Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.comAmazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Predictions on Discontinuing Sets and their Secondary Market Value

18485878990678

Comments

  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    I think Cafe Corner is kind of like CMF Series 1. I don't think Lego made alot of them because they were testing the market. Series 1 was way under produced. I imagine Cafe Corner was as well. Just like Series 1, Cafe Corner was the first in the Series of Modular buildings and from what I understand, Cafe Corner has alot of rare pieces.

    10179 is a different animal altogether. Star Wars, UCS, Iconic ship...Fantastic!!!
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    Speaking of Minifigures. What do you think the Olympic Minifigures will do in the secondary market?
  • BoiseStateBoiseState Member Posts: 804
    I think the best sets will be the high end ones that nobody wants when theyre available.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    You can't go wrong with sets that are $100+ I was at a Target and a child wanted the Queen Annes Revenge and the father said "I'm going to pay that much for a damn Lego set!". That kid, a few years from now, will buy that set because he was denied the chance to have it. I have even went back and bought toys that I wanted as a child.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    ^ Perhaps, but it will take a very long time for that child to grow up, and many great things will come out between now and then...

    From an investment point of view, waiting for a 10 year old to become 20 and want a Lego set, is a poor investment in general. It will go up, but not by enough over that long a period of time... At least, not enough of them will, you can always find an exception.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    I was just using that as an example :-)
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    I understand... :)

    I think a better example are people posting here, adults who recently came out of their dark ages, who loved Lego 10-20 years ago, and are trying to catch up on the stuff that was missed a year or two ago, maybe 3-4 years at most.

    I've found most of the Lego more than 5 years old, rather sucks, to put it nicely. There are exceptions, but in my searching and buying and building, most of my disappointments are from older sets that don't live up to modern design and they show it.

    So the kid today actually *won't* want QAR in 10-20 years, even if he wants it today, because something so much better will be out then.

    The most extreme example is I spent $600 to buy a used copy of 10030 (UCS ISD) a few months ago (couldn't stand to crack the seals on one of my boxed copies).

    That set is now 10 years old, I paid about triple what it probably could have been bought for near the end of its run on clearance or sale ($200).

    Is triple your money over 10 years a good "investment"? Yes, generally it is... Except that you had to be able to guess 10 years ago that UCS ISD was "it", when there was little track record of such things, much less UCS sets.

    Is UCS SSD today that same deal, 10 years from now it'll be worth $1,000 used (triple the 20% off RRP it has been sold for)? Maybe, but do you really want to put more than a few hundred dollars on that bet?
  • BoiseStateBoiseState Member Posts: 804
    Ya.. The older sets just aren't fun to build. I think some of them will be though- Death Star/R2/UCS MF/etc..
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    I don't think most people are as sale/discount "savvy" as adult Lego lovers. I will say obviously to get the best return on your investment is to get it on sale or BOGO. You are probably right about people coming out of their dark ages to buy Lego sets that have been retired. Maybe next time when someone buys one of our sets we should ask he/she why...lol.
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,098

    I've found most of the Lego more than 5 years old, rather sucks, to put it nicely. There are exceptions, but in my searching and buying and building, most of my disappointments are from older sets that don't live up to modern design and they show it.
    That's because you're looking at them as an investor who has been spoiled by modern $400 sets.

    I think you're also missing out on the simple charm of the early themes like 6071-1: Forestmen's Crossing. If Lego designed this set today they would screw it up with flick fire missiles, stickers and an abundance of technic.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    That's because you're looking at them as an investor who has been spoiled by modern $400 sets.
    *takes investor hat off*

    I am going to have to disagree there... Putting aside the expensive sets like 10188 (which is a masterpiece in its own right), even the smaller sets today are far and away better than what was sold 5-10 years ago.

    The new X-Wing is so much better than any of the older X-Wings, perhaps with the only exception being UCS X-Wing, and even that set has a ton of flaws in it (but its size helps a lot with those)

    Ditto with the TIE Fighter, Y-Wing, etc. The minifig quality is also much better today, more details, better flesh tones, better weapons and other things for them to hold and play with.

