Subject:
|
Re: large sets / small sets
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 May 1999 13:45:43 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
c576653@cclabs.missouri.edu*SayNoToSpam*
|
Viewed:
|
1365 times
|
| |
|
|
John DiRienzo wrote:
>
> set sizes, which makes it fun to buy, play with and collect. In ten years a
> new generation will be saying those sets from the seventies sure are
> archaic, and these new sets sure suck, I wish it was 1999 again!
I can hear it now..."Dude, did you see that in AucZilla VL, Old Man
Lehman uncovered a bunch of city-center sets and he has those cool old
2x10x2 double sloped arch thingies with the 2x6 on top? It's sooooo
uncool that TLG stopped making those big awsome pieces where you could
just snap six or seven together and have the Taj Mahal. Those sure were
the good old days..."
--
Sincerely,
Christopher L. Weeks
central Missouri, USA
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: large sets / small sets
|
| Oh boy, Todd and I at it again! Seems no matter where I post... there's Todd - like he owns the place or somethin! Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) Twin (...) Okie dokie. Let me support big sets some more. First, it doesn't seem to me that (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.general)
|
56 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
