Review: 21332 The Globe

Impressive inner construction but as a whole I would not buy it at half the price, just impossible to make it look good using Lego.

I want it! When is it due for release?

I like the idea of the set, but the deal-breaker for me is the obvious gaps where the plates don't meet ... and unfortunately, that's just a necessary part of making the globe this size. Add to that the price-tag (which in Australia is going to be eye-watering), and although I do appreciate the set, I think I'll pass.

What I really like are the colours, which are much nicer than the colours on the map that was released last year.

@Bricklestick said:
"
Re Europe, I think it’s a little short-sighted to complain about the depiction. After all, Europe really is very small, and I’d far rather it be depicted accurately than have it be inflated in size as per historic maps, with all the associated self-importance.

From a practical perspective, I think the quarter circle 1x1 tile above Spain could simply be rotated to be depict France, with the point representing Brittany."

In the Idea Submission Europe was better represented, in the official relese is a mess.

Overall interesting, but not something I’m planning to make room for. However… I am far more interested in trying some of those building techniques on my Mos Eisley MOC - I’ve been trying figure out how to do proper domes for far too long…!

@Huw said:
"Ok, yes, it seems it's not a mistake, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_ (continent), although I am sure it was not called that when I went to school!"

Plate tectonics was not scientifically validated until the mid to late 60s (which I believe is the basis for 'Australia' being the official continent name) and it can take decades for school books and teacher knowledge to catch up with academia so I would guess the majority of AFOLs were probably introduced to the area by one of the other terms.

A green stud between France and Great Britain would make this part look better.

As a rule, Lego does not do "organic" shapes well. This is unavoidable unless Lego starts producing extremely large globe shapes with pre-printed continents on them...which would essentially be a globe.

Really like the updates to the reviews.

This looks like a fun build, definitely on my wishlist. This, the ship in a bottle and typewriter all feel like they'd make a nice desktop display.

Thanks for the review! I think it looks great and I’m looking forward to building it!

Keeping my fingers crossed for a UCS Death Star release! ;-)

Amazing set, looks fantastic. Not £175 fantastic however.
Liking the new review pros and cons box @huw thank you :)

@CapnRex101 said:
" @benredstar said:
" @CapnRex101 If I was building this as a MOC I know that the final stage of construction when you have to complete the sphere would be a nightmare. The force required to click the last section in place when you can't get your hand inside to press from the other side would risk smashing the whole sphere to bits! How do they overcome this?"

I was concerned about that too, but the angled panels push quite easily into the equatorial band using 2L Technic axles. There is also little risk of shattering the whole sphere because the angled panels are attached at both ends, so they feel secure."

mmm interesting. If the whole thing is sturdy enough to survive falling off a shelf that's a bit of a win for LEGO. When I heard this had passed review I remember thinking it was going to be hard to pull off with sufficient quality.

Looks pretty good, but I think the "wooden" construction is too chunky and makes the globe quite imbalanced.
However, I don't buy any display models, so it's not for me anyway.

And btw, I really dislike the new summary boxes at the beginning of a review. This is really the last place where I would expect/want such a summary.
Otherwise, great review and photography as always!

@MisterBrickster said:
" @Huw said:
"Ok, yes, it seems it's not a mistake, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_ (continent), although I am sure it was not called that when I went to school!"
You wait until someone has to decide whether or not Pluto gets a spot on the inevitable model of the solar system!"

Yes it get's a spot, otherwise my planet mnemonic doesn't work :p

One side of me wants it because I love globes and LEGO. I also like the model. I'm not at all bothered by the gaps and I understand this is a representation of a globe, not a globe.

BUT, I don't really dig display sets. I like play sets with minifigs, etc. And, I really don't like repetition. I did not enjoy building 75191, so I don't figure I'll like building that one as well.

So I might be getting it someday, but not day one.

@alegrispa said:
"Can't wait to build a Dreath Star with this technique!

Also, does the "The Earth" plaque seem entirely redundant to anyone else?
Like, no sh*t dude, I know my home when I see it!"

I was thinking that for ALL plaques.

@monkyby87 I think that typewriter and ship in a bottle don't have display value either.

Typewriter I was ok with, you know, being in the technology age and all you don't see them that much. But "Globe", really? And "fairly accurate" at that... I can get an accurate one , with illumination for 30 bucks. $199.99 is madness.

@skadebo said:
"Reading these comments feels like folks don't understand what Lego is. It's bricks, there will be gaps. It's a model, it won't replicate the real thing. "

Even our reviewer was off-put by the site of studs in the "wood."

