Is LEGO getting to inaffordable for kids?

[TeriXeri]

Some themes are definately getting horrible price/volume ratios, especially those recent Frozen II sets.

[MAB]

Just now, TeriXeri said:

Some themes are definately getting horrible price/volume ratios, especially those recent Frozen II sets.

Yes, the play value of the two Arendelle sets seems to be very similar, but their pricing has changed significantly.

2016:

477 parts / £55 / $60

 

2019:

521 parts / £75 / $80

 

 

[coinoperator]

4 minutes ago, TeriXeri said:

Frozen

I suppose Disney wants too see their share.

[TeriXeri]

34 minutes ago, coinoperator said:

I suppose Disney wants too see their share.

Certainly, also for Star Wars, biggest example being (2018) 75203: Hoth Medical Chamber 255 parts €50 in NL.

 

Back to the Frozen II examples, it's not just currency dependant but also country. (Germany generally being lower)

41166: Elsa and the Reindeer Carriage - 116 parts €35 in NL

41164: Enchanted Tree House - 302 parts €60 in NL 

41167: Arendelle Castle - 521 parts €90 in NL (€100 in Finland)

 

But it's not just Disney, Harry Potter has had it's (regional) price hikes as well :

75951: Grindelwald's Escape (2017) 132 parts €30 in NL ($20 in US)

Meanwhile opposite regional price differences exist where City is more expensive in the US.

 

This is not meant as a complaint, as I personally don't collect those sets/themes, more as observation.

Edited October 7, 2019 by TeriXeri

[MAB]

1 hour ago, TeriXeri said:

41166: Elsa and the Reindeer Carriage - 116 parts €35 in NL

 

Yeah, even at the cheaper 30 Eur and £25, I just cannot see how they get that price. Sure it has two molded animals, but even so. I just cannot see that set selling very well at the RRP. Even £15 seems expensive for what you get and that would be 40% off.

But no doubt lots of little girls will like the movie and will want some toys from it. I haven't looked into prices for other Frozen 2 toys yet. I'm hoping to get my 8yo daughter through Christmas without too much interest in it.

[Peppermint_M]

5 hours ago, MAB said:

I'm hoping to get my 8yo daughter through Christmas without too much interest in it.

That ain't ever going to happen man. Unless you can get her into Power Rangers or something,   8 Year old girls are 100% a Frozen target and they flock to it like moths to a flame.

Otherwise, try a media blackout and keeping her off school  

On thread: A lot of the high prices are on the licensed themes and everyone wants their share of the profit pie.  But LEGO does add more play value than other toys, as you can easily combine it with cheaper sets to expand on a collection.

[Gomek]

I was saying in another thread how I don't think my parents would have gotten me a set as large as the ones coming out today. And then I started looking at some of the 1980's sets, and doing an inflation mark-up on an website calculator. I'm not entirely sure I would pay those prices for those sets now.

For instance, looking at Main Street which was one of my favorite sets growing up (and $40 USD at the time), I don't think that should sell for $124 2019 US dollars. So maybe while the sets are getting larger, I'm not sure the value is decreasing.

 

[meliander]

13 hours ago, MAB said:

Yes, the play value of the two Arendelle sets seems to be very similar, but their pricing has changed significantly.

I'm not defending the increased price (infact, the whole line of frozen 2 sets is overpriced of course), but comparing these 2 is not a straightforward comparison. You need to adjust for inflation between 2015 and 2019. Also there 3 figures (mini-dolls) instead of 2. We know that the number of figures, be that dolls or minifigs, is something that Lego considers in their pricing. The amount of side builds is also higher, there is even a boat there, which I think adds to the playability factor. The number of pieces is higher, too. All these factors should account for the price increase, but not a $20 increase. Actually, if this set was priced at $60 it would be an awesome deal. But it's difficult to get that price per part ratio with licensed stuff (especially for the franchise as big as Frozen or Star Wars for that matter).

[Lego David]

A concern I have is how lines like Hidden Side's smallest set is 20$. In my opinion, a 20$ set should be a middle sized set, not the smallest set. The smaller sets should always be 15$ or less. 

