My problem with CUUSOO

[Aanchir]

My only current problem with Cuusoo is that they absolutely refuse to do any new molds meaning Zelda has no chance.

(And Heroica sucks so don't bother)

OK, if you're going to be snippy about it, how about giving this model a glance? It's purely sculptural, just like pretty much every Cuusoo set so far, and demands no new molds as far as I can tell. Plus it's a very iconic representation of the franchise. It's perhaps not the most detailed it could possibly be, but TLG's designers could easily give a redesign a swing (no pun intended), and even left as-is it'd make a gorgeous display piece.

[BrickG]

As a minifigure guy I still wouldn't buy that. I can make a Master Sword (as well as other tools) with my current smallish collection (small compared to you guys).

I'm pretty sure not having Zelda minifigures would hurt sales a lot too since there's so many minifigure people. :P

[Meatman]

So what is the verdict on this new mold issue? No molds will be made correct? So that means that any project that is using molds that are made up and don't exist to help their project gain support have no chance in the end? Some people are saying that it is ok and some people are saying that it is not allowed, so which is it? In my opinion any project that is using custom made minifigures or parts should not be permitted since they will not be created by Lego.

@Aanchir

You seem to be the guy here who has all of the Cuusoo related answers, so what is the deal with the molds/custom parts? Yes or No?

[BrickG]

Right now they're allowed but seemingly just won't happen. So basically Lego is letting them go to the review stage just for show which IMO is the worse option. I think they should just say "NO NEW MOLDS" and immediately kill reviews for ones with new molds if that's how they really feel.

[Meatman]

It seems to me that they are allowing these projects with new molds to attract attention even thought they know they are going to fail. It's just not right.

[ShaydDeGrai]

It seems to me that they are allowing these projects with new molds to attract attention even thought they know they are going to fail. It's just not right.

I think the core truth of that statement is really "to attract attention." In the end, CuuSoo, like ReBrick, seems to be more about drawing attention to the LEGO brand more so than to any one idea or creation. Even if they only release a token set per year with no new parts, we still spend man-years of time and effort proposing projects, writing blogs, hotly debating issues in forums, etc. We're volunteering content that, for better or worse, helps TLG increase their Internet footprint. As a google search term "Lego" becomes a hot item and right next to a list of search results for people arguing over Zelda, MLP and Perdue Pete are a dozen advertisements for, guess what, buying Lego kits! I don't know if this sort of guerrilla marketing is intentional or simply emergent, nor do I know if impacts their bottom line; but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that all of CuuSoo ultimately answered to marketing rather than new product development.

As for new parts on CuuSoo, I speak with no authority whatsoever but my read of their latest posting seems to say that if you want to propose a new part it should be a standalone new part proposal, not part of a kit. If you want to propose a new kit, it should be build-able with existing parts give or take color changes, stickers and print jobs. If your existing kit relies on new parts, they might not ask you to take it down or modify it but your chances are pretty slim that it'll sail come review time.

I haven't heard of anyone complaining that their new (post Zelda rejection) proposal was denied a public posting due to reliance on new molds, but I also haven't noticed any new proposals going up lately that required such so I don't know if anyone has tried to push the envelope on that front.

[GregoryBrick]

I find it misleading and unfair to say that proposals are allowed to continue "just for show" or "simply to attract attention knowing they will fail anyway". It's entirely possible that proposals might include new elements, but the review team would have a better knowledge of how crucial those elements are in order to turn the proposal into a set while keeping its spirit intact. If there's huge interest in Proposal A, but the new element in it is inessential, it's not a problem. I can't see the review team scouring every proposal for new elements within and then turfing it automatically.

CUUSOO is a negotiated, iterative process. It's not a contract like "You do X this way, and we owe you Y".

The only alternative is for the review team to pre-review every proposal as to its feasibility according to every criterion, which is not reasonable and I doubt it is possible.

Edited March 1, 2013 by GregoryBrick

[Faefrost]

So what is the verdict on this new mold issue? No molds will be made correct? So that means that any project that is using molds that are made up and don't exist to help their project gain support have no chance in the end? Some people are saying that it is ok and some people are saying that it is not allowed, so which is it? In my opinion any project that is using custom made minifigures or parts should not be permitted since they will not be created by Lego.