    Ok, put aside licensed themes for a minute... Castle was good, Kingdoms was good, what came before both? Knights Kingdom II, I've bought a few, they are terrible... Castle was a HUGE upgrade over KKII...

    Compare most of the prior Pirate's ships of the past 20 years to BP, QAR, and IF... they are all terrible... Those three ships are perhaps Lego's finest ship work, by a mile...
    I think you're also missing out on the simple charm of the early themes like 6071-1: Forestmen's Crossing. If Lego designed this set today they would screw it up with flick fire missiles, stickers and an abundance of technic./blockquote>

    To each their own, it is a personal preference, but today's sales numbers would indicate that my point is quite valid, older sets like that Forestmen's Crossing, well, sucked...

    Forget the investment part, just building that looks boring, as it should, it is a little kids toy, it has 200 parts, it would take me 15 minutes to put it together. Then what? It isn't (in my personal opinion) attractive to look at, it isn't designed well, etc. Compare the detail in that set to the detail in MMV, just as an example.

    Lego in the past was a kids toy first and foremost. Did adults MOC? Yes, of course, they used lots of bricks to make amazing things, but Lego generally didn't sell "sets" to adults, nor did they make "sets" FOR adults.

    Other than the UCS sets, there is nothing I have found more than 5 years old that holds much interest for me, licensed or unlicensed, for building pleasure. (yes, I've looked, everything in the 90's was terrible, with few exceptions)

    You might find one or two exceptions to the rule, those always exist, but generally today Lego makes a superior product, in design, build quality, and presentation to both an older audience as well as the kids they claim to be aiming at (lets face it, $150 modular buildings are really aimed at adults who remember Lego as kids, but want an "adult build experience").

    I loved playing with my buckets of Lego bricks in the 80's, but I don't want any of them back... all they would do is destroy my memories of my childhood!

    I'll take my $150 modular builds and $120 QAR and be very happy. :)

    *with homage to Dennis Miller*
    Of course that's just my opinion, and I could be wrong... ;)
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    I agree. There are many people in the forums clamoring for re-releases of old sets. The Monorail and the Car Garage for example. Main Street was re released 23years after it was first released. I can sight plenty of examples. We always wish for printed elements instead of stickers they have now.

    I don't like the sail rigging on the new ships. It's cheesy.

  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    Castle theme from 2000-2009 was awful...cmon
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    These are all opinions of course. This is a forum and we discuss things here. I hate the Clone Wars cartoons and all the Lego sets associated with them. I dislike Episode 1-3 and I may only like 5% of the Lego sets. There are alot of people that don't like Star Wars and could care less about the sets as a whole. This is my opinion.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    These are all opinions of course.
    Of course, and everyone is welcome to their own... :)

    The only objective point that can really be looked at is sales... since that isn't an option, it just is a fact... current sales today would seem to indicate that TLG is doing something right, as people are buying.

    Beyond that, beautiful or ugly is very much in the eye of the beholder...
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    If everyone went by "everything new is better" then nobody would collect Kenner Star Wars action figures or G.I. Joes. Nobody would buy a 1969 Camaro SS at auction or buy an old Colt .45. Alot of people buy or collect because of nostalgia. What brought me out of my " dark ages" was finding my old box of Legos and building the sets that I had in storage. I am sure many would agree. I love my modular buildings as well, but they are also $130 more than most of the Lego City sets from the past.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    These are all opinions of course.
    Of course, and everyone is welcome to their own... :)

    The only objective point that can really be looked at is sales... since that isn't an option, it just is a fact... current sales today would seem to indicate that TLG is doing something right, as people are buying.

    Beyond that, beautiful or ugly is very much in the eye of the beholder...
    Very true ;).

    Now let's get back to speculating!!!

  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    Castle theme from 2000-2009 was awful...cmon
    Really? You think this set:

    King's Castle
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=10176-1

    Is superior to this one:

    King's Castle Siege
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7094-1

    In my opinion (and it is just that after all), those are night and day... King's Castle Siege is a superior product in so many ways...

