Just wondering who will end up buying those extremely expensive vintage set?

[ks6349]

Just take an example, Lego 6399 , it is asking for about $4000, are they just waiting for the super rich to buy it? 

[MAB]

A well off but not necessarily super rich LEGO collector.

[ks6349]

41 minutes ago, MAB said:

A well off but not necessarily super rich LEGO collector.

I can afford 200 sets of Lego 6399 for the current price but I won't even get one, not one has 4001 then he will immediately buy it and save 1 for their life

[koalayummies]

Hopefully all the unopened overpriced discontinued sets never sell. That'd be awesome.

[Toastie]

38 minutes ago, koalayummies said:

Hopefully all the unopened overpriced discontinued sets never sell.

I cannot agree more. Very well said. I truly hope that as well.

Best
Thorsten

[ks6349]

1 minute ago, Toastie said:

I cannot agree more. Very well said. I truly hope that as well.

Best
Thorsten

Yes, I cannot agree more too.

But it may be their pricing and marketing skills to overprice first for a few years, and then after some interested people getting hungry then they make some good discount and some fishes will fall into the trap. Since after their discount the price is still ridiculous

Some fishes are not clever enough.

[Toastie]

16 minutes ago, ks6349 said:

Some fishes are not clever enough

And some have simply too much money - enabling this frenzy.

BTW, this overpricing stupidity is exactly the contrary of what LEGO is all about.

Clever or not: When you have that money at your hands, the type of cleverness you are referring to it not necessarily within your grasp. Nor does it have to be. But who knows.

Best
Thorsten 

[ks6349]

19 minutes ago, Toastie said:

And some have simply too much money - enabling this frenzy.

BTW, this overpricing stupidity is exactly the contrary of what LEGO is all about.

Clever or not: When you have that money at your hands, the type of cleverness you are referring to it not necessarily within your grasp. Nor does it have to be. But who knows.

Best
Thorsten 

I will buy overpriced set, but only if it is not going off the track too much and I like it I will buy it. Sometimes you'll be paying $10 or $20 more for a recently retired set that you like it's fine, it's okay. However, I will never pay $4000 for that set 6399 this kind of business is not to be encouraged

[MAB]

16 hours ago, Toastie said:

BTW, this overpricing stupidity is exactly the contrary of what LEGO is all about.

I disagree here, because this set is not a normal set any more. It has become a collectable. 30 year old sealed sets are a relative rarity and so carry a premium. If someone wants to build the set, there are second hand sets around. Of course those also carry a premium as supply is less than demand. But if someone wants a sealed set to display or the enjoyment of reliving opening a Christmas present from the past, they will have to pay even more.

How much should that premium be? That is up to buyers and sellers to decide. A sale only occurs when they agree.

LEGO is a bout the building, and there are literally 1000s of sets available at retail stores now or via the secondary marketplace if someone wants to build them.

[NickLafreniere]

17 hours ago, koalayummies said:

Hopefully all the unopened overpriced discontinued sets never sell. That'd be awesome.

Same, I hope no mortal gets access to those bricks. It disgusts me if someone wants to spend their own money on that - it shouldn't ever happen

 

 

 

jk

[Mylenium]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

It has become a collectable. 30 year old sealed sets are a relative rarity and so carry a premium.

And so has plastic-based art in museums that's now beginning to crumble and decompose. See where this could be going? A few years down the line it may not be anything but a worthless pile of plastic dust rattling in a box. The rest I never understood, anyway. I might covet a ten year old set that I missed out on, but anything beyond that just to relive some childhood nostalgia or whatever? The whole notion just is weird to me on so many levels. Even if I had that kind of money and couldn't be bothered. And in some ways Thorsten's comment may even be true, even if it may have been meant tongue-in-cheek: That whole collecting thing (of brick sets, not minifigures) feels so contrary to what I understand LEGO should be about...

Mylenium

[koalayummies]

 

2 hours ago, NickLafreniere said:

Same, I hope no mortal gets access to those bricks. It disgusts me if someone wants to spend their own money on that - it shouldn't ever happen

jk

The seller is extremely excited listing it for $4,000 thinking 'someday my riches will come!' (muhahah). He is giddy as he thinks: "It was so clever holding on to this for so long, never opening it, never enjoying it or letting a child play with it; I am a genius and my patience will pay off!"Dreaming of all that money, the lust. His conspicuous consumption and hoarding will eventually be worth a fortune! But alas no one buys it, time passes and he slowly grows old. When he finally shuffles off this mortal coil, his unopened children's toys all still unsold, Satan is there to greet him. In disbelief he exclaims: "WHAT!?!? Why am I here? I should be in Heaven! I wanted to meet Ole Kirk Christiansen!"

