Brickset ForumShopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Is Lego heading for a fall?
Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
Recent discussions • Categories • Privacy Policy • Brickset.com
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 26.5K All Categories
- 16.1K General
- 3 Announcements
- 3.1K Collecting
- 3.7K Everything else LEGO
- 1.7K Building and Techniques
- 2.3K Brickset
- 14 Ambassador
- 1K Introduce yourself
- 380 The Database
- 436 Brickset.com
- 314 Forum Operation
- 15 FAQs
- 13.9K Shopping
- 1.7K Shopping USA/Canada
- 337 Shopping Elsewhere
- 11K Marketplace
- 1.2K Other
- 570 Community and Events
- 262 Photography/Video
Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Comments
wonder what his portfolio looks like
Probably runs J.K. Rowling's Empire, Oil Companies, most of the US Gov't, and definitely James Cameron... as well...
*keeps scrolling*
Oooh I see; the UCS MF, and a motorized AT-AT.
Yep, I guess 2007 was not a bad year.
I really don't see why or how TLG is heading for a fall. So much good stuff is released, I cannot keep up. Since that means I will miss out on sets I'd love to have, but cannot all collect, I am happy to know TLG will keep making other new sets that will take my mind of what I will miss out on. So you loose some, you win some. You cannot have it all, well at least I can't. I am sure there are Lego fans who have deeper pockets, and more display, and storage space, as I am sure there are others with less of each.
Back in 2007, the modular buildings were in their infancy (no interior furnishings), many of the licensed sets were fairly lackluster, we were still stuck with simplistic Belville sets instead of anything with the kind of creative potential of LEGO Friends or LEGO Elves, many styles of projectile launcher were way less versatile and effective than what we're seeing in today's sets, the only Space theme was one of the most problematic there's ever been (hey, let's attack the aliens who clearly already settled Mars before we did!), the Racers theme was as absurd as ever, many sets were still using STAMPs, Technic was still using the weird flared panels, and BIONICLE joints were starting to become explosively fragile (although in fairness, that was also the year they finally started to do away with "clone sets").
Don't get me wrong, 2007 was the start of many great things, but I'd hardly call it a golden age. Sets have evolved a lot since then.
I think it is almost impossible to identify a single year as a high point for LEGO. Set designs today are better than they have ever been in my opinion, but I think that is an inevitable consequence of a wider variety of parts being available and in more colours.
Based on the themes alone I think 2012 was LEGO's greatest year. Not only was it the first year of Lord of the Rings, a theme once full of promise, but it also offered Monster Fighters, Friends, the first waves of DC and Marvel Super Heroes and the incredibly popular Serpentine sets from Ninjago.
Wow...that is such as simple question, but such a difficult answer. Companies have to change, grow and evolve.
Elves is still at the point where it hasn't been around long enough to really gauge its success, but a lot of the online chatter about it has been positive and I have a feeling it's going to be sticking around (it is a "big bang" theme, after all). There's no doubt BIONICLE is not the immense craze that it was back in 2001–2003, but I've heard good things about how it's selling (though most accounts are anecdotal). And let's not forget Mixels, which still seems to be going strong. Overall, I think LEGO has plenty of popular in-house products in their portfolio to keep them going until the next breakout hit.
The past 4 years, while continuing the general ideas startedin that time frame, have also seen a continual shrinking in size and grandeur of most of the flagship sets, while simultaneously producing worse price/value ratios
the current stuff is still often great, it's just smaller and relatively more expensive.
I agree that LEGO has more than enough unlicensed themes doing well to maintain a steady position for the time being, but if the number and popularity of licensed themes increases significantly faster than unlicensed themes as I think it has been in the past couple of years, that may cause issues.
Personally, if a new canon is released, I'm not planning on acquiring the sets for anything besides parts, if I do acquire them. I'll be spending that money on Bricklink, etc., to collect the (now)current canon sets.
licensed themes (if the licenses are really strong of course) allow you to reach a lot more people. lots of people know little about lego, but they most likely remember at least one scene from star wars, so they will be drawn to what is familiar to them.
then, the actual quality of the sets probably actually only matters to real connoisseurs who have a lot of references for comparisons.
I feel like there was a time when a person like me who mainly collects themes like Ninjago and Bionicle would have had a really hard time fitting in to many online AFOL communities. Nowadays, I feel like more and more kids who grew up loving these kid-focused, media-driven themes are growing up but continuing to love these sorts of themes (and the corresponding design values) well into adulthood.
