Subject:
|
Re: Multiple numbers for same set (was: 10152 Update)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:29:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
8075 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
| |
At the risk of belaboring a point, renumbering a set is something collectors
want, not necessarily something LEGO would want or need. In fact, adding a
new number for the identical set would probably be counterproductive in the
long run for the company.
|
Well I guess they have an example they can use as a test case now:
As far as I know, there is no difference between these sets except the number. I
don’t own 8438 so can’t say definitively.
ROSCO
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Multiple numbers for same set
|
| (...) There are definatly differences between the origonal set (the 8460) and the re-releases (the 8431\8438). For example, the 8460 used 2 of part Technic Connector Toggle Joint Toothed whereas the 8431 uses a single Technic Angle Connector #6 for (...) (19 years ago, 20-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) That's a fair assertion. Being somebody who collects sets to build them, I don't have the mindset that "limited quantities" = "collectible". Again, though, at the time that was written, that was accurate. (...) At the risk of belaboring a (...) (19 years ago, 20-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
|
257 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
