What is the next set to be remade?

Ayliffe

Istokg said:

Just an off-topic reminder again, since so many here aren't doing so.... The LEGO Group wishes all AFOLs to follow their guidelines for using their LEGO® trademarked name..... always type LEGO only as capital letters, and LEGO is both singular and plural (no LEGOS or Legos... only LEGO).   They have many times asked all AFOLs to do this to help protect their trademarks.   Thank You.

 
...I...what?

Like sure I can understand it for news articles an' such, but asking everyone on a public forum to say it one certain way or else is... a bit rude, honestly? Who really cares whether people say it as "LEGO® Interlocking Building Blocks™" or Lego or even as legos, it's just a casual place where we chat about UCS Falcons and white rangefinders and sausage usage innit. No point getting yer knackers in a twist over trademarks here.

willobee498

... sausage usage in range finders?

datsunrobbie

CCC said:

alaskaguy said:

LEGO produced a certain number of them, they sold them and they retired the set. You didn't buy it when LEGO sold it so you didn't use the primary market. If a reseller hadn't bought the one you later bought from him, you would not have been able to get your hands on a set - LEGO made a certain number and they were all sold.

Then I would simply do without. It wouldn't be the end of the world.

You have the possibility of doing without whether resellers exist or not.

If there are not resellers, you only have the option of doing without.

If there are resellers, you have the option of buying from the secondary market or doing without.

If it is not the end of the world if you cannot buy X at all, then clearly it is no worse if you can buy X, even if you have to pay a higher price than the original RRP.

I'll agree you are correct, but only using the broadest definition of reseller, meaning a complete shutdown of the secondary market. That's not happening anytime soon.

Most of my LEGO was purchased on the secondary market, but it comes almost entirely from thrift stores. These stores are getting inventory from people who are literally giving away LEGO, and they are more concerned with moving product than maximizing profit. Most of it probably comes from parents donating sets left behind by children who have lost interest.

There's also quite a bit available on Craigslist around here, and that's a mix of organized resellers and people dumping unwanted toys.

With organized resellers you have better tools for finding specific items for purchase, but buying on the secondary market does not have to mean paying more than MSRP, as the "brag" thread has demonstrated on many occasions.

Istokg

Ayliffe said:

Istokg said:

Just an off-topic reminder again, since so many here aren't doing so.... The LEGO Group wishes all AFOLs to follow their guidelines for using their LEGO® trademarked name..... always type LEGO only as capital letters, and LEGO is both singular and plural (no LEGOS or Legos... only LEGO).   They have many times asked all AFOLs to do this to help protect their trademarks.   Thank You.

 
...I...what?

Like sure I can understand it for news articles an' such, but asking everyone on a public forum to say it one certain way or else is... a bit rude, honestly? Who really cares whether people say it as "LEGO® Interlocking Building Blocks™" or Lego or even as legos, it's just a casual place where we chat about UCS Falcons and white rangefinders and sausage usage innit. No point getting yer knackers in a twist over trademarks here.

No this is not rude... this has been brought up many times over the years on this forum, mainly for Newbies who don't know the wishes of TLG.  You will find most long time posters respect TLGs request to follow their wishes as much as we can.  Now granted few people here use LEGO as an adjective, which is what TLG wants, but most of us do respect their request for keeping their name capitalized.  No one will penalize anyone for not doing so... but it's one of the few courtesies that TLG asks of LEGO forumers everywhere.  This thread had posters with low post counts, so I just politely reminded them.... nothing more... nothing less.

https://www.lego.com/en-us/legal/legal-notice/fair-play

CCC

datsunrobbie said:

CCC said:

alaskaguy said:

LEGO produced a certain number of them, they sold them and they retired the set. You didn't buy it when LEGO sold it so you didn't use the primary market. If a reseller hadn't bought the one you later bought from him, you would not have been able to get your hands on a set - LEGO made a certain number and they were all sold.

Then I would simply do without. It wouldn't be the end of the world.

You have the possibility of doing without whether resellers exist or not.

If there are not resellers, you only have the option of doing without.

If there are resellers, you have the option of buying from the secondary market or doing without.

If it is not the end of the world if you cannot buy X at all, then clearly it is no worse if you can buy X, even if you have to pay a higher price than the original RRP.

I'll agree you are correct, but only using the broadest definition of reseller, meaning a complete shutdown of the secondary market. That's not happening anytime soon.

