TLG acquires Bricklink

[nerdsforprez]

27 minutes ago, Itaria No Shintaku said:

I

This perception about TLG and the copycats a la Sheriff Nottingham and Robin Hood feels not just wrong but super wrong.
It's a bias.

Biases can be explained.  I would love to hear yours. 

Again, not saying I agree or disagree.  But I don't think TLG is doing themselves any favors in the eyes of the public.  Time will tell.  Perhaps they will be able to work on this image once they actually acquire BL and the changes begin.  I will say this however, no matter the quality of the product, in any market, how one is perceived by their buyers is important.  

Also, in my experience, ethics are great but there is a place where one's back is against the wall where ethics change.  I am not speaking of the sentiment "everyone has a price" - no, it is just that ethics are built on a hierarchy where folks can easily rationalize poor behavior because their POV has shifted.  In their eyes they are not being unethical, it is just that the game table has changed.  If, after this acquisition the average price per piece raises substantially and even prohibitively for some builders, the Robin Hood analogy you gave will be real.  VERY real.  Given the choice between one's ethics or enjoyment derived from their hobby there will be many who will chose the latter.  Right or wrong, It will begin to creep its ugly face in the picture if the average price per piece rises substantially.  

[grum64]

I can’t help but wonder where this leaves those selling custom printed, chrome etc. elements.

22 hours ago, dr_spock said:

There is still BrickOwl if need be.

 

Unless TLG...

[Itaria No Shintaku]

16 minutes ago, nerdsforprez said:

Biases can be explained.  I would love to hear yours. 

Again, not saying I agree or disagree.  But I don't think TLG is doing themselves any favors in the eyes of the public.  Time will tell.  Perhaps they will be able to work on this image once they actually acquire BL and the changes begin.  I will say this however, no matter the quality of the product, in any market, how one is perceived by their buyers is important.  

Also, in my experience, ethics are great but there is a place where one's back is against the wall where ethics change.  I am not speaking of the sentiment "everyone has a price" - no, it is just that ethics are built on a hierarchy where folks can easily rationalize poor behavior because their POV has shifted.  In their eyes they are not being unethical, it is just that the game table has changed.  If, after this acquisition the average price per piece raises substantially and even prohibitively for some builders, the Robin Hood analogy you gave will be real.  VERY real.  Given the choice between one's ethics or enjoyment derived from their hobby there will be many who will chose the latter.  Right or wrong, It will begin to creep its ugly face in the picture if the average price per piece rises substantially.  

Actually, at the present moment, TLG is everything but what you said.
I could enlist around a million reasons starting from "The LEGO Foundation" to the care they have for children and their vision, for the care they have for the community...
Think about it. Does Mattel have an Ideas project in which they will produce what YOU will say. Or have them free loads Barbies two times per year to the Barbie Groups?
Have you ever seen Hasbro saying "Oh, this toy is not ethical per our vision. But it brings us tons of dollars. No we don't do that." If TLG were to make only money, what could prevent them to make a military line that would bring more money than displease people (including myself)?
How many toy companies are investing loads of money on researches on plastic in order to make eco friendly toys?
I can go on forever. Seeing TLG as "the next Toy maker" is possible only for people that are very lightly informed on how TLG works. If you just scratch the surface you get the idea of how wrong you can be.

But let's see the other side of the coin.
Scrap off the TLG retail price all the commercials and advice (3rd party don't need that, they parasite TLG ones), all the boxing, all the packaging, all the design, all the quality controls, etc. etc.

You just remain with the price of the plastic and some raw skills to copy that. Actually turns out that the copycat are far more expensive than TLG is compared to the work they are actually making.
Even if a copycat costs half the price of the same LEGO box (which is usually the par) don't you agree that all the above (commercial, adv, design, quality, packaging, researches, tests etc etc)  cost way more than half the final price? Actually, if you think about it for a second, TLG is making less % profit out of a box than a copycat is. 
So it's actually the copycat that's asking us a leg.

If people do not scratch the surface and limit their reasonment to a very superficial one, that makes not it true.

[Trekkie99]

Just now, TeriXeri said:

 

I agree that custom/non-lego parts should not have been on a "LEGO" marketplace website at all, compatible or not, it's not real LEGO.

I mean yeah a filter would be fine, but not allowing customs to have a voice and be found and recognized on such a large platform is wrong. Minifigs, accessories, train wheels of different sizes, train track of larger radii, unique Technic components, a large array of electronic components, etc! A lot of people purchase these items, and a lot more will if the customs manufacturers have a place their products can be found.

