How do you tell if a set is collection- or investment-worthy?

Datoda

Newbie here. So far I've been buying duplicate sets (blame TRU's BOGO) based on my son's and my own preferences. Would like to learn how to spot a winner. Your comments and pointers would be appreciated.

pcirone

I think a good starting point is if the set number is 10xxx and the rrp is > than $100 and you can get it at some sort of discount than it's usually a good buy for investment.

I like this and can't wait to hear what other people say..

doriansdad

It is very easy. AFOLS are the only ones with the cash to drive the price up. What appeals to AFOLs? If a set is appealing it can very easily move to 20 cents a piece. That price per piece seems to be a natural resistance level for most sets. For greater gains it has to be part of a larger series where AFOLs are willing to pay an even larger premium to complete a line (e.g. the modulars or one day the Winter sets), or a super star that appeals to fans of a series outside of Lego (e.g. UCS Falcon).

LegoFanTexas

There is something to be said for running against the crowd, buy what everyone isn't talking about, because it will become rare faster than the sets that everyone IS buying.

Everyone and their brother has a MMV saved, but how many people have an Imperial Shuttle saved?

sidersdd

^ Case in point - Taj Mahal.

Si_UKNZ

If youre selling to kids, the higher the RRP the better.
A lot of kids will have some from the series, will aspire to the 'top' set but might not be able to buy it before the line runs out, hence there'll always be a market for it.

For the AFOL market, I'm with @LegoFanTexas on this one, although its a fine line between
1. 'obviously desirable and overstocked' and
2. 'not obviously desirable but future demand' and
3. 'not obvioulsy desirable and no future demand either'

Otherwise, if the AFOL community is going mad for it (1) this is generally an indicator that there are mountains of them stockpiled, as well as it being attractive, so this is both a negative and a positive indicator. Seriously, I've heard of people stockpiling 50x Fire Brigade, for example. If no-ones buying it because it's a duff set (3) then obvioulsy you dont want it. Its the (2)s you want.

^^ At least the MMVs are great for parts :)

sidersdd

I wonder about the future AFOLs. I mean, I've paid a premium to get some of the sets I had as a kid (Classic Space, Classic Castle, Legoland) - now that I have the income for it. Will the same be true of the Harry Potter sets 15 years from now? Are kids/parents any wiser these days of holding on to these things? Is there so much stockpiling now that there won't be any premiums to be made?

princedraven

^ I have heard a lot of talk about MMV not being an investment as everyone and their dog has one, which I understand, but being new to the AFOL world, can someone quote a set which was very highly regarded to the point that people stockpiled and then retired and never lived up to the hype, i.e. has there ever been a set that people bought 10 of and then found no-one wanted or they had to sell at a loss?

sidersdd

^ Sounds like a good topic for another thread - what's the worst LEGO investment you've made. :)

Lambringo

A similar question to princedraven but without the hype factor, can anyone think of any set that had a high recomended retail price point (for the sake of the question lets say above USD$100), that when discontinued, was not worth at least the RRP on the second hand market if MISB. I am sure there are examples out there but I can't think of any.

pcirone

^ Robie House will be one example I bet.

pcirone

How about set 10192 Space Skulls

BTHodgeman

@pcirone -

Uggh! I have 4 Space Skulls... at least they were 75% off.

Brent

sidersdd

7754 Home One Mon Calimari

princedraven

^ Why???

Bought as an investment?

sidersdd

^ I didn't. I'm just saying, that set's retail price is over $100 and it's selling for less now.

princedraven

@sidersdd, sorry that ^ was aimed at @BTHodgeman and his Space Skulls, you sneaked in before my post went up :)

BTHodgeman

I bought them for parts. IIRC, they were only $35-ish.

Brent

drdavewatford

^ Worst set ever, however.....

IMHO, of course !

BTHodgeman

I agree. It was definitely one of the worst sets ever... but the part count was hard to pass up at that price.

Plus, I've left mine boxed. Most people seem to have parted them out immediately.

