Would re-releases be such a bad thing?

BooTheMightyHamster

After the announcement that this year's Winter Village set will be an almost-but-not-quite brick for brick re-release of the 2009 Toyshop, many folks have been getting quite cross, insisting that Lego have instigated an annual tradition of a new WV set, but after only 6 year (or 5 depending on your views about Santa's Workshop) they appear to have run out of steam, and have copped out by raiding the archives.

If you didn't get the set originally, maybe this is a good thing.
If you're a reseller with a stockpile of the 2009 sets, maybe this is not such a great thing.  (Although as someone pointed out, original usually trumps v2.)

But would a limited amount of re-releases be so terrible?  I'd be first in line for the chance to get my hands on a UCS Millennium Falcon, and I'm sure there are plenty of other sets that people missed out on.

So.  What if Lego were to run something akin to Ideas, but instead of new sets, people could vote - say over the course of 12 months - and then once a year, the most requested set got a limited run?

Sure, there's all sorts of reasons, both practical and financial, why TLG wouldn't want to do it, but if they could, should they?

Would it devalue a set, knowing that it might come back?  
Would it have an impact on the reseller market?
Is there something good about knowing that once they're gone, they're gone, and you managed to get one?

Thoughts?

Shib

I mentioned it in the winter village thread, but I'm not against rereleasing old sets, but the Winter Village being a once a year thing feels a bit of a kick for long term collectors. If there was a second set announced at the same time there would be no such issue.

Take the modulars - seeing as there are always 3 (I think- don't collect them personally so don't pay attention) on the shelves, if one of those spots was taken up by a rerelease it wouldn't really be an issue.

I don't think it would kill the resale market, after all there's little chance they could maintain having every set ever produced on sale at once, so there would always be things that can't be bought directly from LEGO/retailers, but it would likely destabilise the market a little and probably kick a lot of people out of reselling - which would probably benefit a lot of the longer standing resellers.

madforLEGO

Shib said:

I mentioned it in the winter village thread, but I'm not against rereleasing old sets, but the Winter Village being a once a year thing feels a bit of a kick for long term collectors. If there was a second set announced at the same time there would be no such issue.

Take the modulars - seeing as there are always 3 (I think- don't collect them personally so don't pay attention) on the shelves, if one of those spots was taken up by a rerelease it wouldn't really be an issue.

I don't think it would kill the resale market, after all there's little chance they could maintain having every set ever produced on sale at once, so there would always be things that can't be bought directly from LEGO/retailers, but it would likely destabilise the market a little and probably kick a lot of people out of reselling - which would probably benefit a lot of the longer standing resellers.

There have been many threads debating re-releases and if it was such a good idea LEGO would have never removed the Legends line. Legends showed the pitfalls with releasing old sets, it did not work out well and I do not see that changing any time soon. The WV set is one thing, it is relatively low risk, as it is not the cost of a Mod and is really only out for one time in the year. A mod is not the same case, people seem to forget it is not just another set in the line, it takes up space on a shelf and in a warehouse. While tweaking an older set is still likely cheaper than producing a new set, they will need to redesign many older sets when parts are no longer made that were in them, Which then you hope does not turn off those who wanted an 'original' set. Finally they have to hope they sell more sets to those who do not have them vs selling sets to all that do not have them (I.e new sets).

Shib

^Just to make my original comment clear, I was talking from a buyers perspective only, all the points you made, while valid, are of concern only to LEGO and not to the buyer.

TarDomo

Yes. It can be very annoying. I understand that new lego generations want their AT-AT or toy shops or whatever things and don't want to pay crazy much and AFOLs coming out of dark ages but it annoys me a lot. And yes, I've missed a lot of great sets and feel bad paying ridiculous price for a set or even sometimes can't afford it. I understand the reason for remaking, but...

TXLegoguy

I could see them re-releasing sets like the modulars, haunted house, the UCS falcon, and similiar sets because there is obviously demand for them since people pay such high prices. But there also is alot more people that would by them if the aftermarket price wasn't so high.  They could always make updated versions.