A shame that a company invested in the ethos 'Rebuild the World' should make such a literal and joyless interpretation of the place we all live. The Bonsai Tree 10281 had pink frogs and inspired different versions using all sorts of things instead of leaves – where's the playful knowing wink in this set?

@LukeSkywalker said:
"I think this is magnificent display piece and LEGO-ified representation of the Earth. Those people complaining about it not accurately representing individual countries are missing the point. If you want an accurate globe with capital cities etc, you should probably invest in an actual globe. This is a LEGO model, you kinda have to expect it to look the way it does. I’m much happier with this display with approximate representations of land masses done with actual LEGO pieces than say a globe covered in printed plaques of the various countries/continents (or god forbid, stickers)."

I don't pretend "an accurate globe with capital cities etc" but i pretend a globe where France and Italy are present and not missed at all.
I know that my objection was because i'm italian, but when i see the europe rappresentation in the original idea submission, well i can't undertand the mess in this official release.

sunflowers and some star wars sets availableT

Nice set, but not my cup of tea, especially with the price tag. But still better than the world map. Now I guess this reminds people that they want a new, non-play set death star (The completed Death Star I).

"PIECES 2585
RRP £174.99 / $199.99 / 199.99€
PRICE PER PIECE 6.8p / 7.7c / 7.7c"

Yeah, that's actually good value.

Essex is a continent and I don't see a plaque for it.

I was torn at first about buying it. But the more I think about it, I think I will buy it so I can modify it to represent Land of Ooo . That should be interesting.

Looks nice (althoug not accurate) but way too expensive.
Sad to see that almost every Ideas-set ends up in the higher price bracket.

I like the idea and think that it would be fun to show that model.
But would it be worth the price?
There are 2000+ parts that could be taken as justification. But many of them might be inside, e.g. not seen.

My main interest is Technic and therefore it is hard to get an impression of the models actual size. (For justification of its price: €200 is a steep barrier.)

Thought: Would a 'Waterworld' version of the globe need that inner pair of wheels?

This looks really, really good! I love the addition of the tires as counterweights to ensure that the globe still spins!

...However I most definitely didn't receive a (non-LEGO) globe for Christmas, so... might have to sit this one out. Still awesome though!

That support just bothers the heck out of me. Too big? Too chunky? I dunno but I don't like it. Definitely waaaaay too expensive, won't be buying this one.

I'm glad this has nice colors and isn't colored like 31203 World Map. If only that used these colors...

I really want to like this, and the design is very cleverly done, but just not sure this time.
I usually like the inanimate objects such as Typrewriter, Shoe etc, but this I have a few problems with.
The accuracy is the biggest issue, as it’s the single use for a globe. There’s no clever mechanism like the typewriter to show, or the slightly crazy idea of the shoe.
It could have been an interesting and fun educational model to build, even for a school. This seems to have been an ideal opportunity for Lego to do an AR app with it. Scan the globe and it brings up additional maps and details on the area viewed etc.

It also seems somewhat repetitive to build and not especially difficult either. It is good value for price per piece though!
I really hope a planetarium model gets done as that would be great and needs less detail on the landmasses too.

How many people look at this representation of Europe and recognise it? Not me anyway.

It is a pity because you can see that a massive amount of effort went into the original set design but it just doesn’t work.

When I see all the great sets that get rejected after hitting the 10 votes and this gets approved?

Great review of a pretty good set!

Overall, I love how it looks (despite some inevitable flaws) , and I especially like that it's all prints. As it should be in a €200 18+ display set. And it seems like a pretty good size, bigger would obviously mean more detail (and maybe even a single 1x1 plate for my country!), but it would make it rather unwieldy.

The price seems a bit steep and surely higher than I would have expected, but considering the piece count, the number of unique prints and also the gold lacquered gold pieces, it doesn't seem unreasonable. At least not by (rather expensive) Lego standards, that is. But at least the quality is also there, they didn't really cut any corners like they too often do.

I did however also watch the review by Tiago, and when he puts all of the segments next to each other I can't help but feel this will be a somewhat tedious building experience. But that probably won't stop me from buying this....

@Huw said:
"As someone mentioned in the comments to the press release, the continent that encompasses Australia and surrounding islands has not been named correctly, which is an unfortunate mistake."

I have also noticed that the US territory of Puerto Rico was left out but, in that area it needed a bigger map.

I disagree with two of your "plusses". I don't feel it is an excellent display piece nor do I feel it has remarkably accurate geography. This is a pass at any price.

