the right-hand
side of the page and you'll find all of them!
There is a
persistent rumour of the French Resistance/Partisans being done in the larger
size, but nobody seems to have seen them and when Opie put his collection
through Bonhams, there wasn't a set as far as I recall. I have done the small
ones, again the tag-link will take you to them.
I must of read
you [sic] articles so well done for
them and the factory visits.
Thanks for
passing."
You will note I subtly ignored the fact
that the commentator was wrong about the Blue
Box Australians not being Blue Box,
wrong about the size of the Blue Box
resistance fighters, wrong about the marching pose, made claims about Plastic Warrior articles I knew to be
false (he has now - Summer 2016 - filed one (which has to be open to question)),
made a claim about Blue Box factory
visits I find hard to believe, mentioned a spurious 'link' and was obviously
going to be hard work, should I take up his offers?
Having photographed my own Blue Box Australians to reasonable
effect (along with the Rado Industries -
Ri-Toys - ones) I certainly didn't need to 'borrow' someone else's 'original data picture', nor was I 'in case interested' in any information
from someone making such wild claims as were contained in the latter half of
the comment.
And this is not to say I don't accept
contributions, I do, eagerly, but when they add to the sum total of knowledge,
not when they threaten to detract from it.
Now . . . There's a picture of the chap on
the Internet, he looks about 45, and it was taken a couple of years ago. If Blue Box closed their first factories in
the 'mid-1980's' to transfer to the initial Chinese plant (of three), he would
have had to have visited the first to close before it closed . . . ie, sometime
around his 12th/15th Birthday! Concluding his HK Blue Box factory visits before he was 25
. . . [added 30th December 2015] to my knowledge he started commenting on toy soldiers, on-line, in around February 2014,
registering his website in June of that year.
He says the Rado office in Hong Kong is still going? There is no evidence of a Rado Industries
still in toys. There is a Rado making
shoes (in India I think?), a fashion house called Rado, an electronics Rado
in Japan, etc . . . etc.
However - and to be fair; not finding a named HK company on the web is not always a
sign of its demise and I'm still keen to track-down the original Rado, if only because if they let
someone like him look round their factory, they're bound to let me . . . or
anyone else, for that matter - let's organise a coach-trip! On the other hand Blue Box have been as un-forthcoming as
they were when I first approached them in 2006.
===============================================================
I then heard from a friend that there was
more to all this than meets the eye at first glance.
The comment was not a casual comment (combined
with a boast or two) from a passing stranger keen to encourage me to continue
Blogging (as I tend to regard most comments here - as 'encouragement' not
boasts!), nor was it the first time this chap had called into question my Blue Box posts, he had in fact dismissed
the same Aussie post a few hours earlier over on Stad's Stuff. We will get on to that dismissal in good time.
It seemed that for the previous few weeks
he (the 'Erwin'; being apparently/actually Erwin Sell of the Sell Toy 1:32nd scale Guderein's Duck - JgdPz.IV- fame) had been posting
articles on Blue Box, at the
invitation of Paul Stadinger, on the aforementioned Stad's Stuff.
I read those articles with an increasing
sense of incredulity, it was clear the author knew nothing of which he wrote,
apart from a few details taken either from common knowledge, this blog, or Plastic Warrior magazine, or - possibly,
but unlikely - Vik Rudik's tome (Erwin's refusal to accept the resistance
fighters are small scale suggests he hasn't read either edition of Rudik - or
One Inch Warrior's original articles, for that matter), and - where used - were
often miss-presented. Worse; most of the trenchant 'new' details seemed to have
been invented on the hoof!
I have since become quite familiar with his
style, basically; he makes it up as he goes along, sometimes with the odd fact
gleaned - one assumes - from a quick Google search, on the fly, without
crediting the sources he's clearly using. He becomes very defensive if anyone
tries to question him and only ever credits a source after someone has
questioned him (in order to prove his point - not credit the source!).
He confuses himself from paragraph to
paragraph or contradicts himself from post to post, claims to have missing
items 'somewhere in the pile'; but never produces them, claims to have had them
bagged, carded or boxed - from childhood - but never produces them, or evidence
of them.
He 'stock' excuses when he is caught-out
include: that’s what I meant to say; that’s what I said; that's what I said but
my English is bad; that's what I was trying to say but my English is not good,
or to get so excited Paul Stadinger deletes all the relevant comments...sort of
- Not Stad's Stuff!
And his 'evidence' (when it's not a -
previously unaccredited - follow up link to someone else's efforts) is usually
one of either of the two worst tools for research on the Interweb; eBay listings or click-bait aggregator
sites.
He's probably the same person who posts
anonymous links back to Stad's here,
on Shaun's Fantasy Blog and elsewhere; is almost definitely 'Fritz' at Treefrog; claims to have been
(and it varies from comment to comment) to one or more Hong Kong and/or China
factories on one or more occasions, which are sometimes hinted at and sometimes
(as above) claimed to be the Blue Box and/or
Rado plants, or even to be in touch
with the 'executives', who then seem to give him spectacularly inaccurate information
on pose numbers and release dates!
Indeed, his first mentions of factories
were quite vague, then each time it was embellished a bit until the full ' I had done 3 visit in past to original HK
facilities of BB [Blue Box] as well
now Chinese factory and RADO office', he's building on the theme as no-one
is questioning him, or allowed to question him!
You get the picture, what one circle of my friends
calls a 'Barry-Bullshit', after Barry the United
Carriers warehouseman who had more relatives in the SAS than the SAS had
available positions!
There's one in every pub, club or society.
In the Army it's the Royal Regiment of Weneyes . . . When I was in China; When
I visited Blue Box; When I talked to
God by that unconsumed burning bush . . . and decided Imperial Toys were 'China-funded'
in 1968 . . . the height of the Cold War, Mao and the New Territories refugee
crisis!
Now had the rotten garbage stayed on Stad's Stuff I would have ignored it,
but as he had dismissed my work on that Blog and then come straight over here
and repeated his nonsense I'm afraid I'm going escalate this one, somewhat! Not
least than because in the last few months he seems to have moved up a gear in
the bullshitting stakes, and become an annoying 'shadow' to this Blog, as well
as attacking Plastic Warrior twice recently.
===============================================================
So let's get the Aussies out of the way
first, as no one else has called my Blue
Box Australians post into question, this image is for you Erwin, and you
alone...
One, two, three, four, five...which bit of "these
are the Blue Box Australians"
are you struggling to comprehend exactly, Erwin? And on what evidence did you
think you had the right to say they weren’t . . . as fact . . . more than once,
and then argue that 'fact'? A 'fact' you made-up as you went along.
Here's one in the same plastic and paint
type/style/colour as his Japanese adversary, same base-mark too, difficult to
photograph so I stopped-it down for you in Picasa, Erwin.
Actually I got a better shot of the orangey
ones, I took it for another article - hence the Japs - but saved it for this
one, kind chap; aren't I, Erwin?
===============================================================
Let's now turn to the rest of your 'BB' oeuvre, in the order you placed it
on the Wibbly Wobbly Way, shall we?
Erwin says...
