CopMike

Questions and Concerns for TLG

Recommended Posts

Here's a question which I have pondered for ages - why aren't there any (not even one) Official Lego Stores in Australia?

Lego operates 34 official retail outlets in the US, why can they not even manage to have at least one in Australia (preferably near/in Sydney, as it is the biggest city and... I live close to it :wink: )? The population of the US is roughly around 300 000 000, meaning that 300 million ÷ 34 Lego retail shops = each store caters for at least 8 823 529 people. In Australia, the populace is vastly smaller, with an estimated (2011) 22 620 600 people. So using the results of the US equation, 8 823 529 people/shop + 8 823 529 people/shop = 17 647058, which is close to the total population of AU. So theoretically, shouldn't there be at least 2 official Lego Stores across Australia to cater for the population? It's not like Lego can't afford to build a few new stores, they're doing it all the time in the USA and other counties similar to Australia, plus the whole company is on the up as they are a highly successful brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a question which I have pondered for ages - why aren't there any (not even one) Official Lego Stores in Australia?

Keep in mind that there's only one - 1 - official LEGO Store in Denmark, the home of the brick... and not a single one in either Norway or Sweden, the very closest countries to Denmark, and the two first countries, apart from Denmark, where LEGO was ever sold... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Already since a long time, I am a bit frustrated about the fact that we have to pay more in Europe than in England or the U.S. (while technically seen, we are closer to Denmark)..

I understand this would be a mess with the value of coins always changing, but still it is not really fair.

Same remark for the fact that the customers in the U.S. are always advantaged by the fact that they allways get the exclusives and TLG always releases their products there before going to Europe.

But this is really getting out of hand now:

Attack of the Warges is (www.legoshop.com)

- in the US: 49,99$ (which is around 40€)

- In France & The Netherlands, this set is 59,99 €

- In Belgium (between France & the Netherlands), this set is 69,99 € !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Come'on, that's 30 € more than in the US!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unfortunate and can be unfair, but there are a lot of factors that go into pricing. The US has a larger market base I believe, so they get better deals at times. The US doesn't always receive the exclusives though. I know I've seen some sets posted online that are/were not available here still.

I stand by my statement. If I lived anywhere else, I would not buy LEGO due to not being able to afford it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between the white and clear stickers is something I've only recently become aware of - mostly through Huw at Brickset. I can't imagine it's a cost issue - maybe they're in the process of phasing the white opaque ones out? I've read several posts by people on this board who scan their sticker sheets and re-print them on clear sticker paper, but I'm a bit too apprehensive regarding the long-term resiliency to try it myself. I think I'll stick with the official LEGO ones. (No pun intended.) :wink:

The opaque and clear stickers have different properties, so when they are used will depend on he need. The inks that stickers (or any inkjet printer for that matter) are printed with are somewhat translucent. So the color backing the ink matters. Dark underlying colors will cause color shifts. With the opaque stickers they are printing onto a white base so they can control it and print brightens colors onto darker ones. If the ink is darker than the piece it is to be applied to ( such as the wood grain stickers in Hobbit sets) clear stickers work well. When the piece is darker than the printing the white ones are needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Already since a long time, I am a bit frustrated about the fact that we have to pay more in Europe than in England or the U.S. (while technically seen, we are closer to Denmark).

Heh. Being close to Denmark doesn't matter the least bit, we have some of the most expensive LEGO prices in the world. They know we love LEGO and are willing to pay good money for it, so they exploit it greatly.

Frustrating, but that's just the way it is. It's the reason why I very, very rarely buy LEGO not on 40-50 % sale.

Edited by Hive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opaque and clear stickers have different properties, so when they are used will depend on he need. The inks that stickers (or any inkjet printer for that matter) are printed with are somewhat translucent. So the color backing the ink matters. Dark underlying colors will cause color shifts. With the opaque stickers they are printing onto a white base so they can control it and print brightens colors onto darker ones. If the ink is darker than the piece it is to be applied to ( such as the wood grain stickers in Hobbit sets) clear stickers work well. When the piece is darker than the printing the white ones are needed.

There are of course also other factors-- opaque stickers, for instance, can't blend in seamlessly on a transparent part such as a windscreen. On the other hand, I don't believe transparent stickers can be printed with a mirrored finish.

Furthermore, as I've often noticed myself, opaque stickers don't show fingerprints the way transparent ones do, which is why I tend to prefer opaque stickers. As such they can also be removed and re-applied without damaging their appearance, whereas removing transparent-backed stickers will cause a change in apparent texture due to the stretching of the glue. Also, if an opaque-backed sticker should lose its "stickiness", additional glue can be added to reapply it to a piece. I think this would be more challenging with transparent-backed stickers.

