VFTF1

You're right Killerrobot. I just checked. It looks better when she's in movement, but for fixed poses it's just weird. I guess I like my girls to be symetrical. On that note - here's who REALLY should have had the starring role in Legend of Zero: Pete

I know it's not plastic, but it will keep us happy while we wait nevertheless: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...mp;#entry720430 Pete

Has she been shown? IMO this girl is enough to make me switch my love to Sheryl Oh - and here's someone who also gets top marks for having a hot body and a great costume: Pete

Is that a hot water thermos attached to her back? Guys with bad kidneys could come to love a girl like that... Pete

I've warmed to Max's TV 1A recently. Decided to put it on my "to get list." Reason is pretty simple: I have Hikaru's 1J TV and will get Kakizake TV... and I suddenly had a cute dream where all three of them were together like the time they went to rescue Misa from the Zendradi It'll be fun having the whole TV team together... Pete

Ok. Here I go: Toby Macguire reads this thread and decides to go watch the original Macross. He loves it. He then watches Macross 7 and is photographed in Tabloid pictures running around shouting "Bomba!!" with the headline "Bomba!?" and lots of speculation as to what drugs Toby has been taking. He then moves on the Zero and finally Frontier, and later he is seen giving the Ranka "I Love you" hand sign everywhere he goes. He announces that he's no longer interested in doing Robotech and the movie is scrapped. He also starts up a peaceful resistance movement that camps outsideo f HG and begs them to just give up and go home. Miraculously, HG sees the light and stops haggling over legal issues and Macross as it was originally concieved gets to come to America. Just like Hasbro "re-invents" Transformers every so often, it is decided that Macross will be "re-invented." The new live action movie will tell the story of Lynn Minmey and will be DYRL in live action - DYRL is the screenplay the plot, the everything - it will basically be everything we saw in DYRL but with live actors. Marii Ijima will be cast as Misa Hayes. Lyn Minmey will be performed by some up and coming super star cinderella lovely that we haven't seen or heard of. Shoji Kawamorii will also have a cameo. Heck - they'll even fly Graham in to play some cannon fodder pilot After the smashing success that is live action DYRL, Yamato is given the license for the toys. They are also given a HUGE war chest of money to guarantee QC. Following this, we get Macross 7 the Movie! Yoshiki Fukayama is cast as Nekki Basara and his band is cast a fire bomber. The movie is such a hit that J-Pop becomes the most popular brand of music in the Western world. Bandai retains its' license for Macross 7 and finally produced NEW M7 toys rather than reissuing crap from 1980 for the fourty millionth time. The third installment is Macross: Frontier the Movie. Alto is played by a real Kabuki actor from Japan. Sheryl is played by some hunny from Larry Flint's hustler (it makes sense since Sheryl was an artificial idol - a product of grooming on the part of Grace - so we want some amateur booby girl who also gets a couple of singing lessons and gets slung on stage). Ranka - in the tradition of DYRL live action - is again cast from a list of nobodies and unknowns - she will be the new super star idol of America. The movie makes more money than ALL of the movies that Holywood has ever put out EVER. As thanks, the production studio gives all members of Macrossworld Forum free coupons for 2 thousand USD worth of free merchandise from Yamato. And our girlfriends and wives suddenly want to dress like Sheryl and Ranka and buy us Macross aparel - because naturally Macross fashion makes a big splash and all the big name designers are into it, so the ladies are too. The end. Pete

I dunno. I live in a country where that kind of attitude got about 10 million people killed, so I prefer to just let it be and move on Pete

