hey neighbor, I do and will continue to post here. I really like IG forum. I just do it now on threads that I didn't start

I'm right there with you, I like this site a lot more then RS. This site seems to have a ton of loose COO & variant collectors where RS doesn't have a 1/10 of the amount of discussion with regards to loose figs (which is what I collect). Unfortunately RS seems to be way more active. So odd that people here don't want people posting more...

I agree 100%!

RetroRewindToys wrote:

I'm right there with you, I like this site a lot more then RS. This site seems to have a ton of loose COO & variant collectors where RS doesn't have a 1/10 of the amount of discussion with regards to loose figs (which is what I collect). Unfortunately RS seems to be way more active. So odd that people here don't want people posting more...

No one said not to post. But what it is is when a question is asked, its already been answered. I seen last month the same question asked in 2 seperate threads on the front page, twice. What was the point in that? So its not the questions in general, but the amount of the same questions thats been asked over and over.

As for RS, the reason why theres not many questions asked on there about loose figures is because its all been said before. All that needs to be done is go back and look through old posts. Thats what most people will tell you, to go look back in old threads and the answer will be there. As I've said several times before, Im all for learning something new. But theres really not much left to learn new anymore. And alot of the guys who've been there since the start get tired of reapting themselfs. Thats why most threads get unanswered.

And as for COO and variant collectors being plentiful here compared to RS is cause everybody comes over here. They know they wont get an answer on RS cause the guys over there are tired of answering them same thing over and over. The only thing most of the old guys do ask is for the newer guys to check out old threads and the SWCA for their answers because 9 out of 10 it will be there somewhere. If you cant find it, then ask. But some, not all, dont want to do that. Joe did ask a decent question about how to tell what came from what, but it went out of control fast.

So dont take this as me being mean or chewing you guys out. Im not trying to do either one.

"I mean if we can work out where the COO's where removed we can work out where figures where made. Then by the card backs that these figures appear on we'll know who they where made for. I think with regards to what COO's are on the cards, arn't they they pretty accurate?

I know you quote Wolf saying "no COO's have been found on various cards" I know anything is possible with overstock etc but there is patterns to a lot of MOC's IMO and the figures that are found on them.

where you say "Because they were sold in Europe. Cant call them Kenner or US versions now can you?" What I mean is Europian variants is fine when your talking about all the Europian variants but a lot of the time we can cut it down to Palitoy, Meccano, PBP etc so why not if that's what they are."

COO on cards are not always accurate, removed COOs MAY be specific to one factory & then carded on a whole heap of different cardbacks. There is a pattern to only some figures in respect to cards, do not try and do this with every figure variant. So why catergorise figures with cardbacks when this is too complicated. Try to keep it simple ie. label them as their specific leg markings & paint apps only.

Very LITTLE of the time can it be put down to Palitoy, Meccano, Tri logo because they did not manufacture figures themselves and the supply of these figures were NOT specific to any one factory or production line or batch. And then you have to be very specific of which cardback. ie. orange hair Luke farmboy- only available on 41E, not exclusive to the 41E...........

OK, I will probably continue discussing this latter
I encourage collecting variants, talking about variants but lets try & keep catergorizing variants simple & ACCURATE.

Chris_J wrote:

As far as I know of, the only COO that was removed in the mold was the smooth ones. The ones with scars were hand done. If I can hunt the thread down, Ill post it for you. I know its been brought up in the past before.

And for the re-writing history part, that wasnt directed to you solely. That is for anybody trying to relabel anything. I'll stick with the terminology thats been used for the last 30 years that the guys who put alot of time researching the stuff has used. Theres a guy on RS who tried to come up with new catagories for bootlegs. The only catagory those are is where they are from and/or gen. See what Im getting at with that? You start calling something new and it will all get confusing. Hope that clears that up some.

