Technic Pricing General Discussion

[Jim]

Hi,

Yesterday I stated to stay away from pricing discussions in the CAT topic. This is not some censorship thing, but pricing discussions tend to derail topics quite fast. I hereby present you the pricing discussion topic.....go nuts!

To jumpstart the discussion, I will throw in an unpopular opinion...

The price of the CAT is 450 euro. The set is almost 4000 parts, which boils down to around 400 euro. If you five Powered Up elements and a license the price doesn't seem ridiculous. It's on par with other sets. 

I know it's a LOT of money. But this set's price seems logical.

[Frequenzberater]

So you are of the opinion, that the Liebherr excavator was disproportionately cheap?

[steph77]

So here is my own opinion.

I agree with @Jim the prize is ok for the part count and electric components.

 

But guys, each of us could build the same set with half the part count.

I am 100% sure that it is possible to build a perfect functional RC CAT for 2000 parts.

(could be a cool subject for a contest though)

 

And if this  was done by TLC, a lot more children in the world could had the pleasure to play with.

It's just a matter of philosophy. Selling X sets at 450 euros or selling 2X sets at 225...

[Jim]

14 minutes ago, Frequenzberater said:

So you are of the opinion, that the Liebherr excavator was disproportionately cheap?

Yes 

Cheap is definitely not the right word, but the Liebherr seems to have an odd price calculation. There is much value for money in that set, yes.

Obviously, both of these sets are very expensive and Technic sets are getting more expensive each year. But they do tend to follow a certain pricing scheme.

[Void_S]

@Jim, sorry for a direct question - moving the CAT price discussion to a dedicated topic, was it a fair act to suspend the off-topic speculations, or got you any hint from TLG to stop blaming the coming release? I saw similar feedbacks to the pricing in other set-relared threads but only here I see such stop-reaction... 

[Jim]

Just now, Void_S said:

@Jim, sorry for a direct question - moving the CAT price discussion to a dedicated topic, was it a fair act to suspend the off-topic speculations, or got you any hint from TLG to stop blaming the coming release? I saw similar feedbacks to the pricing in other set-relared threads but only here I see such stop-reaction... 

Most definitely not. I have never had comments from TLG saying we needed to stop a certain discussion. Only when it comes to IP, Leaks, etc. Never about pricing.

It was my decision, after myself and Milan gave a warning, the topic still was about to derail. That's the reason why I created this topic, because it's prefectly fine to discuss pricing. But these type of discussions tend to derail topics instantly. Here you can derail all you want 

[msk6003]

I think king of this topic is 42070. It is very good set for technic beginner but to much expensive. 

[HectorMB]

In part, I agree with @Jim: The Zetros have 4 motors as well, 2000 pieces less, and 150 EUR less. This means that the 150 EUR accounts for the pieces count. Then, I also bring up the other good set this year, the 42128, which counts up to 2000 pieces, with no motors and a price of 150 EUR. So, basically, within this year, the CAT is on price (CAT = Zetros + 42128). 

nevertheless, the 42114 is very similar in piece count and only 1 less motor than the Zetros, and is significantly cheaper. Then, if we compare to the 42100, we lose all possible reference, as it was said all arun the forum, the 42100 leaves in a very bad position the CAT or the Zetros... and basically, any other PU-based set. 

Why? In my opinion, the 42100 and 42099 were introducing the PU motors, which implied a significant increase in price compared to PF sets. So TLG might have made with these two sets an "intermediate step" towards the final real price of the PU-based sets, which is what we are seeing nowadays. 

Conclussion: if you want PU motors, grab one 42100 before is gone. If you want pieces, then go for old models. If you want new pieces, then you have to pay the price either of the new sets or bricklink. 

The downside for me of all of this is precicely that: it makes sense. TLG is taking a direction of increasing an already expensive toy because, basically, the public still pays for it. Unfortunately, that means that a lot of people will give up on lego, but little will change company-wise. 

[Cwetqo]

400 parts does not boil down to 400 euro. I will assume 20€ average motor price and 60€ hub price (I expect them to be cheaper in set than standalone). I excluded supercars and smaller sets with "train" hub.

42100 - 4108 parts - 7 motors - 450€ - 140€ - 120€ = 190€ (C+, license) - 4,6 cpp (cents per piece)

42082 - 4057 parts - 1 motor - 230€ - 20€ = 210€ (PF) - 5,1 cpp

42055 - 3929 parts - 1 motor - 230€ - 20€ = 210€ (PF) - 5,3 cpp

42131 - 3854 parts - 4 motors - 450€ - 80€ - 60€ = 310€ (C+, license) - 8 cpp

42043 - 2793 parts - 1 motor - 200€ - 20€ = 180€ (PF) - 6,4 cpp

42009 - 2606 parts - 1 motor - 200€ - 20€ = 180€ (PF) - 6,9 cpp

42114 - 2193 parts - 3 motors - 250€ -60€ - 60€ = 130€ (C+, license) - 5,9 cpp

42129 - 2110 parts - 4 motors - 300€ -60€ -80€ = 160€ (C+, license) - 7,5 cpp

42099 - 958 parts - 3 motors - 230€ -60€ -60€ = 110€ (C+) - 11,4 cpp

 

Bulldozer is VERY expensive. Still not more expensive than 42099, which means that I should value motors and hubs even more, but would make it even more expensive than others. 