If the end result of Lego buying Bricklink was the elimination of custom parts being sold (potentially the same for official licensed parts!!!), then they shouldn't have bought Bricklink. Period. As far as I'm concerned, Lego has ruined Bricklink.

[anothergol]

I don't understand why some are worried about fees.

Lego isn't there for pocket money, what is 3% of what's sold on BL per month?
And EVEN if you doubled the fees, consider that 10 to 30% of your order is shipping, that Paypal is probably taking as much as BL, and that the price of a part can be up to 10x different from one shop/country/month to another.

Plus Lego is more known to waste money with AFOL's, sending so many letters across countries with just 1 little part inside.

It's for the reason that it's pocket money that I'm not worried about prices changing, but it's also the reason I'm worried that they could just abandon it if they feel it's too small or didn't bring anything. There are lots & lots of examples of companies bought & projects abandonned. They could even be after the talents & allocate them to other projects (which might be what happened with the LDD).
Hey, if they bought it for their image and they realize they're already getting hate before even doing anything..
 

11 minutes ago, Itaria No Shintaku said:

You just remain with the price of the plastic and some raw skills to copy that. Actually turns out that the copycat are far more expensive than TLG is compared to the work they are actually making.
Even if a copycat costs half the price of the same LEGO box (which is usually the par) don't you agree that all the above (commercial, adv, design, quality, packaging, researches, tests etc etc)  cost way more than half the final price? Actually, if you think about it for a second, TLG is making less % profit out of a box than a copycat is. 
So it's actually the copycat that's asking us a leg.

Yeah, let's shed a tear for Kiddicraft first :)

Edited November 27, 2019 by anothergol

[Peppermint_M]

The foreseeable issue that concerns me is how TLG will have to do as requested by IP holders.

Say the BigMouse decided that now TLG own Brick link, they should get a cut of profits on their IP products? With eBay buying PayPal it was the case of a marketplace obtaining and preserving a successful and popular method of facilitating payments. 

TLG are a producer of products, products they distribute. IP products they pay a licence fee for. A fee that is reflected in the prices for those IP products, so both TLG and the IP holder make money.

Now, they own a marketplace and will have oversight and control of it. Licensed figures and retired sets make money for resellers above the original product cost. By owning the marketplace, LEGO will make some money off this resale, money the IP holders will feel entitled to as it is their IP making further profit above the initial license fee.

And let's be real here, the BigMouse has gone after tiny daycare centres with cease and desist orders for having characters painted on the wall. A secondary marketplace that is now property of their licensees is a juicy prospect.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

8 minutes ago, Trekkie99 said:

I mean yeah a filter would be fine, but not allowing customs to have a voice and be found and recognized on such a large platform is wrong. Minifigs, accessories, train wheels of different sizes, train track of larger radii, unique Technic components, a large array of electronic components, etc! A lot of people purchase these items, and a lot more will if the customs manufacturers have a place their products can be found.

If the end result of Lego buying Bricklink was the elimination of custom parts being sold (potentially the same for official licensed parts!!!), then they shouldn't have bought Bricklink. Period. As far as I'm concerned, Lego has ruined Bricklink.

It's an interesting point.
I held a bricklink helping group on Facebook, and I closed it when bricklink opened to brickarms.
To me having bricklink not selling custom products it's a feature that may lead me in helping the community again.

1 minute ago, Peppermint_M said:

The foreseeable issue that concerns me is how TLG will have to do as requested by IP holders.

Say the BigMouse decided that now TLG own Brick link, they should get a cut of profits on their IP products? With eBay buying PayPal it was the case of a marketplace obtaining and preserving a successful and popular method of facilitating payments. 

TLG are a producer of products, products they distribute. IP products they pay a licence fee for. A fee that is reflected in the prices for those IP products, so both TLG and the IP holder make money.

Now, they own a marketplace and will have oversight and control of it. Licensed figures and retired sets make money for resellers above the original product cost. By owning the marketplace, LEGO will make some money off this resale, money the IP holders will feel entitled to as it is their IP making further profit above the initial license fee.

And let's be real here, the BigMouse has gone after tiny daycare centres with cease and desist orders for having characters painted on the wall. A secondary marketplace that is now property of their licensees is a juicy prospect.