Most of my LEGO was purchased on the secondary market, but it comes almost entirely from thrift stores. These stores are getting inventory from people who are literally giving away LEGO, and they are more concerned with moving product than maximizing profit. Most of it probably comes from parents donating sets left behind by children who have lost interest.

There's also quite a bit available on Craigslist around here, and that's a mix of organized resellers and people dumping unwanted toys.

With organized resellers you have better tools for finding specific items for purchase, but buying on the secondary market does not have to mean paying more than MSRP, as the "brag" thread has demonstrated on many occasions.

Yes, maybe it wasn't clear, I'm talking about being able to buy a new sealed set as you would from a retail store and not a second hand / used set.

CCC

Istokg said:

Ayliffe said:

Istokg said:

Just an off-topic reminder again, since so many here aren't doing so.... The LEGO Group wishes all AFOLs to follow their guidelines for using their LEGO® trademarked name..... always type LEGO only as capital letters, and LEGO is both singular and plural (no LEGOS or Legos... only LEGO).   They have many times asked all AFOLs to do this to help protect their trademarks.   Thank You.

 
...I...what?

Like sure I can understand it for news articles an' such, but asking everyone on a public forum to say it one certain way or else is... a bit rude, honestly? Who really cares whether people say it as "LEGO® Interlocking Building Blocks™" or Lego or even as legos, it's just a casual place where we chat about UCS Falcons and white rangefinders and sausage usage innit. No point getting yer knackers in a twist over trademarks here.

No this is not rude... this has been brought up many times over the years on this forum, mainly for Newbies who don't know the wishes of TLG.  You will find most long time posters respect TLGs request to follow their wishes as much as we can.  Now granted few people here use LEGO as an adjective, which is what TLG wants, but most of us do respect their request for keeping their name capitalized.  No one will penalize anyone for not doing so... but it's one of the few courtesies that TLG asks of LEGO forumers everywhere.  This thread had posters with low post counts, so I just politely reminded them.... nothing more... nothing less.

https://www.lego.com/en-us/legal/legal-notice/fair-play

I think that is more about information sites than forums. I agree any reasonable piece of writing should try to follow those rules. But when someone is using a forum, it is more like chat than an article and so I cannot be bothered to go to the handle of capitalising, especially if on my phone, and definitely not bothering with the (R) sign.

Also strictly this isn't a Lego forum (by default, my phone capitalises the L in Lego but not the whole word) and we are not Lego forumers. The former implies the forum is owned by Lego and the latter that we have a connection with Lego, both of which are not true.

Istokg

Lugnet, Brickset, Eurobricks, et al... are all partly LEGO discussion forums... but without the use of the word 'LEGO' in the title. 

To quote the Brickset FAQ page of the Brickset Forum....

"Although the name of the site may imply otherwise, Brickset is a LEGO fan site and discussion of any other brands producing competing products is discouraged."

You can call yourself a Brickset Forumer if you wish... whatever... it's just splitting hairs...

Hanzo

I don't mean to sound rude, but I am the customer and I will call them whatever I want and couldn't possibly care less what they want.  This is so strange, I have never even heard of such a thing in other hobbies.

samiam391

I don't think I've ever seen so many variations of "I don't mean to be rude" in so few comments before. ;)

Surely, there are more constructive conversations we can be having rather than arguing such incredibly specific semantics.

For example, and this is just randomly popping into my head out of nowhere, what is the next set to be remade?

CCC

Istokg said:

Lugnet, Brickset, Eurobricks, et al... are all partly LEGO discussion forums... but without the use of the word 'LEGO' in the title. 

To quote the Brickset FAQ page of the Brickset Forum....

"Although the name of the site may imply otherwise, Brickset is a LEGO fan site and discussion of any other brands producing competing products is discouraged."

You can call yourself a Brickset Forumer if you wish... whatever... it's just splitting hairs...

The point I was making is calling something a Lego forum is probably breaking the fair play guidelines, whereas a Lego fan forum is not. 

Istokg

Yup.... Eurobricks found an interesting way to use it.... 
https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/

Now back to the topic at hand....

CCC

I'd like to see a Ruby Night or Sapphire Express, based on EN. But not another green one.

Another range of remakes  I'd like to see are some of the service packs (so roof pack, window pack, etc). I know there is no chance there though.

