Death of Lego Investing? Rerelease of Taj Mahal

[Doom2099]

I was completely shocked today to see that the Taj Mahal is being rereleased!  I wonder if I'm the only one that thinks this can potentially destroy what collectors and investors have been doing for the last decade plus.

The new UCS Millenium Falcon shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone.  Nice round number for the anniversary year.  The Falcon is popular to an expanded audience thanks to Episode VII. Plus Lego Star Wars fans know everything will eventually get a newer better version eventually.  But at least in this case, there's lots of new pieces, new characters, EP V minifigs, etc. The only people who would complain about this set are people who bought it used for $2500 and were hoping to flip it for more than $5000.  But they should have seen the new version coming as an inevitability.

However, the Taj Mahal just seems like a huge attack by Lego on anyone hoarding larger sets for the last decade.  It's been amazing to watch no matter how many times people talk about resale prices and said "it's a bubble, prices will drop," they never really did.  If you bought big sets, sat on them for five years or so, you could make a lot of money flipping retired modulars, and many many more.

Now Lego is saying, remember our biggest set ever?  We're rereleasing it now.  For only $300!  This isn't a set aimed at people who wish they collected all the Modulars, or Super Hero fans who want old Batman or other rare minifigs, or Winter Village collectors, it's really a one off.  Lego is plainly showing they can rerelease anything now. And it will be amazing to watch the prices ($1200 used / $1600 new USD) on Bricklink drop like a stone.

But of course, what's next? Cafe Corner? Green Grocer? Statue of Liberty? The carousel dodged a bullet by getting a new version, but even then this makes the old one less unique then before. But can you imagine the first three modulars coming out again at regular retail prices?

We've seen this before, though long ago. Early in the Millennium, ebay and the new craze of buying online from people far away demonstrated prices going crazy. Lego responded with the Legends line, and sets like the Metroliner and Club Car which were selling for big money fell back to earth.  Of course now the originals and Legends versions both still sell for a fortune. But Lego has just shown they can turn on the rerelease machine anytime now. Legends died a relative quick death thanks to not as much interest as hoped, but would that happen with Cafe Corner and Green Grocer? Probably not. Then Lego will rerelease more and more, killing off interest in their biggest old sets one by one.

Basically, anyone sitting on large unopened sets from the last 10 years should be worried I think. Lego has decided to say investors resale value is not important, and just the threat of a possible rerelease for any set can start sending prices down across the board.

Any thoughts? What do you think will get rereleased next? What is immune besides Monorail? Is Lego doing the right thing for new fans, and spiting old ones? Is Lego no longer going to outperform gold?

[antp]

That harms only those that want to make a profit.

For true AFOLs it is a good thing :p

As those that buy and store just for reselling later tend to raise prices, at the expense of AFOLs

[MAB]

It won't really affect collectors but will obviously affect investors. They have just lost $2000+ that they could have got last week. I feel sorry for the buyers that have got one shipping to them right now - or maybe for the sellers when the buyers refuse it and want a refund.

I doubt many people would buy a secondary market Eiffel Tower now.

It looks like the money will now be in licensed sets where the license is likely to lapse - so things like LOTR where they are unlikely to want the license again just to re-release old sets.

[ReplicaOfLife]

Yep.

You talk about this as if it's a bad thing. But the only ones getting hurt, as you said, are those that hog sets to sell them later at a highly inflated price.

I know Lego has been viewed as an investment opportunity by many. But that's their bad luck. I personally absolutely don't care at all if someone who planned to sell an original, mint in sealed box Taj Mahal for an outlandish sum got screwed over by this. On the contrary! I applaud Lego. As I said in the modular buildings discussion thread: While I generally prefer new sets, I'd much rather see Lego getting more money out of their own old designs then some scalpers, or even worse (L***n...). Why? Simple: More money for Lego means they'll be able to continue to create and release new exciting sets. More money for some scalper does not. In fact, them hoarding rare sets makes it harder for real fans to get those sets.

Edited October 30, 2017 by RogerSmith

[MAB]

32 minutes ago, Doom2099 said:

However, the Taj Mahal just seems like a huge attack by Lego on anyone hoarding larger sets for the last decade. 