I would feel very very robbed if I had to pay money twice. I am buying products on bricklink that I assume they have already been bought by someone. So that fee has already being paid. Asking an extra would be like asking to pay twice a fee.

[andythenorth]

Bricklink is a potentially powerful circular economy platform.  TLG are under pressure about that.

[RoxYourBlox]

12 hours ago, anothergol said:

We should gather to tell them about that. For me what's missing is mainly moving & centering the camera, it's the thing you do the most & it's painful in Studio, way too fast & not through right-clicking. LDD got it perfect.

I wholeheartedly agree!

[Trekkie99]

3 minutes ago, Peppermint_M said:

The foreseeable issue that concerns me is how TLG will have to do as requested by IP holders.

Say the BigMouse decided that now TLG own Brick link, they should get a cut of profits on their IP products? With eBay buying PayPal it was the case of a marketplace obtaining and preserving a successful and popular method of facilitating payments. 

TLG are a producer of products, products they distribute. IP products they pay a licence fee for. A fee that is reflected in the prices for those IP products, so both TLG and the IP holder make money.

Now, they own a marketplace and will have oversight and control of it. Licensed figures and retired sets make money for resellers above the original product cost. By owning the marketplace, LEGO will make some money off this resale, money the IP holders will feel entitled to as it is their IP making further profit above the initial license fee.

And let's be real here, the BigMouse has gone after tiny daycare centres with cease and desist orders for having characters painted on the wall. A secondary marketplace that is now property of their licensees is a juicy prospect.

Yup. Bricklink will become the new Pick A Brick website, and sellers will go where the buyers go to get the lowest price (aka the normal price without licence fee). Things will sort themselves out soon enough, but the fact will always remain that bricklink used to be something that it isn't anymore.

[MAB]

34 minutes ago, Peppermint_M said:

The foreseeable issue that concerns me is how TLG will have to do as requested by IP holders.

Say the BigMouse decided that now TLG own Brick link, they should get a cut of profits on their IP products? With eBay buying PayPal it was the case of a marketplace obtaining and preserving a successful and popular method of facilitating payments. 

TLG are a producer of products, products they distribute. IP products they pay a licence fee for. A fee that is reflected in the prices for those IP products, so both TLG and the IP holder make money.

Now, they own a marketplace and will have oversight and control of it. Licensed figures and retired sets make money for resellers above the original product cost. By owning the marketplace, LEGO will make some money off this resale, money the IP holders will feel entitled to as it is their IP making further profit above the initial license fee.

And let's be real here, the BigMouse has gone after tiny daycare centres with cease and desist orders for having characters painted on the wall. A secondary marketplace that is now property of their licensees is a juicy prospect.

The other problem is that if LEGO are not allowed to or choose not to sell individual licensed minifigures and parts, then do they try at some stage to stop the independent sellers on BL selling them too? If they do, they will be shooting themselves in the foot, as those sales will just move to ebay but it is still a consideration.

34 minutes ago, Itaria No Shintaku said:

I held a bricklink helping group on Facebook, and I closed it when bricklink opened to brickarms.
To me having bricklink not selling custom products it's a feature that may lead me in helping the community again.

Brickarms parts were allowed to be sold on Bricklink for many years, dating back to when Dan Jezek was alive. He made the decision that customs could be listed for sale on BL. The only difference made a few years back was that they were formally added to a part of the catalogue meaning their prices could be tracked. Many people seem to forget that it was Jezek that first made the decision to allow customs to be sold there and that they had been sold for many years without their knowledge until the new BL formalised them in the catalogue.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

31 minutes ago, MAB said:

Brickarms parts were allowed to be sold on Bricklink for many years, dating back to when Dan Jezek was alive. He made the decision that customs could be listed for sale on BL. The only difference made a few years back was that they were formally added to a part of the catalogue meaning their prices could be tracked. Many people seem to forget that it was Jezek that first made the decision to allow customs to be sold there and that they had been sold for many years without their knowledge until the new BL formalised them in the catalogue.

Actually that's a bit different.
We get back to the 2000's.
Some items were found not to be in the actual bricklink catalog. I myself had a sticker that wasn't in the catalog though having LEGO original ID and number. "Custom Item" was a function added allowing people to enlist stuff that was not in the catalog. Then it spreaded into every possible form and nobody did anything to prevent that. That's the way you could sell brickarms, printed torsos, printed shields, items with factory defects like misprints, miscolors, custom sails, whatever.
Brickarms has simply received a special treatment. 
It was a political/economical choice I didn't support.
One thing is to allow anything non-LEGO to be represented as unsearchable uncategorized custom items, another is to equalize brickarms and LEGO making them only two "brands" on the same level.

