Dr Dengar wrote:

Personally I wouldn’t buy a figure which only POCH characteristics are melt marks.

My 'rule': There should at least be a combination of different characteristics which all together make it very likely that a figure is a POCH figure. So apart from melt marks, also check:
- Colour scheme
- Sloppy paint job
- Welding cracks
- Plastic extrusions

Many of the figures currently on ebay do not fit this rule. So though they may be POCH, they are not interesting to me.

For me the only identifer of a POCH figure is:

-Paint application (colour scheme)

Mould details are shared by Kenner figures so can't be used to distinguish.

As for these:

-Melt marks
-Sloppy paint jobs
-Welding cracks
-Plastic extrusions

These are all factory errors and shouldn't define how a particular variant is identified.

Yes they are "symptoms" (as I like to call it) of a POCH figure just as green spots maybe a symptom of a TT Jawa - but without the cape its no TT Jawa.

Dr Dengar wrote:

***

STAR DESTROYER COMMANDER

COO guide for Star Destoyer Commander


NOTES:
- COO #3 is shared by POCH and Kenner (POCH Era figure).


COO #3: POCH ERA

In the pictures below a POCH Star Destroyer Commander is compared to a Kenner figure sharing the same COO #3.

Star Destroyer Commander COO #3: Kenner (left), POCH (right).


Star Destroyer Commander COO #3: Kenner (left), POCH (right).


Star Destroyer Commander COO #3: Kenner (left), POCH (right).


Star Destroyer Commander COO #3: Kenner (left), POCH (right).


Star Destroyer Commander COO #3: Kenner (left), POCH (right).


Star Destroyer Commander COO #3: Kenner (left), POCH (right).



DIFFERENCES:
The differences between the two figures are subtle. Compared to his Kenner counterpart, the POCH Star Destroyer Commander has:
- a more pinkish face .
- thicker paint apps for the eyes and eye brows.
- an unique emblem composed of a paler blue and a more vibrant red bar.
- In addition - as mentioned on Wolff's site - the red bar of the POCH emblem was applied on top of the blue bar. In the Kenner figure this is the other way around.



In addition the figure in the pics has some typical POCH characteristics, which are indicated in the pic below.



A plastic extrusion on the left foot seem to be present in a MOC figure example as well when looking very carefully (see pic below). This is another indication that the figure discussed here is indeed a POCH variant. Another indication is that the figure came from a Spanish lot also containing confirmed POCH figures (like Han Hoth, Lando).


Source: http://www.starwarsspanishstuff.info


ACCESSORIES

GUN

The POCH Star Destroyer Commander came with a black Imperial blaster.


REMARK

You can read more about the POCH Star Destroyer Commander on Wolff's great site: http://swspaceclub.com/wbobafett/poch/poch-variants/death-squad-commander/

Hi again!!
Here you have one of my POCH Star destroyer Commander figures, with different characteristic the one dr Dengar described (GREAT WORK). You have keep in mind that in many cases, two figures of the same character, can have differents characteristics (paint, COO, marks) and both are POCH figures.
One example is the famous Han Solo Hoth chocolate legs. I have a Han solo Hoth POCH with no chocolate legs and different COO and is 100% confirmed POCH because I have the cardback where the figure came in originally. So no all the Han solo hoth POCH figures has the chocolate legs, so this is more complicated that it seems...
My star destroyer commander has:
-Different COO.
-Pale face , thinner paint for the eyes and eyebrows.
-The emblem has a dark blue bar.
-Paint droplets on glooves and and boots.
-Plastic extrusion on bottoms of both boots (more evident in the right one)
-No melt marks.
I´m agree, with Dr Dengar, is the combination of different characteristics which all together make it very likely that a figure is a POCH figure,mainly, no doubt, the colour scheme and the sloopy paint job. And remember, NOT ALL THE POCH FIGURES HAVE MELT MARKS. AND ITS ABSURD TO THINK THAT YOU HAVE A POCH FIGURE WHEN THE ONLY CHARACTERISTIC IS TO HAVE A MELT MARK.
Here you have the photos, hope you enjoy.

I agree with Oli. These are only signs of poor production which can happy in ANY production in the world. They can be hints but its no sign to identify stuff!

Most important is that the figures have to appear on the early Poch cards, so no CCP, no Tie Pilot, no Luke Hoth possible or whatelse is out there and claimed to be Poch in the last month! You can find meltmarks on all Kenner figures as well.

