Is the price per brick misleading?

jack_bricks

Hi,

I would like to share my thoughts with you. Because I often read how some emphasize a low price per brick is good. When after you look into the set and find 100-200 1x1 slopes, tiles, plates,.... of a total of maybe 250-400 pieces.

There a lots of factors for a good value, but would a price per 100g for example not state the same as the price piece?

You even could do x = (price per piece) + ( price per gram)

CapnRex101

Price per piece is a good system if you are looking for a vague and simple means of defining the value of a set. However, one should take into account that the pieces in some sets might all be very small, and therefore the value may not be as good as the price per piece ratio suggests.

I think weight is a better defining factor as you suggested, although even that can be misleading as that does not take into account new moulds and prints, which of course make a set more expensive.

No system is perfect, but we can make the accuracy greater with each additional step we put in.

jack_bricks

CapnRex101 said:

Price per piece is a good system if you are looking for a vague and simple means of defining the value of a set.

Yes I understand, but is it not given a little to much attention. As I think, even Lego tries more and more to keep the price per piece low - by pouring in tons of tiny pieces.

CapnRex101 said:

I think weight is a better defining factor as you suggested, although even that can be misleading as that does not take into account new moulds and prints, which of course make a set more expensive

You mentioned it, that is why i think it's best to combine both as I stated above. Though there is still the issue of the box and instructions weight and do mini figures count as pieces?

KingDave

There are of course sets with very large (and/or expensive) individual parts that can distort the price per brick starts in the other direction. Boats, large base plates, light/sound bricks, trains etc can all make a set seem very expensive if you just look at the price per brick.

I would agree that the price per 100g could maybe be a fairer (better?) way to do a comparison. It would even work well with sets that have electronic elements as they are generally heavier that just plastic parts. No system is perfect, but the price per part can throw up some strange results.

Shib

I think price per piece is only useful for those new to Lego because it only gives a very rough idea of value.
I don't think TLG are deliberately trying to deceive people with the price per piece as here in the UK the piece count isn't generally printed on the box, so the only people likely to get an idea of price per piece are those that research the sets, so flooding with cheese slopes etc won't help raise the perceived value that much.

I've found that my only perception of value has changed a lot since I started collecting. Initially I was only interested in minifigures so all the value of a set was in the figures. Once I started building and MOCing I started to look more at the pieces and what they are in terms of the value. There are certain colour palettes I put more value to because I like to use them more. Personal pricing is the only effective measure of value, because everyone will be looking for something different in the sets.

akunthita

Price per piece is a quick way to judge if a set is a good deal. Like when you are out and about and run into a LEGO sale or something. It is something to measure from. If the price per piece is well below the norm and you like the set, you might as well buy it.

Price per pound is a better way to measure value when you are buying assorted lots at garage-sales and such. You don't know exactly what you are getting, or if there are any complete sets in the lot, but if the price is not more than $5 a pound, you won't be overpaying and there is even room for profit if you decide to resell some or all of it. Please note that I'm in the USA, so prices/weight ratios in other countries will be different.

ACWWGal2011

I use the PPP number as a jumping point for buying but I also have started looking a lot closer for instances of part padding where they put in a lot of itty bitty studs or cheese to make the PPP look good. If I was into the stud and cheese scene, that'd be one thing but i'm not.

the only times I remember using more then about 4 cheese or studs in a moc is 1) for the coin dozer that has about 24 cheese for the part where the winning coin area is plus I used some studs as filler so I could place needed parts on top and 2) for 3 or 4 GBA/GB/GBC game holders I made and needed a plate thickness to put on top of the bricks to get the spacing to work.

DJ_Pon3

Does anyone else think that Lego unnecessarily put smaller parts in to inflate the piece count? I've lost count of the amount of times I've used 2 smaller plates rather than the next size up to do the same job.

dmcc0

I always assumed the part padding was more to do with using up stock of more common parts rather than upping the part count. eg the factory must churn out 1000's of studs so if you can get away with using two studs instead of a 2x1 plate for example then they'd do that as long as it's not a visible part of the set. Same goes for the seeming random coloured bricks or plates sometimes used at the start of a build that don't really match the rest of the set.

Bumblepants

DJ_Pon3 said:

Does anyone else think that Lego unnecessarily put smaller parts in to inflate the piece count? I've lost count of the amount of times I've used 2 smaller plates rather than the next size up to do the same job.

It saves money/time for them to put multiples of the same part in a set rather than one of this and one of that. So for example, if the model needs a 2x3 yellow plate and a yellow 2x6 plate, It is quite likely they will choose to use three 2x3 plates into the set as long as stability is not compromised.

RomanticWarrior

10-15 years ago, PPP was probably pretty relevant. Today, there are so many specialized pieces and minifigure parts that it is not overly useful anymore.

GallardoLU

RomanticWarrior said:

10-15 years ago, PPP was probably pretty relevant. Today, there are so many specialized pieces and minifigure parts that it is not overly useful anymore.

10 years ago was the absolute height of specialized pieces (and near bankruptcy) even at that I do not see the relevancy to that verse cost per piece. its still a piece in the count weather its specialized or not. unfortunately there is now infallible scale for when the value is good on a set.

a set could be made up of 500 larger parts and sold for $45, that tends to be a good deal in pieces and likely weight. but the object it represents could be poorly designed or the pieces far to repetitive. so for a Non Moc'er it might not be worth it due to aesthetics. a Moc'er on the other hand might love a set that they do not intend to make but has a large amount of the same parts. Value is so subjective that you can use any baseline you like and still it wont be a hard and true value gage.

SilentMode

The price of a set includes the parts packaging, instructions and perhaps even the R&D behind it, so I do think it's misleading. With that said, most of us only really look at the parts.