Subject:
|
Re: New S@H Catalog Discrepancies :)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 31 Oct 2002 21:49:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
730 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Bruce Hietbrink writes:
> In lugnet.general, David Eaton writes:
>
> > And I also noticed that the Imperial Shuttle (7166, p. 14/15) is labelled
> > "NEW!".
>
> I saw that one as well. They tend to call things "New!" for about a year.*
Yeah, that's why I checked the Spring and Summer catalogs for 2002 as well,
which both have the Imperial Shuttle but don't call it "New!" (since it came
out in... what? 2000? Or was it 2001?) Anyway, long past time for it to be
called "New!".
> I wonder if that "New!" is meant to refer to the Jedi Adventure Kit? Those
> sets were all released in 2002 so they could be called "New!" by the normal
> S@H usage.
Perhaps-- though I woulda figured they'd put that on the right hand side
where they list the title "Jedi Adventure Kit", since where they put it is
next to the regular set descriptions of the smaller sets, which *still*
aren't new IIRC. Dunno though-- at least that would make some semblance of
sense.
> *I do wish they'd say "New" only on those sets that were new since the last
> catalog as it would be easier to figure out what was where.
Yeah, usually I just ingore the "New!" labels. Especially around this time
of year when some of the "New!" sets are about a full year old.
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New S@H Catalog Discrepancies :)
|
| (...) I saw that one as well. They tend to call things "New!" for about a year.* I wonder if that "New!" is meant to refer to the Jedi Adventure Kit? Those sets were all released in 2002 so they could be called "New!" by the normal S@H usage. Bruce (...) (22 years ago, 31-Oct-02, to lugnet.general)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
