Unpopular Opinions about LEGO

[icm]

I was looking at inflation-adjusted prices the other day, and the 6929 Starfleet Voyager and 924 Space Cruiser both have higher inflation-adjusted RRPs than the much-maligned Ahsoka's Jedi Interceptor, for a much lower weight of plastic and a lower minifig count. The price for Ahsoka's Jedi Interceptor is still awfully high, but I think probably Lego reached a low for inflation-adjusted price per part and price per gram in the mid-2010s and now prices are rising back to previous norms.

[JohnTPT17]

59 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Did TLG ever "use" the ppp as some sort of figure of merit?

I think it's come up in designer interviews as a "consumer expectation," or something along those lines. But I could also be misremembering.

[MAB]

8 hours ago, Toastie said:

Did TLG ever "use" the ppp as some sort of figure of merit? I don't think so. Isn't it that TLG (naturally and aggressively) just asks for whatever they believe is most profitable for them? We have long departed from a company that “cares”. It feels, just that, it feels as if there was such a notion, in a galaxy, far, far away.

I believe the quote should read "LEGO fans should forget ...", or am I mistaken?

Best
Thorsten

I don't know as I've never seen their internal documents. But for a long time their output managed to be close to it and i have no doubt that they know it is used. Of course it could be coincidental that sets tended to contain a similar mix of parts no matter what the range or size of the set and so getting close to that ratio was a natural occurrence and it continued to happen when they started to use many and more smaller parts at the same time as increasing set prices.

There have always been outliers, of course. CMF, single baseplate sets, anything that was electronic and not many other parts to average the high cost of the expensive part.

[Stereo]

8 hours ago, MAB said:

I don't know as I've never seen their internal documents. But for a long time their output managed to be close to it and i have no doubt that they know it is used. Of course it could be coincidental that sets tended to contain a similar mix of parts no matter what the range or size of the set and so getting close to that ratio was a natural occurrence and it continued to happen when they started to use many and more smaller parts at the same time as increasing set prices.

Yeah, to the extent it stayed level, it's cause pieces were bigger in the 90s, I'd think.  Or maybe put another way, sets didn't include the smaller pieces.  Look at something like 6984 (406 pieces, 1992) and it has maybe 40 decorative exterior pieces, there are 17 tiles in the whole set.  10497 (1254 pieces, 2022) has 215 tiles.  10497 is larger, but maybe 125% the size, not 3x.

[DrJimbo]

A few things seem pretty obvious to me, but not perhaps not to all: basing ppp assessments on sets that include dinosaurs is not going to work - like electronics, they will be outliers; on the other hand, sets these days have a lot more small parts and fewer large ones compared to older sets. 

I think people also have a hard time having an intuitive sense of the effect of inflation over time. As a kid growing up in Ireland in the 80s, lego was incredibly expensive. There have been a lot of changes in standards of living, disposable income purchasing power, and children's expectations since then. I remember being incredibly grateful when my parents would buy me the 1-2 medium-large lego sets I might get in a year. I would buy medium ones for sure more frequently for my kids now (if they had any interest any more, but hey, I get to buy for myself!)

I am seeing Galaxy Explorer as ~€28 rrp when released in 1979 (I suspect rrp may have been higher locally, this is based on US$ pricing on BrickEconomy. That adjusts to ~€150 now with inflation. The Galaxy Explorer redux a couple of years ago was €100 rrp, for many more parts, functionality, and a bigger ship (although no baseplates). All sorts of things impacted this, I am sure.

Here is the unpopular opinion: to me, Lego has always been a premium product. It got cheaper for a while and now it is getting more expensive.

I think the point about there being fewer bargains is well made - there is a wider awareness of the potential value, and lego is bought up for hoarding. There are fewer 30-50% off bargains than their used to be, fewer opportunities to get a set that I was only slightly interested in at a good price. 

Personally, I don't get the minfig collecting thing, but other people I am sure look oddly at me, a grown-megablocks man playing with lego. It's all just degrees of oddness. 

 

[danth]

I think it's important to realize that inflation isn't just something you should take for granted across the board. 

Console video games have cost about $50-$60 since the original NES. 

A pair of jeans has cost about $50 my whole life. I've been paying $80-$100 for sneakers since the early '90s. And I'm talking the same brands/from the same stores. 

Companies will always charge what they think people will pay. Buying into the idea that inflation is a given is what allows them to charge more. 

