After explaining to Newman that the new milennium doesn't actually begin until 2001, Jerry said that he was one year late. Since Newman's party was for Jan. 31, 1999, wasn't he actually one year early? Please let me know if I missed something.
Paul
Question about "The Milennium"
S08E20 The MillenniumliveMay 3, 19972 days later6 posts by 4 posters
❓ Question
Fans debate whether Newman booked his millennium party one year early or late, with disagreement over whether he meant December 31, 1999 or December 31, 2000.
6 posts
Nope, one year late. Newman never specified a date except for the Millennium new year. This would mean Dec. 31, 2000 - Jan. 1 2001, the new year of the Millennium. And everyone knows, the real party everybody wants to go to is for the Dec. 31 1999 - Jan. 1 2000 new years.
Howver, Kramer said that he was gonna keep his stuff at Jerry's for two and a half years. That would make his party on Dec. 31, 1999. Newman never specified a date because it was implied that since it was on the same day as Kramer's, it would be on Dec. 31, 1999. Thus, he is one year EARLY, not late.
[email] (DWuerrfell) wrote:
Wrong. Both Kramer and Newman wanted their parties to be on 12/31/99. However, since Newman booked his for the millenium, he actually booked the place for 12/31/00.
In article , [email] says...
No, they THOUGHT they had the same date. Kramer is one year early (technically). It WAS implied that Newman booked his party for 12/31/2000 - 01/01/2001 because Jerry asked Newman if he booked his party for the true millenium. Newman smugly and proudly said yes, so Newman booked his party for the technically correct millenium end/beginning, but one year late for when most people will celebrate.
[email] (Huckleberry) wrote:
Precisely!! And well said.