Would re-releases be such a bad thing?

oldtodd33

Just a thought. If I sell my one sealed Cafe Corner because it's taking up too much space and someone pays the going rate of say, $2000. Does that now make me an evil re-seller?

juggles7

Of course it would. Why wouldn't it?

Jern92

oldtodd33 said:

Just a thought. If I sell my one sealed Cafe Corner because it's taking up too much space and someone pays the going rate of say, $2000. Does that now make me an evil re-seller?

Assuming you haven't bought up every single set available in store back then just so you could resell them now, then it probably doesn't. I have seen people literally empty shelves and go home with thousands of dollars worth of Lego they'll then carefully store and resell in a decade or so.

cheshirecat

@oldtodd33 of course not, that's like saying all Americans are stupid Americans when we all know that only those with 'Trump for president' stickers are. Or all Brits have wonky teeth, actually that is true.

Legopants

cheshirecat said:

Or all Brits have wonky teeth, actually that is true.

I can vouch for that!

TigerMoth

monkey_roo said:

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.

Some of the current comments about the Toy Shop suggest otherwise. Completionists don't like re-worked releases because it means there's a set that they don't really want but have to have. Do I want to spend what is actually quite a large sum of money on a building that looks just like Cafe Corner, but has an interior? No. I'd rather have a new building. Would I be bothered if the original was re-released, being an identical set? No. It devalues existing sets, which would upset resellers, but most other collectors didn't buy it with any real eye for its future value.

The Toy Shop has already been re-released. That didn't draw anything like the negative comments of the release of the new reworked version. It takes a lot of positive sentiment to make up for one negative one.

Yodalicious

oldtodd33 said:

Just a thought. If I sell my one sealed Cafe Corner because it's taking up too much space and someone pays the going rate of say, $2000. Does that now make me an evil re-seller?

No. And it doesn't if you did the same with 10 of them either. In that case, it's become a collectible to that person wishing to purchase it, making it no different than a baseball card, comic book, antique, etc. Yes, not everyone treats them as collectibles and that's fine too, but the "evil resellers" thing is ridiculous. 

I missed out on Cafe Corner because I was in my dark ages. Would I like to have it? Sure. Am I mad at myself for missing it? No. Do I want to see it re-released? NO! I missed it. It happened. I'm moving on. If I'm upset about anything I missed, it's the ones I had a legitimate chance to buy when they were available in the retail environment. Haunted House, for instance. But even I that case, it was my own fault for not pulling the trigger. Why in the world should I be upset at the people now selling it for a higher
price? It isn't their fault I missed it. I had months and months and months to figure out a way to get it, but I didn't.

i've bought two sets at aftermarket prices that I could've bought when they were on shelves. All told, I paid about 250% of the retail price for them both when they were on shelves after I came out of my dark ages. If anyone is to blame for that, it's me. Not the people who sold them to me. 

TL:DR - I don't want re-releases. I'd rather move on from the sets I missed and get excited about the next new waves coming out. 

aldredd

Bobflip said:

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

As far as I'm aware, nobody is forced to buy anything from Lego - re-release or otherwise :)

veleta

The sales on this WV set are going to be good for Lego. they won´t lose money.  Already they are almost 3,000 that want it,  only  in this website.

For me the main problem is that we have to wait for next year to have a new WV set.

So if we stick to the issue :  " Would re-releases be such a bad thing?" 

I would say that as long as this doesn't interfered  (just like what happened this year with WV theme) with the release of new sets.  I´m happy.

The first big set that got me out of my dark ages was the carousel  I did  found it in a small store and paid 130€.  I have to admit that I almost build it until I found out how expensive it got. So I keep it seal, thinking to trade it for the MS or CC. 

I will love to see  all three re-released,  if this is what Lego fans want. then I will build mine and get the other two.

 

So I will say that time has come for Lego to ask people what they want.  Just like they are doing with Cuusso,  IDEAS.

They want 10.000 votes to take a project in consideration.  Well...   Go  ahead  and ask to see how many of us want the chance to get that special set that we are missing.

