Would re-releases be such a bad thing?

Pitfall69

I mentioned the safety and quality control standards adding cost to Lego sets before. I am sure that LEPIN does not employ these kind of standards. Also, it costs money to have lawyers on retainer and I am probably sure that LEPIN doesn't have many if ANY at all. All this costs money. Design, Testing, Quality Control, Safety, Advertising, Web Design and IT...wait...as bad as Lego S@H is, maybe they don't spend a lot in that department ;) Anyway, all of that costs money and LEPIN doesn't have to pay much if any of those costs.

I mean, if a child cuts themselves on a very sharp corner of a LEPIN brick or gets sick from the ink they may use; who are you going to sue? I am sure you will get nowhere. Does LEPIN even have a customer service? That costs money too.

blogzilly

@cheshirecat I know you had your tongue in cheek, but I wanna address that too. Review sites get a pass. Even though they get comped samples, and some do and some don't, that doesn't mean that the integrity of a review is compromised. I think that certainly there is a human desire to not want to bite any hand and be gracious, but I've read reviews here that, were I the designer, I would say "yeah he's got a point about that".

Review sites need to try and be professional and objective, in my opinion. And most are. The Internet has made it too easy for anyone to express any opinion in any way, almost immediately. And that isn't really a true reflection of life. Reviewers on sites that reach a certain level go beyond that gut immediacy and present reviews that are more cerebral and less emotional. 

i remember reading plenty of reviews that were not favorable of products I designed, from reviewers I respected and would see in person at conventions. Reviewers know this is a possibility and I think it's great that they DO have the courage to still express opinions that aren't just glowing adulation. Any creative person worth anything will tell you that we don't improve unless we are open to criticism that is presented constructively.

Honestly? Most of the real biting criticism I ever found? Message boards. I guess I'm lucky I got out before YouTube was so popular. :)

Pitfall69

As far as reviews go: I have seen it many times; if the product is crap, but affordable,  people tend to give it higher ratings. People will say "For $100, I expected the quality to be much higher, so I am giving it 1 star". On the flip side you see comments like "For $20, I took a chance and did not expect much, the quality was decent, but it blew up after only a short while, but for $30 what the hell, so I am giving it 4 stars"

How many times have you gone to dinner and the food and service was ok, but cheap, so you gave a good tip (Oops, I forgot Europeans don't tip ;) ) and you gave a decent review of the restaurant. Then you go to an upscale restaurant and the food and service was better, but thought for the money it could be better, so you give it a bad review.

Pitfall69

Anyway, all of this should probably be in the thread affectionately known as the "LEPIN thread" ;) 

datsunrobbie

blogzilly said:

I'd be careful, or rather suspect, of all the 5-star reviews. For one? It is much easier to plop down five stars when you pay a lot less money. A lot easier. You are way, WAY less critical. It is simple human nature. But also...I imagine that most who have this have it because they DON'T have the LEGO version. So they do not have a comparative base.

I tried something a few days back. A test so to speak. Bought an Architecture set from LEGO, and the bootleg set that stole its core design produced by BlockTECH. I then built both. The LEGO version was mid 30 dollars on eBay, I got lucky. The BT version was FIVE DOLLARS at a local Dollar General store.

The LEGO version was quality across the board. Loved it. The BT version was going well and when I got to a certain level everything was wrong. Structurally unsound. Totally began throwing everything off. In addition, the plastics were inferior. I just know this because I worked in the toy industry for years. But...anyone can just SEE the difference by looking at the way light penetrates the plastics. I also know that BT does not safety test their bricks. Doesn't indicate it on the packaging, and examining the bricks reveals a lot of small safetly issues that LEGO does not have, especially sharp point issues.

Testing properly costs a TON of money I might add. A TON.

Anyway...as I was reading all of the above, I was thinking...how might someone react who wasn't me to either product? Probably the same way a lot of people around here and on the main site react. Complaints about the high costs of LEGO compared to so-called "brands" like LEPIN, etc. But you need to understand...LEPIN is not a brand...it is nothing more than a more organized version of a Chinese factory worker grabbing a bunch of samples off the assembly line and selling them on eBay from Hong Kong once he or she crosses the border (back when there was absolutely positively NO Internet allowed in Southern China).

That kind of BS happened all of the time to products I worked on and to other friends of mine, it was just outrageous. This is just that multiplied by a factor of You Gotta Be Kidding Me.

But does John Q. I Don't-Give-A-Sh#t really care, as long as he can get a UCS Tumbler for a reasonable price? Nah...why get bent out of shape if a lot of it falls apart or if half of the parts are sharp and dangerous to the younger kids in the house or that the whole thing is likely toxic? Hey man...It didn't cost nearly as much as LEGO does! WOOHOO! Five stars baby!

My opinions...and these are just mine.
1. LEGO pricing is likely done to a very rigid standard of percentages like every other company.
2. Their product is not overpriced at all, it is actually a LOT of plastic parts, with lots of different colors, and kids are involved here no way around that so safety testing is required and is very, very expensive.
3. Speaking of a lot of plastic parts, plastic has gone up in price like you would not believe. So has gas. All that comes from petroleum. And its all interconnected. Remember when action figures were, I dunno, five bucks? They cost around 20 now.
4. LEGO is experimenting with evergreen product and re-releasing previously retired product in an effort to engage new customers but more importantly, and I stress this...make profit. If these experiments make profit, they will do more of them. Period end of sentence. Every company has that goal. LEGO dreams and lollipops aside, it is still a business like every other toy company.

