 | | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) (leaping out of bed to follow-up on this) Wait a second. The pictures that went in *were* legitimate consumer catalog photos -- from the sheet catalog/brochure someone got in a copy of a Technic set at a store in the UK, and from one other. (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) I think you would be wasting your time there, Todd. I'm sure that TLC employees would rather spend their time by trying to make more money and by further juniorizing those sets and themes that are still decent rather than spending hours or (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) So that's why no-one responded to my WTB request for 6500 :) -- Jonathan Wilson wilsonj@xoommail.com (URL) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) Maybe what we should do is this: I could print a list of all the sets and set numbers we know about, and send that to someone at LEGO, and ask them to send it back with any set numbers crossed out that they felt weren't appropriate to appear (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:FMEzxF.Au8@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) intended (...) leaks (...) lines (...) I'm with the second one completely, although it is fun to watch the rumours and "spy works" around..:-) Actually (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