Maybe de CC with more than 7,000 asking for it in this web site, or the GG with 6,500...  All the modular's  that came after have more than 15,000 between  owns and wants.  So taking another wild guess  the  CC with  (4290 own) could have a potential demand of more than 10,000 units easily.   I don´t think that Lego could lose money selling  10,000 CC.

TigerMoth

Compared to Ideas sets, Cafe Corner would be expensive, so the gap between interest and action is likely to larger. If new moulds are required, as seems to bet he case, only producing 10,000 sets would add a lot to the cost of each one (or reduce the profit quite a lot). And a re-released set would also be less popular to the general public because they are quite likely to have seen 'something like that' before The whole point of an Ideas set is that it is innovative and therefore attractive.

TLG have all the information we have - and a whole lot more besides. On that basis, you would hope that, when making any concrete decision, they'd have a reasonably good idea of what they are doing. That's a little different from the situation a few years ago when they simply drifted into trouble.

Bumblepants

Hey remember when the Pirates 3 wave came out and everyone said things like 'Waaa it is all just the same as Pirates 2!'. Yeah. Re-releases.

TheLoneTensor

I don't like re-releases because:

1) It's lazy
2) It's embarassing (really, do you think the designer felt proud in making that video?)
3) It's taking up the slot of another new design

#3 is the strongest for me, but not because I just want another cool design (which I do).  It's more that when there's a new design, there's new techniques, new parts, new colors, etc.  Lots of newness that evolves with every single new design.  Re-releases squelch that innovative momentum.

There's also one more thing.  My entire WV just got a little less special.  I thought it was cool having all the sets, for all the years. even if they weren't all winners.  I'm a completionist and I love Xmas.  This was the perfect line that Lego had me hooked on because the sets were reasonably priced, once a year, something I could look forward to for the season and as a result of all that, really special.  That magic took a big hit this year.

TheLoneTensor

TigerMoth said:

TLG have all the information we have - and a whole lot more besides. On that basis, you would hope that, when making any concrete decision, they'd have a reasonably good idea of what they are doing.

This kind of sentiment is obvious, so why do people continually feel the need to post it over and over again?  Next you'll be writing that Lego is a corporation, and that a corporation's job is to make money.  You're not enlightening anyone.

I know Lego is successful, and I know they make tons of money.  When it comes to me, and my selfish love of myself and those around me, I don't give a crap about what Lego knows, thinks they know or doesn't know.  I only know how it affects me.  I'm not here to make Lego money, or support some kind of greater corporate effort for them to make even more money.  I'm here to buy some cool things that appeal to me.  If they don't appeal to me, then I'm simply not going to be spending that money, nor promoting others to do the same.

Pitfall69

Bumblepants said:

Hey remember when the Pirates 3 wave came out and everyone said things like 'Waaa it is all just the same as Pirates 2!'. Yeah. Re-releases.

I love the Pirates line, but I haven't bought one Pirates 3 set...not one.

juggles7

oldtodd33 said:

Just a thought. If I sell my one sealed Cafe Corner because it's taking up too much space and someone pays the going rate of say, $2000. Does that now make me an evil re-seller?

Since you chose to insert the word "evil", you asked 2 questions in 1, leaving it open to interpretation.  Does reselling one item make you a reseller? Yes. That's the definition of the word. Is reselling evil? Not in my book. 

TheLoneTensor

According to the local vernacular, it makes you a reseller, not a Reseller.

cheshirecat

Surely with regard to the WV line its most likely that the rerelease hasn't replaced a new set design. The theme was over, there weren't production slots for a full release etc etc who knows. So noone has lost a set, just some people have gained the chance to get one they missed out on. And a bunch of us get to enjoy post after post of butthurt. The video was bad though, very cringey.

Also its not lazy if a rerelease was the intention/solution to a problem. If they did release a range of rereleases it wouldn't be lazy it would be factored in to the decision making and free up other designers to spend time on other sets, its not as if LEGO are downsizingfor releases like this I can't see shelf space being an issue although clearly production capacity could be. 

Rereleases aren't a problem, how they do it could be.

jonamok

Speaking from self-interest (aren't we all?): As a very new AFOL and massive Star Wars fan, I would love to own the UCS Falcon. But could never pay $5,000 for it, or whatever the 'market' says is the going rate.