    How about these two:

    Vladek's Dark Fortress
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=8877-1

    Troll's Mountain Fortress
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7097-1

    I view Troll's Mountain Fortress as a vast improvement over Vladek's...

    ------------

    Going back further:

    2000 - King Leo's Castle
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=6091-1

    1993 (about 20 years ago)
    Fire Breathing Fortress
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=6082-1

    Those two are the "big" castles made in their day, the last one has a whopping 397 parts in it... And looks it, being built on a raised baseplate.

    Ok, go back 1 more year to 1992:

    Black Knight's Castle
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=6086-1

    I find it hard to see the appeal of sets like that one, compared to King's Castle today:

    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7946-1

    Just my opinion of course. ;)
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    I don't like the sail rigging on the new ships. It's cheesy.
    Black Seas Barracuda:
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=6285-1

    Imperial Flagship:
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=10210-1

    Serious question... tell me what you see about the sails (or anything else) on the older ship that is better than IF. I am open to learning something new... I know BSB is often cited as one of the "best" of the older Lego ships (it was remade in 2002 after all).

    -----------------

    BTW, looking at the anchors, it appears that TLG used the same mold for both anchors, even with a 21 year gap between these two ships. :)

    Finally, it is worth pointing out that Black Seas Barracuda had a RRP of $110 in 1989, adjusting for inflation, that would work out to a RRP of $190 in 2010, when IF was released...

    BSB has 909 parts, IF has 1,664 parts with a RRP of $180.

    IF is actually almost exactly half the price of BSB, per part, 21 years later...
  • graphitegraphite USMember Posts: 3,270
    I haven't built my IF or QAR yet but I was definitely impressed with BP over the older ships but I still think all of the old ships were pretty well done especially compared to a lot of the other stuff at the times they came out. I have almost all of the pirate ships made to date (missing skulls eye and one smaller one), they're some of my favorite things LEGO has made but as with everything people get better at stuff as time goes on and that is definitely so with the ships and with LEGO in general.
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002
    I don't like the sail rigging on the new ships. It's cheesy.
    Black Seas Barracuda:
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=6285-1

    Imperial Flagship:
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=10210-1

    Serious question... tell me what you see about the sails (or anything else) on the older ship that is better than IF. I am open to learning something new... I know BSB is often cited as one of the "best" of the older Lego ships (it was remade in 2002 after all).

    -----------------

    BTW, looking at the anchors, it appears that TLG used the same mold for both anchors, even with a 21 year gap between these two ships. :)

    Finally, it is worth pointing out that Black Seas Barracuda had a RRP of $110 in 1989, adjusting for inflation, that would work out to a RRP of $190 in 2010, when IF was released...

    BSB has 909 parts, IF has 1,664 parts with a RRP of $180.

    IF is actually almost exactly half the price of BSB, per part, 21 years later...
    Well... the fact that the Black Seas Barracuda actually has a 'complete' rigging setup is certainly much nicer... and more accurate. I realize that the detail on IF is much more intricate... but that makes the absence of cordage all the more glaring. Not that the Barracuda's was perfect, but the IF doesn't have anything in place to even suggest that the sales and spars could be manipulated in any fashion. As such, although it's a nicer model, the IF's design would leave little to no means of controlling the ship.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    As far as castle sets...all I said was I hated the castle sets from that time frame. I didn't like some of the early castles either, but I do not like fantasy castles. I didn't go through Bricket and site examples as you have. I was mostly talking about castle sets I grew up with. I'm 40 and Fire Breathing Fortress was released in my "Dark Ages". Kings Castle was released in 2010 I stated from 2000-2009. I like that castle.

    IF is clearly a superior ship. I don't know if we can accurately do a cost difference analysis between 2 sets released 20 years apart unless we know every factor involved. Maybe it more expensive to manufacture Lego 20 years ago. Automation has really lowered costs. That's just one example. I think a better example would be comparing Blackbeards Bounty with the Black Seas Barracuda.