[MAB]

4 hours ago, meliander said:

I'm not defending the increased price (infact, the whole line of frozen 2 sets is overpriced of course), but comparing these 2 is not a straightforward comparison. You need to adjust for inflation between 2015 and 2019. Also there 3 figures (mini-dolls) instead of 2. We know that the number of figures, be that dolls or minifigs, is something that Lego considers in their pricing. The amount of side builds is also higher, there is even a boat there, which I think adds to the playability factor. The number of pieces is higher, too. All these factors should account for the price increase, but not a $20 increase. Actually, if this set was priced at $60 it would be an awesome deal. But it's difficult to get that price per part ratio with licensed stuff (especially for the franchise as big as Frozen or Star Wars for that matter).

Inflation has run at what, about 5-6% in total over the past four years. This one has three characters, the last one had three characters - including Olaf, as he has just as much play value as Kristoff. The boat, maybe $2 worth.

I think the cost of this compared to the last line of Frozen sets has started to be out of control. For parents, not for kids.

No doubt these prices will be paid by some over the first Christmas period, but presumably these sets will be around for the following year and I expect to see significant discounts. I was able to buy the last Arendelle castle at 50% RRP, so it could well be time to sell those on, as they will look good value compared to the new one.

11 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

That ain't ever going to happen man. Unless you can get her into Power Rangers or something,   8 Year old girls are 100% a Frozen target and they flock to it like moths to a flame.

There will be other Frozen 2 toys - it will be interesting to see if they are priced so high too. And she already has all the minidoll characters from the last one, plus the minifigure versions of Anna and Elsa.

[timemail]

In my experience Lego is more affordable for kids than it used to be. I have a look back at what my parents bought me for birthdays and Christmas and it is similar to the small sets these days. As a kid I could never afford a Lego set and would only get them as presents. Although back in my day pocket money was minimal - it seems to me kids get a lot more spending money than they used to (and money as a gift which would have never happened when I was a kid).

But with a lot of questions like this it is quite subjective. It really depends on the circumstances of the kids and the parents.

[ShaydDeGrai]

I don't really think you can look at these things in isolation and make an absolute judgement about "Lego-then" v. "Lego-now" even with simple adjustments for inflation.

I grew up Lego poor.  Sets were rare and precious gifts and even then, they were almost always the lowest-end of the line or used thrift store finds.  I think I was in my early teens before I got a MISB set that retailed for more than $20 US.  I _did_ have lots of other toys and comic books and art supplies, in no small part because, by comparison, those things were cheaper than Lego and my folks could get me a lot more variety of things to play with for the price of a single lego kit.  Now I would have _liked_ to have more Lego growing up, but even I recognized that for the price of one $10 lego kit I could get a half dozen comic books, a good sized pack of crayons, a couple action figures and a candy bar or two.

Now I'm the dad looking to buy things for my child (or perhaps more often, trying to get my child out of the toy store without either buying a load of crap or risking a public meltdown) and, by comparison, I'm not seeing a lot of cheaper, quality alternatives to entry level sets.  When I was a kid, comic books were twice as thick and proudly advertised "Still only 35 cents!" now they are on glossier paper and sell for 8-12 dollars per issue.  Action figures that I used to get for $1.98 (I know, because I still have a couple in original packaging)  are now $12 (and all look like they OD'ed on steroids).  What used to be a $2 pack of crayons is now $14.50 if you get it on sale.  A plastic model car kit (formerly $3-4) now sells for $20-25 (paint and glue extra).  So when entry level lego kits effectively double their price over the same period of time, I actually think it still makes them a better buy than when I was growing up.

Now I'm only talking about the low end kits here because, to be frank, my folks were never in a position to spend $100+ on a toy (Lego or otherwise) and even today, your average kid is not going to find a UCS Star Destroyer under the tree this Christmas.  The high-end of the line are luxury items and we should just accept that and recognize that those kits aren't accessible to a lot of adults either.

I'll also admit that I'm biased based on where I live.  There is one MSRP for Lego across the US but the buying power of the US dollar (and household income) varies widely by region.  Where _I_ live, it costs $10-15 dollars to buy a quick, unsatisfying (probably unhealthy) lunch.  Head to some places in the mid-west and that same $15 will buy you a steak dinner and a cocktail.  I have a coworker in Wyoming who recently bought a house for less than what I pay in a single year in real estate taxes on my place.  So when _I_ look at a $30 kit, see the price and think "that's pretty cheap, just what I'd spend for parking if I drove to the office one day this week" whereas someone in Nebraska might look at the same $30 asking price and think "That's ridiculous! I could fill a bag of groceries for that!"  