Wow, OK I'll stop now...sorry! 

It is odd that you warn people here to be wary of 5-star reviews of LEPIN product, and then review product from an unrelated manufacturer to prove your point. That's like warning people in a Ford forum to ignore reviews about a Chevrolet because you bought a Yugo and it was not very good.

Block Tech is part of RMS International, a company based in England.
http://www.rmsint.com/block-tech.html

From their website:
"RMS International is under-pinned by rigorous safety and quality control procedures. We liaise closely with local government agencies and trading standards inspectors to ensure that our products meet all the high principles laid down by legislation. All our testing is performed by internationally accredited laboratories ensuring that legislation is met along with our own demanding codes of practise."

This would seem to contradict your "knowing" that they don't safety test their products. And if you think LEGO has no sharp points, dump a couple dozen 2x2 blocks on the floor and jump on them barefoot. 

So they appear to be a safety-tested English knock-off, not an untested Chinese knockoff. I've seen some of their minifigure sets locally and dismissed them as fugly, but not dangerous. I have not ever seen their Structures line in person, and cannot find any reviews. Did you find 5-star reviews of the set you built, or were you referring to reviews of other products?

Your analysis of LEPIN as "not a brand" is quite simply hilarious.

And I think you don't give John Q enough credit. Crap is still crap, and nobody wants that. If somebody can afford to choose between LEGO and Best Lock, and they buy Best Lock and it sucks, they are likely to be critical because they wasted money on an inferior product. A person who can only afford Best Lock may be even MORE critical, because they had less money available and spent it all on a product that did not meet their lowered expectations. LEPIN seems to be getting around this by supplying bricks that compare favorably in quality to LEGO, which is generally accepted to be the benchmark all other block-based construction toys strive for.

TigerMoth

blogzilly said:

I tried something a few days back. A test so to speak. Bought an Architecture set from LEGO, and the bootleg set that stole its core design produced by BlockTECH.

Nobody disputes that most clones are a pile of dingo's kidney's. However, any comments you have to make about BLOCK TECH have no direct relevance to any of the others. One of the reasons that LEPIN are singled out is because their products buck that stereotype, and there are people on this forum who have commented on LEPIN products when they've actually got one, not speculated on the basis of another manufacturer that's 10,000 miles away on the other side of the world.

There are serious collectors here who have reviewed LEPIN's sets, started from a position of scepticism, and had those opinions overturned. And considering the type of reaction they've been likely to get, they had absolutely nothing to gain. They've also been members here longer than you, but you want people to pay more attention to your review of the wrong product than their review of the right one?

But you need to understand...LEPIN is not a brand...it is nothing more than a more organized version of a Chinese factory worker grabbing a bunch of samples off the assembly line and selling them on eBay from Hong Kong once he or she crosses the border (back when there was absolutely positively NO Internet allowed in Southern China).

Please, tell us more. You seem to be in possession of much more information than a number of posters, both in the West and the East, have been unable to determine despite a lot of research.

Speaking of a lot of plastic parts, plastic has gone up in price like you would not believe.

No it hasn't. The price of ABS pellets has actually gone down. Adjusted for inflation, it's gone down even more.

So has gas.

That hasn't either, except during the course of this year. The price is lower than during any other period during the last ten years, except for a brief dip at the end of 2008.

All that comes from petroleum. And its all interconnected.

Again that's not true. It's part of the skill involved in running an oil refinery that determines the proportions of the fractions that can be obtained. It's not simply a matter of putting oil in at one end and you get certain amounts of each product out of the other. Their prices are not directly related.

Pitfall69

TigerMoth said:

Pitfall69 said:

Oh, I wasn't talking about value, I was just talking about the production numbers. In the grand scheme of things, 10,000 units is nothing compared to the number of sets Lego actually produces.

You spoke of rarity, so I'm not sure of the point you were trying to make?

As far as different parts; there is an actual part  or two that is different. The COA is not the different part.

Oh, I know. What I meant was that something trite like the COA is all you need to make a "limited edition", and is something that anybody with a printer could produce.

Ha!!! To be fair, I started typing qhile we were driving to puck up my little one. My father decided to drive and refused to drive on a gravel road with his new SUV, so he drove 5 miles out of the way and I lost cell service. Between the loss of cell service and arguing with my father about his choice of routes, I lost the point I was trying to make :) To be honest, I am Pitfall and under normal conditions my points are a bit blurred. 

tallblocktoo

Sorry for all your losses @Pitfall69!

TigerMoth

Pitfall69 said:

To be fair, I started typing qhile we were driving to puck up my little one.

Is that legal in the US?

tallblocktoo

@TigerMoth why wouldn't it be as a passenger?

SumoLego

Pitfall69 said:

Oops, I forgot Europeans don't tip ;) 

Is that why I can't get my waiters to smile at 'Chez Albert'?

TigerMoth

tallblocktoo said:

@TigerMoth why wouldn't it be as a passenger?