Should I just accept my lot, let it go, or stare enviously and longingly at those crazy eBay entries for ever? Maybe.

But would I want Lego to re-release UCS MF so I could get it for whatever today's RRP would be? Even if it meant one or more other sets were delayed a little? Of course. Would the thousands who have it on their I WANT list feel the same? I strongly suspect so.

Would I care that a re-release would eat into the profit margin of speculators with multiple UCS MFs going for current 'market' prices? Nope.

dragonhawk

TheLoneTensor said:

According to the local vernacular, it makes you a reseller, not a Reseller.

Ah I got it now.  That was why the store chain was called Toys "R" US and not Toys r Us

vwong19

I don't mind re-releases. Just give us a few months warning so that we can sell off sets before the prices plummet. A main why rumors are so important.

Seriously, I collect Lego because it is fun, creative, mentally stimulating and also the sets and pieces have value. I would be less inclined to buy more Lego if they didn't retain their value. Re-releasing set effectively reduces the value by increasing the supply.

I am fine with re-releases because we all can control how we collect with what we buy, but also with what we sell. Collecting doesn't have to be a one way street and just accumulate. Collections can be better appreciated and managed by selling off unwanted sets or sometimes very desired sets (sacrifices have to be made).

I am just saying that we don't have to be victims of re-releases, but go with the flow.

dragonhawk

This is such an easy thing for LEGO to solve.  They should have released the re-hashed set ALONG WITH brand new Winter Village set.  They would have gottten the double dip of profit from the already popular line.  This would satisfy both the new and current fans of the line.  And who knows, perhaps the current fans would buy the cheaper (than 2nd market) re-hashed sets as gifts to bring even MORE new fans to the line.

This is so easy to figure out, my question is why didn't LEGO do it this way?

juggles7

Guess they thought Santa's Workshop and the redone Toy Shop would be enough Christmas offerings for this year.

BrickDancer

If the theory ends up being true that Santas Workshop was supposed to be the last and indeed we do not get any WV set in 2016, then I would retrospectively retract my complaint about this ill conceived rehash. Because it would have been a no gain/no loss situation in the end. But I doubt this to be true, I expect a glorious new WV set next year. Which only makes this lost year a big shame. When you look at the theme's history after a long 8 years it would be:

'Original, Original, Original, Original, Original, Original, Rehash, Original,' What does look right in this picture kids?

And when it comes to being selfish/entitled, who's actually more so? The folks against the rehash and asking for something new? Or those folks cheering/asking for more rehashes to service those left wanting?

TheLoneTensor

BrickDancer said:

If the theory ends up being true that Santas Workshop was supposed to be the last and indeed we do not get any WV set in 2016, then I would retrospectively retract my complaint about this ill conceived rehash.

I agree with this, a lot.  If Lego were even the least bit forthcoming about this kind of information (i.e. lines/themes ending), it would make a lot more sense.  Instead of them explicitly stating that Santa's Workshop was the end of the line (and I don't count an arguably misspoken word in the designer video to be such), they leave us in this weird twilight zone wondering if this is the end, is there something else coming later this year, and what about 2016?

Instead, here we sit, on one of the largest and most influential fan sites, confused and with a bit of potentially misplaced anger.  This is why I take umbrage with people who give Lego a free pass on all their actions by blindly correlating making billions of dollars with the ability to do no wrong.

SumoLego

^ Agreed! 

The overall volume of sales may lower TLG's motivation to share information with a segment of the market, but there are consequences for being so close to the vest that it may frustrate the base of purchasers.

Who knows if/when they actually decide to retire certain sets.  Most of the time when I'm purchasing, it's because I want the set, not because I expect to sit on 10 or 100 of them for sale later.  However, some sets take priority over others, and (for instance) the UCS Sandcrawler should probably be in my collection, but I'm waiting until it's closer to retirement before purchasing.

(Which is why I happened to miss the Town Hall.  Dag-nabbit!)

I remember all of that nonsense with the initial release of the Exo-Suit.  Sometimes it may be better to not have the detailed information...

If they had not done a second production run, then who knows what that set could have been selling for!

madforLEGO

veleta said:

The sales on this WV set are going to be good for Lego. they won´t lose money.  Already they are almost 3,000 that want it,  only  in this website.

