Brickset ForumHome›
Shopping 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.
Predictions on Discontinuing Sets and their Secondary Market Value
Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
Recent discussions • Categories • Privacy Policy • Brickset.com
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 26.5K All Categories
- 16.1K General
- 3 Announcements
- 3.1K Collecting
- 3.7K Everything else LEGO
- 1.7K Building and Techniques
- 2.3K Brickset
- 14 Ambassador
- 1K Introduce yourself
- 380 The Database
- 436 Brickset.com
- 314 Forum Operation
- 15 FAQs
- 13.9K Shopping
- 1.7K Shopping USA/Canada
- 336 Shopping Elsewhere
- 11K Marketplace
- 1.2K Other
- 570 Community and Events
- 262 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
Anyway, I don't think it helps that BttF III is nowhere near as beloved as the first two. It has a Godfather III vibe to it.
But I think a good sequel would be for Doc Brown and Marty to travel back to the Old West and turn a steam engine into a Time Machine...
As far as BTTF; The DeLorean time machine is probably one of most iconic automobile's, at least in the US. The movie was fantastic.
I'm fairly ambivalent (I'm mid 40s) about the films. I saw 1 and 2 as a kid, but have barely seen them since. I built the lego set, didn't really like it and sold it on.
As for Ecto-1, I'm fairly similar about the films. I saw them as a kid, seen them a few times since. I built the lego set and it looks great, so I kept it. I cannot see me buying the HQ though.
Kind of like the original Indiana Jones trilogy.
These are the same people that can't find a SINGLE Ideas project to move forward with.
Even smart companies make all kinds of small errors that can add up over time.
Don't worry, LEGO, we are still BFFs.
how can there be 1700 pet shops in stock one day, then the following its out of stock, that's what happened a few months ago!
I have no idea if there will be a massive restock before Christmas. Most stores have pulled the shelf tags and filled with other sets. So I'm not counting on seeing them in quantity until after stores reset from Christmas.
Given all of that, the entire JW line is on the reseller watch list, with I Rex and Raptor sets being the highest focus. Anytime they have popped up online, they quickly disappear.
So no, I don't think JW is done. But I'm not counting on getting anything before 2016.
Remember, back in 2003, sales for themes like Harry Potter, Star Wars, and Spider-Man plummeted because there wasn't a new movie in theaters. That was a big part of why LEGO nearly went bankrupt that year, since they'd come to rely on these licensed themes while taking expensive risks with many of their in-house themes.
As for Dinos. If I am not mistaken the Dino line for LEGO a few years ago did great while produced, but the aftermarket value was not spectacular, except maybe that main set with the T Rex. Now, this is Jurassic park, so I think the name may carry it better, but only until another Dino line appears.
From Brick by Brick, pages 90–91: "By late 2003, the LEGO Group's leaders finally began to concede that the glowing success of LEGO Star Wars, as one executive put it, was ultimately a 'thick, fat layer of cosmetics' hiding the raw blemishes of a sickly core business. By November of that year, it was apparent that all the rouge and mascara had melted away. Without a Star Wars movie, LEGO couldn't reprise the line's explosive growth, and sales rapidly lost altitude."
I never said that having these licenses was a mistake. Far from it. Getting these licenses, especially Star Wars, was hugely important to the company's future. But it was a mistake to assume a lucrative license would stay lucrative year after year even though a lot of its popularity depended on forces outside the LEGO Group's control.
That's what I'm getting at here. Even LEGO Star Wars isn't immune to this kind of sales slump in the absence of a new movie, and Star Wars is probably one of the strongest licenses the LEGO Group has ever had. So even though Jurassic World sets have sold like hotcakes this year, that doesn't mean the same thing would happen if LEGO releases new Jurassic World sets next year or the year after that. In 2016 and 2017 LEGO will probably fare better by betting on more current summer blockbusters.
Though it just reinforces my belief that LEGO is on a trend in the wrong direction as it seems they are making many of the same mistakes in the late 90's/ early 2000's and now could be seen as relying on licenses to help keep up their gains and experiments into other mediums.
For starters, LEGO has several non-licensed themes like City, Friends, Ninjago, and Creator that continue to thrive year after year. Also, LEGO designers today work hard to keep every product and every theme within a strictly controlled budget. By contrast, "in early 2004, an internal survey of the company's entire product portfolio revealed that 94% of LEGO sets were unprofitable. Only Star Wars and Bionicle kits were making money." (p98) Nowadays new colors, part designs, and decorations MUST be within a theme's budget and MUST be approved by Design Lab (a department that had become largely powerless during the LEGO Group's crisis years).
Bionicle in particular provided a road map for how LEGO would develop future product lines, since it's really the theme that had the most influence in keeping LEGO from going bankrupt. "In 2003—the year the rest of LEGO came crashing down—Bionicle's soaring sales accounted for approximately 25 percent of the company's total revenue and more than 100 percent of its profit (as the rest of the company was tumbling to a net loss), making it a financial anchor in turbulent times." (p155) Nowadays, "big bang" themes like Atlantis, Ninjago, Legends of Chima, and Nexo Knights are specifically engineered to imitate the Bionicle theme's media-driven, consumer-focused brand strategy and generate a similar global sensation.
The LEGO Group still takes risks, but they do so more cautiously than they used to. The company's worst-selling theme, Galidor, was developed and rushed to production without adequate market research or audience testing as soon as the LEGO Group saw that Bionicle had become a big hit. By contrast, the LEGO Group's more recent "big bang" themes like Ninjago, Friends, and Legends of Chima were all in development for three or four years in order to make them the best products they could be.
For example, all it takes is someone at Disney to wake up one morning and say "Gee, why are we paying LEGO all of this money? Why not buy Megabloks, be a competitor, and make our own lines?" Guess what, if that happens a good chunk of LEGOs revenue goes bye bye real quick; bye Disney, bye SW, and bye Marvel. Three major money makers all gone at the snap of a finger. As much as City, Friends, Creator and Ninjago make for LEGO, I'm guessing that losing three licenses overnight would hurt bad (never mind a rival mega brand would likely make lines to compete against LEGOs lines). Then you have expanded factories and new supply lines all over (just like in late 90's), manufacturing too many part types (just like late 90's/early 00's) and fairly uninspired designs (like the mid to late 90's) sucking money out of LEGO's pockets. I also see the company delving back hard into 'virtual brick' which is another potential pitfall from the late 90's. I see many parallels to the 90's, regardless of what any book says. Also add onto this what appears to be instances of inferior part quality (and apparently a 'ho hum' response to it) and the future of LEGO could turn quicker than most think.
I still think LEGO does not think of the 'what ifs', at least as much as they claim to now. I just think they have gotten a bit over confident in their success (just like the late 80's to mid 90's) and if they are not careful it bites them in the tookus real fast. Especially with this talk of ripping off Idea submissions for large sets (like Helicarrier and GB HQ), what appears to be growing instances of inferior part quality, and ever rising costs of the sets (which seem to be more than just inflation).
Lego has gotten past wanting to control every aspect of their product. It is important to note that TLG had nothing to do with the film, video games and television productions. Like a good 'ideas' company, they leave the execution of other products to companies with experience.
They make the bricks, and get fat checks for their ideas.