When you look at Green Grocer, for instance, even though it was the first modular building to have a furnished interior, it wasn't very play-oriented at all above the first floor. But as time goes on, we see more and more being invested in furnishing the interiors with "play starters" — kitchens, bedrooms, and activities for the buildings' inhabitants. The Detective's Office has perhaps the most humor and playability of any of the modular buildings to date.
That detail comes at a cost, though, because these "play-starters" often require more a greater <i>variety</i> of parts than exterior walls. It's hard to create greater detail just by using the same pieces in greater quantities The Detective's Office may be smaller, weigh less, and have fewer pieces than the Green Grocer, but Green Grocer had just 311 unique types of element and Detective's Office had 450. NPU isn't cheap!
It's also important to think about other factors like inflation that cause costs to rise even when the actual value of the product doesn't. When you factor for inflation, it's sometimes actually pretty surprising how MUCH value we're getting for the prices we're paying.
Let's look at pirate ships, for example. Brickbeard's Bounty was released in 2009, which doesn't feel like a long time ago, for $100. Today that would be about $112. Again, doesn't seem like a huge increase for a set that's already so big and expensive. The set had 592 pieces (198 unique types of element) weighing 1.801 kilograms.
The Brick Bounty, released this year, also costs $100. It has 745 pieces (251 unique types of element) weighing 1.64 kilograms. That means that not only does it have a lower price per piece (despite a much greater variety of pieces), but after adjusting for inflation, it also has a lower price per gram and a lower price overall. Is it any wonder, then, that it's smaller and lighter than its predecessor?
No it's not all about size, but size is one factor for sure. I can always add interior and play details to a set like GG. Other than stacking floors, which is a less than ideal way to add substance to a modular, you would have to implement some substantial remodeling to make the DO match the GG in "curb appeal"
ideally, they would release modulars as fully envisioned structures with little or no interior, then sell the interiors as a ~$30 add on set. everyone wins. But since that is never going to happen, I will continue to bemoan the continual miniaturization of the modular lineup. But I'll still buy every one of course :-)
I would rather have larger grandiose Modular Buildings with bare interiors and less minifigures than smaller Modular Buildings with full interiors and play features.
Also, as the AFOL community grows, I feel like it becomes a little bit less apologetic. Knowing the size of the community, even some older AFOLs no longer feel such pressure to legitimize enjoying LEGO themselves. As such, there are fewer and fewer AFOLs who fit the "Man Upstairs" stereotype, who consider "playing" with LEGO beneath them and insist that "the way (we) use it makes it an adult thing". Conversely, there are more and more people who are proudly and openly seeking to bring the joyful and lighthearted play experiences of their childhoods into their adult lives.
I've seen this shift firsthand just from my time attending LEGO conventions (which I've been doing since 2006). And I think it's sort of a corollary to the shift that's been going on in general where "nerdy" is the new "normal". There used to be much stronger stigma against adults enjoying things like video games, animated movies, and superhero comics, even more so for being a "fan" of these things and going to fan gatherings like Comic-Con. But nowadays people are starting to realize how silly that is. Today, things once considered "nerdy" or childish are not only openly enjoyed but <i>celebrated</i> by adults from all walks of life.
It's an interesting time we live in to be sure. There are still some voices in politics and the media who decry these things as an "infantilization" of society, but those voices are getting weaker and weaker as people's enthusiasm for bringing their childhood passions with them into their adult lives gets louder and louder. And to be honest, I think LEGO has profited mightily from this shift.
Is there evidence that it was not a great seller or just hearsay? Compared to the other one wave series.
When you think back to the more recent in-house themes, excluding Ninjago and Chima:
Atlantis 2010/11 (two waves)
Pharoah's Quest 2011
Alien Conquest 2011
Monster Fighters 2012
Dino 2012
Galaxy Squad 2013
Was MF really any worse at selling than the others? Even though I liked the sets, I think Atlantis was probably the worse selling based on what I saw in sales, and GS probably not far behind. And Atlantis got two waves / two years. Maybe my memory is clouded by the second wave, when the sets started to get a bit stale.
I imagine Atlantis was always planned to be two waves, and the others had all been planned to be one wave with no extension. By keeping them one wave, they remain quite fresh. However, there are obvious repeats. AC followed by GS two years later, something for the space / sci-fi fans. Dino gone, but being followed by the licensed Jurassic World. MF may be gone, yet we are getting a similar licensed theme in Scooby Doo and the CMF series - no doubt lego knows that the monsters were well received. If MF really was a bad seller, then why would lego be investing in these, especially the CMF.
the original adventurers theme was in egypt for like one, maybe 2 waves, then went to the jungle, then the dino.
many dino theme, probably for a single wave each.
there has been lots of underwater stuff, but I think it usually lasted one to two waves as well.