Bumblepants

I am 100% against modulars or things like the Haunted House getting redone. If there is a production slot for a modular I want an exciting new one. If they do another haunted house I want a new model in a new color that would sit nicely next to the old one if you wanted it to. Rehashing Creator sets seems completely against the spirit of creating. A new Falcon UCS wouldn't bother me as much because Star Wars sets are required to fit the content of the films.

pharmjod

Legends came out at a completely different time for LEGO. Comparing its success then to what might be possible now isn't a fair comparison at all. LEGO as a company had nowhere near the market exposure 14-15 years ago that it does now. I say go for it and see what happens.

Fauch

how did they choose which sets would become legends? for example, when they re-released CMFs, they said they actually weren't the most popular ones.

sonsofsceva

LEGO was not even close to being the #1 toy brand in the world when the Legends line was brought out. A re-release system today would likely be much more lucrative than in the past.
Besides, the police stations and fire stations seem to be re-released every other year without much trouble for their sales... ;)

Fauch

call of duty games too

Yodalicious

Not an opinion either way, but just a comment to note that a re-release is different than an update. 

For instance, the police stations and fire stations are not technically re-released. They are updated. It may be semantics, but what I see LEGO doing more likely is updates. 

There are two UCS X-Wings. The second wasn't a re-release. It was a different set of the same ship. There is probably a high likelihood that someday we will see a second UCS Falcon. It's such an iconic ship in both the SW and LEGO universes. But if it does come again someday, it will be a new set, not just a re-release. 

There's a chance 10 years from now we could get another modular hotel/cafe, but odds are it'll not be a repackaged Cafe Corner. 

As others have already said, Legends was a different situation all together. 

matticus_bricks

I'd like to add that the Legends line resurrected Lego sets that were relatively old sets (15-20 years at the time, I think) which may be why they didn't appeal to as many buyers. I think if rereleases were to work today, they would have to limit it to hugely popular sets (Cafe Corner, UCS MF, Taj Mahal, etc) which obviously have a huge demand and not enough supply in the aftermarket. Many people don't already own these sets because they missed out and simply can't afford them now. I'm sure there's a market for people who would be thrilled to buy these sets at a reasonable price. 

What if these releases were done once a year or so, and buyers had to sign up/preorder in advance? That way TLG could produce an accurate number of sets without having too many left over. 

Pitfall69

Fauch said:

call of duty games too

Apples to Lamp

Pitfall69

matticus_bricks said:

I'd like to add that the Legends line resurrected Lego sets that were relatively old sets (15-20 years at the time, I think) which may be why they didn't appeal to as many buyers. I think if rereleases were to work today, they would have to limit it to hugely popular sets (Cafe Corner, UCS MF, Taj Mahal, etc) which obviously have a huge demand and not enough supply in the aftermarket. Many people don't already own these sets because they missed out and simply can't afford them now. I'm sure there's a market for people who would be thrilled to buy these sets at a reasonable price. 

What if these releases were done once a year or so, and buyers had to sign up/preorder in advance? That way TLG could produce an accurate number of sets without having too many left over. 

The Legends were mostly for older sets, but there were other re releases that were of fairly recent sets like Fort Legoredo, Pizza to Go and the Metroliner. Most of the larger Classic Pirate sets were re released with BSB being the Legend, but there was only a 9-10 year gap between when the orginal retired and the Legend was released. Many of these sets had pieces that weren't in the original release;  most notably,  Main Street.

cheshirecat

whilst lego have production capacity issues it would seem churlish to be using up slots on previously made sets. which is part of the reason i think the toy shop was done as something was necessary to fill a hole rather than a pro-active decision to re-release a set. the little message that re-releases are possible might have been a fringe benefit but no more.

that said i would love them to re-release a few key sets, ucs mf, green-grocer or cafe corner, taj mahal or grand carousel. if they could do just one set a year in addition to whatever else would be released, becomes a once a year theme but really strict that its only good sets with demand, not an opportunity to offload crap [see cmf set]. just the knowledge that sets are re-released would stop anyone but the wealthiest paying more than say 3xrrp and that would be a good thing imo and disrupt just enough the reseller market. 

