Subject:
|
Re: Toys used to be so much better
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Apr 2001 00:41:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
181 times
|
| |
|
|
Maggie Cambron wrote:
> The catch, of course, is that if you want to get your kids (or
> yourself) any of these toys you generally have to be willing to pay a lot. It
> is unfortunate, but unless children have parents (or grandparents) with both
> the means and willingness to purchase these upscale toys, they are probably
> going to be stuck with the cheap mainstream stuff you find at places like TRU
> and Kmart.
I'm curious if anyone knows of any real analysis of the price of toys.
My gut feel is that the quality toys have possibly actually fallen in
real cost (LEGO certainly appears to have done so, looking at the Lugnet
Set Guide, the 10 cents a brick price for a set holds for quite a large
range of years). The thing is that today's kids instead of being excited
by one big present at Christmas and one on their birthday seem to expect
toys in a constant stream. I also remember a lot of junk as a kid, of
course there was also plenty of good stuff. We bought a lot of toys used
at yardsales, fleamarkets, and consignment shops, which is a great way
to get quality toys cheaply (after all, anything which makes it to those
places in a still useable condition is probably of at least decent
quality).
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Toys used to be so much better
|
| (...) It's true. The Barbie I played with as a child had clothes with real buttons and zippers rather than cheap strips of Velcro. My Creepy Crawler maker had molds made of real metal. My Schwinn bicycle with the balloon tires later became trendy as (...) (24 years ago, 8-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
