 | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) I still think this is a valid observation, helping readers figure out what something is about is a good idea. (...) I am still interested in the answer to this question. (...) Unfortunately, I think you shouldn't expect that, for reasons that (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Gary Quinlan
|
| | | | (...) I was sent an email from somebody not associeated with Lugnet. It was a brickshelf reference about something that was repeatedly talked about by members of the public at our recent public train display. I don't know about you but juggling the (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | I've snipped all the rest away because I agree with it, close enough, and I want to focus on one thing... (...) THe following is my view but I believe it's pretty widely shared. LUGNET is (especially when it's working right) a meritocracy. You get (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Gary Quinlan
|
| | | | | | I've also snipped all the rest away because I agree with it, close enough, and I want to focus on certain things But if I get it right, what your trying to say is that posting in newsgroups etc is easily overlooked and taken for granted so it is (...) (20 years ago, 19-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Peter Parsons
|
| | | | | | (...) Beause it is just getting BORING (...) Cheers Champ well done "Trains Rule" Peter #348 (20 years ago, 19-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —John Riley
|
| | | | (...) Australia is definitely not the unique case, but more likely the typical case. In the US, most consumers can only buy Lego trains online or from S@H. During the holiday shopping season, TRU may carry trains, but other than that, trains are (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | | (...) The big question is, why arent LEGO trains available on the retail shelves? I suspect part of it is because LEGO trains as a rule are expensive. Expensive compared to other LEGO sets (due to the cost of the electrics) And more to the point, (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Is this actually true? I think you need to compare to LGB, Lionel, or quality HO or N gear rather than comparing to Bachman or Tyco stuff (or the equivalent low quality Oz brands). In that case LEGO stuff is cheaper. At least the starter sets (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) Hmm, you need to be careful in including Bachman in the list of cheap trains... Bachman has remade itself and is now a purveyor of reasonable cost high quality trains... I agree though, LEGO trains are of comparable cost to comparable quality (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: PROPOSAL for new track (was Re: New Lego Track! —David Koudys
|
| | | | In lugnet.trains, John Riley wrote: <snip> (...) They are in the new greys--I bought the Harry Potter motorized Hogwarts package--the track that come in the Hogwarts box are the new dark grey. The funny thing is I bought the 'big package' from (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| | | | |
