|
|
 | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| In lugnet.lego, Mark Neumann wrote: (snip) (...) In general, you're right. But not in this case. (...) ...and so do most of the other AFOLs I know, for sure. (...) plus, what tools TLC uses to sell those specific sets we're talking about. (...) (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | comme toujours
|
| (...) Good news would be if the second run was only for Maersk and not for selling them again. What do you now mean with "limited"? Each limited set, TLC sold in the last years, got a second, third..... production run. Can you imagine that most of (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| In lugnet.lego, Mark de Kock wrote: Hi! Your last sentence first: (...) You don't have to excuse yourself for that, it's your right if you feel like that. But I wonder about your comment: (...) I indeed didn't talk about making money and it's not my (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| In lugnet.lego, Ronald Borchert wrote: [snip] (...) When I first read your comment, I was shocked. Then awed, then disgusted. Your reaction is exactly the kind that makes me sick. Buying up large quantities of a "rare" set just to make money on them (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego) !
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Hi, very poor try of irony, Larry, you normaly write better ones ;-) To make a serious theme out of this: It's for sure a good deal for TLC when Mearsk wanted them to re-release the ship. But that they now decided to make the same model again (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
|