 

It is probably more aimed at Lepin than resellers. How many will buy the Lepin one now (even if it is 50-60% of the RRP) if they can get a genuine Lego one? They probably know they are not going to win the court case, so have taken action this way.

2 minutes ago, RogerSmith said:

Simple: More money for Lego means they'll be able to continue to create and release new exciting sets. More money for some scalper does not. In fact, them hoarding rare sets makes it harder for real fans to get those sets.

 

I doubt it is that simple. They are probably going to lose sales of bigger sets to resellers. That is not necessarily a good thing for "real fans". It could well be that LEGO doesn't make as many sets as they would if resellers were actively buying. If the sets don't exist it is harder for "real fans" to get hold of them than if resellers are selling them (albeit at a marked up price). If all the produced sets go into the hands of collectors / builders / "real fans", then future "real fans" have no chance of getting hold of them once they are retired from retail.

[Doom2099]

19 minutes ago, RogerSmith said:

You talk about this as if it's a bad thing. But the only ones getting hurt, as you said, are those that hog sets to sell them later at a highly inflated price.

No, personally, I think this is a great thing! I love picking up old stuff I missed. I got all the Legends at the time except for the USS Constitution. Now for me and others, prices on Bricklink are sure to go down across the board!

However, if you were an investor, it's just a huge game changer. Everything on your shelf is now a potential liability, taking up space for 5+ years, and then suddenly Lego announces a rerelease and your dreams are shot. Every buyer will always wonder if and when they should pull the trigger on every purchase, and overthinking can become a big issue, with regret from buyers and sellers on both sides depending on timing.

Lego could qualify things by creating a line again for rereleases, or giving some indication of what else could come out. Otherwise, besides licensed stuff as mentioned, anything goes!

I would really like to see all the early Modulars rereleased, but perhaps in a different main color. Then you can differentiate the new and the old, and new fans can still build up a decade of modular goodness for regular retail. It's an exciting time!

[koalayummies]

As a true builder I hope they re-release everything. Lego is a for-profit company that is in the business of making money, if there is a demand and profit margin they should absolutely re-release old sets and not give any thought to the scalpers. Lego is about building. Its a children's building toy not financial investment assets and liability is part of financial investing, no tears shed for the scalpers. 

And yet:

16 minutes ago, Doom2099 said:

However, if you were an investor, it's just a huge game changer. Everything on your shelf is now a potential liability, taking up space for 5+ years, and then suddenly Lego announces a rerelease and your dreams are shot.

You still seem sympathetic towards the scalpers. Who cares about their "dreams" and shelf space? Seriously? 

Here's the other side.

Someone was saving up for those sets while they were still available, someone that couldn't afford them all at once like the scalpers can. Then Lego announces the retirement of that set that, that unlucky Lego builder never saved up enough to get it while all the scalpers at the very moment of 'retiring soon' announcement bought up as many as they could, swallowing, consuming and hoarding them all in hopes of turning a profit off of someone else who just wanted to build. Disgusting. I hope they re-release everything and bring the secondary slimy scalper market down on all of their heads. 

[Littleworlds]

Awesome to hear indeed and hopefully more re-releases will follow!  I'm basically in favour of everything that ruins the profit-greedy speculation aftermarket. 

A pity its not so easy with licensed sets though.

[antp]

I'm hoping for a re-release of the "sand green parts pack", aka "statue of liberty", now that Lego seems to use that color in many sets :)

[Doom2099]

20 minutes ago, koalayummies said:

You still seem sympathetic towards the scalpers. Who cares about their "dreams" and shelf space? Seriously?

Being aware of someone's side is not the same as being sympathetic to their side.  I would like Lego to rerelease 6399 Airport Shuttle right now for $150.  But since I won't get every set I want rereleased, I'm hoping the prices for used sets on Bricklink all fall across the board, making everything more affordable for everyone. Buyers win, and sellers lose, as of today.

However, I will always have to wonder, should I buy a Modular Fire Brigade now while the price hasn't gone to CC or GG prices?  Or should I hope for Lego to resell some Modulars, and scoop it up directly from Lego or from a disappointed investor? Guesswork is now a part of the game.