Again - I understand the emotions some people are feeling due to all the bad stuff going on. Believe me, I share your sentiment. But I honestly think we have to be careful about channeling that emotion in unhealthy ways. 1) Someone who hasn't broken any law is not a criminal, even if he has done something very very ugly and low. 2) Somene who has not been convicted by a court of law is not a criminal, even if he is a suspect in a crime or if he is in the process of being tried for the crime. I bring this up only because I think that - as someone mentioned ( think it was Jenius) a few pages back - when there's a boom, we tend to all live it up and party and we really don't care who is making off with what as long as we get a piece of the action. As soon as things go south, it's "let's point fingers and hiss" time. That is not fair and it's dangerous. I have my own business and am a one-man show, so really don't have to deal with people (well, I deal with customers. It's easy - they want/I give with a smile. I don't have to deal with "co-workers" and "bosses" and 'corporate culture' and all the politics involved in that) But my girlfriend works in a big company where she deals with lots of people. She is editor in chief of a few magazines and lately her company has been starting to lay off people, cut back on spending etc etc. People were promised promotions and raises - and now they are being told there's no place for them. Initially, my Girlfriend had this same reaction as some of you guys "boy - the management is being evil. How could they promise raises and promotions to people and now they're laying people off?" I told her to think for a minute. Does she really think that financial managers and accountants are HAPPY with this? Those promises were made during the boom - when it seemed that they couldn't find enough people to work in their office and when workers felt confident enough to actually put my girlfriend in a position of "well if you don't give me a THIRD raise I'm going to the competition which is buying us all off." Those times are OVER. ANd it does no good to point fingers and say "well this guy is an evil bum bleh bleh bleh." He's not. He would be quite happy making his millions and running a successful business rather than having his company crash and running off with cash and having people think him an ass for it. I'm not talking anybody in particular - but just in general. And that's my point: Remember: YOU could be the next "evil dude" when the finger pointing and witch hunting starts. YOU could be the one who is "to blame." No matter if you are a big corporate exec or if you are the shift manager at MacDonalds. I just don't think it's healthy to generally attribute blame all over the place. Some people surely committed crimes and will be proesecuted. But most folks are probably guilt of the same thing as all of us: believing the hype and thinking the boom would last forever. Pete

Check out how Pete has learned to use the multiple Quote function I read it. The Fountainhead is a FAR more beautiful, meaningful and well written book. Atlas Shrugged is a TRAIN WRECK (pun intended) Miryia - IMO (if you care) - you shouldn't bash yourself for your hobby. You also have a right to be happy. It's nice to want to help poor people - but if you believe that they would be better off being lifted up - up to the point where they too could have the liesure and wealth to enjoy hobbies and culture - then why bash the thing that you wish on others? Besides - it IS possible to give to charity and help those in need WHILE also enjoying your hobby. No need for self-pity when making a decision on whether or not to buy the SDF-1 IMO. Just donate WAVE to toys for Tots or something Agreed. And a big thanks to the moderators who aparently have trusted us in that thread to keep the discussion within the bounds of the rules - even though admitedly we are skirting on the border of forbidden subjects. Still, I'm happy to see that peopel are being careful in how they discuss the subject and that the mods seem not to have felt the need to intervene. We'll try to make sure you guys don't have extra work because of us Hurin: the guy who posts seldom - but when he does it's always worth reading My girlfriend would KILL me if I adopted that attitude. She wants me to look as good as she does and she would be embarrased if I didn't have nice clothes and generally look well dressed in public. Thankfully - she helps out in this regard. My most recent gift from her: Naturally I also buy her nice stuff and we're pretty good to eachother. It's kind of like with the charity thing. It shouldn't be a matter of "either/or" - I think it is possible to strike a balance between all of life's needs. You just need planning and patience. You can dress well and have your SDF-1 too I think. Barring unforeseen sickness, catastrophe etc etc etc. Pete

Polidread - nice pic- as usual. Giliam... should be left to RIP. No Tomato juice Gilliam please. The prototype pics look good - but - I presume the helment will be removable? Although - I'm betting it will be a matter or "remove helment and insert spare head" since it would be impossible to get Alto's hair done...or... wait - the Saint Seein' Ya figures have hair - no? But yeah - I can't wait for Sheryl I'll get her an Alto. But the key question: will Sheryl (in her dress) be able to come out of the armor and just be a figure all by her lonesome? So we can have Alto hold her mid flight? Pete