"X... but in LEGO" may make for an interesting design challenge but, as here, it doesn't make for an interesting set.

@Huw said:
"As someone mentioned in the comments to the press release, the continent that encompasses Australia and surrounding islands has not been named correctly, which is an unfortunate mistake."

The Lego designer followed the Risk boardgamr map.

Next year expecting the version for "Flat Earthers". :D

I guess I was holding out hope for Forma-like “skins” for the continents.... oh well.... that’s $200 saved for me. Happy for those that love it!!!

@Bricklunch said:
"Follow Australia's own example and just call it "The Wasteland" like they do in Mad Max. I presume that's their official stance."

You'd be surprised.

Man, they really did miss an opportunity to include a second set of instructions for the flat-earth peeps - would have been a hilarious inclusion that could have been a genuinely fun model of it's own.

@Huw said:
"As someone mentioned in the comments to the press release, the continent that encompasses Australia and surrounding islands has not been named correctly, which is an unfortunate mistake."

Not how I was taught, Oceania was a region not a continent, but people keep changing things... looking at you Pluto !

Nevermind Australia, they missed Zealandia!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zealandia

Doesn’t interest me at all. But may steal the plans to build my own Death Star.

The continent of Australia is fine.

After all, we have 'Europe' even though it is geographically attached to 'Asia'. Technically the whole Northern Hemisphere (roughly) should be called Eurasia but we use the much better and more useful terms of Europe and Asia. The same logic should be applied to Australia.

This is a lovely set, but the complete failure of Europe and the horrid price turn me off it. I'm sure Italy could have been achieved a lot better. Africa is almost perfect so I think with some more effort Europe could have been achieved more effectively.

Recently Lego has been focusing on rather unnecessary features to the detriment of important ones, for example the glow in the dark labels instead of getting Europe at least somewhat correct, or having a Pythagorean triangle for the Boutique Hotel to the detriment of more rooms. ($319.99 AU for a hotel with only 3 rooms is a bit of a rip off)

@capnrex101 If only there was a photo with a Porg or some other animal so I could get a better sense of scale… lol. I’m really just kidding. Thanks for the great review.

As an Ideas set I applaud the design and execution, even if it has flaws. For that reason I used to buy every CUSOO/IDEAS set released, just out of admiration.

But now LEGO has turned AFOLism into a commercial ‘thing’ I think more and more: that is great for someone else. I don’t need to prove LEGO can be used to build anything. And just focus on the things I like to see in LEGO form: buildings (incl Modulars) and vehicles (incl. SW).

For a globe, I have one I can actually use and I love it. On display it looks great. How can a LEGO one on display ever compete?

Anyhow, hope TLG keep innovating to stay healthy and sustain their business so we can keep enjoying LEGO. And if it takes mishaps like this (my opinion) so that in the meantime they learn also what their focus needs to be, then so be it.

Ps back in the eighties when I was at school we were taught Australia is a country and is also the name of the continent that also includes New Zealand. But nowadays they teach Oceania as the name of the continent, undoubtably for political reasons. Thinking Australasia is a continent is just as silly as thinking Eurasia is a continent. They are just regions which can be what anyone wants to make them (often business’ trying to divide commercial areas).

@Huw said:
"As someone mentioned in the comments to the press release, the continent that encompasses Australia and surrounding islands has not been named correctly, which is an unfortunate mistake."

Not sure what you were taught, Australia is the correct name for the continent. Unless you want to get technical and use Sahul? Or perhaps are you forgetting everything you know to do with Australia to avoid remembering the absolute drubbing we handed out to your cricket team?

@Altair1970 said:
"I do not understand how this review can be so positive."

Probably because it can be taken apart easily.

I still don’t understand why this is even a LEGO set. This one will sit pretty on a table but not something to educate anyone with.

@MrMonkey said:
"Awesome review! This set is a must-buy for me. The only question is if I wait for a discount or buy it for the full price..."

I think there’s a pretty easy answer to that question!…. Unless you have a limitless supply of money?

I'm in the "always learned the continent is called Australia and Oceania was just a defined region, and had no idea it was different anywhere else in the world until this set was revealed" camp. All my Aussie friends said the same. The world is a fascinating place.

@Huw said:
"Ok, yes, it seems it's not a mistake, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_ (continent), although I am sure it was not called that when I went to school!"

It is comparable to the UK, GB, England thingy: Australia as a continent excludes new-zealand. Oceania/Austalasia includes them (and neighbouring islands)...