Heres a list for the known true variants to make this alot easier. These I do go by, even though the list needs to be updated. And it does list other companys besides Kenner like PBP, Meccano, and Palitoy. Anything beyond this, except the known Euro variants like Toltoys Jawa and a few others , is going over the line to me. Its a case of wanting something to be a variant when its not. Factory errors I wouldnt consider variants, to be honest, because you got to be careful with those in case the limbs have been swapped. Which has been known to be done with shady sellers on Ebay. And as for non-painted parts. Those could slip by unnoticed, but still doesnt make it a variant. All figures were hand painted using a paint mask so some couldve slipped by. The word variant just gets tossed around way to easy anymore compared to a few years ago.

http://theswca.com/textf/sw-figure-variations.html

And Joe, . Good one, bud.

I'd like to see that thread on removed COO's Chris as IMO the only way posible to do this was in the mold, there is just to many that match up exactly to there other counterparts, IMO that is not posible to do this by hand.

That List of known variants is pretty good to but to be honest there is loads of variants and information missing and it's just not current with the information that's available to us, In my collection I have 95% of that information and also a lot more. If we are happy to keep using the terminology that's been used for the last 30 years then a lot of this wrong information is never going to be right.

I have a few theories, and thats all they are at the moment but I hope to prove or disprove this eventually with the help of collectors.
IMO there is 5 types of No COO figures and each represents a method used to remove the COO from the mold.
1, Scar COO(Deep scar that lies under the level of the plastic)
2, Smoothed over COO(level to or sits on to of the level of the Plastic)
3, Remnant of(Coo looks smooth'ish but has remnance of the COO left, a few dots or some times letters)
4, COO removed(Rough patch remaining, some times a 1 or a few letters left)
5, These are the ones made for ROTJ cards like Leia poncho and Han TC

I've just read this great article on Production and think these few paragraphs help explain the proses used to support my thoughts above.

http://www.12back.com/features/creation/creation.php3

Hope I'm not breaking any rules by quoting these paragraphs here, please delete Mods if this is the case.

"Steel Molds
The generic term for these molds is "steel", but aluminum is frequently used because it is softer and easier to machine than steel is. Since the plastics used to make toys are non-abrasive, aluminum would be a good choice due to the fact that production won't wear them out. If the plastics are abrasive (meaning they have a high glass content) then steel molds are required because the injection process would wear out soft metal like aluminum. Even after awhile, steel molds will show signs of wear if a glass-filled plastic is required to run in them.

Metal molds can be "cut" in two different ways. In order to machine the metal, a three-dimensional pantograph is used to trace the hard copy. A stylus traces this pattern and the contours are relayed to the milling machine. Utilizing very small cutting tools, fine details can be reproduced in the metal. The metal must usually be highly polished after the pattern is cut in order to keep the plastic from sticking in the mold during use. Steel could be cut this way too, but as the material gets harder, the cutting tools tend to get bigger (so they won't break) and this means that some details might not be recreated in the metal.

Electronic Discharge Machining, or EDM is another method of "cutting" a pattern into metal. This machine works on the principle of "reverse welding" and uses an electrode to "burn" away the unwanted metal. Since there is no physical contact involved, nearly any shape can be created in the metal. Many times, the electrode itself is machined or cast to resemble the toy which would remove the problems of tracing any pattern in the metal. Electrodes wear out, so several off them would be made in order to properly machine the metal. The "cuts" get finer and finer as the series of electrodes is used up and the end product is a very polished cavity resembling the toy part. This process is similar to pushing your finger into putty and leaving behind a contour of your finger and fingerprint, The steel is not being displaced however, it is actually being blasted away.

EDM techniques can be used on the hardest of steels and are the choice for most work involving tight tolerances and complex shapes. Because of the copying process, fine details cam be lost at this stage of figure development. Usually the first details to go are small features like cloth pleats, hair and facial wrinkles. Nowadays, technology has made it possible to capture very fine detail that would have been lost years ago.

As in the silicone molds, each part of the figure requires a two-part steel mold to be made. Several "sub molds" or "cavities" are created and placed inside a large mold "frame" so that one cycle of the molding machine can yield several kinds of parts, but all made of the same plastic. This also allows for the use of generic sized frames and cavities which means cavities can be swapped in and out and frames can be used for many different parts. The cavities themselves could be swapped with replacements (if damaged) or replaced with cavities for parts that were needed at the time. Multiple molds can be made in order to increase production yields which is evident by looking at the dates stamped on the legs of most old Star Wars figures. Many different text sizes and combinations can be found for identical figures which signifies that each was made from a different mold or mold cavity. Molds are made of steel and are not trivial in cost or complexity. Think of how tough steel is and consider the difficulty in transferring the shape of your favorite figure into a large chunk of it. So when you hear the term "steel mold" just remember that Joe Shmo doesn't have the equipment or money involved to make them.