59 minutes ago, Trekkie99 said:

Yup. Bricklink will become the new Pick A Brick website, and sellers will go where the buyers go to get the lowest price (aka the normal price without licence fee). Things will sort themselves out soon enough, but the fact will always remain that bricklink used to be something that it isn't anymore.

Edited November 27, 2019 by Itaria No Shintaku

[TeriXeri]

1 hour ago, Trekkie99 said:

I mean yeah a filter would be fine, but not allowing customs to have a voice and be found and recognized on such a large platform is wrong. Minifigs, accessories, train wheels of different sizes, train track of larger radii, unique Technic components, a large array of electronic components, etc! A lot of people purchase these items, and a lot more will if the customs manufacturers have a place their products can be found..

And a lot of people started to question the moment Brickarms was officially added as category, just look at the initial reactions:  

https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=230627

I think in recent years this divide has only grown larger with all the attention of clone brands, 3d printing or custom printing on official LEGO parts.

Obviously there is a division between purist and non-purist and sub-divisions within those categories, that said both opinions are equally valid.

But now that it's becoming an official LEGO site, I personally wouldn't want to see any custom listings on it at all, but that's just me, if people want to buy/sell/use custom parts it's up to them.

 

Edited November 27, 2019 by TeriXeri

[Lego David]

1 hour ago, anothergol said:

Lego isn't there for pocket money,

LEGO is a company. The reason they exist is to make money. And they certainly wouldn't invest a few millions of dollars without expecting even more money back. Whether that is trough fees or by using BL as a place to sell their own stuff, it's still money that's the biggest motivation.

[Grover]

More than just licensed prints, which may be marked up for royalties (because asking someone to pay double fees happens all the time and is very realistic), or being disallowed at all, this brings up the question: where do custom printers source their minis?  If you want a really cool superhero figure (e.g.) that TLG doesn't make, you can get it from a custom printer.  However, if TLG disallows them to buy from B&P, then they have to go to BL.  If BL is part of TLG, then the sourcing of these torsos, etc. can become very difficult.  I am less concerned the details of fees, etc., and more concerned with some of the farther reaching implications of involving a company bound by legal agreements for licensing and corporate image for how their product is used after it passes from their control (and thus trying to control that use as much as possible).

[Gray Gear]

2 hours ago, Itaria No Shintaku said:

But let's see the other side of the coin.
Scrap off the TLG retail price all the commercials and advice (3rd party don't need that, they parasite TLG ones), all the boxing, all the packaging, all the design, all the quality controls, etc. etc.

You just remain with the price of the plastic and some raw skills to copy that. Actually turns out that the copycat are far more expensive than TLG is compared to the work they are actually making.
Even if a copycat costs half the price of the same LEGO box (which is usually the par) don't you agree that all the above (commercial, adv, design, quality, packaging, researches, tests etc etc)  cost way more than half the final price? Actually, if you think about it for a second, TLG is making less % profit out of a box than a copycat is. 
So it's actually the copycat that's asking us a leg.

If people do not scratch the surface and limit their reasonment to a very superficial one, that makes not it true.

Advertisement is not a nececary expense. It is a expense a to grow a company to make more profit in the future.

[Ankoku]

1 hour ago, Lego David said:

LEGO is a company. The reason they exist is to make money. And they certainly wouldn't invest a few millions of dollars without expecting even more money back. Whether that is trough fees or by using BL as a place to sell their own stuff, it's still money that's the biggest motivation.

True enough, but there is also the question of power and control. So some of what they spent may relate to that. Now they are the biggest fish in the resale/reseller platform market, which means they can influence it.

If you think about it, with this purchase, they take a very similar position to Amazon. Amazon controls the platform that everyone sells on. Amazon is also the biggest seller on said platform. Which is something regulators are looking into. BrickLink revenue is tiny in comparison to The LEGO Group. That said, LEGO could potentially becomes the biggest seller on the platform they now own.

[koalayummies]

The Brothers Brick did a most excellent job with question preparation for that interview yesterday. Brought up some really fantastic points. That was some good Lego journalism.

