Subject:
|
Re: Yet another CLUELESS about MIB
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.auction
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Feb 2000 17:19:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3140 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.auction, Mike Poindexter wrote:
> I don't know about your interpretation, but I always thought the M in MIB
> was Mint. Mint is a condition, not a level of completeness.
'Mint', in a perfect world, means *perfect*. In a slightly more realistic
world, it means 'in the same condition as it left the factory'. 'Mint' is a
heavily misused and abused term.
(In the eBay world, 'Mint' means 'I really want to sell this item for a high
price')
> The IB is for
> In Box, which is not the same as MISB, a Sealed Box, which implies
> completeness.
'In Box' is redundant. A set cannot be Mint if there's no box.
Likewise, 'Sealed' is redundant. A set cannot be Mint if the seals have been
broken.
> This is an incomplete set MIB - condition Mint, with Box, but
> not complete.
Nope. A set cannot be Mint if it is missing pieces. Period, the end.
It might be that the individual pieces can be accurately described as Mint, but
not the entire set.
> The stickers are not applied, but included. Sounds like MIB - missing one
> piece to me.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, 'missing a piece' means that it
ain't Mint.
> How would you describe a set in mint condition that is missing a few pieces
> and still has the box?
'In great condition, but missing a piece. Piece X, to be exact. All other
pieces are in perfect, mint condition.'
> MIB is not necessarily perfect. MISB would be, with the possible exception
> of a battered (but still sealed) box.
Nope. Mint is perfect. Damaged box, opened box, missing box, missing
instructions, applied stickers, missing pieces, all these things mean the set is
*not* mint.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Yet another CLUELESS about MIB
|
| Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:gbaZOHyTkFg2Xct...4ax.com... (...) a (...) Consulting Websters Dictionary, mint is defined as: adj. not marred or soiled, as if new. That once again defines a level of condition, not (...) (27 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Yet another CLUELESS about MIB
|
| I don't know about your interpretation, but I always thought the M in MIB was Mint. Mint is a condition, not a level of completeness. The IB is for In Box, which is not the same as MISB, a Sealed Box, which implies completeness. This is an (...) (27 years ago, 31-Jan-00, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
  
- 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
|
|
|
|