The copyright dates and "foot holes" on action figures are added at this stage of the development process. After molds have been qualified and ready for production, the dates are added. This is why first shot figures do not have the dates present as they are "first" trials of the mold and not production pieces. Also at this process the limbs and head are modified so that, after being molded, they can be assembled. This means that the joints will differ from the way they look and function on the hard copy. Bulbous stubs will be added to protrude from the head so that it locks into and rotates on the torso. The limbs are made similarly.

It's possible that some preliminary, design-stage metal molds are made in order to assist in the creation process. There is at least one known example and it's made of brass. These could have been used to make some early first shots just to see what a molded figure would look like. Another explanation for the preliminary molds is that it could probably have made life a bit easier on the steel mold makers. They would only have had to replicate the existing "negative" (the shape of the part) in steel rather than create this negative from a positive (the actual hard copy).

Anyway you look at it though, first shots take mondo time, effort, money and equipment to produce.

You can get a good idea of what steel molds look like here http://www.pmbc.com/picture/picture.html"

aussiejames wrote:

Most importantly I want to support & encourage your passion for variants Scott but sometimes I think it's ill directed.
Firstly :
http://forum.rebelscum.com/t1072470/

"To determine where or when these figures appeared is in most cases nearly impossible."

yes not impossible, but do we really want to 'classify' a figure as eg. SW 12,20B,12E, ESB41A,E, ROTJ77A,B...... instead of Hong Kong small font Left thigh .

To do this properly you would need focus collectors like Craig T for every character to even come close to saying this figure from this mold was available on these 3 cards, but so was this figure variant & this figure..... Now Craig spent years on a Jedi character, imagine how long it would take on the SW characters?

The imperial gunnery weapons site tried to explain which cardbacks certain versions of weapons were released on- freakin impossible, & there are less weapons to worry about & you can see them in a MOC.

Why impossible? Because there is no set pattern, I wish I could find the Kenner employee quote. I'm pretty sure it was Tom N (the one with the coins for sale, & who was allowed to dumpster dive ) that said variants were randomn.

Paint errors, production flaws, short pours etc are NOT variants.( by all means collect them I do )

James I apriciate you want to suport my passion mate but I disagree that my collection is ill directed. You quote Wolf again, I didn't want to come out and say this on the open forum but I don't agree with a lot of what he says in that thread either mate. I don't want to offend you Wolf if you are reading this but I have strong opinions about everything I've read. Everything I have learned over the last year, a hell of a lot of information but its fresh in my head and all goes against some of your theories. I don't want to argue with you either and respect your opinions, it's just that I have a few of my own. I am truly sorry I had to Involve you in my post.

I dont want to 'classify' a figure as eg. SW 12,20B,12E, ESB41A,E, ROTJ77A,B...... either mate and if I have used that with any then it's because thats the only card there found on. a simple SW/ESB/ROTJ/POTF will do, along with the maker/distributor.

I'm not talking about weapons and have no idea about them but I can imagine the impossible task.

I also believe the variants where random with Kenner as that company was massive dealing with several of the factory's all sending in figures to be packaged at the same time. But with the European figures these company's where smaller and IMO mainly receiving certain figures for certain cardbacks or baggies.

aussiejames wrote:

"I mean if we can work out where the COO's where removed we can work out where figures where made. Then by the card backs that these figures appear on we'll know who they where made for. I think with regards to what COO's are on the cards, arn't they they pretty accurate?

I know you quote Wolf saying "no COO's have been found on various cards" I know anything is possible with overstock etc but there is patterns to a lot of MOC's IMO and the figures that are found on them.

where you say "Because they were sold in Europe. Cant call them Kenner or US versions now can you?" What I mean is Europian variants is fine when your talking about all the Europian variants but a lot of the time we can cut it down to Palitoy, Meccano, PBP etc so why not if that's what they are."