Pitfall69

^The CMF set was a complete fiasco.

SithLord196

Personally, if they're going to do re-releases, I'd rather see true to original re-releases rather than updates, but that's just me. 

madforLEGO

And how many people 'love' to see LEGO do police station after police station, instead of say an airport, or maybe even a post office, maybe another farm?

Does LEGO really want to roll the dice on making a ton of redo Cafe Corners (which also would not likely be 100% original as parts change) at 159.99 USD a pop (excluded from discounts by the way), and hope that they all sell out? Same with Haunted house at 180 USD, which likely would now be 199.99 USD knowing LEGOs recent pricing history. People always want a set, but want and buy are two separate things IMO.

matticus_bricks said:

I'd like to add that the Legends line resurrected Lego sets that were relatively old sets (15-20 years at the time, I think) which may be why they didn't appeal to as many buyers. I think if rereleases were to work today, they would have to limit it to hugely popular sets (Cafe Corner, UCS MF, Taj Mahal, etc) which obviously have a huge demand and not enough supply in the aftermarket. Many people don't already own these sets because they missed out and simply can't afford them now. I'm sure there's a market for people who would be thrilled to buy these sets at a reasonable price. 

What if these releases were done once a year or so, and buyers had to sign up/preorder in advance? That way TLG could produce an accurate number of sets without having too many left over. 

Sure there is demand, but how many people are really clamoring for a Cafe Corner re-release and would pay the 159.99 USD for one? I have a feeling the small number would surprise you.
100, 1000, 10000 people? LEGO is not just making 10K of a production set, they are going to make 100K-200K+ of them at least otherwise you are right back to the complaining of those seeing re-sellers buying them up to sell for twice the amount on eBay when the pre-orders run out. I mean you cannot pre-order them forever, so where then do you draw the line? Once they are all sold then the price rises again, only for more people to complain that they could not get one.
You will ALWAYS have a set increase in cost and people complain that they cannot get one.

juggles7

If Lego goes down the path towards re-issuing old sets, I think they're going to be amazed by how poorly the sets do the second time around. I've said it before and I'll say it again: People want what they can't have. I'm one of them! And, on the flip side, people don't want what they can have.

jpcz

I didnt read through all the comments above, so this may have been thrown out already.

While there are a few people that genuinely missed the set for various reasons, there are many more who had the opportunity to buy them but chose not to...seeing aftermarket prices, they started kicking themselves for passing and thus want another chance.  if they didnt like it then, why like it now?  And a re-release will not keep aftermarket prices at the same level, so they will buy them at re-release and be upset when they dont appreciate like they did the first time around.

kiki180703

madforLEGO said:

And how many people 'love' to see LEGO do police station after police station, instead of say an airport, or maybe even a post office, maybe another farm?

Does LEGO really want to roll the dice on making a ton of redo Cafe Corners (which also would not likely be 100% original as parts change) at 159.99 USD a pop (excluded from discounts by the way), and hope that they all sell out? Same with Haunted house at 180 USD, which likely would now be 199.99 USD knowing LEGOs recent pricing history. People always want a set, but want and buy are two separate things IMO.

matticus_bricks said:

I'd like to add that the Legends line resurrected Lego sets that were relatively old sets (15-20 years at the time, I think) which may be why they didn't appeal to as many buyers. I think if rereleases were to work today, they would have to limit it to hugely popular sets (Cafe Corner, UCS MF, Taj Mahal, etc) which obviously have a huge demand and not enough supply in the aftermarket. Many people don't already own these sets because they missed out and simply can't afford them now. I'm sure there's a market for people who would be thrilled to buy these sets at a reasonable price. 

What if these releases were done once a year or so, and buyers had to sign up/preorder in advance? That way TLG could produce an accurate number of sets without having too many left over. 