[Peppermint_M]

3 hours ago, Itaria No Shintaku said:

I would feel very very robbed if I had to pay money twice. I am buying products on bricklink that I assume they have already been bought by someone. So that fee has already being paid. Asking an extra would be like asking to pay twice a fee.

That is exactly my point. If they are capable of wringing twice the fee from you, they will. There was a very big problem with re-sale of event tickets (like music concerts etc) in that events would sell out on the ticket provider and then resellers would inflate the price selling them on. Selling them on using sites that belonged to the ticket companies; companies who would take a nice slice of profit from the resale of tickets they had already sold! It took Government intervention for measures to be put in place to prevent the worst of it. 

2 hours ago, Grover said:

more concerned with some of the farther reaching implications of involving a company bound by legal agreements for licensing and corporate image for how their product is used after it passes from their control (and thus trying to control that use as much as possible).

Indeed. They are already admitting that they will need to remove products that do not match their corporate image. Which probably means anyone selling MOCs of modern war situations or anything from the World Wars will be removed from Bricklink. Also, might prevent store names that references war, armies or soldiers and possibly even Gun (After all, the pew-pews LEGO makes are Blasters, not guns!). 

It is quite the quagmire of unconsidered problems.

[Dane]

What is it you wanted TLG to do? if its true that BL have been for sale for a while as some claim and with the large store chains going bankrupt all over world. TLG then need to secure an important channel as BL is, I dont think TLG expect to re-earn from fees what they paid but in the long run they have secured this platform.. that is if all AFOL's dont freak out about it in advance before they even find out how it will go...

Edited November 27, 2019 by Dane

[andythenorth]

12 minutes ago, Dane said:

...that is if all AFOL's dont freak out about it in advance before they even find out how it will go...

How long have you been around AFOLs?  'Freak out' is like the default response.  Love of a small plastic world and fear of real life seem to go nicely together  

[AmperZand]

17 hours ago, msk6003 said:

I find rumor TLG will remove all custom part in bricklink. Is this true?

LEGO marketing exec: ‘you will not see Brickarms.’

Please see the post by @MajklSpajkl earlier in this thread as well as: Brothers Brick interview

Edited November 27, 2019 by AmperZand

[ShadowWolfHount]

So I saw Jangbricks video pointing out a contradiction between interview with both brickset and brothers-brick. LEGO keeps saying that "warfare and violence is something that the LEGO Group will never support." All the while they have many gun elements as can easily be seen in the 'Minifigure, Weapon' section on bricklink, not to mention having both Star Wars and Overwatch themes. Which have a large thing of violence (Especially Clone Wars that was killing clones and other characters like it was going out of style).

I have no care about brickarms, if they say they just want to have only official LEGO elements on bricklink, than I would be fine with it. But the contradiction is what I have a problem, along with the "don't want warfare and violence" that always say while still breaking that rule is what I'm getting really annoyed of.

Edited November 27, 2019 by ShadowWolfHount
forgot to add the link to jangbricks video.

[Jacob Nion]

13 minutes ago, andythenorth said:

How long have you been around AFOLs?  'Freak out' is like the default response.  Love of a small plastic world and fear of real life seem to go nicely together  

Thus far I find most arguments people bringing up very reasonable.

Some may freak out, others say it's all fantastic and wonderful (which is a silly and naive point of view really), but the word I read the most is 'concerned'.

@Exetrius thank you. I will make sure to rewrite my statement more eloquent and submit it to whatever TLG will offer for communication. As they stated they want to consult the community for opinion.

[Fuppylodders]

I think this is terrible news. 

It should have stayed independent. Already they are interfering, making false statements that there is 'no conflict' when there clearly is, sayin g they're not going to implement anything immediately, then immediately having to backtrack when pointed out they won't be allowing things such as Brick arms on there anymore. 

 

I'd suspect they truly want to data mine the hell out of it because it gives an insight into what people are *still buying* and *still interested in* while not having to do any market research of their own into what people might want to buy. It'll show them trends, as well as what pieces are highly sought after, enabling them to focus on them being in their own online BaP section... 

Essentially, it's just one big market research tool for them, with a couple of added extras they can probably use to their advantage of free profit, but also they'll implement their own policies on it as they already have done, removing the independent feel and freedom of it. It'll probably stick around for years, but I really can't see how it'll become better. 

 

We may just see a different range of new stuff offered by tlg than we would had they not acquired it...