Speculation on the upcoming Death Star

willobee498

Flying cars is debatable... more like terrible plane that can put around on the road after you fold up the wings. Not quite what the vision of a flying car is.

ryjay

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

Aanchir

ryjay said:

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

While I mostly understand the cost of the new DS, I got a real laugh out of this comment on Reddit: "They played the long con: Release AoH, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $250 I won't have to spend.' Release DS remake, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $500 I won't have to spend.' Come 2017, everyone has $750 to spend on a 7,000 pieces UCS Millennium Falcon and the crowd goes wild."

monkeyhanger

ryjay said:

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

It's a Jedi mind trick!

canon03

^^ That actually would be a great comeback from the poor showings of 2016.  Not much to be excited about on the Staw Wars front this year.

masterX244

canon03 said:

^^ That actually would be a great comeback from the poor showings of 2016.  Not much to be excited about on the Staw Wars front this year.

Lol, another name the cheap clones could use(staw wars). Ymmd

ecmo47

Aanchir said:

ryjay said:

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

While I mostly understand the cost of the new DS, I got a real laugh out of this comment on Reddit: "They played the long con: Release AoH, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $250 I won't have to spend.' Release DS remake, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $500 I won't have to spend.' Come 2017, everyone has $750 to spend on a 7,000 pieces UCS Millennium Falcon and the crowd goes wild."

That is a very accurate observation. If Lego re-released 10179, nobody would be making the "phone-in design" or "Lego is being lazy" comments. It would praises for "listening to the community" and "sticking it to the evil re-seller".

CCC

ecmo47 said:

Aanchir said:

ryjay said:

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

While I mostly understand the cost of the new DS, I got a real laugh out of this comment on Reddit: "They played the long con: Release AoH, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $250 I won't have to spend.' Release DS remake, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $500 I won't have to spend.' Come 2017, everyone has $750 to spend on a 7,000 pieces UCS Millennium Falcon and the crowd goes wild."

That is a very accurate observation. If Lego re-released 10179, nobody would be making the "phone-in design" or "Lego is being lazy" comments. It would praises for "listening to the community" and "sticking it to the evil re-seller".

There would probably even be complaints that the minor changes they have necessarily made are too much.

Fireheart

If the DS is to be released on the 15th to VIP, and general sale on the 30th. Why isn't it on shop.lego.com as a coming soon set? Like other exclusives are.. 

TigerMoth

ecmo47 said:

Aanchir said:

It would praises for "listening to the community" and "sticking it to the evil re-seller".

And open them to accusations along the lines of "they didn't pay any attention to the community's requests for years, and it took an evil clone manufacturer to do it before they did themselves".

Fireheart

^^ Just as I wrote that the NEW shop.lego.com website is up, and there it is... 

binaryeye

Adzbadboy said:

They had a great opportunity to market the new Starkiller Base featured in last year’s Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015), [...]

They're saving that for Episode IX, wherein the First Order attempts a reconstruction.

madforLEGO

ecmo47 said:

Aanchir said:

ryjay said:

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

While I mostly understand the cost of the new DS, I got a real laugh out of this comment on Reddit: "They played the long con: Release AoH, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $250 I won't have to spend.' Release DS remake, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $500 I won't have to spend.' Come 2017, everyone has $750 to spend on a 7,000 pieces UCS Millennium Falcon and the crowd goes wild."

That is a very accurate observation. If Lego re-released 10179, nobody would be making the "phone-in design" or "Lego is being lazy" comments. It would praises for "listening to the community" and "sticking it to the evil re-seller".

Why would anyone call the UCS falcon 'phoned in' or 'being lazy' under any situation? From what I have heard no one has criticized the UCS Falcon's design at all, which is one of the reasons why people want one today.
I guarantee you one thing though, they would sure as heck complain about the price; people did back then, and they would today.

Aanchir

madforLEGO said:

ecmo47 said:

Aanchir said:

ryjay said:

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

While I mostly understand the cost of the new DS, I got a real laugh out of this comment on Reddit: "They played the long con: Release AoH, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $250 I won't have to spend.' Release DS remake, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $500 I won't have to spend.' Come 2017, everyone has $750 to spend on a 7,000 pieces UCS Millennium Falcon and the crowd goes wild."

That is a very accurate observation. If Lego re-released 10179, nobody would be making the "phone-in design" or "Lego is being lazy" comments. It would praises for "listening to the community" and "sticking it to the evil re-seller".

Why would anyone call the UCS falcon 'phoned in' or 'being lazy' under any situation? From what I have heard no one has criticized the UCS Falcon's design at all, which is one of the reasons why people want one today.