Sure there is demand, but how many people are really clamoring for a Cafe Corner re-release and would pay the 159.99 USD for one? I have a feeling the small number would surprise you.
100, 1000, 10000 people? LEGO is not just making 10K of a production set, they are going to make 100K-200K+ of them at least otherwise you are right back to the complaining of those seeing re-sellers buying them up to sell for twice the amount on eBay when the pre-orders run out. I mean you cannot pre-order them forever, so where then do you draw the line? Once they are all sold then the price rises again, only for more people to complain that they could not get one.
You will ALWAYS have a set increase in cost and people complain that they cannot get one.

Well I would 159,99 USD for a cafe corner :wink: 

SithLord196

Lego has a much bigger market share now than when the main sets being discussed were available. 

So while I don't think the market would be as big as buyers that missed out on those sets are making it out to be, I'm not sure it would be as small as resellers want it to be either.

veleta

Sorry for posting something similar as new discussion.

monkey_roo

Re-releases and updates are a thing, Lego has always done updates, of which the new WV toy shop is one, it isn't a re-release, but when it has done direct re-releases the sales haven't done as well.

for the most part re-releases only appeal to those who missed a specific model and can't afford the after market price or are seen as a cheap way of offloading excess stock (CMF thing anyone) and are of no interest to anyone. Whereas up-dates appeal to everyone. The new model is invariably an improvement on the original, be it design, colours, figures, parts etc. and therefore is a new model. And as an update that is very much a replacement for a past model it means new collectors/kids can get popular new sets without having to go into the after market.

for example the updates UCS X-Wing is 100 times better as a model than the first (opinion), likewise the recent Sandcrawler, Shuttle etc. etc. in fact I struggle to think of one updates set that isn't an improvement in any line and is therefore worthwhile.

now specific to the WV line, which I think is the issue, that is a little different, yes looking at the pictures I think the new shop is a little cleaner and crisper as a model and the figures look better, so it has value, what is sad is that after only a few short years we are onto updates and that feels a bit half hearted. Now likely I will buy one as I have a full line (minus the train sadly) and hope that next year we are back to a never before seen model rather than this becoming a thing.

but to directly answer the question are re-releases good... no, no they are not. But updated releases are.

MrJ_NY

I would think there are a lot more people buying/collecting the modulars now than when they were first released.Many current buyers were probably not even aware they existed when the first 3 were released.Now that it's come to their attention or perhaps you're of working age you're willing to shell out your own $ instead of asking parents to buy you an overpriced "toy".You can't blame people for wanting to complete their street once they start collecting them but are unwilling to pay the exorbitant prices they go for on the secondary market.Business wise it makes sense for Lego to step on the toes of resellers if it means a profit for them IMO and at this point in the game I'd bet a lot more people are willing to pay asking price for a rehashed version than when they were first released.

thedingman5

^ This.  

Bear in mind that the fastest way to eliminate your edge in capturing the value left behind by a "market inefficiency" is to POINT OUT THE INEFFICIENCY.  In this case, the reseller market has complely exploded compared to 5, 10, 15 years ago.  Major, mainstream media outlets cover the investor / reseller angle.  Widely consumed and easily available reseller data is available to all (ebay, BP, BL, etc.). By being so public and so open about the "leakage" from LEGO's retirement schedule is only going to "poke the bear", so to speak.

Countering that, of course, is the fact that a full policy of reissuances would make no sense; there are limits (store shelf space, warehousing, etc.), but a targeted and limited program to recapture a market that DIDN'T EXIST 5-10 years ago is a smart move.

As always, it will come down to execution, market research and proper pricing.  

One "re-hashed" set in, they are on to something, IMHO.  Price is right, the response is incredible (no publicity is bad publicity).  We'll see how the sales turn out!

Will be very interesting to watch... 

Pitfall69

Would a limited Re Release version of Cafe Corner cost just $159.99? I would imagine that limited edition sets cost more to make, especially if there are parts and colors they no longer make. 

natro220

And especially since they just re-released the Toy Shop at 1/3 markup over RRP (if you don't count the added minifig), I doubt any re-release is going to be what the original price was.  I'd put a re-released Café Corner at $199.99 minimum.  The key here is "limited", so it'll not have the luxury of economies of scale to bring the cost down.

