Please refrain from posting animated GIFs, memes, joke videos and so on in discussions other than those in the off topic area.

Dismiss this message to confirm your acceptance of this additional forum term of use.

Holiday 2014 performers

rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
edited March 2015 in Buying & Selling Topics
We spend a lot of time making predictions, so I thought it would be an interesting and informational exercise to perform follow-up and share sales data from the Holiday 2014 season on how some sets actually performed.

I'm still crunching some numbers but decided not to wait to make this initial post so people could go off and do their own analysis. Are your records good enough to contribute?

I'm using 10/1/14 - 12/31/14. For simplicity, I'm ignoring fees and I'm also ignoring the value of freebies, reward points, etc. I'll post:

1. profit $
2. my ROI % 
3. my Annualized ROI %
4. profit $ over MSRP
5. ROI on MSRP %
6. Annualized ROI on MSRP %

Before I post my data, I'll post just the names of the 5 best, 5 median, and 5 worst performing sets and see if people can put them in the proper categories without research.

Comments

  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,938
    The names...?
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    still working on it :)
    tamamahm
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    Ok, let's use "Personal annualized ROI %" ... in other words, my profit % as a function of time.

    Try to put the following 15 sets in the correct grouping of Top 5, Median 5, and Worst 5, and rank them correctly within their group for extra credit. Try to refrain from clicking on the link as it'll expose you to aftermarket listings:

    #3221 City LEGO Truck
    #3661 City Bank Money Transfer
    #4628 Fun w/ bricks 600-piece
    #4841 HP Hogwart's Express
    #5882 Dino Ambush Attack
    #5885 Dino Triceratops Trapper
    #7958 SW 2011 Advent Calendar
    #8061 Altantis Gateway of the Squid
    #8098 SW Clone Turbo Tank
    #8408 City Public Transport
    #10199 Winter Toy Shop
    #10210 Imperial Flagship
    #10212 SW Imperial Shuttle
    #21110 Research Institute
    #853373 Kingdoms Chess Set

  • graphitegraphite USMember Posts: 3,240
    lol.. you are complicating it by breaking it up into top, median and worst when all that really ends up being is a ranked top 15.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    HP Hogwarts Express
    WV Toy Shop
    Imperial Flagship
    SW Imperial Shuttle
    SW Clone Turbo Tank

    Fun w/ Bricks
    Dino Ambush Attack
    SW Advent Calendar
    Dino Tricerotops Trapper
    Research Institute

    City Public Transport
    City Lego Truck
    Lego Kingdoms Chess set
    City Bank Money Transfer
    Atlantis
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    ^^ true, but the ranking within the grouping isn't nearly as interesting or illuminating, so if people want to just create the groups of 5 rather than agonize between, say 13 and 14, that's fine.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    @pitfall69 That's in order of best, median, worst... yes?
    Pitfall69
  • graphitegraphite USMember Posts: 3,240

    WV Toy Shop
    SW Imperial Shuttle
    Imperial Flagship 
    HP Hogwarts Express
    Dino Ambush Attack

    Lego Kingdoms Chess set
    City Bank Money Transfer
    Dino Tricerotops Trapper
    Research Institute 
    SW Clone Turbo Tank

    City Lego Truck
    City Public Transport
    Fun w/ Bricks
    SW Advent Calendar 
    Atlantis
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    @rocao, yes. These are complete guesses. I only sold 1 set from your list during the 2014 Holiday.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    Hogwarts Express?
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    Ha. No. Imperial Shuttle and the box was damaged.
  • BanditBandit Member Posts: 890
    So are you using the standard Compound Annual Growth Rate formula then?  Based on *your* initial item cost (not MSRP) and your final sale price (no fees, no shipping)?  Once I have your exact criteria to match up with I will post my data.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    @Bandit: I'm using Annualized ROI but can switch to CAGR if you wish. I'm not an accountant so I may be wrong, but I think for the simplicity of this discussion, I prefer to treat the following as equivalent because it suits the hobby reseller who is not constantly reinvesting:

