Harry Potter 2021 - Rumors & Discussion

[karrit]

38 minutes ago, RODDY said:

No offense but this isn’t a really good example. The book was $20 where the set Tom Riddle is coming in is $140. And we don’t even know if it’s the same figure or variant. Meanwhile DA Harry Potter was in a $400 set is now in $40 set, 90% off the original price. I know why they put him in there along with Griphook and the mine cart, so it pairs well with Gringott’s but it’s a bit of a let down to those who bought the OG Diagon Alley set imo. 

DA Harry Potter also isn't a good example either.  Until the set was actually released we didn't even know he was included.  LEGO advertised 4 exclusive figures in the set and as of now that is still true.

[Alexandrina]

1 hour ago, Lego-Freak said:

The head being Justin‘s is the only thing I could believe, but why does that twerp deserve a new face print?

The more the merrier. Justin in 2021, and next year let's hope for an Ernie and a new print for Hannah

[RODDY]

1 hour ago, Donkeypunch said:

In all honesty it's just a couple of minifigues you still got an amazing build out of the DA set.

1 hour ago, karrit said:

Exactly.  If people are spending $400 on a set just to get a couple of "exclusive" minifigures that is the prime example of first world problems.

No ones spending $400 for just the minifigs, that’s just a gross exaggeration of differing opinion you just don’t seem to understand. The minifigs imo are just as an integral part to a set along with the build. If I’m paying $400 for a set, I expect something special from all parts of the set, build and minifigs alike. It better be the whole package. And while yes DA is an amazing build, easily in the top 3 of my favorite sets of all time, it wouldn’t be the same without the minifigs. The minifigs give life to the set from the WWW twins to DA Harry to Lockhart. An empty DA isn’t the same. 

 

1 hour ago, karrit said:

Just because a particular figure is exclusive to a specific set upon release doesn't mean the figure should never be used again in the future.  If someone is just starting to collect now should their only option be to buy a retired set third hand just to get a particular variant?  That doesn't make any more money for TLG.  I'm not saying there shouldn't be exclusives at all but you can't always have it both ways.  People complain about all the variants of the main three as well as a few other figures but the minute one of them gets used again others who thought they were exclusive complain about that.  They complain when we get yet another variant of Luna or Neville but then whine that we need another version of Lockhart or Lucius or Snape.  Meanwhile we each have particular other characters we want that have yet to be made.

Give me all the variants you can give me I have no problem with any of them. I love every single one of the Harry variants, especially the PS and COS Harrys. I love the HBP and COS Dumbledores. I think so far Lego has done an incredible job with character selections. We have gotten most of the main characters in a wide variety of attires along with a bunch of characters that never been made Kingsley or or James and Lily Potter or Colin Creevy or Slughorn. Honestly the line could end this year and I would be satisfied, I’m thankful for this resurgence of HP. 
 

47 minutes ago, Guyon2002 said:

If this was Fortescue, the DP photographer or the twins in their WWW outfits that were going to be reused I'd be upset. But I don't really see the problem with reusing a Harry figure, especially as he pops up literally everywhere.

Well that’s the thing, Harry shows up everywhere so keeping one variant exclusive isn’t hurting anyone. For sets under $50 you can get both young and old Hogwarts Harry, Muggle attire Harry from both POA and HBP, Quidditch Harry, Invisibility Cloak Harry, list goes on. 
 

46 minutes ago, karrit said:

DA Harry Potter also isn't a good example either.  Until the set was actually released we didn't even know he was included.  LEGO advertised 4 exclusive figures in the set and as of now that is still true.

Reviews came out the same day the set was revealed which was the day before the set was released. Not to mention it leaked before any other  DA minifig. We knew.  And considering it’s part of a gimmick of the set with whole secret bag component just lends its even more credibility why it should be exclusive. What’s the point of the secret box where the fig that shows up inside of it is elsewhere?

Edited February 9, 2021 by RODDY

[Textorix]

32 minutes ago, RODDY said:

Well that’s the thing, Harry shows up everywhere so keeping one variant exclusive isn’t hurting anyone. For sets under $50 you can get both young and old Hogwarts Harry, Muggle attire Harry from both POA and HBP, Quidditch Harry, Invisibility Cloak Harry, list goes on. 

Exactly and thats the reason why this minifigure should remain exclusive. Its very common character so everyone can get many variations of him for cheap prize. Some kid or regular fan doesnt give a damn about having every version of Harry so its not a problem that DA version stays exclusive to only one expansive set and on the other hand some hardcore collector who already owns the set is happy to have that special minifigure in his collection. Over all both sides of customers are pleased so everything is okay. Same with characters like Fred and George, we already have them from CMF so their DA versions can remain exclusive. Also we are getting new version of Lockhart and I am sure that Lucius will come as well in some of the Deathly Hallows sets. Then of course there are characters who will remain exclusive maybe forever bcs they are very obscure but those arent that interesting for most of the fans anyways.