I am of course aware that some cost more beacuse of new tires, LA's and similar stuff, but still, there is no excuse that it costs the same as 42100, with almost half less electronics and less pieces.

[syclone]

I think I can partially agree @HectorMB, PU might be the reason why a set is "expensive" . However then I don't understand the reason for said system to be so expensive - silicon shortage or not, other comparable electronics (like Raspberry Pi)  are dirt cheap in comparison and are much more sophisticated when it comes to hardware specs (with even the 10€ Pi Zero being able to run an OS with monitor output) even factoring in a few motor drivers and other necessary electronic components still seems to leave quite a significant markup.

Then,  PF sets included a remote, which added to the cost, yet PU sets do not include one - so some savings should be seen there (surprise! there aren't any) 

Setting aside the remote control system itself, we are left with the issue whether the set is worth the money - the flagships such as Liebherr and now CAT look needlessly big with the former having huge open spaces inside and latter seeming to repeat the same trend - at least IMHO, having looked a bit at the photos. 

Even if the size were justified - what is the target audience? Spending such amounts of money on a toy most likely would imply an adult audience, and hardcore lego Technic fans would certainly appreciate it (parts/electronics source...) , yet they seem to be made for inexperienced builders in mind instead, while relying on said hardcore fans for marketing purposes (remember Sariel's video with the real Liebherr). 

Well, just my 2 cents, since I definitely can't afford something like this, nor have the desire to honestly. 

[williamyzfr1]

Whilst specific to the thread it would seem many of the Technic Forum members prefer builds of published MOC's. I was tempted to do this on more than one occasion but the cost of the parts from Rebrickable or Bricklink was insane. 

One recent example was a Lamborghini and the MOC publisher suggested a Lego Chiron as a donor  for parts, even then the total cost was from memory >£700 for one 1/8th Supercar.

Makes Lego supercars cheap IMHO.

Edited September 10, 2021 by williamyzfr1

[allanp]

I have said before that price per piece is not a good way to quantify value, even without PU involved. Price per kg gives a much stronger correlation and it does seem that the CAT has a lot of big panel pieces. Also it has the 42099 gear reduction hubs which aren't cheap. And I also agree with @Jim that the price of 42100 was probably just excellent value compared to this new CAT, which is only just okay value. Not as good a 42100 but not as bad as a lot of people would make it out to be. But to me, price per piece, price per KG or whatever, these are different methods of trying to find out how a set will be priced and that's fair enough. But these methods in no way reflect how much a set is worth to me as the buyer. On paper the CAT may be reasonable value, but as the CAT doesn't offer much of value to me (apart from one new (wide track) and one recoloured (5x7 yellow frame) part which I will be buying separately) the value discussion become less relevant. If it was ----insert wishlist here----- then I'd say it was excellent value and I'd be coming up with all sorts of excuses for the price even if it had less pieces. Value is subjective at the end of the day.

[Gray Gear]

7 minutes ago, allanp said:

I also agree with @Jim that the price of 42100 was probably just excellent value compared to this new CAT, which is only just okay value.

Good one m8

[allanp]

2 minutes ago, Gray Gear said:

Good one m8

 Well I am trying to be more positive on this forum, too much?! 

[Gray Gear]

@allanp I appreachiate it m8, but it sounded like 

Edited September 10, 2021 by Gray Gear

[m2fel]

I'm gonna quote myself from the Bulldozer thread:

Okay, I won't buy it and think it is to expensive but the decision about the price is up to Lego. If it sells badly and  they are not making good money they might change something and maybe, just maybe change their pricing or stop making xxl-models. But only because we like technic Lego must not make things affordable...

By the way I also would like to drive a Mercedes but they are to expensive :/

[HectorMB]

So, correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that we came to some sort of common point which is that the insanely expensive CAT11 (is a pretty high price, regardless the piece count, price per kilo or whatever) converted most of the lego sets in quite cheap ones. 

Honestly, for me lego sets are a hobby. And I hope it won't become something else than that. And for this kind of hobby, I think that 450 EUR is just too much. 

Other opinion that I have -and I have the impression that it is shared by some people in the forum- is that one set has to have very good reasons to overpass a 2500 piece count. Big red, for me, have plenty of good excuses for such piece count. Even the 42055. I think, sticking in that range, lego has still a huge potential to do amazing things, instead of making moles of sets that are impressive just because they are massive and looks nice in the vitrine. This applies for regular technic sets; the super cars are targeting other public, I think. 

[1974]

It's not about the amount of parts but WHAT parts. A thousand pins is worthless to just about everyone (and totally worthless if if you have a BL shop)

A better metric is weight-to-price ratio. Or electric/pneumatic-to-price ratio. And certainly also function-to-price ratio

The dozer does not deliver. Only cool thing is the new threads

Pretty sure no-one is buying this set for the app controlled ladder

Edit : I'm also looking forward to the crying game in plus ten years when none of the apps are working on our inplanted 7G smart hubs and the 8275 is 3KEUR on the secondhand market

Right now PF is a better investment than gold

Cheers,

Ole

Edited September 10, 2021 by 1974

[Jurss]

I hope, that CAT will cost around 300EUR at some point, after some half a year. At least in one local shop it always happen with expensive sets, that they get 30% discount. So I don't worry too much.

