Subject:
|
Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Mon, 14 Jun 1999 18:31:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
544 times
|
| |
|
|
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 ;)
> Its a lot of work no matter how you slice it, but it seems to me the more
> lots there are, the more organization is needed. I personally don't have
> that organizational skill (ask anyone), but Todd certainly seems to. If you
> have that skill, or can acquire it quickly by trial and error it may not be
> as difficult/tedious as it seems. I mean, Todd does that very well, and
> runs this website (I find it hard to believe sometimes) and does both
> amazingly well, somehow.
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.
The /inv part of lugnet is very cool for verifying completeness. I need to
contribute as I get new sets.
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.
> > 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 :)
> 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. ;)
(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 :)
-Tom McD.
when replying,
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
| Tom McDonald wrote in message ... (...) rumors (...) wasn't (...) No, and not me either, must've been a scalper. (...) of (...) Yeah, probably, imagine how much time he must spend on his PC (or MAC). But perusing his collection couldn't be boring, (...) (25 years ago, 15-Jun-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
| | | Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
| (...) You can stop worrying on that account. They're not. Either that or I'm boring too and don't know it. But boringness is a fault, so that can't be it. :-) (...) Sounds like sour grape flavored spamcakes to me.... (25 years ago, 15-Jun-99, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
| (...) Hey, by the 10 cents per piece rule, thats... a lot. (...) 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 (...) (25 years ago, 12-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
|
|
|
|