"After all, we have 'Europe' even though it is geographically attached to 'Asia'. Technically the whole Northern Hemisphere (roughly) should be called Eurasia but we use the much better and more useful terms of Europe and Asia. The same logic should be applied to Australia."

That makes no sense,...Africa is also attached to Asia, so why not call it Eurafrasia then?

@Huw:
The issue stems from how we define “continent”. The strict geographical definition is a large (not specifically defined) continuous landmass, its continental shelf, and any islands present on that shelf. Canals and rivers are ignored. By that definition, there are four continents, being Australia, Afro-Eurasia, the Americas, and Antarctica. Since the geography most of your readers learned originated in Europe, of course they ignored the thousands of miles of mountains that sorta divide Europe from Asia (which, to be fair, were a fairly significant barrier in the days before air travel), but all of the SW Pacific got ignored in favor of the only large landmass they could find.

We have a similar geographic goof where I live. Scientifically speaking, there are only four Great Lakes, as there’s no change in water level in the Straits of Mackinac (which is about five miles wide), so Lake Michigan and Lake Huron are considered by the scientific community to be one giant lake (Huron-Michigan), which would make it the largest freshwater lake by volume, by surface area, and coastline. Lake Michigan is already the most dangerous, so adding Huron doesn’t change that ranking. I’m not sure how it impacts standings on lighthouses.

Is the " are you going to get it" mini poll at the end of some reviews a thing of the past as I liked it and thought it a nice barometer of interest in a set especially sets like this.

Edit. I have only just noticed the reveal article and it is on the end of that.

@xboxtravis7992:
Does that mean we can kick California out of North America? Anyways, I hadn’t heard that explanation for the distinction, but I guess it explains the North/Central/South division as well, since there’s a small plate between Mexico and South America. And it makes “Europe” as a continent look even less defensible. India is often termed a “subcontinent” because of size. Less commonly, the Arabian Peninsula is too.

@lost_scotsman:
Anyone who excludes Pluto as a planet because it “doesn’t clear its orbit” has never looked at Pluto’s orbit compared to the solar plane from the side. 99.9999999% of it is completely clear.

@lippidp:
Those are knots. Uniformly sized and spaced knots, in a repeating grid pattern. And the wood has been sandblasted, which is why they stick out like that.

@Banners:
Oh, I expect that now that people have the instructions available, you’ll be seeing mods pop up. DS is almost certain to happen. DSII, too, if someone can figure out how to cheat around the giant gaps where the frame would need to go. The moon, or some of the Solar planets are other possibilities, as are various sci-fi locales. Pangaea might be interesting, especially as a side-by-side pair. You could build it in solid black and pepper it with GitD 1x1 round plates to represent constellations...or little chunks of rock to represent Alderaan (too soon?).

@TheOtherMike:
No camera? Maybe a flower bouquet or potted plant?

@chefkaspa:
I’m pretty sure Waterworld, ignoring chemistry and physics, had all the ice on the planet melt, _EXPAND_ to a much larger volume, fill all the planet until just the tip of Mount Everest was visible, and pushed the atmosphere up to a higher altitude so people could hang out in skimpy outfits without flash-freezing. Represent it by buying a second copy and adding a second layer of blue, with one 1x1 round plate where Everest is located. Balance it out with another 1x1 round plate added exactly opposite to the interior so you don’t throw the entire planet off-kilter and risk snapping the axis every time you spin the globe.

@CapnRex101:
So, I’m not sure if people are aware of this, but I hear it’s possible to “modify” the design, with pieces you buy later, or pull from your collection. Maybe if someone told them this was possible, they might not blow off buying a copy because of a tiny handful of missing/misplaced parts?

@Brickchap:
The “whole northern hemisphere”? So, North America should be part of Eurasia? Somehow I feel this is headed to the point where there’s just two continents: Australia and Not-Australia.

Ironic that the price is out of this world... I'll see myself out.

The various modifications suggested by @PurpleDave suddenly made this set much more appealing to me, but given the price is as much as several other sets I want much more, I'm afraid I still won't be buying it. Oh, well.

@kyrodes said:
" @Huw said:
"Ok, yes, it seems it's not a mistake, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_ (continent), although I am sure it was not called that when I went to school!"

The definition of what a Continent is varies a lot and different places have a different number of continents and names depending on the convention and model.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent"

Yes, it's really surprising me how many people in this thread think continents are a real, meaningful thing. For the record, distinct oceans are also arbitrary nonsense.
On a related note, I'm also surprised TLG included
continent and ocean name prints, as they are a well-known localization issue. They are very nicely executed, though.