[Kit Figsto]

5 hours ago, DrJimbo said:

I think people also have a hard time having an intuitive sense of the effect of inflation over time. As a kid growing up in Ireland in the 80s, lego was incredibly expensive. There have been a lot of changes in standards of living, disposable income purchasing power, and children's expectations since then. I remember being incredibly grateful when my parents would buy me the 1-2 medium-large lego sets I might get in a year. I would buy medium ones for sure more frequently for my kids now (if they had any interest any more, but hey, I get to buy for myself!)

Yes, I agree here, I think that LEGO prices from the “golden age” in the eyes of many (80s/90s) were actually quite a bit higher than people realize.  I believe that the Forestmen’s Crossing has an inflation-adjusted price of like $70, Enchanted Island was around $150, the original Eldorado Fortress was somewhere in that $160 neighborhood, etc, which all translate to horrendous PPP ratios. Granted, they all included baseplates and some larger elements, but they were still, without a doubt, very expensive, especially if other tots on the shelves, like action figures or Hot Wheels cars, cost $3 or $1 each.  
 

I don’t disagree with the point that prices lately have risen at a somewhat unreasonable and unsustainable level, but I think part of this is our perception.  Prices in the 2000s and 2010s remained mostly stable - a $20 set in 2002 felt like it was pretty much the same size as a $20 set in 2018, and it felt like the value was there.  Lately, it feels like large parts have completely gone by the wayside and while we’re still getting similar price per piece ratios, a lot of it feels overengineered just to inflate the part count.  
 

That said, I think a happy medium is absolutely doable.  I think that people would be upset if they put out a 400 piece set at $150 but justified it because it had a raised baseplate (as if we’re ever getting those back…) but I also think that modern manufactuing techniques, and economies of scale would suggest that the cost should be able to stay closer to what it was 8 years ago.  It definitely does with some stuff - the Up House or the recent Indiana Jones sets felt like they were priced very fairly, yet you’ll have stuff like this summer’s Star Wars wave or some of the Batman stuff where everything feels $20-30 overpriced, even if the PPP seems okay.

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Kit Figsto said:

Lately, it feels like large parts have completely gone by the wayside and while we’re still getting similar price per piece ratios, a lot of it feels overengineered just to inflate the part count.  

I'm not sure they are doing this just to inflate the part count (and hence price). I think it is primarily because people and especially adults these days want as detailed designs / models as is possible and this is often better done with smaller parts. That is not to say it isn't frustrating when you get for example 8 1x2 bricks when maybe two 1x8 could have been used instead or there is a little unnecessary build that adds another 50-100 parts. I was looking at Helm's Deep earlier, thinking how much better it would look with brick built walls rather than panels and those vertical grooves in the curved section filled in with cheese slopes on SNOT bricks.

[Darth_Bane13]

Unpopular opinion: I think Lego should take a break from the Star Wars theme for a bit. They should take 1-2 years off, or at the very least greatly reduce the number of sets. Yeah business wise it doesn't make sense, but as a Star Wars fan I am just sick of seeing this theme get worse year after year. 

[icm]

That's the kind of unpopular opinion that is surprisingly popular (or surprisingly frequently repeated) in online spaces and never makes much sense. They should definitely think hard about what they actually want to do with the theme, but completely putting it on ice is a pretty bad idea. You acknowledge that it doesn't make business sense, so you know that. ... Yeah, LSW has been trending pretty steadily down. Too many 18+ display sets instead of affordable playsets, too many sets that are egregiously overpriced, too much careless lack of attention to detail. There are still a few really good sets every year, but the overall picture kinda sucks right now.

[MAB]

2 hours ago, icm said:

That's the kind of unpopular opinion that is surprisingly popular (or surprisingly frequently repeated) in online spaces and never makes much sense. They should definitely think hard about what they actually want to do with the theme, but completely putting it on ice is a pretty bad idea. You acknowledge that it doesn't make business sense, so you know that. ... Yeah, LSW has been trending pretty steadily down. Too many 18+ display sets instead of affordable playsets, too many sets that are egregiously overpriced, too much careless lack of attention to detail. There are still a few really good sets every year, but the overall picture kinda sucks right now.

 

Yet those sets sell and the theme remains a best seller. LEGO will only change when the finance shows they are doing something wrong. 

They probably have thought hard about what they want to do with the theme and decided that more adult display sets are the way to go, with fewer cheap playsets than in the past. Just because some fans don't like that doesn't mean they haven't thought about it.