    Set A initial cost $100 sold for $200 after 1 years
    Set B initial cost $100 sold for $300 after 2 years 
  • HokieJoe99HokieJoe99 Member Posts: 348
    I'm taking this game two steps further and breaking them up into 5 groups of 3 each.  
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    ^ heh, ok, but you might as well rank them in that case, as graphite mentioned. There are quite a few sets between each group so set #4 ~= #5 >> #6
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    Annualized return

    1. 2973% #5882 Dino Ambush Attack 
    2. 1528% #21110 Research Institute (2 months)
    3. 512% #4628 Fun w/ bricks 600-piece (10 months)
    4. 450% #853373 Kingdoms Chess Set (8 months)
    5. 375% #3221 City LEGO Truck 

    51. 157% #10210 Imperial Flagship 
    52. 154% #10199 Winter Toy Shop 
    53. 146% #4841 HP Hogwart's Express 
    54. 127% #3661 City Bank Money Transfer
    55. 127% #5885 Dino Triceratops Trapper 

    102. 80% #8408 City Public Transport
    103. 64% #7958 SW 2011 Advent Calendar
    104. 57% #10212 SW Imperial Shuttle 
    105. 48% #8098 SW Clone Turbo Tank 
    106. 36% #8061 Altantis Gateway of the Squid
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    So @pitfall69 correctly guessed 0 of the top 5, and @graphite picked 1 of the top 5. This is my argument for diversifying.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    edited March 2015
    I suspect they werent taking the time issue fully into account, otherwise it was obvious RI would be up there as a very quick flip.

    Of course, that's also one of the two types of reselling that LEGO are mostly concerned about.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,495
    RI up there is not surprising, simply due to the quick flip. I'm guessing you got a very good deal on the small Dino one.

    I don't really see that this is an argument for diversifying. The winners seem to be cheap sets and quick flips. And in fact, if you delve a little deeper, it is an argument not just for quick flips, but quick flips before christmas. Take RI, you must have sold it for about $71 (assuming RRP of $20 paid, I don't know what tax you paid). Looking at BL prices (OK, I'm sure you didn't sell there), only 1 transaction (for 5 units) in the last 6 months in USD was above $70, in September. Otherwise in Sep-Dec very few were above $50, many are $30-40, although the maximum is high $60s. Yet if you hold out just too long, the maximum paid drops to $30 after Xmas.

    So what the data seems to suggest is that the big winners are the Minecraft 21102 type sets, buy current popular sets before Christmas and flip them quick when they go OOS before christmas (the "nasty opportunist" reseller :-) ). Or buy sets that are very cheap, they will make somewhere between not a lot and a lot and you either forget about them or they are proclaimed excellent investments.

    I'm sure if you take other equations you'll get very different outcomes. Start to compound properly and quick flips will rise up the charts, start to include volume, and no doubt Dino Attack will drop. Time investment per set sold (as in working, not holding), and the larger sets will rise.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    Indeed, which metric to use should be based on what your limiting factor is and one size doesn't fit all.

    For larger more business type resellers the limiting factor is likely to be storage and/or capital tied up. In those cases annualised income is more useful and unsurprisingly you'll end up not dissimilar to most retail businesses where quick turnover of product is key. If storage was the most importnat factor you might even go further to factor in the volume of each box giving you a ROI not just /$ but also /cubic foot. Presumably you should almost never hold stock beyond a year post EOL, as thats where the largest % increase in value comes, free up the capital and reinvest.