The next problem is: Poch seem to have used overstock parats from Asian factories. So a lot of Poch figures are mixed up with those parts. The challenge is to find the "pure" Poch figure and this is normally only ONE variant! If I hear 2, 3 or more variants it chukkles me because thats simply not possible on most! Its mixed up trash...no variant at all...a factory error if you will....

To make the bubble burst (LOL), IMO only one of the black neck Landos is Poch....the other one is a mixed up figure with Asian overstock head
I will get flamed for that, but Im pretty sure that there is only ONE variant on those on 98% of them "produced" by Poch!

Have fun......Im out of that "Poch buisness". Collecting should be fun...and the fun on Poch has gone since month!

Means: No more posts on poch matters and no new entries on the guide....till people find there comon sense again

javitc wrote:

Hi again!!
Here you have one of my POCH Star destroyer Commander figures, with different characteristic the one dr Dengar described (GREAT WORK). You have keep in mind that in many cases, two figures of the same character, can have differents characteristics (paint, COO, marks) and both are POCH figures.
One example is the famous Han Solo Hoth chocolate legs. I have a Han solo Hoth POCH with no chocolate legs and different COO and is 100% confirmed POCH because I have the cardback where the figure came in originally. So no all the Han solo hoth POCH figures has the chocolate legs, so this is more complicated that it seems...

Ok fair enough but POCH didnt produce figures (PBP did some) and not all figures on POCH cards can necessarily be classified as a POCH figure right?

That's just like me saying a Boba Fett that came on a Palitoy card that looks like a regular Fett is a Palitoy.

Also since POCH figures share the same COO and mould details of Kenner figures then it is only paint applications that differentiate them. So if the figure doesn't have those paint applications then surely it would be difficult to argue its a POCH. I don't think melt marks and other factory errors carry much weight on their own. Just my 2 cents and I realise as I write this I'm repeating myself. Lol. I know the general feeling out there with a lot of collectors is that this classification of POCHs based on factory errors is getting a bit crazy and people are grasping at straws trying to create something that doesn't exist. POCH classification is not as tangible as Lili Ledy classification. It really is making a lot of people loose interest in POCH figures and  damaging peoples opinions of this collecting area which i think is responsible for the low prices of POCHs on these boards.

wbobafett wrote:

I agree with Oli. These are only signs of poor production which can happy in ANY production in the world. They can be hints but its no sign to identify stuff!

Most important is that the figures have to appear on the early Poch cards, so no CCP, no Tie Pilot, no Luke Hoth possible or whatelse is out there and claimed to be Poch in the last month! You can find meltmarks on all Kenner figures as well.

The next problem is: Poch seem to have used overstock parats from Asian factories. So a lot of Poch figures are mixed up with those parts. The challenge is to find the "pure" Poch figure and this is normally only ONE variant! If I hear 2, 3 or more variants it chukkles me because thats simply not possible on most! Its mixed up trash...no variant at all...a factory error if you will....

To make the bubble burst (LOL), IMO only one of the black neck Landos is Poch....the other one is a mixed up figure with Asian overstock head
I will get flamed for that, but Im pretty sure that there is only ONE variant on those on 98% of them "produced" by Poch!

Have fun......Im out of that "Poch buisness". Collecting should be fun...and the fun on Poch has gone since month!

Means: No more posts on poch matters and no new entries on the guide....till people find there comon sense again

Lol. Forget what I said, Wolff said it better

Stop the madness!  

wbobafett wrote:

I agree with Oli. These are only signs of poor production which can happy in ANY production in the world. They can be hints but its no sign to identify stuff!

Most important is that the figures have to appear on the early Poch cards, so no CCP, no Tie Pilot, no Luke Hoth possible or whatelse is out there and claimed to be Poch in the last month! You can find meltmarks on all Kenner figures as well.

The next problem is: Poch seem to have used overstock parats from Asian factories. So a lot of Poch figures are mixed up with those parts. The challenge is to find the "pure" Poch figure and this is normally only ONE variant! If I hear 2, 3 or more variants it chukkles me because thats simply not possible on most! Its mixed up trash...no variant at all...a factory error if you will....

To make the bubble burst (LOL), IMO only one of the black neck Landos is Poch....the other one is a mixed up figure with Asian overstock head
I will get flamed for that, but Im pretty sure that there is only ONE variant on those on 98% of them "produced" by Poch!