[Darth_Bane13]

11 hours ago, icm said:

That's the kind of unpopular opinion that is surprisingly popular (or surprisingly frequently repeated) in online spaces and never makes much sense. They should definitely think hard about what they actually want to do with the theme, but completely putting it on ice is a pretty bad idea. You acknowledge that it doesn't make business sense, so you know that. ... Yeah, LSW has been trending pretty steadily down. Too many 18+ display sets instead of affordable playsets, too many sets that are egregiously overpriced, too much careless lack of attention to detail. There are still a few really good sets every year, but the overall picture kinda sucks right now.

I'm just speaking from what I'd like to happen as a fan, not saying it's realistic or anything. For example it might not make business sense for Lego to bring back pirates or castle as a full theme but I still think it would be cool as a fan.

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

I'm just speaking from what I'd like to happen as a fan, not saying it's realistic or anything. For example it might not make business sense for Lego to bring back pirates or castle as a full theme but I still think it would be cool as a fan.

What do you think not having any new Star Wars sets or a reduced number of Star Wars sets for a couple of years would actually achieve? It would just mean that there is less choice for a Star Wars fan. It wouldn't make those sets any better. I dont see why that is cool.

[danth]

It's not always possible to predict the effects that any decision might have long term. 

If Lego didn't produce SW sets for one year, a lot of SW fans might realize they actually like non-SW Lego. Maybe they pick up some City sets (or, heaven forbid, non-licensed Space sets) out of desperation and realize that they like those sets, and like building things, and maybe it doesn't have to always be about Star Wars.

It's better for Lego to have Lego fans than just SW fans. 

37 minutes ago, MAB said:

What do you think not having any new Star Wars sets or a reduced number of Star Wars sets for a couple of years would actually achieve? It would just mean that there is less choice for a Star Wars fan. It wouldn't make those sets any better. I dont see why that is cool.

Lego wouldn't get rid of SW sets without replacing them with some kind of space sets. So there wouldn't be any less choice. 

[Darth_Bane13]

3 hours ago, MAB said:

What do you think not having any new Star Wars sets or a reduced number of Star Wars sets for a couple of years would actually achieve? It would just mean that there is less choice for a Star Wars fan. It wouldn't make those sets any better. I dont see why that is cool.

I can only speak for myself but personally it would make me a lot more excited for when the theme returned, I guess I just have LSW fatigue after collecting for so long. I would also hope they would change their design philosophy kind of like a reboot for the theme.

 

2 hours ago, danth said:

It's not always possible to predict the effects that any decision might have long term. 

If Lego didn't produce SW sets for one year, a lot of SW fans might realize they actually like non-SW Lego. Maybe they pick up some City sets (or, heaven forbid, non-licensed Space sets) out of desperation and realize that they like those sets, and like building things, and maybe it doesn't have to always be about Star Wars.

It's better for Lego to have Lego fans than just SW fans. 

Lego wouldn't get rid of SW sets without replacing them with some kind of space sets. So there wouldn't be any less choice. 

This brings up a lot of great points which I didn't mention.

[MAB]

19 minutes ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

I can only speak for myself but personally it would make me a lot more excited for when the theme returned, I guess I just have LSW fatigue after collecting for so long. I would also hope they would change their design philosophy kind of like a reboot for the theme.

If you want a break for 2 years then you can already skip buying for 2 years. It is not like if they skip two years there would suddenly be lots of new material to base new sets on. If they rebooted Star Wars, they would repeat what they have already done so the situation would be pretty similar to now. People with an old X-Wing set probably won't want a new X-Wing set whether it is next year or in 3 years. But new Lego SW fans would.

[SpacePolice89]

If a full lineup of Space sets were available in stores I believe they would sell equally good as the SW sets or even better. Considering that SW is older than Classic Space they should focus on 18+ SW sets and instead focus on new creative subthemes for Space.

[icm]

Unfortunately, the short shelf life of the Blacktron Renegade and the relegation of the Galaxy Explorer and the CS'24 sets to clearance aisles seems like a counterexample to that rosy picture.

[danth]

Just now, icm said:

Unfortunately, the short shelf life of the Blacktron Renegade and the relegation of the Galaxy Explorer and the CS'24 sets to clearance aisles seems like a counterexample to that rosy picture.

"I saw something on sale once so it must not have sold well"

Really tired of this lazy take. 

Go look at this sales list.

It's all Disney, SW, and other licensed sets. I guess those themes don't sell well. 