@Aanchir

You seem to be the guy here who has all of the Cuusoo related answers, so what is the deal with the molds/custom parts? Yes or No?

It's not quite that simple. Not all new molds are the same, and not all designed new molds impact a project in the same way. When looking at a new mold in a CuuSoo project a few questions need to be asked.

- is this something that would be pretty much unique to this project or license. Ie something specific to a licensed character? Links Hair would be a good example.

- is the part something that would be unique to the set or project?

- Is the part a true core element of the set? Is it something that defines a central character to the set, or would radically change the core project in it's absence?

- is it a structural or building part that would be useful elsewhere?

If the part is required, is key to the license and cannot be used elsewhere, the project is dead. Stick a fork I it. The part will not be made for CuuSoo

If the part is not required for the set. Just a nice to have, evaluation will continue without it. Part will not be made.

If the part is something that would be really really useful elsewhere, evaluation will take much much longer, and has a good chance of failing. But it has a chance of getting made. Albeit a very very rare chance.

The key thing is no new molds will be made specifically or exclusively for a CuuSoo project. But there is a rare chance that a new part suggested through CuuSoo may be approved for general production.

Edited March 1, 2013 by Faefrost

[Aanchir]

So what is the verdict on this new mold issue? No molds will be made correct? So that means that any project that is using molds that are made up and don't exist to help their project gain support have no chance in the end? Some people are saying that it is ok and some people are saying that it is not allowed, so which is it? In my opinion any project that is using custom made minifigures or parts should not be permitted since they will not be created by Lego.

@Aanchir

You seem to be the guy here who has all of the Cuusoo related answers, so what is the deal with the molds/custom parts? Yes or No?

Faefrost seems to have a pretty good summary in the post above mine, so read that. In short, even a project with a new mold in the proposal can succeed if it doesn't depend on the mold being made for that project. If, for instance, you used a new mold in the proposal because you couldn't think of a solution using existing parts, but the LEGO designers making the sketch model come up with a solution that didn't occur to you (or wasn't available to you, in the case of unreleased parts), then the concept is still viable without the new mold and can be allowed to proceed.

Right now they're allowed but seemingly just won't happen. So basically Lego is letting them go to the review stage just for show which IMO is the worse option. I think they should just say "NO NEW MOLDS" and immediately kill reviews for ones with new molds if that's how they really feel.

Well, there are a number of problems with that. First of all, as Faefrost says, new molds in a project don't necessarily mean the project can't succeed without new molds. Second, the LEGO Cuusoo staff are NOT experts on what molds exist or don't exist. Most of the LEGO sites I'm on have a "help identifying pieces" topic, meaning even some dedicated LEGO fans aren't experts on what is an official part and what is not, so why should anything different be expected of the LEGO Cuusoo staff? And finally, it's a bit unfair to automatically dismiss any project including new molds because it could sway votes, because there are several other "impossible" things that could be incorporated into a project that could sway votes just as much. And dismissing things based on any of these factors would essentially be demanding that not only the Cuusoo staff, but also every project creator, have complete knowledge of ins and outs of the LEGO Group's internal design processes. It's just flat-out unreasonable.

The reason these kind of things aren't dismissed before review is because except in the case of certain factors like the LEGO brand standards, only the LEGO designers who are performing the review have any authority to say what can or can't be done in a set based on any particular project. Dismissing projects on the grounds that they might not be viable is a surefire way to stifle creativity. The best the LEGO Cuusoo staff can do is offer a warning to project creators if they notice new molds in a project, which is what they already do when projects seemingly dependent on new molds reach certain milestones.

[Meatman]

First off I think everyone here knows that we are talking about custom minifigures in the Cuusoo projects, not some random system part.

I am not talking about a part that you didn't consider so you made your own, I am talking about custom made minifigure parts being used to draw the interest of supporters even though that custom part will never happen and the creator knows this.

If a project is worthy it shouldn't call for the creator to dream up something that doesn't exist to make it more appealing. That is basically tricking the public into supporting.

