re: Discussion

Viewing 1 to 2 (2 Total)
re: Discussion
J.P. Manalo
Total Posts: 2

Option two is the best option from my point of view. As I am located in Australia, it is highly unlikely that i would be able to make it to a convention in the United States. (unless someone is willing to fund such a trip, lol) :-) . I am also happy to utilise option three - but I feel that option three would be particularly unfair on the participants who end up having to ship the package overseas.

To minimise postage costs, perhaps those who are located geographically close to each other (relatively) could join together to allow their packages to be sent to them, and then send their packages out to the other groups. As an example to illustrate my point, say there are five LTCs; A-LTC, B-LTC, C-LTC, D-LTC and E-LTC. A and B are located quite close to each other. D and E are located quite close to each other. A and B group themselves together, D and E do likewise. C sends out 2 containers to the address nominated by A and B. C also sends out two containers to the address nominated by group D and E. A and B send a package containing one A container and one B container to the address nominated by C-LTC. A and B also send a package containing two A containers and two B containers to the address nominated by D-LTC and E-LTC. D and E do likewise - sending one D container and one E container in a single package to C-LTC, and one package containing two D containers and two E containers to the address nominated by A-LTC and B-LTC.

Thoughts? Also, has it been decided on what format the actual containers will be? Are we using the 'newer' container format, or the older format?

 

Posted on July 06, 2013 at 10:35 AM
Reply Quote
RailBlox Colin Redner
Total Posts: 57

re: Discussion

The size of the container is also yet to be decided.

Posted on July 06, 2013 at 2:00 PM
Reply Quote

 

Subject

 

Message