 | | Re: SALE PRICES [inc. 6975 fo $35 AUS]
|
|
(...) A horse, a bush, even a snake I think. (...) Hey, I have one already, I just try not to look at it. (Completists will go to any depths...) pete.w (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | RE: SALE PRICES [inc. 6975 fo $35 AUS]
|
|
(...) That's right....They had 39 of them Yesterday ! [I doubt there's that many now however :) ] Also, I've got to agree with the 6150 description, although it won't stop me getting one at that price. Benjamin Whytcross (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: SALE PRICES [inc. 6975 fo $35 AUS]
|
|
(...) That 6150 is one ugly set. Dave Low, you there 6709's $3. pete.w (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Roll Call
|
|
"Rachel Kingston" <kingston@spirit.com.au> wrote in message news:Fv0F1F.F4H@lugnet.com... (...) competant (...) The 1.5 set has a few cool technic parts that 1 hasn't, and is minus a couple of very ordinary parts. It's also got an upgraded (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Standards for LEGO
|
|
"Peter Callaway" <pcallaway@bmcl.com.au> wrote in message news:Fv098q.Lxp@lugnet.com... (...) moving (...) suppliment (...) Argh! I got 4100 and 1170 confused *starts self-flagelation with birch sticks* Bah, I've been studying too much mining (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Standards for LEGO
|
|
(...) What say we at loc.au develop the first lego Structural code, we call it (Australian Lego Stadard) ALS2000. And Yes the first appendix can be Appendix L < Engineering Geek Discussion mode> Hmm See I'd have to disagree with the Lego being akin (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | SALE PRICES [inc. 6975 fo $35 AUS]
|
|
For anyone interested, the sale prices of the folling are a little lower than reported: 6150 $20 6709 $3 4280 $4.99 4211 $4.99 4221 $4.99 6975 $35 [That's right, and they only have 8 so first in :) ] NOTE: these prices are with the 30% taken off, (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm back!
|
|
(...) after. (...) Australia, New Zealand and....Canada ? No...I was just thinking on the fly and wondering what one could term a group that encompasses both Australia and New Zealand could be called. ANZAC is a term used to cover soldiers from both (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm back!
|
|
(...) ANZACLUG? What's the C for? (Not that Canadians wouldn't be welcome, I'm sure--it's just that pesky airfare thing.) best LFB (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Roll Call
|
|
Oops sorry, maybe it was Kerry, well maybe if we are both lucky we will get the RIS for xmas, and then we can help each other out :-) I agree with the Duplo comments, I too think that the tunnel is extremely ugly, but my son and daughter want one (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