"Peter
Chan Pui founder of Blue Box started manufacturing and marketing his own toys
in 1952. Shortly after his early start into the toy manufacturing business he
ventured into making all sorts of plastic toys"
I say...
What toys did they make before they shortly
ventured into plastic, Erwin; Evidence?
The fact is
They bought the injection moulding machine
of their former boss, and were in plastics from the very start. How do you come
up with this stuff? Do you carefully hone it for hours or days, or do you type
the first thing that occurs to you and hope someone like me doesn't read it?
Either way; you're making it up as you go along!
Erwin says...
"Accessories
were done in scale-approx. with 45-50 mm figures and other accessories were in
more HO scale." [Opposites!]
"Original
plastic (space set) was done with space men and rubber type painted aliens"
[Lucky Products]
"original
design resembles LIDO/SUPERIOR Captain Video sets but not same or close at all"
[Opposites]
I say...
No further comment!
The fact is...
Errr . . . really? I mean REALLY! Very
poor.
Erwin says...
"Assuming
first and finding later more than one mold was done per set by a subsidiary
firm in mainland China to be sold at local (china mostly) area."
I say...
Do you have the faintest idea what was
happening in that part of the world in the late 1950's or 1960's? Evidence for
'finding'? You're making it up as you
go along!
The fact is...
China was the 'enemy', it had a broken
economy, was killing millions of its own people, undergoing the 'cultural
revolution' and wasn't in a position to buy 'Western' toys, especially not from
toy makers who were - in the main - refugees from err . . . China!
Wars, insurgencies and insurrections in
Korea, Singapore, Malaya, Borneo, Indo-China/Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia were
being fought - in part - against . . . err . . . China! The Ghurkha's and
British Army were patrolling the New Territories day-and-night rescuing
refugees (who would become toy-makers) while the Chinese tried to shoot them.
You're inventing it as you write it, making it up as you go along!
Erwin says...
"with
Cuba being one of its main customers"
I say...
See comments on China above, Cuba was under
embargo!
The fact is...
You need to read some history and stop
making things up as you go along! Main customers . . . MAIN customers . . .
you're funny!
"We've
just started a toy company, let's ship our MAIN production to that steeped in
rural-poverty, war-torn, mafia gambling-den in the Caribbean!"
===============================================================
Erwin says...
" I never had them in hard plastic but I
know they were done..."
I say...
No they weren't, they were never made in
hard plastic; How do you 'know'? You're
making it up as you go along!
The fact is...
You might be thinking of Marx in either scale (Warriors of the World/Miniature Masterpieces),
but I think you're just making it up as you go along.
While your explanation of the gun in the
post is so confusing it's hard to credit you with what you're saying or trying
to say, meaning or wanting to mean, there's not a Blue Box gun to be seen in any of the accompanying pictures.
(Look
- no saddle/blanket, you made it up as you went along)
How would you fit your gun/s in this box
exactly, Erwin? All Blue Box sets in
both scales use the hard-plastic copy of the Crescent WWI howitzer, in green or grey polystyrene. And this was
the standard depth of packaging for all military sets in both scales/sizes.
[And: for those who remember the Bedford Lorry
posts early-on in this Blog's history; that sticker does belong on the door!]
===============================================================
Erwin says...
"British
were done as most other figures by Blue
box in hard and soft plastic..."
I say...
No they weren't, they were never made in
hard plastic; you're making it up as you go along!
The fact is...
None of the 50mm WWII range were issued in
hard styrene polymers, the 30mm/small scale range all had a hard plastic
version, which have all been shown on this Blog, with the GI's and Brit's
getting soft plastic issues from Blue Box,
while the Resistance and Germans only seem to have had Rado (and others) pirated soft plastic issues. The 54mm historical
figures on the other hand were only in hard plastic, while the 'accessory'
figures accompanying civilian vehicles or in civil play-sets could be hard
plastic, soft plastic or - in the case of the airport set's passengers- a soft
PVC/synthetic-rubber.
===============================================================
Erwin says…
"Nido was Singapore producer line factory of Blue Box, it distribute most to Australia-NZ,Japan, and Europe-not
UK."
I say…
What is you evidence? What proof have you
got for this stunning claim about specific sales destinations? What evidence
have you got for the existence of a company called Nido? What evidence do you have for specifically saying "not
UK"? Old factory shipping-manifests from the 1950's? The Harbour-master's
log for Rotterdam dockyard circa 1964? Two (or three) 'facts' there, that are
totally 'new' to the hobby, and you provide no supporting evidence for these
bombshells - because you're making it up as you go along! "Citation
Needed"!
The fact is...
There were two or three Singapore factories,
two called Blue Box, the third -
possibly - known locally as 'the Fisher
Price factory', there is nothing about Nido
on the web, nothing about Nido in the
hobby's library or archive? You're making it up as you go along!
The UK was the second market for Blue Box, after the US, but they
deliberately kept the US market at no more than 50% of all sales. Japan had a
very healthy toy industry of its own and would have taken very little Hong Kong
product, preferring to fight Hong Kong for global market share in the toy-export
field. Even now, 30, 40, 50-years after the events you profess to know, Japan
still has a very healthy domestic toy market, although a lot's
contract-manufactured in mainland China (Tomy-Takara
have a whole Chinese division, and another in Taiwan), but it's still sold in
Japan as Japanese brands.
Only the other day (26th August 2016) we
learnt that Japan's exports to China are greater than the reverse traffic.
Blue
Box is going to send a ship all the way to Europe (in
the days before containerised shipping and 747-cargo 'planes) without dropping
of in the UK, their colonial administrators? You're making it up as you go
along! The importer Cecil Colman was
one of their bigger customers and directly (probably without knowing it) helped
give-birth to the Blue Box 'brand'!
Erwin says…
"While
HK factories(two) produce and sent to UK and South America-Caribbean most Nido with Cragstan took over moldS and produced later after using already
over used and waste original BB mold, also later cloned in downsized many
molds."
I say…
What evidence for Cragstan's involvement? What evidence for Nido, again? Are they the 'line
factory' (owning the moulds) or just taking over moulds? You're making it
up as you go along! Why the "(two)"?
Do you mean only two of the dozens of Blue
Box facilities? If so which two, where, why, what's your evidence? Or do
you mean there were only two Blue Box
facilities in HK . . . bollocks; you're making it up as you go along!
Destinations - Evidence? "Citation Needed"!
The fact is...
There is plenty about two of the Singapore Blue Box factories on the web, if Nido outlasted them, there would be
something about them too, there isn't. Cragstan
ceased trading in the late 1960's or very early 1970's, a decade or more before
either of the Singapore factories (still called Blue Box, not Nido, not Cragstan) were closed. While Blue Box had dozens of facilities and
sub-contractors back in the colony, and they all would have sent product
to all customer countries of which UK was an important one.
Erwin says…
"BB did an entire western line of coach and wagon(included jail),copies of
Timpo with timpo swap type horses. The line very similar to timpo with few mix details from each
other. The BB-timpo copies box were
later sold under HK generic brands, it had the collection depicted in back with
all models"
I say…
Where's you evidence?
The fact is...
