Lego pushing out to too many licenced sets?

[blueandwhite]

One issue I have with LEGO's licencing is that they seem to jump onto the franchise bandwagon a tad too early. The Prince of Persia and Speed Racer lines are examples of this. Both movies proved to be absolute disasters. That's the risk you take when you licence a less established property. Star Wars, Batman and Indiana Jones were all well-established licences before LEGO stepped on board. While PoP and Speed Racer certainly had a decent fanbase before their film incarnations I suspect that neither of these properties would be well known to younger kids. Both licences could have been major hits, however there was definitely a major risk here. Personally I think that it's better to go after an established franchise rather than taking a gamble with something that is still unproven. For example, given the past success of the LOTR films I would expect the Hobbit to be a pretty safe bet if LEGO were to go in that direction.

I expect that we'll continue to see licenced sets in the future (and many of the sets are truly excellent), however I'm in favour of seeing more established franchises getting the licenced treatment. On the other hand, a lot of the dud licences end up on clearance in the fall making for some real bargains. Hopefully today's kids have grown out of Harry Potter .

[Svelte]

One issue I have with LEGO's licencing is that they seem to jump onto the franchise bandwagon a tad too early. The Prince of Persia and Speed Racer lines are examples of this. Both movies proved to be absolute disasters. That's the risk you take when you licence a less established property.

Yes, it's a risk - but that's at the heart of all business decisions. If the movies had been monster hits LEGO would have been ahead of the game. The limited number of sets in those themes also means the risk is more concentrated than if they had done a 'full' line of 8+ sets.

It's funny, even before release LEGO seems to have been aware that Prince of Persia wasn't likely to do as well as Toy Story - and in Australia at least - adjusted the prices to reflect this foreknowledge.

Eg, the US price of the Army Men set and Desert Attack are both $US10.99, and the Western Train Chase and Alamut sets are both $US79.99, but in Australia the price of Army Men is $AUD22.99 and Desert Attack is $AUD17.99 ($5 is a huge difference at the small price point) and the Western Train Chase is $AUD159.99 whilst Alamut is a more palatable $AUD139.99.

I also imagine that Disney has its own ideas about what it sees as appropriate properties and exerts some influence over what Licensed themes LEGO does in the end produce, but that is pure speculation based on Disney's coercive behaviour in other markets

[NightBat]

At all my local stores, the P.O.P. Legos are shelf warmers, I think if the Minifigures were sold alone then the sales would have done much better, Toy Story is good for kids who are just being introduced to the series with Toy Story 3 but also some of us adults who remember when the first movie came out....with that being said, I think that there is room for three different types of markets....what's popular with kids and what's popular with adults and what's popular with both....

Since Disney just bought Marvel Comics and Lego has now put out Prince Of Persia, Cars and Toy Story all of which are Disney properties then who knows what we'll be seeing as far as what the future holds for Lego and Disney....

Spiderman (again but with the comicbook costume and or the new Marc Webb directed Spiderman Reboot)

Iron Man

Captain America (movie coming out in the next year or so)

Thor (movie coming out soon)

The Avengers (movie coming out in the next couple of years)

X-Men....

You all get the point....

Those (to me at least) are properties that would make a ton of sense to go after, just look at how much Batman and Spiderman go for on online auction!

And hey, get DC Comics on board with more than just Batman (sorry Batman you ARE the BEST comic book character of all time haha)because Green Lantern hits theaters next summer and Superman comes back in a few years as well....

[Admiral Ron]

Coming back to the Avatar line, I do not think TLG will make new sets about it,if they were going to, they most likely would have as soon as the movie came out. I would have liked to have some more, as i do like the cartoon, but after seeing the movie I really dont want to think about it.

[RileyC]

I think having many themes is a great way to get kids interested in Lego. Its kinda they way I got back into it. By having many themes it gives many portals to jump into the world of lego and discover their other themes.

[The Green Brick Giant]

Since Disney just bought Marvel Comics and Lego has now put out Prince Of Persia, Cars and Toy Story all of which are Disney properties then who knows what we'll be seeing as far as what the future holds for Lego and Disney....

Spiderman (again but with the comicbook costume and or the new Marc Webb directed Spiderman Reboot)

Sony holds the Spiderman movie rights.

Disney bought Marvel Comics, the movie rights don't change hands right away. The whole reason we are getting a Spiderman reboot instead of Spiderman 4 is because Sony wanted complete control and the director told them to screw off.

[Aanchir]

Coming back to the Avatar line, I do not think TLG will make new sets about it,if they were going to, they most likely would have as soon as the movie came out. I would have liked to have some more, as i do like the cartoon, but after seeing the movie I really dont want to think about it.