I meant what he was contemplating doing to his child.

blogzilly

Can't get sucked into a message board debate...it was my mistake to get involved. I don't want to go point for point, sentence for sentence, it just gets so freaking tiresome. Apologies if the BlockTECH comparison offended anyone, to me they are no different than LEPIN, their packaging and design rips of Architecture on their Structures is as bad as LEPIN's ripoffs...and that's my opinion. If their website says one thing but their packaging says nothing about testing...I find that suspicious. There are rules for product that you release.

Anyway...I was expressing opinion, and that is all.  

TigerMoth

SumoLego said:

Pitfall69 said:

Oops, I forgot Europeans don't tip ;) 

Is that why I can't get my waiters to smile at 'Chez Albert'?

Possibly, However, if it's down to the lack of a tip, then somebody's telling them something. Europeans tip according to the service they perceive they've received; if they don't give one, there's a message.

There is an alternative - that a tip has automagically been added. That's a good way of getting it removed completely.

Pitfall69

TigerMoth said:

tallblocktoo said:

@TigerMoth why wouldn't it be as a passenger?

I meant what he was contemplating doing to his child.

See, under normal circumstances I can't even type.

SumoLego

TigerMoth said:

...Nobody disputes that most clones are a pile of dingo's kidney...

TigerMoth

blogzilly said:

Apologies if the BlockTECH comparison offended anyone

It didn't offend, but it was rubbish.

You stated quite categorically that you KNOW that BLOCK TECH don't safety test their products. I let that go to see what happened, but as somebody else pointed out almost simultaneously to my post, they're a British company, and is therefore subject to all the rigours of EU regulations. You also stated that there was no indication that it had been tested. The same products are sold in the UK, and therefore MUST be CE marked. Now, it is possible that they use different packaging in the US, but that's unlikely - and it's even more unlikely that they'd remove the CE mark in particular as it's recognised internationally - not universally, but certainly internationally.

Most people here have moved on from the concepts that all clones are Chinese, and all Chinese products are rubbish; you obviously have not. Most even accept that LEPIN is rather different - in particular when it comes to quality. The issues there come down to copyright infringement.

TigerMoth

SumoLego said:

TigerMoth said:

...Nobody disputes that most clones are a pile of dingo's kidney...

I like to give you an opportunity to nudge up your score of likes; you've been a bit disappointing in that regard recently.

madforLEGO

parsom said:

Legends line was battle with childhood memories. It was rather hard to win. And these sets were from rather different category than modulars etc.
WV "re-release" was like telling child - hey, no new gifts for this Christmas. We give you your gift from 5 years ago. But we repainted it!
Death Star was making a fools of us.
But sets like Haunted House or Orthanc Tower are something different. They are quite modern designs, with no need to upgrade. They not interfering with any exsisting series. Releasing them will not stop any new set release (like was with WV Toy Shop).
And they are still wanted. Look for a brikset wanted lists. Haunted House - 7000 own, 4000 want. Orthanc - 4900 own, 3400 want.
Plus - they were available for quite short period.
I think that Lego realised that retiring such sets too fast is stupid. Look what happend with WV Camper Van - it is still available.

There is a difference between 'want' and 'own'. Many 'want' a set, but are they willing to buy the set? I think people forget why there are not many of some of these older sets around, they were thought of as 'too pricey' when they were new, well if many of those folks thought those sets were expensive then.. wait until they see what LEGO will charge for them now.
Also the need to 'upgrade' is not always due to visual queues. It is due to lack of a part, or LEGO phasing something out of production, which can cause a change. Haunted house is nice, but now would likely be around 200 USD with some likely changes to the set. Well if it is released today for a 2 year, or even three year run, how many will buy it at 200 if many of the folks already have it? DS is not applicable because it is likely going to be around for another 8 years; LEGO clearly sees it as a flagship type of set for the SW line.
'Retiring sets too fast' is also really subjective. How long should the set be out?

Pitfall69

SumoLego said:

TigerMoth said:

...Nobody disputes that most clones are a pile of dingo's kidney...

I will have to give you a "like" because of the content and the "Seinfeld" reference, but I should take back the "like" because when deploying a proper meme, it must be the exact scene when said character (Elaine in this instance) spoke those words. I take great pride in my meme creation. I hand pick each pic or scene. This is almost offensive. Good day sir.

TheBigLegoski

^
It is not easy being funny.

MaffyD

^ I'm not giving you a like for your faux upper class English put down.  I'm giving you a like for your chutzpah in claiming your memes are in any way 'proper' - that's some statement! :-)

JudgeChuck

I gave @Pitfall69 a "like" simply because... :-)

SumoLego

Pitfall69 said:

I will have to give you a "like" because of the content and the "Seinfeld" reference, but I should take back the "like" because when deploying a proper meme, it must be the exact scene when said character (Elaine in this instance) spoke those words. I take great pride in my meme creation. I hand pick each pic or scene. This is almost offensive. Good day sir.

Look - I'm not the meme guy, but I couldn't let a dingo reference go unnoticed.  And the meme generator didn't have that photo.

https://youtu.be/ghCTZF61ey0

Maybe the dingo ate your kidney?

(Atleast I got the 'Alf' one right.)

CircleK

I'm seeing a few likes given out here and there, but I have yet to see anyone awarded a "boner like". All of you need to up your game. 

TheOriginalSimonB

I've finally worked out what the re-release Death Star reminds me of. Basically the same, but with tweaks to entertain the kids that also annoy the purists...

