 | | Re: 10152 Update —Ronald Borchert
|
| | | (...) For all collectors who trusted your words of a "Limited Edition" of this set and bought it by thinking having a real rare and collectible set with the ever last bricks in maersk blue this announcement is a kick in their ass. One more fact not (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Benjamin Medinets
|
| | | | | <snip> (...) <more snippage> I agree somewhat, yes another run does "flood" the market more with sets, however, if you are truly diligent with your MISB sets, I'm sure in 25 to 30 years, a Maersk Sealand will reach a fine price in the after-market, (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Mark de Kock
|
| | | | | 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 (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego) !
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Ronald Borchert
|
| | | | | | 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 (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Mark de Kock
|
| | | | | | | (...) Thanks. I'm glad that this isn't turning into a flame war between afols :-) (...) ... (...) Okay, my mistake. Indeed, you didn't mention that you would loose money and such. It seems we are the same kind of collector: we either enjoy the sets (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm being a little facetious here, but a truth you may want to consider is that some people are really gullible---they'll believe pretty much anything. And if someone is able to wrestle money out of them, hey, more power to them! ;] But (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | | TLC never said that this was a "limited edition" set. What they said is that they used all their maresk blue up to make the first run of however many sets and that once they were gone, al;l the maresk blue would be gone and they wouldnt be able to (...) (20 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Gerhard R. Istok
|
| | | | | | (...) I agree with you Jonathan. Anyone who buys Lego as an investment should look elsewhere to invest. I own 10 copies of 6390 Main Street. Then 20 years later they re-release it. Was I mad? No, TLG never said that old sets would not be (...) (20 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —James Powell
|
| | | | | | (...) Gary, the problem is that from Jake's mouth: Quote: I do know, however, that there will be 5 set limit per customer on this set (Troy,are you listening? J). Why you ask? This set uses …drum roll please… Maersk blue! In fact, the run of this (...) (20 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) Wait... Other than the arguable "limit of 5-per-customer" thing, what Jake said in that quote turned out to be perfectly accurate! - The run that they did used up all of their Maersk blue. It did. True fact. - Litterally no Maersk blue ABS (...) (20 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: 10152 Update —William R. Ward
|
| | | | (...) I think it's incredible that LEGO gives any attention to AFOL's at all. Now you want them to give special attention to the minority who are collectors? You don't ask much, do you? It's great that LEGO has made this set available again. And (...) (20 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Steven D. Weiser
|
| | | | | (...) Amen, And thank you William, Another voice of reason. Let the collectors cry all they want. As I said, Kudos to TLC for taking Mearsk's money and making a profit. Oh, the collectors don't want that happening. WELL TO DAMN BAD. Steven Weiser (20 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Fredrik Nyman
|
| | | | "Bill Ward" <bill@wards.net> wrote in message news:I91w7E.1yL8@lugnet.com... (...) Now you (...) You (...) Why is it incredible? If LEGO was an airline, AFOLs would be the first class and business class frequent flyers, who bring in the most money (...) (20 years ago, 21-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Anders Isaksson
|
| | | | | (...) I sincerely doubt that. I think the AFOLs are much more price-aware that the casual Lego buyer. Even though the posts about FOTW:s (and FOTM:s and FOTY:s) have dwindled here on lugnet, I do believe that the 'typical' AFOL is giving TLC *less* (...) (19 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —Fredrik Nyman
|
| | | | | | Yes, I'm sure AFOLs are more aware of sales and hot deals and pay less per brick than a casual LEGO shopper (exception: those who just pick up 4496's at Wal-Mart; $14.88 for 1000 bricks is hard to beat). On the other hand, AFOLs but orders of (...) (19 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: 10152 Update —William R. Ward
|
| | | | (...) That would be true if the airplane sat 100,000 people and had 1 first class and 2 business class seats. Your numbers are all wrong. (19 years ago, 22-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
| | | | |
