Safari Ltd. - New for 2023

[SerAndrew]

Well, it seems there's been such a discussion after my "it's not good" comment...

First of all, I agree, by saying "It's not good" one should give some arguments. But I honestly see it clearly that this one is NOT good and I didn't expected so strong support by anyone, despite most people would like it (even more being Safari...).

Apart from the cartoonish looking (which is something Safari had always had and is totally acceptable, that's their artistic approach) this figure, and this is something I'm surprised no one has stated, has totally weird proportions.
And when showing comparison pictures with the real animal that's something that one suddendly notices.

Then, being the face the most charismatic feature of this creature, I will ask any figure to have it done properly. And I know that's not easy, but I have said "it's not good", not "how easy it was to make it good".

Also, feet are so disturbing, with such blunt claws. It totally takes me out of the figure. And, yes, it is me giving such importance to such a feature, but it is objectively "not good". I know these are made for children, but my concern si the same.

But what really "bothers" me is the praise to Safari and the despise to other brands. This is something we have discussed maaaaaaaaaaaaaaany times, but it's still a reality. For me this figure is same quality than the Schleich harpy eagle, which is also "not good". And that one is definitely not defended by anyone here.
Besides, I'm not a dino expert but, accepting that Safari is highly accurate (which I don't know), their dinos are completely weird in colours, vague in patterns, orthopedic in the poses and lazy in feet and hands (I know, they are made for children...). But I know the reactions this may bring and this is only my opinion.

Ah, I don't like the Bullyland either and I don't think I should post the Naturalism owl when making reference to it here, but still:

https://www.yoybuy.com/p/iChaGXkBx8KbCfwodtxh.html

 

All of this basically tells me that you @SerAndrew  don't like Safari Ltd. products, which is fine, but then why are you here in this thread? Safari's goals and aesthetic has remained mostly unchanged for decades. They're kid's toys, you said it yourself. They've always blunted the sharp bits and simplified the paint apps. You're coming in here and pointing out blunt claws and I just have to roll my eyes and chuckle, because of course they're blunt! And as a parent, I'm thankful for it. My daughter has already played with this owl and I don't need her pricking her finger or stabbing the bottom of her foot on a kid's toy so that adult collectors will be satisfied with it. These aren't made for you! 

You're bothered by the praise that Safari gets around here. I'm bothered by everyone getting excited by Safari reveals every year just to then be disappointed because Safari does the same thing to their toys that they've ALWAYS done. No, I'm not going to judge this owl on the things you mentioned because it is exactly what I expected from Safari in the first place. What you're doing here is analogous to me going into a Playskool or Playmobile thread and criticizing the stylization and simplification of their toys because they don't appeal to my adult aesthetic. Sound ridiculous? It is. And if you don't like kid toys there are plenty of animal models, sculptures, wood carvings, and other collectables that aren't child safe and made specifically for adults.

Ok, so you entered into the personal field, so I have to (briefly) answer.

I DO like Safari, and I have a lot of their figures. I'm in this thread simply because I want to be, and I don't have to justify that to anyone, this is a free-speech place and I have not said anything offensive to anyone, just saying my opinion about a figure. Safari aesthetic is good, and enjoyable, simply doesn't work for all animal species in my opinion. I'd suggest you to roll your eyes back to their normal position (what a condescending comment!) and read all the other flaws/features I said about the figure, because many people here have just centered in that, but there are others. And, of course, I know these figures are not made for me, but I thought that here, as collectors, we were judging figures as collection pieces: ones will look for realism, others for diversity, but I don't think many of us are looking for actual toys...

[SerAndrew]

Some of the posts in this thread make me wonder why these people even bother to collect animal figures in the first place.

I'm definitely off of this topic now

Really? Really?
People don't like a figure and you are question their right to collect? or their quality as collectors? Or simply, their reasons?

[SerAndrew]

Greenland shark will be awesome!

BTW, I love Safari sharks @Gwangi   

[sbell]

.m. but I don't think many of us are looking for actual toys...

I hate to weigh in... but...this is the Animal TOY Forum (and Blog).