COO on cards are not always accurate, removed COOs MAY be specific to one factory & then carded on a whole heap of different cardbacks. There is a pattern to only some figures in respect to cards, do not try and do this with every figure variant. So why catergorise figures with cardbacks when this is too complicated. Try to keep it simple ie. label them as their specific leg markings & paint apps only.

Very LITTLE of the time can it be put down to Palitoy, Meccano, Tri logo because they did not manufacture figures themselves and the supply of these figures were NOT specific to any one factory or production line or batch. And then you have to be very specific of which cardback. ie. orange hair Luke farmboy- only available on 41E, not exclusive to the 41E...........

OK, I will probably continue discussing this latter
I encourage collecting variants, talking about variants but lets try & keep catergorizing variants simple & ACCURATE.

I disagree again, see the theories above I think we can work out where the NO COO's where made and then for who

I agree, lets try & keep catergorizing variants simple & ACCURATE.

I'm genuinely gutted that you and Chris feel so strongly against the Idea of working out Euro variants and Getting this info down for all to read. You guys have been a geat help to me in the past and I share your opinions on so many levels but I find it hard that I cant get this across to you. I hope your opinions are not shared by to many other collectors as I don't set out to piss any one off.

No no, I didn't mean to infer your collection is ill directed at all. Attempting to determine all loose figure origins may be a futile exercise but I'm willing to keep an open mind.

aussiejames wrote:

No no, I didn't mean to infer your collection is ill directed at all. Attempting to determine all loose figure origins may be a futile exercise but I'm willing to keep an open mind.

I miss read you on that one mate, thanks for keeping an open mind

There must be a production chief or something like that from the factories or from the companys who knows more than we do.

Have any of you tried to contact some of the companys or does they all not exist anymore ?

pomse2001 wrote:

There must be a production chief or something like that from the factories or from the companys who knows more than we do.

Have any of you tried to contact some of the companys or does they all not exist anymore ?

I'm not sure what exists today mate but good idea.

Scott, when did I say I didnt agree on working on Euro variants? Are you putting something that isnt there? All I said was the figures where made in one of several places and shipped out to everywhere to be packaged. How is that discouraging figuring out the Euro stuff? You need to read my posts alittle bit better next time. Ive already said Im all for learning something new. So do it. And I also said (since you missed it too) that that list of variants needs to be updated. But I also think that theres alot out there considered variants that arent one. The reasoning for that is cause no 2 figures are alike. They cant make the figures the same way all day. I do believe I pointed that out in another thread also. You do a list with all the so-called variants today and put it in book form, it would be like and encylopedia cause there would be every known figure in it. And like I said, thats going overboard and crossing into the obscene. I had over 400 figures at one time and they were all considered to be variants to me. That is until I learned about them more. Then when I looked at them again, I had a tad over 100 afterwards.

You found one of the articles I was refering to. Good work, even though it was in another thread here. I didnt look for the other one yet, but will.

This I could agree with But what is #5? Those would also be #2 since they are smooth, no?

1, Scar COO(Deep scar that lies under the level of the plastic)
2, Smoothed over COO(level to or sits on to of the level of the Plastic)
3, Remnant of(Coo looks smooth'ish but has remnance of the COO left, a few dots or some times letters)
4, COO removed(Rough patch remaining, some times a 1 or a few letters left)
5, These are the ones made for ROTJ cards like Leia poncho and Han TC

One last thing. You have strong opinions about everything Wolffs said. Why is that? Is it the way he says things? I do believe the guy has been studing these figures for quite awhile now and should know a few things hes talking about. If you can accept the opinions of mine and James, why not Wolffs? The way I see it, we are all saying the same thing. I know Wolff can be over the top sometimes, but thats no reason to disagree with him on what hes found out. Hes work hard as hell to get the COO guide up and running for guys like you and me to learn whats out there. And if everybody keeps diagreeeing with everything he says, why should he continue with it? That would be a shame if he did quit doing it. That would be like Marco and the other guys whos doing the Ledy guide to up and quit doing it. Talk about great info being lost then.

