 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Matt Hein writes:
>
> I tried to not to be too much of a "me too" person around Lugnet, but I
> thought I would have to throw in my agrument here too. On Beneke's opinion.
>
> When I was younger, I never had a chance to get my hands on a Battrax,
> Yellow Castle or even a Black Falcon's fortress. Instead, the only sets I
> had a chance to get were exploriens, unitron and royal knights, not the best
> items, but still great sets. However, I never got a chance to get my hands
> on the
> real sets" such as classic castle and space sets.
>
> I never collected Lego for value, no way! I took up the brick solely because
> I wanted to build something awesome. But what Beneke wrote about turning
> Legends into "faked up sets" I firmly disagree with. If you re-release a
> set, most likely you will see changes (i.g old parts thet no longer can be made)
> Even though some parts have changed, and the sets are now a current product,
> does that really change the set? I think not!
>
> Legends were made for a reason, they were popular sets with a wide appeal to
> a variety of collectors, adult and kid alike. Even though the cash value of
> the set has been lost, think of it in a good term, now Lego fans of all ages
> can get an equal chance to get their hands on something they couldn't get
> before. Lego isn't about value. Adult collectors shouldn't be the only
> people to get thair hands on a particular set. Unfortunately, some people
> seem to think so.
> Remember, Lego wasn't made to be stacked brick by brick locked in a safe.
> Lego was meant to be built.
>
> Anyway, J. Irvine's opinion pretty much sums it up, but I thought I had
> to add my two cents to this deal. You see, well...that's my nature...
>
> Just my two brickz...
>
> <<_Matt Hein_>>
> Lugnet No. 1112
Amen!
I have to agree. And I, for one, have grown up with UFO, town JR, and
Insectoids, and believe me, I ain't happy with it!
:-)
Lego Legends are supposed to be that: legends. I think that if you don't
count a set as a legend just because its equally avaliable and dosn't go for
absurdly high prices, you are doing something wrong.
John Kruer
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, John Henry Kruer writes:
> Amen!
>
> I have to agree. And I, for one, have grown up with UFO, town JR, and
> Insectoids, and believe me, I ain't happy with it!
>
> :-)
Yeah. I was stuck with excuses for space for quite a while until Star Wars
hit the market. (and I joined Lugnet)
> Lego Legends are supposed to be that: legends. I think that if you don't
> count a set as a legend just because its equally avaliable and dosn't go for
> absurdly high prices, you are doing something wrong.
Yeah. For months I wanted a Guarded Inn before it became a legend, and there
was *no way* I would blow one hundred dollars on a 6067. Luckily, that model
is now available at the cheap cost of $25. I think Lego should definitely
release ALL of the candidates for Legend (although I *know* they won't in
the first place). I just say that they should make a set universally
available. That's all I ask as a consumer. :)
Now, I'm stuck between voting for a battrax or a yellow castle, OR a BFF.
It's giving me a headache, but oh well, I *really* need a battrax, then I'll
be helfway BT1 complete!
Just my two brickz...
<<_Matt Hein_>>
Lugnet No. 1112
> John Kruer
| | | | | | |