Aanchir

Pitfall69 said:

Would a limited Re Release version of Cafe Corner cost just $159.99? I would imagine that limited edition sets cost more to make, especially if there are parts and colors they no longer make. 

Not to mention, Winter Village Toy Shop was already up to more or less the same design standards as the other more recent Winter Village sets. Whereas Cafe Corner's design is much more dated/obsolete, with no interior furnishing whatsoever. Updating Winter Village Toy Shop mostly just required a handful of part substitutions to keep it feeling fresh. Updating the Cafe Corner to meet the standard of quality of other modular buildings would require a lot more additions.

Plus, as Jamie Berard has pointed out on these very forums, certain parts like the door used on the front of the Cafe Corner no longer exist. Unless they swapped it with a train door (the only 1x4x5 door still in production, to my knowledge), some considerable rebuilding would be necessary.

Overall, I don't know if the market for winter village sets is really comparable to the market for Star Wars UCS sets or modular buildings (winter village sets are typically much smaller, and their sales are even more strictly driven by the holiday season). Nor do I know the LEGO Group's reasons for choosing to do a re-release of the Winter Village Toy Shop this year. I think it's safe to say they probably know a lot more about the market for these sets than I do.

Whatever the case, the market for any of these exclusives is completely different than the market for LEGO City police and fire stations, so I don't know why people are even making those comparisons. Big D2C sets are aimed at dedicated collectors, particularly teen and adult collectors. LEGO City police and fire stations are unique, aimed at kids, and sold at your average toy shops. Never underestimate the amount of pressure LEGO is under from retailers. If LEGO City police stations are always among the top-selling City sets, and City is always one of the top-selling themes, it's easy to see how retailers might be frustrated if LEGO suddenly decided NOT to give them a new police station to replace their older stock.

ReesesPieces

I would love the idea of reissuing older modulars since I missed the older ones.  Maybe have one reissue every two years in addition to issuing a new modular annually.  They can also change the colors a bit and change the design a little as well to keep the owners of the original happy (and keep its value).  This way, everyone can be happy.

Bobflip

It strikes me that if they're unable to meet customer demand, then they don't have enough production capacity. Whether the market for rereleased sets (and rereleased rare bricks) is enough to pay for the extra capacity, I'm not so sure...

Dedgecko

Why not have a kickstarter like site/system but for old sets.  The main difference is that you are basically paying in full, upfront, with sets delivering in 6-8 weeks or whatever.  One legacy set per month, possibly more depending on what themes would partake in this.  The price should be the same or comparable, depending on the age of the set and how much additional tooling may be required.  There should be a specific quantity of sets to sell threshold, to cover any non-recurring tooling costs that TLG may require to make an out of print part.  Shipping would be a separate cost.  There would be no official box, and the manuals are available online.  You would just be buying bags of parts basically.  If the required number of sets are not purchased, then no one is billed.  If the number of sets purchased exceeds the threshold, perhaps at different quantities there may be a cost reduction to the consumer.  This could kill the aftermarket, those buying Lego to build could get complete sets at reasonable prices.  TLG could slap their X% markup on it, so they'd be happy.  Hell if people wanted boxes and manuals they could pay for premium versions, and it might still be cheaper than the aftermarket depending on the set.

Something like this must have been brought up before.  Where did I go wrong?

BrickDancer

A lot of the reseller hatred is clouding people's minds on pros/cons of re-releasing/rehashing valuable themes like WV, Modulars or UCS. Nobody likes to pay over the mark for anything in life. And nobody likes others making money off them. So I get it, your irrational hatred of resellers and the aftermarket provide you with a bit of glee to see this valuable set get rehashed.

As always, great news for everyone that is new, was in Dark Ages, or simply missed/passed on a given set that is now being rehashed. But where do we draw the line? Should we rehash all the old models of current lines just so the newbies get a chance to get it at RRP? Should we do it to save them money from buying on the secondary market?