Edited February 9, 2021 by Textorix

[Jacob Bricks Alot]

Does anyone know when we will get the 2021 summer sets revealed??

[mark1991t]

2 minutes ago, Jacob Bricks Alot said:

Does anyone know when we will get the 2021 summer sets revealed??

Last year it was end of April. Don't expect anytime sooner than that. 

Edited February 9, 2021 by mark1991t

[Textorix]

Pictures? Well hopefully very soon as I am super excited for Hogsmeade and Chamber of Secrets sets and I cant wait until July.

[Jacob Bricks Alot]

Just now, mark1991t said:

Last year it was end of April. Don't expect anytime sooner than that. 

Thanks! Late April seems most likely :)

I can’t believe we already have 2 Figures leaked already. 1 seems fake but it has been bought on Facebook market place.. we will just have to wait and see 

[Metanoios]

21 minutes ago, RODDY said:

Reviews came out the same day the set was revealed which was the day before the set was released. Not to mention it leaked before any other  DA minifig. We knew.  And considering it’s part of a gimmick of the set with whole secret bag component just lends its even more credibility why it should be exclusive. What’s the point of the secret box where the fig that shows up inside of it is elsewhere?

Why do you want it to be exclusive so bad? Do you want to sell it? Does the figure look less good or precious to you now than it did two weeks ago? Has anything changed physically on the figure you can hold in your hands right now? Or did only your perception of it change? Do you want others not to have it, so that it makes your own more precious? Just ask yourself these questions and think about the answers. You don't have to type them on here. Just think about what kind of person this makes you, if you argue like you just did. Is it really true that your own precious possession becomes less meaningful to you, because others have it as well? Kings in the past believed they were chosen by god because of some shiny golden material found in the dirt of the earth. Some former president, who shall not be named, used that same material for his loo and thought he was something better and special...

[mark1991t]

I'd rather have a new variant instead of a duplicate. Exclusivity doesn't do anything to me, but if something is advertised as 'exclusive' like Tom Riddle, it should be exclusive.

[karrit]

7 minutes ago, Metanoios91 said:

Why do you want it to be exclusive so bad? Do you want to sell it? Does the figure look less good or precious to you now than it did two weeks ago? Has anything changed physically on the figure you can hold in your hands right now? Or did only your perception of it change? Do you want others not to have it, so that it makes your own more precious? Just ask yourself these questions and think about the answers. You don't have to type them on here. Just think about what kind of person this makes you, if you argue like you just did. Is it really true that your own precious possession becomes less meaningful to you, because others have it as well? Kings in the past believed they were chosen by god because of some shiny golden material found in the dirt of the earth. Some former president, who shall not be named, used that same material for his loo and thought he was something better and special...

Thank you for being able to express my whole point so eloquently. 

At the end of the day the exclusive elements of a set aren't what make or break it for me.  I want the whole package to appeal to me.  Slapping the term "exclusive" on something is purely a marketing gimmick.

It's a toy,  a very expensive one but in the end still just a toy.

Edited February 9, 2021 by karrit

[Textorix]

1 minute ago, Metanoios91 said:

Why do you want it to be exclusive so bad? Do you want to sell it? Does the figure look less good or precious to you now than it did two weeks ago? Has anything changed physically on the figure you can hold in your hands right now? Or did only your perception of it change? Do you want others not to have it, so that it makes your own more precious? Just ask yourself these questions and think about the answers. You don't have to type them on here. Just think about what kind of person this makes you, if you argue like you just did. Is it really true that your own precious possession becomes less meaningful to you, because others have it as well? Kings in the past believed they were chosen by god because of some shiny golden material found in the dirt of the earth. Some former president, who shall not be named, used that same material for his loo and thought he was something better and special...

Why do you think its so bad that he wants it to be exclusive? Does it make him greedy or selfish person? I think you just dont get what are we talking about. Its not about value in money at least not for me as I dont sell Lego but its something only collectors understand. It just makes happy to have rare exclusive minifigure in your collection and no it doesnt make you more than someone else and if you look at it that way then sth is really wrong.

[Juve]

I agree with not keeping the minifigs exclusive. I understand people who spent a lot on a set want to have some ones that are only there but I mean come on 400 set really. I mean there are people who can only dream of getting those ones so I dont think it hurts putting the minifigs in cheaper ones. You have the build and thats ok.

