Kirin

Help get LEGO to re-release retired sets!

Recommended Posts

TLG won't listen, but I appreciate the idea. 

Anyway, if they did re-release the retired modulars, the second-hand market would come crashing down and we old folks wouldn't have anything worth more than a couple of hundred dollars.

I did manage to build Fire Brigade out of the parts in my collection, though... so there's still hope for you kids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not likely to happen, and a petition isn't going to sway Lego one way or the other. Designers have gone into the reasons why rereleasing modulars isn't likely numerous times. Too tired to track down the links right now, but in short:

  • Older modulars use retired molds, which would cost a significant amount to recreate. Substituting some of those retired parts would be possible but would make the new versions "inauthentic" (less appealing to some collectors).
  • The newer modular sets use more advanced techniques and the older ones feel more dated and simplistic by comparison.
  • Lego can only release so many sets a year. Rereleasing a modular would essentially have to take the spot of a new modular-sized set, and a new set inherently appeals to more people than a rerelease of an old one (since people already have the old one and nobody has the new one).

If you are fine with an "inauthentic" classic modular, it's not too daunting a task to make your own based on the instructions of the originals (making substitutions in the case of rare or expensive parts). You can even vary things like the colors up completely, if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with what the others said. Too many reasons against it and if you really want just the buildings, you an always find ways from rebricking them to buying a cheap knock-off.

14 hours ago, Lyichir said:
  • Older modulars use retired molds, which would cost a significant amount to recreate.

Not really in 2021. I really think we should do away with the myth that molds cost an arm and a leg in the age of CAD, CNC milling and electro erosion. If molds were really that expensive, we wouldn't get a slew of new Ninjago pieces or minifig stuff every release cycle and series like VIDIYO or Trolls with their tons of new molds would be completely unfeasible. At the end of the day it probably really boils down to actual production numbers and in case of Modular Buildings that's what breaks the camel's back, not bringing back that exotic gate mold for Market Street...

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

Older modulars use retired molds, which would cost a significant amount to recreate.

Which retired molds are you exactly referring to? I can't recall any of the older modulars including any special molded elements that aren't still available today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lego David said:

Which retired molds are you exactly referring to? I can't recall any of the older modulars including any special molded elements that aren't still available today. 

Some I can think of that I have sold recently for decent money 73312, 73435, 2039, 6120.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of collecting signatures, collect money.  You could commision/contract LEGO to make special run. LEGO in the past have done special stuff for other companies. Money talks.  :pir-classic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lego David said:

Which retired molds are you exactly referring to?

Market Street uses an old type gate and balcony fence and the Green Grocer uses a stair piece that no longer is produced. At least those are the two things I remember most off-hand. Outside that the usual gag applies - LEGO haven't done some pieces in certain colors for ages and that alone would be a hinderance to re-issuing Modulars. Unless they can find an excuse to produce parts in million lots and use them in other sets, too, they're not going to do it, which is kind of the point rather than the cost of molds...

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lego David said:

Which retired molds are you exactly referring to? I can't recall any of the older modulars including any special molded elements that aren't still available today. 

In addition to parts like the doors to the Café Corner and Market Street (which are no longer available) and the upper windows of the Café Corner (likewise), there are several types of parts which have had their molds subtly updated over the years (including panels and arches, among others), some of which make building techniques used in the originals impossible with the newer variants (such as the arch over the hotel staircase entry for the Café Corner, which attached parts directly to the underside of the arch in a way that the newer arches no longer allow for).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Mylenium said:

Agree with what the others said. Too many reasons against it and if you really want just the buildings, you an always find ways from rebricking them to buying a cheap knock-off.

Not really in 2021. I really think we should do away with the myth that molds cost an arm and a leg in the age of CAD, CNC milling and electro erosion. If molds were really that expensive, we wouldn't get a slew of new Ninjago pieces or minifig stuff every release cycle and series like VIDIYO or Trolls with their tons of new molds would be completely unfeasible. At the end of the day it probably really boils down to actual production numbers and in case of Modular Buildings that's what breaks the camel's back, not bringing back that exotic gate mold for Market Street...

