Lego prices trend

[Takezo]

Sorry for the little outburst, but it does not seem anybody that Lego is really climbing a vertical road with regard to set prices in relation to the actual content? I am not referring to the number of pieces, because we know that you can easily increase the count using small parts, but to the fact that in recent years we are witnessing a true inflation. While prices rise, modulars are getting more and more smaller, sets increasingly skinny, although the wise use of the graphics on the display boxes masks a little bit the effect... It seems strange to me that no one is complaining about this fact.

[ReplicaOfLife]

Regarding the modulars there's lots of critique on this issue in the general discussion thread and the threads about Brick Bank and Detective's Office.

Can't really comment on the general trend, since I don't buy all that many sets (and if I do, it's mostly large sets like the Simpsons stuff), but recently I eyed some sets purely as parts packs, and was put off by the price... e.g. the Minecraft Nether Fortress is 90€ at 571 pieces, most of which are simple bricks and plates. Seems widely overpriced to me, even for a licensed set.

Edited October 28, 2015 by RogerSmith

[Takezo]

Can't really comment on the general trend, since I don't buy all that many sets (and if I do, it's mostly large sets like the Simpsons stuff), but recently I eyed some sets purely as parts packs, and was put off by the price... e.g. the Minecraft Nether Fortress is 90€ at 571 pieces, most of which are simple bricks and plates. Seems widely overpriced to me, even for a licensed set.

Yes! It is!

[Doge]

I honostly never got the pieces per set madness, it would be a way more accurate method to compare the weight of the pieces instead of the amount...

There was once a guy with a signature comparing 100 1x1 flat tiles against 100 2x1 normal bricks, the totall actual amount said enough.

Anyway, I can only speak regarding the Modular serie, since I'm the John Snow about the newest Lego sets

First of all, the costs of the Modulars really depend on the country, like in Germany the last three Modulars were all 150 Euros, while for instance the last Modular in the Netherlands (BB) costs a whopping 170 Euros...

It can also depend besides that shocking difference on the fact that the newest Modulars have NO stickers at all. The community asked for that multiple times and their wish got answered.

Also in the last three buildings there was more energy stuffed into the details and interior, meaning more differerent Lego parts which are only used once. Results in a more expensive set, the production costs will be higher.

So its basically a combination of the country price (which can be +20 Euros of other countries price) and the more demanding sets, regarding no stickers and more individual bricks.

[LegoSjaak]

400 euros for a 4634 pieces set isn't that bad....(LEGO 75827 set)

Edited October 28, 2015 by LegoSjaak

[pirzyk]

It can also depend besides that shocking difference on the fact that the newest Modulars have NO stickers at all. The community asked for that multiple times and their wish got answered.

Slightly off topic, how many Modulars have stickers? I can only think of the PC, I suspect I am missing at least another one. The HH does not quite count.

[Doge]

400 euros for a 4634 pieces set isn't that bad....(LEGO 75827 set)

I still find it quite shocking for that price that they still include stickers, multiple outside details have been made that way... :c

Slightly off topic, how many Modulars have stickers? I can only think of the PC, I suspect I am missing at least another one. The HH does not quite count.

I'm sorry you're completely right! Indeed only the PC has stickers, still I think the other Modulars (most likely the newest ones with more details) have more printed bricks. I think that has a certain influence in the price..

[tkatt]

Lego set designs are always evolving, I for one wouldn't want them to go back to the 80's and 90's style. I prefer a set with a high amount of detail and a smaller footprint. Mainly due to the fact that its easier to display them. They fit better on a shelf and simply look better. And don't forget, a dollar isn't worth what it used to be. For instance The Green Grocer released in 2008 for $150.00 would cost $165.00 in todays money. http://www.usinflationcalculator.com

It would be great if Lego didn't cost so much, but I look at it as a challenge. How do I get the most Lego for the least amount of money? Clearance sales, garage sales, thrift stores, eBay, and Bing have saved me a ton of money and helped me build up my collection. It just takes dedication and persistence.