Maybe there will be a tiny market for boxed someday... haha

Brent

princedraven

^ See, you didnt stockpile that because it was clearly a great set and good investment, only to find it wasn't. You bought them because they were dirt cheap and had a decent part count.
And sidersdd's example of 7754 again has been roundly slated, so again not something you could compare, say, MMV with.

sidersdd

^ Right - 7754 probably falls into Si's (3) category.

rocao

I am extremely bullish on LEGO as an investment. That's because in my ~12 years of collecting and price-watching, I could probably count on one hand the number of sets I've purchased that would only be break-even if sold, and I honestly can't think of a set where I would lose money.

Of course, this a result of a fair amount of fastidiousness to ensure you are buying the sets as cheaply as possible, but it really isn't hard to find the discounts, particularly when we are collectively deal-hunting.

doriansdad

^ I don't know anyone who buys sets at retail to resell. 7754 was $55 on clearance and I sold all mine for $75-$80. After fees a 30% gain in 1 year is good by any standards.

rocao

While it's true that 7754 is not selling below MSRP despite being retired, we are just one year removed from the glut that was available for at least 50% off. So most of those resellers are indeed making money.

Will they ever reach stratospheric levels? Not likely, but it will increase over time.

Datoda

@pcirone: Would you mind sharing why you think so lowly about Robie House?

@All: What do you think of the sets that are not "pure" LEGO play, such as Mindstorms NXT? These sets have the hi-tech elements that inevitably will be replaced by something even more hi-tech soon or later. Do you think their values would appreciate?

drdavewatford

^ One of the reasons I DIDN'T buy the current NXT set when it dropped to 50% off is that at some point a 3.0 will doubtless come along and render 2.0 pretty obsolete, at which point it's hard to see too many people wanting to buy 'vintage' when they can get 'state of the art'.

LegoFanTexas

10186 is another good example of a nice looking set that never went anywhere, and it has been gone for longer than a year. I like it, bought one and built it, but I don't know that I could make money with 20 of them. :)

LegoFanTexas

You didn't ask me, but...

Robie House is 2,200+ boring red bricks, it isn't a good parts set, it isn't a very interesting build, it isn't playable, and it is expensive for the size of the parts you're getting.

Had it been $129 RRP, it would have been a hit, but as it is it is way over priced...

BTHodgeman

And I don't tend to think of it as a set that will decrease in value too much, if at all, primarily just because of the number of pieces.

There seems to be sufficient stock of it, so it will likely be clearanced out when it gets to EOL, but the price per piece is already less than 10 cents, which kind of seems to be the average.

Granted, it is almost entirely small parts, but there is a market for those size pieces in micro-building, etc.

Brent

y2josh

Just for the record, I really enjoyed 7754 outside of the hangar portion. I don't expect it to skyrocket in price, either, but the minifigs are all unique to the set (IIRC). Most of them aren't super popular characters, I realize, but look at how well Greedo has retained his aftermarket value.

sidersdd

Ackbar ended up in a magnet set which decreased his value.

y2josh

Ya know, I've never actually looked at the magnets. How easily can they be fashioned into a standard minifig?

BTHodgeman

Before they started gluing them, it was easy. They were just standing on a 1x2 tile. Now, they're glued together, so it's more difficult.

Brent

AScaryOctopus

In my opinion, no lisensced sets would count as investment worthy, as things like PoTC, PoP, Airbender, Cars, or Spongebob will eventually lose popularity and will not appeal to newer collectors. Star Wars never loses popularity. DC and Marvel are not collection worthy because tons of people will buy them seeing how much people are making of old Batman and will be worthless because of the amount of people selling them.

TL;DR: Only Star Wars and non-licensed themes are investment worthy.

coolpix

I missed the EOL sales on 7754 and I was really upset that I couldn't get one when it was available. Of course the set's worse flaw is that it is misleading to the point where this is not the actual Mon Calamari ship from Return of the Jedi, but just the bridge and a hangar with a small ship, however, I want to have this set someday because of the characters, the A-Wing and some of the elements into the set.