Personally, I agree with Jenius about credit cards too. One of my biggest problems as a business is slow cash flow, and I often have to "borrow" money from myself. If I didn't have my credit card, I'd have gone under before being able to do anything. Polish people don't use checks, very few of them use paypal, most of them use bank wire transfers, and lots of them apparently do "keep their money in a shoe box" because they use the post office to wire money rather than doing it from their bank. There's also a system whereby if I send someone a package, they have the option of paying the mailman for it upon reciept, and then the post office wires me the money. This means that there's usually at least 7 days from "day of purchase" to "day Peter actually sees the money on his account." This often creates a cash flow nightmare. Thanks to my credit card, I can make purchases and payments to keep my business afloat. They key, of course, is to quickly pay yourself back and only use the credit card when you are 100% money is coming in (well - 99%... ) And yeah - credit cards also offer you perks like if you use them you get a discount at select stores. This was moderately helpful when I would shop for stuff for me or my girlfriend during the boom. Not so helpful now when we really don't do much shoppng any more. But I agree - if you're smart - you won't get killed by your credit card and it can be a helpful resource. Pete

Thank you for sharing this interview. Kawamori certainly seems to be a very conscious and intelligent individual. Great stuff. Pete

D Unit - I like the way you think dude And in general - dag - I am learning so much from this thread. People are opening up and I guess unsurprisingly it turns out that this great forum is populated with great people Pete

Well - get ready for happy days again at least according to THIS guy - once the 1/2000 SDF-1 comes out, we'll all be buyin' three of them http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090224/ap_on_..._re/wall_street I hope he's right. That's a pretty bold prediction though... Pete

If it helps make you feel better: When you spend that 500 USD on a toy, you ARE helping a family, a even a village in an impoverished area. Who do you think is making these? And do you really think they would be better off if instead of making these, they just sat around their villages waiting for Habitat for Humanity to show up to build them a new hut? I am by no means attacking charity, and of course everyone decides for themselves how much they want to spend on this hobby, but personally - on a personal level - aka - like if we were having a beer and you said that - I would say: Dude - chill out. Your purchase is putting food on peoples' tables and giving kids an education. And I would wager it's doing so in a much more effective way than - gulp (don't hang me now) ...many charities. Pete

What did Kakizake do to deserve this? Not only is Roy beating him up, but he's got to pilot the chunky monkey? The panel lining and sticker work are great - they give the figure a bulkier feel. I prefer the sleek feel without the panel lining - but this certainly shows how versatile these figures are - fans can dec them up to their hearts content Nice pics. Pete

Minmey's hair is all wrong! Yamato - how could you screw up her hair!? She's got this mullet thing going on her forehead! And the color of the hair is all wrong too! I'm not buying this! It's outrageous! When will Yamato learn and listen to the fans!? 5 million dolars for this piece of crap!? No thanks! I'd rather buy a Gundam! Pete

Thansk guys - and thanks Azreal for the link to the article. I didn't know about Google Apps... will have to..er...google it Pete

I am happy with this - if these are going to be poseable. Poseable Sheryl in Ex-Gear? But... didn't she put the ex-gear on while wearing some skimpy outfit? Pete