PapaBear

A similar type EN in a different color would be great.  I'd also like to see a new Maersk and a new colonial ship.  They are bound to a do a new Maersk sometime soon.  It's been five years since the last one and the freight cars could be improved a bit.

Fireheart

CCC said:

I'd like to see a Ruby Night or Sapphire Express, based on EN. But not another green one.

Agree 100%, and if LEGO had done this with Taj Mahal ( not a colour change, but more of an upgrade / change) then there woulld be minimum discussion on this subject...

Dfchang813

Dont forget those of us who got into the game late and paid dearly for out of print sets not as an investment but because we wanted to build and own them. I paid 1600 for a used MF and thousands more for Modulars, Taj, ISD, Eiffel Tower, Ststue of Liberty etc.  Re-releases with significant differences and upgrades like the MF is one thing ... but simple reissues like the Taj Majal really hurt those of us who spent big money because we thought that was the only way to get a retired set.  

I am an experienced collector of many things including statues and what Lego has done is a big NO-NO in the world of collectibles. Many rare statues are numbered and limited. This would be suicide for any collectible company to do.  However the amazing thing is Lego apparently doesn't see themselves as a collectible company but a toy company. Which if fair enough. But I think they are in for a very very rude awakening.  A significant percentage of their market share are collectors and adult ones at that like myself. We are the ones driving sales of sets costing hundreds of dollars.  And once many of us stop buying I guarantee you Lego will see the hit.  I sincerely hope this is a very rare occurrence and that future reissues see significant upgrades.  

Ma1234

Hanzo said:

Istokg said:

Just an off-topic reminder again, since so many here aren't doing so.... The LEGO Group wishes all AFOLs to follow their guidelines for using their LEGO® trademarked name..... always type LEGO only as capital letters, and LEGO is both singular and plural (no LEGOS or Legos... only LEGO).   They have many times asked all AFOLs to do this to help protect their trademarks.   Thank You.

I won't get into further details about its' use, since we are all guilty of sometimes not getting that right!  ;-)

I am not sure if you're being serious or not, but why would I (or really anyone not employed/partnered with TLG) possibly care what Lego wants them to do?

Because of the LEGO trademark is not properly policed, it can become generic and LEGO loses it. Many words like Aspirin, Escalator, Thermos and Band-Aid were actually trademarks. But their owners failed to police them and subsequently lost ownership. If this were to happen to LEGO, companies like Lepin would legally be able to market and sell their product as Lego. 

Hanzo

Ma1234 said:

Hanzo said:

Istokg said:

Just an off-topic reminder again, since so many here aren't doing so.... The LEGO Group wishes all AFOLs to follow their guidelines for using their LEGO® trademarked name..... always type LEGO only as capital letters, and LEGO is both singular and plural (no LEGOS or Legos... only LEGO).   They have many times asked all AFOLs to do this to help protect their trademarks.   Thank You.

I won't get into further details about its' use, since we are all guilty of sometimes not getting that right!  ;-)

I am not sure if you're being serious or not, but why would I (or really anyone not employed/partnered with TLG) possibly care what Lego wants them to do?

Because of the LEGO trademark is not properly policed, it can become generic and LEGO loses it. Many words like Aspirin, Escalator, Thermos and Band-Aid were actually trademarks. But their owners failed to police them and subsequently lost ownership. If this were to happen to LEGO, companies like Lepin would legally be able to market and sell their product as Lego. 

Not even remotely the same thing.  Calling some generic bandage a band-aid is wrong, because it isn't a band-aid.  Your analogy only works if I call a Lepin set LEGO, which I am not.  But even still, it isn't my job as the consumer to worry about any of this, so my point still remains.

Istokg

CCC said:

I'd like to see a Ruby Night or Sapphire Express, based on EN. But not another green one.

Another range of remakes  I'd like to see are some of the service packs (so roof pack, window pack, etc). I know there is no chance there though.

Amen to your last idea about service packs!! 

Another service pack I would like to see is a trans-clear pack.  Ever take a look at 2x2, 2x3 and 2x4 sizes in trans-clear bricks AND plates?   YIKES!! Very very pricey in new condition!  Ditto for the trans-clear macaroni bricks... although I don't like the idea of them in trans-clear in the reinforced underside variety.  :-(

Also that 3x3 33 degree concave corner slope that first appeared in the Robie House in dark red... 
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=99301#T=C

It is a wonderful addition to complete that line (system) of low slopes  But it will probably be 10 years before we start seeing this part in more colors where you actually have the complete line of the different low slopes (in the same color) to complete a low sloped roof (with both hips and valleys).  Even in a cool color such as sand green (where the concave corner is available)... you won't find enough of the 2x3 and 4x3 regular slopes available in BL.