It's the Star Wars special editions.

AustinPowers

blogzilly said:

I tried something a few days back. A test so to speak. Bought an Architecture set from LEGO, and the bootleg set that stole its core design produced by BlockTECH. I then built both.

[...]

But you need to understand...LEPIN is not a brand...it is nothing more than a more organized version of a Chinese factory worker grabbing a bunch of samples off the assembly line and selling them on eBay from Hong Kong once he or she crosses the border (back when there was absolutely positively NO Internet allowed in Southern China).

[...]

You obviously haven't got the slightest clue about Lepin and what TLG might be up against.

Why compare BlockTECH with Lego and then draw conclusions about Lepin? Totally different subject matter. Have you built a Lepin set at all? I have, two of them actually. And I can attest for a fact that they are up to 98% of Lego standards already, and going by reviews of their newer sets, improving on those missing two percent in rapid steps.

Everyone who hated clone brands not only for the way they work but especially for their crappy quality should think again when it comes to Lepin. They are a real threat to TLG, not just some Chinese factory workers stealing stuff and flogging it off over the net. And TLG seems to have realized that, otherwise they wouldn't have taken the action they have just recently, after ignoring Lepin right up until the point where they became really popular in countries outside Asia.

blogzilly

TigerMoth said:

blogzilly said:

Apologies if the BlockTECH comparison offended anyone

It didn't offend, but it was rubbish.

You stated quite categorically that you KNOW that BLOCK TECH don't safety test their products. I let that go to see what happened, but as somebody else pointed out almost simultaneously to my post, they're a British company, and is therefore subject to all the rigours of EU regulations. You also stated that there was no indication that it had been tested. The same products are sold in the UK, and therefore MUST be CE marked. Now, it is possible that they use different packaging in the US, but that's unlikely - and it's even more unlikely that they'd remove the CE mark in particular as it's recognised internationally - not universally, but certainly internationally.

I'm sure most of what I wrote is rubbishy, I do regret using the term "know". Should have said "suspect". It was my understanding that BlockTech was not a UK company. I certainly could be wrong about that. Wouldn't be the first time. As for the packaging, I picked up another set to shoot and show here for a compare and looked at it, couldn't find any CE marking or other testing indicators on it. Not sure if there is anything on the inside that says anything, the set I tried to build I tossed the printed instructions and box as they became unusable to me. The shots below show a set I have not built but from the same line-up.  

Also @AustinPowers...no claims of expertise here, but I think it is OK to express an opinion on a subject in an open forum, just as you have. And I drew a conclusion about one clone brand after discussing another because IMO they are not that different from one another. Your assessment of LEPIN's quality being 98% of LEGO is your opinion, one I do not share, and that is OK. I lump clone brands together, as one pile. And I do so not necessarily even based on quality level. I do so more on an ethics-based assessment. But again, that is my own opinion and feeling. I see a photo like the below and see no genuine creativity from the company stealing the concepts from LEGO so blatantly.

I originally posted my thoughts because of the five star review thing, and that is why I brought up BlockTech stuff, since that was what I had personally opened but as I often do I went on a tangenty. There was no Lepinized agenda per se, I think I was making a perception point about clones in general. Perhaps I did not make that clearly enough. I can't even remember. It's a message board, I don't scrutinize when I write like I do when writing other things, I forgot how much posting on the fly can get misinterpreted or mis-intended.

But I posted because, to get back to the point of the thread, I believe the whole success of LEPIN's line is based on the prices on the secondary market of select sets from LEGO's history. Newer fans like myself would very much like to get a full set of Modular Buildings, for example. I have gone back as far as Grand Emporium but no Town Hall (for some reason got a good deal on GE). Earlier than that? Can't afford. I did miss out on the Death Star when it first came around, will be buying the new version, and am happy about that. Would love to see a re-released Haunted House, or a UCS Falcon, and others. 

So should LEGO re-release some of their earlier sets? They should give it some thought and it seems they have/are, as Huw's article from today suggests, since a decision to not re-release Cafe Corner, brought up in a Q&A at the fan weekend in Skærbæk, was supported with some compelling reasons.

dougts

I'm sorry, but this just makes no sense:

And I drew a conclusion about one clone brand after discussing another because IMO they are not that different from one another.

how do you know?  you admittedly have never interacted with a Lepin set, so there is no basis for drawing this conclusion. That's like saying "well, I've never seen a cat, but man I hate dogs, so cats must be just as bad".

Your assessment of LEPIN's quality being 98% of LEGO is your opinion, one I do not share

how can you have an opinion o the quality of a product you've never interacted with?

I honestly have no idea about Lepin quality - maybe it is junk, but I won't opine on it personally until I have interacted with it.

Fauch

that doesn't look like a clone to me, the 2 eiffel tower builds are very different. unless lego is the only company allowed to make eiffel tower toys?

dougts

Fauch said:

that doesn't look like a clone to me, the 2 eiffel tower builds are very different. unless lego is the only company allowed to make eiffel tower toys?

yeah, I noticed that too.  it's the same with the knockoff london bridge pick we saw before.  It would be nice if we could all agree on terminology, but we seem to interchange clone/counterfeit/competitor in all kinds of different ways that confuse the discussion.

calling Mega Bloks for example a clone or counterfeit brand is just not factually accurate.  they are a legit brick competitor to LEGO, regardless of what one things of them.

blogzilly

dougts said:

I'm sorry, but this just makes no sense:

And I drew a conclusion about one clone brand after discussing another because IMO they are not that different from one another.

how do you know?  you admittedly have never interacted with a Lepin set, so there is no basis for drawing this conclusion. That's like saying "well, I've never seen a cat, but man I hate dogs, so cats must be just as bad".