@sklamb:
Yeah, extending the base so it’s large enough to include Pluto (with a sign that says “Pluto: Definitely a Planet”) probably would break the bank. Plus you’d never be able to close your front door again.

@Huw said:
"Ok, yes, it seems it's not a mistake, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_ (continent), although I am sure it was not called that when I went to school!"

What name did you learn in school? For me in the USA and I feel that I can speak for all is "Australia", one of the 7 continents. I'm not sure what students are learning these days. I have seen Australia constitute a part referred to as "Oceania" .

*PS:* Is there a way for me to see my posts from article comments? In the Forum, you can view the list of topics and comments.

Lego just put up a page with various Afol mods, encouraging people to customize the set. Maybe some of our skilled commenters will try their hands at improving Europe! https://www.lego.com/en-us/categories/adults-welcome/article/how-to-personalize-your-lego-ideas-the-globe

@Suboptimal said:
" @kyrodes said:
" @Huw said:
"Ok, yes, it seems it's not a mistake, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_ (continent), although I am sure it was not called that when I went to school!"

The definition of what a Continent is varies a lot and different places have a different number of continents and names depending on the convention and model.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent"

Yes, it's really surprising me how many people in this thread think continents are a real, meaningful thing. For the record, distinct oceans are also arbitrary nonsense.
On a related note, I'm also surprised TLG included
continent and ocean name prints, as they are a well-known localization issue. They are very nicely executed, though."
When each syllabus around the world teaches continents to indeed be "real and meaningful", with no indication whatsoever (at least in my case) that the definition varies from place to place let alone that it amounts to nothing, can you really blame anyone but the education system? Of course it'd have to take hindsight and/or something like this thread for everyone to realize that everything was just made up after all.

@Suboptimal:
Continents are real things, though the dividing line between “really small continent” and “really big island” is one that has never been clearly defined, largely due to the unlikelihood of having a new landmass pop up that falls somewhere between Australia and Greenland in size.

They are also meaningful things, for the same reason that telephone area codes and postal zip codes are meaningful. They serve to limit the scope of geography that you have to pay attention to when searching for the location of a particular place. We do this with states, provinces, counties, boroughs, districts, and various other purely political divisions as well, though these usually include some form of government to oversee them. But in many countries, you’re expected to include at least one of these in the address when mailing a letter or package, not because any affiliated governing body needs to be involved in the shipment, but because various people will need to know where to forward it so it’ll arrive at the listed address.

I wrote something more elaborate, but it seems to have failed to post. I've substituted very brief responses.

@LegoSonicBoy said:
"When each syllabus around the world teaches continents to indeed be "real and meaningful", with no indication whatsoever (at least in my case) that the definition varies from place to place let alone that it amounts to nothing, can you really blame anyone but the education system? Of course it'd have to take hindsight and/or something like this thread for everyone to realize that everything was just made up after all."
Surprise isn't blame.

@PurpleDave said:
" @Suboptimal:
Continents are real things, though the dividing line between “really small continent” and “really big island” is one that has never been clearly defined, largely due to the unlikelihood of having a new landmass pop up that falls somewhere between Australia and Greenland in size.

They are also meaningful things, for the same reason that telephone area codes and postal zip codes are meaningful. They serve to limit the scope of geography that you have to pay attention to when searching for the location of a particular place. We do this with states, provinces, counties, boroughs, districts, and various other purely political divisions as well, though these usually include some form of government to oversee them. But in many countries, you’re expected to include at least one of these in the address when mailing a letter or package, not because any affiliated governing body needs to be involved in the shipment, but because various people will need to know where to forward it so it’ll arrive at the listed address."

The map is not the territory. Continents are a way to describe real places, but they are neither conceptually coherent nor particularly useful.
Continents are not better than other terms for regions.
As an aside, neither ZIP codes nor area codes are, in general, areas.

When I was younger (not so very much younger, either) Area Codes in the USA were very definitely "areas" just as much as States were; the map was printed in the front of every phone book, making it very easy to decide what area code served a particular area. They were a lot more regular in shape than the average voting district, and much less changeable. It has only been in the last few decades that the increase in US phone numbers has forced the telephone system to have some overlaid area codes, meaning that it is now necessary where I live to dial the area code even for a local phone call. Of course, the simultaneous rise of cell phones has done a lot to blur the difference between "local" and "long distance," and to modify the entire price structure of making a call.

Meanwhile, ZIP codes continue to signify specific areas, and can appear on maps along with city, county, and state lines. They are still often used as a proxy for information about your probable socioeconomic status, consumer preferences, etc.