Transparent stickers, on the other hand, can have more varied unintended uses, since they can be used on any color of part, whereas opaque-backed stickers are often designed to match the color of the part they are meant to be applied to in the set. I know that some Sci-Fi builders have gotten a lot of use out of the transparent-backed stickers from the first year of LEGO Exo-Force.

There is also apparently a problem with opaque-backed stickers peeling over time. I have not experienced this myself, which leads me to think it might have to do with humidity or some other factor that varies from builder to builder.

I think you're probably right in that the color a sticker is being applied to will make a big difference as far as TLG is concerned, but from an AFOL perspective the pros and cons of either type of sticker are numerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but from an AFOL perspective the pros and cons of either type of sticker are numerous.

Ah, but therein lies the biggest conundrum we AFOL's face over TDSS. While we, the adult fans despise the stickers and can't understand why Lego keeps using more and more of them. One of the reasons is the young target audience prefers stickers, and Lego's market research backs up that the kids view the application of the stickers as a key fun element of the sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have an XRAY Spectrometer at work that analyzes elements in an item placed in front of it. For fun I decided to put a 2x2 white Lego brick to see what elements it is made of, and was surprised to find some concerning results!

Of the brick that is not plastic, there are the following metals, in percentages disclosed:

Fe (Iron) 3.00%

Ni (Nickel) 1.01%

Zr (Zirconium) 1.34%

Ru (Ruthenium) 7.24%

Rh (Rhodium) 12.67%

Pb (Lead!!!) 18.10%

Ag (Silver) 26.93%

Cd (Cadmium!!) 29.69%

It should be noted that the percentages are not of the entire makeup, but are percentages of the heavy metal elements of the item. If the plastic makes up 99%, and metals make up 1%, the percentages above are what percentage of that 1%. However, I do not know the exact overall makeup of plastic to heavy metal ratio in a Lego brick, only TLG could answer that question.

What is alarming is the content of Lead, Cadmium, and other potentially toxic metals. Would someone care to comment about my findings?

Locutis

Edited by Locutis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be noted that the percentages are not of the entire makeup, but are percentages of the heavy metal elements of the item. If the plastic makes up 99%, and metals make up 1%, the percentages above are what percentage of that 1%. However, I do not know the exact overall makeup of plastic to heavy metal ratio in a Lego brick, only TLG could answer that question.

What is alarming is the content of Lead, Cadmium, and other potentially toxic metals. Would someone care to comment about my findings?

Locutis

You are probably reading off of the color dye that is injected into the plastic to give the piece its color. Some lead and cadmium is common in white pigmentation (there's a reason they actually named a color "Cadmium White"). The key question is how much of the overall percentage of the brick is the dye? I would suspect that it is substantially less than 1%?

Edited by Faefrost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are probably reading off of the color dye that is injected into the plastic to give the piece its color. Some lead and cadmium is common in white pigmentation (there's a reason they actually named a color "Cadmium White"). The key question is how much of the overall percentage of the brick is the dye? I would suspect that it is substantially less than 1%?

Thanks for the insight, 'Faefrost'.

I didn't have time, but I could analyze different colors and report the findings. Based on what you're saying, then theoretically the clear bricks should contain no heavy metals at all.

Locutis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but therein lies the biggest conundrum we AFOL's face over TDSS. While we, the adult fans despise the stickers and can't understand why Lego keeps using more and more of them. One of the reasons is the young target audience prefers stickers, and Lego's market research backs up that the kids view the application of the stickers as a key fun element of the sets.

Well, I'd contest that a bit. TLG has avoided stickers in several kid-oriented applications (for instance, many sets from the Cars and Toy Story themes), so I don't think it's fair to say that they feel kids in general like stickers. It should also be considered that historically, many of TLG's sets with stickers have been sets with greater technical intricacy. LEGO Technic sets have had stickers for decades, and likewise LEGO Exo-Force sets, while aimed at kids, often had enough stickers to be comparable to Beyblades or Gundam model kits (albeit thankfully not usually as fiddly as the stickers in Beyblades could be to apply, speaking from experience).

I think when determining whether to use stickers or printing, the audience is still a major factor for TLG, but I think they're usually looking at the capability of the audience rather than just preferences. So products that are expected to appeal greatly to younger kids might avoid stickers whenever possible, in order to ensure that kids don't become frustrated with the assembly. Those stickers they have will likely be relatively easy to apply, rather than small and fiddly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the insight, 'Faefrost'.

