Brickset ForumShopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
LEGO Pricing Becoming Prohibitive to Collecting?
VaderX
Member Posts: 220
So after watching The Brick Show's NYTF videos I was really disappointed with the new MSRP on most of the sets. I have not made a lot of Lego purchases in the last six months due to lack of discounts. If the pricing trend continues I can see myself exiting the hobby. Does anyone else feel this way? Thoughts?
1
Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 25.5K All Categories
- 2 Announcements
- 2 Current Announcements
- 10.3K General
- 458 Brickset.com articles
- 3K Collecting
- 3.4K Everything else LEGO
- 1.6K Building and Techniques
- 13.2K Shopping
- 1.7K Shopping USA/Canada
- 328 Shopping Elsewhere
- 10.1K Marketplace
- 62 Charity Sales
- 2.1K Brickset
- 70 News
- 13 Ambassador
- 2 Announcements
- 984 Introduce yourself
- 317 The Database
- 395 Brickset.com
- 277 Forum Operation
- 15 FAQs
- 1.1K Other
- 546 Community and Events
- 13 Fairy Bricks
- 253 Photography/Video
Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Comments
#70810 MetalBeard's Sea Cow - Price per piece: 6.202p / 9.120c
#10210 Imperial Flagship - Price per piece: 8.593p / 10.817c
#6243 Brickbeard's Bounty - Price per piece: 10.133p / 16.890c
#4195 Queen Anne's Revenge - Price per piece: 9.414p / 10.968c
#4184 The Black Pearl - Price per piece: 10.571p / 12.437c
I you want to discuss "Prohibitive to Collecting" I think the large number of great sets produced over the past few years is a much larger factor.
Actually aside from UCS the recent Exclusives have been priced fairly according to their price per part.
"But I want it and they've made it too expensive for me to afford" is the reply I'm expecting to hear to that. Well, I want a 5 bedroom house with a 4 acre garden in the middle of the country, but that would be too expensive for me to afford, so I don't buy one, and you don't hear me complaining about it or blaming the owners for setting the price too high.
I might just be in a "can't be bothered" mood at the moment, but I'm starting to get sick of people moaning about the 'increasing price of Lego', apparently unaware that there is such a thing as inflation.
If you really want it so much, find an evening or weekend job to supplement your income, then you'll be able to afford it.
Rant over.
Part of the reason I no longer collect licensed themes is that I know it is prohibitively expensive to meet my own personal standard for "completion" in these themes. There are so many beautiful Star Wars sets today which put my 1999-2005 collection to shame. But I know that no matter how many Star Wars sets I get, there will be sets and figures "missing" from some of the franchise's most iconic scenes. The epic scale of the source material makes recreating its cast of characters and its range of ships incredibly expensive to do, even if you just focus on the most memorable scenes.
In themes like Ninjago, my standard for completion tends to be to get all the main character minifigures with few duplicates, plus a certain selection of models. In 2011, I wanted to ensure I got all the Ninja minifigures and all the dragons (I ended up getting all the skeleton minifigures too, but didn't really bother with the skeleton vehicles unless they got me figs I was missing and had good value for money). In 2012, my emphasis was on getting all five ZX Ninja, all four NRG Ninja, all four of their elemental vehicles, and Epic Dragon Battle. But I skipped most of the spinner sets and a number of other sets — I didn't put forward a concerted effort to get all 17 Serpentine minifigures. All in all, I still end up getting a lot of sets, but I don't shed any tears over the sets I miss, because they're usually ones I know I can do without. I also try to schedule the majority of my purchases to take advantage of sales and deals, so that cuts down on the overall cost.
And in some themes where I'm not invested in the story, I have an even looser definition of "completion". For instance, I plan to get the Legend Beasts from this year's Legends of Chima theme, which I love, but I don't care too much about getting any of the larger playsets. And I buy the CMFs as impulse purchases, not with any goal of completing a collection. I used to get reasonably complete collections back when I was in college and had to go shopping frequently. Nowadays, I tend to get only a few from any given series.
#70810 MetalBeard's Sea Cow - ?g
#10210 Imperial Flagship - 2590g
#6243 Brickbeard's Bounty - 1801g
#4195 Queen Anne's Revenge - 1991g
#4184 The Black Pearl - 1748g
Bottom line, this set is priced consistent with other boats produced over the past few years and in Lego terms is a good value. I actually expected this to be $270-$280.
To answer the OP's original question: pricing is not much the major issue for me, more the sheer proliferation of themes and sets. But then, the extent to which that is prohibitive depends on your perspective on collecting, as @anchir suggests. It may be prohibitive if you are a completist, but not if you are happy to be more selective.
