Carnegie Collection Velociraptor-New for 2015 (?)

[Concavenator]

So,since there's has been a delayed Carnegie figure for 2014,and given thebig quantity of rumours (demoncarnotaur said the figure is not a secret anymore),and more sources,I think Carnegie's coming up with an updated,obviously feathered Velociraptor for next year.What do u think?Also,I've just found this on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_collection#Models
Any thoughts?

[CityRaptor]

I don't consider Wikiepdia a reliable source, but from what we know, Velociraptor is indeed likely.

[Concavenator]

I don't consider Wikiepdia a reliable source, but from what we know, Velociraptor is indeed likely.

Likely to say the least! 

[Roselaar]

I'd be happier if we didn't get one Raptor only. Carnegie adding one figure to its line each year isn't exactly a grand output, especially if it concerns figures that have been done to death already. :-/

[CityRaptor]

IU think we all known which Dinosaur would be a good one to accompany that Velocriraptor: a new Protoceratops!

[Concavenator]

I'd be happier if we didn't get one Raptor only. Carnegie adding one figure to its line each year isn't exactly a grand output, especially if it concerns figures that have been done to death already. :-/

On FB,they come to say there now releasing a figure per year 

[John]

I'd be happier if we didn't get one Raptor only. Carnegie adding one figure to its line each year isn't exactly a grand output, especially if it concerns figures that have been done to death already. :-/

On FB,they come to say there now releasing a figure per year 

Yes,unfortunately it does seem that way.I'd rather see more than one too.But that's life I guess. As for it being a new sculpt of Velociraptor as I've seen rumors of,time will tell if it turns out to be the case.Who knows,they may scrap that one completely for some reason and release something else entirely instead.

[Takama]

I remember back in 2011, it was reveled that there was a New Brachiosaurus and a Exotic Theropod that was said to be released that same year.   The Theropod was never named, but some(Including me) theorized that it was Concavenator. A year later in 2012, it turned out to be true, as the Concavenator was planed for release for the next year.

Knowing this, I think its safe to assume that a new Velociraptor(or Archaeopteryx, Remember there were rumors about that) could be next years new figure.

[John]

I remember back in 2011, it was reveled that there was a New Brachiosaurus and a Exotic Theropod that was said to be released that same year.   The Theropod was never named, but some(Including me) theorized that it was Concavenator. A year later in 2012, it turned out to be true, as the Concavenator was planed for release for the next year.

Knowing this, I think its safe to assume that a new Velociraptor(or Archaeopteryx, Remember there were rumors about that) could be next years new figure.

As I recall,the hints given were that it was a new sculpt of something that has previously appeared in the line,is feathered,and has a wide name recognition to the general public,and that could only be Velociraptor.The average person on the street who is not a prehistoric animal enthusiast is not going to know what an Archaeopteryx is,plus there has not yet been one in the Carnegie line.Maybe those rumors of Archaeopteryx were actually about the one that just turned up from Papo?

[CityRaptor]

Only 1 Carnegie per year? Not good.
As for the Archaeopteryx: Could it be a Wild Safari one?

[SBell]

Only 1 Carnegie per year? Not good.
As for the Archaeopteryx: Could it be a Wild Safari one?

No, because it was baseless rumour about a Carnegie figure. If it were a Safari figure, that would be part of the Wild Safari line. They are different (man, saying it twice in one week--I'm having 3-years-ago flashbacks).

And I'm surprised that this much attention is being given to a Wikipedia article that was updated 8 or so hours ago. Just because everyone has assumed that a second figure has been 'delayed' (at this point in the year, it would have been unveiled even if it was going to be late) doesn't mean that a nameless edit on an open source page has any basis. If there were something else to go on--a Facebook update, a dealer who had heard in an email, a professional involved in the design, anything like that, then perhaps there'd be more reason to speculate, or even discuss. It could still be true, but I'd wait to hear more, until we see pictures of it and then start nitpicking it to pieces
_{I kid because I love...}

Also, maybe the T.rex was the dinosaur they cryptically spoke about? Maybe they chickened (!) out at the last minute with the sculpt and went back to shrink-wrapped lizard? Also, other feather-able options could include Deinonychus and Albertosaurus.

[tyrantqueen]

Yep, Wikipedia is not a reliable reference for these kind of things. Anyone can edit it, and that includes people who just like to make things up.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Still lots of re-sculpts of older pieces..Stego, Allo, Apato..for a start.