But the Devil replies: "You did not PLAY WELL!!!!!! Now suffer in my domain of fire and damnation for all of eternity!!!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!11"

jk

[MAB]

54 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

And so has plastic-based art in museums that's now beginning to crumble and decompose. See where this could be going? A few years down the line it may not be anything but a worthless pile of plastic dust rattling in a box. The rest I never understood, anyway. I might covet a ten year old set that I missed out on, but anything beyond that just to relive some childhood nostalgia or whatever? The whole notion just is weird to me on so many levels. Even if I had that kind of money and couldn't be bothered. And in some ways Thorsten's comment may even be true, even if it may have been meant tongue-in-cheek: That whole collecting thing (of brick sets, not minifigures) feels so contrary to what I understand LEGO should be about...

Mylenium

It is more likely to break or bits get lost if out of the box. But yeah, some parts may degrade especially rubber wheels/tyres. But does it even matter. If someone wants it as a sealed set, the condition of the contents is not important unless the box has a plastic window. It is more like a fine wine than plastic art. The sealed container is the collectable, sometimes more important than the condition of the stuff inside.

24 minutes ago, koalayummies said:

 

The seller is extremely excited listing it for $4,000 thinking 'someday my riches will come!' (muhahah). He is giddy as he thinks: "It was so clever holding on to this for so long, never opening it, never enjoying it or letting a child play with it; I am a genius and my patience will pay off!"Dreaming of all that money, the lust. His conspicuous consumption and hoarding will eventually be worth a fortune! But alas no one buys it, time passes and he slowly grows old. When he finally shuffles off this mortal coil, his unopened children's toys all still unsold, Satan is there to greet him. In disbelief he exclaims: "WHAT!?!? Why am I here? I should be in Heaven! I wanted to meet Ole Kirk Christiansen!"

That is unlikely to be the case for vintage sets. I imagine many sealed vintage sets that show up are ones that never got sold and were left in a stockroom, or were bought and then never  gifted,  or didn't sell and sold off in bulk and not sold on at the time. Of course some would have been in the hands of collectors of the time, for what they were - sealed sets - (and would have been enjoyed in their collection even if not built) rather than what they thought they would be worth in 30 or 40 years. The fact that so few sealed sets were saved is what makes them so desirable now. A lot of vintage sets are worth very little in terms of contents (if just basic parts), but still valuable if the set is sealed and the box is good. Having a sealed box with desirable contents inside is a double whammy.

It is different these days where people do invest in multiple copies each of many sets primarily for investment. 

[ks6349]

22 hours ago, koalayummies said:

 

The seller is extremely excited listing it for $4,000 thinking 'someday my riches will come!' (muhahah). He is giddy as he thinks: "It was so clever holding on to this for so long, never opening it, never enjoying it or letting a child play with it; I am a genius and my patience will pay off!"Dreaming of all that money, the lust. His conspicuous consumption and hoarding will eventually be worth a fortune! But alas no one buys it, time passes and he slowly grows old. When he finally shuffles off this mortal coil, his unopened children's toys all still unsold, Satan is there to greet him. In disbelief he exclaims: "WHAT!?!? Why am I here? I should be in Heaven! I wanted to meet Ole Kirk Christiansen!"

But the Devil replies: "You did not PLAY WELL!!!!!! Now suffer in my domain of fire and damnation for all of eternity!!!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!11"

jk

You don't have to over describe what he thinks, but that he is keeping it for this long time and selling at this price is just not worth pity for. Hope he will be buried with his crazily priced vintage sets

Edited September 12, 2021 by ks6349

[nerdsforprez]

Actually, I am going to post an unpopular opinion here.  I just love how folks project their own interpretations, aspirations, and opinions onto what Lego is "supposed" to be.  Like one often does with say a favorite actor, actress, or athlete.  They morph into something that initially was never intended.  At least not directly.  They play a super-hero in a movie, but it is the consumer's projections that try to make them into a super-hero in real life.  

Folks do the same with Lego.  Lego "fans" is short-hand for fanatic.  And that is totally fine.  No one wants to be rational and practical when it comes to a hobby.  That is what real life is for.  

But the above says much more about the poster's themselves than any objective description TLG ever gave itself.  As far as I can tell, the motto for TLG was always "play well" - who are we to dictate what it means to "play well"?   If buying things, saving them, and seeing if one can sell it for a profit is a way to "play" for a person when who are we to judge?  BTW... everyone knows there are whole websites dedicated to this stuff. Buying and selling Lego like market shares of stock  can be a ton of fun for folks.  I think its kind of shallow to throw shade upon others just b/c they don't fit your definition of what it means to have a good time....