So that leaves us with everyone else who already owns it or purposefully skipped it. All they wanted was something new, anything new. Not the same exact set. This is not City where Police and Firestations get rehashed on a regular basis ad infiniti. These are the loyal fans that have been eagerly buying each and every year. For these folks, possibly the majority of any given sampling pool, they got the shaft this year and have to wait a whole year for even the possibility of adding something new.

And in the end, it is TLG's history & legacy that is ultimately tarnished by any rehashes. A wasted year on a highly desired theme. Same as I feel about the UCS X-Wing rehash (that wasn't even exact re-release). So I hope the sales for Toy Shop crash and burn in a massive fire that leaves Lego with a stinging memory to never rehash any valuable theme's set again. We all deserve better than that.

Bobflip

Dedgecko said:

Why not have a kickstarter like site/system but for old sets.  The main difference is that you are basically paying in full, upfront, with sets delivering in 6-8 weeks or whatever.  One legacy set per month, possibly more depending on what themes would partake in this.  The price should be the same or comparable, depending on the age of the set and how much additional tooling may be required.  There should be a specific quantity of sets to sell threshold, to cover any non-recurring tooling costs that TLG may require to make an out of print part.  Shipping would be a separate cost.  There would be no official box, and the manuals are available online.  You would just be buying bags of parts basically.  If the required number of sets are not purchased, then no one is billed.  If the number of sets purchased exceeds the threshold, perhaps at different quantities there may be a cost reduction to the consumer.  This could kill the aftermarket, those buying Lego to build could get complete sets at reasonable prices.  TLG could slap their X% markup on it, so they'd be happy.  Hell if people wanted boxes and manuals they could pay for premium versions, and it might still be cheaper than the aftermarket depending on the set.

Something like this must have been brought up before.  Where did I go wrong?

That'd be excellent.  :)

The best part is that anyone who doesn't like sets being rereleased isn't forced to buy them.

kiki180703

@Bobflip I totally agree with you! @Dedgecko I'd love that too because now, if you buy the pieces separately, it's way more expensive 

Oldfan

ReesesPieces said:

I would love the idea of reissuing older modulars since I missed the older ones.  Maybe have one reissue every two years in addition to issuing a new modular annually.  They can also change the colors a bit and change the design a little as well to keep the owners of the original happy (and keep its value).  This way, everyone can be happy.

When it comes to Lego, and the people who collect Lego, there will always be someone who is unhappy, regardless of what is being presented.  It's just the way we are; you can't please everybody no matter how hard you try!

And for the record, I think yours is not a bad idea; I'd buy those reissues for certain.

Bobflip

They could even choose which sets to recreate in a similar way to the way Cussoo Lego Ideas is run, people could genuinely see the potential demand for a range of sets before it goes to the Kickstarter-style phase, and be able to plan ahead for being able to afford it!

Pitfall69

When the Legends and other Re-Releases came out, I bought most of them sans Main Street. I just came out of my Dark Ages in 1999. After buying the sets, I was disappointed because I didn't like the way they were packaged. I loved the old boxes with the flaps and windows. I guess Lego was trying to bring back the nostalgia aspect with the release of these sets, but missed the mark in my opinion. 

It is typical for people to not want to pay aftermarket values for anything. Over time, things will either increase or decrease in value. People buy rare items because of the exclusivity. If everyone could afford a Bugatti, then it wouldn't be as exclusive or collectible. I like the fact that I have some rare and valuable Lego sets in my collection. I understand that people miss out on sets, but why do they want to destroy the collectible and exclusive aspect of Lego, just because they think they deserve a re release because they missed out? 

SumoLego

Pfft.  You don't have a Bugatti?

I have like, five of them.