    If it makes you feel better, I will just agree with you and say "yes, newer is better" When my wife wakes up I will tell her that and see how long before she throws me out of the house :)
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,098
    You're pretty much missing my point (not unusual). I'm not saying that the Forestmen's Hideout is better than MMV. Of course I can see the difference in detail between the two sets. You're argument that old sets "suck" is pretty much as wrong headed as it gets. I would argue that from a display stand point, MMV wins. It's about 10x more detailed and shows how far Lego designers have come. However from a "playability" stand point I would give the Forestmen's Hideout the edge. MMV isn't what I would call a "playable" set. It's way too delicate. I could see my son having a lot of fun with FH though.

    Also if you check ebay you will see that the classic castle and space sets do quite well. Not USC MF dollars but who cares. Obviously there is a market for them especially if they have their boxes.

    Another thing that classic sets have an advantage in is creative building. The old boxes often displayed several other builds besides the main one. Usually none of them were very good but it at least gave the promise of creative building. Todays sets on the other hand pretty much leave creativity solely to the Lego designers and kids are hand held through a series of "one brick per page" building steps.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    Another thing you can point out is the availibility of parts that Lego had at their disposal. Can you recreate alot of these new sets today with only the parts they had 20-30 years ago?
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,098
    edited June 2012
    The rigging or lack of on IF is rather disappointing. I want to say that Lego got lazy when it came to this part. OTOH, it doesn't really bother me anymore. I like that the sails can be easily posed which increases playability. But I think they could of probably compromised with something similar to BSB.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    We can all go back n forth on this forever. As an investment standpoint (since this is what this particular forum is about) The new sets would win out because of their price point.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    You all had great replies, didn't even consider the "rigging" on the older ship, shows you what I know about ships! :)
    Another thing you can point out is the availibility of parts that Lego had at their disposal. Can you recreate alot of these new sets today with only the parts they had 20-30 years ago?
    Wanted to respond to this one...

    No, I don't think you could create much of any set today using the parts Lego had in 1989, the cost to make a plastic mold back then was 10 times higher than it is today (probably more), so they had to be very limited in their mold list.

    Plus, the number of colors back then was also more limited. A lot has changed in plastic making in 23 years. :)
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    Another thing that classic sets have an advantage in is creative building. The old boxes often displayed several other builds besides the main one. Usually none of them were very good but it at least gave the promise of creative building. Todays sets on the other hand pretty much leave creativity solely to the Lego designers and kids are hand held through a series of "one brick per page" building steps.
    I agree with this point 100%... The new instructions do seem to have the "one part here, one part there" thing going on... Sets from 10 years ago didn't do that.

    I also miss the fold-up flaps, baseplates, alternate builds, and other goodies the older sets provided, those are missed, but not enough to time travel back to then. :)

    I suppose my point is that 10-20 years from now, the sets released today will look as old as the sets from the past, so anything your future kid today wants in 2030, well, they probably won't.

    What is really the demand for the older sets? Just looked at BSB on Bricklink, in the past 6 months, 3 new copies were sold. That makes sense, how many new ones are still kicking around... 25 used copies were sold for an average of $146. That is actually less than the set cost new, accounting for inflation.

    As for 10210, in the past 6 months, 157 new copies were sold, average price of $246. 6 used copies were sold, average of $234 (really close)
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,830
    Another thing you can point out is the availibility of parts that Lego had at their disposal. Can you recreate alot of these new sets today with only the parts they had 20-30 years ago?
    It doesn't make the set somehow better just because they didn't have so many parts available. It may have been creative at the time, but compared to modern sets the design is not so good. No doubt in 10/20 years time, Lego will have come out with a wider range of parts, and current day sets will look a bit lacking compared to the new ones out then. Which is what LFT's point was ... better sets will have come out after 10 years to make kids of today forget current sets in favour of their future replacements.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332


    Ok, go back 1 more year to 1992:

    Black Knight's Castle
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=6086-1

    I find it hard to see the appeal of sets like that one, compared to King's Castle today:

    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7946-1

    Just my opinion of course. ;)
    Go further back though and you get to the gold...

