 | | Re: Why the Star Wars license isn't always good for builders
|
|
Hey John, I get what you're saying. Personally, I just don't see the point in buying a toy that you're never going to play with. I bought comics solely on spec in the late 80's for awhile, but I soon felt like I was wasting my money because I wasn't (...) (17 years ago, 8-Sep-08, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the Star Wars license isn't always good for builders
|
|
Wow, That's quite a rant. As a MOC'er, and not a collector, I will say that I agree with you that it is terribly frustrating to find that some pieces are so incredibly expensive or rare, whether due to Star Wars associations or rarity of piece. It (...) (17 years ago, 8-Sep-08, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the Star Wars license isn't always good for builders
|
|
(...) It seems like you are irked at others good fortune and smart buying. I mostly disagree with what you have said. Buying Legos and putting them away for the future does not preclude buying stocks and investing in your 401K. It is not an either (...) (17 years ago, 8-Sep-08, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the Star Wars license isn't always good for builders
|
|
Hey Steve, You are correct in that my main frustration is not knowing at the time that the parts would be useful and then finding out later that they cost far more than what I would deem they're worth because of something that really has no bearing (...) (17 years ago, 8-Sep-08, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the Star Wars license isn't always good for builders
|
|
I have to agree with Adrian on this one. If you'd wanted those parts, you could have bought up on the set, and then sold off the parts you didn't want. I think the parts are expensive because they only appeared once, there were only 3 of them in a (...) (17 years ago, 8-Sep-08, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
|