[sebastian666]

14 minutes ago, Metanoios91 said:

Why do you want it to be exclusive so bad? Do you want to sell it? Does the figure look less good or precious to you now than it did two weeks ago? Has anything changed physically on the figure you can hold in your hands right now? Or did only your perception of it change? Do you want others not to have it, so that it makes your own more precious? Just ask yourself these questions and think about the answers. You don't have to type them on here. Just think about what kind of person this makes you, if you argue like you just did. Is it really true that your own precious possession becomes less meaningful to you, because others have it as well? Kings in the past believed they were chosen by god because of some shiny golden material found in the dirt of the earth. Some former president, who shall not be named, used that same material for his loo and thought he was something better and special...

This carried me away  Thank you for giving me a much needed laugh today. You are a great creative writer and I could not agree more with your point about the silly debate over exclusive minifigs. Very well put. I keep re-reading and laughing  

[RODDY]

29 minutes ago, Metanoios91 said:

Why do you want it to be exclusive so bad? Do you want to sell it? Does the figure look less good or precious to you now than it did two weeks ago? Has anything changed physically on the figure you can hold in your hands right now? Or did only your perception of it change? Do you want others not to have it, so that it makes your own more precious? Just ask yourself these questions and think about the answers. You don't have to type them on here. Just think about what kind of person this makes you, if you argue like you just did. Is it really true that your own precious possession becomes less meaningful to you, because others have it as well? Kings in the past believed they were chosen by god because of some shiny golden material found in the dirt of the earth. Some former president, who shall not be named, used that same material for his loo and thought he was something better and special...

You can take it easy with the personal attacks there pal lmao, we just have a difference in opinion. And if you think that’s arguing hard, you really haven’t seen much. Truth is I don’t argue with people who don’t argue in good faith and devolve into insults, so this is finished. You tell me to look in mirror, maybe you should give it a shot.

Edited February 9, 2021 by RODDY

[droobles]

27 minutes ago, Metanoios91 said:

Why do you want it to be exclusive so bad? Do you want to sell it? Does the figure look less good or precious to you now than it did two weeks ago? Has anything changed physically on the figure you can hold in your hands right now? Or did only your perception of it change? Do you want others not to have it, so that it makes your own more precious? Just ask yourself these questions and think about the answers. You don't have to type them on here. Just think about what kind of person this makes you, if you argue like you just did. Is it really true that your own precious possession becomes less meaningful to you, because others have it as well? Kings in the past believed they were chosen by god because of some shiny golden material found in the dirt of the earth. Some former president, who shall not be named, used that same material for his loo and thought he was something better and special...

Very well said. I want to add that the whole point of LEGO is that it is a building system where the pieces can be re-used. If LEGO already has a part and print that exist for a certain situation, I would much rather have them re-use it than create a new one just for the sake of exclusivity. It is better for everyone if certain figures and pieces are more widely available, unless you really only can value something if others don't have it. I would understand annoyance if some figure was re-used in a situation where it doesn't fit the scene, but I don't think we have seen that happen often. 

Edited February 9, 2021 by droobles

[Balrogofmorgoth]

I honestly think it’s fine to include a previously exclusive figure in a cheaper set. I would have bought the figure on BL for way less than $400 if that’s the only reason I was buying the set. Doesn’t matter to me if figures don’t stay exclusive. 

[spiderfan2000]

That version of Harry is prominent enough in the first movie that it would have seemed weird if it stayed exclusive to a $400 set.  I'm assuming that the Harry and SS Griphook from the Advent Calendar are meant to be used with the constantly-speculated Gringotts set (which seems more likely to include DH minifigures instead of SS versions).  If the Ron and Hermione in the Advent Calendar are from the Hogwarts Express scene from the first movie, that would be an additional reason to reuse that Harry to go with them.

[Juve]

LEGO should be available to everyone and is the best toy on the market. Now with all the exclusive sets, minifigs its becoming more and more expensive. When I think about it when I was a kid sets were way more accessible now they are just coming with ideas how to make more 200 dollar sets. I mean I understand that there is a market for that but still just like in football money is starting to rule LEGO

2 minutes ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

I honestly think it’s fine to include a previously exclusive figure in a cheaper set. I would have bought the figure on BL for way less than $400 if that’s the only reason I was buying the set. Doesn’t matter to me if figures don’t stay exclusive. 

True. If you are buying DA and have enough to spend on it you want the build not just one figure

[girlie-site-boots]

Juve I think the difference between now and 15-20 years ago. LEGO was aimed fair and squarely at children, even the big technic sets were age 10 or 12. Argos listed them as "boys toys". It wasn't cool or acceptable to admit you STILL liked it or collected it, if it got out you'd be called a "big kid"

The big expensive sets came about with the internet and the AFOLs.