MaffyD

Dfchang813 said:

Dont forget those of us who got into the game late and paid dearly for out of print sets not as an investment but because we wanted to build and own them. I paid 1600 for a used MF and thousands more for Modulars, Taj, ISD, Eiffel Tower, Ststue of Liberty etc.  Re-releases with significant differences and upgrades like the MF is one thing ... but simple reissues like the Taj Majal really hurt those of us who spent big money because we thought that was the only way to get a retired set..;

You still have the Lego that you bought, and presumably you were happy with the price when you bought it. That someone else can now buy it for less does not alter that. The only issue is if you want to sell it on again, which presumably is not much of an issue if you're trying to collect them instead of reselling them. Certainly buyer's remorse is a thing, but that's true for an awful lot of stuff we all buy: "Will this TV be cheaper if I buy it next year? Will I get a better TV for the same price if I buy it next year? do I want a TV now?" I do agree that this is a new-ish thing for Lego to do, and I don't think anyone likes surprises like this. Imagine if it were a house... actually, that's not a bad idea.

Dfchang813 said:

I am an experienced collector of many things including statues and what Lego has done is a big NO-NO in the world of collectibles. Many rare statues are numbered and limited. This would be suicide for any collectible company to do.  However the amazing thing is Lego apparently doesn't see themselves as a collectible company but a toy company. Which if fair enough. ;

They are a toy company. They are not a collectibles company. That a subset of their target market treats them like they are, and they sometimes follow those rules with some of their products doesn't turn them into one.

Dfchang813 said:

But I think they are in for a very very rude awakening.  A significant percentage of their market share are collectors and adult ones at that like myself. We are the ones driving sales of sets costing hundreds of dollars.  And once many of us stop buying I guarantee you Lego will see the hit. ;

Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not sure collectors are a significant percentage of their market share (depending on how you define 'collector', 'significant' and indeed 'market'). I don't think they drive the sales as much as is assumed. Either way, it will be interesting to see what happens when the TM hits shelves.

Dfchang813 said:

 I sincerely hope this is a very rare occurrence and that future reissues see significant upgrades.  

I too, would like to see upgrades instead of straight reissues. We shall have to see if this is the start of a trend...

By they, I'd like to say that I don't mean to single you out, but you've managed to hit pretty much all the 'buzzwords' I could have imagined for this topic! I hope you continue to enjoy your collection for what it means to you, like I do for mine!

Mr_Cross

I'm totally happy to see straight reissues. I don't care how much I paid for a set I now own, I own it and the "cost" is irrelevant to me. I've bought classic space sets I missed out on, but I would LOVE to be able to buy more, brand new ones - even if the value of one's I have take a hit. The availability of new classic space sets would be worth it for me. I can see that not everyone would feel like that, especially folk like those who paid four figures for #10179!
Happy if they need to be updates, as that probably represents better value.

CCC

It would be really interesting to see what would happen if they brought out exact re-issues of the CMF series. They could probably do full series at £3 per figure (today's pricing). So £48 for a complete set of series 1, series 2, or series 3, etc. No need messing with buying multiple packets, just a straight up reissue of all the old ones for anyone that missed them. 

Istokg

CCC said:

It would be really interesting to see what would happen if they brought out exact re-issues of the CMF series. They could probably do full series at £3 per figure (today's pricing). So £48 for a complete set of series 1, series 2, or series 3, etc. No need messing with buying multiple packets, just a straight up reissue of all the old ones for anyone that missed them. 

I too have wondered about that.  It will give pause to those resellers/investors that have entire series stashed away as a future investment.  And then there's Mr. Gold.  I don't think that TLG would reissue him (say series 5001-10000), but by the same token, I didn't hink that the Taj Mahal would be coming out as an exact reissue either.

Time will tell.  But I wouldn't plan on any modern LEGO items as a retirement nest egg!

Aanchir

CCC said:

It would be really interesting to see what would happen if they brought out exact re-issues of the CMF series. They could probably do full series at £3 per figure (today's pricing). So £48 for a complete set of series 1, series 2, or series 3, etc. No need messing with buying multiple packets, just a straight up reissue of all the old ones for anyone that missed them. 