Not really a scientific number of folks wanting the set, but OK we can use that for this exercise. 3000 people supposedly want the new toy shop here (though my screen shows that 1992 on Brickset currently 'want' it). However, how many of those are going to pay 80 USD for it?  I mean I could put that I 'want' it... but only at about half price as I already have an original. So how many of those 2K are in the same mindset I wonder? How many are kids when they have no way to buy it?
Lets look at the original. I see 7000K owning #10199, Keep in mind that is 7K that are likely not going to buy the re-release. So is 2K -even 3K- enough to justify this set coming back out? if you are 'losing' 4-5K people that could buy it but will not due to having it already? Even if you but some of those will buy the new one as well, I doubt all 7K will.

veleta said:

.....So I will say that time has come for Lego to ask people what they want.  Just like they are doing with Cuusso,  IDEAS.

They want 10.000 votes to take a project in consideration.  Well...   Go  ahead  and ask to see how many of us want the chance to get that special set that we are missing.

Ideas regularly have mod type buildings on it, they get 10K votes and guess what? NONE are produced by LEGO. I think that Cuusoo is limited, LEGO may not say it, but they are. Look at how many really well designed sets over 100 USD have been sent to Ideas, and gotten the required votes, but LEGO refuses to produce.

Plus I do not think you can always take the Ideas surveys verbatim. 10K may want it, but again how many will pony up the cash to buy it? Again I think the low numbers would shock you. 10K even really is a drop in the bucket to LEGO. Especially when you see the numbers that City, SW, and Ninjago have put out in the recent past. LEGO can placate to folks at 10K votes when the set is 59.99 or under, but would they really do that with a larger set? I have not seen it yet in the history of Cuusoo or Ideas.

The_Mad_Vulcan

As a record collector, I have no issue with re-issues, especially when there is a high demand. Making things available to new collectors increases the interest in the hobby and it doesn't significantly detract from the value of the originals as they are still the original version (steps are always taken to make the re-issue distinct).

Pitfall69

I suspect a lot of the love for the UCS MF and wanting it re released is stemming from it being so expensive in the Aftermarket. Any respectable Star Wars fan, Lego fan or not, was foaming at the mouth when it was released. The problem was the price tag. $500 is a lot to pay for a toy, so even people that wanted the set at RRP couldn't afford it; me included. 

The CC and to a lesser degree the GG, look dated and I wouldn't want them re released. I wouldn't mind another Hotel/Cafe or Apartment/Grocery Store, but completely reworked and re designed ones.

I laugh at the disdain against resellers. Any person that resells an item they previously purchased is a reseller. Any store (unless that store makes and sells its own products) is a reseller. If you hate resellers, yet you shop at Amazon, Ebay, Walmart, Target, Briclink etc. you are a hypocrite. 

jonamok

What if most of the 'disdain at resellers' is aimed at those who bulk buy sets to hasten there out of stock status, and sit on garages full of BNIB rare sets to sell later for the new 'market value', which they have, at least partially, helped to drive up? Is that less hypocritical?

TheLoneTensor

Please, just stop.

TigerMoth

TheLoneTensor said:

This kind of sentiment is obvious, so why do people continually feel the need to post it over and over again?  Next you'll be writing that Lego is a corporation, and that a corporation's job is to make money.  You're not enlightening anyone.

Because there is a constant stream of posts that say "TLG have got it wrong", " TLG shouldn't do that; they should do this". As the people at TLG who make these decisions are quite likely to read a forum like this one, it must be galling to not only have their decisions constantly criticised by people who aren't in possession of all the facts, but also to be unable to respond.If their critics are not enlightened, they should be.

cheshirecat

@Pitfall69 your argument would hold some weight if the minecraft thing hadn't happened. That one event showed exactly the sort of class, or lack of it, that a fairly big chunk of the 'resellers' have. And clearly differentiates between retailers and resellers. Sadly all resellers are tarred with the sane brush.

SithLord196

I didn't bring enough popcorn with me for this.

Pitfall69

^^^It is really no different than any big box store or online store driving out other smaller businesses. I see people on Facebook complain about Walmart and Amazon.Those same people post things that they bought at said places for a song on Facebook. Ugh...