    #6080 King's Castle
  • sidersddsidersdd USAMember Posts: 2,432
    ^ This was essentially going to be my point. The "newer is better" approach doesn't always fly. I think there's a reason i didn't come out of my dark ages in the 90s - the set designs and parts just sucked. All those BURPs, POOPs, and goofball themes were just awful. There's no guarantee the TLG of tomorrow will have the same formula for success as the one today. Perhaps once KK Kristiansen has passed on, TLG will move *all* production to China, where the part production is "good enough" for the consumers. Or perhaps the next gen of leadership at TLG will decide to use "greener" materials for their product, what with the rising prices in oil. Or perhaps since these minifigs are all the craze these days we'll eventually see lots more Dark Bucket style "sets", and less construction sets. Or perhaps Hasbro will buy up TLG and put their thoughts into what direction the product lines should go.

    That's not to say these are highly probable events and one should buy up all current sets in sight, but I do think we're in a golden age (as some others have called it) right now and many of these sets will be treasured for many years from now.
  • roxioroxio UKMember Posts: 1,360


    Ok, go back 1 more year to 1992:

    Black Knight's Castle
    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=6086-1

    I find it hard to see the appeal of sets like that one, compared to King's Castle today:

    http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=7946-1

    Just my opinion of course. ;)
    Go further back though and you get to the gold...

    #6080 King's Castle
    Or a little further for more gold ? #375
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    The #'s have stopped working....

    We had that castle, sadly all thats left are a few tatty shields and armour.
  • BrickarmorBrickarmor USAMember Posts: 1,257
    There's no guarantee the TLG of tomorrow will have the same formula for success as the one today. Perhaps once KK Kristiansen has passed on, TLG will move *all* production to China, where the part production is "good enough" for the consumers. Or perhaps the next gen of leadership at TLG will decide to use "greener" materials for their product, what with the rising prices in oil.
    The former is certainly a possibility and could become a reality if TLG decides to heed the torrent of requests for lower prices. The overwhelming majority of consumers don't know ABS from Pepsi caps and if many more sets can be sold at a lower price, the decision will become "inevitable." I'm all for greener production and would support manufacturing alterations more for this reason than simply cuz it's cheaper in China. If the formula is changed and it somehow confounds Lego's Byzantine product testing and is ultimately worse, ABS itself could become gold for collectors, resellers, and--the real reason we're discussing this--builders.

    I realize this would fit better under "predictions on discontinuing pieces..."
    I have to wonder, though, where Lego is going to place emphasis in the coming years: making quality parts and sets that may sell to a few less people, or producing trillions of boxes of junk fit only for recycling but that have Star Wars emblazoned on every side... This ain't the 90s and Lego sure doesn't seem to be in the red, so why break it trying to "fix" it?
  • cloaked7cloaked7 Member Posts: 1,448
    edited June 2012
    An extremely interesting aspect to think about. Who knows what a corporation (their high level mgt) will do and why? I must say that seeing the decisions corporations have made over the years I have wondered if they were using logic or a ouija board. And, it is even more pronounced when there are changes at the top. That's because new mgt has to make their mark (like it is some unwritten law). Staying the status quo isn't making their mark. So, what do they do? They change things. Often things that shouldn't be changed. I have seen this many, many times. It's a crap shoot as to whether the changes are for the better or the worse. And, in the US they will be rewarded even if the changes fail (I think that's another unwritten law.).
  • SpaceCakeSpaceCake Member Posts: 291
    Perhaps once KK Kristiansen has passed on, TLG will move *all* production to China,
    Erm... The LEGO president has the initials KKK???

    :/
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    Perhaps once KK Kristiansen has passed on, TLG will move *all* production to China,
    Erm... The LEGO president has the initials KKK???

    :/
    Maybe those aren't "ghosts" on that train after all

  • sidersddsidersdd USAMember Posts: 2,432
    Perhaps once KK Kristiansen has passed on, TLG will move *all* production to China,
    Erm... The LEGO president has the initials KKK???