I dunno. Visually, I hear the movie's pretty phenomenal. It's the writing and directing that are criticized, and those don't really have any influence on the content of a LEGO set.

I myself am curious what sorts of licensed themes are over the horizon. Perhaps that's one of the good things about the current line of licensed themes: many of them are just one-year things to promote current movies. Of course, others might see that as a bad thing, as it keeps people from constantly expanding their collections as they do with LEGO Star Wars, but I personally think it's good for LEGO to experiment with different licenses until they find one that, like Star Wars, has real staying power.

[Admiral Ron]

I dunno. Visually, I hear the movie's pretty phenomenal. It's the writing and directing that are criticized, and those don't really have any influence on the content of a LEGO set.

I myself am curious what sorts of licensed themes are over the horizon. Perhaps that's one of the good things about the current line of licensed themes: many of them are just one-year things to promote current movies. Of course, others might see that as a bad thing, as it keeps people from constantly expanding their collections as they do with LEGO Star Wars, but I personally think it's good for LEGO to experiment with different licenses until they find one that, like Star Wars, has real staying power.

I agree with the visuals, but im a story/writing guy, so meh. But I do agree with you about the licensed lines, it does keep people expanding their collections

[NightBat]

@TheGreenBrickGiant....

I had a brain fart about the Sony rights, good point about the rights not changing hands right away and I think Fox still owns the X-Men movie as well BUT a lot of really cool characters are Marvel (Disney) owned....I would just love to see more comic book Lego minifigs and sets

[lightningtiger]

Maybe Lego would be on a winner if they did the collectable minifigs trick with Marvel and DC Comics characters, in the poly bags so you didn't know (unless you had the cheat barcodes) what they were !

Of course they would be a little dearer, but would you pay the price for a genuine Ironman or Superman ?

I'm a conformist! !

[Svelte]

Perhaps that's one of the good things about the current line of licensed themes: many of them are just one-year things to promote current movies. Of course, others might see that as a bad thing, as it keeps people from constantly expanding their collections as they do with LEGO Star Wars, but I personally think it's good for LEGO to experiment with different licenses until they find one that, like Star Wars, has real staying power.

That's clearly LEGO's intention these days - short, quickie licenses to coincide with movies. Star Wars is in a category of its own, and even it has suffered from the 'remakes' syndrome at times which no other line could get away with, apart from perhaps Harry Potter which had its own years in the wilderness.

The great thing about short Licensed themes is you get the 'best of' releases rather than malingering lines which go nowhere and become desperate for inspiration.

Buy these quickie lines if you like them! Celebrate their success! Don't mourn their failure! Like buses, they'll be another one along in a minute

[The Green Brick Giant]

@TheGreenBrickGiant....

I had a brain fart about the Sony rights, good point about the rights not changing hands right away and I think Fox still owns the X-Men movie as well BUT a lot of really cool characters are Marvel (Disney) owned....I would just love to see more comic book Lego minifigs and sets

However now that I think about it. LEGO Batman only had the rights to certain Batman shows and movies and not the two newest movies. However LEGO still released a Bat Mobile based on the Bat Tank from the newest movies. SO LEGO could easily release whatever super hero they want that Disney lets them and just say they have nothing to do with the movie release. I think a LEGO Marvel theme would be great, 5-6 sets a year with different action hero minifigures.

[Pellaeon]

However now that I think about it. LEGO Batman only had the rights to certain Batman shows and movies and not the two newest movies. However LEGO still released a Bat Mobile based on the Bat Tank from the newest movies.

Lego must have had rights to the Chris Nolan Batman films, because they used more than the image of the Tumbler: they used the copyright name "Tumbler", put the movie-style logo and armor on Batman, and featured The Dark Knight's logo on the box.

SO LEGO could easily release whatever super hero they want that Disney lets them and just say they have nothing to do with the movie release. I think a LEGO Marvel theme would be great, 5-6 sets a year with different action hero minifigures.

But, I do agree with your point: licensing deals are complicated, and while Sony has exclusive rights to the film franchise, Marvel (now Disney) still owns all the original rights to Spiderman and could presumably put out a line of Spiderman toys with no tie-in to the films. Well, unless Sony's licensing deal says otherwise, of course.

[Batbrick]

A very shallow opinion for me, but I love licensed sets simply because they usually have great parts, great colours and fleshie figs. So I'm all for more!

(Though a return to the Batman theme would be so exciting I may slip into a coma willingly just to get them sooner consciously)

Batbrick Away!