The new Renegade is a terrible set, not worthy of the original design. But that doesn't say anything about the popularity of classic themes. 

 

[icm]

Here's the secret: without inside sales data, it's ALL lazy takes to get tired of, including the one I was responding to.

"I'd buy the heck out of theme Y, therefore if they replaced theme X with theme Y it would sell like gangbusters" is just as lazy of a take.

And now we're back retreading the familiar SW-Space rivalry for the umpteenth time.

Edited July 17 by icm
wthout -> without

[Darth_Bane13]

1 hour ago, MAB said:

If you want a break for 2 years then you can already skip buying for 2 years. It is not like if they skip two years there would suddenly be lots of new material to base new sets on. If they rebooted Star Wars, they would repeat what they have already done so the situation would be pretty similar to now. People with an old X-Wing set probably won't want a new X-Wing set whether it is next year or in 3 years. But new Lego SW fans would.

Here's the thing though I'm not really excited for winter 2026 Star Wars but if they took 2026 and 2027 off and returned in 2028 the hype would be crazy, they would in fact have a new movie and shows to base sets off of. Sure I could not pay attention to LSW for 2 years but it's not quite the same, and the sets are unavoidable if I walk in a LEGO store. As I said my hope would be they would come back stronger and make better sets and figures.

[MAB]

16 minutes ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

Here's the thing though I'm not really excited for winter 2026 Star Wars but if they took 2026 and 2027 off and returned in 2028 the hype would be crazy, they would in fact have a new movie and shows to base sets off of. Sure I could not pay attention to LSW for 2 years but it's not quite the same, and the sets are unavoidable if I walk in a LEGO store. As I said my hope would be they would come back stronger and make better sets and figures.

That isn't really how they do Star Wars though. New material or TV series tend to get a few sets but the majority of the range is still based on old source material. They wouldn't come back stronger, they'd come back the same. If, that is, Disney haven't already switched Star Wars and their other franchises to Mega as LEGO dumped one of their flagship franchises.

 

What is wrong with the winter 2026 sets? Or to put it another way, what could they do in three years time that you would buy then that you wouldn't buy next year. If what you would buy is based only on new material then it suggests you wouldn’t buy anything for two years anyways so you can sit out while other fans, especially new fans, can buy what they missed in all the tears you have been collecting.  

Edited July 17 by MAB

[icm]

17 minutes ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

Here's the thing though I'm not really excited for winter 2026 Star Wars but if they took 2026 and 2027 off and returned in 2028 the hype would be crazy

Would the hype be crazy? This sounds to me like a classic case of "the grass is greener on the other side"-type thinking, or spinning castles in the air. It's easy to talk about a hypothetical scenario that would be so great and so exciting, but the reality usually is that when our dreams come true they're ... pretty mundane, or worse, they don't turn out like we want them to. Remember how quickly the hype for the Prequel Trilogy turned to hate when it didn't meet people's expectations! Ditto for the Sequel Trilogy!

Chances are, any hypothetical rebooted Lego Star Wars theme after a two-year hiatus would start strong for a year or two (Lego seems to give new themes higher budgets in their first year or two), then quickly be more remakes and overpriced sets. You would wonder, why did they make this ship instead of that one, why did they price it this high instead of this much lower, what even is this other character or vehicle from new media that I haven't seen yet?

When Pirates took six years off between 2009 and 2015 (or four years off between 2011 and 2015, if you count PotC), the hype was there for a new Pirates theme but the Lego community found the sets disappointing and they were more or less a flop.

When Bionicle took five years off between 2010 and 2015 (with Hero Factory taking its place in between), the hype was strong for its return, but G2 Bionicle was a major flop and is not remembered fondly.

Just taking time off between release years to build hype is far from a surefire move to bring back excitement for a fresh start to a newly sustainable theme.

[DonQuixote]

2 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

If a full lineup of Space sets were available in stores I believe they would sell equally good as the SW sets or even better. Considering that SW is older than Classic Space they should focus on 18+ SW sets and instead focus on new creative subthemes for Space.

I would like to see a Space police 1 remake set 

[icm]

Just now, DonQuixote said:

I would like to see a Space police 1 remake set 

The set from Space Police 1 that I'd most like to see a remake of is the Spy-Trak 1 rover (6895). Imagine a Spy-Trak 1 remake and a Battrax remake (6941) playing cat-and-mouse or spy-vs-spy in the forbidding extraterrestrial terrain of the living room :)