Mylenium

I just Bricklinked Market Street together over the last two weeks. The only expensive parts in that set are the Light Bluish Gray doors and the Black door and doorframe. Total with shipping included about $400.00 which is still less then buying it new. 
Oh, that gate piece, very common on Bricklink and about a $1.00 a piece new…

:classic:

Edited by Wimmer
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, I'd far rather see them invest time and money into developing new products.  Althought there is a nostalga to Cafe Corner and Market Street (both of which I own so I don't have the desire to see them rereleased), I think the new modulars are light years ahead of where they were 10 years ago, with great uses of new parts and detail.  This would be a bit like asking Lego to re-release the old castles from the 80's, times have moved on and in most cases I'm sure eventually they will release a set which has for example that expensive black door from Cafe Corner or one very similar.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, paul_delahaye said:

For me, I'd far rather see them invest time and money into developing new products.  Althought there is a nostalga to Cafe Corner and Market Street (both of which I own so I don't have the desire to see them rereleased), I think the new modulars are light years ahead of where they were 10 years ago, with great uses of new parts and detail.  This would be a bit like asking Lego to re-release the old castles from the 80's, times have moved on and in most cases I'm sure eventually they will release a set which has for example that expensive black door from Cafe Corner or one very similar.  

Same here. I'd much rather see them release a new modular cafe or hotel (whether it is on a corner or not) than re-release an old set that is of no  interest to longer term collectors. It is not like all the modulars are necessary to enjoy new releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no reason for Lego to do this: it wouldn't sell as much as a new set.  You can either Bricklink the parts (which can be fun), or you can just buy a knockoff, or you can even mix and match the two.

Some pieces, like the infamous 4216 in sand green, for which you need 56x for 10185, are available from 3rd-party manufacturers like BlueBrixx.  

I Bricklinked a 10190 with 100% real Lego parts and while I enjoyed it, today I would probably incorporate some 3rd party stuff.

Edited by CopperTablet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you can substitute colours or parts and still end up with a decent modular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2021 at 9:12 AM, Mylenium said:

Not really in 2021. I really think we should do away with the myth that molds cost an arm and a leg in the age of CAD, CNC milling and electro erosion. If molds were really that expensive, we wouldn't get a slew of new Ninjago pieces or minifig stuff every release cycle and series like VIDIYO or Trolls with their tons of new molds would be completely unfeasible.

I totally agree on this, particularly with the "do away", as "molds costing a fortune" actually sounds more than a bit off the rails in the years 2000+ 

The competitors in the market mold whatever they see fit ... with ever-increasing quality. It really is a well-preserved TLG myth. Which in turn is a nice twist for TLG to run their business as they see fit (which is entirely a must for a for-profit organization!) and let people believe the resurrection of old parts is more or less out of reality - and if TLG takes that route, it is perceived as a gift - and: That it really hurt to do so. Myths need to be carefully kept alive.

Molds ... yes they were expensive, back then. In the olden days. As were dual in-line TTL chips. Or washing machines.

Best
Thorsten

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Toastie said:

I totally agree on this, particularly with the "do away", as "molds costing a fortune" actually sounds more than a bit off the rails in the years 2000+ 

The competitors in the market mold whatever they see fit ... with ever-increasing quality. It really is a well-preserved TLG myth. Which in turn is a nice twist for TLG to run their business as they see fit (which is entirely a must for a for-profit organization!) and let people believe the resurrection of old parts is more or less out of reality - and if TLG takes that route, it is perceived as a gift - and: That it really hurt to do so. Myths need to be carefully kept alive.

Molds ... yes they were expensive, back then. In the olden days. As were dual in-line TTL chips. Or washing machines.

Best
Thorsten

 

And instead of believing in the cost of introducing a new mold we're supposed to believe... you? On what basis, exactly? I find it's incredibly easy for somebody on the "outside" of Lego to call the people who represent it to us (designers, community representatives, etc.) liars without any evidence or insight to actually back them up. But generally, when you ask why Lego isn't making or doing a particular thing, it's probably pretty safe to assume that if it were realistic, reasonable, and profitable to do so, they'd already be doing it. They didn't get to their current levels of success by leaving easy money on the table.

Injection molds can vary in price due to numerous factors, including their precision and durability. Many alternative toy brands, which rely more on "de facto" parts molded to purpose instead of a system of reusable parts, can use cheaper molds because the need for precision can be reduced (since connections between parts can use screws or fasteners that aren't designed to be put together, taken apart, and put together again), and they only need to be as durable as however many copies/variants of that toy they plan to make. Even Lego uses cheaper molds in some cases—depending on the type of part being made and its purpose. A single-purpose figure part, designed for a one-off movie or TV character, doesn't really have the need to be produced for the same lifespan as a functional building element that's likely to be produced in quantities hundreds or thousands the size, and it doesn't always even need the same level of precision if its details are mostly aesthetic instead of having connection points that need to have precise clutch power or support the weight of a full-size model. But for functional architectural parts, like the kinds of parts that are needed for modular buildings, that precision is necessary.