    :/
    He's not the current "president" (he stepped down as CEO in 2004), but is likely the last influential family member from the original founder. I have no clue on how much influence the family has (other than being the major stockholders), but was just postulating possibilities.
  • SecretjediSecretjedi Member Posts: 175
    edited June 2012
    Odd that it may sound, I am not much of fan. I admire it and find it interesting, but am not a builder or a collector. My son likes the Marvel/Star Wars sets. But when I saw HH, I thought I must buy that! I do think it a god investment.

    I would think the VW Camper will do very well too as its an excellent looking set and is such an iconic van. VW itself also has a collectors market.

    As a rule of thumb, buy what you like just in case you get stuck with it.

    Also I'd buy anything that goes half price.
  • Brewer51Brewer51 Member Posts: 248
    I second the VW van. I'm tempted to buy another one, because I have an unopened one right now but I feel I'd be missing out if I didn't build it. Same with the Tower Bridge.

    What are the thoughts of you fellow bricksetters on the next CC Boba Fett? I was thinking about getting some Star Wars sets and holding on to the minifigs. I like the look of the current Slave I Boba, but I'm not sure how well it'll do later on.
  • fitzyfitzfitzyfitz ManchesterMember Posts: 94
    Or perhaps the next gen of leadership at TLG will decide to use "greener" materials for their product, what with the rising prices in oil.
    This was discussed at AFOLCON. TLG have done some experiments with bioplastics and other materials but the longevity isn't proven - they don't want to switch to a different material that's going to degrade in 5-10 years.
  • prevereprevere North of Bellville, East of Heartlake, South of Bricksburg, West of Ninjago City Member Posts: 2,923
    The aftermarket value of specific figs, isn't something we've talked about much (if memory serves correct). Partly because their value are attached to sets and we seem to key on those.

    I honestly don't see any figs currently available or recently retired that could carry the price tag that CC Boba does. I mean, not even close to Boba, nothing even that will crack the $50 barrier.
  • BoiseStateBoiseState Member Posts: 804
    I really wonder if any recent figs will carry much value because so many collectors have popped up recently(like myself). I'd be shocked if any reached the $50 mark in the next 5 years. Excluding promos of course.
  • UKtsumiUKtsumi Member Posts: 627
    edited June 2012
    Surely alot of collectors is what drives the prices up, and a lot of sellers is what drives prices down.?
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    I think retired minifigures need to be a seperate topic. I know minifigures can drive a set, example Cloud City, but we are talking about entire sets and their after market value.
  • thorniethornie Member Posts: 245
    I'd be interested to see how TLG will handle using more eco friendly building materials going forward. My wife is a very active conservationist and has a strict "NO PLASTIC" stance in the house. No plastic bags, no plastic bottles, etc etc. It's a bit maddening at times, but I completely understand why. She makes the one exception for my LEGO because she knows I love it so much, and she knows how much a part of my life it is. It would be really awesome if TLG announced some sort of road map or commitment to alternative materials.
  • monkeyhangermonkeyhanger Member Posts: 3,013
    Thornie: There is nothing wrong with using plastic, from an environmental point of view, when the item made will not be discarded like a free carrier bag. Does your wife refuse to drive a car because it contains plastic? Some of the most environmentally "friendly" items are anything but, such as current Li-ion batteries used in electric cars - have you ever looked into the manufacture of those? The fact that those raw materials get shipped from India/China for refining in Canada, then shipped back to Japan for manufacture, not to mention the hugely toxic byproducts. A Prius doesn't pay back those environmental costs vs a traditional petrol car of similar size and power until it's 25th birthday at 10k miles per year. A hemp lego model wouldn't last 5 minutes. Enjoy your Lego, that plastic has been put to good use!
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,444
    You can recycle Lego though. I know after market Lego parts manufacturers melt down existing Lego elements to use in their molds.
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    I completely understand why.
    I don't... plastic is not evil, it can be recycled endlessly, what is evil is throwing plastic into the ocean... where I do agree it lasts forever...

    We recycle, plastic, paper, and metal, using plastic doesn't bother me a bit.
  • monkeyhangermonkeyhanger Member Posts: 3,013
    From a figure point of view, you have some iconic and unique/exclusive figs from that unloved set "Home One Mon Calamari", those could seriously increase in value in the future.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy Brickset.com

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

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.