BrickDancer

^Quick flippers are a bane and sully all other Resellers/resellers. They do not add any value whatsoever to the community and only hold new released sets as hostage for those impatient to wait for the next batch to hit shelves.

But they are completely different to EOL sellers, whom help the community by extending the amount of time for others to buy retired sets.

And a whole different animal compared to Part Sellers, whom bless their little hearts and pained fingers, do the hard work of populating the world with pieces for others to MOC their lives away. They are like the farmers in the Lego World, spreading seeds across the globe.

Yodalicious

^ And all of those types will still be around 10 years from now when this thread has 25,000+ comments. 

Briking

I appologise for a session of "like-whoring".

I missed CC, GG and MS. I BL'ed them. If they were to be re-released I would not see the Modulars as collectible as they are now.  These models are not aimed at kids.  Lego do what Lego wants.  But p1$$1ng off fans who buy your premium line hasn't been known to be a great business strategy so far.

Enough of Lego for today.  Off to look at my 20 Bugattis.

tamamahm

I think for me there are two different questions.
Do I have an issue with this re-release?
YES.
Do I have an issue with re-releases in general?
No.

The issue with this set is that there is one set a year for a theme. Unlike most Lego themes, it is VERY much set up like other non-Lego holiday display themes out there. Virtually any holiday display theme I can think of, has the innate expectation that a new set will come out every year to add to the collection. It is like a holiday Barbie, or a Holiday Hallmark ornament, or a winter village display set. It doesn't matter that Lego has not communicated this expectation, but it is simply based on this being analogous to what so many other companies do with a display set.  You just do not simply re-release an item in such a line without a new item. 
What is worse, though, is that this particular display item, has became a yearly tradition for some families.  It would sort of like Lego saying...eh... we decided to skip a Lego advent calendar this year.


If there was any set to re-release, this was simply not it, UNLESS they planned to put out a new set as well.


As for other sets Lego has, I think that becomes a very different matter. It isn't quite wrapped up in all the expectations the Winter theme will have to many consumers. Putting out something old, but desired, such as the Grand Carousel, I think actually would attract new customers, especially considering the other carnival sets out right now. 

TigerMoth

Briking said:

I missed CC, GG and MS. I BL'ed them. If they were to be re-released I would not see the Modulars as collectible as they are now.

How does that work? If a new Modular was released tomorrow, it would either be collectible or not. You have no idea how many are sitting in warehouses, and even if you did, you would have no idea whether more production runs are intended. And what is the difference between a further production run when stocks are low compared to one a few years after the set was retired

Or are you thinking of a re-release as being a very similar rather than identical set?

BrickDancer

How would everyone feel if they re-released recent EOL'd sets? Instead of something new, for 2016 we get:

Train: An exact re-release of the Maersk Train
Pirates: A similar re-release of the Imperial Flagship but with red instead of medium blue accents.
Modulars: A re-release of Grand Emporium but with a different Billboard design.
UCS SW: We get a rehashed TIE Interceptor with Bley instead of Blue accents.
Creator Expert: We get the VW Beetle again but in Red instead of Dark Blue.
Licensed Theme: We get the entire Sponge Bob run to start again from the beginning with slightly changed sets of Chum Bucket, Krusty Krab, and a third Pineapple house.

I'm sure a lot of the folks happy about the Toy Shop rehash might feel a bit differently when it hits their other fave themes that they might already have.

TheLoneTensor

^ Agreed 90%.  As many prototype train locomotives are simply different paint jobs, I'd be totally fine with palette swaps on the Maersk Train with different roadnames, and I'd buy every damn one :)

Yodalicious

To summarize all that's been said/debated, the answer to the question "would re-releases be such a bad thing?" is no, they wouldn't. But those that want them shouldn't assume everyone does because, clearly, that isn't true. 