[CP5670]

I have quite a few MISB sets that I got on ebay in the early 2000s and have been opening up them over the years. Just opened up an 8862. Back then they were much cheaper. I could sell them but prefer to enjoy them myself, and can make much more money doing something else. I only sell them if I want to free up space in my collection.

I don't necessarily have a problem with the buyers, and to be honest they are cheap compared to a lot of other stuff people buy, like exotic cars. However, buyers who speculate on them (instead of building it themselves) and expect to sell in the future will often get shafted. The market can shift over time and not all old sets are desirable anymore.

Also, the bricks definitely can degrade over time. I've opened MISB sets from the 80s that were apparently stored in smoky environments, where the bricks had become brittle with excessive clutch power and would crack easily.

Edited September 23, 2021 by CP5670

[howitzer]

In Finland we have this saying which roughly translates to something like "It's not stupid to ask" and I think it sums this up pretty nicely. If you want to sell it, you can ask however much you want and no matter how exorbitant the price, it's not you who is the stupid one if someone buys it. This of course applies only to stuff that is not in any way necessary for living.

I've never really understood why someone wants to buy extremely expensive stuff that has little intrinsic or practical value, no matter if it's a painting or a fast car or a Lego set. But if someone does want to do so and can afford it, who am I to deny them that.

[BrickG]

What a weird thread.

People can like what they like. If they like and want a 30 year old expensive Lego set, let them. It's not up to them to have their likes be understood by you.

I wouldn't buy those things. They're not for me. But geeze, why so much hate in this set for people having their own opinions and tastes and desires? Oh no someone wants a collectable! Oh no! The price is going up because there's few of them and enough people want them! OH MY GOOOOSSSH!!!

What? Stop judging people based on something like this :P. "I never really understood" geeze, what kind of attitude is that? I don't understand freeform jazz or country music but I'm not going to take a dump on people who like it. People like different things.

 

This is a needless thread.

[Stuartn]

7 hours ago, BrickG said:

wouldn't buy those things. They're not for me. But geeze, why so much hate in this set for people having their own opinions and tastes and desires? Oh no someone wants a collectable! Oh no! The price is going up because there's few of them and enough people want them! OH MY GOOOOSSSH!!!

Most AFOLs aren’t overly rich, of course you have to have excess money to afford unnecessary construction toys to display on your shelf, but not everyone can dispense several thousand dollars for a set. When scalpers sell sets for multiple times their worth, they price many out of the market, this is especially unethical when  recently they often buy up large quantities of sets. There is nothing wrong with keeping sets as an investment (hence the modulars and GWPs unopened upstairs in my house) but such massive overpricing isn’t ethical and the people who cannot afford these sets have a right to be frustrated. Of course, we don’t need to buy said sets, but it is frustrating nonetheless.

[MAB]

2 hours ago, Stuartn said:

Most AFOLs aren’t overly rich, of course you have to have excess money to afford unnecessary construction toys to display on your shelf, but not everyone can dispense several thousand dollars for a set. When scalpers sell sets for multiple times their worth, they price many out of the market, this is especially unethical when  recently they often buy up large quantities of sets. There is nothing wrong with keeping sets as an investment (hence the modulars and GWPs unopened upstairs in my house) but such massive overpricing isn’t ethical and the people who cannot afford these sets have a right to be frustrated. Of course, we don’t need to buy said sets, but it is frustrating nonetheless.

You don't need most AFOLs to be rich to make a sale. You only need a few rich collectors to want something. I don't really see any difference buying a set for investment and selling at 1.5x RRP or selling at 10x RRP. In both cases, you have removed a set from the primary market to sell later. The only difference is how much profit you make, which is typically down to supply and demand. Purposely creating a market unbalance by buying 1000s of sets and leaving shelves bare and quick flipping is unethical but the vast majority of sets are available for a long time on shelves. If people didn't buy when it was available at retail, it is their fault  not the sellers fault. If the reseller had not bought it, someone else would have and it still wouldn't be available on the primary market later.

I don't think I have ever missed out on a regular retail set I wanted due to resellers. If I have missed something it is more typically because I was waiting for a better price.

 

Edited October 10, 2021 by MAB

[Alexandrina]

13 hours ago, MAB said:

If people didn't buy when it was available at retail, it is their fault

I'd argue that in many cases it isn't anybody's fault. I'm not going to blame sellers for me not having all the cool 80s and 90s sets that I don't have, but equally it's not my fault I didn't buy the sets before I was born. Lego's been about for over 60 years now, and even the Golden Age of the 90s is pushing thirty years now - lots of people will feel frustrated that they can't get the sets they want when they never even had the chance to. That's nobody's fault at all, it's just life.

[BrickG]

It's not unethical. It simply isn't. It's supply and demand. Especially of retired sets which you can't really control how wanted they are.

