>>11647052Heres something you don't want to understand, because then your little fantasy would be ruined: your sources are anecdotal.
You need to come up with 50-100 major news sources for what you believe in to actually be relevant, because none of your sources even state any numbers for what's being sold out. Shit like those videos only show a SINGLE store talking about how shit is selling out, when there's TENS OF THOUSANDS of stores out there.
Your sample size is too tiny to actually be anything but flyover opinions
This is why i want to see a national news source, because if they report it, it's likely a majority consensus that shit was hard to find and selling out everywhere.
I mean, that fucking AP video has not even 9 people looking over the shelves, in no rush, just looking over the products. The toy owner or manager is talking about how they RESTOCK the shelves overnight, because the products aren't actually hard to get.
Same with the TRU video, with like 6 people lined up, with a bunch of grandpas calmly picking and choosing, because there's plenty of stock for everyone.
Whereas Tickle Me Elmo and N64 videos have people fighting and running around to get a chance for the limited stock (because even if they had a thousand units that's limited due to demand). They're lucky to even get a fucking RAIN CHECK.
The difference between what's actually hard to get because demand oustrips supply and Power Rangers is very easy to understand, so why don't you?
I think a single forum that has 80 people posting on it is more reliable than the Washington Post or New York Times, because those hundred people come from a hundred different places and if they're anything like us, actually going to 5-10 different stores every week or two and reporting what they see. But of course, the internet wasn't that popular back in 1994, so dumb people like yourself love to point at fluff pieces on a newspapers you can't even read, because of your rose tinted memories.