Aanchir

BrickDancer said:

How would everyone feel if they re-released recent EOL'd sets? Instead of something new, for 2016 we get:

Train: An exact re-release of the Maersk Train
Pirates: A similar re-release of the Imperial Flagship but with red instead of medium blue accents.
Modulars: A re-release of Grand Emporium but with a different Billboard design.
UCS SW: We get a rehashed TIE Interceptor with Bley instead of Blue accents.
Creator Expert: We get the VW Beetle again but in Red instead of Dark Blue.
Licensed Theme: We get the entire Sponge Bob run to start again from the beginning with slightly changed sets of Chum Bucket, Krusty Krab, and a third Pineapple house.

I'm sure a lot of the folks happy about the Toy Shop rehash might feel a bit differently when it hits their other fave themes that they might already have.

Besides the SpongeBob sets and the UCS TIE Interceptor (which I'd want to see updated more substantially, since unlike all the other examples they weren't such great sets to begin with), I would not have an issue with any of those things individually. If they were the only new things we got for the year, yes, that'd be a problem, but that's a ridiculous slippery-slope scenario with no bearing to the current reality of one popular set being re-released.

Granted, there are a lot of those examples I wouldn't actually buy, particularly if my family already had the original. But there are already a lot of sets I don't buy. Being able to drop a new set in any of those product categories from my wish list would just mean I could better focus on other things. And meanwhile, it'd be very cool for those fans who missed out on the originals to have a chance to enjoy the re-released/updated versions.

Also, none of the things you mentioned are my favorite themes. But I wouldn't really feel much differently about re-releases in my favorite themes like Ninjago or Bionicle, as long as they were sets that are still great enough in hindsight to be worth re-releasing (of course, as with SpongeBob, Bionicle has very few of these, since the constraction category has evolved a great deal since 2010 when the line first ended).

TigerMoth

BrickDancer said:

I'm sure a lot of the folks happy about the Toy Shop rehash might feel a bit differently when it hits their other fave themes that they might already have.

Only if they did them all at once, so there was nothing new.

But you have muddied the waters, because some sets do bear repetition in different variants, although most do not.

Another factor to consider is how many sets someone buys. If someone only buys Winter Village, they'll notice when there's a re-release instead of a new set; if they buy, say, a dozen reasonably-sized sets a year, they'll probably not.

Also some things are more demanding in terms of completism. Someone might might have to have all the Modulars but not be so bothered about all the Technic flagships.

dragonhawk

Briking said:

Enough of Lego for today.  Off to look at my 20 Bugattis.

Bugattis are overrated. McLaren 4evah!

oldtodd33

@BrickDancer  Please, no more Sponge Bob sets, I could take that again. 

NinjaGaiden

I'm all for re-releases.  Despite the whole collector's/resale market, these toys are meant to be played with, and should be available to kids that weren't born 8, 9, or 10 years ago.  However, the easiest way to make it a win-win for everybody is to simply label it as a re-release.  The original, sealed version will hold its value for its collectibility, being a "first print" (as they say in the comics world).  

Galactus

BrickDancer said:

And when it comes to being selfish/entitled, who's actually more so? The folks against the rehash and asking for something new? Or those folks cheering/asking for more rehashes to service those left wanting?

I think that the people from the most selfish group would care the least about this.

BrickDancer said:

How would everyone feel if they re-released recent EOL'd sets? Instead of something new, for 2016 we get:

Train: An exact re-release of the Maersk Train
Pirates: A similar re-release of the Imperial Flagship but with red instead of medium blue accents.
Modulars: A re-release of Grand Emporium but with a different Billboard design.
UCS SW: We get a rehashed TIE Interceptor with Bley instead of Blue accents.
Creator Expert: We get the VW Beetle again but in Red instead of Dark Blue.
Licensed Theme: We get the entire Sponge Bob run to start again from the beginning with slightly changed sets of Chum Bucket, Krusty Krab, and a third Pineapple house.

I'm sure a lot of the folks happy about the Toy Shop rehash might feel a bit differently when it hits their other fave themes that they might already have.

Personally I'd have no problem with this particular scenario, since I don't own any of those original sets yet. And after the 2016 wave would end, I still wouldn't have them all, simply because of my limited budget.

Pitfall69

TheLoneTensor said:

^ Agreed 90%.  As many prototype train locomotives are simply different paint jobs, I'd be totally fine with palette swaps on the Maersk Train with different roadnames, and I'd buy every damn one :)

Me too.

Pitfall69