I don't know that I ever heard any complaints about the Winter Village Toy Shop's design, and yet people still called its re-release "phoned-in" and "lazy".

datsunrobbie

I don't recall seeing complaints about the design of #10188 prior to it being retired. When the replacement was revealed there was a lot of disappointment posted, but not a lot of suggestions for improvements that could have been made without a major overhaul of the design. I tried searching around for MOCs based on #10188, and aside from one AFOL who designed an outer shell I don't see much. I'm looking forward to seeing people's MOCs demonstrating how easily LEGO could have made improvements without breaking the bank.

dougts

@CapnRex101 posted a list of specific changes that could have been made, most of which would not have required major modifications.

datsunrobbie

The 2 most interesting changes @CapnRex101 suggested back on 19 August were adding curved bricks to the stepped exterior walls, and making it modular so you could remove sections for play. These are really cool ideas, and I look forward to seeing them implemented by somebody a lot better at design than me :) 

madforLEGO

Aanchir said:

madforLEGO said:

ecmo47 said:

Aanchir said:

ryjay said:

After seeing the cost of the new Death Star, suddenly the Attack on Hoth looks like a cheap deal....wait, a minute Lego, I see what you did here....not gonna work on us!! :)

While I mostly understand the cost of the new DS, I got a real laugh out of this comment on Reddit: "They played the long con: Release AoH, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $250 I won't have to spend.' Release DS remake, everyone goes 'Oh well, that's $500 I won't have to spend.' Come 2017, everyone has $750 to spend on a 7,000 pieces UCS Millennium Falcon and the crowd goes wild."

That is a very accurate observation. If Lego re-released 10179, nobody would be making the "phone-in design" or "Lego is being lazy" comments. It would praises for "listening to the community" and "sticking it to the evil re-seller".

Why would anyone call the UCS falcon 'phoned in' or 'being lazy' under any situation? From what I have heard no one has criticized the UCS Falcon's design at all, which is one of the reasons why people want one today.

I don't know that I ever heard any complaints about the Winter Village Toy Shop's design, and yet people still called its re-release "phoned-in" and "lazy".

It was phoned in and lazy because they did not do a new Winter village set like they have done since the sets were made, and especially so since they have a winter village train set out this year so the argument of well they just wanted to make this one available again appears to be bunk. Really apples and oranges.

mr_benn

^ It's been well established and written about that they had nothing suitable for release and thus re-issued the one that the fewest people were likely to have when they realised there was a clamour for WV sets - which has resuscitated the line and resulted in the production of the train this year.

But yeah, that lazy company who don't know what they're doing because they're NOT DOING IT FOR THE FANS... yet somehow manage to be more successful than last year.

stlux

Review by CapnRex101 now posted.

chrisalddin

CapnRex101's review is top class.
the set it's self however is still a copy of a older set and a complete let down. 

but with the help of CapnRex101's numbers i understand the price better.
still about £50 over priced. and i am blaming Disney for the £50.

SumoLego

SumoLego said:

dutchlegofan50 said:

Still no review on Brickset. Sigh. I give up. 

Still no review of the BB-8 keychain on Brickset.  Sigh.  I give up.

Just a review of the new Death Star on Brickset.  Sigh.  I give up.

donutboy

I know i'm showing my age but 400 quid on  a Lego set - Jeez - my first 3 cars were all cheaper than that.

CCC

chrisalddin said:

CapnRex101's review is top class.
the set it's self however is still a copy of a older set and a complete let down. 

but with the help of CapnRex101's numbers i understand the price better.
still about £50 over priced. and i am blaming Disney for the £50.

Blame Lego and sales of #10188 for the price increase.

To me, the old set was great. But this one is even better. If I could only have one, I know which I'd choose. 

dougts

^ agreed.  I would get the new one over the old one, all things being equal. I think most everyone would - there are certainly improvements.  But the question for people who already have the old one is whether there are enough improvements to justify buying the new one.

MAGNINOMINISUMBRA

The Australian RRP has become available with the release of the new LEGO site.  $799 AUD! That's a direct conversion to 602 USD or 452 GBP and is quite frankly ridiculous. The only comparison I can actually come up with to justify the price increase is 800 AUD is about the top price that aftermarket 10188's have historically achieved in the first six months of the year. Interestingly - 799 was the local going rate for 10179's when they were on the shelf.  

CCC

dougts said:

^ agreed.  I would get the new one over the old one, all things being equal. I think most everyone would - there are certainly improvements.  But the question for people who already have the old one is whether there are enough improvements to justify buying the new one.

Probably not. But I don't think that makes the set a disappointment.

I wonder what people will have done if say 3 or 4 vignettes had been changed / update / significantly improved. I still doubt many people would have bought the new if they had the old. And I imagine Lego took the same view. So it is either go for a non minifig heavy set that probably doesn't sell so well or go for an extension of life for a proven seller by updating it and its price.

dougts

it makes it a disappointment to the person who already has #10188!  Instead of getting something they don't have to fill this limited slot in the annual UCS calendar, they get a slight update on something they already have.