While many of us collect a range depending on focus... it's based off of an appreciation of toys as collectibles in their own right. Even if it means there are design choices that affect the realism.

Personally, I really have no opinions on the owl. I generally don't collect birds.

[suspsy]

Some of the posts in this thread make me wonder why these people even bother to collect animal figures in the first place.

I'm definitely off of this topic now

Really? Really?
People don't like a figure and you are question their right to collect? or their quality as collectors? Or simply, their reasons?

Really, really. I have never seen such a lengthy folderol over a toy owl. And whenever someone begins vehemently insisting that they have a right to free speech or to collect stuff, that just says that they have nothing left to defend their position with.

[Shane]

Wasn't there already high suspicion that there was spamming going on? Added to the fact that it's the highest number of votes, an emotionally charged subject for a couple individuals, and a confirmed bias for SafariLtd...I dunno.

I think accusing people of spamming a poll with all of a whopping 20 votes is more emotionally charged than anything else I've seen in this thread.

Please point to any "high suspicion" of spamming being discussed that originated outside of yourself.

[Gwangi]

Wasn't there already high suspicion that there was spamming going on? Added to the fact that it's the highest number of votes, an emotionally charged subject for a couple individuals, and a confirmed bias for SafariLtd...I dunno.

I think accusing people of spamming a poll with all of a whopping 20 votes is more emotionally charged than anything else I've seen in this thread.

Please point to any "high suspicion" of spamming being discussed that originated outside of yourself.

I mentioned it when the review received two back-to-back 1 star votes shortly after I posted it. Then it continued to generate votes well beyond what is typical on the blog. Most figures get 4-7, maybe 10 votes. This GGO probably has more votes than any other figure on the ATB.

[Shane]

I mentioned it when the review received two back-to-back 1 star votes shortly after I posted it. Then it continued to generate votes well beyond what is typical on the blog. Most figures get 4-7, maybe 10 votes. This GGO probably has more votes than any other figure on the ATB.

Ah, ok. Based on the comment, I assumed he was referring to spamming positive votes.

Still, I don't know that that's "high suspicion". We already know there are at least two people who don't enjoy this figure (though 1 star is a bit harsh, in my opinion).

[Gwangi]

I mentioned it when the review received two back-to-back 1 star votes shortly after I posted it. Then it continued to generate votes well beyond what is typical on the blog. Most figures get 4-7, maybe 10 votes. This GGO probably has more votes than any other figure on the ATB.

Ah, ok. Based on the comment, I assumed he was referring to spamming positive votes.

Still, I don't know that that's "high suspicion". We already know there are at least two people who don't enjoy this figure (though 1 star is a bit harsh, in my opinion).

I found it suspicious, I've never gotten a single 1 star rating on a "fresh" review, let alone two back-to-back like that. And I have 119 reviews on the ATB. And the odds of both people who don't like the figure voting on it so close together seems unlikely. 1 star is harsh and I assume that the votes were cast more as personal jabs at me than at the figure. Far worse figures have gotten better ratings than that.

[Shane]

I found it suspicious, I've never gotten a single 1 star rating on a "fresh" review, let alone two back-to-back like that. And I have 119 reviews on the ATB. And the odds of both people who don't like the figure voting on it so close together seems unlikely. 1 star is harsh and I assume that the votes were cast more as personal jabs at me than at the figure. Far worse figures have gotten better ratings than that.

Fair enough. I can't speak to the spamming either way, but to me, 1 star for this figure seems overly excessive; even the most negative comments here don't read to me as something that merits a 1 star rating. But hey, people are gonna vote how they vote.

[Gwangi]

I found it suspicious, I've never gotten a single 1 star rating on a "fresh" review, let alone two back-to-back like that. And I have 119 reviews on the ATB. And the odds of both people who don't like the figure voting on it so close together seems unlikely. 1 star is harsh and I assume that the votes were cast more as personal jabs at me than at the figure. Far worse figures have gotten better ratings than that.

Fair enough. I can't speak to the spamming either way, but to me, 1 star for this figure seems overly excessive; even the most negative comments here don't read to me as something that merits a 1 star rating. But hey, people are gonna vote how they vote.