The bottom line is there should be no custom minifigure parts in any of the Cuusoo projects. This isn't fair to the Zelda project that failed because it was using them. You can say what you want about it calling for more molds than another project, but the fact is there are many projects using custom minfigs and regardless of what you think, there are some people giving their support based on them.

[Flipz]

(And Heroica sucks so don't bother)

Excuse me? I dare you to spend a few months there and still tell me afterward that it sucks.

I'm...still sceptical about Cuusoo. On the one hand, I can see where there are a lot of issues that TLG has to deal with regarding it, which prevents them from using it the way we'd like them to. On the other, my own inherent cynicism prevents me from holding out hope of anything truly great coming out of this--and yes, that includes the advertizing benefeits to LEGO. That's probably just me, though.

[Faefrost]

First off I think everyone here knows that we are talking about custom minifigures in the Cuusoo projects, not some random system part.

I am not talking about a part that you didn't consider so you made your own, I am talking about custom made minifigure parts being used to draw the interest of supporters even though that custom part will never happen and the creator knows this.

If a project is worthy it shouldn't call for the creator to dream up something that doesn't exist to make it more appealing. That is basically tricking the public into supporting.

The bottom line is there should be no custom minifigure parts in any of the Cuusoo projects. This isn't fair to the Zelda project that failed because it was using them. You can say what you want about it calling for more molds than another project, but the fact is there are many projects using custom minfigs and regardless of what you think, there are some people giving their support based on them.

You're missing a key component of the debate. It isn't just that a project proposal includes new minifigure parts. It is also an evaluation of whether or not the set can stand without a specific new part, or if there is a workaround. The Zelda set failed because The look and design of Link is very very specific. If they were to make the set the core figure, Link would have to be matched to Nintendo's design models and guidelines. Much like Jack Sparrow's hair, Links look is integral to the whole project and must be maintained. It wasn't that the project asked for a new mold, it was that there was no way to meet the visual need of the project without one.

Contrast that with The BTTF proposals. The DeLorean that passed review does have a few new custom minifig elements in its proposal. Mainly for Doc Brown's hair. Now being that Doc Brown is based on an actual actor, and is not a tightly controlled graphic design, the style guide for him offers a bit more flexibility. TLG most likely felt they can achieve an acceptable version of his look using printing or existing or forthcoming parts (probably the CMF series 10 Grandpa hair). While getting Doc's look as good as possible is a desireable, it isn't a mission critical element of the project. It isn't the core focus, so a viable alternative may be worked out.

The far end of this is the Space Troopers / Space Marines project. As others have pointed out, there are some new minifig parts requested in that project. But they are all in figs or characters that are completely secondary to the core project elements. The requested custom parts are all for the alien foes. While nice to have, Lego can easily swap the proposed aliens for ones assembled from their stock of assorted creature parts and have absolutely zero impact on the center core of the project, which is the squadron of Space Troopers. Whether or not the released set has a blue two headed alien is not a show stopper.

So it's not just the presence of the new part request, it's the context of it. And the simple question of "how critical is the new part to the project?"

[Faefrost]

While we are discussing some of the reasons that projects can fail review, such as requiring new molds, let's talk a little bit about one of the other more mysterious ones. That oh so open ended "It does not meet the business case". As in...

"The supporters we received for the EVE Online Ships – Rifter project allowed us to examine the feasibility of another niche gaming-related product. However the Rifter presented a more challenging business case when considered alongside other potential products in this Review period. Therefore, the LEGO Review Board has decided that this project does not meet the requirements for the business case."

So what does that mean? What is the issue with projects such as the Grifter (or the soon to be shot down Purdue Pete)? The business case assessment that they are talking about for any licensed project is what can be best described as "Conversion". What percentage of the existing fan base to we need to convert to actual paying customers in order for this to be a viable product? It doesn't really matter that 10,000 people swore that they would buy this if it was produced. It is far more important to look at how much of the established fan base is reflected in those 10k voters. And in this case a lower number is better. If you need to convert 10% of the current fans to purchasers of your product, you are going to have to work a lot harder for a lot less return than if you only need to convert 2%. (Believe it or not, contrary to popular belief the Marketing department is not entirely populated by clueless C student frat boys who spent their college years in a Bud Lite Coma. A small few of them do need to know some math.)