@sklamb said:
"When I was younger (not so very much younger, either) Area Codes in the USA were very definitely "areas" just as much as States were; the map was printed in the front of every phone book, making it very easy to decide what area code served a particular area. They were a lot more regular in shape than the average voting district, and much less changeable. It has only been in the last few decades that the increase in US phone numbers has forced the telephone system to have some overlaid area codes, meaning that it is now necessary where I live to dial the area code even for a local phone call. Of course, the simultaneous rise of cell phones has done a lot to blur the difference between "local" and "long distance," and to modify the entire price structure of making a call.

Meanwhile, ZIP codes continue to signify specific areas, and can appear on maps along with city, county, and state lines. They are still often used as a proxy for information about your probable socioeconomic status, consumer preferences, etc."

In addition to overlays, partial overlays, and the like, there are purpose area codes, e.g. 800.

ZIP codes are not areas. They are closer to groups of routes or sometimes postal facilities. Some can be mapped relatively reasonably; others correspond to PO boxes, and there are also unique ZIP codes that map to organizations who route them internally. ZIP Code Tabulation Areas are areas, but they are not the same thing; they exist precisely because ZIP codes aren't areas.

@Suboptimal:
The page timed out. After you load or refresh the page, you have a time limit to complete your post, or it just clears the text field (and still doesn’t reset the clock). I don’t know what the precise time limit is, but Huw did recently increase it. I think it used to be either 30 or 60 minutes.

The rest of this pertains specifically to the US, though Canada is definitely included in the section on area codes.

Anyways, if you actually research them, ZIP codes are most definitely areas. Specifically, “ZIP” stands for “Zone Improvement Plan”. The first three digits identify the regional sorting facility where the mail will be processed, and the next two digits identify the local post office that’s serviced by that facility. The “+4” was an attempt to further divide this area into smaller chunks, from individual P.O. Boxes, to whole city blocks. It didn’t really take off with the public, but the USPS still uses that and more behind the scenes. Where we sometimes still see a 9-digit ZIP+4, they use an 11-digit code. The last two identify where to deliver at that address. This 11-digit number is encoded in that weird barcode they print across the bottom of every envelope as it’s processed through a sorting facility.

Because ZIP codes are geographically locked, they do still seem to abide by the old rules, which assigned the lowest 5-digit numbers to Eastern US, with the numbers growing progressively larger as you moved west. Phone area codes used to operate by a similar rule, but the passing of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the advent of the mobile phone, and a growing population kinda muddied the waters.

When the area code system was first put in place, all phones were rotary dial. The system recognized which number you dialed by how long the pulse was. 1 was the shortest, and 0 was longest. Dialing low numbers took less time, so large populations got preferential treatment when it came time to assign area codes. None of them start with 1, because that’s how you dial out of your area code (1+) or country (11+). They don’t ever end in “x11” either, because those are reserved for informational assistance. NYC got 212, which was the fastest area code you could dial. 213 (SoCal) and 312 (Metro Chicago) were next. Detroit (313), D/FW Texas (214), and Metro Pittsburgh (412) were the next tier, and so on.

Over time, populations grew, and as deactivated numbers were allowed to lie fallow for a set period of time before being reassigned, places like NYC ran out of numbers, and they had to split the area into two area codes (currently there are three just for Manhattan Island, three for the rest of NYC, and a seventh for the entire city). States ended up splitting area codes as well. My home town was in 616, which covered the western half of the lower peninsula of Michigan (the “mitten”), plus the entire UP. Then the UP split off, then the western half got split N/S, and finally 616 got reduced to just the small area encompassing Grand Rapids, Grand Haven, and Holland.

Geographically, most of the US consists of places that are served by a single area code. Only major population centers have overlay plans where two or more area codes served the same territory. Identification with a single area code can be so strong that NYC almost passed a law in 1984 to prevent splitting the 212 area code (Seinfeld even has an episode where Elaine gets assigned one of the newer area codes, and people keep asking her what city she lives in). If you want a 212 number in Manhattan, you will generally have to buy it from the previous assigned user. But if you look up any map of area codes, they are clearly blocked out by geographic divisions, hence the “area” in “area code”.

@PurpleDave said:
" @Suboptimal:
The page timed out. After you load or refresh the page, you have a time limit to complete your post, or it just clears the text field (and still doesn’t reset the clock). I don’t know what the precise time limit is, but Huw did recently increase it. I think it used to be either 30 or 60 minutes."

Thank you; that's helpful information.