2014 has been good so far, in part due to this self-realization, but perhaps moreso due to the fact that the themes and sets offerred thus far has been the absolute worst in years (in terms of their appeal to me personally), outside of a couple of gems of course.
If reduced to just numbers of pieces, it is worth noting number of 1x1 rounds and technic pins and for every 100 remove £1 from the cost, as for both parts I typically pay 1p on bricklink. That often gives a different picture. Same for small cheese slopes.
And it's nor that I am against small details, I love it. Ot is just that those parts are not 10p per piece parts.
People always want new parts to make their LEGO look 'realistic' and with different colors. That price comes at a cost.
How many tiny pieces are used in sets nowadays whereas before you would have had less part counts in sets 10 years older where the part and color palette was less.
I'd rather have a bit less detail and have my LEGO cost me less, but that is just my theory on this (and full disclosure, I am a child of the 80's where we did not have 3000 part types and colors).
Plus you have inflation, both imagined (LEGO overcharging -IMO- on licensed themes) and real (cost of the materials as oil is not going to go down in price)
Finally the imagined inflation otherwise known as LEGO's blatant money grab on licensed sets, but again people are going to buy at those prices then LEGO will do it. Same reason why TRU has obnoxious RRP on their LEGO. People keep paying.
To be clear, I have no problem with LEGO having to charge more for SW or other licenses, as it is licensed and they have to butter Lucas, now Disney's, bread so to speak. But I have notice that prices are going up with the sets seemingly getting smaller, which is not cool.
The best way to get LEGO to lower their prices is do not buy it. Most times companies only get the idea when their pocketbook takes a hit, Or wait for it to go on sale.
Sure Exclusives do not count to this discount (at least in the US) but then do not buy it and miss out on the set.
and when it comes to cloth vs panel sails, I think it depends on the case. If the sets meant to have sails set up like the ship is sailing, then cloth looks fine, but if it's supposed to be sails folded, I think panels look better.
And minifigures are defiantly a matter of opinion. I'd rather have only 1 or 2 figs a set and more parts in the set then more figs. Including parts, I think I have something like 400 figures plus spare parts.
I think the most overpriced theme in 2014 is City. A 250 piece set shouldn't cost $50. The Star Wars sets look fairly priced in comparison. Especially when you take in consideration the license. Take for example the new AT-AT: At 1,137 pieces I would have expected it to be $130. But at $110 it's less than .10 Pp. Amazon and others will probably have it at $80 during the run-up to the holidays.
That said, it may be fairly priced, but I don't subscribe to the price-per-piece model, for the exact reasons stated by others above. To be fair, it looks like it's probably quite a bit heavier than the Imperial Flagship, but I obviously don't have any data to support that.
My mum said they didn't sell them like that anymore. My uncle apparently mumbled and grumbled about this, wondering why not, as he hated how they're sold these days (lots of different pieces in sets with instructions).
My mum tried to explain the concept of PAB walls to him, but he couldn't quite grasp it.
My uncle is nearing 70. He and my mum played with Lego back in the early 60s. I think my uncle wanted the world of construction toys to have stayed still in the intervening 50 years...
Nice to see a favourable exchange rate too for once: £170:$250 - far better value for the UK than the Simpsons House (£180:$200) and not a million miles off true exchange rate. I wonder why TLG can release 2 comparable sized sets within 2 months of each other, with no currency swing in that time, and see such a huge difference. Another example of selling for what each market will bear?
Have your limit for any set and move on if it is too much. There are some sets i'd buy at RRP without much persuasion and others i'd only touch at 40% off.
(Or should that be 'in the brick'...)
And even if the recent lack of Pirates sets has anything to do with the terms of the PotC licensing agreement, I am incredibly skeptical of whether the LEGO Group would have entered into such a restrictive licensing agreement if they saw a lot of money to be made from non-licensed Pirates sets. Certainly they haven't let their licensing agreements for LotR and SW restrict them from releasing Castle or Space sets, even if non-licensed Space sets did go on hiatus for many years in the early naughts as a deliberate business decision — not as a term of any licensing contract.
And finally, if the success of themes like Ninjago are any indication, the younger crowd are not sticklers for historical accuracy. They like wacky, playful sets that tell them stories that they haven't heard before in historical movies and history books. An awesome futuristic pirate ship will probably be incredibly popular among TFOLs, and its steampunk stylings will probably help boost its popularity within the AFOL community, which I imagine tends to skew slightly nerdier than typical parents.