    The more hobbiest reseller is likely to be limited more by actual time: packing, listing, posting. As such an annualised metric is less useful and one based on pure $ profit rather than % ROI is more important. That will lead to a smaller number of larger exclusives held for a longer period of time. 
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    Yes, I am definitely not a quick flipper, so I don't have any experience in any of the sets that were prime for that category. I am very disappointed in the Imperial Shuttle, but I didn't buy that many. I picked Hogwarts Express based on how well Hogwarts Castle has done and I bought plenty of those. My goal is to have far more winners than stinkers in my inventory and so far I'm doing pretty good. I think this Christmas should be very interesting. I'm curious how HH and TH will do this holiday season.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,495
    edited March 2015
    Another fun inclusion to add in is when you buy the set for short term quick flips.  If I purchase a set online on day 1, receive it on day 5 and sell it on day 6, how many days have I owned it? What if I ordered on day 1, sold on day 2 and then posted it out on day 5 when it is received?

    More fun - what if I paid by credit card and don't pay the bill until day 30? What if I paid by credit card and return the set if it doesn't sell by day 20? This is essentially sale or return, betting on a quick flip with the safety of returning if not.

    You can get phenomenally different rates depending on how you define time elapsed in such cases. In the run up to Christmas, I can imagine it is quite easy to sell a set before the credit card bill is actually paid and also have the option of returning it if it doesn't sell (even if bad behaviour).
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    CCC said:
    RI up there is not surprising, simply due to the quick flip. I'm guessing you got a very good deal on the small Dino one.
    I got a great deal at 90% off, but even if I had purchased at the more typical 50% off, its rank on the list would be the same.
    CCC said:
    I don't really see that this is an argument for diversifying. The winners seem to be cheap sets and quick flips. And in fact, if you delve a little deeper, it is an argument not just for quick flips, but quick flips before christmas. ... I'm sure if you take other equations you'll get very different outcomes. Start to compound properly and quick flips will rise up the charts, start to include volume, and no doubt Dino Attack will drop. Time investment per set sold (as in working, not holding), and the larger sets will rise.
    There are a lot of approaches suggested by this data, and quick flips would be one of them. There's no doubt that the criteria we use will change the result. Even still, I think the outcomes will be illuminating, if not, surprising.

    If I use ROI instead of annualized ROI, Ambush Attack, LEGO Truck, and 600-pc set are still in the top five of the fifteen mentioned sets, and #10212 Imperial Shuttle, whose retirement was celebrated and actually accelerated by people purchasing and posting in real time on the forum, is still dead last. That's my argument for diversifying.

    Should I bother soliciting guesses for my overall top 5 ROI, or should I just post it? Does anyone have their own data to share?
  • doriansdaddoriansdad CTCMember Posts: 1,337
    Can you include cost of labor and will that change the result?

    Personally I would rather have just HH and TH rather than a diversified lot of smalls. No steamrollers or creative towers for me :) But if the math works with all costs included maybe I am viewing it all wrong? 
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,495
    edited March 2015
    rocao said:

    If I use ROI instead of annualized ROI, Ambush Attack, LEGO Truck, and 600-pc set are still in the top five of the fifteen mentioned sets, and #10212 Imperial Shuttle, whose retirement was celebrated and actually accelerated by people purchasing and posting in real time on the forum, is still dead last. That's my argument for diversifying.
    Yes, I guess that is not so surprising, as it will knock down the quick flips.

    Even your worst performer was a profit - I assume this means you don't sell at a loss. Does that mean you have any real dogs that won't sell at more than RRP, therefore go unsold? Because of course that is another side of the argument - some sets when you diversify will lose, but are not reported if they are not sold.

    It's interesting to see the Dino one at the top. I bought a six of them when they were £2 in the UK (so about 75% off), and couldn't get more than £4 for them for a good 18 months. So I didn't bother selling them just chucked them in the back of the cupboard. I even opened 3 of them for some minifig parts* (keeping the dino sealed) and gave one away as a present. Then all of a sudden the set was selling for £15, it seemed almost out of nowhere (but probably over six months) so I managed to get rid of them. *Bear in mind I'm not really a set reseller. If I find cheap sets I purchase them normally for the parts / minifigs, and sell off what I don't want. So I'm not dipping into an investment.