The best place to voice your complaints may be that little survey they have in the back of instruction books. Let Lego know what you think and you may just win a free Lego set.

[fred67]

OK, I'm going to be honest here and say I haven't look in several years, but based TLG's own financial statements, their profit has outpaced the increase in sales year after year. That means that year after year their profit margin increased. That's all there is to it. There is inflation, there are spikes in supplies coming from volatile markets (petroleum), but ultimately their own financial statements don't lie... profits increases outpaced sales increases. There's only two ways to do that: higher efficiency, or higher prices.

As someone who supports the free market, I say it's their right to charge whatever the heck they want to. As a consumer, I don't have a problem complaining prices have risen too high, and not that TLG cares (as their sales keep increasing), but personally I buy less in actual dollars in LEGO now than I used to because I'm a little tired of the high prices... I'm doing a lot of trades lately, and I wait for sales when possible. I think the set that really set me off was the Lonely Mountain set price. I was invited to the first two special pre-"Brick-Friday" events for some LEGO VIP members... and have not been invited since.

I also like to point out the CMF prices (as it's one of the things I still collect - although I don't buy boxes anymore, I just get my sets - mainly because of the price). CMFs started out at $2 in 2010; by 2014 they were $4. That's 100% price increase in four years. Assuming they already had a 25% profit margin ($0.50/figure), they are now well over 50% profit margin. I would agree they were probably underpriced at $2, but you still must assume TLG was making a profit - they knew what they were doing by then.

As far as counting bricks is concerned - neither by weight nor number of parts is a great measure of a sets value. Quite obviously certain parts - even roughly the same size and weight can have vastly different values (always subjectively, of course - compare a red Darth Vader helmet to a black one). Sometimes chroming adds value, sometimes just a rare part or color. Objectively, though, either way gets you a ball-park estimate. You can adjust from there - a lot of small pieces lowers value, a lot of large ones increases it. Minifigures are objectively more valuable in price per part OR weight than average pieces. It's just a rough estimate. Ultimately it's a subjective thing....

So, subjectively, even adjusted for inflation ($165), the Bank is more expensive ($170) AND smaller.

Edited October 28, 2015 by fred67

[ejred]

I thought this analysis of Lego prices was pretty interesting (http://www.realityprose.com/what-happened-with-lego/)

Spoiler - the author believed prices were pretty stable over 2004-2012.

I wonder if people agree with his analysis? These things are hard to compare but it seemed pretty solid. Have things changed in the last 3 years?

[fred67]

^^ That's an interesting article, but it's lacking in a few fundamentals, IMO.

First, the prices should be culled to reflect only maybe the last ten years (since TLG started operating in the black instead of the red).

The other thing is that, as pointed out, a lot of sets have more, but smaller pieces. I'm even surprised at how unstable some builds are while sacrificing larger pieces for smaller ones.... nothing heinous, but things you'd never do as a builder unless you were hard up on parts.

Lastly, it's all about perception - so some people might not think there's been a price spike, but others definitely would. When I was still actively collecting SW sets, they took the very unusual step of actually raising prices on an EXISTING set (one of the battle packs went from $10 to $11 on the shelves). The latest battle packs are $13 - that's a 30% increase in five years. CMFs went from $2 to $4 in the US. It's only a couple of bucks, but it's still 100% price increase over the same time.

Then, another set I pointed out, the Lonely Mountain is just heinously expensive.

We can compare another set - the 10231 Shuttle Expedition. It was 1230 pieces for $100; the latest shuttle set 60080 space port, is 586 pieces for $120. If that's not pretty heinous, I don't know what is - but then we get back to the price/piece argument and whether or not it's valid. Well, for 20% more the 60080 is 1.53KG, only 75% of the 10231 at over 2KG. The physical built dimensions are also much smaller.