I didn't have time, but I could analyze different colors and report the findings. Based on what you're saying, then theoretically the clear bricks should contain no heavy metals at all.

Locutis

I think you may still see some very small amounts of lead in some clear plastics. I am not sure if it applies to Lego though. If I remember correctly, traditionally white, bright yellow and very bright reds are the colors that rely most on things like lead and cadmium, while blues and greens use less and may be more organic in composition. Always helpful information when trying to ascertain what paint not to eat.

Edited by Faefrost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have an XRAY Spectrometer at work that analyzes elements in an item placed in front of it. For fun I decided to put a 2x2 white Lego brick to see what elements it is made of, and was surprised to find some concerning results!

Of the brick that is not plastic, there are the following metals, in percentages disclosed:

Fe (Iron) 3.00%

Ni (Nickel) 1.01%

Zr (Zirconium) 1.34%

Ru (Ruthenium) 7.24%

Rh (Rhodium) 12.67%

Pd (Lead!!!) 18.10%

Ag (Silver) 26.93%

Cd (Cadmium!!) 29.69%

It should be noted that the percentages are not of the entire makeup, but are percentages of the heavy metal elements of the item. If the plastic makes up 99%, and metals make up 1%, the percentages above are what percentage of that 1%. However, I do not know the exact overall makeup of plastic to heavy metal ratio in a Lego brick, only TLG could answer that question.

What is alarming is the content of Lead, Cadmium, and other potentially toxic metals. Would someone care to comment about my findings?

Locutis

A question: what was the age of that particular piece? Was it brand new, or was it an older piece from your collection? I'm not jumping to any conclusions, but I thought that might be relevant in regards to amount of potential contaminants (from smoke, etc.) as well as differing safety standards over time. Of course, even that can't help us to draw a conclusion on our own without knowing exactly what the ratio of dye to plastic is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question: what was the age of that particular piece? Was it brand new, or was it an older piece from your collection? I'm not jumping to any conclusions, but I thought that might be relevant in regards to amount of potential contaminants (from smoke, etc.) as well as differing safety standards over time. Of course, even that can't help us to draw a conclusion on our own without knowing exactly what the ratio of dye to plastic is.

The piece I analyzed was from the Calendar set. I purchased that set about 8 months ago. It has not been exposed to any smoke or contaminants (it's at work). Just for fun, I could open a brand new set, and analyze the pieces to determine if brand new from a bag would have the same result.

Locutis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question: what was the age of that particular piece? Was it brand new, or was it an older piece from your collection? I'm not jumping to any conclusions, but I thought that might be relevant in regards to amount of potential contaminants (from smoke, etc.) as well as differing safety standards over time. Of course, even that can't help us to draw a conclusion on our own without knowing exactly what the ratio of dye to plastic is.

It would be interesting to see if the numbers and ratios changed substantially when Lego shifted to their newer color injection system. In the old days Lego bought colored plastic pellets. These days they buy a single neutral color pellet and inject the color into the molten plastic as it is processed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are of course also other factors-- opaque stickers, for instance, can't blend in seamlessly on a transparent part such as a windscreen. On the other hand, I don't believe transparent stickers can be printed with a mirrored finish.

Furthermore, as I've often noticed myself, opaque stickers don't show fingerprints the way transparent ones do, which is why I tend to prefer opaque stickers. As such they can also be removed and re-applied without damaging their appearance, whereas removing transparent-backed stickers will cause a change in apparent texture due to the stretching of the glue. Also, if an opaque-backed sticker should lose its "stickiness", additional glue can be added to reapply it to a piece. I think this would be more challenging with transparent-backed stickers.

Transparent stickers, on the other hand, can have more varied unintended uses, since they can be used on any color of part, whereas opaque-backed stickers are often designed to match the color of the part they are meant to be applied to in the set. I know that some Sci-Fi builders have gotten a lot of use out of the transparent-backed stickers from the first year of LEGO Exo-Force.

There is also apparently a problem with opaque-backed stickers peeling over time. I have not experienced this myself, which leads me to think it might have to do with humidity or some other factor that varies from builder to builder.

I think you're probably right in that the color a sticker is being applied to will make a big difference as far as TLG is concerned, but from an AFOL perspective the pros and cons of either type of sticker are numerous.