TheUltimateTFOL

I think that re-releases would be great but only on certain things. Lego definitely shouldn't re-release limited edition or exclusive sets. Additionally, sets like Modulars or Winter Village which only have one release each year shouldn't either, unless it was alongside the main release. I think the idea of some sort of re-release program similar to Ideas would be nice, but sets on there should meet certain criteria such as being a certain number of years old, having a design flaw that takes away from the set that should be fixed, and/or having pieces that could be replaced with newer pieces to make a better set. I personally wouldn't mind re-releases of some sets. Though it would be nice to get my hands on some older Ninjago sets or something of that like, Ninjago is probably too recent and has a booming market on eBay. However, sets that have a ridiculous reselling price (older modulars, perhaps :wink: ) would definitely be welcome as re-releases. Lego might even go so far as to re-release an entire series! I'm sure this would definitely be welcome among some other members of the community but maybe the cost and the risk wouldn't be worth it for Lego.

thedingman5

Pitfall69 said:

When the Legends and other Re-Releases came out, I bought most of them sans Main Street. I just came out of my Dark Ages in 1999. After buying the sets, I was disappointed because I didn't like the way they were packaged. I loved the old boxes with the flaps and windows. I guess Lego was trying to bring back the nostalgia aspect with the release of these sets, but missed the mark in my opinion. 

It is typical for people to not want to pay aftermarket values for anything. Over time, things will either increase or decrease in value. People buy rare items because of the exclusivity. If everyone could afford a Bugatti, then it wouldn't be as exclusive or collectible. I like the fact that I have some rare and valuable Lego sets in my collection. I understand that people miss out on sets, but why do they want to destroy the collectible and exclusive aspect of Lego, just because they think they deserve a re release because they missed out? 

Response:
Like anything, the customer base is not of one mind.  For me and many of the folks I know and talk LEGO with, the "collectible and exclusive" aspect isn't an aspect at all! 

Jern92

1. Am I really the only person who couldn't care less what happens to the resellers when there's a re-release or update? Heck, some of these people are so rich they buy out all the new sets so no one else can have them. And yes, I have experienced the sweep of modulars in stores in NZ (and the absolute sweep of the Lego Brand Store exclusive sets in Malaysia by people buying about ten modulars and getting 20 of the free exclusive sets), only to have them popping up online at double the retail price. Forgive me for being pissed, but in my mind, anyone who is a scalper is not a nice person, and they can suffer huge losses for all I care. At least wait till most fans have gotten their sets before emptying the stores.

2. In terms of who would pay USD159.99 for a Cafe Corner, I'm sure all the Lego modular fans would, especially those who can't afford the reseller prices and came out of their dark ages too late (myself included). In fact, it'd probably sell more than the original because the number of modular fans have increased since it was first released. I certainly would, even though I'm not a very big fan of it.

3. As for devaluing a set, well, if you think your hurt feelings of having a set you own become slightly 'devalued' trumps the feelings of thousands (if not tens of thousands) of Lego fans' jubilance at getting a set they never though they would, then you sir are incredibly self-absorbed. Who cares if the rest of the world is sad, as long as my little toy retains its value to me?

4. I can understand not wanting re-releases taking the place of new sets, but at the same time, I think my wallet would appreciate the occasional break. Of course, if they really did re-release the first 3 modulars and some older sets like the Carousel and Taj, I'd break the bank. but I doubt it'd all come at once anyway, so it'd be fine. Lego re-releases Star Wars ships all the time, so what's wrong with doing the same for buildings?

5. At the end of the day, I don't think Lego really cares what we think, as long as they continue making profits. Is anyone here really going to boycott Lego and stop buying anything if they re-release old sets alongside new ones? I doubt it.

goshe7

Bobflip said:

They could even choose which sets to recreate in a similar way to the way Cussoo Lego Ideas is run, people could genuinely see the potential demand for a range of sets before it goes to the Kickstarter-style phase, and be able to plan ahead for being able to afford it!

I think you need to have people commit to paying if you really want to assess demand.  As an AFOL I would vote to re-release several sets (UCS MF, Modulars, HH, Carousel, Taj Mahal) that I most likely would not buy simply because I believe it would make more people happy than not.  

And if people are just voting for stuff for a lark, well, you get Golden Girls Ideas concepts approved.

For a set that I would likely purchase on re-release like the Imperial Flagship, I would have no problem putting my money where my mouth is.

oldtodd33

I didn't buy the UCS MF the first time and I'll pass on it the second time, I think others that passed on it will pass again. The same will happen to any re-hash in the future. Don't kid yourself into thinking that if you want a re-hash that everyone else will too. Only time will tell, don't forget Lego had to discount the WV Market just last winter because they weren't selling.