If someone can remind me, what rereleases has Lego done since 2002? A winter village set (with various excuses and changes), and the CMF Bumble Bee? Lego operating one way for 15 years, and then suddenly dropping the Taj Mahal is a huge move on their part.

[Robianco]

I think they've rereleased sets before... I can't place what it was but I seem to remember this happening.

Sets will be updated such as the Falcon (and possibly the next UCS set) and we've already had the Snowspeeder and the Death Star in the Star Wars line.

There's nothing to stop them doing a rerelease of most of the early moduiars. It'll certainly keep the scalpers on their toes.

[RetroInferno]

There's a huge difference between a scalper and a reseller. The scalper is the guy that will hoard as many of a set he can buy on release to create fake rarity and demanding more than retail. Look at the NES classic edition.

The common reseller will try their hardest to find sets as cheap as they can find, ususally when it's on it's way to retire, then demanding premium when it's officially out. 

The re-release of the Taj Mahal is weird; it was extremly rare and produced in small quantity, and doesn't catter to a large audience, bibbest problem of all they did not re-designed it. I'm glad for the 50 people who's gonna buy an outdated lego model that could have benefited from all the new pieces Lego has now, but to me it looks like a middle finger to resellers more than anything. ( A Taj Mahal was sold for 3000$ a few days ago )

I wouldn't have any problem with the set if they had chosen to redesign it, but Lego seems to be in quite the panick mode of firing employees and making a quick buck with these lazy re-releases. 

It's hurting the brand in the long term. And no I'm not defending resellers either, it's just less scummy than scalping. 

Edited October 30, 2017 by RetroInferno

[DeanLearner]

Sets like the original UCS MF and Taj Mahal were outliers in terms of the magnitude of price inflation. The people benefitting the most up to now will have been the scalpers, only drawn into Lego for the promise of a return on such “headline” sets, then artificially jacking-up the price (most notably on eBay) and creating the perception of some enormous demand. I’d be curious to know how many of these sets did ever sell at those >$2000 etc prices that you see in articles etc.

Either way, it can only be a good thing that their bubbles have burst. Lego will remain a moderately good investment for the most part (economics and production scales mean Lego will only ever rerelease sets in exceptional circumstances), and I doubt whether loss of potential profits from MF or TM will harm the vast majority, of BrickLink/BrickOwl sellers offering a great service to the community.

[AFOLguy1970]

The purpose of Lego is not to be an investment.  It is a toy for most, and a collector's item for some.  The vast majority who buy Lego want to enjoy it, not to try and make a buck off of it.  I think the rerelease is a good thing.  The Taj Mahal is an architectural masterpiece well known throughout the world.  The set was released back in 2008.  Much of the target audience was either not old enough nor were they out of their dark ages at that time.  Others probably could not afford it back then, but might be in a better position to get one this time.  Just because Lego releases something should not mean that it cannot ever be released again.  In time, another generation will come along, and I am sure that places like the Taj Mahal will be as popular as it ever was.  The same can be said for Statue of Liberty, Eiffel Tower, and other world landmarks.  

[ReplicaOfLife]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

It is probably more aimed at Lepin than resellers. How many will buy the Lepin one now (even if it is 50-60% of the RRP) if they can get a genuine Lego one? They probably know they are not going to win the court case, so have taken action this way.

I doubt it is that simple. They are probably going to lose sales of bigger sets to resellers. That is not necessarily a good thing for "real fans". It could well be that LEGO doesn't make as many sets as they would if resellers were actively buying. If the sets don't exist it is harder for "real fans" to get hold of them than if resellers are selling them (albeit at a marked up price). If all the produced sets go into the hands of collectors / builders / "real fans", then future "real fans" have no chance of getting hold of them once they are retired from retail.

Yep, I also think that part of the reasoning behind this is L***n bootlegging those rare and sought-after sets. And who knows, it might at least give the people that would love to buy the original thing, but don't have a four-digit sum of money to spare some pause before pulling the trigger on that chinese crap.