    So I guess sometimes slow sellers do also rise, but you still need the right buyer (and I guess not too much stock).

    Even so, you must have sold the Dino one for about $70 or so, so a very good mark-up. Out of interest, how many did you manage to sell at that price?
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    Can you include cost of labor and will that change the result?

    Personally I would rather have just HH and TH rather than a diversified lot of smalls. No steamrollers or creative towers for me :) But if the math works with all costs included maybe I am viewing it all wrong? 
    I don't really do cost of labor calculations. There is obviously more work involved if you're trying to produce the same profit from lower yield sets. However, at the levels we're discussing, I don't think it changes the result. If it does, then I suspect you would want to focus on making your process more efficient, e.g. having the correct size packaging, scheduling pick-ups, etc.

    Also, I think we'd all rather have a bunch of Haunted Houses and Town Halls than various small sets now that we know how they've appreciated. What if you picked incorrectly? Would you make the same claim with Imperial Shuttles and Fire Brigade? For the record, I'm still bullish on both of these sets, but the same money invested in random sets that retired at the same time would have yielded more this past Holiday season.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    You also have to look at space as well. I would rather store 10 TH's than lot's of smaller sets that have the same return in profit.

    I'm also surprised that Hogwarts Castle wasn't on your short list? I sold my last one in January for $400.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    CCC said:

    Even your worst performer was a profit - I assume this means you don't sell at a loss. Does that mean you have any real dogs that won't sell at more than RRP, therefore go unsold? Because of course that is another side of the argument - some sets when you diversify will lose, but are not reported if they are not sold.
    Correct, I'm a hobby reseller and don't need to derive a living wage from sales. I'm not pressured to cut my losses on sets and choose instead to sell profitable ones. But I can't even think of any sets on which I've incurred losses; the worst case is break-even. And that's where being an AFOL softens the blow. I can always part it out and add it to my parts inventory (which is almost always a consideration when I purchase), make an activity out of it with my LUG, etc.
    CCC said:
    So I guess sometimes slow sellers do also rise, but you still need the right buyer (and I guess not too much stock).
    Even so, you must have sold the Dino one for about $70 or so, so a very good mark-up. Out of interest, how many did you manage to sell at that price?
    Dino theme sets were among my quickest movers last season. I sold 12 Ambush Attacks at an average price of $69. Raptor Chase and Dino HQ also sold very well.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,495
    rocao said:

    But I can't even think of any sets on which I've incurred losses; the worst case is break-even. And that's where being an AFOL softens the blow. I can always part it out and add it to my parts inventory (which is almost always a consideration when I purchase), make an activity out of it with my LUG, etc.

    Yes, I've bought a few in the past that were cheap knowing I'd probably use them as parts packs if they didn't rise, and then I couldn't really be bothered selling them for little to no profit. Strangely one of them was #8061, your worst performer. It's actually not a bad set, in a not great theme (too many mechs/vehicles, not enough ancient city) with some fantastic parts in it - if you are into the organic looking squid / monster parts.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,495
    rocao said:
    Dino theme sets were among my quickest movers last season. I sold 12 Ambush Attacks at an average price of $69. Raptor Chase and Dino HQ also sold very well.
    So although not huge numbers, definitely not a one-off then.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    Pitfall69 said:
    You also have to look at space as well. I would rather store 10 TH's than lot's of smaller sets that have the same return in profit.

    I'm also surprised that Hogwarts Castle wasn't on your short list? I sold my last one in January for $400.
    Do you mean purely because of storage volume? It's possible that the smaller sets take up less volume. Even if they do take up more volume, you can be more versatile in how you store them. For Modular boxes, I'm almost always buying expensive boxes to store and ship, whereas smaller ones can easily fit in re-purposed boxes.

    Big LEGO boxes also are damaged more easily because of the increased internal weight.