Have fun......Im out of that "Poch buisness". Collecting should be fun...and the fun on Poch has gone since month!

Means: No more posts on poch matters and no new entries on the guide....till people find there comon sense again

Hi again.
I´ll try to explain again. The main characteristic of the POCH death star commnader I think is the paint droplets on hands and boots. My figure have this , but have other different characteristic, like the COO. We can say is another variation or not, but is different to the other one. What of the two figures is the "pure " POCH variation? I think is the same variation (different paint work) with another different characteristic (not POCH especific). I,ll post this photos because I think It would be interesting...

javitc wrote:

Hi again.
I´ll try to explain again. The main characteristic of the POCH death star commnader I think is the paint droplets on hands and boots. My figure have this , but have other different characteristic, like the COO. We can say is another variation or not, but is different to the other one. What of the two figures is the "pure " POCH variation? I think is the same variation (different paint work) with another different characteristic (not POCH especific). I,ll post this photos because I think It would be interesting...

never mind...was not talking to you or about your DSC! I was talking about the generell situation

You reached me on the wrong foot...has nothing to do with you or your figures!

olisuds wrote:

javitc wrote:

Hi again!!
Here you have one of my POCH Star destroyer Commander figures, with different characteristic the one dr Dengar described (GREAT WORK). You have keep in mind that in many cases, two figures of the same character, can have differents characteristics (paint, COO, marks) and both are POCH figures.
One example is the famous Han Solo Hoth chocolate legs. I have a Han solo Hoth POCH with no chocolate legs and different COO and is 100% confirmed POCH because I have the cardback where the figure came in originally. So no all the Han solo hoth POCH figures has the chocolate legs, so this is more complicated that it seems...

Ok fair enough but POCH didnt produce figures (PBP did some) and not all figures on POCH cards can necessarily be classified as a POCH figure right?

That's just like me saying a Boba Fett that came on a Palitoy card that looks like a regular Fett is a Palitoy.

Also since POCH figures share the same COO and mould details of Kenner figures then it is only paint applications that differentiate them. So if the figure doesn't have those paint applications then surely it would be difficult to argue its a POCH. I don't think melt marks and other factory errors carry much weight on their own. Just my 2 cents and I realise as I write this I'm repeating myself. Lol. I know the general feeling out there with a lot of collectors is that this classification of POCHs based on factory errors is getting a bit crazy and people are grasping at straws trying to create something that doesn't exist. POCH classification is not as tangible as Lili Ledy classification. It really is making a lot of people loose interest in POCH figures and  damaging peoples opinions of this collecting area which i think is responsible for the low prices of POCHs on these boards.

Hi!!
I´m agree with you. I try to explain again. The main important aspect of this POCH figures, is the different paint work. And I,m agree, not all figures on POCH cards can classified as a POCH figure. My example of the Han HOTH no chocolate legs is because it has a COO that I´never see (kenner, palitoy)...

lfantelo wrote:

Hey Luis, welcome to the boards! As mentioned before meltnmarks and other factory errors are only hints no proof for Poch!

For your collection:

Poch:
- Lobot
- Luke Bespin
- Han Hoth
- Leia Bespin
- Tusken (?)
- Bespin Guard
- Lando BN
- Luke Pilot
- Imperial Commander


NO Poch(or mixed up figure):
-Luke Farmboy
-Han original
-ATAT Commander (never appeared on early spanish cards)
-Jawa
-Leia
-Rebel Soldier
-Chewbacca



Cant be said because of the picture/lacking evidence of MOC and investigation:
Vader
Snowtrooper
R2
C-3PO
ATAT Driver
DSC
R5
Boba
IG
Yoda
Stromtrooper
2-1B

...not sure about Ben...though (could be mixed up)

We all would like to see more pictures of the questionable figures

wbobafett wrote:

javitc wrote:

Hi again.
I´ll try to explain again. The main characteristic of the POCH death star commnader I think is the paint droplets on hands and boots. My figure have this , but have other different characteristic, like the COO. We can say is another variation or not, but is different to the other one. What of the two figures is the "pure " POCH variation? I think is the same variation (different paint work) with another different characteristic (not POCH especific). I,ll post this photos because I think It would be interesting...

never mind...was not talking to you or about your DSC! I was talking about the generell situation

You reached me on the wrong foot...has nothing to do with you or your figures!

