Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
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.
The fire bridgade will stop being made that time. They then will continue to sell out their inventory. If some are still left by black friday they will be discounted then and will be gone.
Since then it has been a long and twisty road to try and apply logic to this thing called LEGO set retirement, or EOL as I have since learned it is referred to. :-) Sadly, I don't understand it much better now than I did back when I bought those 2 MF's. :-) There are some patterns, but nothing to hang a hat on. Yes, I too would like to see stats on how long sets are sold before going EOL. By theme, retail price, etc.
I mean some sets seem to only be around for a few months. Like the 8265 Front End Loader, and as mentioned the Maersk Cargo Ship. Then, others seem to hang around forever, like the MMV, DS, and Luke's Landspeeder (which is a WM only set, so I figured it would be around for 14 mths, tops). As mentioned I am sure it is partially based on how many are initially made, what the sales figures are, how many retailers take, how many are reordered.
I expect one of two things to happen with it:
1) It gets EOL'd in the next 6 months, or
2) It gets a $5 (or euro) price increase (like the old X-Wing (6212) did.
I have many LS sets, and I think it will do well in the aftermarket once it is EOL'd due to the array of minifigs.
And to your point, the Landspeeder itself can't hurt... In fact, I've purchased a few Landspeeders w/o the minifigs on eBay for $5-7 each. I figure I should be able to make a few dollars on those once the LS is EOL'd.
I think it is safe to say that the demand of LEGO collectors does not match the 10's of thousands LEGO can sell of a new set that has never been produced.
Also if LEGO constantly recycled products two things could happen: One, disappointed fans who wait for the next new set only to see a 'retread' sitting on a shelf taking the space of what could be a new set (plus it is also good for marketing... 'Better buy one now before it is gone', etc). Two is that Cafe Corner, and Market street as well, do not have the details that the later sets have. I know the Market Street is an empty building and I think Cafe Corner basically is as well, and probably would not make sense to sell an 'inferior' (compared to the new) set. Not to mention the price of Market street (as people forget) was $90 dollars MSRP, lord knows what they would need to charge now for it, and how many parents would really buy a 'half' building set for 120, especially when their are creator house sets that go for 40-50 dollars? This is excluding the AFOLS and everyone else on the site here that say they would, of course. But that is (as others have also said on this site) really is a drop in the bucket compared to all the kid fans of LEGO and their parents who have never heard of the term AFOL.
I know people constantly ask 'why not', and I (and others) also point to the 'Legend' sets of the late 90's early 00's.
I'm guessing, since the Legend Metroliners had to be put on sale for something like 50-75 dollars (honestly cannot remember) to get rid of them, that LEGO feels that re-treads will only hurt their profit margin instead of help.
Maersk sets do get redone, but I am guessing LEGO does this because Maersk, and not necessarily LEGO, wants to have those sets again, and since LEGO must make them for Maersk why not also make a few to sell at the stores as well.
But I think it is safe to say that the odds are heavily stacked that Cafe Corner and Market Street are gone for good.
You may see a similar set that looks like both, but I doubt you see an exact set.
Or another example, why pay $150 for an EOLd X-Wing, when the current version is $50 and a much better design.
That is one reason to stick to sets that aren't easy to replace. UCS Falcon will never be done again. Taj Mahal won't either... Emerald Night is unique, we might get another steam engine some day, but it won't be the same...
The X-Wing? Yea, that has been done, it will be done again... I agree, the current one is the best, other than the UCS X-Wing of course... And even then the current one has a few advantages over UCS X-Wing, mini-figs and a more "swooshable" design.
Tower Bridge is unique, it will never happen again... That sort of thing...
I suspect $2K is around that limit, a few will be sold over that, but that is really pushing it for most people I think. :)
I didn't see your emotional comment, sorry. I was just justifying my purchase for people thinking I'm crazy. I don't know why someone would buy the older x-wing to the newer one, (I sure wouldn't) but, yea, I'm sure they're wrapped in emotions when they do so.
But, regardless of that. I take it as a sign that will set will sell for a good profit when it is EOL'd. My fear is that there won't be any left by then and it won't be on clearance at [email protected] So, I'm thinking I need to get some when TRU runs a BOGO. What are your thoughts about 10219?
Not all, but most have some unique parts that make it nearly impossible to complete via Bricklink or other sources. A few years ago, I bought an incomplete UCS X-wing for $200 with instructions and box. Figured great deal, and it was (after I got the smoke smell out of it). But I had to dish out $60 for the cockpit. It also uses a bunch of "Bellville flower pots" in dark gray - those go for $8-$12 each on BL.
Same goes for the MF, and so on.
This helps the long-term value of these sets.
When sets like the MF go over $1K, then there is zero logic and 100% emotion. JMO.
I know people scuffle at the idea of Lego re-releasing sets but the only people who lose out are the people who intend to invest and the collectors that falsely believe Lego sets are 'rare' collectibles. Otherwise Lego and the true consumers would benefit from it.
But let's say LEGO does re-release a set. 10179, we'll say. What are they going to do? Charge $1000 for it? LEGO's not going to be able to get NEARLY as much money out of a set that they're currently producing as a third party would after it's discontinued.
So, while your argument that this would be good for the 'true' consumer (not at all sure what you meant there, honestly... as if the people buying aftermarket sets aren't consumers or something) holds true, this wouldn't even begin to make good financial sense for LEGO as a company.
I never realized there were two different shuttle sets that are almost identical because I never looked that closely at the set numbers to catch the difference. Is the only difference name change and the stability fix?