Me I'm a big kid who never grew up. 

[Textorix]

27 minutes ago, Juve said:

True. If you are buying DA and have enough to spend on it you want the build not just one figure

I think you missed a coversation where was said that the build is the most important thing but without good minifigures it wouldnt be that great and therefore they are also very important. I think that people who like some of minifigs staying exclusive should be respected and not marked as some selfish people who only care about owning sth that others do not bcs thats not true, everyone can buy those minifigures, even from BL for those who cant afford DA set, its just you wont find them in other sets.

Edited February 9, 2021 by Textorix

[lego_guyon02]

7 minutes ago, girlie-site-boots said:

Me I'm a big kid who never grew up. 

Sounds very relatable 

2 minutes ago, Textorix said:

I think you missed a coversation where was said that the build is the most important thing but without good minifigures it wouldnt be that great and therefore they are also very important. I think that people who like some of minifigs staying exclusive should be respected and not market as some selfish people who only care about owning sth that others do not.

I very much agree with that last bit.

Figures are just as important as the build of a set.

[Yope]

I think there are pros and cons to the gradual change in Lego's approach.  It's a shame that it's less affordable (impossible) for most kids to collect all the sets they like but at the same time it's nice that Lego is recognising other markets for their products, I'm sure many here have enjoyed building Diagon Alley for example.

As for people who enjoy the exclusivity of minifigs, there is no problem with this.  People like collecting things, coin collectors wouldn't want all 50 pence pieces to be equally common, stamp collectors wouldn't want all stamps to be equally prevalent too.  So if people like having more exclusive minifigs that's ok.  It's not about vanity, they don't want it to be able to lord themselves and their collection over children.  That's ridiculous.

I don't even particularly have a preference.  It's just not nice to see people looking to condescend/patronise others on this forum with no due cause.

 

[Textorix]

3 minutes ago, Yope said:

I think there are pros and cons to the gradual change in Lego's approach.  It's a shame that it's less affordable (impossible) for most kids to collect all the sets they like but at the same time it's nice that Lego is recognising other markets for their products, I'm sure many here have enjoyed building Diagon Alley for example.

As for people who enjoy the exclusivity of minifigs, there is no problem with this.  People like collecting things, coin collectors wouldn't want all 50 pence pieces to be equally common, stamp collectors wouldn't want all stamps to be equally prevalent too.  So if people like having more exclusive minifigs that's ok.  It's not about vanity, they don't want it to be able to lord themselves and their collection over children.  That's ridiculous.

I don't even particularly have a preference.  It's just not nice to see people looking to condescend/patronise others on this forum with no due cause.

 

Thank you for this. I think you summarized pretty well what collecting is about and why its not bad if there is some exclusivity and that its just okay if that makes someone happy.

 

[MaxHeadroom]

1 hour ago, Metanoios91 said:

Why do you want it to be exclusive so bad? Do you want to sell it? Does the figure look less good or precious to you now than it did two weeks ago? Has anything changed physically on the figure you can hold in your hands right now? Or did only your perception of it change? Do you want others not to have it, so that it makes your own more precious? Just ask yourself these questions and think about the answers. You don't have to type them on here. Just think about what kind of person this makes you, if you argue like you just did. Is it really true that your own precious possession becomes less meaningful to you, because others have it as well? Kings in the past believed they were chosen by god because of some shiny golden material found in the dirt of the earth. Some former president, who shall not be named, used that same material for his loo and thought he was something better and special...

Plenty of people (including myself) are unsure of their future. If you're financially secure enough to be able to spend $400 on something as frivolous as LEGO without ever considering the possibility you may have to sell that it or part of it then you are very fortunate.
 

I did not buy the DA to sell the figures (I didn't even buy it for the figures in general) but knowing that the set and the figures would hold some of their value was a factor for me. It was nice to know that if too many unexpected emergencies piled up I would be able to sell the set, or even a single minifigure to get some of that $400 back if I really needed to. 
 

I completely agree that the DA set is too alienating to casual collectors because of its price/size but acting like the issue is that kids can't get a third variant of young Harry in casual clothes is absurd. Kids haven't spent the last three years begging for a figure Harry in Dudley's clothes with smiling face/sooty face, they've been begging for Diagon Alley. 
 

Framing this like LEGO helping kids against the mean collectors who selfishly want to have their purchases retain value is also ridiculous.  The figure was included with the DA as an exciting new secret figure as a selling point and its being included with the AC as an exiting (formerly) rare figure as a selling point. If LEGO actually wanted to help kids they would rerelease rare characters like Hooch, Moody, and Trelawney.