It's all relative.  

[The Brick Boss]

@ShaydDeGrai LOL! I was made fun of when I was in grade school. Authentic Lego was a treat. Up until I was 6, all we could afford were those low quality bricks called Mega Blocks. It was only rich and middle class kids who got real Lego. It wasn't until my dad got a better job and we moved to a better neighborhood that we were able to afford real Lego for my birthday. 

Point being: I finally met another one. 

Edited October 8, 2019 by pooda

[kelceycoe]

Wow! It's great to hear from the people who weren't given high-priced sets grow up and afford them for their children or themselves.

I was spoiled. Between alliwance and gifts, I always had all the smaller sets by my birthday. For Christmas the bigger sets and money I got was used to complete each theme.

I remember being 6 and getting the Black Seas Barracuda my birthday. That Christmas or next it was the Island and Fort Legorado. Plus a robin hood set. Until I met kids at school I thought that was normal for those of us who collected Lego.

I grew up in the Midwest. The idea of collecting Lego was absurd and counter-productive to the Midwestern ways of giving hotwheels cars or Tonka trucks to boys or even guns. And cooking sets, baby dolls, or barbies. In other words, toys were used as a means to teach children how to behave in a traditional manner and I was often teased for collecting Lego sets. Lego sets, at that time, couldn't teach me to live in the real world and work at plants of fix cars, only to have an imagination, which doesn't get you anywhere in the Midwest.

[The Brick Boss]

On 10/8/2019 at 3:40 PM, kelceycoe said:

Wow! It's great to hear from the people who weren't given high-priced sets grow up and afford them for their children or themselves.

I was spoiled. Between alliwance and gifts, I always had all the smaller sets by my birthday. For Christmas the bigger sets and money I got was used to complete each theme.

Tbh, I didn't really own my first REAL Lego sets until I was 8. My first set was the 6434 Roadside Repair. Then I got rid of my Mega Blocks. I became more of an avid town collector when I turned 10. I remember getting 3 buildings for my 10th birthday; 6336 Police Station, 6472-1 Gas N Wash Express and the 10036 Pizza to Go. 

Edited October 11, 2019 by pooda

[knotian]

Make sure you really consider not only inflation but general price increases. 1964 2 hamburgers, two fries, two drinks - less than $1. When I picked up my wife from work - if we had a buck--we ate out.

[The Brick Boss]

I think another question is....are kids getting tired of Lego. 

[ShaydDeGrai]

15 hours ago, pooda said:

I think another question is....are kids getting tired of Lego. 

Well, I think for some this is a perpetual condition.  Every toy company has to face the reality that most of their customer base will outgrow them over time and that, to survive, they need to attract new kids to the brand on an ongoing basis.

Historically, I feel TLG has done a pretty good job drawing in "the next wave" of Lego fans.  While I haven't seen Primo/Lego Baby bricks around for about 15 years, Duplo is still going strong and acting a gateway to Lego Juniors/4+ and the full line of Lego System products we all know and love.  There are decent, interesting and reasonably priced kits available to allow kids to "discover" Lego at any age range.  Certainly we all ooh and aah over the flagship models of the line, but I bet most people's first experience with Lego starts with something far more modest.

Now maybe I've brainwashed my daughter, but she really likes her Lego (and still plays with her Duplo) as one of her few evergreen toys (the others being her play kitchen and Thomas the Tank engine trains) while other toy wax and wane in popularity.  At school, her classmates have access to Lincoln logs, Magna-tiles, KNex, simple wooden blocks, etc.  but its the Lego they always go after and complain there isn't enough to go round.  So, anecdotally, I'd say still appeals to young kids, creating the next wave of consumers.

