Subject:
|
Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:36:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
587 times
|
| |
|
|
Tom McDonald wrote in message ...
> In lugnet.market.theory, John DiRienzo writes:
>
> > In the case of 6011 and 6023, which sell for high prices as sets, they
> > would do nearly as well, possibly better, broken down. I think a record
> > price for 6023 was $175 (with others close to that) but I have heard • rumors
> > of the infamous white hat alone selling for $50 plus.
>
> Ouch! That certainly wasn't me, and I'd be willing to bet a red 2x4 it • wasn't
> Mike Stanley either ;)
No, and not me either, must've been a scalper.
> Yes, Todd has an amazing patience and thought-out methodology. One concern • of
> mine is that I'll finally get to meet the Lehman's and they'll be
> super-boring. I doubt it, but it makes for stupid daydreaming.
Yeah, probably, imagine how much time he must spend on his PC (or MAC).
But perusing his collection couldn't be boring, if he'd let you.
> The /inv part of lugnet is very cool for verifying completeness. I need to
> contribute as I get new sets.
I should do that, too. Maybe I will send him ALL the Castle inventories,
except for this blasted 1960 set.
> Not that I'm implying you did, but don't underestimate the process of • verifying
> a set's completeness, vs doing a parts auction, especially when it comes to
> 300-400 (or more) piece sets. I'd hate to have to go through and verify a • 4559
> Cargo Railway for completeness (somehow I wouldn't mind doing it as much • for a
> Metroliner though :) - it's 710 pcs.
Actually, if I had that opportunity, I would probably build each of the
sets, for old time's sake, and enjoying the ones I had missed, and to see
all the sets set up in a cool display. But, I guess time and space are
factors.
> > > That's one reason I haven't dived headlong into this further. The other • being
> > > the lack of good sales fodder and good garage sales around here.
>
> To clarify: I meant around my house :)
Thanks, I thought there was plenty of fodder around here. Looks like
there will continue to be for awhile.
> > Tom, please! I am afraid Lugnet would be so bland if you were so busy
> > with all this stuff.
>
> Thanks, that's quite a compliment. But Sproaticus and James Brown (no, not • that
> one, the other one) are both very funny. I didn't mention John Neal's name • here
> because he's almost funny and that's not the same. ;)
Yah, John has made me smile (and you did mention his name), but not
actually laugh - of course most the time I don't know what he is talking
about.
> (If I didn't mention your name in that list, it's probably because I don't
> think you're funny and that you need a wit-transplant. But the real reason
> might be that you have way more lego bricks than me because you spend more • time
> doing that stuff :)
And, damn it, I realize I am not funny. Can you perform the wit-transplant
via the internet? I hold that what I lack in wit, I make up in Lego, for
whatever thats worth.
> -Tom McD.
> when replying,
--
Have fun!
John ( ig88888888@stlnet.com ) remove NOSPAM:
John's Lego Web Trade Page:
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego/index.htm
MOC,CA[cl,bf,cr,fm,bk+++ wp,dm,rk,df++ fk-]++++(6035)
SW,TR,old(456)+++ TO++ PI,SP+ DU--
#+++++ S LS¼ Hy? M+ A+++ LM-- IC12m
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
| (...) That makes two of us. If you include John, it might make three. ;) (...) But that's a *very* important thing. It's the first step in that 12-step program known as, "I could have my own TV show-aholics". You'd be surprised how many people in (...) (25 years ago, 15-Jun-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
| | | Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
| John DiRienzo (jdiri14897@email.msn.com) wrote: : >The /inv part of lugnet is very cool for verifying completeness. I need to : >contribute as I get new sets. : I should do that, too. Maybe I will send him ALL the Castle inventories, : except for (...) (25 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
| (...) Ouch! That certainly wasn't me, and I'd be willing to bet a red 2x4 it wasn't Mike Stanley either ;) (...) Yes, Todd has an amazing patience and thought-out methodology. One concern of mine is that I'll finally get to meet the Lehman's and (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jun-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
19 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
|
|
|
|