But more to the point... every cost has to be weighed according to whether it's the best use of that money. If Lego had been interested in prolonging the use of some of those older retired parts, they probably would have done so back when they were retired in the first place, making new copies of the molds as soon as the old ones wore out like they do on a regular basis for "staple" parts like basic bricks. A part being retired (whether or not a direct replacement has been introduced) generally means it's been deemed obsolete or unnecessary going forward. So why exactly would you expect Lego to spend money they could spend on a new part serving a new purpose to instead reintroduce ones they decided long ago were no longer worth preserving?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Injection molds can vary in price due to numerous factors, including their precision and durability.

No need to get yourself worked up. A 10 x 10 cm block with standard mounts for something like a standard plate or brick costs around 7000 Euro, a prototype mold of same around 1500 to 3000 Euro for a 10000 pieces test run. That's numbers you can easily research at OEM manufacturers/ contract-for-hire companies. And no, those aren't anything different from what LEGO uses and fulfill the same quality standards. Sure, every ejector pin, nudge, sprue clipper, reservoir, cooling loop and so on is gonna cost you extra and of course you have to develop the mold, but it's not like in the olden days where a tool maker would carve on this for weeks on end by hand with minimal support from a few machines and the mold would cost you end up with a 200000 Euro investment. These days you're pretty much in the 15000 to 30000 Euro range for everything, with the latter already being a complex multi-part mold. Of course this scales with size, but even a large 70 cm block is probably gonna cost you around 50000 Euro most of the time.

Think of it: How else would anyone be able to cost-efficiently produce parts for household appliances, custom industrial machine parts, car accessories and so on? We'd be stuck with dated designs for everything because molds for different designs would be unaffordable and the old ones had to recoup their cost for forever. You have to take it back to a rational level and just because LEGO make a whole song and dance about their complex mold-making process, the underlying technologies and metrics are no different. And that is really the point: Given that they produce most parts by hundreds and thousands or even millions, even an expensive mold is/ should be peanuts to a company that makes 6 billion a year. It's insofar even ridiculous to get defensive about the matter, as even their regular molds need constant maintenance and replacement from time to time. Or do you really want to argue that a standard 2 x 4 brick in 2021 is still being produced on a worn out mold from the 1970s? Point in case: Outside adding new molds every year, keeping the standard molds in shape already needs to be figured into their budget as normal operating cost. This isn't anything unusual. Any such company has the same cost factors, including the Chinese knock-off manufacturers.

6 hours ago, Lyichir said:

So why exactly would you expect Lego to spend money they could spend on a new part serving a new purpose to instead reintroduce ones they decided long ago were no longer worth preserving?

Well, not meaning to be snarky, but ultimately it becomes a simple question of: Why not? LEGO can spout BS about having lost the original mold for the much coveted goat for instance, but beyond cost considerations for rebuilding the molds it's probably simply a matter of that they really don't want to for other reasons. Maybe they owe royalties to the original designer, maybe they can't see the sales prospects of a set to stuff in their millions of goats they'd have to produce, maybe something else. It's also an observable strategy, at least for the last few years, that LEGO want to protect their IP by registering designs, so generic designs that have long fallen out of any patent or trademark protection are less likely to reappear. In fact my impression sometimes is that they are even pushing out parts just so they can introduce a new, slightly different design to register. In any case, certainly the cost of mold-making is just one aspect here and rather likely not even the most important one...

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of the new moulds for parts for minifigures are lower precision than for regular bricks, and maybe made to have a lower life span. Parts with single connections that do not butt up against other parts do not need to be as precise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lyichir said:

And instead of believing in the cost of introducing a new mold we're supposed to believe... you? On what basis, exactly? I find it's incredibly easy for somebody on the "outside" of Lego to call the people who represent it to us (designers, community representatives, etc.) liars without any evidence or insight to actually back them up.