Where TLG has had much more mixed results is in chasing fads and trying to find gimmicks to keep kids from losing interest in Lego as they age.  Sometimes they open an entirely new market and do really well there, like Lego Expert/Technic and Mindstorms.  Sometimes, its a fiasco, like back in the 1990's when they went mold crazy to downplay the "construction" aspects of the toy in favor focusing on playing with "built" models after the fact, or Lego Galidor trying to break into the dedicated action figure market, or pushing Lego Universe to jump on the MMOG bandwagon.

The latest "reinvention to retain interest" in my opinion is the new emphasis on making everything "app enabled."  Gimmicks like the apps for Hidden Side and the new PoweredUp replacement for PowerFunctions undermine the timelessness of Lego.  Will TLG still be updating those apps 10 years after the themes are discontinued/replaced or will it be like the Lego Studios line where you can't even get a modern driver for the camera and the software (if you can track down an old CD) strongly prefers to be running on a Windows 98 PC?  My daughter plays with 50 year old Samsonite Lego that I played with as a kid and it integrates just fine with the modern stuff, but when Lego goes high tech with the software, the longevity goes right out the window.  It might have _some_ short term appeal to keep kids interested _today_ but, for my money, its the one aspect of Lego that's guaranteed to depreciate over time.  IMO they are the world's best construction toy and they should really focus on that rather than chasing side markets in areas where they know they've not done well, but what do I know, I'm just a consumer...

And getting back to the OP, I think the "value added" of these tie-in apps just serve to make Lego less affordable than straight "bricks in a box."  Families that are having trouble affording a $15 Lego set probably aren't running out to replace their smart phone(s) every two years so they may not be able to run the software in the first place, but the cost of developing and maintaining that software is folded into the product line whether you use the app or not.

As for PoweredUp, just give me a damned battery box with an on switch.

 

[The Brick Boss]

@ShaydDeGrai Ok. I have no idea what you've just said. Psaise simplify to a straightforward answer so I'll understand. 

EDIT: I understand now after reading it fully. So then they're not getting tired of it. 

Edited October 9, 2019 by pooda

[MAB]

Kids that like to build things will probably always like LEGO. Whereas those that were drawn in by a gimmick will probably not continue with it. But then they were never going to stay with it anyway.

[The Brick Boss]

35 minutes ago, MAB said:

Kids that like to build things will probably always like LEGO. Whereas those that were drawn in by a gimmick will probably not continue with it. But then they were never going to stay with it anyway.

True enough

[Modeltrainman]

Fortunately, Powered Up has a few options on Windows, but agreed about Hidden Side. At least those will always parts.

[hagridshut]

On 10/9/2019 at 1:18 PM, ShaydDeGrai said:

The latest "reinvention to retain interest" in my opinion is the new emphasis on making everything "app enabled."  Gimmicks like the apps for Hidden Side and the new PoweredUp replacement for PowerFunctions undermine the timelessness of Lego.  Will TLG still be updating those apps 10 years after the themes are discontinued/replaced or will it be like the Lego Studios line where you can't even get a modern driver for the camera and the software (if you can track down an old CD) strongly prefers to be running on a Windows 98 PC?  My daughter plays with 50 year old Samsonite Lego that I played with as a kid and it integrates just fine with the modern stuff, but when Lego goes high tech with the software, the longevity goes right out the window.  It might have _some_ short term appeal to keep kids interested _today_ but, for my money, its the one aspect of Lego that's guaranteed to depreciate over time.  IMO they are the world's best construction toy and they should really focus on that rather than chasing side markets in areas where they know they've not done well, but what do I know, I'm just a consumer...

I just started looking at the Hidden Side product line.

I'm not sure that it matters whether the apps still work in 10 years.  The physical set designs seem compelling on their own, without the Augmented Reality aspect, and the "plot" of the series (exorcising possessed townsfolk) can still be played out with just the Legos.   

[BrickG]

Yes, probably.

Thank god I'm an adult with some money. The original Falcon UCS that came out was such a far off dream that I could NEVER afford when I was that young... that was almost painful to bear.  I can imagine being into LEGO as a kid these days and having to look at all the amazing stuff I couldn't have...

[Lego David]

On 10/9/2019 at 4:08 AM, pooda said:

I think another question is....are kids getting tired of Lego.

Well.. if they can't even afford it to begin with, I assume they will get tired eventually. Especially when they have video games that they can play for free.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Lego David