I also came to that conclusion, from the darker color-white sticker sheet, lighter color-transparent sticker sheet. but sometimes, that is really a pitty, because if there is only one sticker applied on a darker surface, they use a white sticker sheet.

for example in this year's A-wing (star wars), there was one surface that was darker, and all the stickers where on white. And I wanted to have that same red A-wing in green, but that is now not anymore possible, because I then have got red stickers! :cry2:

And a solution for the fingerprints on the transparent sticker sheets: just print the whole sticker. Lego did that in the Sith Nightspeeder (star wars), its stickers were printed on a transparent sheet(because one little 1x1 sticker got on a trans-red piece), but the rest of the stickers were all printed completely, so you couldn't see fingerprints at all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also came to that conclusion, from the darker color-white sticker sheet, lighter color-transparent sticker sheet. but sometimes, that is really a pitty, because if there is only one sticker applied on a darker surface, they use a white sticker sheet.

for example in this year's A-wing (star wars), there was one surface that was darker, and all the stickers where on white. And I wanted to have that same red A-wing in green, but that is now not anymore possible, because I then have got red stickers! :cry2:

And a solution for the fingerprints on the transparent sticker sheets: just print the whole sticker. Lego did that in the Sith Nightspeeder (star wars), its stickers were printed on a transparent sheet(because one little 1x1 sticker got on a trans-red piece), but the rest of the stickers were all printed completely, so you couldn't see fingerprints at all!

True, but that only solves the fingerprint issue for stickers that are in fact printed completely. The places where it's most frustrating for me are stickers that have a lot of transparent space and are going on transparent parts. Often with a bit of redesigning a non-transparent sticker could be used, unless the pattern is something that actually needs to be see-through like crosshairs on a windscreen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but that only solves the fingerprint issue for stickers that are in fact printed completely. The places where it's most frustrating for me are stickers that have a lot of transparent space and are going on transparent parts. Often with a bit of redesigning a non-transparent sticker could be used, unless the pattern is something that actually needs to be see-through like crosshairs on a windscreen.

Then it is the best idea to not touch the stickers with your fingers.

but sometimes transparent stickers leave other marks, as with my AT-OT walker. the problem of then only using sticker for the non having to be-transparent part of the piece is that the sticker might turn out bad a bit folded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question:

When new parts are made from the soft, rubbery type of plastic, are they cheaper to mould? The cost of a new ABS mould is well known to be incredibly high, and LEGO tend to ensure that these new pieces are used in at least two sets to offset the cost. But with the rubbery pieces you often find them being single-use, such as alien heads in Star Wars. The next SW in particular will have brand new moulded heads for Yoda, Ree-Yees, Max Rebo, Adi Gallia, Coleman Trebor and Poggle the Lesser, and it's hard to imagine any of them being made from hard plastic - or for that matter, being re-used in any way.

So yeah: is it cheaper to mould specialist, one-use pieces for the rubbery plastic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant speak for TLG but I have noticed that the rubbery plastic is often used these days for parts that would otherwise have sharp points or small parts that could snap off if molded in hard ABS.

In fact, I have heard this articulated by others in relation to things like swords, spears, tridents and other "pointy" minifig accessories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question:

When new parts are made from the soft, rubbery type of plastic, are they cheaper to mould? The cost of a new ABS mould is well known to be incredibly high, and LEGO tend to ensure that these new pieces are used in at least two sets to offset the cost. But with the rubbery pieces you often find them being single-use, such as alien heads in Star Wars. The next SW in particular will have brand new moulded heads for Yoda, Ree-Yees, Max Rebo, Adi Gallia, Coleman Trebor and Poggle the Lesser, and it's hard to imagine any of them being made from hard plastic - or for that matter, being re-used in any way.

So yeah: is it cheaper to mould specialist, one-use pieces for the rubbery plastic?

No, rubbery plastics are used primarily for the reason jonwil described: sharp corners and points could easily break if they were in a harder plastic. Fine detail is thus easier with a softer plastic. In fact, I've read at least one rubber used for LEGO parts is actually considerably more expensive than ABS.

The cost of a mold probably doesn't vary much at all no matter what material is going into it, since they'd require about the same volume of steel and the same level of precision either way. Variations in the cost of a mold would more likely come from other factors, such as if it requires "sliders" (seperate sections that allow a part to be molded from more than two sides, as is necessary with headlight bricks, for instance) or if it will be producing co-injected (blended) parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but (and I speak from experience), molding rubber is a lot easier due to the fact that the molds don't need such an insane level of accuracy- because rubber is, y'know, stretchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but (and I speak from experience), molding rubber is a lot easier due to the fact that the molds don't need such an insane level of accuracy- because rubber is, y'know, stretchy.

I agree with that, and TLG outsorce these things also to China. Think CMF and all their special parts.

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.