OK
You are right, this situation is going a little bit crazy....
Cheers

javitc wrote:

Hi!!
I´m agree with you. I try to explain again. The main important aspect of this POCH figures, is the different paint work. And I,m agree, not all figures on POCH cards can classified as a POCH figure. My example of the Han HOTH no chocolate legs is because it has a COO that I´never see (kenner, palitoy)...

Can you spot him here???


I can already tell you that the coo is NOT unique!!!

But he is on that picture........

Cool mixed limb factory error!

there is (in general) no unique coo to Poch figures. Believe me, I collect coos since decades now

Coos got mixed up on a lot of those spanish figures because of overstock IMO!

(The one you are searching is in last row on the far right). He doesnt look special at all to me but these can be found in Spain I agree! Now is it variant or a chocolate boots Han with wrong (overstock) legs?? Ist surely "half" Poch. Will we ever know???

Mixed up coos can be found on spanish Dnagras, Snowtroopers and Han Hoith pretty often, but are they factory errors (mixed up) or legit variants?? I doubt the variant thing!

wbobafett wrote:

there is (in general) no unique coo to Poch figures. Believe me, I collect coos since decades now

Coos got mixed up on a lot of those spanish figures because of overstock IMO!

(The one you are searching is in last row on the far right). He doesnt look special at all to me but these can be found in Spain I agree! Now is it variant or a chocolate boots Han with wrong (overstock) legs?? Ist surely "half" Poch. Will we ever know???

Mixed up coos can be found on spanish Dnagras, Snowtroopers and Han Hoith pretty often, but are they factory errors (mixed up) or legit variants?? I doubt the variant thing!

OK Wolff, I understand.

lfantelo wrote:

1.- Poch Fett (check the unpainted middle section of the belt as well as the evident extrusions on left foot and bottom)
2.- Poch grey/green Yoda & unpainted pouch, weird coloured-limbed Chewie (the unpainting is not private to Glasslite)
3.- Some Lukes, chocolate-legged Han, black-necked Lando...

Luis, from what I can see your Boba Fett has an unpainted belt and some plastic extrusions which are factory errors and dont make it a POCH. Your Chewbacca has green limbs which is discolouration not making it a POCH. The Death Squad commander has bubbles which is a factory error which on its own does not make it a POCH.

Are there any unique details of paint application (not factory errors) that distinguish these from other figures and make them unique to POCH. The COOs are not unique as they are all shared with with Kenner. And buying it in Spain or having its old POCH card back doesn't make it POCH either - they were made in Asia.

Lili Ledy, Glaslite, Top Toys, Takara, PBP all have unique paint applications, COO, moulds, sculpts etc. Classifying a figure purely based on factory errors or discolouration is crazy and no one is going to take that kind of collecting seriously.

We're very interested in your collection so maybe you can tell us more about them and the identifiable characteristics.

As it is late at night, just a quick answer to olisuds concerning the "seriousity" of my collecting: asides from almost 30 AFA ROTJ PBP MOC's, the 4 Poch ships MIB, some Poch MOC, pinball, props... most of the loose figures of the picture I posted DO have the distinctive features to Poch. It's not just molds, sonic wielding imperfections, extrusions... I just wanted to post a quick post with some global pictures as way of a self-introduction. I will upload some close-up of some of them, so that any doubts may clarify themselves. And trust me, it is not that any loose figure bought in Spain which matches the back mentions and has some extrusions, bubbles... Does have to be Poch, I'm not that gullible. But most of them either I had bought to me when I was a kid, or have been acquired from their original owners, friends of mine, now in their forties.
Best,
Luis

olisuds wrote:

Dr Dengar wrote:

Personally I wouldn’t buy a figure which only POCH characteristics are melt marks.

My 'rule': There should at least be a combination of different characteristics which all together make it very likely that a figure is a POCH figure. So apart from melt marks, also check:
- Colour scheme
- Sloppy paint job
- Welding cracks
- Plastic extrusions

Many of the figures currently on ebay do not fit this rule. So though they may be POCH, they are not interesting to me.

For me the only identifer of a POCH figure is:

-Paint application (colour scheme)

Mould details are shared by Kenner figures so can't be used to distinguish.

As for these:

-Melt marks
-Sloppy paint jobs
-Welding cracks
-Plastic extrusions

These are all factory errors and shouldn't define how a particular variant is identified.

Yes they are "symptoms" (as I like to call it) of a POCH figure just as green spots maybe a symptom of a TT Jawa - but without the cape its no TT Jawa.