I also think every space theme only lasts for one or two waves, though we got some reboots (are alien conquests and galaxy squad supposed to be reboots of ufo and insectoids?)
then, I don't think any of those serie included particularly memorable characters. themes like space or castle feature mostly generic minifigs, and they are always more or less the same, who would want a castle subtheme lasting for 5 years, with the same soldiers, king and queen?
Though I sympathize that you didn't like the movie. I liked it, but not as much as I wanted to like it. And I worry that any sequels will just be terrible. But I think the company, as a whole, has enough money and organizational size that they can afford to make a few mistakes without jeopardizing the entire company. Their core business seems to still be sound, inasmuch as a business founded on scarce plastic blocks sculpted to precise tolerances and sold with assembly instructions can survive the coming future of 3D printing.
but it doesn't just threaten lego. with production costs getting closer and closer to 0, it's the whole economy which is heading toward a change and the dominant economic model which is threatened. either company will try to adapt, or they'll try to resist, like by forcing governments into supporting dictatorial corporacy.
we already have the example of internet, which they try to control and lock as much as possible, because it gives too much power to people.
For me it makes the build a lot more fun and interesting rather than just building the exterior.
I can see both sides of the argument though.
Economies will only change if corporations and governments allow and adapt to it. They mainly only change from influence from other powers also. I doubt the big powers want to see widespread collapse, they are too addicted to power to give up everything at once.
though, when costs of production becomes low enough that nearly everyone can afford it, of course, everyone could open his own capitalist business, but all in all it gets pretty close to communism, common ownership of means of production, not in the sense that everyone is allowed to use your 3D printer, but everyone can own one. well, that's kind of stretch here, but not that much when it comes to computers.
They are much different with completely focusing on their core product.
The success of Friends is a testament to their marketing and brand strength.
I suppose we might be seeing a bit more of that with the video games these days, like the LEGO City set #60007 High Speed Chase that featured Chase McCain and two vehicles inspired by LEGO City: Undercover, or the LEGO Ninjago set #70735 Ronin R.E.X. which features Ronin and his main vehicle from LEGO Ninjago: Shadow of Ronin, though since they are a part of pre-existing, themes, it's a bit hard to tell in those cases whether the vehicles were designed for those games, or just designed as part of their respective themes and then linked to the games during development.
Although I agree - overexposure to a single brand is not healthy. We make an effort that the kids have lego time, and more general play time.
Overall, though, I don't think there's a huge risk of that kind of overexposure. Even in interviews about The LEGO Movie, LEGO Group executives have been very insistent that they don't want LEGO to become a general entertainment company, and they intend for toys to remain their core focus. And while it sometimes feels like I eat, sleep, and breathe LEGO, really there are plenty of other things I enjoy more casually (and even a few other things I enjoy passionately, like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic).
The only way I can see LEGO taking over kids' lives on the level you're describing is if the quality of non-LEGO books, movies, TV shows, and video games for children takes a nosedive, to the point that kids no longer have other options that can give them that same level of enjoyment. And that's not the trend I've been seeing.
Meanwhile, alternative brands from China and Korea are getting more shelves. In one of my childhood toy store, LEGO is entirely gone, they are not selling it anymore. They are replaced by their cheaper rivals. Why? Because they are cheap to stock, they also offer more variety, stays longer (no seasonal model release), has themes that LEGO refused to make (military stuffs), and far lower price. But the keeper (which has been there since I was a child) says that they don't sell that well, mostly because the parents here are quite selective about brands.
So, what do we see in stores does not represent the dire situation TLG is facing. In fact, they have replaced Coca Cola and Ferrari as the world most powerful brand in 2015. How? Like many other have posted before, they are expanding their licensed portfolios. Every blockbuster movie nowadays should have a mandatory LEGO merchandise, just like how every sports team must sell T-shirt.
Probably like me, many collectors find it cheaper to just purchase the brick sets online. It is 5-10% cheaper, before offsetting your petrol or bus, parking, convenience costs. Our 3 biggest local online mall offers IDR 300,000 for a LEGO Logging Truck, where as the cheapest you can get in a physical store is IDR 330,000. For some model like Speed Champions Cars (Porsche 918, McLaren P1, the Ferraris), the difference will be much bigger (IDR 250,000 online vs. IDR 360,000 in a local shopping centre- almost twice). Yes, the Speed Champions are not available elsewhere here, but the only one selling it is charging like crazy. I expect them to purge some of their LEGO portfolio next season.
Personally, I hate movie / entertainment licensed LEGOs. They are just collectibles, but that's all, they are no longer an education or creative toy. I prefer the real-world company licensed ones, at least these sets are teaching kids about who makes what in real life.