Your assessment of LEPIN's quality being 98% of LEGO is your opinion, one I do not share

how can you have an opinion o the quality of a product you've never interacted with?

I honestly have no idea about Lepin quality - maybe it is junk, but I won't opine on it personally until I have interacted with it.

Let me explain so it does. I don't feel I have to interact with Lepin to have an opinion on its quality. Just as I do not have to interact with a new LEGO set to form some kind of opinion on it. Or a film, or book, etc. I read reviews and I listen and I form an opinion. Now that is a flexible opinion, and if I'm smart, which I sometimes am, I keep my mind open and if something comes along that sways that opinion one way or another then it is swayed.

But I believe that everybody does this to some degree. Don't you? Just a little teeny bit? Maybe you don't on Lepin, but maybe in some other aspect of your life? Judgment without personal experience is a foundation of the human condition. Much of the Internet thrives because of it. :)

dougts

so it sounds to me like your opinion is based on what you think of Lepin's business practices, and not about their actual product quality.  That's fine, but then you should probably use a different term - a more accurate one - other than "quality".

can you point me to some of the Lepin reviews you have read from people who have actually interacted with the product? 

blogzilly

Fauch said:

that doesn't look like a clone to me, the 2 eiffel tower builds are very different. unless lego is the only company allowed to make eiffel tower toys?

My bad. I look at it as a knock-off, not sure what the terminology is supposed to be. But to me? The company putting the product out is trying to mimic the design of the Architecture brand of LEGO. To answer your question? No, LEGO is not the only company allowed to make Eiffel Tower toys. But if you are going to make an Eiffel Tower block building product, you don't have to make the product in packaging on black, with a very similar font and placement, with the first letter of the word "Structures" larger sort of like the "A" in Architecture is, etc.

It is ripping off an idea. And I don't like it. Would it be any kind of intellectual property law violation in a court? I have no idea. But as a creative person, I see that, and it doesn't pass the sniff test to me. Again...just my opinion.

Clone, knock-off, counterfeit, or even legit product, whatever it is supposed to be called, its crap. To me.

TigerMoth

blogzilly said:

It was my understanding that BlockTech was not a UK company. I certainly could be wrong about that.

BLOCK TECH is a brand of RMS International. Their headquarters is in the outskirts of Manchester in the UK. They have subsidiaries elsewhere in Europe, in China and in the US. The set you have shown is produced by and for the latter market - an American subsidiary of a British company. The name is probably totally unknown, but, in the UK,  they supply TRU, at least two of the four major supermarkets and the largest independent toy retailer, amongst others. The set  was made in China, but that doesn't mean much otherwise Apple fanboys would all be hiding under the table. So would TLG.

In the US, toys do not have to have any indication of safety testing, inside or out - I don't believe LEGO sets do.

I think it is OK to express an opinion on a subject in an open forum

That is fine. What is not fine is libelling one company based on your experience of another. Indeed, your comments don't just relate to one company but a whole industry. The comments made by @AustinPowers are at least made with reference to an actual product made by that company. If you look around, you will find similar comments made by others that are long-term AFOLs and not just "people who don't know any better". Their number includes at least one widely-respected reviewer.

I forgot how much posting on the fly can get misinterpreted or mis-intended.

If you state a whole series of issues as facts when they are demonstrably not, then you are highly likely to be taken to task for it. Unusually, you not only stated them as fact, but that they actually were fact. That is not something that is open to misinterpretation.

If you like facts, then you would do well to read the threads on this forum on this very subject. Indeed, reading them would demonstrate how opinions started very much from the same position as your and have gradually evolved in the light of evidence to the contrary. This is much deeper than you posting one opinion and somebody else posting another. It is one of the most significant issues to have affected the hobby in recent times, and there are threads to match.

if I'm smart, which I sometimes am, I keep my mind open and if something comes along that sways that opinion one way or another then it is swayed.

Oh good. That ought to mean you'll start reading.

Incidentally, whilst you'll find plenty of positive reviews for LEPIN products, and plenty of negative opinion about them from people who've never seen one, negative reviews are much harder to find.

You'll also find there's a new term that's been coined for LEPIN. You talked about clones; LEPIN has been referred to as a "premium clone" - the justification being that it is significantly different.

Much of the Internet thrives because of it. :)

These days, much of the Internet thrives despite being complete and utter BS.

So should LEGO re-release some of their earlier sets? They should give it some thought and it seems they have/are, as Huw's article from today suggests, since a decision to not re-release Cafe Corner, brought up in a Q&A at the fan weekend in Skærbæk, was supported with some compelling reasons.

Those "compelling reasons" are disappointing, largely because we've heard them all before. It's almost as if it's something they might've considered once and discarded, and have absolutely no intention of revisiting even in as the circumstances change. Any "can't"s on the part of TLG suddenly becomes "don't want"s in the light of another manufacturer doing just that thing, and is presumably why this subject has been resurrected.