 

As for Lego losing sales to resellers, well, yeah, that might happen, but this is way too hypothetical for my taste, especially as we don't have any actual numbers to support either claim. 
I just think that in this case and similar ones, it is better for us fans to have the opportunity to buy these sets agaim directly from Lego instead of having to rely on after-market resales at higher prices. And as long as there are collectors, there will be people stopping collecting and putting their collection up for sale. Iconic sets will propably be more expensive after they retired for a long, long time, but that's just the way it is. Lego can't keep all the thousands of sets they ever made in stock/production. So if they occasionally re-release an old set that has incredibly high-demand, that helps all those that want to have it.

And that's a good thing.

Edited October 30, 2017 by RogerSmith

[koalayummies]

1 hour ago, Doom2099 said:

Being aware of someone's side is not the same as being sympathetic to their side.  I would like Lego to rerelease 6399 Airport Shuttle right now for $150.  But since I won't get every set I want rereleased, I'm hoping the prices for used sets on Bricklink all fall across the board, making everything more affordable for everyone. Buyers win, and sellers lose, as of today.

However, I will always have to wonder, should I buy a Modular Fire Brigade now while the price hasn't gone to CC or GG prices?  Or should I hope for Lego to resell some Modulars, and scoop it up directly from Lego or from a disappointed investor? Guesswork is now a part of the game.

If someone can remind me, what rereleases has Lego done since 2002? A winter village set (with various excuses and changes), and the CMF Bumble Bee? Lego operating one way for 15 years, and then suddenly dropping the Taj Mahal is a huge move on their part.

Ok thats a more clear stance. As is evident from the responses the 'reselling'/scalping of Lego for more than MSRP is a topic that generates a lot of intensity. I stand with you in the desire for more affordability. 

Regarding Fire Brigade another option to consider that some have done; playing around with the design with the free and fully-built Lego Digital Designer file for Fire Brigade and doing some minor part or color changes as a number of modular building enthusiasts have been able to piece-together and build the retired sets very affordably this way. Some of the pieces in the modular line are in such high demand that a minor color or part change can dramatically reduce the cost. A simple change from Sand Green to Olive Green and changing the color of the side and rear walls for Green Grocer for example maintains the look of the building and lowers the cost while also creating a completely one-off personal version. 

 

3 hours ago, MAB said:

It is probably more aimed at Lepin than resellers. How many will buy the Lepin one now (even if it is 50-60% of the RRP) if they can get a genuine Lego one? They probably know they are not going to win the court case, so have taken action this way.

Thats a great point about taking on the knockoffs. Even if its not and Lego is just releasing it again for whatever reason, it is a good thing for Lego and Lego builders.

[antp]

2 hours ago, RetroInferno said:

The re-release of the Taj Mahal is weird; it was extremly rare and produced in small quantity, and doesn't catter to a large audience, bibbest problem of all they did not re-designed it.

Possibly all of its elements (part+color) are still in production, so the cost of producing it again is nearly null (just reprinting the manual and the box, and package the right parts)

Maybe they produced too many of some white parts and wanted to get rid of the stock? :D

[bonox]

3 hours ago, AFOLguy1970 said:

The purpose of Lego is not to be an investment.

This is a very interesting observation. One might well postulate that there is nothing in the world that has the purpose of an investment - that's a decision people make based on many factors. Simple example - what's the purpose of Gold? It has far more benefit to society as a conducting (electrical and thermal) or chemically inert metal than anything else, however most of it gets caught up in bling and state level bank reserves.

Even money doesn't satisfy that criteria - it's made to facilitate the exchange of things and services between people. It's not made to stuff in your matress and horde. Yet somehow LEGO is fundamentally different? LEGO is an item with no intrinsic value. What value you assign to it as fun is surely no better or worse that the value some else assigns to it by storing it as an investment. And extending that a little, storing one on the shelf to sell and storing one for your children in 10 years time have quite different outcomes for the person storing it, but the effect on others (reduced supply) is still the same.

Edited October 30, 2017 by bonox

[JGW3000]

Maybe we are looking at a new trend, with large sets updated (MF) or re-released (Taj) every 10 years?  This would be great news for most.   

[dr_spock]

LEGO tried reissuing sets under the LEGEND line back in the 2000s and it didn't work out too well for them it seemed. Maybe market conditions are different now.  We'll see. 

Any type of investment comes with risks.  Past performance do not guarantee future results.

