 | | Construction Toy Grading Standards Now Live!
|
|
Hey Y'all: I have created a printer friendly, html version of my proposed construction toy grading standards and it is now live online at: (URL) hope that it will prove useful in providing an easier method of appraising and communicating the (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.market.appraisal, lugnet.announce) !
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
This is very useful and I wish it was around a fews months ago when I had problems with a buyer. So with all this being said, if a seal looks like it might have been moved or opened, where would this fit in the categories? A 98 perhaps? Thanks for (...) (23 years ago, 25-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
(...) I think these are an excellent piece of work. Where I think more verbiage might be helpful is in a discussion of what exactly "sealed" means. Sets are sealed in many different ways depending on the technology. One of the more common ways is (...) (23 years ago, 25-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Need value of RED 12V train motor
|
|
Hi, I would like to get estimate how much I could get for a RED 12 volt train motor in USED condition, which has one wheel loose (i suppose glue would fix that), and the small clips on other end of motor broken off. The engine runs fine and is (...) (23 years ago, 25-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
Looks good to me! --Gary jedi*mugin alaskanjedi to many aliases to list in this sig.... richard marchetti <blueofnoon@aol.com> wrote in message news:GLqJo3.IyD@lugnet.com... (...) annoys. (...) it (...) to (...) bit (...) the (...) new (...) only (...) (23 years ago, 25-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
Hey Y'all: I am not the cross-posting genius or anything, so forgive me if this annoys. I just thought that the first time I posted this I might have pigeonholed it a little too much. The original of this post is available here: (URL) I could use (...) (23 years ago, 25-Oct-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
(...) Well, the idea comes from things like the "Comic Book Buyers Guide", "Wizard Magazine", or something like that. So yeah, the idea seems to be to protect the buyers in some way. And while comic books can be worth hundreds of thousands of (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
(...) I personally like the idea of a numeric grading system that also uses the labels you listed such as Very Good, Good, Poor, etc. Overall, your proposal appears easy to use and understand, primarily for buyers. The merchandising of new, unused (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Yup, 'tis fair. Also seems to be accurate, and sufficient, but I have to confess that my eyes started to glaze over about halfway down, and I personally will never use a grading system of that exactitude (either when selling, or (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed Construction Toy Grading Standards
|
|
(...) Any constructive criticism in developing these grading standards is very much appreciated -- so thanks, Chris, for responding at all! The more voices I hear the better I can improve the standards and hopefully arrive at something that many (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.market.appraisal)
|