Re-releasing old sets has many aspects to it, many of which have supporters on both sides, sometimes with personal reasons. On one hand, people who don't have EOLed sets would be able to get them at sensible prices; on the other it would probably not be too welcome with resellers who have stockpiles of those sets.

They're not new. What has changed is that LEPIN have done what some think TLG should've done. In doing so, they have demonstrated the existence of some sort of market for those sets, and, perhaps more significantly, caused some of those who have been loyal to the "LEGO" brand to question that loyalty. There are AFOLs who, faced with a set only being available on the secondary market, purchased the LEPIN version and, having first-hand experience of their products and contrary to your opinion, then gone back and bought others.

Fauch said:

that doesn't look like a clone to me, the 2 eiffel tower builds are very different.

It is also a totally different size. It's like comparing either of them to #10181.

dougts said:

calling Mega Bloks for example a clone or counterfeit brand is just not factually accurate.  they are a legit brick competitor to LEGO, regardless of what one things of them.

What makes a competitor "legit"? TLG are suing LEPIN; if TLG lose, how many people here will consider LEPIN legit?

As regards Mega Bloks being a clone, people are normally thinking in terms of the pieces, rather than sets, so they regard Mega Bloks as a clone because it's plug-compatible.

Recently, "copycat" seems to have been adopted for manufacturers that reproduce sets. "Counterfeit" implies fraud and an attempt to deceive the purchaser - and ought to be reserved for those, thankfully very few, companies who actually brand their products as "LEGO". The problem with that is that it gets applied to near-misses, and then not-so-near-misses.

CCC

blogzilly said:

dougts said:

I'm sorry, but this just makes no sense:

And I drew a conclusion about one clone brand after discussing another because IMO they are not that different from one another.

how do you know?  you admittedly have never interacted with a Lepin set, so there is no basis for drawing this conclusion. That's like saying "well, I've never seen a cat, but man I hate dogs, so cats must be just as bad".

Your assessment of LEPIN's quality being 98% of LEGO is your opinion, one I do not share

how can you have an opinion o the quality of a product you've never interacted with?

I honestly have no idea about Lepin quality - maybe it is junk, but I won't opine on it personally until I have interacted with it.

Let me explain so it does. I don't feel I have to interact with Lepin to have an opinion on its quality. Just as I do not have to interact with a new LEGO set to form some kind of opinion on it. Or a film, or book, etc. I read reviews and I listen and I form an opinion. Now that is a flexible opinion, and if I'm smart, which I sometimes am, I keep my mind open and if something comes along that sways that opinion one way or another then it is swayed.

But I believe that everybody does this to some degree. Don't you? Just a little teeny bit? Maybe you don't on Lepin, but maybe in some other aspect of your life? Judgment without personal experience is a foundation of the human condition. Much of the Internet thrives because of it. :)

I once read a post from someone else from Ohio and I didn't think much of it. I didn't read yours but I assume it's rubbish.

TigerMoth

CCC said:

I once read a post from someone else from Ohio and I didn't think much of it. I didn't read yours but I assume it's rubbish.

I'm just surprised that he didn't come to the conclusion that all plastic construction sets that are produced by European companies are crap.

parsom

TigerMoth said:

(...) perhaps more significantly, caused some of those who have been loyal to the "LEGO" brand to question that loyalty. There are AFOLs who, faced with a set only being available on the secondary market, purchased the LEPIN version and, having first-hand experience of their products and contrary to your opinion, then gone back and bought others.

True. Losing loyalty could be very hurting to Lego.

Josh_VanLego

kiki180703 said:

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.

 

I agree with kiki. There way to many Lego Police Stations. I would rather have a farm. 

AustinPowers

blogzilly said:

Also @AustinPowers...no claims of expertise here, but I think it is OK to express an opinion on a subject in an open forum, just as you have. And I drew a conclusion about one clone brand after discussing another because IMO they are not that different from one another. Your assessment of LEPIN's quality being 98% of LEGO is your opinion, one I do not share, and that is OK. I lump clone brands together, as one pile.

My assessment of Lepin's quality might be my own, but just look around. Read the reviews on the web, read the opinions of others here on the forum who have built Lepin sets. No matter where they come from, they share a common conclusion: that you can't throw Lepin onto the same pile as the other clone brands. When it comes to ethics, sure, they are all the same. But most people don't give a sh** about the ethics of a company, otherwise Amazon, Apple, ExxonMobil, Facebook, Google, McDonalds, all their peers from their respective segments, as well as most companies in the world would have gone bankcrupt a long time ago. There is hardly any company in the world that doesn't rely on unethical behaviour in order to thrive economically. After all, they are not charitable organisations but businesses who want and have to make money in order to pay their employees, invest and grow.

Now I am not condoning unethical behaviour but I am acknowlidging that we are too far gone in order to change the way the business world works.
So yes, Lepin is unethical, but that was not my point. I was talking about the quality of their products versus the quality of Lego versus other clone brands.

And you explicitely said you draw conclusions based on your experiences with one brand about another totally different brand. Sorry, but that is just BS behaviour, not just in my opinion, but as a fact. It's as if you said "I have test driven a Honda. It was crap. I am not going to buy a Toyota, because like Honda they are a Japanese carmaker and they are all the same".