@PurpleDave said:
"Anyways, if you actually research them, ZIP codes are most definitely areas."

I appreciate the elaborate, thoughtful, and almost entirely correct response. However, ZIP codes are still not areas. Many are easily matched to areas, but the same is true of lots of things that aren't areas, e.g. companies. More importantly, not all ZIP codes correspond to any area at all.

Sources:
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/guidance/geo-areas/zctas.html
§4.23 of https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/technical-documentation/complete-technical-documentation/tiger-geo-line.html

Also, 12345, 20252, 88888, and private Presidential ZIP codes, exist. Business-only and uninhabited ZIP codes exist but don't generally have corresponding ZCTAs.

@PurpleDave said:
"Phone area codes"

Again, this is a great response with a lot of information. However, despite the name, many non-geographic area codes exist. This is another example of conflating most and all.

Specifically, area codes 500, 521-525, 533, 544, 555, 566, 577, 588, 600, 622, 700, 710, 800, 833, 844, 855, 866, 867, 888, and 900 exist.

@Suboptimal:
ZIP Codes are used for delivery of physical mail. Every ZIP Code corresponds with a specific geographic location, even if it’s exclusive to a PO Box that may not physically exist. By that I mean there are certain high-volume mail recipients who probably don’t have a standard PO Box that they can unlock in the lobby of their local post office. Instead, there’s probably a collection point at their local sorting facility, and it’s either forwarded to a physical address that’s not published, or someone comes to collect the accumulated bins of mail on a regular basis. They may not appear on any map that you’re likely to see (unless you’re a postal worker), but regardless of what person (real or fictional) you address it to, the ZIP Code is going to determine where it ends up.

For the Area Codes, 18 of the 24 numbers you listed are in a format where the second and third digits are the same (800, 888, etc). These are referred to as an ERC, or Easily Recognized Code. They were purposefully kept out of the regular Area Code pool, and I’m not sure if they are really classified as “area codes”, or if that’s just how we understand them.

710 (along with 510, 610, 810, and 910, none of which you listed) was set up as part of the TWX (Typewriter Exchange Service), which was a predecessor to fax machines. It used the same phone connection system as POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) (yes, seriously), but the two were purposefully not allowed to place calls to each other. I don’t know how the five TWX codes were organized, but they apparently operated worldwide. All TWX codes were officially retired by 1992, but 710 was claimed by the US government for GETS (Government Emergency Telephone Service), probably because it was not something people would normally dial into. Currently, there is only one known phone number on that area code, which requires a 12-digit passcode to access. So, technically, that currently corresponds to a geographic area by default. Somewhere, there’s a desk with a phone on it that can be reached via that number. Western Union has revived the TWX as Telex II, but they now use a 6-digit number system where the first number corresponds to the nearest local exchange, so it exists outside of the defined scope of the NANP.

All of the 5xx numbers on your list are part of the PCS (personal communications services) group. The first to go online was 500, which has since been retired (a lot of businesses blocked dialing to it because it worked much like the 900 block...and was sometimes used for similar purpose) and currently sits in reserve (don’t know why you have it on your list). 511 (not on your list) is one of the x11 Service Codes, and not available for use, but the other 5xx ERC numbers have all been used to capacity. 521-525, and 526 (just went online a year ago next Friday) are part of the 52x block, which (aside from 520) is reserved for PCS. Several other 5xx block numbers are also being held in reserve, but they’ve been burning through one number per year since 522 was first assigned in 2016. 5xx accounts for half of your list, even if you swap out 500 for 526.

I have no idea what PCS is about, other than that AT&T pushed early users to switch to 800 numbers once they stopped restricting their usage to Fortune 500 companies (which in turn led to 888 being opened up as the second toll-free ERC block).

I figured 867 would have something to do with Tommy Tutone, but it turns out it’s actually the very-much-geographic area code assigned to the three Canadian Territories. Geographically, it is the largest area code under the NANP (it’s also the least populated, with only about 100k users) and was put into use in 1997 so the territories could stop mooching off of nearby area codes. I’m not sure why you listed that one.

Regardless, barring 867 (which _is_ a true area code), I would consider everything on your list to be designated exceptions rather than disproof.

@PurpleDave:

I guess we have a different understanding of what an area is in this context. I will clarify that I mean something that, at any given time, is a statically defined set of fixed points. A human being wouldn't qualify.

I would also say that the large organization collection point ZIPs are not located at the collection point any more than my ZIP code is located at the sorting center or local post office just because all the mail in it passes through there. If there's a useful sense in which some ZIP codes correspond to areas, surely it's based on their final delivery addresses.