[jorgeopesi]

17 minutes ago, m2fel said:

By the way I also would like to drive a Mercedes but they are to expensive :/

Second time I read this, ok that it is a matter of taste and I do not like to drive so any car is good for me but I also think that there are brands like mercedes which are expensive for exclusivity more than efficience. I would not like Lego to be another mercedes of the toys because I will start to buy generic Lego in that case.

[HectorMB]

1 minute ago, jorgeopesi said:

Second time I read this, ok that it is a matter of taste and I do not like to drive so any car is good for me but I also think that there are brands like mercedes which are expensive for exclusivity more than efficience. I would not like Lego to be another mercedes of the toys because I will start to buy generic Lego in that case.

Cannot agree more

[1974]

This fixation on part numbers is weird. i don't recall buying sets as a kid based on that. In fact, the part number was never stated on the box! I believe this is an american thing only

No-one is buying a swing or a playhouse for their kids going "Honey, this has 279 more screws than that other one which is 100EUR cheaper. Let's get the one with the most screws!"

Another hobby of mine is Tamiya RC cars (re-res and vintage) and NO-ONE in that hobby is buying those cars for the part count

 

3 minutes ago, jorgeopesi said:

Second time I read this, ok that it is a matter of taste and I do not like to drive so any car is good for me but I also think that there are brands like mercedes which are expensive for exclusivity more than efficience. I would not like Lego to be another mercedes of the toys because I will start to buy generic Lego in that case.

LEGO IS the Mercedes of construction toys. Also, PLEASE do not use the word "LEGO" for generic off-brand/clone/straight up ripoff stuff. "LEGO" is not the Kleenex of construction toys just yet and I think TLG have enough lawyers around to deal with that

[Gimmick]

Some useless statistics:

You can fit

[MEAN(NON RC PPP)]*1.2*PartCount+75 = Price

linear to the costs in € of RC models with a coefficiant of determination R² = 0.97 (also depends on inflation correction, so the 20% PPP increase and 75€ offset may vary a bit, if you use 9.5c PPP it's close enough for demonstration)

The relative deviation is the largest at smaller sets of course. This results in surprisingly small absolut pricing distances of +/-  ~20€ from that curve but sometimes large absolute set-set distances of ~50€ of two sets that appeared very close to each other (42114 and 42129).

It seems that the way RC is implemented does not matter that much, mainly because different implementations only exists in sets with a decent size, so the discrepancy in electronics does not weight enough.

The problem with this model is, that it mixes the price of physical things with "experience" which will never be fully comprehensible for everyone.

 

My opinion about the pricing of the CAT, Liebherr, Lambo,...:

I have in general no problem with such "special" sets that appear every two years. I don't know why a 42115 or 42083 does / should feel special I cannot "connect" with that. I count those sets as "special intereset sets" and so do I with the CAT and the Liebherr. If they want to release even larger special-interest-sets with even more parts -> I'm sure I will not care and I will not buy, but if someone cares.. feel free to do so. If someone wants to buy a giant model of a ship, building or whatever -> feel free to do so.

And therefore I do not think that those models are a good representation of the "general pricing situation". The question should be: How does the price-performance ratio of the normal sets look like.

And my opinion for the general situation would be:

• RC is and always was(!) too expensive to be always used in flagship models - RC is overrepresented
• pricing of the smaller models is fine
• pricing of the higher-end models (like 42128) is fine and so are by far most toys sets
• pricing of the 1:10 cars is way too high
• pullbacks are in a good position since last year

And then are sets that do not fit to their price-class anymore like the Zetros. The flagship range should be ~200-250€, if you leave that range it leaves a giant gap in the product list and it will not make much sense anymore. I mean you can make every small set larger and more expensive - but then there will be no cheap sets left :|

 

Edited September 10, 2021 by Gimmick

[Cwetqo]

25 minutes ago, Jurss said:

I hope, that CAT will cost around 300EUR at some point, after some half a year. At least in one local shop it always happen with expensive sets, that they get 30% discount. So I don't worry too much.

I'm sure that it will soon be available for much reduced price, similar to another overpriced set, 42099, which could be bought for as low as 150 euro. Market always levels thing to its proper value. Same with Sian set, which was always on sale with good discount (I bought it for 260euro). On the other side, I've almost never saw 42100 with good discount.

[jorgeopesi]

16 minutes ago, 1974 said:

LEGO IS the Mercedes of construction toys. Also, PLEASE do not use the word "LEGO" for generic off-brand/clone/straight up ripoff stuff. "LEGO" is not the Kleenex of construction toys just yet and I think TLG have enough lawyers around to deal with that

I will use it like I want if you do not mind and I do not think lego is the mercedes of construction toys, Lego was the first to explode the business like ford but lego patented its wheels,

Edited September 10, 2021 by jorgeopesi