AustinPowers

And on the subject of Lepin review, one other thing I noticed: all of the ones I have read were very thorough in showing both the positives about a Lepin set as well as the negatives. I have not yet found a "glowing" only positive review, as you would expect if they were fake or paid for. Indeed many reviews are as thorough as any here on Brickset, and as balanced, indicating to me that the reviewers are very keen to show the real deal you get with a Lepin set, not simply going "this is great, it's much cheaper than Lego but just as good."

I myself was very sceptical of Lepin quality, mainly because of my experience with a BestLock set. But after having read several reviews I decided to try it out myself - even though I don't think much of Lepin's ethical values. But as I said above, if I wanted only to deal with businesses that are on impeccable moral high ground, I would have a very small choice of companies to deal with.

By the way, has anyone seen the latest updated box art of the new Lepin sets? They are very quick to react to TLG's legal action. All their new sets now feature original box art, the Lepin logo has changed to look less like Lego, and I am quite sure they will update the instruction manuals too. Goes to show that Lepin knows very well how to likely get around a court ruling against them.

A.Brickovsky

blogzilly said:

Wow. The thing on the left is just too ridiculously ugly to be true. I started laughing when I saw it. Does it even remotely resemble The Eiffel Tower? :D
Really, it has to be one of the most horrifying sets I ever saw. Thanks for posting this. I'll gladly keep sending TLG all my money. 

Fireheart

So the title of the thread is "Would re-releases be such a bad thing"

In my opinion yes they woud be a bad thing. Not just for the loyal collectors who have spent large amounts of resources accumulating the vast range of retired sets ( be it as a new release or on the secondary market), but also it would change the very successful business model of a company that has a unique market, of which other toy companies can only dream of to have.

Why are people so infactuated with a rerelease of the 10179 UCS MF? Or other retired sets that have now demanded large increases on the secondary market. And would the current people wanting this, want the same if they had purchased a set this year, that in 10 years time became a highly desirable classic, only for a re-release to happen, and smash the now value of the classic?
Surely if people want the classic that much then they would do due diligence and take the time to buy the set? Or don't you want it that much?

I personally would love a original E Type Jag, but do I want it enough to buy one on the secondary market, no, thus I don't have one. Why do I want one? As its the best ever car produced or because it's a great investment that I know 100% once I have had my fun with it I can sell it for more? If I was around when the E Type was for sale as a new product, would I have wanted it as much, probably not... (I think you get the gist).

And before someone asks, do I have a lot of the highly desirable sets, then yes I do. Did I buy them all as new products, no not all of them. But I was prepared to go out and pay the going rate for what I wanted, as I'm a Lego Collector.
Do I want more, yes of course I do, but you have to live within your means. And that means for some classic sets I will have wait and bide my time until I can have it, as I'm a Lego Collector.


But why did you pay for the classic desirable sets on the secondary market? Because I know that current sets will also become desirable in years to come (maybe not as much as others) but over a long period of time, when I say that's enough its time to let the collection go. The sets I have paid the RRP for will compensate for the others I wanted on the secondary market.. And I'm happy with that. Hence I will collect Lego.

What happens if Lego starts re-releases, I'll stop collecting Lego, as the fun of it in the collector side of me will go... And I'll probably not be the only one...

parsom

^ Why Lego should care about value of the retired classics?

Bobflip

blogzilly said:

you don't have to make the product in packaging on black, with a very similar font and placement, with the first letter of the word "Structures" larger sort of like the "A" in Architecture is, etc.

I agree the box and font designs look similar, but here you've basically described a capital letter!

A.Brickovsky

^^ So true. Like, a few hundred sentimental AFOLs buying empty Cafe Corner value over thousands different people buying Brick Bank. Rereleasing some sets is pointless, regardless of their aftermarket prices. 

Still, I think another UCS Falcon is possible. 
Some zombie mansion like Haunted House would also nail it, for children as well. 

datsunrobbie

Fireheart said:

So the title of the thread is "Would re-releases be such a bad thing"

In my opinion yes they woud be a bad thing. Not just for the loyal collectors who have spent large amounts of resources accumulating the vast range of retired sets ( be it as a new release or on the secondary market), but also it would change the very successful business model of a company that has a unique market, of which other toy companies can only dream of to have.

Why are people so infactuated with a rerelease of the 10179 UCS MF? Or other retired sets that have now demanded large increases on the secondary market. And would the current people wanting this, want the same if they had purchased a set this year, that in 10 years time became a highly desirable classic, only for a re-release to happen, and smash the now value of the classic?
Surely if people want the classic that much then they would do due diligence and take the time to buy the set? Or don't you want it that much?

I personally would love a original E Type Jag, but do I want it enough to buy one on the secondary market, no, thus I don't have one. Why do I want one? As its the best ever car produced or because it's a great investment that I know 100% once I have had my fun with it I can sell it for more? If I was around when the E Type was for sale as a new product, would I have wanted it as much, probably not... (I think you get the gist).

And before someone asks, do I have a lot of the highly desirable sets, then yes I do. Did I buy them all as new products, no not all of them. But I was prepared to go out and pay the going rate for what I wanted, as I'm a Lego Collector.
Do I want more, yes of course I do, but you have to live within your means. And that means for some classic sets I will have wait and bide my time until I can have it, as I'm a Lego Collector.