The only SW sets I collect are from Episodes 4-5-6, and I feel that my collection is not complete without this one so it almost makes me feel like a fish out of the water when everyone hates this set. I saw one at eBay right now for $60 + shipping. Is that a good deal? I may get it!

madforLEGO

^ I have heard a lot of talk about MMV not being an investment as everyone and their dog has one, which I understand, but being new to the AFOL world, can someone quote a set which was very highly regarded to the point that people stockpiled and then retired and never lived up to the hype, i.e. has there ever been a set that people bought 10 of and then found no-one wanted or they had to sell at a loss?

7754 comes to mind.. while those sets do clear a somewhat profit, there are many of them out there that have kept the prices stagnated which hurts anyone who bought them for near or at retail.. Same with the Pig farm (although it is a great set, IMO)
Also 8877 Vladeks Dark Fortress... BUT as 8877 has shown, wait long enough and they tend to become desirable... laws of supply and demand... they just get delayed a bit longer when more and more people decide to make LEGO a retirement fund....

All in all, higher retail priced sets tend to shoot up, as a lot of people want them but either are waiting for an excellent price and/or forget and BOOM they explode in price.. the Death Star may do this, but not for some time I think, everyone, it seems, is stacking those waiting for a sell out, but then again I thought that about the Ultimate Millenium falcon and those are going for a nifty price now....
Grand Carousel went for 250 in the store and when they sold out they jumped to about 600 in the span of a few months.
I kick myself for not buying Effil towers.

Plus the more people talk about this the less investment is to be had, just like other hobbies that became speculation markets (baseball cards, Comics) the difference here is LEGO is a toy, whereas the demand for those other markets were primarily driven by the Secondary market. Ty Beanies come to mkind.. it was a highly sought after competative market.. as I understand it Ty eventually decided to wreck their own market which crashed the demand and then the secondary market with it.
So unless LEGO does something dumb there will always be a market for sets (although having sets on the market for an extra year would not help) .. the only thing that would crash a market is re-doing sought after sets.. which is always possible (especially with Star Wars, albeit redoing a specific model but slightly different design, like Sith infiltrator) but relatively rare, excluding the Legends line and a few sets (like the Maersk Cargo ship)

Yellowcastle

10186 is another good example of a nice looking set that never went anywhere, and it has been gone for longer than a year. I like it, bought one and built it, but I don't know that I could make money with 20 of them. :)

I had to look that one up...and you know something is not popular when google doesn't list it in its first 5 guesses even after you type "Lego 1018". :o). Obiwan's Starfighter looks like another underperformer...

LegoFanTexas

I've got Obiwan's Starfighter build as well, not as good as 10186, but that is just my opinion...

I really would love R2-D2 in the scale of 10186, he would look really good 2 feet high in Technic.

My 6 year old son who loves R2 (his buddy he says) asked me for a "real" R2-D2 for Christmas, as in one that is full size, rolls around on his own, and has that "computer plug thing" to open locked doors.

:)

MinifigsMe

Just thought I'd point out this set: http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7628-1 - (indiana jones peril in peru). Barely gone up in value, I just got one for 15% over RRP new. Would have thought it would do much better. Nice plane, loads of figs and Indy.

atkinsar

^ It's a fantastic set, great plane. I'm surprised it hasn't risen further in value.

madforLEGO

^--- this set goes for 100 on eBay (at least the ones I have seen), Id say it is doing fairly well, there just was not as much interest in Indy partially due to the ho hum reviews and knocks by fanboys of the latest movie (please do not go off topic about the movie..lol)
But I agree it is an awesome looking set. I have not opened the one I have but I am going to eventually (when I have space to bust out and set up my collection).. I toyed with the idea of making a LEGO airplane museum and this would be one of those for that...

Si_UKNZ

A similar question to princedraven but without the hype factor, can anyone think of any set that had a high recomended retail price point (for the sake of the question lets say above USD$100), that when discontinued, was not worth at least the RRP on the second hand market if MISB. I am sure there are examples out there but I can't think of any.

old police and fire stations? not sure on the US RRP but cant be far off.

DaddyWhale

^ One of the reasons I DIDN'T buy the current NXT set when it dropped to 50% off is that at some point a 3.0 will doubtless come along and render 2.0 pretty obsolete, at which point it's hard to see too many people wanting to buy 'vintage' when they can get 'state of the art'.