So the calculations will look at the total established fan base of a proposed license. For Harry Potter that is somewhere around 200 million. For Eve online it is around 200 thousand. They look at statistical trends. What is the typical ratio of fan to purchaser that they would see? (honestly it's probably somewhere around 2% if they are lucky). So the question becomes if 2% of the properties fans bought a set, would that be sufficient sales for the project? Looking at the Eve Online Grifter, 2% of 200,000 is 4,000. Less than half of what the minimu production run for a CuuSoo set is suspected to be. It doesn't actually matter if the fan base is enthusiastic and well organized and seemingly into the project. If the % of the fanbase that is showing interest is above or outside normal sales conversion rations, they will not take a gamble on it. The project must be viable using their most basic and conservative sales estimates. Not simply on the basis of who shouts "Me Too"! And this is why Purdue Pete will also most likely fail.

This is also why many of even the more popular video game based properties are still marginal for things like Lego sets or projects. The best, highest selling, highest grossing video games are just barely hitting the minimal numbers needed to make this calculation viable.

[BrickG]

You can easily use existing stuff to make a 100% legit Doc Brown and Marty. The custom pieces in the project will likely have been completely ignored.

Link would suck if you used existing molds.

[hachiroku]

Does the BTTF Time Machine come the 29th May? I read this, but I didn´t find info.

[BrickG]

I find this unlikely as they would have likely shown it by now if it was that close to release.

[Faefrost]

There is a new "Scientist" minifig coming in CMF series 11. Indications are he may be of the more wild haired Einstein type look. They may be waiting on that hair piece before they announce or release the BttF set.

[CM4Sci]

There is a new "Scientist" minifig coming in CMF series 11. Indications are he may be of the more wild haired Einstein type look. They may be waiting on that hair piece before they announce or release the BttF set.

Unfortunately not.

-Sci

[Faefrost]

Unfortunately not.

-Sci

That's kinda dull (and may put a wrinkle in the Female Minifgures project that just hit 10k). rats. (not that I don't like a Lady Scientist) I was hoping for one similar to the old CMF concept art with the wild Einstein hair. Oh well. I'm still betting DOC uses an existing hair piece. Either Grandpa or something like the Exo Force ones.

[TheLegoDr]

I would assume them to use the scientist hairpiece from Monster Fighters. It's crazy enough without needing a new mold. Who knows..

[BlueberryWaffles]

You mean Inferno hair. Nobody likes Agents! (pouts)

[Navy Trooper Fenson]

I would assume them to use the scientist hairpiece from Monster Fighters. It's crazy enough without needing a new mold. Who knows..

That would be especially lazy and look nothing like the character. This is something LEGO would have done in 2002 or 2005. I don´t think it´s too late for them to do a fitting hairmold with some other CMF, either this or next year. It´s not relevant if the mold will debut with the BTTF set or not, if they can use the mold multiple times there should not be a problem with getting a fitting one.

I have a new problem. The fall results are in and Cuusoo just... I don´t know how to describe this. They talk about the Sandcrawler that he is too ludicrously big, which would be a fine reason to not accept the model on its own, but then they say they can´t produce it because they already have licensing agreements with Lucasfilm.

What?

Wouldn´t existing agreements not make the production easier? What is this crap? Does that mean they can´t just take one of the fan designs and ask Lucasfilm/WB/Disney if they can´t just use that? You would think that is easier than talking with the actors from BTTF, the production company and the car manufacturer for a single set.

But the Portal set was in that batch too, so what is the final decision at the end of the review? Production or no production? Of course the only answer is that they are still doing test results aren´t finished yet...

?????????????

I thought the point of this batch system is that we know the final fate of each set at a certain date? And now they just say "Oh, that still isn´t decided on"?

I guess this is because they are nearly a year behind their original schedule and they want to catch up but what is keeping them from just throwing the 15 or so sets from the last 4 batches into one review, so that we can finally get decisions? Right now it takes 9 months for them to end a cycle, can´t they just speed it up a little? Otherwise we won´t see results for that female minifigs set project before 2022, when LEGO can already have a new girls theme in production. It´s not like the lawyers, designers or whoever is responsible for the reviews can´t handle more than three sets at a time.