JudgeChuck

I've not seen it mentioned before, but you can get an Ultimate Ultimate Death Star from TLG:

https://shop.lego.com/en-GB/Death-Star-Ultimate-Kit-5005217

£439.99

As opposed to £469.98 for both sets separately and available between 15th September and 31st October 2016...

floridabrick

OMG.  U mean the price is less than the sum of both sets?  Can't beat that, the benefit of both sets being sold together AND a discount.  Someone's getting fired.

madforLEGO

JudgeChuck said:

I've not seen it mentioned before, but you can get an Ultimate Ultimate Death Star from TLG:

https://shop.lego.com/en-GB/Death-Star-Ultimate-Kit-5005217

£439.99

As opposed to £469.98 for both sets separately and available between 15th September and 31st October 2016...

Not surprising, they are probably trying to spur sales as I'm sure they have heard grumbles from the AFOL community on this one. AFOLs may not be the largest demo for LEGO sales, but they typically have the most to spend and the DS is likely more geared toward them.

Fauch

well that's not a 27% discount.

Lobot

JudgeChuck said:

I've not seen it mentioned before, but you can get an Ultimate Ultimate Death Star from TLG:

https://shop.lego.com/en-GB/Death-Star-Ultimate-Kit-5005217

£439.99

As opposed to £469.98 for both sets separately and available between 15th September and 31st October 2016...

Perhaps a better policy would be to reduce the RRP of 75159 by £30.... at that sort of level I'm sure it wouldn't have received such a negative reception from AFOLs!

JudgeChuck

^I doubt they'd be directly discounting one of their flagship sets so soon after launch!

chrisalddin

JudgeChuck said:

^I doubt they'd be directly discounting one of their flagship sets so soon after launch!

i would crackup and almost die from laughing at you if with in the next 75 days that set gets discounted. (why 75?) it's not officially out yet and will not be fore 15 more days. and so i pick 2 months after official launch so added on 15 days. as the Official launch is not for 15 days! 

there again Lego.com don't directly discount any set that is not going to be discontinued or that is under 9 months old! (maybe once in a blue moon.)

JudgeChuck

^Why @chrisalddin ? It seems a little bit of an overreaction to me saying that they wouldn't directly discount it this early... Perhaps they will in a couple of months time, I don't know, but I would doubt it.

Perhaps they will do some kind of launch offer but, again, I doubt that it would be in the form of a direct discount.

CCC

I doubt they will discount it for a long time. If they have mispriced it (it is still early days, maybe they haven't, they'll need to see sales data) then they won't want to admit it. Extra freebies as an incentive, yes. Discount, no. Of course, they might also allow a discount on it on special days if that discount appears on all SW sets, for example.

JudgeChuck

^I'd agree with that...

I don't normally post in SW threads, as I'm staying clear of SW as a theme, for sanity reasons, but I may get each of the iconic ships at some point, so a Millenium Falcon, X-Wing, TIE Fighter and Death Star. And a Slave-1, AT-AT, an Imperial Shuttle and a Snowspeeder and...

No, no, no! Stop right now! ;-)

xwingpilot

JANGBRiCKS just uploaded a really good review:

https://youtu.be/mXHym1NTzac

ryjay

Went to the Lego store the other day and saw the display model....biggest waste of $499 I could ever think of spending.   

I was tempted by the ewok village at $249....but I wasn't sure if that was because that looked like a deal compared to the DS.

sklamb

I've been tempted by the ewok village since day 1; still haven't pulled the trigger. Although I think presenting the Death Star as a frame for a great set of OT vignettes is inventive and well-carried out, and the new set is a superb update of what had become a very outdated old classic, I never wanted it personally. People who were saving up for the old version but never got it may feel a bit cheesed off at present, but in the long run I think this was a good plan from TLG's point of view.

CCC

I wonder if all the complaining about the price hike on this set compared to the last will be listened to by lego. There is of course an easy solution. For any long term sets (say available for 2+ years at retail), they increase the prices by about 2% each year (and then round to nearest $5/10 depending on the price).

That way, if it had already been up at about $450-60 or so for #10188 by the time it had retired, then this one with a couple of changes and the extra minifigures doesn't seem so bad at only $50 higher.

chrisalddin

CCC said:

I wonder if all the complaining about the price hike on this set compared to the last will be listened to by lego. There is of course an easy solution. For any long term sets (say available for 2+ years at retail), they increase the prices by about 2% each year (and then round to nearest $5/10 depending on the price).

