EFX Millennium Falcoln

I have. When someone states something that simply isn't true (EFX takes full payment, exclusively, and sits on it) I'm going to speak to that. Why don't you chime in on the Anovos threads, where we know that sort of nonsense goes on?

Qui, As far as Anovos is concerned, Ive never ordered anything from them, nor added any reviews of their stuff to my site (you can check) - so have no first-hand experience of what is going on there. I did contact them a couple of years ago (and since) to try and work something out so I could get hold of one of their helmets to review - but to be frank I don't think they are interested.

As it stands I don't even own a single Anovos product (although am in process of buying a 2nd hand FO Trooper from a fellow RPF'er) - but never even touched an Anovos product. So I hardly feel I can comment on their current poor service - even if it is as trashy as you suggest.

However, as far as EFX, I HAVE (as have a number of other people) PAID 100% FULL up-front over 2 years ago. All we get are the kind of excuses the very worst prop-makers used to give a decade ago. Frankly its gone on so long its actually quite pathetic.

We all know that if they really wanted to, they COULD resolve the Scout Trooper issue and start shipping. Hell they COULD ship the "free" PCR Vader helmets to International customers - but clearly they either cant be bothered or cant afford to do it. Either way its really poor form and understandably people have questioned the ethics of selling something new - while ignoring their responsibilities.

Cheers

Jez
 
I have. When someone states something that simply isn't true (EFX takes full payment, exclusively, and sits on it) I'm going to speak to that. Why don't you chime in on the Anovos threads, where we know that sort of nonsense goes on?

EFX is taking payment in full or in part for this piece as non-refundable payments. You want to pretend that because I missed the partial payment option on their webpage that it somehow hand-waves away the point and makes it all "LIES LIES DAMNABLE LIES AND SLANDER!!!!" you're defending this poor, defenseless company from, but that's what they're doing, Qui. You're welcome to put your money where you want, obviously, but between 'dumb' and 'dumberer', I'll take 'dumberer' if they've got a proven track record of responding to customers in a timely fashion; but for one recent example, have a track record of making refunds in a timely fashion when requested; take criticism and make changes to their process in response to customer concerns instead of sitting in the house with all the lights off and the curtains drawn when customers want to speak to them; and actually seem to be ACCELERATING the pace on what they're managing to get out the door, not falling further behind behind a mountain of 'oh sure, right, we'll see a studio scale Stardestroyer from them ANY DAY now". Their obvious misteps over the last two years clearly means 'dumberer' will bear watching closely before putting up more cash with them, but ONE of these companies seems to be going in the right direction, while the other looks more and more like it's stalling for time and circling the bowl.

As far as size, look at the screws in the base - I'm not even sure that 13" wouldn't be pushing it. As EFX doesn't seem to be too bothered about releasing any details on this piece, even though they'd like money now please, who knows? All I can see is that the paint is not great on their sample, the sidewall details seem to be kinda chunky modules that plug into the trenches, and the details on the cockpit exterior are soft. Anyhoo, after following this thing since the beginning, based on the sample pics I'm not interested, so I'm done.
 
Doesn't the De Agostini 32" replica work out to like a hundred and forty bucks more? This looks like a Disney diecast with more lighting and less metal. I'm also trying to wrap my head around what an "accurate approximate" is exactly.

And be studio scale, and have electronics and has a huge aftermarket upgrade following and, and, and.
 
This thread is more than 7 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top