In the same vein, one shouldn't be too quick to defend TLG's corporate doublespeak

Jens Kronvold Frederiksen was recently asked on BS why R2-D2 doesn't have back printing :

"The equipment necessary to decorate both sides of that cylinder piece is not available at the moment. Honestly, I am not certain why this has not really been considered before because other characters are printed on both sides"

Lol! do you want me to believe TLG cannot print on both sides of a simple cylinder when they have been doing it for decades with torsos?

And that it has never been thought of?

No, it's because TLG will not to do it, not that they can't

Edit : And maybe think about re-designing the droid body with a single stud on top so the head can rotate and make that third leg to pop in. Can't be that hard

But first, please fix the wonky printing on the dome heads!

Edited by 1974

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lyichir said:

And instead of believing in the cost of introducing a new mold we're supposed to believe... you?

Oh heavens, no!
But it is not that hard to find out the cost for "molds". There are guys here on EB (e.g., refer to the TrainTech forum) who have their molds made - of course by Chinese folks - precision top, clutch top, durability top - as reported by users. These pieces are not necessarily small, rather big. And the numbers reported are close to what @Mylenium was saying. And: These numbers are of course steep for individuals or small businesses. Nevertheless, there are now numerous products on the market made by such small businesses, e.g., refer to the reported quality of BuWizz devices (BLE nubs, motors).

11 hours ago, Lyichir said:

liars without any evidence

Huh? Liars? Preserving a myth and lying is something very different. I did not say they're liars. Never. They are way too smart. No, this has nothing to do with lying. And I never said that. I quoted the "We should do away" section of @Mylenium's post as preserving a myth naturally involves us.

11 hours ago, Lyichir said:

But generally, when you ask why Lego isn't making or doing a particular thing, it's probably pretty safe to assume that if it were realistic, reasonable, and profitable to do so, they'd already be doing it.

Yes. This is the core of the matter. But certainly not caused by the towering costs of remaking old molds for sure. They have calculated it all the way through - again for sure. Most of the customers want new stuff. And I do understand that - I believe - very well. We are collaborating with two companies with about the same revenue as TLG is making. Yes, these folks have certainly figured it out.

New stuff sells better than old stuff. That's it. Not the molds.

11 hours ago, Lyichir said:

So why exactly would you expect Lego to spend money they could spend on a new part serving a new purpose to instead reintroduce ones they decided long ago were no longer worth preserving?

I do not expect that for a second. Otherwise, they would have never come close to the 6 billion dollar revenue mark.

All I am saying is: Resurrecting old parts is not attractive, because they won't sell as good as new parts. It has nothing to do with the cost of a mold, it has to do with sales.

Best regards and have a nice day,
Thorsten           

 

Edited by Toastie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1974 said:

"The equipment necessary to decorate both sides of that cylinder piece is not available at the moment. Honestly, I am not certain why this has not really been considered before because other characters are printed on both sides"

Lol! do you want me to believe TLG cannot print on both sides of a simple cylinder when they have been doing it for decades with torsos?

Probably a more complex issue since the cylinder and head cone don't have orientation nudges for the machines and you are entering a dangerous territory of getting smudges with complex curved prints. Then again there should of course nothing be stopping them to create new molds and adapt/ build a custom printing machine. It's even more of a non-argument when you consider how Jangbricks regularly ends up with terrible printing on his R2-D2s, anyway. There's a clear need for improvement there either way. The way I see it they are mostly afraid of not getting it right and possibly having lower throughput due to the longer drying times required to avoid the aforementioned smearing issues, but from a strict engineering standpoint it should be possible, even if such a dedicated printing machine/ robot would be pretty costly.

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the cylinder have studs, the orientation machine should be able to grap that. Dome heads don't. But neither do torsos and they do those just fine

Yeah, it's more about volume than precision ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be possible with the Bricklick go fund me program.  You might get 5000 AFOL to fund a re-release of a modular.....or something very close where old parts are discontinued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LegoDW said:

This might be possible with the Bricklick go fund me program.  You might get 5000 AFOL to fund a re-release of a modular.....or something very close where old parts are discontinued.

What is this Bricklink go fund me program? 

Or do you mean the Bricklink Designer Program? If so I cannot see LEGO rereleasing modulars that way. That would mean they are allowing a third party to upload their past sets to IDEAS, get to review, not pass them but allow them to go to the BDP, then paying the "designer" who uploaded LEGO's design a fee for the use of their work.

If they do that, they can kiss goodbye to trying to claim their set designs are copyright protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.