[Faefrost]

I have a new problem. The fall results are in and Cuusoo just... I don´t know how to describe this. They talk about the Sandcrawler that he is too ludicrously big, which would be a fine reason to not accept the model on its own, but then they say they can´t produce it because they already have licensing agreements with Lucasfilm.

What?

Wouldn´t existing agreements not make the production easier? What is this crap? Does that mean they can´t just take one of the fan designs and ask Lucasfilm/WB/Disney if they can´t just use that? You would think that is easier than talking with the actors from BTTF, the production company and the car manufacturer for a single set.

Believe it or not, that existing ongoing and active SW license makes it much harder for a CuuSoo project. We have discussed this a bit over the past year, but it comes down to a number of things.

- The Lego Star Wars group may already have a Sandcrawler somewhere on the production schedule. So this may conflict with that.

- similarly since SW is an active and ongoing license, and this is a subject that has been done before, it may simply be held that it remains an active design subject and is simply already part of the active or available pool of sets, and would be inappropriate for CuuSoo or anything involving a third party.

- there may quite simply be an issue regarding third party design royalties over interpretations of familiar Lucasfilms designs which would already be covered under the existing license arrangement. While new unique interpretations of things like described but never seen EU vehicles may be fine for CuuSoo, stuff that has been seen on screen may not be feasible once they ask the lawyers.

- Lucasfilms may simply not want the set to be done via a small limited release mechanism such as CuuSoo.

Or it may be an issue involving all of the above. Remember CuuSoo s setup to do one shot subjects. The LegoSW team however will revisit things. So lets look at an example of where problems pop up. Lego has made 10144 in the past. Lets say they decide to make Marshall's? This then attaches a royalty and design credit to it. What then happens if they go to make a new version a few years later? Does that design royalty prevent it, or further attach the new set? Are there any claims that could be made? PR problems? It just seems like it has the potential to get unpredictable or messy if not managed extremely carefully. I've kind of long suspected that the CuuSoo royalty mechanism might cause issues with ongoing licenses. Going to a flat fee reward for sets involving already active and existing licenses might be a better option.

Now the question is would it be possible for the CuuSoo group to hand it all off to the LegoSW group, and for all to reach some sort of flat fee contract designer arrangement with Marshall in order to produce such a set under the regular LegoSW banner? It would certainly be a pleasant thought. I suspect that no matter what happens we will be seeing a new Sandcrawler within the next 24 to 36 months. But I personally would really love for it to be some variant of Marshall's, and for him to be compensated and credited.

Oh and just in case anyone missed it, yeah, this probably means the Batman Tumbler is unlikely as well for many of the same reasons.

Edited June 15, 2013 by Faefrost

[Faefrost]

But the Portal set was in that batch too, so what is the final decision at the end of the review? Production or no production? Of course the only answer is that they are still doing test results aren´t finished yet...

?????????????

I thought the point of this batch system is that we know the final fate of each set at a certain date? And now they just say "Oh, that still isn´t decided on"?

I guess this is because they are nearly a year behind their original schedule and they want to catch up but what is keeping them from just throwing the 15 or so sets from the last 4 batches into one review, so that we can finally get decisions? Right now it takes 9 months for them to end a cycle, can´t they just speed it up a little? Otherwise we won´t see results for that female minifigs set project before 2022, when LEGO can already have a new girls theme in production. It´s not like the lawyers, designers or whoever is responsible for the reviews can´t handle more than three sets at a time.

The fact that the Portal set is still in "testing" is interesting and unusual. Especially that they opted to give out the rest of the results. The one thing that it has me suspecting (though I may be completely wrong) is parts. The Portal set had one or two new structural type parts. Now normally this probably would have killed it... Unless the review team thinks that these might be really useful structural parts to have, and is worth doing some tests on. This might be one of he rare cass where they are actually considering a new part from a CuuSoo set. And they have said that in such cases the review would be much much longer.

[CM4Sci]

As I asked on CUUSOO, and don't reply harshly, why can't LEGO make one or two parts for the project when they made over 300 just this year? It confuses me.

-Sci