I'd be a liar if I said I didn't covet this JVC Boombox, but it's beyond my price range.
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
« Men Between Age 20-50 Generally Do Not Read Fiction And When They Do It's About Alienation | Main | Put on Your Big Boy Pants: There's a JVC RC-M90JW8 Boombox for Sale: $1,500 »
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ||||||
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
30 | 31 |
Beyond your price range and mine, and I expect most people's, but that certainly is a beautiful-looking radio.
What I appreciate most is that it is not stereo. I always thought that the old generic boombox design was dishonest in that most did not have adequate distance between the speakers for true stereo separation. Plus stereo only works for FM.
But $1300? And the seller lists the auction number of a similar set that sold for $2,000 on the first bid. For a radio with a cassette recorder that only records and plays in mono? Are these prices even for real?
Posted by: Mike W | July 29, 2009 at 06:17 PM
I agree. On the other hand, a boombox recently sold for over $500 on a bidding war.
Posted by: Jeffrey McMahon | July 29, 2009 at 07:34 PM
This boombox it´s beatiful but having 1,3000 dollars in my pocket is more beatiful !
Posted by: Huesby | July 30, 2009 at 03:44 PM