What's an objective measure? Pieces? Weight? By both standards, some sets are a lot more expensive by comparison to previous incarnations, inflation or not... and it's so bad (Lonely Mountain) that people take notice.

[Takezo]

So, subjectively, even adjusted for inflation ($165), the Bank is more expensive ($170) AND smaller.

Yes that's the point!

We can compare another set - the 10231 Shuttle Expedition. It was 1230 pieces for $100; the latest shuttle set 60080 space port, is 586 pieces for $120. If that's not pretty heinous, I don't know what is - but then we get back to the price/piece argument and whether or not it's valid. Well, for 20% more the 60080 is 1.53KG, only 75% of the 10231 at over 2KG. The physical built dimensions are also much smaller.

What's an objective measure? Pieces? Weight? By both standards, some sets are a lot more expensive by comparison to previous incarnations, inflation or not... and it's so bad (Lonely Mountain) that people take notice.

Even if you consider parts number than weight, or phisical size of the builded set, the result is the same.

From my point of view, the most important element is the fact that they are using more and more a series of "tricks" to mask and reduce the visual effect of the consistent reduction of sets: rich graphics used as background of the boxes, which "fill" and make sets look less skinny, use of small parts (although special parts, to improve the detail, as someone said above) to increase the count of the pieces, use of separable "sub-models" rather than a "single bloc"k to increase the overall dimensions... Things so.

Just compare the pictures of some 2015 sets (for example of the City serie, but not only of course) with similar a few years ago and all these things are evident...

[Doge]

^^ That's an interesting article, but it's lacking in a few fundamentals, IMO.

First, the prices should be culled to reflect only maybe the last ten years (since TLG started operating in the black instead of the red).

The other thing is that, as pointed out, a lot of sets have more, but smaller pieces. I'm even surprised at how unstable some builds are while sacrificing larger pieces for smaller ones.... nothing heinous, but things you'd never do as a builder unless you were hard up on parts.

Lastly, it's all about perception - so some people might not think there's been a price spike, but others definitely would. When I was still actively collecting SW sets, they took the very unusual step of actually raising prices on an EXISTING set (one of the battle packs went from $10 to $11 on the shelves). The latest battle packs are $13 - that's a 30% increase in five years. CMFs went from $2 to $4 in the US. It's only a couple of bucks, but it's still 100% price increase over the same time.

Then, another set I pointed out, the Lonely Mountain is just heinously expensive.

We can compare another set - the 10231 Shuttle Expedition. It was 1230 pieces for $100; the latest shuttle set 60080 space port, is 586 pieces for $120. If that's not pretty heinous, I don't know what is - but then we get back to the price/piece argument and whether or not it's valid. Well, for 20% more the 60080 is 1.53KG, only 75% of the 10231 at over 2KG. The physical built dimensions are also much smaller.

What's an objective measure? Pieces? Weight? By both standards, some sets are a lot more expensive by comparison to previous incarnations, inflation or not... and it's so bad (Lonely Mountain) that people take notice.

I agree, you can't judge the average price by the amount of pieces, even when its the most easy way to judge the overall price of the sets.

One of the main trends of Lego is the shift of design. The 90's were designed easier. Less bricks, more bigger pieces, it was more like a plastic modell than the Lego we know nowadays...

Lego made way less profit and it didn't do well. People like the AFOL community asked for more bricks so more things than only a box picture can be created, so more diversity and chance for creativity.

From that day (dramatic voice ) the sets got more pieces, which generally replaced the bigger pieces.

Isn't it a good idea to look at the weight of the totall amount of bricks instead the pieces?

[temes]

One of the main trends of Lego is the shift of design. The 90's were designed easier. Less bricks, more bigger pieces, it was more like a plastic modell than the Lego we know nowadays...

Nowadays Lego uses much more small decoration pieces. For example the 1984 King's Castle (6080) had 674 pieces. The 2014 King's Castle (70404) had a similar footprint, but it had 996 pieces, it was more complex and more detailed.