SumoLego

^ @Jern92,  I don't care about resellers and continually remind folks that Lego doesn't give a flying crap about them, either.

Their goal is to move as much product through the retail channel as quickly as possible.

Although by the looks of it, Lego is going to be focused on selling buckets of Dimensions figurines this Christmas season.  I hope the game is worth it...

<cough cough Galidor... Fusion... cough cough>

Dedgecko

goshe7 said:

Bobflip said:

They could even choose which sets to recreate in a similar way to the way Cussoo Lego Ideas is run, people could genuinely see the potential demand for a range of sets before it goes to the Kickstarter-style phase, and be able to plan ahead for being able to afford it!

I think you need to have people commit to paying if you really want to assess demand.  As an AFOL I would vote to re-release several sets (UCS MF, Modulars, HH, Carousel, Taj Mahal) that I most likely would not buy simply because I believe it would make more people happy than not.  

And if people are just voting for stuff for a lark, well, you get Golden Girls Ideas concepts approved.

For a set that I would likely purchase on re-release like the Imperial Flagship, I would have no problem putting my money where my mouth is.

Agreed, that's why it should skip any voting phases, and go straight to taking orders with credit card numbers.  People can vote with their wallets / VIP points. If they don't get enough orders within a months time, that's it.  The next month a new set gets listed.  If the minimum goal is reached, then they could have stretch goals, with the ultimate level resulting in a re-release to general public, reduced prices, free offers, whatever.

i would think that with their Lean practices, existing tool design knowledge / archive, and logistics this is win/win for TLG and the Community

Pitfall69

madforLEGO

oldtodd33 said:

I didn't buy the UCS MF the first time and I'll pass on it the second time, I think others that passed on it will pass again. The same will happen to any re-hash in the future. Don't kid yourself into thinking that if you want a re-hash that everyone else will too. Only time will tell, don't forget Lego had to discount the WV Market just last winter because they weren't selling.

This. It is amazing how people are rationalizing that since they want a redo of a set then everyone must want it as well.
For example, Cafe Corner is this expensive not because of outrageous demand or that it is a tremendous set (it is not). It is because not many are around, especially in sealed box condition (That and it is 8 years old). As others have noted, this set shows its age and is woefully outdated. However, you have a small percentage of folks that can afford to pay the amount that people are asking for (this notion of re-sellers 'scalping' buyers, or 'suckering' them is silly), and they are completionists that must have it. LEGO apparently does not account for those folks or we would have seen Cafe Corner redone a few years ago. Same with Market Street

As for kick starters to make sets only for people that want them... I really think that people would be amazed to see that only a small percentage of LEGO fans sign up and put hard money on the table. Again want a set and buying that set are two different things here. I think people assume that just because people may want the set, they would pay the larger amount for it. Take Grand Carousel as another example, that set would likely retail now for 300-350 USD, maybe more. Considering how few bought that set when out of shelves at 250 USD, and likely got it when it was on sale somewhere, how many would really sell (especially with a discount ban on 'exclusives')? '1000' does not count IMO, not when you think of the sheer numbers of a new set that LEGO pumps out. Also would they want it because of how it is or want it for how much it would go for later once EOL again?

oldtodd33

^ I like Cafe Corner, it has, in my mind a nice French feel to it. I don't mind the lack of interior, I don't play with them like doll houses and I rarely separate the levels to look inside. Mostly because I am afraid of scratching the tiles the level rests on. 

dougts

I think trying to cast this discussion as resellers vs everyone else is really an inaccurate oversimplification of the situation. 

I think there are plenty of reasons for non-resellers to be against the idea of re-releases too, and most of those reasons have been pointed out already. Likewise there are reasons for both resellers and non-resellers to like the re-release concept

i think trying to twist this conversation into yet another "screw those evil bastards" rant fest does us all a disservice and distracts from the more interesting aspects of the re-release debate