    Hogwarts Castle is just a slot above the middle tier sets I posted at 161% annualized return. I was happy with it, but it's worth noting that #4736 Freeing Dobby, #4737 Quidditch Match, #4865 Forbidden Forest, and #4867 Hogwarts all did better.
  • BanditBandit Member Posts: 890
    edited March 2015
    rocao said:
    @Bandit: I'm using Annualized ROI but can switch to CAGR if you wish. I'm not an accountant so I may be wrong, but I think for the simplicity of this discussion, I prefer to treat the following as equivalent because it suits the hobby reseller who is not constantly reinvesting:

    Set A initial cost $100 sold for $200 after 1 years
    Set B initial cost $100 sold for $300 after 2 years 
    No problem, just want to make sure we're comparing apples to apples.  Here are my Annualized ROI results:

    1.  18.73% #8038 The Battle of Endor
    2.  31.75% #10193 Medieval Market Village
    3.  35.75% #7188 King's Carriage Ambush
    4.  42.96% #10198 Tantive IV
    5.  43.21% #8098 Clone Turbo Tank
    6.  44.19% #7065 Alien Mothership
    7.  46.19% #7964 Republic Frigate

    35.  115.89% #10231 Shuttle Expedition
    36.  117.84% #7959 Geonosian Starfighter
    37.  118.06% #4183 The Mill
    38.  119.87% #3178 Seaplane
    39.  123.48% #7962 Anakin and Sebulba's Podracers
    40.  129.29% #3368 Space Center
    41.  134.39% #5885 Triceratops Trapper

    72.  280.04% #4865 The Forbidden Forest
    73.  299.15% #6157 The Big Zoo
    74.  325.07% #79104 The Shellraiser Street Chase
    75.  328.74% #4867 Hogwarts
    76.  338.79% #6864 The Batmobile and the Two-Face Chase
    77.  373.93% #4737 Quidditch Match
    rocao
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    CCC said:
    So although not huge numbers, definitely not a one-off then.
    I wish I had more. As I mentioned earlier, they were among my quickest movers. I unloaded most of my Dino sets this past holiday because of the impending release of Jurassic World. Other notable sets that sold quickly were the #4628 600-piece building set, #3181 Passenger Plane, #4736 Freeing Dobby, and of course, #21110 Research Institute.
  • pharmjodpharmjod 1,170 miles to Wall Drug, USAMember Posts: 2,871
    This entire thread is fascinating for me. Thanks!
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    @Bandit: Wonderful, thanks for sharing! My data looks similar for the sets that we have in common.

    Does it surprise anyone to see that no Star Wars sets made our top tiers and instead were common entries in the middle and bottom tier?
  • BanditBandit Member Posts: 890
    rocao said:
    CCC said:
    So although not huge numbers, definitely not a one-off then.
    I wish I had more. As I mentioned earlier, they were among my quickest movers. I unloaded most of my Dino sets this past holiday because of the impending release of Jurassic World. Other notable sets that sold quickly were the #4628 600-piece building set, #3181 Passenger Plane, #4736 Freeing Dobby, and of course, #21110 Research Institute.

    Agree - Dino was big for me.  I had a pretty big inventory of sets from the walmart clearance 2 years ago that all did very well.  Just have a few left now.  

    I also sold off most of my HP that I had left.  That also sold very quickly and for gonzo money.  #4737 Quidditch Match being the biggest % gainer of them all -- Avg. cost of $12, sold my last remaining inventory of them for $140 a pop.  
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    ^ Yep, I purchased Quidditch Match 50% off at Walmart. They sold so quickly that unfortunately I ran out in October at an $85 price point. Impressive that they are up to $140 now.