It wouldn't be completely outside the realm of possibility for LEGO to do that, considering that other types of collectibles like trading cards sometimes relaunch past series.

That said, I think part of the reason LEGO hasn't done that so far is that they expect a lot more demand for brand-new figs that nobody owns, and relaunching a past series might mean less production capacity to devote to their usual new series.

CCC

Aanchir said:

CCC said:

It would be really interesting to see what would happen if they brought out exact re-issues of the CMF series. They could probably do full series at £3 per figure (today's pricing). So £48 for a complete set of series 1, series 2, or series 3, etc. No need messing with buying multiple packets, just a straight up reissue of all the old ones for anyone that missed them. 

It wouldn't be completely outside the realm of possibility for LEGO to do that, considering that other types of collectibles like trading cards sometimes relaunch past series.

That said, I think part of the reason LEGO hasn't done that so far is that they expect a lot more demand for brand-new figs that nobody owns, and relaunching a past series might mean less production capacity to devote to their usual new series.

Yes, that (the last bit) is why I suggested doing them as sets rather than as the blind bagged collectables. It then wouldn't impact on new CMF sales. There seem to be plenty of people wanting to catch up, based on the prices and sales volumes on the secondary market, and also the Chinese fakes - many of the early series are available in fake form too.

I'd still prefer themed smaller "battle packs" though - eg four or five animal suits, or historical warriors, city workers (enough for multiple series!) etc. They could either be recolours or direct copies of the originals. A bit like the TRU packs, but more themed, or the old style minifigues packs they used to do (beach, music, halloween).

PapaBear

Hanzo said:by

Ma1234 said:

Hanzo said:

Istokg said:

Just an off-topic reminder again, since so many here aren't doing so.... The LEGO Group wishes all AFOLs to follow their guidelines for using their LEGO® trademarked name..... always type LEGO only as capital letters, and LEGO is both singular and plural (no LEGOS or Legos... only LEGO).   They have many times asked all AFOLs to do this to help protect their trademarks.   Thank You.

I won't get into further details about its' use, since we are all guilty of sometimes not getting that right!  ;-)

I am not sure if you're being serious or not, but why would I (or really anyone not employed/partnered with TLG) possibly care what Lego wants them to do?

Because of the LEGO trademark is not properly policed, it can become generic and LEGO loses it. Many words like Aspirin, Escalator, Thermos and Band-Aid were actually trademarks. But their owners failed to police them and subsequently lost ownership. If this were to happen to LEGO, companies like Lepin would legally be able to market and sell their product as Lego. 

Not even remotely the same thing.  Calling some generic bandage a band-aid is wrong, because it isn't a band-aid.  Your analogy only works if I call a Lepin set LEGO, which I am not.  But even still, it isn't my job as the consumer to worry about any of this, so my point still remains.

It's not about what one person chooses to do.  It's about taking steps to protect a trademark. All the names Ma said used to be proprietary, but many are not now because the companies that owned them didn't take enough action to protect their brand name.  You can call LEGO whatever you want.  I'm not enamored by the company, but I don't find it hard to show the tiny amount of respect they only ask for.  If not for that, then I do it to be grammatically correct and more readable.

Fauch

CCC said:

It would be really interesting to see what would happen if they brought out exact re-issues of the CMF series. They could probably do full series at £3 per figure (today's pricing). So £48 for a complete set of series 1, series 2, or series 3, etc. No need messing with buying multiple packets, just a straight up reissue of all the old ones for anyone that missed them. 

4€ per minifigs is already expensive, what would it be for rereleases of the first series which generally have simpler figures, less accessories, and absolutely no new pieces? there are no more than a handful of figs per series which would be maybe worth rereleasing

CCC

Fauch said:

CCC said:

It would be really interesting to see what would happen if they brought out exact re-issues of the CMF series. They could probably do full series at £3 per figure (today's pricing). So £48 for a complete set of series 1, series 2, or series 3, etc. No need messing with buying multiple packets, just a straight up reissue of all the old ones for anyone that missed them. 