 

[Cubfan78]

7 hours ago, Doom2099 said:

Being aware of someone's side is not the same as being sympathetic to their side.  I would like Lego to rerelease 6399 Airport Shuttle right now for $150.  But since I won't get every set I want rereleased, I'm hoping the prices for used sets on Bricklink all fall across the board, making everything more affordable for everyone. Buyers win, and sellers lose, as of today.

However, I will always have to wonder, should I buy a Modular Fire Brigade now while the price hasn't gone to CC or GG prices?  Or should I hope for Lego to resell some Modulars, and scoop it up directly from Lego or from a disappointed investor? Guesswork is now a part of the game.

If someone can remind me, what rereleases has Lego done since 2002? A winter village set (with various excuses and changes), and the CMF Bumble Bee? Lego operating one way for 15 years, and then suddenly dropping the Taj Mahal is a huge move on their part.

 

I would be surprised to see a remake of FB, however, I would not be surprised to see a remake of both CC and GG. I think the remakes are part of a short-term strategy to mitigate the risk of declining sales and buy themselves some time to figure out their long-term solution. 

[Stash2Sixx]

When I worked in the stores, Taj Mahal was the most frequently asked for set that had been retired.  I think this is a trial by TLG to see if the demand from the Lepin sets really is as big a threat as people say it is.  LEGO may not be designed as an investment, but when the company intentionally produces less than the market demands and continues to make special 'limited' edition items which only cause people to come out of their holes to buy up all that they can (first hand experience here in a North American LBR store), it becomes just that.  Yes, it's a toy, but people will do whatever they choose to do.

For the time being, I'm going to sit back and see what happens; let's see who goes flying off the deep end into a frenzy!

[ShaydDeGrai]

In the interests of full disclosure I must admit I've got a closetful of decade+ old kits, but that's because I haven't gotten to them yet, not because I plan on scalping them.  Probably my oldest kits in the pile are two copies of the 3739 Blacksmith Shop from 2002 at this point.  I consider this a backlog, not an investment.

In the past couple of years I've also been picking up various sets that I think would be fun to do with my daughter (but I'd be unlikely to buy just for myself).  Right now, she's too young (but loves her Duplo) and I generally assume that the kits I'm choosing today will be discontinued by the time she's old enough to appreciate them. 

I concur with the majority here, the biggest losers in the re-issue game are the "investors"/scalpers and it's hard for me to have much sympathy for them (i'm looking at _you_ bricklink guy who wanted me to pay 400 euros for a "mint in box" 8880 Supercar - I could download the instructions and bricklink the parts for a dozen cars at that price).

Reissuing certain kits can be a great way to give a new generation access to things they never had the chance to buy and Older-than-Dirt fans a chance to recapture that special set that came out during their dark age, or the year their first child was born, or the year they lost their job and had to cut back, etc. (sigh, if only I had an 8880 Supercar....)

As for the Taj Mahal in particular, I think the biggest downside for me personally is that I already own (and have built) one.  I suppose it saves me some money in my Lego budget, but I wish they'd come up with a NEW high end Creator Expert kit  for those of us who got the Taj the first time 'round.  I'd like a new modular, or a new landmark series kit on the scale of the Taj or the Sydney opera house, or even a new sculpture (The Thinker? Winged Victory? David?) to keep my Statue of Liberty company but with the reissue of the Taj this week, it seems unlikely they'll come out with something to compete with it any time soon.  Oh well...

[ElectroDiva]

Anything which helps deflate the frankly ridiculous prices out there for some of the old iconic sets is a very good thing in my book.

 

I don't normally indulge in schadenfreude - but if some hard core scalpers and knock off merchants like Lepin get caught out as a result - tough!

 

Now don't get me wrong- I think a healthy resale market is a very useful thing for AFOLs and I personally don't mind paying reasonable mark ups for sets I missed out on but when you are talking many multiples of the original sale price, it's just pure greed

[Trekkie99]

18 hours ago, Littleworlds said:

Awesome to hear indeed and hopefully more re-releases will follow!  I'm basically in favour of everything that ruins the profit-greedy speculation aftermarket. 

A pity its not so easy with licensed sets though.

  My sentiments exactly!