Blue
Box did a Stage-coach and a Covered wagon, they are
both reasonably original mouldings, the Stage loosely 'based on' Britains, the wagon 'based on' the Crescent/Tudor Rose designs and both
came with copies of the Britains horse-team,
not Timpo horses. The other (Timpo copy) wagons were by other Hong
Kong makers and generic importers (Award
International Inc. for one, EJP I
think is another?), you almost say so yourself; as you go along, making it up.
Blog Admin says…
"Erwin
- Do you know it Cragstan was the same company that made the tin litho battery
operated robots."
Erwin says…
"Yes
indeed; they sold the rights to HK other firms later, I had seen same older tin
toys copied by no only HK factories in the 80’s but now some Chinese firm ,just
with different art paint. They had a another factory in japan ,that part of it
transfer to Singapore other was bought with some mold by Japanese toy maker. It
was the late Cragstan ,not early that took the BB mold and sill are seen with
Blue box logo in front and back corner ( Cragstan Inc. Singapore). Now what I
don’t know if they pass it to Nido or was other way around.I will do some
research on that"
Him Over There says
"
Cragstan
was a jobber, buying-in mostly tin-plate and die-cast from Japan, but also HK
plastics and Israeli die-casts. They would have bought-in these sets from Blue
Box…hence the logo remaining. They also bought from AHI (metal figures), Alps
(tin automata), Atlas (8mm film projectors), Cardinal (wooden toys), Diaya
(robots), Distler (battery-operated train sets), Gamda Sabre/Gamda Koor
(die-cast cars), Habonim (die-cast vehicles), Horikawa (tin-plate) Lucky
(plastic cars), Mikuni, Nomura, Shioji, Tsukuda, Vanda, Yonezawa and Yoshiya
(all tin-plate) and Zee/Zylmex (die-cast planes). Cragstan disappeared before
either of the two Blue Box plants in Singapore closed. Can’t help with ‘Nido’ "
I say…
Admin gave you an 'out', you didn't take
it. What evidence do you have for these factory ownerships? For these mould
transfers? What evidence to you have for 'rights' sales, a copy of a bill of
sales perhaps? Which was the Cragstan
factory in Japan? Where? What 'other firms'? Earlier you told us - as fact - Nido were the factory in
Singapore . . . now; you don't know? Because you're making it up as you go
along! 'Research'? I wish you would!
"Citation Needed"!
Which Singapore factory
are you referring to? The Toa Payoh facility which was closed
in the mid-1980's when Blue Box state
they moved production back to HK/China, sometime after Cragstan had disappeared (by 1970/71 when two of their senior
executives joined Arco), or the Kallang
plant which closed in 2003, 20-odd years (or more) after all these toys were
long out of the catalogues? "Citation
Needed"!
The fact is...
You should have made your excuses when Admin gave you the chance. Him Over There (in the corner?) was
basically right. Cragstan were
a jobber, and while they did carry some Blue
Box production, they did so as a result of sales contracts arranged in
their (Cragstan's) offices in the Toy
Building (200 Fifth Avenue), after Tong
Wai-ki showed them Blue Box
samples from his sample cases…he also showed them samples from TN Toys, Wong Haw and others, and they probably bought some of them too,
sometimes with the Cragstan
mark being added before delivery to the 'States! Just as they had bought from
Japanese companies in the 1950's, just as other salesmen showed them other Hong
Kong maker's products, including Lucky
Toy.
Why would Cragstan
keep the Blue Box logo? When you buy moulds,
you put them out under your own brand, why would you put the old owners label
on the box? Do you even understand the difference between moulds & mouldings
or packaging & print-plates, you don't seem to? Too busy making it up as
you go along?
Picture from FeeBay auction
This is a Cragstan import, the animals are at best poor copies of the Blue
Box, the pigs are a different design, the figures are copies of the Blue Box-Marx 'minis' and the whole is
the same as that found in some non-Blue
Box/generic Home Farm sets.
[Dear reader: It seems it then 'kicked-off'
on that thread and further 'facts' from Erwin are lost in the deleting of
comments by Admin!]
===============================================================
Erwin says…
"The
detail was poorer compared to other Blue
Box Figures. These figures were some of the last Blue Box I purchased in a box.
Even in the original boxes the blue
Box logo was missing from the base of the figures which the other figures
have."
Him Over There says...
Erwin says…
"Nice
link, very questionable as not marking/either, neither author is positive, mine
come in (BB) set with all acc from BB; so good enough for me.Still
interesting copies from one above. I think is same link that show 28-30 mm
partisan by BB!?;that were never
done by BB in that scale. Original
partisan were in 42-45 mm . the so call “Rado”
figures bellow in that link are indeed a wasted mold of what I have on hand, it
is very clear. thank you for sharing!!"
I say…
I am positive, and they are not copies,
they are the originals, they are marked. Yours are the Rado/Ri-Toys copies, and far from being somehow superior to the
"so call Rado" posted in my
article, are exactly the same, not a "wasted
mould" of what you "have on
hand"! You're making it up as you go along! And you know you are; the Rado figures never saw the inside of a Blue Box, there's ten years (at least;
more like 20) between them for a start! '...
good enough for me', of course it is: you're making it up as you go along!
The fact is...
(Where's
the palm tree, cactus, rocks and armoured car?)
The Australians - as we have now seen above
- have the same base marks as all other figures in the range, either as the
integrally-based, or with the separate plug-in green, square base, they are
made out of the same plastic as the Japanese (both the commonly found shades)
and are painted in the same fashion, and with the same colours - when painted.
Blue
Box good, Ri-Toys
bad!
Touches of green paint on some but not all
figures and the risible cut-n-shut with Airfix
arms you call Blue Box's '6th pose'. Blue Box have made some pretty poor shite
over the years, but they never produced a figure as bad as that!
Blue
Box still good, Ri-Toys
still bad!
A comparison with the Ri-Toys copy of the Airfix
Frenchman, both with the standard Ri-Toys
base; also found on the small-scale figures.
But you were/are also trying to insist your
'Blue Box' are somehow superior to my Rado/Ri-Toys?
The Rado/Ri-toys even you agree are
what I say they are! Well, let's compare shall we?
Yours is the one in the middle, are mine
"a wasted mold of what .. [you] .. have on hand"? If anything - yours
is the poorer! But I think that's just down to batch or lighting, they're the
same Ri-Toys crap!
Mine are top-left and bottom-right, there's
nothing in it, they're the same Ri-Toys
crap!
I'm left, you're right, there's nothing in
it and they're the same Ri-Toys crap!
Cut-it any way you like and add a bucket of
cream; it's the same Ri-Toys crap-pie!
A
poor scan taken from an index-print
of
the photograph supplied to
Plastic Warrior magazine
over a decade ago!
The Blue
Box resistance fighters are well known to [some] other collectors (not you Erwin
- obviously; you're making it up as you go along) and have only ever been seen
in the 30mm version, both in Blue Box
. . .
. . . and Linda packaging. Same figures glued in
the same places on the same card, in the same box - contract manufacture for a
third party.
