Subject:
|
re: 2001 set info
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Aug 2000 22:08:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
489 times
|
| |
|
|
You guys are all saying that the new atst is going to suck because it is only
$9.99, but a at-st at that price isn't even feasible. Could it be that there
was a cut off at the begining of the price? I'm only a kid so I might be like
totally wrong on this subject but that just might be the case
cheers
Geordan
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: 2001 set info
|
| (...) Yeah. I really can't imagine an AT-ST for $10. You try making a AT-ST out of the Flash Speeder.... =\ -- Andrew, Agent 0007 (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: 2001 set info
|
| (...) Hey, or maybe it was a misplaced decimal? UCS AT-ST for $99.99, anyone? (I'm not mocking you, by the way, in fact, I say you're most likely right or pretty close to it.) Greg "There was a guy... an underwater guy who controlled the sea... got (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: 2001 set info
|
| (...) I have one reason why Lego may get the ATST under $10.00. Can you say Throwbot. Those are only $6.00 and would be not too much under ATST size, especially since the Lego one will be smallist anyway. Tim (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sir Alec Guiness
|
| (...) passed to (gulp) our generation (meaning those of us who can only dimly remember a time without Star Wars), this has to be it. Sadly, LFB (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
8 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
|
|
|
|