Bri: Thank you for pointing me towards Nash and Solow. I will check them out. As you can probably tell, I've been "out of the loop" in terms of what is considered the most relevent in current academia - it's been a while. I am not an economist, nor did I study economics, but I have always had a life long facination and have done a lot of reading, as well as having many colleagues who are economists. Some comments on some of your points: This is something I can better understand and agree with. Public unrest, the growth of demagogy and the risk of a political system slipping towards some form of tyranny are very high during economic crisises and certainly ought to be worked against. However - what always alarms me is that to the extent that a policy makes an economic situation worse and not better, it prolongs the conditions under which social unrest can develop. I think we actually agree. We're just using different terminology. What I call "fractional reserve banking" is precisely what you describe - a situation where the ratio is not 1:1, but instead the reserve is fractional - a fraction of the initial deposit (1:2 or 1:12 or whatever). The 1:12 rule itself is, in my opinion, unhealthy. Finally - the only reason - in my opinion - why a bubble developed on the interbank market and did so in a systemic way was because governments since Brenton Woods have allowed for free floating currencies not bound to gold or silver or anything else beyond the fiat power of central banks. And this is exactly where Monetarists and me part ways. The idea of a central bank independent from politicians is good. But the idea of a central bank independent from politics - in the sense of democratic control and oversight - is bad. The chairman of the Federal reserve often testifies before Congress, but Fed board meeting minutes are never made public, nor is the Fed ever audited like other federal agencies - basically - the entire institution is - for lack of a better term - an oligarchical institution. The Monetarists feared a Central Bank that caters to the inflationary desires of politicians who wanted to buy elections by spending on their voters without raising people's taxes. That was good. But all people are faliable and the principles of limited government need to apply to everyone - even central bankers. But I guess this is why I agree with you when you write: Moving on: It was in one of his NYT op-eds from a few weeks back. I tried to find it so I could give you a link, but I couldn't. He wasn't saying that this was his opinion - he was giving it as a "possible view" that he went on not so much to debunk as to work around to get to his point - which was something else entirely. Sorry for making it so confusing - if I could find the link that would probably help... The reality is that sh#t is not human, has no feelings and is usually skinny compared to a person. I can't agree that by swearing, we make our point stronger. If anything, we merely make our emotional state more pronounced to others. But do you really think that if you called someone a fat piece of sh$t - this would encourage them to try to loose weight and improve their health? Or would the effect be the opposite - would it make them so sad and stressed that they would eat more and isolate themselves from the outside world in order to avoid similar attacks? Finally - it's all a matter of context. I would definitely call my best friend of 10 years a "fat piece of sh#t" and tell him to do something to help himself - why? - because we've been buddies for years, we've experienced a lot together and we can lay it out "like it is." But to use that language with strangers or in a public forum does absolutely no good. It distracts from whatever merit your views might hold and makes people uncomfortable. I'm flattered you agree with some of what I say - but I'd rather you disagreed with everything I have written on economics if only you'd agree to please not swear and understand that other people might feel slighted if you belittle their profession with an ad hoc attack. As for collections and the economy - to sum up and get back on track: I think that the fact that we even HAVE collections is a testimony to the strength of our economies - despite these troubles. If you think about it - these are total "unnecessary" luxuries. Or - at best (which is how I think of them) - they are expressions of appreciation for a certain artistic spirit. It's kind of like having busts of the David and other famous statues in your palace or something... I treat anime and the whole hobby industry as a form of art and culture - a very unique one. Like all art and culture- it has its' crass and kiche sides - but also there is much beauty - technical and aesthetic to it. And it adds happiness to life in many ways. Economic downturns always suck - no matter what the theory and no matter what benefits might follow them. Pete

"Well - at least now there's finally going to be something big and long in the house!" "Worth a lot, supposedly 2 feet long when fully extended, and due to a QC problem it has trouble standing up? Where have I heard that before dear?" "You're such a sweetheart letting me use it as a rack to hang my lingerie on..." Pete Edit: All of those items you are using in your comparisson sell millions of units per year and can take advantage of economies of scale to a much greater extent than something like the Macross. If manufacturers and vendors could sell millions more of them because the demand was there - they'd do it - and they'd do it for less. This of course doesn't factor in stuff like cost of production etc etc etc.

I would love to know what this means As for the speculation - I think we're just throwing out numbers out of curiosity... Pete

Dag. Sweet pic. The VF-1 has to be made into a real life fighter plane at some point. It is just so perfect a design. Pete