But why did you pay for the classic desirable sets on the secondary market? Because I know that current sets will also become desirable in years to come (maybe not as much as others) but over a long period of time, when I say that's enough its time to let the collection go. The sets I have paid the RRP for will compensate for the others I wanted on the secondary market.. And I'm happy with that. Hence I will collect Lego.

What happens if Lego starts re-releases, I'll stop collecting Lego, as the fun of it in the collector side of me will go... And I'll probably not be the only one...

I can see your points as a Lego Collector. I, on the other hand, am a Grandpa. I'd like to see a re-release of the 10179 UCS MF because I was not part of the LEGO market during the time it was in production and would like to build the set. I don't buy LEGO for the resale potential, I buy it because I have fun building with it, and the build quality has mostly been superior to their competitors. Some of the Samsonite blocks I have are really not good at all, only proving that every company making blocks can have quality issues.

You as  "why did you pay for the classic desirable sets on the secondary market?". My answer is because it was cheaper than buying it new. I buy the majority of my LEGO on the "other" secondary market - at thrift stores. When I got the bug to start buying LEGO again the 10188 Death Star was available, but more than I wanted to spend. I found it in a thrift shop for $80. The previous owner was apparently not interested in resale value either, as the set was complete, never built, and had parts from several other sets stuffed into the box.

I applaud the resellers, as they make retired sets available to those who want them. Even more important, from my perspective, they sort through the used lots and make it possible to obtain the missing pieces. If LEGO starts re-releasing classic sets, some resellers will certainly close up shop, while others will scoop up their inventory and sell it. Or their inventory will end up in thrift shops, and if I get lucky I'll buy it.

Lego Collectors that have an eye on resale value may be a more significant part of the market than I give credit for, but I suspect LEGO really makes their money on sets sold to (or purchased for) kids that are going to play with them. If my grandson decides he wants to build #10179, I cannot get it for him unless I stumble across a deal. If LEGO decides they can make more from reissues than they make from "investor" purchases, the reissues will come. 

Bobflip

Fireheart said:

So the title of the thread is "Would re-releases be such a bad thing"

In my opinion yes they woud be a bad thing. Not just for the loyal collectors who have spent large amounts of resources accumulating the vast range of retired sets ( be it as a new release or on the secondary market), but also it would change the very successful business model of a company that has a unique market, of which other toy companies can only dream of to have.

Why are people so infactuated with a rerelease of the 10179 UCS MF? Or other retired sets that have now demanded large increases on the secondary market. And would the current people wanting this, want the same if they had purchased a set this year, that in 10 years time became a highly desirable classic, only for a re-release to happen, and smash the now value of the classic?
Surely if people want the classic that much then they would do due diligence and take the time to buy the set? Or don't you want it that much?

I personally would love a original E Type Jag, but do I want it enough to buy one on the secondary market, no, thus I don't have one. Why do I want one? As its the best ever car produced or because it's a great investment that I know 100% once I have had my fun with it I can sell it for more? If I was around when the E Type was for sale as a new product, would I have wanted it as much, probably not... (I think you get the gist).

And before someone asks, do I have a lot of the highly desirable sets, then yes I do. Did I buy them all as new products, no not all of them. But I was prepared to go out and pay the going rate for what I wanted, as I'm a Lego Collector.
Do I want more, yes of course I do, but you have to live within your means. And that means for some classic sets I will have wait and bide my time until I can have it, as I'm a Lego Collector.


But why did you pay for the classic desirable sets on the secondary market? Because I know that current sets will also become desirable in years to come (maybe not as much as others) but over a long period of time, when I say that's enough its time to let the collection go. The sets I have paid the RRP for will compensate for the others I wanted on the secondary market.. And I'm happy with that. Hence I will collect Lego.

What happens if Lego starts re-releases, I'll stop collecting Lego, as the fun of it in the collector side of me will go... And I'll probably not be the only one...

So as a loyal collector who's spent a lot of money on the sought after sets, you think they would be a bad thing. Not surprising!

It sounds like one of the things you like is having things that other people don't. Do you enjoy Lego for any other reason other than collecting? Because stopping buying Lego just because more people are able to buy (and enjoy) it seems completely ridiculous.

datsunrobbie

parsom said:

^ Why Lego should care about value of the retired classics?

Because there were "news" reports a few years ago that claimed LEGO was a better investment than gold. There are probably already articles written about the subsequent crash in LEGO investment value caused by reissues, competition, the Spanish Inquisition, or whatever else causes the price on 10179 to suddenly drop. When that "news" hits, some people who are only in it for the money will quit buying. 

Fireheart

Bobflip said:

It sounds like one of the things you like is having things that other people don't. Do you enjoy Lego for any other reason other than collecting? Because stopping buying Lego just because more people are able to buy (and enjoy) it seems completely ridiculous.

Far from it.. If you want it there are plenty of sets out there for you to buy... And no one is stopping you from buying it. So it's a bit low saying "one of the things you like is having things that other people don't"
I have plenty of Lego sets that are built with my children, which we enjoy doing together. And I have even purchased some retired sets for charity auctions..

But my passion is also collecting, and personally I think the Lego group know there is a vast section of AFOL that do this. Hence their policy of retired sets works for most... (If it didn't they wouldn't do it).. Everybody is different..