    I regret passing on literally hundreds of Freeing Dobby at Walmart. They were 30% off and considering the huge pallet they had, I took a chance to wait for 50% off. I don't remember how soon I checked back, but they were all gone, and I suspect they were just sent back to a warehouse.
  • RonyarRonyar Member Posts: 357
    I find this all fascinating as well.  Due to circumstances (wife.. Cough cough) I tend to be a quick flipper of sets when the opportunity arises so that they aren't "cluttering" up the house.  Seeing the numbers on the long term return does make me think I need to at least dip my toes into long term buying and holding of sets.  (the RIGHT sets of course.)  Thanks to everyone who is contributing, as this is both interesting and educational!
  • BrickaholicBrickaholic UKMember Posts: 342
    edited March 2015
    Pitfall69 said:
    You also have to look at space as well. I would rather store 10 TH's than lot's of smaller sets that have the same return in profit.

    Nice discussion.

    You could easily turn that one off example to another

    5 x #10188 as opposed to 125 x #6866 or 250 x #6865 for example

    Stored correctly 125 (250) sets that size would take the minimum same space as 5 x DS

    Horses for courses i suppose, but personally i prefer Newton Abbot to Royal Ascot also.
  • doriansdaddoriansdad CTCMember Posts: 1,337
    rocao said:
    Also, I think we'd all rather have a bunch of Haunted Houses and Town Halls than various small sets now that we know how they've appreciated. What if you picked incorrectly? Would you make the same claim with Imperial Shuttles and Fire Brigade? For the record, I'm still bullish on both of these sets, but the same money invested in random sets that retired at the same time would have yielded more this past Holiday season.
    Yes I would rather have IS and FB over numerous smaller sets. I also work full time so that extra labor is crucial in my calculations as I don't have alot of it to spare myself and would have to pay someone to fulfill. When I change to reselling full time in a few years that may change tho.
  • rocaorocao Administrator Posts: 4,284
    edited March 2015
    @Ronyar: I excluded the really long term sets that I sold because they wouldn't be particularly useful for the previous analysis. But they are fun, so here are sets 9+ years old that I sold this past holiday:

    ROI
    2678% #7181 UCS Tie Interceptor
    2542% #4702 HP The Final Challenge
    1270% #4709 HP Hogwarts Castle
    1258% #3433 Ultimate NBA Arena
    1061% #10014 My Own Train Caboose
    953% #4479 Tie Bomber
    900% #4481 Hailfire Droid
    860% #4708 HP Hogwarts Express
  • BanditBandit Member Posts: 890
    edited March 2015
    Here are my top results for Annualized ROI on MSRP %:

      94.61% #4736 Freeing Dobby
      97.00% #4842 Hogwarts Castle
    101.64% #10216 Winter Village Bakery
    103.38% #10231 Shuttle Expedition
    103.39% #6864 The Batmobile and the Two-Face Chase
    109.44% #10222 Winter Village Post Office
    120.73% #4840 The Burrow
    124.22% #4738 Hagrid's Hut
    132.47% #4867 Hogwarts
    139.01% #6866 Wolverine's Chopper Showdown
    162.55% #4865 The Forbidden Forest
    236.42% #4737 Quidditch Match

    Those were the only items over 90% MSRP ROI.  The moral of the story is, TLG needs to re-release HP sooner rather than later. :)
    rocao
  • BanditBandit Member Posts: 890
    And the bottom results for Annualized ROI on MSRP %:

    -4.57% #7065 Alien Mothership
      1.87% #7188 King's Carriage Ambush
      6.86% #7066 Earth Defense HQ
      7.77% #7051 Tripod Invader
    12.05% #7326 Rise of the Sphinx
    12.83% #7325 Cursed Cobra Statue
    14.53% #7959 Geonosian Starfighter
    14.98% #7962 Anakin and Sebulba's Podracers
    15.73% #6869 Quinjet Aerial Battle
    16.85% #4194 Whitecap Bay
    17.90% #4193 The London Escape
    19.56% #7052 UFO Abduction LOST
    19.78% #7052 UFO Abduction
    20.41% #79104  The Shellraiser Street Chase
    21.59% #8098 Clone Turbo Tank
    24.26% #7962   Anakin and Sebulba's Podracers
    24.47% #10193  Medieval Market Village
    24.49% #7964 Republic Frigate
    24.67% #4183 The Mill
    24.76% #8038 The Battle of Endor
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    edited March 2015
    I have 3 on that list. I think everyone had high hopes for MMV. The Quinjet Aerial Battle could still make a small push once the new movie comes out, the market is flooded with Superheroes sets right now, but you never know.