Well, here goes: With all due respect, I disagree. The world economy was over-heating. In 1997, the market already attempted a self-correction (a recession) but was stopped by concerted action by the FED and other central banks (you'll remember the Time Magazine cover with "the commitee to save the world" and the three notable people on that cover?). In 2001, there was another attempt at self-correction, but for reasons we all know, there was also the out-break of war which led to even greater spending. In Europe, on the other hand, EU expansion was also tied to greater spending flowing from "Old" Europe into "New" Europe in the form of infrastructure and other types of subsidies meant to "bring old Europe up to speed" "Stimulus" and Keynesian spending and taxing have been the norm for the last 20 years; largely financed by the US selling T-bills to China, Japan and other countries willing to buy them and largely hoping to prop up their export economies by doing so. Every time the market tried to self correct - the Federal Reserve and central bankers would step in to blow more air into the bubble. The current liquidity failure is a normal, healthy reaction to a situation wherein the economy is artificially over-extended. The fall in consumer spending and confidence is also healthy and good. If I am right that capital accumulation leads to growth in the long term - which you yourself admit - then please do tell me when it is ok for people and businesses to start saving? When does the "long term" finally start? Because for the last 20 years we've had "short term" (aka short sighted) policies which boiled down to "spend and inflate." This is the Keynesian explanation of business cycles. I think this explanation is flawed. In this scenario - there is no bottom. But in reality, a depression always bottoms out (unless government intervenes to try to blow more air into the bubble and prevent liquidation of toxic debt and toxic assets). If firms continue to fire people, then unengaged labor eventually becomes plentiful and very cheap - which means that production becomes cheap. If firms and households continue to go bankrupt then real estate becomes very cheap - which means putting it to profitable use becomes possible because costs go down. The Keynesian model seems to presume that this will never happen - that there will never come a point where the deflation will actually spurn economic growth by making goods and services extremely cheap and therefore making investment in profitable ventures more likely. Finally, the Keynesian model seems not to take into account the broken window fallacy. If I break your window, sure - you can argue that it's economically beneficial because it gives the window-maker a job and he then can pay the painter to paint his house, and the painter can shop at the grocers etc etc etc. But the problem here is the opportunity cost - the fact that if I hadn't broken the window, then the resources spent fixing it would have gone elsewhere rather than having to be wasted on recreating something that was already functional. The same goes for stimulus packages. To say that people are prolonging the depression by hording their money and therefore proposing to raise expenditures or create other artificial incentives to get them spending in the hope that this will spur real growth is akin to going around the neighborhood breaking everybody's windows - hoping that it will create a boom in the window-fixing business which will "multiply" and grow the economy. This just isn't how a healthy economy works. Yes; this reminds me of Paul Krugman's contention that in the macro-world, it's really not possible to talk about profit and loss since (in macro terms) all spending done in an economy is also a "gain" - but to me, this is yet another reason why macro-economics as a seperate discipline makes little sense and is pre-occupied with abstractions like "aggregates" far too much. The real problem that you don't seem to touch upon is the fact that we have fractional reserve banking. Banks do NOT "loan savings from people to firms and pay interest over these deposits." It would be great if they did. In reality, however, our fractional reserve system has banks loaning money they DO NOT HAVE, but which the central bank magically creates out of thin air by printing it up or by selling IOUs in the form of Treasury bills and the like. Our banking system - I am sorry to say - is a ponzy scheme. A pyramid scheme - and at the base of the pyramid are government central banks. This problem is compounded by a fiat currency monetary system where governments have a monopoly on the creation of money and can set its' value at whim - or at least try to. The solution is at least to return to a gold standard so that politicians can't play with our money every time they want to win an election and - AT LEAST to bring some democratic control over central banks. I would personally not mind seeing them abolished, but if we have to have them - then couldn't they, as government institutions in democracies at least ...you know - allow audits? Couldn't they be subject to the same democratic controls that other government institutions are subject to? These are some examples of where I do not agree with the Keynesian model. Actually the problem is the government stimulus packages - which are nothing new - governments have been trying to "stimulate" people for decades now, and they've "stimulated" us all into reckles debt and bankrupcy. They should just leave people alone to do as they please with their money. You make it sound as though people wouldn't even want to go on a date with a cute girl unless the government stimulated them. That's not how people function - thankfully It is an even bigger misconception to think that we can speak of "economic theory" as though there was only ONE. The one you are presenting is a form of Keynesianism, modeled after John Maynard Keynes. It is one of the two dominant majority views in modern economics - the other being monetarism in the vein of the Chicago school. I personally am closer in my views to the monetarist view than to the Keynesian view, but also have much respect and fondness for the Austrian school of economics - people like Hayek, Mises, and Rothbard. In any event - there is not just one "economic theory" - and I do think that this crisis has revealed (not for the first time) the short comings and weaknesses of Keynesian economic theory. Pete

This would probably be a good time to crack a bad Gundam Seed joke... sadly, I don't know any. Pete