Fuly agree. The rule is applied as follows:

A. Differences in colour scheme (paint applications) should be there when labeling a figure as POCH.
B. Alle the other aspects (melt marks, sloppy paint jobs, welding cracks, plastic extrusions, bubbles) are considered a welcome bonus, further confirming the POCH identity, once condition A has been fulfilled.

olisuds wrote:

Ok fair enough but POCH didnt produce figures (PBP did some) and not all figures on POCH cards can necessarily be classified as a POCH figure right?

olisuds wrote:

And buying it in Spain or having its old POCH card back doesn't make it POCH either - they were made in Asia.

I was under the impression that it also might well be that POCH (or technically spoken PBP, as the merger of three parent companies, i.e. POCH, Borras, and Palouzieon was already completed) produced its own figures for the ealy ESB 31, and 37/31 backs. Correct me if I am wrong.

olisuds wrote:

POCH classification is not as tangible as Lili Ledy classification.

I am sure POCH classification can be made as solid as Ledy identification, once differences in colour schema are taken as the main identifier, and all the other features (melt marks, welding cracks, etc.) are just considered a bonus.

This thread and Wolff's site try to share those unique paint applications, so collectors know what to look for.

Sorry to stray from the topic at hand but I noticed a good (price) purchase on a black neck Lando today on Ebay... Not sure if that was one of the mixed variants/heads (none pure POCH) spoken of above but it looked legit by the blue ring top of the neck... Either way, it went for far less then I thought it would...

wbobafett wrote:

Most important is that the figures have to appear on the early Poch cards, so no CCP, no Tie Pilot, no Luke Hoth possible or whatelse is out there and claimed to be Poch in the last month! You can find meltmarks on all Kenner figures as well.

Probably somewhere in the transition from ESB to ROTJ cards, PBP changed the production process from POCH standard (with a lot of production flaws) to better quality PBP standard. I can imagine that this transition was not done overnight. So can we exclude the possibility, that in the beginning some of the old and new ESB figures (e.g. AT AT commander, CCP, TFP, Luke Hoth) were still produced under POCH standards and put on ROTJ cards? And that later the COOs were removed and these figures were produced according to the PBP way.
Just brainstorming here for discussion.

EDIT June 2nd 2013: Personally I don't think anymore that PBP produced its own figures in the POCH era. The late ESB characters were either imported completely (Class IV figures ) or in parts (Class II figures).

wbobafett wrote:

Have fun......Im out of that "Poch buisness". Collecting should be fun...and the fun on Poch has gone since month!

Means: No more posts on poch matters and no new entries on the guide....till people find there comon sense again

Wolff, to overcome that misinformation will prevail the boards soon, collectors spend crazy amounts of money to factory errors, and after a while loose interest in this great variant line, I hope you reconsider, and continue discussing here and extending your great site. Now is exactly NOT the time to retreat. We need you!

THIS IS POCH!!!!!

Dr Dengar wrote:

I was under the impression that it also might well be that POCH (or technically spoken PBP, as the merger of three parent companies, i.e. POCH, Borras, and Palouzieon was already completed) produced its own figures for the ealy ESB 31, and 37/31 backs. Correct me if I am wrong.

IMO that doesnt make much sense. Even PBP didnt produce the majority of figures on PBP cards. I find it highly unlikely that POCH was suddenly capable of producing their own figures that share COO and mould details of  Kenner figures and then suddenly start producing PBP in a very different style and different plastic. POCH figures dont have the characteristics of figures produced in Spain. 

Or perhaps POCH made all the figures and kept the dodgy batches for Spain and shipped the good ones to the rest of the world

lfantelo wrote:

As it is late at night, just a quick answer to olisuds concerning the "seriousity" of my collecting: asides from almost 30 AFA ROTJ PBP MOC's, the 4 Poch ships MIB, some Poch MOC, pinball, props... most of the loose figures of the picture I posted DO have the distinctive features to Poch. It's not just molds, sonic wielding imperfections, extrusions... I just wanted to post a quick post with some global pictures as way of a self-introduction. I will upload some close-up of some of them, so that any doubts may clarify themselves. And trust me, it is not that any loose figure bought in Spain which matches the back mentions and has some extrusions, bubbles... Does have to be Poch, I'm not that gullible. But most of them either I had bought to me when I was a kid, or have been acquired from their original owners, friends of mine, now in their forties.
Best,
Luis

Hey Luis, I dont doubt your collection, it sounds great and I would like to see more pictures of it especially the MOCs. Its just all this talk of factory errors is driving me crazy. And when you take a figure off a PBP or POCH card you dont necessarily have a PBP or POCH figure still. The majority of these were made in Asia. So they are only PBP or POCH when they are on their cards. So it really doesn't matter if you bought it on a card as a kid.