867 was a typo of 877, which I believe is in use as a toll-free area code. I regret the error.

The only number in 710 can, given that secret code, apparently be used to dial any other number with special priority rules (possibly only within the United States or the areas under the NANP). That's not really a phone on a desk.

Yes, they are formally area codes; see https://nationalnanpa.com/enas/nonGeoNpaServiceReport.do for authoritative verification.

I admit I take an absolute stance on "A is B" type statements. I feel this more closely matches the natural use of language. What you take as exceptions I take as counterexamples. It seems likely to me this is our actual point of dispute.

Thank you for the interesting reply.

I like this Earth set, but LEGO can create specific LEGO parts to cover the whole a little more.
Cause LEGO is al square or blocks, circle blocks are rare. The price is kinda expensive cause there are issues with this set. Is there going to be a Moon, Mars, ... as well?

@Suboptimal :
Ah, yes, 877 makes more sense. Yes, it’s been used as a toll-free overlay since 1998. Toll-Free started with just 800, then expanded to 888, 877, 866, 855, 844, and 833, in that order. 822 is probably next to go live. After that, the entire 88x block (aside from 888, which is already in use) is reserved for future Toll-Free expansion. Oddly, 899, which fits the ERC format they’re currently working through, is reserved for future expansion of geographic area codes. And 811 is restricted as part of the Service Code block of x11 numbers (notable for being fast to dial on rotary phones).

But you’re still off on ZIP Codes. Let’s pick on arguably the most famous one. If the first digit is 9, it tells you that’s located in one of the three west coast states, Alaska, or Hawaii. First two of 90 narrows it down to California. First three digits of 902 identify the specific sorting facility where that mail will be processed. Each sorting facility has a range of 100 5-digit ZIP Codes assigned to it, from xxx00 to xxx99. Local post offices will have one of those assigned to them, so 90210 is the post office for Beverly Hills.

The +4 that nobody really even pays attention to anymore (the automated sorting system is better at figuring that out than we humans proved to be) are geographically defined. They may be a city block, an apartment building, a single address, or even a small metal box located in a post office lobby, but they represent physical delivery locations. The extra two digits that we never see (but which are encoded into the barcode printed on every envelope during sorting) correspond with a physical location at that address, so a substitute carrier doesn’t have to hunt around the entire building for a mailbox.

Most 5-digit numbers are assigned to local post offices. PO Boxes have +4 that corresponds to their PO Box number, so each ZIP Code has a maximum of 10k PO Boxes that it can serve. Some use up that allotment are a geographically confined to the lobby of a post office, while a second ZIP Code will be used to handle local delivery (e.g. Alexandria, VA uses 22313 for PO Box delivery including USPTO, and 22314 for carrier routes assigned to the same post office).

A few are assigned to a single entity. The IRS receives so much mail that they have a unique ZIP Code, but that still corresponds with a physical location (IRS headquarters). Walmart also has a unique ZIP Code that delivers to their world headquarters (again, a physical location). Some colleges have assigned ZIP Codes, and others have ZIP Codes that are treated as general purpose but geographically confined to their campuses.

ZIP Codes are part of the USPS format, so only used for addresses they deliver to (other countries have their own postal code systems). Three foreign nations are incorporated into the USPS delivery system by Compact of Free Association (Micronesia, Marshall Islands, and Palau). Official communications with diplomatic embassies are routed through a Washington DC ZIP Code, with a +4 that corresponds to the specific diplomatic pouch assigned to that embassy. Mail addressed in such a manner would be sorted in DC, delivered to a government building where it would be loaded into a locked diplomatic pouch for overseas delivery, and sent by diplomatic courier to the assigned embassy, all of which are considered to be US soil (just as all foreign embassies in the US are considered to be home soil for the countries they represent).

Military bases are also incorporated into the ZIP Code system (and also considered to be US soil, with a few quirky exceptions resulting from sharing military bases with foreign nations). But this brings up the sole non-geographic exception I can think of to the ZIP Code system, which is the US Navy. The Army, Air Force, and Coast Guard all have land-based locations where mail can be delivered consistently. The Navy has ships that travel the oceans for months at a time, get sent all over the world, and need mail to be delivered in a timely manner. I have no idea how they’re incorporated into the USPS ZIP Code system, except that they are. Each vessel has a home port, but I’ve never sent mail to someone who was stationed on a ship, so I have no idea how it’s addressed, or if it’s required to bounce through home port before being forwarded to the ship.