I wonder if ANY LEGO set is a good long-/medium-term investment. Having watched prices on ebay and bricklink, I get the unscientific sense that over the longer term prices don't appreciate enough to justify thinking of LEGO as a good investment.

Sure, over the shorter term, recently discontinued sets (like CC and the Mobile Crane (8421)) appreciate rapidly, but this is because of limited alternatives in the short term: once you have the FB, GE and Pet Shop, the only modulars you can get are CC and GG, so this drives up prices. But I don't know whether in 10-15 years there will be nearly the same mismatch between supply and demand for these sets. New sets and themes will come out with innovative designs, elements and complexity (9 of the 10 sets with the most pieces came out within the last ten years). Demand for older sets might just be driven by nostalgia.

Yes, some older sets sell for double or triple of MSRP, but looking at charts the stock market's actually done better over the long term - even given the awful performance in the last few years. Plus mint sets take up space, don't earn you dividends, boxes get damaged, etc.

Over the short term - buying, waiting for a set to be discontinued and then selling - LEGO reselling might make sense. But over the longer term, as an investment?

tdhbr

I see it as a fairly short-term investment, 2-3 years hopefully. If I can buy a set at $100 or $150 near the end of it's availability, then sell it within a couple years at a 50% markup, I think that's a pretty good ROI. Not too many investments that I can think of where you can earn your investment plus 50% in that time frame. If I can get sets at a good discount, even better.

Of course, I've just recently started this and haven't sold anything ... yet. I have a 7946 King's Castle on eBay that' getting some attention - it has potential to get me that 50% profit within about a month.

brickmatic

I am extremely bullish on LEGO as an investment. That's because in my ~12 years of collecting and price-watching, I could probably count on one hand the number of sets I've purchased that would only be break-even if sold, and I honestly can't think of a set where I would lose money.

Ah, of course past performance is no guarantee of future results. Right? These are boom times for LEGO in general. That could change. And how much speculation is there in the market? Have we ever had this much speculation?

Dato

I think I've spotted a "big set" that's bound to under-perform: 2010 Yellow Cargo Train (7939). It got an average review here, and over on bricklink.com it was sold at $153 on average for the last 6 months. Its RRP is $180.

kylejohnson11

@Dato I am more than happy with that. It has plenty of good track pieces :)

brickmatic

@Dato I want that set and still haven't gotten it. Yeah, the track pieces in that set are good.

coolpix

@brickmatic Fantastic set. I recommend the Yellow Cargo train to anyone that's a Train fanatic. It's my favorite, so far.

Lambringo

I can not see why Yellow cargo train would fetch any where near RRP in the last six month since it is regularly available at most shops on a 25% off or BOGO deal. Bricklink prices do not take into account shipping, so if I paid $153, plus say $25 shipping, the total price someone is willing to pay is pretty similar to RRP. It is a great set and I think it will do very well in the years after it retires. I have picked up a bunch of them at 50% off my local RRP from overseas amazons and already sold a few at a tidy profit already. I will also be keeping a few myself as it is a great set with everything you need to set up a large trainyard.

With regards to LEGO investments in general, I think bricklink and ebay are great sites for determining current value of a set, but it can distort the amount of return you will get. I can get a Maersk train for $140 shipped, and people will pay up to $200 for it. But that is a total cost people would pay. Using rough amounts, for someone to get one off me for $200 cash out of their pocket it would include $20 shipping and the hassle of posting, $25 in selling fees, chances that damage could occur during transit or getting done by a scammer. My total cash in pocket would run down to $155 maximum, and that is only if bidding reached $200 as a buyer may get lucky and not have many other bidders against them. This then boils down to the fact that making $15 (11%) is probably not worth it to sell this way. This is the issue with high % returns on low cost items, as a large amount of the profit is eaten up in other costs, including your own time.

There is also the time value of money and opportunity cost to consider. Simply selling a set for 50% profit over the cost price in 10 years will have actually cost you money (generally speaking).

In my opinion, I still think LEGO is a great investment and low risk (check your house and contents insurance policy as my LEGO now has to be listed separately due to the amount I have), but my strategy is only in short term holding (immediate resale or 1-3 years) with most of the money I make due to smart buying, rather than huge MV jumps.