I'm not too concerned about it at this point. Whatever was going on it seems to have worked itself out. I think 4 stars is a fair rating for that figure.

[EpicRaptorMan]

Wasn't there already high suspicion that there was spamming going on? Added to the fact that it's the highest number of votes, an emotionally charged subject for a couple individuals, and a confirmed bias for SafariLtd...I dunno.

I think accusing people of spamming a poll with all of a whopping 20 votes is more emotionally charged than anything else I've seen in this thread.

Please point to any "high suspicion" of spamming being discussed that originated outside of yourself.

The person who reviewed it themselves and has been the one going at other user's throats for not liking one toy is the one who said it first.
I came here to voice my first impressions on the toy as did a couple others, people took offense, and now we're nine pages deep into arguing over an owl, accusing one another for spam, gatekeeping, and resorting to ad hominems.

Some of the posts in this thread make me wonder why these people even bother to collect animal figures in the first place.

I'm definitely off of this topic now

Really? Really?
People don't like a figure and you are question their right to collect? or their quality as collectors? Or simply, their reasons?

Really, really. I have never seen such a lengthy folderol over a toy owl. And whenever someone begins vehemently insisting that they have a right to free speech or to collect stuff, that just says that they have nothing left to defend their position with.

Yeah but gatekeeping people from a hobby because of not liking one figure is very toxic.

[stargatedalek]

Questioning someone's intentions is not "gatekeeping" and certainly isn't saying anyone doesn't have a "right" to do anything.

[Gwangi]

The person who reviewed it themselves and has been the one going at other user's throats for not liking one toy is the one who said it first.
I can here to voice my first impressions on the toy as did a couple others, people took offense, and now we're nine pages deep into arguing over an owl, accusing one another for spam, gatekeeping, and resorting to ad hominems.

Yeah man, I already admitted to that and had a whole discussion about it with Shane. You're late to the party but decided to chime in anyway in order to try to get a few more knocks in.

We don't have to still be talking about this owl. I haven't been, I was enjoying the shark talk as off topic as it was and then responded to Shane's query. And now I'm biting my lip and am going to ignore your attempt to bait me into further arguments with your gross misinterpretation of my discussions regarding this owl. It is already clear to the majority here what is happening, so I don't really need to defend myself.

[suspsy]

Right. I don't believe you know the correct definition of gatekeeping. And you may want to consider just letting all this go instead of trying to get the last word in. Again, it's just a toy owl. Certainly not enough to warrant all this mataeology. If you dislike it that intensely, then simply don't buy it.

[EpicRaptorMan]

The person who reviewed it themselves and has been the one going at other user's throats for not liking one toy is the one who said it first.
I can here to voice my first impressions on the toy as did a couple others, people took offense, and now we're nine pages deep into arguing over an owl, accusing one another for spam, gatekeeping, and resorting to ad hominems.

Yeah man, I already admitted to that and had a whole discussion about it with Shane. You're late to the party but decided to chime in anyway in order to try to get a few more knocks in.

I was tagged directly and was responding directly to said comment. I check my notifications first before I read through pages. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Right. I don't believe you know the correct definition of gatekeeping. And you may want to consider just letting all this go instead of trying to get the last word in. Again, it's just a toy owl. Certainly not enough to warrant all this mataeology. If you dislike it that intensely, then simply don't buy it.

Being passively aggressive over someone's right or quality of collecting may not be a word-for-word description of gatekeeping but it seems awfully close. Perhaps hypocritical would be better suited. And I wasn't the only one who had a problem with that comment either.

[suspsy]

None of those words are suited. And since you apparently do not wish to let this trifling matter go, I'll simply be shaking the dust from my shoes now. All the best.

[Shane]

Couple of new images added to some upcoming product pages:

Great Grey Owl: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2281/5369/files/100691_7_1600x1600_crop_center.jpg

Tuatara: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2281/5369/files/102503_9_1600x1600_crop_center.jpg

[Shane]

https://www.safariltd.com/collections/new-releases/products/australian-continent-toob

[JimoAi]

idc if it's a repack but the crocodile aged like fine wine. Any idea of species though?