Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
Posted

Solid market trends and history generally prevail in my book (ie. 'theme') - from an investing viewpoint. Playability doesn't really rate highly when I look at and evaluate a set - afterall, I doubt many AFOL's actually play with their set, other than to admire it and appreciate it as a part of their collection. I try to establish whether a set will 'display' well, contains 'hidden gems' (openings, places for minifigures, subtle yet important design details, etc), or offers a 'rarity' like a particular figure or part. The generally perfect example is the UCS Star Wars. It does all of the above with ease, and rarely fails. But, even the UCS is prone to weakeness. Take the SSD (10221) and look at the underside - a failure of note. How can such an iconic ship not display the same style of undertones as the ISD. Go figure?!?!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...