There ex-employees out there, but to track them down is damn near impossible unless you already got contacts in the industry. And even then, you might not actually get someone who knows anything about it. Thats the reason why it would be damn near impossible to figure out all the production stuff except for whats out there now.

Chris_J wrote:

Scott, when did I say I didnt agree on working on Euro variants? Are you putting something that isnt there? All I said was the figures where made in one of several places and shipped out to everywhere to be packaged. How is that discouraging figuring out the Euro stuff? You need to read my posts alittle bit better next time. Ive already said Im all for learning something new. So do it. And I also said (since you missed it too) that that list of variants needs to be updated. But I also think that theres alot out there considered variants that arent one. The reasoning for that is cause no 2 figures are alike. They cant make the figures the same way all day. I do believe I pointed that out in another thread also. You do a list with all the so-called variants today and put it in book form, it would be like and encylopedia cause there would be every known figure in it. And like I said, thats going overboard and crossing into the obscene. I had over 400 figures at one time and they were all considered to be variants to me. That is until I learned about them more. Then when I looked at them again, I had a tad over 100 afterwards.

You found one of the articles I was refering to. Good work, even though it was in another thread here. I didnt look for the other one yet, but will.

This I could agree with But what is #5? Those would also be #2 since they are smooth, no?

1, Scar COO(Deep scar that lies under the level of the plastic)
2, Smoothed over COO(level to or sits on top of the level of the Plastic)
3, Remnant of(Coo looks smooth'ish but has remnance of the COO left, a few dots or some times letters)
4, COO removed(Rough patch remaining, some times a 1 or a few letters left)
5, These are the ones made for ROTJ cards like Leia poncho and Han TC

One last thing. You have strong opinions about everything Wolffs said. Why is that? Is it the way he says things? I do believe the guy has been studing these figures for quite awhile now and should know a few things hes talking about. If you can accept the opinions of mine and James, why not Wolffs? The way I see it, we are all saying the same thing. I know Wolff can be over the top sometimes, but thats no reason to disagree with him on what hes found out. Hes work hard as hell to get the COO guide up and running for guys like you and me to learn whats out there. And if everybody keeps diagreeeing with everything he says, why should he continue with it? That would be a shame if he did quit doing it. That would be like Marco and the other guys whos doing the Ledy guide to up and quit doing it. Talk about great info being lost then.

There ex-employees out there, but to track them down is damn near impossible unless you already got contacts in the industry. And even then, you might not actually get someone who knows anything about it. Thats the reason why it would be damn near impossible to figure out all the production stuff except for whats out there now.

I must have read you wrong in your first thread, apologies. to quote you "This I could agree with But what is #5? Those would also be #2 since they are smooth, no?

Could be the same factory but IMO they are different and the Leah poncho's etc are more precisely done.

I'm forced again now to write this about Wolf as I know he's well respected in this game but Its got nothing to do with the way Wolf says things, my opinion is simply based on the information available and some of his theory's, For example I stopped using his COO guide after 3-4 months because the information written on the COO's was wrong in a lot of cases. I would really love for Wolf to update his COO guide as if it was correct it would be the best ID thread on the internet IMO, the problem is he has now started a second one which total contradicts the work he did on the first and best one. This is only my opinion based on the facts I've read.

I think Im correct on this, but the reason why hes doing a second COO guide is because he learned more info about the figures now then he did when he did the first one. Thats why theres alot more info at the beginning of it and things have been changed.

Chris_J wrote:

I think Im correct on this, but the reason why hes doing a second COO guide is because he learned more info about the figures now then he did when he did the first one. Thats why theres alot more info at the beginning of it and things have been changed.

Ye maybe your right but you just can't change the info that already exists IMO where's all the evidence to beck it up?

I have only briefly flicked through the posts in this topic guys so forgive me if I missed it but: Scott, what exactly do you think is wrong with Wolff's new guide?