The 50mm versions are a bit of an urban
myth, if they ever do turn-up they will probably be soft ethylene like the rest
of the range, but I don't suppose they ever will now -
ten-thousand...twenty-thousand, thirty-three thousand+ toy shows, on three
continents, in over thirty years and not a single figure turned-up yet? But you
state their existence as fact, because you're making it up as you go along
again!
Don Perkins says...
These
Blue Box figures are to Airfix what Lido figures were to Marx.
- in other words, Airfix and Marx are in a different league than Blue Box and Lido. But they’re nevertheless interesting, and we appreciate Erwin
initiating these posts, photos, and accompanying history.
I Say...
It
would help Don, if the 'accompanying'
was 'history'! However if you want to
go looking for the crappy Rado
figures on the word of a Barry Bullshitter, you'll be leaving the very uncommon
Australians by Blue Box for those of
us who like to take the empirical evidence-based approach to our collecting!
Don't
bother with those bigger, better detailed, factory-painted,
rare-as-rocking-horse-shit ones when you can seek out some common or garden,
easily-spotted, jade-green blobs, and just call them 'blue box'!
Daily
stats, random, six-odd months apart, constant interest in all the Blue Box posts, which have also tended
to garner above-average comments; why? Because there is genuine interest in
them Don; that's in part because you're right, they're in a different league - a
darn-sight rarer than Airfix or Marx! That's why Rudik, Stads, Plastic
Warrior, One Inch Warrior and I - all cover them. You're lying to yourself Don,
lying to yourself to protect a Barry-Bullshit!?? Is this the Penn-State Toy
Soldier Mafia (hereafter: PSTSM) in action? And he's not 'initiating' anything, he's following others without credit, but
that's OK; he's just making most of it up!
Erwin Says…
Don, not doubt on your opinion, I
think same way . My only idea in exposing the BB sets/figures is to give a bit
more to the hobby world with pictures and what I got from this original Chinese
factory . I say they copied and mix match from some others; still made their
own original poses and else too. Few other Chinese had done it in the toy
soldier world till recently are coming. At the end all European and American
firms copied from each other too many times and the true on who copied first
who go infinity as to few true back up info and many verbal saying. We still
got Marx copies with out knowing who did them or how and were end up. It is an
incredible and interesting world of curiosity I should say..
I Say...
Blue
Box were 'exposed' by One Inch Warrior magazine,
Plastic Warrior magazine, Vic Rudik's two books and my own Blog, years before
you started pontificating! You're regurgitating other people's work, without
credit, while adding liberal shovelfuls of cow-turd! You're "exposing" nothing; you're clouding
a previously - slowly - clearing picture in a miasma of made-up 'facts' and
plain old bollocks!
The Fact is...
The Blue Box figures were issued in the
1960's, so - unless you 'got from this original Chinese factory' as a
gamete or a swaddled-toddler - you're lying! And . . . the - admittedly sketchy
- evidence (a recent display by a Singapore museum - Item 40) would suggest the large scale figures may have come from one of the
(several) Singapore factories anyway?
===============================================================
Erwin says…
"The
BB charater historical figures is of 33 poses.All in most not action . Thet
were limited run as the rare metal and plastic 90s sets"
I say…
Bollocks! Name them! And they weren't a
limited edition; just a long time ago, what evidence do you have for such a
factual statement? You're making it up as you go along. As the internet is
awash with BBI/Elite Command Collectors
Series and the flyers say nothing about 'limited editions' what are your
sources for stating the modern sets are limited? More making it up as you goes
along!
The fact is...
The older set contained 12 figures, which
were produced as a polychrome painted set and as an antiqued chromium-plated
set, 24 in total, neither 12 nor 24 gives 33 as a typo! They weren't 'limited'
and are common enough for the readers of PW to come-up with the total years
ago...no others have ever been found.
Alphabetically the figures are: Admiral
Lord Nelson, Alexander the Great, Buffalo Bill, Davy Crockett, Duke of
Marlborough, Geronimo, Henry VIII (Tudor), Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Richard the
Lionheart (RRIII), Robin Hood, Sir Francis Drake. A nice, if eclectic set,
which ticks boxes or tickles the fancy of their three main markets at the time;
Europe (3 poses), the UK (6) and the US (3 - all 'Wild West').
While the newer set is really quite common;
a quick Google or evilBay search will reveal whole loose sets, mint boxes, part
collections . . .
. . . and where does it say 'Limited
Edition'? I just can't seem to find that all-important marketing hook? Are you
making it up as you go along again? I think you are!
===============================================================
Erwin Says . . .
"Blue Box company is only and first Chinese
true toy manufacture that was funded by Chinese in 1952, they produced many
copies from UK and German/most Elastolin and Merten Brands soldiers/figures and
toys . still the produced over many series of ww2 and post ww2 original
designed series sets not copied as well original Tarzan sets and others not
copied from any body. They are the only TOY COMPANY in the world never stop and
still active till today with out interruption and owned by same person till his
death in 2013 ,now owned by one of his son.
I
Say . . .
1)
They were not the only - there's hundreds, you talk arse!
2)
They were not the first; they were quite late to the party, you talk arse!
3)
They certainly weren’t funded by the people who made them refugees, you talk
arse!
4)
Other firms have lasted longer (Hasbro),
some with the same boss (Marx), you
talk arse!
5)
They've had the same changes/interruptions as many other companies, you talk
ars
The fact is . . .
Blue
Box Joined a fledgling industry that already had
50+ companies registered in the colony (several still going), by 1960 it would
be over 600 companies, they joined an industry who's first members had set up
in the mid-1940's, they were funded by loans from people the founder knew
within the Chao Chow refugee community, China had nothing to do with it and indeed
- under Mau had driven most of them out.
Plenty of companies have longer histories,
often with the same chap at the helm, while Blue
Box have had all the same financial reorganisations, name changes and the
odd buy-out other companies do, you really do just make it up as you go along!
Erwin says . . .
'Original BB has to be
market with name brand always. Made in Singapore or HK.
After 1999 (made in china)'
I say . . .
They are not always marked; firstly, they
did plenty of contract manufacture and secondly they weren't officially called
Blue Box for their first 11 years, so apart from the odd TS mark on a carded rack-toy, everything produced early-on was
either generic, shipped loose/bulk (Cecil
Colman, Herbert Kees) or branded to the client's requirements (Blue Bow, Linda). . . and they had a
plant in the Portuguese colony of Macau.
The fact is . . .
You know nothing and just make it up as you
go along.
===============================================================
Erwin says…
"The pose on right come
in a construction set sold under J.B .That
is all I know and is very resent, they resemble some of the Boley construction poses."
And then, the next day . . .
Erwin says…
" I think the construction black color guy is
from RED BOX brand bag set…
…RED BOX is a 1985.Was original
funded in HK and united with others from other toys line in China after 90’s.
It has been BLUE BOX main competitor
since from china market.
It has “”wrongly mentioned”” as same or part as Blue Box companies in PW magazine incorrect. They are two complete
different companies …
BB and RB are only original funded HK companies still in existence with
out interruption and Chinese family owned till today .BB been much older of course in 1957
RD now produced most action figures
and articulated learning toys most."
I say…
Which is it? JB (as fact) or Red Box
(as fact)? That is not empirical evidence-based research; that is someone
bullshitting falsehoods like sugar-beet plops off an elevator.
Blue Box's main competitor? Cattle-crud! What about [alphabetically] Arco, Early Light, Jetta, Lion Rock, Lucky, Manley Toys, May Chong, Qualidux, Soma, or Universal (I've left-out those listed in
the last paragraph of this section)? All still in existence in 2010 (to my
knowledge) bar Arco - you're making
it up as you go along...again! 'That is
all I know'? You know nothing, you make it up! 'Wrongly mentioned'? Bullshit, it's a correct correlation; you're
making it up as you go along AGAIN, not PW contributors! 'Only
original'? Cow-turd! 'Funded'? By
whom? 'United with others'? What
'others'? Evidence? Steer-crap - you're making it up! After 1990? What evidence
do you have for such a specific statement? You're making it up again!
"Citation Needed"! "Citation Needed"! "Citation
Needed"!
The fact is...
You don't know who made the figure or what brand
it might have been sold under you just want people to think you do. Did you find
it in a current Red Box bag after a Google search and decide to ignore your
incorrect (as fact) ID the previous day.
The current Red Box (two words) is probably a different Red Box to the 1950/60's Redbox
(one word?) or "Red-Box",
correctly identified in Garratt's encyclopedia (which you clearly don't own or
haven't read) as being linked to Blue Box
(written "Blue-Box"). My
own research unhelpfully only suggests Redbox
was either a subsidiary or contractor for Blue Box.
If it was a subsidiary it will be long-gone
and very different from the current Red
Box, which has some connection to Universal
and/or the now defunct Zylmex/Zee, if
it was a contractor there is every possibility you got something right, but by
good luck, not good judgement! Throw enough darts out of a train window and
eventually you'll hit a fly! But then you go on to state they were rivals when -
in fact - they co-produced the same line;
(or Red-Box?)
Redbox made the accessories for the blow-moulded, 1970's, Blue Box 8-inch figures, specifically
(to my knowledge) the deep sea diver - a rip-off of the Hasbro/Palitoy GI Joe/Action Man diver, the doll marked Blue Box, the helmet and weights marked Red Box . . . rivals; my arse!
Both the diver and similar bagged ['girl's
toy'] dolls having the 'Blue Box' in
a red ovoid cartouche, rather than the usual blue one; 'red' Blue Box . . . geddit? No, you don't,
you just keep making it up as you go along.
You casually call in to question Plastic Warrior's contributor's
voracity, whilst lying through your teeth, making it up as you go along and
then suggest Blue Box and Redbox are the oldest firms from HK
still going? Equally casually writing-off; [chronologically] Kader and Forward Winsom (1947), Tia
Nam (1949), Advance Industrial (Wynnwood, 1952), Herald Holdings (1955) . . . PMC
(the Gardeners; 1956), all still going in 2010 (to my knowledge) bar PMC who collapsed in '73 after the Arco partnership, but no . . . you carry
on making it up as you go along!
And it's no good saying 'that's what I
meant to say'; you have stated - as fact - that they are oldest, rivals
and longest lasting, but they weren't, they weren't and they aren't - you're
making it up as you go along!!!! And many of them are 'family owned' that's why researching them is so problematical, not
for you of course; after your 'factory visits' you just make it up as you go
along!
===============================================================
Don't ever accuse me of being wrong again
when I'm right, not on my Blog, not on someone else's...don't ever accuse PW of being wrong when it's not; you're
the one making it up as you go along.
You're running around a hobby with about
1000 active members (a quarter of whom hardly use the Internet) spouting verbal
diarrhea like a dying whale with a rocket up its arse . . . Stop It!
Sure: you've downloaded a few things, noted
a few links, and can use that to waffle convincingly-enough when no one
questions you, but as soon as your wittering is subject to study, as soon as
someone like me thinks "Hold on,
that's not right, that's wrong and that's made up?", it all falls
apart, because what you come out with has no framework, no covering, no
citations and no substance.
You pulled me up on Blue Box; twice - now I've pulled you back. [The above has been in
edit for months, some of it nearly a year]
[This was going to be the end of the post!
And might never have been published?]
===============================================================
[New text - short on pictures]
But . . .
. . . then I decided to have a 'Rack Toy Month' didn't I, and you went
into a sort of apoplectic overdrive, running around the Internet trying to
second guess what I was going to say or contradicting what I'd said a day or
two earlier...while continuing to make it up as you go along!
Let's look at some of your gems shall we?
Erwin says...
"CHIN-toys
is a distributor as far I can research .I got confirmation as I have access to
business chamber international system and can search x any active company in
China or else from my work
Now because I do not have the case with ID and serials numbers plus Item # I
cannot do more research..so we will have to way too see"
I say...
Which is it? Do you have 'confirmation' or will we have 'to way too see'? It can't be
both! You're talking arse!
The fact is...
Small companies like, err . . . Sell Toy (shall we say?) don't have to
register with anyone, ever! Trading-as (T/A), even the tax return will be in
the name of the individual, not the 'company'. I've nominated myself CEO of
several 'companies' over the years including a toy 'company' (Impact Imports) you won't find that on
any 'business chamber international
system'!
You don't even know the language of the
industry you seek to pass yourself off as being an expert in! 'Business chamber international system' .
. . you're too funny! Too. Funny.
Why don't you wait until this brand-new
company reveals itself in its own good time, or your data base might prove to
be as inaccurate as the 'BB executives'
- you were telling the Fantasy toy guys about - do you remember? You talked-to
them a few months ago; how wrong those 'BB
executives' proved? But then; I think you made it up - as you went along.
Erwin said...
" . . . “Supreme” distributed soldiers pack
were made by SUNJADE factory with offices in HK and factories in mainland
china.
http://www.globalsources.com/si/AS/Sunjade-Industrial/6008827591424/Homepage.htm
However SUPREME is listed as factory and
wholesale too, meaning they do both and or most the second option."
I say…
Let's get
this straight; You're telling us Supreme
(formed in 1974), a factory (and wholesaler) are jobbing the products of
a another factory which (going on the link you posted last year) can't decide
if it's called Sunjade (number of staff (员工人数) :16-25) or Sunjin (manufacturer of photograph albums?), is unknown to most and was formed in 2005?
That's thirty
years after Supreme were
founded and ten years after Wilkinson's
were carrying the SP Military Command
play-sets (mid-1990's)? You're talking arse . . . making it up as you go along!
Then Erwin says...
" If you go to Supreme LTD and contact then they do not carry the SUNJADE
toy soldiers line at all but only export toys else .It is only a distributers
of many others brands toy."
I say…
What other
brands did they tell you they carried Erwin? 'Many'?
Must be quite a list? Don't keep it from the hobby, that sort of stuff needs to
be disseminated as widely as possible - as soon as it reaches the public
domain! But it's arse isn't it? You're making it up as you go along.
The fact is...
As Supreme 'wholesale'
the products they ship, from their factory, where they make 'stuff' that
needs to be sold - that is: that they don't get involved in the retail of their
own products, I'd imaging they sell-through to . . .ooh? Who do you
recon Erwin? Errr . . . Sunjade
perhaps!
So Sunjade - as a second-party
Jobber (sorry; 'jogger or wherever they
call it '), FoB sales outfit or shipping agent - can advertise them on a
marketing page on a third-party's webpage (globalsources.com.)
for onward sales contracts to fourth parties. They [Sunjade] are the middle-man Supreme wholesale's too, you cretin! They'll probably turn out to
be a subsidiary of Supreme, as KY (Supreme) seem to be! That's why the
cards are marked Supreme/SP, not Sunjade, fuckin'ada, you're hard work!
Except...
From your Internet portal link - "Sunjade Industrial Toys Co. Ltd does not currently advertise
comprehensive company & product information with Global Sources. We cannot
guarantee the accuracy of company and product information."
You are trying to prove your pointless 'point' to the rest of us by relying
on some half-dead, bullshit, semi-automated, algorithmic, data-mining, click-bait,
aggregator site? Really? You are? Fuck! It's like Dali's melted my barin!
You actually don't understand the business you talk about, do you? You
don't comprehend the language you use, you don't know how to research or how to
use the Internet, yet you happily draw (the completely opposite) conclusions
[to the facts presented] in order to get your mates in the PSTSM to believe
you're a 'walking encyclopaedia on toy soldiers', when you're making it up as
you go along!
You've been to China, You've been to the factories, you've got access to
a secret 'business
chamber international system' (heeheehee, I love
that!), you
talk to 'BB' executives . . . You've got Walter Mitty steering your fingers
across the keyboard, that's what you've got!
Erwin says...
" Chinese factories when selling under their
real name ,mark the toy with it stamped or engraved 90% or generally."
I say…
Really? Fascinating, let me play . . . err . . . Blue Box . . . check! Imperial;
check! Lucky Toys/Lucky Products (do
they count as two?). . .check (sometimes), Soma
(sometimes), Smart, check, check, err
. . . no, can't think of a sixth, ooh, hold-on; there's that [otherwise
anonymous] animal maker: AAA . . .
and . . . Hing Fat marked some didn't
they, that's seven (or eight!) but we're looking for what? Thousands of
companies? You made it up as you went along again, didn't you? It's not 90%;
it's closer to 0.5%! Another typo, is it?
The fact is…
Hardly any Hong Kong, Chinese, Singaporean, Macau or Taiwanese companies
have ever marked their products, whether contracting, FoB'ing or selling straight-through.
Within 'toy soldiers' even less so than the wider toy market, where a lot of
(mostly Japanese branded stuff) is marked. Now that their undemocratic rulers
have told them to 'brand' up, they are beginning to mark, mostly with stickers
on the cards! You're not so much 'making it up again' as just talking complete
bollocks.
Erwin says…
" Half of “HASBRO” star wars COMMNAD
sets soldiers(non characters) were made by (“Unknown”) Chinese factory and pack
with other licenses HASBRO to reduce cost, license fees and else.(Note how many
figures are not marked even made in china bellow wile few are).
In fact that was legally and technical an open violation of US imports
distributing federal laws and custom laws. But Hasbro got away with it easy as
many had done all time."
I say...
An utter, utter, absolute and complete,
cash-on-delivery, no-returns, free Barry Bullshit figurine (four to collect!)
with every order, ship-load of horse-shite!
I don't know where to begin with that lot .
. . head-plant emoticon, tear-face emoticon . . .
The fact is...
Star
Wars Command figures are mostly marked with the
same moulded-in data-panel with the usual Lucas/Hasbro
license/copyright/date crap, a few (very few - and mostly the characters!)
aren't, while some have a tampo-printed code which is probably a QA or
stock-control number - I don't know, so I don't say! But you make it up as you
go along.
Are you trying to say the character figures
come from a different factory? Does that mean a marked non-character comes from
the (Hasbro?) 'Character' factory,
while his - identical - unmarked mates are being made in 'open violation' somewhere else . . . you're making up total garbage
as you go along! Especially as it's the characters that are the ones [sometimes]
not marked! That's the opposite of what you said? Geddit?
And all the above in answer to someone's
innocent comment on a new company, not related - in any way - to any of it!
But I had mentioned all the named companies
in 'Rack Toy Month', hadn't I; well,
well, well! And the bits I haven't quoted are equally funny; Jaru being American-funded? What, they
had a whip-round down the pub? Is it like a lottery? Tax-payer 'funded' or
dirty 'Contra' cash in brown-envelopes? Too funny, you're becoming too funny;
I'm gonna' burst with mirth!
===============================================================
But there's more, with you there's always
more; Erwin Sell; the gift that keeps on giving...
In 2015 Erwin says...
" Another sample is HING FAT Chinese
company that does produce sets and sale then direct with own site/face store."
In 2016
Erwin says…
" HING FAT toys is barely a maker but
a distributor and or jogger or wherever they call it."
I say…
Pretty much
complete opposites . . . get a grip! 'jogger or wherever' . . . Priceless!
In 2015 Erwin says...
" Supreme
is in importer not maker=factory."
In 2016
Erwin says…
" However
SUPREME is listed as factory and wholesale too, meaning they do both.. "
I say…
Pretty much
complete opposites . . . get a grip!
Erwin says…
"China has two different way to do toys/else.
One they have their own designer who cloned or make original toys. Then offer
it to western /others toy companies that either buy the products and right so
no one could copy then or rent the rights of production for some time.
≈
Two- they direct made toys for toy company that ask for specific product with
their own license and rights making it hard to resale later or clone the molds
by others. But after some years are sold to other firms or rented too."
I say…
Absolutely
unber-fucking-lievable!
The
facts are…
There's a
hundred ways 'to do toys/else' and
they all happen in the Far East; contract manufacturing, which can be for
another local company (larger, partner or as part of a co-op), or for a foreign
company which might be a FoB'er or importer or facilitator, there's branded
production to wholesale, direct sale or order, there's OEM, ODM and companies
like JDH who oversee the whole
process; liaising-licensing-design-order-manufacture-packing-costs management-shipping,
there's start-ups, established firms, wholly-owned sub-contractors, parents,
subsidiaries, sourcing firms, development engineering firms (moulds), project
management firms, firms that only do [toy] project research, there are
shippers, shipping agents, clearance warehouses, there's mediators who deal
with leases, labor, tax & regs, there's . . . no point carrying-on; you
haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about!
It's getting silly now, I have bits of you
in about fifteen folders, so I can put the myth-disclaimers on the correct A-Z
entries as I get round to them!
Erwin on Imperial Toys Corp/Imperial Toys LLC...
"Imperial
is original 1968" . . . [It's actually 1969]
"Hong
Kong base Chinese company" . . . [It's actually a US-based FoB
importer]
"knights
and ninjas original designed figures not cloned" . . . [The knights
are actually from Marx via Tudor Rose]
"They use aluminum mold technique" . . . [Really? For all that steel-destroying PVC they used! For
high-pressure injection-moulds? Evidence?]
"Company
was close down in 1992" . . . [It's actually still going strong!]
"Most molds pass to china and wasted there" . . . [Evidence?]
"Imperial figures were barely sold to UK" . . . [where do you actually get this shit!!!! Evidence?]
Still too funny! Where did you get the
information that Imperial (who I'd
mentioned on the Blog a few days earlier!) " was close down in 1992"?
Such a specific date; just more bullshit!
I mean, I'd just shown you a set available in NY
stores (right now), while a quick Google would have told you your lie wouldn't
stand-up to scrutiny? There they are - there's Plaid Stallions, Toltoy
and Blomberg for fucks sake! They're
among the first results in a Google-search for Imperial and the dinosaur guy
has a whole page were he's telling anyone who visits that he's buying Imperial dinosaurs in Walmart . . . right NOW!
And again with this UK thing? What's your hang-up
there Erwin? It was a British Colony, we got the stuff first! The Americans
took a while to move across from Japan, where they'd been importing toy from
since before the war. The Europeans likewise had a source nearer home and were
busy getting their cheap plastic toys from Germany (Siku, Manurba, Jean/Big &etc.) and were also slower
to HK, although they did go there, Hagmayer
the Dutch importer for instance, while France and Portugal made use of Macau's
vinyl producers.
Back to Blue
Box . . .
Erwin says...
"The two girls are HK were sold generic under
BB playset (Ferris Wheel ) with other civilian figures also used in the BLUE
BOX CABLE RAILWAYS PLAYSET that was a direct copy of German 1960’s LEHMANN G
SCALE RIGI 900 TIN CABLE CAR SKI LIFT."
I say...
No
they weren't!
The fact is...
The
two children are from the Blue Box
doll's houses, which also contained six seated figures (grandma, grandpa,
parents and brother/sister) which were in the Blue Box Cable Car sets; the Lehmann
(and China's ES Toys) sets both
containing sets of four standing figures, of two different designs.
Additionally:
the Rigi Duo, was the tinplate model,
the Rigi 900 was a later plastic set
(eventually issued as a plain 'Rigi'),
with Blue Box copying the
gondola/cabin of the plastic 900 and
the cable-gear of the tin-plate Duo.
Minor details, I'll grant you, but these are all on the Internet, five minutes
'research' (well: ten minutes, you obviously did five!) would have given you
all the details you needed to not make it up as you went along
The fact remains that nothing you write can be
trusted.
That's you, on the Blue Box A-Z entry, at the
moment they're all anonymised, but I'll be happy to name you in all of them if
you keep spouting shit about things you don't know and don't understand; as
fact - you're creating myths with the gullible, making it up as you go along.
You piss this stuff off the top of your head, you
show a crass disregard, even contempt for your fellow-collectors who - in the
case of the PSTSM - seem happy to be shafted by your dishonesty. On the rare
occasions you are right, it's other peoples work - you haven't credited, but,
mostly you just make it up as you go along!
===============================================================
Oh, are the rest of you all still here,
reading along? No one can resist watching a car-crash if it's safe to do so,
huh? It's what drives soap operas, reality TV and the Facebook! Did you watch
that 'plane they crashed into the desert on purpose? Slo-mo and - I'm happy to
report - First Class 'gets it'; every time!
Well, hopefully he's gone off to look up
all the evidence he needs to find, to back up his claims, being as how they
differ so greatly from the actual, empirical, evidence-based record, so while
he's doing that I'll switch back to the third person.
I know it's frightfully jolly terrible when
some poncy little tick-turd like me runs-about the Internet letting the facts
get in the way of good stories, but the trouble with Erwin's stories is that he
gives them a different ending every time! He's pontificated on Supreme several times now, each time
contradicting either his own previous facts on the same subject and/or what
someone else has been saying.
While only the other week he managed in one
paragraph to appear to insult or question Steve Weston, Engineer Bassevitch and Plastic
Warrior magazine; in one comment! He's becoming bolder because the PSTSM
have protected and encouraged him into believing he's the world's number one
expert on everything! I'm glad to say he's now been barred from that thread.
Luckily for the hobby and casual reader
alike: Google's algorithms seem to
have decided to believe my versions of the Blue
Box story and output, no matter how sparse they are, not his!
Taken
9th June 2016
I try to be a fair-minded man, but I have
no religion, I believe you do what you can in your four-score and ten and then
you're worm-food . . . forever, no ifs - no buts; no heaven. Not saying
something "until later" or because "it's not the done
thing" means it never gets said, and someone gets away with it.
I also have Asperger's, it makes me a
loose-cannon, I know that and I don't set out to make friends; life's shit (unless
you're near the top) and I'm an iconoclast, I tend to upset people - usually with
the truth. I can be outspoken and I can be vindictive, but I try to be a fair
man; or - at least - I like to think I do, truth is: I can be as arrogant,
hypocritical or plain-wrong as any other human being! And - I massacre
punctuation.
Now I've seen Erwin's little tank, well,
it's not little is it? It's a chunk of a thing, it's also very good. It holds-up
well against the Airfix/CTS and Weston stuff [that was the patronising
bit]. I imagine he sent the CAD files to a generic contractor in Guangdong or
Szechwan and they sent back...what...150, 300, maybe 500 units? Perhaps he didn't
even CAD it, just paid for them to do the whole OEM job, or maybe he goes
through the Russians (mostly Ukrainians but that's another rant for another
day)?
I also imagine all the business being done by
eMail, VoiP/Skype, or telephone, with the odd snail-mailed samples and shipped
final delivery? Maybe he even went to 'a' factory (more likely 'an' office),
but it wasn't Blue Box, it wasn't Rado (who seem to have ceased trading or switched to shoes), they
wouldn't touch an order for less than 10,000 units! Companies like those ship
to Toys'R'Us for fucks sake, not Mr.
Erwin Sell's condo!
And if he was the sort of person who
regularly travelled to China (or Hong Kong) he wouldn't be scrabbling around
eBay for peanuts. He wouldn't be flogging Boley
re-sales from a stock-menu webpage (25 item total, last time I looked),
reselling small quantities of mostly new-production for tens of dollars. He
wouldn't be excitedly announcing he'd taken delivery of a 'few' sets of Technolog; back when Marksmen were talking to Rado they took delivery of thousands of
units, loose, in huge boxes.
That was before a few American eBay bottom-feeders went direct, split
the market several ways and ended the market! Now there's no Marksmen-Rado re-issues. Greedy people will always piss on the bonfire to
try and make more steam than the next guy, in the end they just put the fire
out! Mr. Sell has made a lot of steam. And - let's be honest - he wouldn't be
using the terminology he uses; if he was familiar with the industry he'd be
using the proper toy-industry jargon.
He uses the manufacture of his tank to
pretend he's something he's not; his comments on Redbox/Blue Box the other day {and other comments since I edited
this} prove he knows nothing about Hong Kong or China, the toy companies, their
history, production techniques or the business models and continuing to post as
if he does, while making it up as he goes along is damaging the hobby I love
and have put a lot of effort into.
And apparently it's not enough for him to
run about the internet spouting shite, he also snipes, he snipes me, he snipes Plastic Warrior magazine, He's started
sniping Engineer Basevitch he snipes
others, he has the odd dig at CTS
armor, last year he ranted at Hornby,
he's even contradicted two AFV authors in a long rambling post (you should see
what 'Fritz' wrote about the A7V tank on Treefrog the other day!) presumably
because he's marketed a tank . . . two published expert's not good enough for
him! He's in love with his own idea of himself.
A man with a truck-load of arrogance
strapped to his back, a man over-impressed by his own sense of self-importance
and over-excited by the sight of his own 'voice' on the wibbly wobbly way. He
shows a dislike for all things Hong Kong (constantly conflating them with one-party,
dictatorial, communist China), all things British (two or three times now he's
stated - falsely - products made in a British Colony didn't come to Britain -
with no evidence), and - I suspect - relies on Google, when he's not making it
up as he goes along.
He should stick to dealing new-production,
get another tank (a Renault F17 could have a choice of turrets and plug-in
rear-bodywork detailing) and if he has to bullshit, he should do it elsewhere,
and his friends in the PSTSM should explain that to him. He's only been active
in the Hobby for a short while, so he's only repeating other people's efforts
when he is right.
People know what I'm like when it comes to arseholes,
rude eMailers or plagiarists; I've had three thread's on two sites (Strellets and TMP)* closed in the last 14 months, and other images removed and I will
continue to defend both my voracity and my intellectual property, loudly.
*Thanks to the boss of TMP for dealing swiftly with the antics of a certain Argentinean
who keeps plagiarist-posting my images and thanks to Bravenet for shutting down the filth on Strellets when they declined to themselves.
And understand this - I'm not unfairly
judging some innocent trier; weighing his sweated efforts against my poncy,
liberal, middle-class, sensibilities. I'm pointing out the rank hypocrisy of a
man who came to MY blog and told ME that MY figures weren't what they actually ARE.
I tend to stay off the forums because
there's a lot of shite spouted on them and if I correct it people tend to get
upset, or annoyed that someone would dare to seek the truth . . . after all 'It's only a hobby' (the ultimate
wishy-washy, meaningless, cop-out), if I'm not there I can ignore the idiot/s
and wonder when the others might cotton-on!
If you want to set yourself up as someone
who knows about a subject, you need to know that subject, or study it, whether
you come from the 'right' side of the tracks, the 'wrong' side of the tracks,
or have been tied to the tracks by the Keystone Cops, I'm calling-out his false
'knowledge' and the way he delivers it, nothing else.
I know I need to acknowledge sources and accept
criticism, when it's correcting my mistakes, I put all my post-corrections in
Salmon Pink, as far as I know I'm the only person to do such a thing, I don't
point that out to hold myself up as a paragon of virtue, most Bloggers never
edit, just leave what they've posted and move-on, but some people do 'adjust'
their websites on the QT, and nothing wrong with it, but I choose to highlight
the learning curve.
I
don't claim to be an expert, I post links wherever I can, or wherever they've
added to a post with prior research/facts, most of my metal posts have required
input/correction, I pretty-much rely on the likes of Brian C to correct my
larger-scale boo-boos, or Mathias to put-me-right on European production, or
even Stad pitching-in with the Super Hero stuff the other day.
Deleting comments that question bullshit
won't help anyone get closer to the truth - that's censorship, that is! Neither
will preventing someone from commenting at all, especially if you wish to
retain the reciprocal right to comment on their page? That's hypocrisy, that
is! While 'accidentally' finding Tatra's
website four weeks after it's been announced here; that's just silly, that is!
And ask yourself this, why do the sales
sites never have links? Because they want to sell you stuff, not support the
hobby! I'm not trying to sell you anything, except knowledge, and I'm giving it
away, for free, as I learn it. Erwin is selling stuff.
There's an idea that idiots must be
protected from criticism on the web 'in case their feelings are hurt' or that
they have some human or civil-right to spout crap unmolested by the facts
'because everyone's equal on the 'net' even idiots' . . .
. . . No! That's nonsense. They actually have
the right (and freedom) to educate themselves out of idiocy, or shut the fuck-up!
Egyptologists fall out, physicists fight, psychoanalysts'
disagree, historians, astronomers, brain-surgeons, war-ship designers;
Presidential candidates! . . . All argue, why should Faceplant Twitting gobshites
not endure the criticism of their peers - especially when they ignore (or are
ignorant of...) the empirical evidence and make it up as they go along?
If the PSTSM want to swallow 22-carat shite
wholesale, let them; I do my own thing here, I don't follow other-peoples posts
with the same stuff, and regularly hold stuff back if it's recently been posted
elsewhere. But it's nice to see the old guard of vintage 54/60mm collecting now
starting to blog 30mm flats and rack toys - good to know my Blog's having such
a positive effect on the hobby!
If the members of Treefrog choose to tolerate Fritz's
long rambling diatribes, from here it's just amusing, but Erwin is now clearly following
my activities, he is contradicting me, he seems to think we're in competition?
Perhaps someone at the PSTSM would do well to have a word with Mr. Sell.
When Erwin said 'neither author is positive'
about my Blue Box Australian post, I
assume he was referring to my constant use of 'maybe', 'probably', 'possibly',
'presumably', 'assuming' or question marks in the text. I use quite a few
question marks, I do so because that's how you present research, particularly
when someone else has opined another view, or you know the point is contentious
or even when you're only 99% sure!
I've made one big mistake this year, trying to
pass-off some Spanish/Italian knights as Cherilea!
Ironically PW published the figures
I was thinking-of the other day, but no matter, I didn't use a question mark
and was quickly corrected, and rightly; I needed correcting. However, I know
that out of the 600-odd visitors to the Blog every day, a few you are only hoping
to spot my mistakes, so I do everything I can to cover my arse!
Plastic Warrior uses question marks, Joplin and Opie,
use question marks, Garratt and Harris used plenty; it's how you present
research. Mr. Sell never uses question marks - because he's making it up as he
goes along, and then presenting it as fact with the odd 'when I was in China'
thrown in to validate the statement! It's lazy - lazy research and lazy
presentation of lazy 'facts', lazily invented.
I have above (26 pages - A4) not mentioned his
writing, but the quotes speak for themselves. As someone who spells badly myself,
it is easy to accept the odd typo, while - assuming he's using a second
language - one shouldn't unfairly attack his grammar, but even if he's writing
in a second language he pays no heed to universal rules of punctuation,
capitalisation or the space bar. He ignores all the 'shouting' rules,
capitalising whole sections for no reason, uses lower-case for companies AND contries (disrespectful) and he can spell the same company
three different ways in one paragraph, that's laziness.
There are German, French, Spanish, Portuguese,
Italian, Dutch and Belgian Bloggers, Forumers and web-site owners who use
English as a second language with more success than ME, day-in, day-out, Mr.
Sell doesn't even TRY - laziness!
I realise he's unlikly to stop, but he needs to
accept that my Blue Box Australians
ARE, his Rado crap IS, and he needs
to keep his phoney, fake, make-it-up-as-he-goes-along, bullshitting, lazy-arse
the fuck-out of my cyber-space. If I have to post another like this; I can
always add him to the tag list!
Rant Over.
We'll finish with a nice picture of a
kitten to calm any frayed-nerves! Disbelieving Kitten says . . .
Who
does not understand, should either learn, or be silent
- John Dee