That way, if it had already been up at about $450-60 or so for #10188 by the time it had retired, then this one with a couple of changes and the extra minifigures doesn't seem so bad at only $50 higher.

i going to have to say NO!
this is the 1st time that i know of a set has lasted for 8 years only to get a revamp and come back for what could be more years.

you idea is BAD.
stuff go's down in price the longer it is sold. not UP!

CCC

chrisalddin said:

CCC said:

I wonder if all the complaining about the price hike on this set compared to the last will be listened to by lego. There is of course an easy solution. For any long term sets (say available for 2+ years at retail), they increase the prices by about 2% each year (and then round to nearest $5/10 depending on the price).

That way, if it had already been up at about $450-60 or so for #10188 by the time it had retired, then this one with a couple of changes and the extra minifigures doesn't seem so bad at only $50 higher.

i going to have to say NO!
this is the 1st time that i know of a set has lasted for 8 years only to get a revamp and come back for what could be more years.

It has happened on quite a few other items previously, notably the 32x32 baseplate in the US going from $5 to $8, where there were many complaints that this was a 60% price rise overnight. When in reality it had remained at a low price for many years and when readjusted in one go people observe a big jump and complain. Whereas if that change was only 50c every one or two years over 6-10 years it wouldn't be noticed. It has also happened on series where the items may change but the product is equivalent, so things like CMF packs, keychains, minifigure accessory packs, etc although the CMF series have not been running for eight years.

chrisalddin said:

stuff go's down in price the longer it is sold. not UP!

Actually most things go up in price in the long term (as in the number you are charged), because the purchasing power of money drops over time. Or the prices remain the same and the products become smaller. In lego's case, it wouldn't make sense to reduce the amount of bricks in a set since it would require a redesign. It also wouldn't make sense to constantly increase the price of a set that is out for two years only.  But for a product / set that is out for many years, it does make sense to increase the price during its lifetime.

Of course, there is a downside that keeping prices up with inflation costs money, as prices in catalogues (print and online) and so on need to be changed. However, for products with a life cycle much longer than one year, this is fairly small if the updates happen at the same time as new ranges come out.

Consumers don't like it, but consumers don't like big jumps in prices either - proof is everywhere that the new Death Star is discussed. Which is probably why lego have included more minifigures than the last Death Star, to help offset the price increase.

Recce

Regardless of inflation or not, I can see that TLG priced their products at a price point where they THINK the market can bear, even the same product they can sell at a huge price difference across different countries, the only way to counter this practise is to NOT buy it, pure and simple.

However, given the views shown by members here I would say the chances of people not buying it is pretty slim. Does this mean we get what we deserved?

datsunrobbie

Recce said:

Regardless of inflation or not, I can see that TLG priced their products at a price point where they THINK the market can bear, even the same product they can sell at a huge price difference across different countries, the only way to counter this practise is to NOT buy it, pure and simple.

However, given the views shown by members here I would say the chances of people not buying it is pretty slim. Does this mean we get what we deserved?

Yep. When it comes to luxury items, as long as people keep buying they are telling the seller that the prices are acceptable. LEGO is not food or an Epi-pen. It is somebody's job at LEGO to figure out how high they can push prices while maintaining profits.

CCC

chrisalddin said:

CCC said:

I wonder if all the complaining about the price hike on this set compared to the last will be listened to by lego. There is of course an easy solution. For any long term sets (say available for 2+ years at retail), they increase the prices by about 2% each year (and then round to nearest $5/10 depending on the price).

That way, if it had already been up at about $450-60 or so for #10188 by the time it had retired, then this one with a couple of changes and the extra minifigures doesn't seem so bad at only $50 higher.

you idea is BAD.
stuff go's down in price the longer it is sold. not UP!

Plus you should also realise if they had increased the last DS with inflation, then it would be ~$450. If they were going to allow for future inflation, this one could have been ~$460 (rising to $500 over the next 3-4 years). That would probably be much more palatable for customers (in the know ones).

That said, anyone that is thinking of spending $450 on it will probably spend $500 on it too. Lego know that, which is probably why they don't bother too much changing prices for long term items.

Lyichir

I think whether Lego takes any future action to avoid price hikes like this will depend largely on how well the new Death Star sells. If it meets or exceeds sales expectations then all the complaining in the world won't make much of a difference. The question will be whether mainstream consumers similarly make a fuss or if enough of them accept it and purchase the set regardless of the price hike.

Of course, I don't know of any other sets likely to have a comparable lifespan, so who knows whether anything else needs to be done in the first place...

legoleppy

I read most of this thread, but since I have the old DS, I went through it quickly.  However, I came across this article on my Yahoo homepage:  http://www.popularmechanics.com/culture/movies/a23166/lego-star-wars-death-star/  It says that the new DS will be on sale until Oct. 31.

playwell

^ That cant be right?