Edited October 29, 2015 by temes

[HawkLord]

I think the licensed sets are getting a little out of hand with pricing. TFA SW sets are a good example - it just seems like less in the build and minifigure department. Granted the prelim pics Lego got weren't the best to off of, but it does seem other SW sets are just too high priced.

Everything changed after the Lego movie. More people got into Lego and it's become huge company now that they have the number one spot as toy companies go. This means that they're doing even more to secure that place with better profit margins.

At the very least, Lego has offered cheaper sets. One thing I appreciate with Lego is that there are various price points to buy from, so I never feel truly trapped with my purchasing. The hardest part is just factoring in where the price bumps will be, as some sets we expect to be cheaper aren't. Lego has also acquired more licenses which I think they're accommodating for across the board.

[fred67]

Isn't it a good idea to look at the weight of the totall amount of bricks instead the pieces?

They're all ways of trying to objectively measure the "value" of a set, and weight might be a better measure, but they're both just "ballpark" estimates, and each set needs some further consideration. Minifigures, for example, are subjectively more "valuable" than regular pieces, so a set with a lot of minifigures might be way more valuable.

But then there's this from the post you created:

We can compare another set - the 10231 Shuttle Expedition. It was 1230 pieces for $100; the latest shuttle set 60080 space port, is 586 pieces for $120. If that's not pretty heinous, I don't know what is - but then we get back to the price/piece argument and whether or not it's valid. Well, for 20% more the 60080 is 1.53KG, only 75% of the 10231 at over 2KG. The physical built dimensions are also much smaller.

10231:

Year: 2011

Pieces: 1230

Weight: over 2KG

Shuttle length when built: 17.5 inches

Price: $100

60080:

Year: 2015

Pieces: 586

Weight: 1.53KG

Shuttle length when built: 10 inches.

Price: $120

It's hard to subjectively determine the value of the other ridiculously priced sets this year, like The Lonely Mountain, but $130 for about 1.7KG puts in on order with the 60080 - which is objectively a ridiculous price.

[paul_delahaye]

I think it's only the Hard to Find sets that are an issue. Within 3 months of launch, Amazon or Argos in the UK have usually knocked 30% of the list price via some kind of special weekend promotion or 3 for 2 effort. I can only imagine similar offers are available over Europe and the USA with Amazon or TRU.

But yes, with the cost of manufacturing reducing in general with factories in cheaper worldwide locations like Mexico/China and the cost of a barrel of oil being at an all time low, it's hard to see any reason other than, they can get away with raising the prices and people are still buying. I guess any commercial vernture is going to do this, the question is how high can they go before they loose/upset their loyal customers. I guess in the high street shops, MegaBloks is likely seen as their greatest competition, although we all know the difference in quality between the brands, toy shops often stock them side by side. It's when the parents who buy the majority of sets consider the price difference, this is when things might change.

It was not long ago, that if you bought new bulk lego bricks, the average price was around £10 a Kilo. Now it's nearer £50 a kilo if your lucky. There are always some people who seem to have ways of aquiring bricks cheaper. but it's a great point you raise.

Paul

Edited October 31, 2015 by paul_delahaye

[x105Black]

I've noticed the trend as well. One thing that bothered me was the latest wave of Pirates sets. I was a fan of the original Pirates sets, and since I just emerged from my dark age, it was exciting to see that they were doing Pirates again.

What irked me was that the sets are so much smaller. They may be using more bricks, but the overall size of the sets when built has gone down. I know that a new set at a similar size to an old set would be more expensive, but it would be impressive, especially with the modern bricks and techniques they use today.

Price per piece is a nice guideline to go by, but I find it doesn't always work for the same reasons mentioned above (minifigures, scarcity of a piece, etc). I sometimes think that LEGO as a commercial entity is taking advantage of their fans and milking them for as much as they can get. This practice may have negative repercussions for them in the future, as other companies improve and get more attractive licenses and people tire of the rising prices of LEGO.