TwistLaw Posted July 7, 2015 I remember Greg said this, but I can't find the source. Do any of you know it? Also, do any of you know more about this? Like, did the Bohrok-Kal really sell that bad? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bigger Fish Posted July 7, 2015 As much as I liked the Kal, they were pretty bad rehashes of the Bohrok from the year before that. Plus, the whole Nuva Symbol arc was pretty much pointless filler that had little to no effect on the Bionicle story as a whole. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GK733 Posted July 7, 2015 As much as I liked the Kal, they were pretty bad rehashes of the Bohrok from the year before that. Plus, the whole Nuva Symbol arc was pretty much pointless filler that had little to no effect on the Bionicle story as a whole. Kal were the most forgettable sets, when majority talks about Bionicle they usually mention only years 2001-2003, sometimes 2004 and especially bohrok but it's like they had no idea the Kal even existed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Walter Maugham Posted July 8, 2015 I don't know anything about that quote, but the Rahkshi were the first Bionicle sets that really got my attention. And got me into the whole Bionicle craze. I still really like them today even. IMO, their design held up quite well compared the the whole first generation of Bionicle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Kumquat Alchemist Posted July 8, 2015 Though a rather rushed and ill-colored mess of sets, the Kal I will always remember for providing some of the best Bohrok shields, and a plentiful supply of silver socket connectors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bbrink1996 Posted July 8, 2015 The Bohrok Kal are among of my favorite Bionicle sets although I can see why/if they sold bad since we had just gotten the normal Bohroks and in build they are basically the same. But I must admit, the Rahkshi were the sets that really got me into Bionicle. I had Toa, Rahi, Bohrok sets before that but when the Rahkshi came out I went full speed into Bionicle. So yeah, I can see truth in that quote even though I don't know where it came from. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frozen Assasin Posted July 10, 2015 (edited) I highly doubt that this was really the case. However, as we have seen in the past, the fact that they have a plan for the future storyline doesn't yet mean that the series won't be cancelled. For me, the Bohrok-Kal were my very first Bionicle, and man, I adored them. They were motherfracking briliant. Edited July 10, 2015 by Frozen Assasin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lyichir Posted July 10, 2015 This actually wouldn't surprise me. 2003 was the year Lego almost went bankrupt due to their reliance on licensed themes like Star Wars, Harry Potter, and Spider-Man (none of which had a movie that year to bolster sales). Bionicle accounted for more than 100% of Lego's net profits that year. I don't know any firm facts about how successful or unsuccessful the Kal were, but I do know that they were a last-minute stopgap to keep Bionicle sets on shelves during its absolute peak in late 2002 and early 2003. So it's not hard to believe that if not for the Rahkshi (and their promotion via the highly successful Mask of Light movie), there might not have been a 2004, not just for Bionicle but also for Lego in general. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mandate Posted July 11, 2015 Bionicle accounted for more than 100% of Lego's net profits that year. (emphasis added) How could BIONICLE have accounted for more than 100% (or all of) LEGO's net profits? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DraikNova Posted July 11, 2015 If it counteracted the losses caused by some other themes, it could easily have accounted for more than 100% of LEGO's net profits. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vexorian Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) The Bohrok Kal were really terrible. It was bad enough all Bohrok were exactly the same, but by the time the Kal appeared it was almost insulting to have the same 6 repeated sets repeated once more. The Rahkshi weren't much better, but at least they were a new design. I think though that what caused the sales improvement was the Makuta and Takanuva plot and the Movie. Edited July 11, 2015 by vexorian Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Refy L.S. Posted July 12, 2015 Kal were the most forgettable sets, when majority talks about Bionicle they usually mention only years 2001-2003, sometimes 2004 and especially bohrok but it's like they had no idea the Kal even existed. They barely even did exist where I was, could only find 2 of them on one occasion. Didn't get any krana packs for them either. I recall some other places also had a limited supply of the Kal too, with select colors absent. I wonder why? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aanchir Posted July 12, 2015 (edited) If it counteracted the losses caused by some other themes, it could easily have accounted for more than 100% of LEGO's net profits. You hit the nail on the head. Bionicle was more profitable than the company as a whole because the company, at that time, was not very profitable at all, and pretty much all other themes were operating at a loss. Source: Brick by Brick, p155. Edited July 12, 2015 by Aanchir Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