Likewise I'm not going to start claiming my figures are Palitoy variants because I bought them in the UK as a kid and have the original Palitoy card backs.

I don't doubt that some of your figures are real POCHs but when you start to throw in others that have no apparent solid evidence then it starts to make people sceptical. So for example your "POCH" Boba Fett. How did you come to the conclusion it was POCH? I am very interested to know!

You will have to excuse my scepticalness (i know that not even an English word - so I hope you know what I mean) but a lot of people feel the same about POCHs right now and are giving them a wide birth.

Steve pointed out a POCH Lando with black neck on Ebay for a great price and this is a great example of the damage this madness is doing. There is/was another POCH Lando black neck on Rebelscum that was a good price too and it was listed with a POCH CCP that looked like any regular Kenner CCP but was going for £400ish. They aren't selling because people are wary of POCHs and all these crazy unsubstantiated claims. There are too many POCH figures about at the moment with no proof coming from Spanish sellers who i can only presume are looking to make a fast € out of nothing.

Trust me I'm not the only one who feels like this. Try starting a thread like this on SWFUK (or Rebelscum for that matter) and see how far it gets

I have the feeling we are running in circles. In the past 24 hours several statements has been made by different members (including me, Oli, Kenneth, Wolff) that we should be careful to label POCH figures as such when the only indicators are melt marks, welding cracks etc.
Differences in colour scheme (paint applications) should be leading, not melt marks. That is clear now, I think.

From Luis answer, I understand that he understands this perfectly well, and he has already offered to show close-ups of his figures thereby sharing the distinctive POCH characteristics. I appreciate that very much.

lfantelo wrote:

most of the loose figures of the picture I posted DO have the distinctive features to Poch. It's not just molds, sonic wielding imperfections, extrusions... I just wanted to post a quick post with some global pictures as way of a self-introduction. I will upload some close-up of some of them, so that any doubts may clarify themselves. Best,
Luis

Let's just be patient, no need to rush things now.

Thanks for your words, olisuds. I joined this forum precisely because stablishing a comprehensive -and, most important, reliable-, guide to loose Poch figures is a task much needed, and it does require serious analysis, so people will deposit their trust on such an achievement. I think good fora should intend precisely that, and after having sailed through the "best" webs about vintage collecting (one of which is this one, needless to say) , TIG is the one in which I have found a greatest degree of accuracy and serious treatment of the matter.

I have been a collector of spanish Vintage for the last 20 years, I have found even the PBP order checklists which dealer agents gave to retail toy shops, and believe me when I tell you that I am aware of the complexity of the matter. Point is, I wanted my first post at TIG to show that I was willing to "add value", not to impose or defend that what I call "the Poch test" is enough to judge on an action figure being Poch.

Little by little, and letting aside the 9 -thanks, wbobafett, for your list: it's most enriching- that should be clearly Poch (Luke Bespin, Han Hoth, Lobot, Leia Bespin, Tusken, Bespin Guard, Lando Black neck, Luke Pilot and Imperial Commander), I will post close-ups of the rest, pinpointing variations, mold differences, plastic qualities, color differences -not changes due to time, humidity or quality of plastics- cape textures, "facial painting/not color" and the rest of circunstances to back the authenticity at least of most of them as Poch (you guys were right: the ATAT Commander never appeared on Poch, althoug in PBP ROTJ Card is maybe the hardest to find MOC of the Retorno del Jedi line).

I will try to start with good old Yoda, quite distinguishable specially through the head colour; afterwards will follow the Jawa (I will post close-ups of both eyes and the different strap) and thirdly Lord Vader: I think that the roughness of the molding will surprise you.

Best and please keep this post going: it's really worth it

I am very happy to see new members from Spain joining this discussion I have strong feelings on this matter with grave fears for people being scammed. But I will keep an open mind & look forward to people sharing their knowledge. I also think that we all need to be respectful of each other & bear in mind that certain things can be lost in translation. I had almost lost all interest in POCH but now have a renewed enthusiasm