I don't want to start an argument but it would be helpful if the things you disagree on were pointed out to be discussed? Perhaps in another thread so you can get back to discussing Nien Nunb

snaggletooth wrote:

Ye maybe your right but you just can't change the info that already exists IMO where's all the evidence to beck it up?

Thank you. Im glad someone finally gets it. I think this is what Ive been trying to say for the past month. Theres no need in changing any info out there unless you got hard core facts to prove it. Thats why Im standing behind everything Ive said about how things are made, where they came from, and variants because the facts thats out there now have proven that much. So why was it so hard to finally realize that you cant go changing the info out there unless you got proof? If that wouldve been realized last month, there wouldnt have been so many heated discussions going on and everybody would be better for it. And changing any info without proof, in my opinion, is trying to re-write the history. Do you understand that now? I think thats a better explanation for what I was trying to say yesterday. So until someone comes out and says how things were done 30-40 years ago, theres not much we can do about it but go with the info thats out there.

Joe_O wrote:

I have only briefly flicked through the posts in this topic guys so forgive me if I missed it but: Scott, what exactly do you think is wrong with Wolff's new guide?

I don't want to start an argument but it would be helpful if the things you disagree on were pointed out to be discussed? Perhaps in another thread so you can get back to discussing Nien Nunb

Joe to be honest this is exactly what I don't want, I do not want to scrutinize(if thats the right word) Wolf in any way, also its not just about the guides.

If you want to ask me about figures in my collection that differ in there descriptions to Wolf I'll try my best to explain and come up with the Proof

Chris_J wrote:

snaggletooth wrote:

Ye maybe your right but you just can't change the info that already exists IMO where's all the evidence to beck it up?

Thank you. Im glad someone finally gets it. I think this is what Ive been trying to say for the past month. Theres no need in changing any info out there unless you got hard core facts to prove it. Thats why Im standing behind everything Ive said about how things are made, where they came from, and variants because the facts thats out there now have proven that much. So why was it so hard to finally realize that you cant go changing the info out there unless you got proof? If that wouldve been realized last month, there wouldnt have been so many heated discussions going on and everybody would be better for it. And changing any info without proof, in my opinion, is trying to re-write the history. Do you understand that now? I think thats a better explanation for what I was trying to say yesterday. So until someone comes out and says how things were done 30-40 years ago, theres not much we can do about it but go with the info thats out there.

I've always thought that Chris, Do you think this is what I've done with my collection? "So why was it so hard to finally realize that you cant go changing the info out there unless you got proof?"

Scott, anything past the "Im glad someone finally got it" actually wasnt directed towards you. I was using the rest in a statement form about all the threads last month. Sorry for the confusion on that. I shouldve seperated those two parts. And I do think you are making some progress. But the key thing is, not all info will be available to finish it. Thats why I gave up even worrying about tracking down the info for variants. Im not saying to give up either, but its going to be near impossible to finish it.

Hi snaggletooth I think you are doing a great work with the variants you have. Maybe is there some one from hasbro there has been working for kenner in the 70's and 80's there know more about the questions we have ?

pomse2001 wrote:

Hi snaggletooth I think you are doing a great work with the variants you have. Maybe is there some one from hasbro there has been working for kenner in the 70's and 80's there know more about the questions we have ?

Thanks for the vote of confidence Lars, maybe your right mate but I think Chris has a good point here and I'm sure it's been tried before.

"There ex-employees out there, but to track them down is damn near impossible unless you already got contacts in the industry. And even then, you might not actually get someone who knows anything about it."

Lars and Scott - On the subject of contacting employees to find out about variants don't forget guys that anyone that worked for Kenner in the states would have absolutely no idea about the production side of things outside of a few quality control checks perhaps.

The designers job was to create the sculpt and the accessories etc, the packaging and so on, beyond that once it was approved and all sent on to the factories they really wouldn't get involved with the production side of things.

The other departments were probably just interested in sales and promotions, then there would have been customer services etc that helped with customer enquiries and mail aways etc, sending off stuff to kids for the "we really do care" promise.

Former Kenner employees that had any items of any real interest have probably all been contacted, but I would guess that none of them ever even visited a factory in the far east to oversee any production, they were simply toy designers or sales staff etc.