The only places this becomes unethical is if someone buys out an entire stock to sell things for Markup (like Playstation 5s, iPhones, whatever). At that point the stores should impose a 1 per person thing. There's other areas it might become unethical (like making medicine overpriced, whatever) but geeze, if a retired set is selling for 5x the amount because it's retired and hard to find and people want it, there's literally nothing wrong with that.

Scalpers are bad under some circumstances. But this thread doesn't seem to be foucsed on those circumstances. I'd say the most possibly arguably unethical LEGO related thing like this are the comic-con figures and other things that are so exclusive and hard to find that it's like $500 for one minifigure. But even with that we're just talking about a small plastic character and I'm not sure it's unethical but more like... really annoying :P. Now if someone bought all of the Comic Con figures and controlled the market and made it bad...

 

I don't think not being able to afford something = it's automatically unethical. I can't get a Tesla. I want a Tesla. Is it unethical for the Tesla to exist?

Before the UCS Falcon got rereleased I desperately wanted one of the original ones. Those were going for ridiculous prices. But it's because the set was retired and really wanted. Was it unethical for someone to sell one for $3k? I don't think so. Was I upset I couldn't afford it? Yes.

 

Idunno I still have my opinion that this thread is kind of dumb.

At the end of the day it's also TOYS. Not medicine. Not something people need. I understand anti-capitalist sentiments to an extent but when you're talking about stuff that at the end of the day doesn't really matter (sorry LEGO but you're not THAT important ultimately) and you're not talking about someone charging 5000x the price for insulin, which is clearly wrong.

 

And WHO is buying 1000s of sets that aren't retired? Lego 6399 as is mentioned in the first post... wasn't that made in like 1990? Am I missing something? Was it rereleased? It seems totally reasonable that it would be expensive (it's not 4k though, seems to be about 500-1k max in the places I look).

[Toastie]

8 hours ago, BrickG said:

Idunno I still have my opinion that this thread is kind of dumb.

Well relax, I'd say. "Dumb" is an assessment you do, from your perspective - and that is fine! You believe this thread is dumb, I believe that the price is unethical. Who cares.
Reason: I (personally) have a different perspective on LEGO bricks as you have. Which is perfectly fine as this perspective thing is one of the definitions of a public forum. 

Of course, you are right ... what else: There is a price, and folks who can afford that: Done deal. The Amazon guy was doing his space thing, because "we" use Amazon - and he can simply afford it, because we do Amazon. Again: Done deal. Certainly not his fault, but ours. Well, it is not even a fault: It is what we do and want. Over and out.

The thing is: LEGO has this "play well" tag they use here and there and everywhere. Play, not gamble. But then: They do it as well; look at the price tags of recent flagship sets ... so why shouldn't resellers do it.

In the end: Yes, it is as it is - and who cares. As it is always, when cracking down on "demand and supply". Playing or not.

Best regards,
Thorsten

[nerdsforprez]

15 hours ago, Toastie said:

Play, not gamble.

you balance your observation so I won't hit this too hard... but I am not sure I would try and define "play" - its very definition is anything but objective or definable.  Most would inject its meaning a healthy dose of fun, reality-testing, and emotion.  The definition of the word is not meant to be logical, restricted, reality-based or boring.  There are MANY who would define "play" injected with some form of risk-taking....i.e. "gambling" if you will.  In fact, a popular English phrase, at least here in the US, in terms of risk-taking is indeed "playing with our life" or "playing with fire" -  i.e. "risk-taking" 

"playing" games, etc. all includes risk-taking and strategy.... so I am not sure your observation holds water.   

I have said it before and I will say it again... I think its silly to try and define for other grown men and women what it means to "play" - and all efforts to do so  easily dissolve.  

Edited October 12, 2021 by nerdsforprez

[MAB]

1 minute ago, nerdsforprez said:

you balance your observation so I won't hit this too hard... but surely I am not sure I would try and define "play" - its very definition is anything but objective or definable.  Most would inject its meaning a healthy dose of fun, reality-testing, and emotion.  The definition of the word is not meant to be logical, restricted, reality-based or boring.  There are MANY who would define "play" injected with some form of risk-taking....i.e. "gambling" if you will.  In fact, a popular English phrase, at least here in the US, in terms of risk-taking is indeed "playing with our life" or "playing with fire" -  i.e. "risk-taking" 

"playing" games, etc. all includes risk-taking and strategy.... so I am not sure your observation holds water.   

I have said it before and I will say it again... I think its silly to try and define for other grown men and women what it means to "play" - and all efforts to do so probably easily dissolvable.  

Indeed. Some of my sets I enjoy because they are sealed. Am I playing well with it by displaying them?

I also play the market. I enjoy picking sets I think others might want in future, especially if those sets are not wanted now and need to be discounted to sell.