4€ per minifigs is already expensive, what would it be for rereleases of the first series which generally have simpler figures, less accessories, and absolutely no new pieces? there are no more than a handful of figs per series which would be maybe worth rereleasing

The going rate / RRP for a CMF these days is £3 in UK, so I doubt they would do it any cheaper than that. If someone has none of S1 and wants the entire series, then they would want all of them, not just the handful that long time collectors would want. Re-releases are not to satisfy people that have the original, they are there for people that want the originals and to stop them using the secondary market and / or fakes.

Lordmoral

Seems I haven't heard of this until now,  so here is my own 2 cents: Super Star Destroyer UCS, even thought I much prefer the minifigures version there have been rumors around.

PapaBear

I read the rumor that an SSD will come out in February.  How much warning did we have for the new MF, two weeks?  So weird that they would rerelease an SSD after only 3 and a half years of retirement.

PapaBear

If they remake the SSD #10221, when would we get an announcement?  When do UCS sets typically get revealed?

daewoo

MaffyD said:

Someone was very unhappy yesterday:

https://www.brothers-brick.com/2017/10/30/lego-re-release-taj-mahal-news/#comment-101624

I guess I'm a jerk because I'm happy that guy is so ticked off.  I hope Lego continue to rerelease sets since people like me can get something we missed out on without having to shell out a large fortune.

MrJackson

 New Elementary had a good article a week or so ago about the re-release of the Taj Mahal, and the point they made was that all of the pieces either still exist or exist in an only slightly modified form i.e. hollow vs. solid studs on the dishes. Plus, even though it's just shy of 6k pieces, the lot number is fairly low (164 unique pieces compared to 256 for Cafe Corner, even though CC is less than half the total part count, not to mention moulds for that set that no longer exist). So that's something to keep in mind with re-releases vs. new updated sets like the Carousel, Falcon, or Snowspeeder. 

AustinPowers

@daweoo: If you're a jerk then I am one too. When I read his comment I immediately thought "I hope LEGO issues even more re-releases, if only to make this guy even more annoyed".

I have so many LEGO sets that one could call it a collection. Would I be annoyed if LEGO re-released some of the older and by now "valuable" rare ones (I put valuable in quotation marks because in the end it is all just ABS plastic bricks, hardly something of much intrinsic value)?

Hell no, I would be happy that even more kids and adults could enjoy sets like the Technic 8043, large Star Wars sets like 10030, any old modular or other "rare" old D2C set for a reasonable amount of money. Or that they could choose to not get them, even a second time, like I don't intend to buy the new Taj Mahal just because I have no need for it plus nowhere I could display it. Matter of choice.

Then again, as I mentioned 10030, I sure hope that if LEGO releases an new UCS Imperial Star Destroyer, they will do an update as thorough as with the new MF. Not because I want to see the "value" of 10030 preserved (I haven't got that set anyway), but because there is so much potential here for improvement versus the old one.

arathemis

why do you say that the 10030`s value will be preserved if a supposedly new set is released and is massively better? In my opinion everyone will just buy the newer version as it will look a whole lot better, better structure etc.
If you`re not a coo-coo collector, I don`t see anyone ever looking back at 10030 if a newer better set would be available.

CCC

^ There will always be some that want the older, rarer one. Prices may hold up a bit, but volume will be down massively.

I'm not a fan of re-releases but understand why they do them. But when someone makes comments like that, I also feel a bit happy they remade it. Although when they do re-releases I'd much prefer to see them made to current standards rather than direct re-releases (so more like MF than TM).

ecmo47

PapaBear said:

I read the rumor that an SSD will come out in February.  How much warning did we have for the new MF, two weeks?  So weird that they would rerelease an SSD after only 3 and a half years of retirement.

Yeah, and you can only get it if you have the MF Black Card.

(That falsehood should send 1/2 the AFOL world into a tail-spin!)  

CCC

ecmo47 said:

PapaBear said:

I read the rumor that an SSD will come out in February.  How much warning did we have for the new MF, two weeks?  So weird that they would rerelease an SSD after only 3 and a half years of retirement.

Yeah, and you can only get it if you have the MF Black Card.

For a one year VIP advance purchase.

Bumblepants

ecmo47 said:

PapaBear said:

I read the rumor that an SSD will come out in February.  How much warning did we have for the new MF, two weeks?  So weird that they would rerelease an SSD after only 3 and a half years of retirement.

Yeah, and you can only get it if you have the MF Black Card.

(That falsehood should send 1/2 the AFOL world into a tail-spin!)  

You joke but there will be some exclusive poly attached to that card that will upset everyone without and then if it later becomes available to others the black card holders will have a turn being upset.