    Harry Potter was a huge money maker for me over the last 3 years. Even used sets were easy to sell. The new movie should bring us new sets from the "HP Theme", but I don't know if Lego wants to take another crack at releasing more HP sets.

    I'm not surprised that any SW sets cracked the top 5. There are so many sets out there and I bet interest is starting to wane...until the new movie is released ;)
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    @Brickaholic , It is an interesting topic about space. We don't really know what DS's performance will do after retirement, but I would hazzard a guess that Wolverine Chopper Showdown will have done better overall. I was comparing apples to apples. 2 sets, post retirement, that you have to store for an extended period of time.

    As far as time vs money, I like the idea of having to only buy 1 set, store, list, sell, pack and mail one set. I may not make as much money as some of the smaller sets, but for me it is a lot less hassle.

    There's also the purchase limitations that Amazon and Lego [email protected] put on certain sets. This needs to be addressed as well. Sure, you can get larger % returns on smaller sets, but if you have to buy 10 of them to make as much TOTAL PROFIT as 1 larger set, that puts you in a bind.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,495
    rocao said:

    Does it surprise anyone to see that no Star Wars sets made our top tiers and instead were common entries in the middle and bottom tier?
    Not really, for two reasons:

    1) There is still a lot of SW stuff available at retail. Most of the sets being bought before Xmas are going to be presents. Why overpay for an old set, when you can buy a similar set from the same theme at retail?

    2) Normally there are not such good deals on SW sets in sales (such as 90% off), simply because people will start buying it (to use or for reselling) when the discounts are much lower. Being able to knock a large chunk of the purchase price really pushes a set up the list. Not getting those large discounts will hurt the position.

  • BrickaholicBrickaholic UKMember Posts: 342
    edited March 2015
    Pitfall69 said:
    @Brickaholic , It is an interesting topic about space. We don't really know what DS's performance will do after retirement, but I would hazzard a guess that Wolverine Chopper Showdown will have done better overall. I was comparing apples to apples. 2 sets, post retirement, that you have to store for an extended period of time.

    As far as time vs money, I like the idea of having to only buy 1 set, store, list, sell, pack and mail one set. I may not make as much money as some of the smaller sets, but for me it is a lot less hassle.

    There's also the purchase limitations that Amazon and Lego [email protected] put on certain sets. This needs to be addressed as well. Sure, you can get larger % returns on smaller sets, but if you have to buy 10 of them to make as much TOTAL PROFIT as 1 larger set, that puts you in a bind.
    Pitfall69  I know where your coming from, but  I would rather try to try my luck just before EOL, if I miss out I miss out! 

    I'm sure DS does ok for people who bought them but I'm going to give it a miss. The old one however, that is a Death Star for me, hopefully one day i will have that on display at home or even better they make a new one :)
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,354
    ^I have the Death Star II. I only have the frame assembled right now. It is a great set and seems more suited for display than the current Death Star playset.
  • BrickDancerBrickDancer Dunes of TatooineMember Posts: 3,639
    The DS II is just beautiful in simplicity and a great display piece in an artful way. The size of it really captures the attention of any passerby or visitor. I caught my non-AFOL buddy just standing there awe struck and staring at it one time taking it all in.

    The build itself was nice and pleasant, as the technical question of how it is structured starts to play out in the flesh. However, it may not be so entertaining on a second go-around once the magic is revealed. As the high part count and lack of variety can become tedious.
    Pitfall69
Sign In or Register to comment.
Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy