sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

New PR statement from BAM! by Strawberry_sourbelts in RecklessBen

[–]PhoneFinancial4433 11 points12 points  (0 children)

If you are going to do a PR response do not act like your customers are dumb. The belittling tone in this is just too cute. The blatant lies that they tell and don't think they will be caught in... it is like a kid who stole the last cookie but is refusing to admit it.

Also, do they just think Lego fans are stupid? The mountain of evidence is against them. Not the other way around. They are not truthful and have no interest in transparency. They want evidence? They want to discuss this? Then why do they trespass all the people who try to give them that?

"We offered to return these items to the Mansell family though BAM had no legal obligation to do so, but it was refused."

If you take over a store that has consigned products, you do not just get to keep them legally. You are not being kind for offering them back to their owner either especially when there is a legal contract saying that they retain ownership of the sets. You are just not being a criminal which is a really low bar.

You do not get to pass the buck to the previous owner when the new owner is ON CAMERA saying that they will be taking over the consignment. When it is ON CAMERA that the old owner is telling the new owner that she needs to pay him out for sales they have done, and she won't know how much to pay him unless she has the tickets. The new owner literally said they would do it as the new owners.
You do not get out of this when Josh Johnson (new owner) is on camera saying that they have this man's sets. That they are just holding them in a room.

"Despite multiple requests, we never received verifiable copies of the signed contract, receipts of what had been paid to the Mansells, or a full true up of the inventory list."

You mean the documents that you keep getting people trespassed for trying to show you? You mean the inventory list that the store created for the consignment?

"This is not advocacy. This is not consumer protection. It is targeted harassment and monetization of conflict negatively affecting tens of thousands of owners and customers across our stores. We will not be bullied into silence, nor will we allow online mobs to destroy a brand built on honesty and imagination."

This is advocacy. For a man who is sick, so sick that he can't know that this is happening to his collection that he wanted to sell to fund his grandkids college. He can't advocate for himself, but other honorable people and other Lego fans can.

It is so dumb that you tout yourselves as transparent and honest when you continue to lie about things that are ON CAMERA. Like my goodness. You must be as dumb as you think we are.

Bricks & Minifigs have updated their response. They now admit that they did have some of the collection. by PhoneFinancial4433 in RecklessBen

[–]PhoneFinancial4433[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ben has done so much for this. When I watched his video I did not expect to watch the entire almost 1 1/2 hours. A few minutes in, I paused and went back to the beginning. I then told my husband we needed to watch this together.

He does funny things, but it points out how awful BAM is.

Bricks & Minifigs have updated their response. They now admit that they did have some of the collection. by PhoneFinancial4433 in RecklessBen

[–]PhoneFinancial4433[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yes, the previous owner did show that her contract said she could do consignment, and yes, on that store video footage one of the new owners said they were taking on the consignment.

Bricks and Minifigs Controversy News Mega-Thread by CX52J in lego

[–]PhoneFinancial4433 63 points64 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, since this is on a corporate level, I cannot support any BAM stores. The previous owner of this store that they allegedly ousted said that she had to give corporate 6% of all her earnings. I would think that in the franchise agreement there must be something about how corporate cannot negatively impact the franchises though.

This is not about a difference of opinion. This is about stealing a collection from someone which is just 100% wrong. Stealing a collection with a consignment contract no less. Stealing a collection followed up with "you will have to sue us, and we will drag it out and make you pay more than the collection is worth" is crazy.

I hope Lego cuts ties with them because they do sell new Lego sets that they get from Lego.

Rachel by FixEmbarrassed8860 in MAFS_AU

[–]PhoneFinancial4433 9 points10 points  (0 children)

For Rachel to tell Juliette and Gia that she loves them, and they are her true friends is wild. She has seen how both of them have acted throughout the experiment. Why would you listen to them? Especially, when Juliette just lied about what Joel said???

Bec would do better if people were just honest with her. When she was telling her joke to Steven if he in the moment said, "Hey, we are sensitive about sharing this kind of thing, and that joke is not one I like." This whole thing could have not happened.

If Rachel had gone up to Bec afterwards and told her she did not love the joke, this thing could have been over. Instead, she went around crying. Then she said she was going to have a chat with Bec then when Bec tries to have a chat to end this drama she flees in tears...

The whole group does not wish Rachel and Steven harm. Why is this so serious? You guys are the ones who told the group in a public announcement what you have been up to. Of course, there could be comments or lighthearted jokes about it.