[Concavenator]

Yep, Wikipedia is not a reliable reference for these kind of things. Anyone can edit it, and that includes people who just like to make things up.

Yes,I know,but I'm not focusing on Wikipedia.I said it based on what demoncarnotaur told us:"The figure is not a secret anymore,however,I will still not say it "And  Deinonychus or Albertosaurus weren't in our minds.

[Concavenator]

WHAT THE HECK?!?!      :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_collection
...Barney The Dinosaur...

[DinoToyForum]

WHAT THE HECK?!?!      :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_collection
...Barney The Dinosaur...

It was John. Naughty John! 

Again, this shows why Wikipedia is so very unreliable.

[Yutyrannus]

Only 1 Carnegie per year? Not good.
As for the Archaeopteryx: Could it be a Wild Safari one?

No, because it was baseless rumour about a Carnegie figure. If it were a Safari figure, that would be part of the Wild Safari line. They are different (man, saying it twice in one week--I'm having 3-years-ago flashbacks).

And I'm surprised that this much attention is being given to a Wikipedia article that was updated 8 or so hours ago. Just because everyone has assumed that a second figure has been 'delayed' (at this point in the year, it would have been unveiled even if it was going to be late) doesn't mean that a nameless edit on an open source page has any basis. If there were something else to go on--a Facebook update, a dealer who had heard in an email, a professional involved in the design, anything like that, then perhaps there'd be more reason to speculate, or even discuss. It could still be true, but I'd wait to hear more, until we see pictures of it and then start nitpicking it to pieces
_{I kid because I love...}

Also, maybe the T.rex was the dinosaur they cryptically spoke about? Maybe they chickened (!) out at the last minute with the sculpt and went back to shrink-wrapped lizard? Also, other feather-able options could include Deinonychus and Albertosaurus.

No, it isn't. Someone said in the Safari 2014 thread that there were two figures, both were easy picks, and that one of them was of a small and feathered dinosaur.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

WHAT THE HECK?!?!      :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_collection
...Barney The Dinosaur...

It was John. Naughty John! 

Again, this shows why Wikipedia is so very unreliable.

So no Barney? I was already trying to order it too !!

[SBell]

Only 1 Carnegie per year? Not good.
As for the Archaeopteryx: Could it be a Wild Safari one?

No, because it was baseless rumour about a Carnegie figure. If it were a Safari figure, that would be part of the Wild Safari line. They are different (man, saying it twice in one week--I'm having 3-years-ago flashbacks).

And I'm surprised that this much attention is being given to a Wikipedia article that was updated 8 or so hours ago. Just because everyone has assumed that a second figure has been 'delayed' (at this point in the year, it would have been unveiled even if it was going to be late) doesn't mean that a nameless edit on an open source page has any basis. If there were something else to go on--a Facebook update, a dealer who had heard in an email, a professional involved in the design, anything like that, then perhaps there'd be more reason to speculate, or even discuss. It could still be true, but I'd wait to hear more, until we see pictures of it and then start nitpicking it to pieces
_{I kid because I love...}

Also, maybe the T.rex was the dinosaur they cryptically spoke about? Maybe they chickened (!) out at the last minute with the sculpt and went back to shrink-wrapped lizard? Also, other feather-able options could include Deinonychus and Albertosaurus.

No, it isn't. Someone said in the Safari 2014 thread that there were two figures, both were easy picks, and that one of them was of a small and feathered dinosaur.

So one person says something--with no particular evidence--and then someone else updates Wikipedia (possibly based on that post) and so we ascribe it some sort of factual reality now? Has Carnegie, the company that produces it, actually come out and said, in no uncertain terms, that a Velociraptor has been sculpted for 2014 or 2015? If not, then all speculation is just that, regardless of what a person says they know. Unless that person saying it has a an actual, demonstrable way of proving some sort of relationship with the people who would know.

If not, then it's just the Internet being the Internet--statement becomes rumour becomes fact. It might even be true, but we have no way of knowing until something official comes forward.

[postsaurischian]

WHAT THE HECK?!?!      :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_collection
...Barney The Dinosaur...

It was John. Naughty John! 

Again, this shows why Wikipedia is so very unreliable.

So no Barney? I was already trying to order it too !!

I wouldn't be surprised if the next Carnegie model was Barney . Corollary!