Heck I mean Tom N is a hive of information but he was a marketing research director for Kenner and on many occasions he has stated he doesn't know too much about foreign production etc and to be honest why would he? It's like asking a fireman how the tyres on his truck are made, he might drive the truck every day but he probably wouldn't have a clue.

To get to the bottom of the production variants you would need to speak to minimum wage staff from 30 years ago in Hong Kong who were firing up molds and putting figures together, those guys wouldn't have cared then just like they wouldn't care or remember now.

Unfortunately as time goes on it seems that collectors are so concerned about the slightest change in production which creates a variant figure that instead of saying "ok thats cool" and putting it on the shelf next to the others, its put under some intense scrutiny to see if it holds the key to some amazing unknown area of collecting. There was no real intention to create collectables out of any of this stuff let alone in COO markings and paint differences. That goes for pre production and prototypes as well, collectors create the interest in the items not the other way around, the fact that the stuff survived to be collected is another matter entirely which adds to the interest IMO. With production figures you are literally trying to find a needle in a haystack with determining the whys and what fors with regard to variants.

I think it's helpful to remember that when seeking out all the information, that you will probably never find out the answer in many cases as to why it happened, I mean it's hard enough identifying the origin of many figures let alone why they were made that way. The real reason is probably very mundane and unimportant, change of paint supplier because the cost was cheaper, change of fabric supplier because the cost was cheaper or the product was better, change of mold because of wear and tear, change of location because of cost cutting.

Just something to keep in mind and FWIW I do get that you guys are just super interested in variants and want to know it all, I just think sometimes its worth remembering that over thinking every single loose variation is not the most productive way to collect. Just my opinion, I am trying hard to keep my posts nice and not angry lol

snaggletooth wrote:

pomse2001 wrote:

Hi snaggletooth I think you are doing a great work with the variants you have. Maybe is there some one from hasbro there has been working for kenner in the 70's and 80's there know more about the questions we have ?

Thanks for the vote of confidence Lars, maybe your right mate but I think Chris has a good point here and I'm sure it's been tried before.

"There ex-employees out there, but to track them down is damn near impossible unless you already got contacts in the industry. And even then, you might not actually get someone who knows anything about it."

Maybe you are right.

Maybe we should be better to compare and share our figures and MOC to get some more information

½ year ago I began to write down which variants I bought from who and in which country they was bought in the 70s and 80s I hope it will give be some answers in the future about variants I only do this with childhood collections where there has only been one owner.

Joe_O wrote:

Lars and Scott - On the subject of contacting employees to find out about variants don't forget guys that anyone that worked for Kenner in the states would have absolutely no idea about the production side of things outside of a few quality control checks perhaps.

The designers job was to create the sculpt and the accessories etc, the packaging and so on, beyond that once it was approved and all sent on to the factories they really wouldn't get involved with the production side of things.

The other departments were probably just interested in sales and promotions, then there would have been customer services etc that helped with customer enquiries and mail aways etc, sending off stuff to kids for the "we really do care" promise.

Former Kenner employees that had any items of any real interest have probably all been contacted, but I would guess that none of them ever even visited a factory in the far east to oversee any production, they were simply toy designers or sales staff etc.

Heck I mean Tom N is a hive of information but he was a marketing research director for Kenner and on many occasions he has stated he doesn't know too much about foreign production etc and to be honest why would he? It's like asking a fireman how the tyres on his truck are made, he might drive the truck every day but he probably wouldn't have a clue.

To get to the bottom of the production variants you would need to speak to minimum wage staff from 30 years ago in Hong Kong who were firing up molds and putting figures together, those guys wouldn't have cared then just like they wouldn't care or remember now.

Unfortunately as time goes on it seems that collectors are so concerned about the slightest change in production which creates a variant figure that instead of saying "ok thats cool" and putting it on the shelf next to the others, its put under some intense scrutiny to see if it holds the key to some amazing unknown area of collecting. There was no real intention to create collectables out of any of this stuff let alone in COO markings and paint differences. That goes for pre production and prototypes as well, collectors create the interest in the items not the other way around, the fact that the stuff survived to be collected is another matter entirely which adds to the interest IMO. With production figures you are literally trying to find a needle in a haystack with determining the whys and what fors with regard to variants.