SumoLego

(^ like the Darth Vader Pod?)

monkeyhanger

PapaBear said:

If they remake the SSD #10221, when would we get an announcement?  When do UCS sets typically get revealed?

TLG are usually very tight-lipped about the early annual UCS release, usually available literally a week beford May 4th, and usually known about/confirmed only a few weeks before.

Why would the SSD be next? It's only been gone 4 years. ISD has been gone far longer, us begging for a structural upgrade, and is more iconic. I have the SSD but if I could only have one or the other, i'd want the ISD.

Bumblepants

monkeyhanger said:

PapaBear said:

If they remake the SSD #10221, when would we get an announcement?  When do UCS sets typically get revealed?

TLG are usually very tight-lipped about the early annual UCS release, usually available literally a week beford May 4th, and usually known about/confirmed only a few weeks before.

Why would the SSD be next? It's only been gone 4 years. ISD has been gone far longer, us begging for a structural upgrade, and is more iconic. I have the SSD but if I could only have one or the other, i'd want the ISD.

The only reasons I can think of would be to stick it to resellers and/or because all the parts are still in production like with the Taj Mahal. I agree a regular ISD would be much better.

Lordmoral

With Dianey now esentially acquiring the rights to Fox again I reckon that we will be seeing X-Men sets again and Fantastic Four sets at last.

datsunrobbie

monkeyhanger said:

PapaBear said:

If they remake the SSD #10221, when would we get an announcement?  When do UCS sets typically get revealed?

TLG are usually very tight-lipped about the early annual UCS release, usually available literally a week beford May 4th, and usually known about/confirmed only a few weeks before.

Why would the SSD be next? It's only been gone 4 years. ISD has been gone far longer, us begging for a structural upgrade, and is more iconic. I have the SSD but if I could only have one or the other, i'd want the ISD.

Maybe it will be the re-re-release of the UCS Millennium Falcon, finally in stock again for May 4th.

PapaBear

monkeyhanger said:

PapaBear said:

If they remake the SSD #10221, when would we get an announcement?  When do UCS sets typically get revealed?

TLG are usually very tight-lipped about the early annual UCS release, usually available literally a week beford May 4th, and usually known about/confirmed only a few weeks before.

Why would the SSD be next? It's only been gone 4 years. ISD has been gone far longer, us begging for a structural upgrade, and is more iconic. I have the SSD but if I could only have one or the other, i'd want the ISD.

My thoughts exactly, but the rumor is from someone who predicted the UCS MF and Taj Mahal I believe.

Lordmoral

This Forum seems to have died up a bit but I will add my two cents:
-City Harbor return (a few good cargo ships with cranes and warehouses as well cargo containers would be most welcomed).

Astrobricks

I’m still waiting for the imminent (re)release of a Technic tower crane.

KungFuKenny

I would be thrilled with either Forestmen or Islanders but these are both pretty unlikely.  Seems like both classic castle and pirate themes are being pushed aside by licensed themes and in-house one-off themes (POTC and Nexo Knights for example).

Dfchang813

Just resurrecting this topic to state that for whatever reason Lego seems to have largely abandoned the idea of straight reissues at least as a wide spread phenomenon. 

The Millennium Falcon and ISD are actually significant upgrades to the older sets so the only straight up reissue I can think of is the Taj Mahal and just this week the Saturn. 

I’m not quite sure what the deal is with the Saturn since they retired the older version only to reissue it again under a different set number a few months later?  Huh??? 

It reminds me of the Death Star where they retired the old one only to introduced the new shinier version that cost 100 dollars more literally the next month. 

But both the fears and hopes of those of us debating reissues seem to overblown.  For better or worse Lego seems dedicated to releasing better upgraded versions which is what I wanted all along.  

Perhaps Taj Mahal did not move as many units as they thought and the expense and resources required to reissue it could have been directed elsewhere?  

Astrobricks

Still thinking a large Eiffel Tower will happen again at some point.

Dfchang813

I guess common sense should have told us that reissuing a set is a big business decision. You need to justify the investment of resources, money, and time into a set that you have already sold.   Would people still buy it if it’s widely available??   

It was never something Lego was going to do widely.   Unless Taj Mahal does well I wouldn’t hold out hope for Eiffel but I would love to have a reissue of that.  I just have a used one with instruction book but no box ...