If anything stands to present sales problems for the Sea Cow, it's that the ship is not incredibly prominent in marketing materials for the LEGO Movie, and that there are not as many scenes on board the ship as there are in, say, Lord Business's Evil Lair. But I still think that LEGO Movie fans (who are, we can assume based on the movie's popularity, an ENORMOUS demographic) will find this set incredibly desirable.
There are so many choices of sets and themes that it is easy to end up buying sets that don't really interest you. It requires a lot of focus and self-discipline to select the sets that are most likely to please you in the long run. Usually we don't know what a set really looks like when built. Or how we will feel once we have built it. We must make our selection decisions based on many other assumptions, such as how much the price and availability will vary over time.
There often is the temptation to buy heavily discounted sets that don't interest us. And the differing desires of some collectors for completing a theme. With so many sets in some themes, this seems like an impossible goal at times. And most of us are limited by how much space we have to store, display and play with our LEGO as well as having to figure out how to pay for it, especially if we have partners and families vying for those discretionary funds.
In the background is the big question of how many toys are enough? Are we so busy collecting, sorting and organizing that we can't spend time enjoying our toys? A friend of mine has made a point of buying few LEGO sets but building some amazing smaller MOC's. He makes the most of his small collection of anyone I know, and seems quite happy with his approach. He is setting a great example for his child of how to enjoy what you have and not worry about what you might have bought.
All of these factors make the choice of sets difficult. Maybe we need to step back and decide which sets and themes are most important to us, and focus on those so that we have the time to build the sets we own and some decent MOC's as well. This could help solve the lack of space problem because many of us seem to have too little room to build anything with so many toys lying all over. That definitely is the case in our large home.
Maybe another solution would be to trade, give away or sell off some of the sets that no longer interest us. The idea of recycling expensive plastic is attractive for many reasons. The problem that keeps us from doing this is the way our preferences change so often leading us to collect sets in another theme. How would we know if we ever want to collect a theme we have but no longer want…some time in the future. Most of us fear getting rid of LEGO that we might one day want again. And with the increasing prices, this is a valid fear.
Anyway that is my two cents worth. Every day I am thankful that I am not buying LEGO for resale and don't have a Bricklink store. That is more pressure than I could bear and still enjoy playing with my toys.
I always seem to use automobiles to make a point, so I guess I will again :-) Lego IS more expensive than your average toy, but there are other toys that are even more expensive, like Power Wheels. Everything seems to get more expensive every year and Lego is no exception. Not everyone can afford a Lamborghini or Ferrari, but there are plenty of cars we can choose from to fit our budget. I remember my first new car I bought with my own money. I wanted all the bells and whistles, but the payment didn't fit my budget, so I got a second job to afford the payment and get the car of my dreams.
If Lego is really important to you, maybe you can find a way to afford the Lego sets you want to buy. I certainly have to plan in order to buy the sets I want, especially with 2 children, but the price point will never keep me from buying Lego :-)
Sure I could save up for other sets, but judging by the 2 sets in my budget that I got plus the fact that I didn't even like the movie, I'm not planning on anymore TLM buying unless there's a good sale(I like a good parts pack or interesting set that's clearance)
the melting room is too small a scene for the price tag. Maybe as 10 buck set, but not as a 13 buck set
And TBH, the CCP is pushing it. I think it might be a "saved by the cool parts and unikitty" case for me.
It's a far greater challenge to deal with my wife's "disapproval" of the hobby than to deal with the cost...
Last year I nearly brought home 100k, after taxes. I live in a state that has an average family income of 45k. I have a modest mortgage payment, both my cars are paid off. I have zero debt other than my mortgage and living costs on a monthly basis. Odds are my situation in life is far more comfortable than most.
By no means am I trying to brag or boast. I generally work 60+ hours a week and have a part time employee. I've worked extremely hard to get to this point in my life. I'm 29 years old and single. My "budget" for "toys" is probably higher in a year than most people make in a year.
My concern is that Lego has inflated on a higher % basis than most other products have. A barrel of oil is still 20% cheaper than it was before the crash of 2008. I'm sure TLG is pushing the envelope to see just how far people will go before they walk away from the brand. It's a common practice to raise prices when business is booming.
The price per set ratio most people use to perceive a 'value' is meaningless to me when 20% of a set is tiny little 1x1's. 1x1's are not worth 10c per part. If this makes you happy, great. The question I asked had nothing to do with moaning. I simple wanted to know if others had seen a diminishing value in the Lego brand in the last two years. Specifically in 2014 sets.
Perhaps I should have asked a more specific question originally. Price per weight in stead of price per part or MSRP.
Thanks to all who responded to my original question.
:)