I think it's helpful to remember that when seeking out all the information, that you will probably never find out the answer in many cases as to why it happened, I mean it's hard enough identifying the origin of many figures let alone why they were made that way. The real reason is probably very mundane and unimportant, change of paint supplier because the cost was cheaper, change of fabric supplier because the cost was cheaper or the product was better, change of mold because of wear and tear, change of location because of cost cutting.

Just something to keep in mind and FWIW I do get that you guys are just super interested in variants and want to know it all, I just think sometimes its worth remembering that over thinking every single loose variation is not the most productive way to collect. Just my opinion, I am trying hard to keep my posts nice and not angry lol

Hi Joe, you could be right. Maybe the people on the factory did not know and the people in USA did not know or care.

But I still think it is strange why there is no. on some figures and the details is not the same on some figures.

pomse2001 wrote:

snaggletooth wrote:

pomse2001 wrote:

Hi snaggletooth I think you are doing a great work with the variants you have. Maybe is there some one from hasbro there has been working for kenner in the 70's and 80's there know more about the questions we have ?

Thanks for the vote of confidence Lars, maybe your right mate but I think Chris has a good point here and I'm sure it's been tried before.

"There ex-employees out there, but to track them down is damn near impossible unless you already got contacts in the industry. And even then, you might not actually get someone who knows anything about it."

Maybe you are right.

Maybe we should be better to compare and share our figures and MOC to get some more information

½ year ago I began to write down which variants I bought from who and in which country they was bought in the 70s and 80s I hope it will give be some answers in the future about variants I only do this with childhood collections where there has only been one owner.

MOC's would be the best way I think if everyone joined in but I don't think there's many MOC collectors who really care about COO's

Good idea about your list from Childhood collections to mate, wouldn't mind a look at that at some point.

pomse2001 wrote:

Maybe we should be better to compare and share our figures and MOC to get some more information
½ year ago I began to write down which variants I bought from who and in which country they was bought in the 70s and 80s I hope it will give be some answers in the future about variants I only do this with childhood collections where there has only been one owner.

Yes, this is the only way you can attempt to correctly categorise and identify loose figures, but and this is a big but if you are using information from loose figures with cardbacks, do not always trust that the figure came with that backer. I know that sounds silly but there is plenty of opportunity for it to be wrong. Two kids, two saved figures, but only one cardback saved, one is ESB the other is ROTJ..how do you know which one came with that card? Etc

You would need to sit down and contact ALL MOC collectors to build up a list of figure COO's on certain cards. Figure by figure is the best way, check ALL cardback versions for different COO's not just: SW Card Luke Skywalker = Hong Kong (just an example!) you would literally have to go 12A= 12B= 12C=, 12D= and so on.

If someone wanted to do it right that is.

snaggletooth wrote:

pomse2001 wrote:

snaggletooth wrote:

pomse2001 wrote:

Hi snaggletooth I think you are doing a great work with the variants you have. Maybe is there some one from hasbro there has been working for kenner in the 70's and 80's there know more about the questions we have ?

Thanks for the vote of confidence Lars, maybe your right mate but I think Chris has a good point here and I'm sure it's been tried before.

"There ex-employees out there, but to track them down is damn near impossible unless you already got contacts in the industry. And even then, you might not actually get someone who knows anything about it."

Maybe you are right.

Maybe we should be better to compare and share our figures and MOC to get some more information

½ year ago I began to write down which variants I bought from who and in which country they was bought in the 70s and 80s I hope it will give be some answers in the future about variants I only do this with childhood collections where there has only been one owner.

MOC's would be the best way I think if everyone joined in but I don't think there's many MOC collectors who really care about COO's

Good idea about your list from Childhood collections to mate, wouldn't mind a look at that at some point.

Hi Scott, I have just begun ½ year ago to write down. But if you have questions. Then just ask and I can try to see if I have some information about that figure

I care about coo and moc, but it is difficult to see coo on moc also weapon variants is interesting.