Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
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.
6211 is a playset with an interior, and much more durable than the big one. My son could well have a lot of fun with 6211, but he can also have fun with non-retired sets at a fraction of the cost. :)
So I built this, then put it on the shelf where it has sat for about 6 months. Kinda sad, because it was meant to be played with, but given the value of it, I hesitate to give it to my son.
Since I have the box in great displayable condition, the instructions are in near mint condition (I keep them in a filing cabinet inside the house), I would think $200 shipped within the US would be a fair price for it.
I know you can get cheaper copies, but none of them have the box.
So my question becomes, does anyone really care about the box?
So if they redo this but put in 900 parts and charge $120 for it, how great can it be, being 450 parts short of the last one?
That is one hard point going forward, regarding further Star Wars rereleases. If the price per part of SW is now 13-15 cents per part, it is going to make having "improved versions" released in the future with lower part counts for the same price points they need to hit.
If in 5 years they redo the Falcon again, and instead of 1,254 parts they put in 900, can they get the same effect? At some point, everyone is going to start to notice the lack of parts.
This is the same way they store them at The Lego Store, in the back room.
You just have to make sure you're putting the same size boxes on top of each other. Not a problem with multiples, but if you only have 1 of each, it gets harder...
The manual is a different story. I know you can get them online, but it's just not the same, nor is it nearly as convenient.
6390 was released in 1980 and cost $40 USD. 10041 was released in 2003 and cost $65. If you use a simple inflation calculator you would find that $40 in 1980 was worth $89.32 in 2003. There were some minor changes done between the sets because they didn't have the mold for the long grey Ibeams so they had to use other parts which resulted in more parts for the set. You can take whatever you want from this data, but one thing is for sure, the cost of Lego sets will always go up.
Actually, all things considered, for awhile Lego was getting less expensive over time, not more. Adjusting for inflation, Lego was more expensive in the 80s than it was in the 2000s.
But I think that trend is reversing. Looking at the summer wave of sets, everything from Creator to Ninjago to Star Wars has seen a noticeable bump in prices.
The old rule of 10 cents per part is being washed away, even the Creator sets, long the best deal on the Lego wall, has broken the 10 cents per part for even normal sets. The new Beach House is a good example of that.
The summer wave of Star Wars sets seems to be in the 13-15 cent per part range. Taking the middle of that, at 14 cents a part, 6211 Imperial Star Destroyer with 1,366 parts would cost today $191, compared to the $99 it cost in 2006.
Inflation hasn't jumped THAT much! :) Or maybe it has, perhaps this is a reflection of all the money printing that governments around the world have done in the past 4 years. But that is a topic for another forum.
Back on topic, my point is only that as the price per part rises, it becomes harder to hit those desired price points and still have a large detailed toy.
We will buy a remake of 6211 because we are addicted :-)
But LEGO better be careful still I just see them doing a lot of stuff now that I just do not see see selling much IMO.
People also forget that Oil is used to make plastics and Oil is not going to get any cheaper... Unless LEGO finds a way to make reliable ABS out of Corn LEGO is only going to go up in its production costs, which will get passed to the consumer. Nevermind the Obvious price mark ups for LEGO SW and other licenses.
The summer wave is the first that I haven't bought any Star Wars sets from. I'd love a Jabba's Palace, but for $120? Pass...
That set should be $79, even $99 taking into account the figs perhaps. At 17 cents a part, that is just nuts. And don't tell me that the Jabba mold is the problem, other companies make plastic toys for far less all the time without a problem. I just don't buy the whole "but Jabba costs so much to make" story.
I think TLG is just charging what they think they can get away with. I have no problem with that, free market at work and all, but I won't be buying at that price.
Corn isn't the answer either seeing that the drought has killed the corn crop this year. Hemp isn't exactly the answer either since they haven't found a way to make clear plastic out of hemp.
I do think this topic is relative to the secondary market because furtue set and piece prices do reflect on the secondary market, but maybe we can discuss this in detail in another thread.
I never thought in my wildest dreams that I would pay $200 for a Lego set. Then the $300 and $400 sets came. I bought them and I guess I will still keep buying them as long as TLG puts out a quality product.
But that is ok, because it is a nice display piece that you can show off. Jabba's Palace is not, it is a kids toy, and that I think is the difference.
Then again, I've sold several very expensive copies of Jabba's Sail Barge (6210), so what the heck do I know?
since Oil, by all accounts, is a limited resource one can speculate that it will do nothing but make things more expensive that are oil based plastics.
ANd if the quality of LEGO drops anymore you may see people starting buying older sets just for the better quality of parts..lol
I think way too much weight to the value of oil is being put on the price of something like Lego. Plastic is not that expensive, even high quality plastic.
R&D, printing manuals and boxes, shipping, labor, manufacturing, advertising, etc. all cost a lot of money. I would suggest that the cost of the plastic in a Lego set is less than the cost of labor, R&D, etc.
Brickopedia states that 10030 retired in 2007, surely that isnt correct?, that would make its lifespan longer than the deathstar's current one?
The spiral binding was done for both, so you never know without just comparing bricks with that one.
Some sets don't rise in value, some linger around or below RRP for a long time. IF and EN are the outliers, they have performed very well indeed.