[Clone OPatra]

Very nice topic, and something I've been thinking about myself lately after buying all but one PoP set (I don't care for a $50 set of gray bits).

The clear answer in my mind is 'no,' LEGO is not pushing out too many licenses. This year, excluding Star Wars (since it doesn't count), there will be by the December 5 different licenses, by my count: Toy Story, PoP, Ben 10, Cars, and Harry Potter. Besides Toy Story, which has already seen two waves and a load of sets, these other themes are relatively small and quiet. PoP has 5 sets, HP 6, and I honestly do not expect a second wave from either one. Cars doesn't even count really since it's Duplo, and Ben 10 isn't System either. LEGO has often had weird, non-system odd licenses like Dora the Explorer and Winnie the Poo (and you could count Mickey, if you wanted too), and those sorts of themes don't even seem to take a chunk out of how many System themes LEGO offers and don't really take away shelf space, since everywhere I've been Duplo has its own little place, and Ben 10 is either with Bionicle or off in its own display.

My point is, when it comes down to it, there are really only three non-SW licenses for 2010: TS, PoP, and HP. PoP will certainly not continue, signs point to the HP line being the very last, and TS's fate is uncertain, since I'm not sure where it could go from here. Next year may see a return of IJ and perhaps a PotC line, but that's all merely speculation. I think PotC would work very well for a two-wave series (one for the last three films, one for the new one), but that's a discussion for a separate speculation thread.

Anyway, I don't think that three probably short licenses is too many in a year, and all spaced out at that (HP not until fall), but I also like what the licenses have to offer. PoP might have tanked, but it gave LEGO a great excuse to give us some middle east architecture, new animals, new parts, a new color, and loads of figures. Even if you don't like fleshies (what are you doing in the licensed forum?), I'm sure you could find uses for all the new fig accessories, not to mention Nizam's robes and other skin-color-less prints. Also, since PoP is so likely to be another one-hit-wonder in the style of Speed Racer, LEGO had no problem filling up every set with unique figure prints. In Star Wars, you have to fork out $120 to get a cool new figure these days, while $11 on PoP gets you three unique ones. What a deal!

HP also offers plenty of cool stuff, though perhaps not as cool altogether for non-fans as PoP. Plenty of cool new figure prints, some new hair-pieces, some interesting colors here and there. Besides, HP was dying for a few more sets, and LEGO produced them in style.

I'm not a fan of LEGO TS, but some people are, so over all I think that was also a fine LEGO choice.

Overall, I think LEGO has mainly been going in the right direction with licensed themes. Licenses let LEGO dabble in something more interesting and unusual than the in-house lines. Though licenses are often shorter-lasting than non-licensed lines, do we really need to see a long run of Persian architecture? I like all of the different styles and figures that licensed themes offer, and I don't mind hopping from one excursion to another since they all have something different and don't have the time to get old.

[Cpt. Dan]

Yes, absolutely. If I can remember, one of the first licensed lines were Star Wars. After its success, Lego probably hoped for the same results with some big names. Personally, I think Indiana Jones was a good idea and the Batman and Spiderman series were interesting concepts, but I think at this point they have gone too far. PoP was cool but for some reason I don't feel like it fits. Ben 10 or whatever it was called is too much. So was Cars.

I think Legos were best when all figure had the yellow, simple faces. I like the new pieces and designs, but I feel like they have gone too far and in some licensed sets I see less and less creativity (bigger pieces, stickers, etc.) Maybe it is just me, but I miss the old sets like Black Knights, Forestmen, old Pirates, etc. I think Lego has changed tremendously over the years but after the 2001 Star Wars and Adventurers desert theme things started to change.

Just my .02, but I think TLG needs to go back to its roots before it becomes something its not. Maybe I am wrong - maybe today's kids really like this stuff. But as an adult builder I don't like it nearly as much.

[Admiral Ron]

Just my .02, but I think TLG needs to go back to its roots before it becomes something its not. Maybe I am wrong - maybe today's kids really like this stuff. But as an adult builder I don't like it nearly as much.

I almost agree with you on this one. I too would like the simpler, more creative sets like back in the old days. But this is also a toy for children, and if TLG goes back to that, they would lose quite a bit in sales because kids would think them to be TOO simple, and not as much fun. The toy market is very competitive, if someone falls behind they are left behind.

[NightBat]

If Lego continues with the licensed themes then what would you like to see come out? This is my list in no particular order....

1.) New Batman Sets

A. Batman movie ('89 Burton and Batman Returns)

B. Batman the Animated Series

C. Batman Begins and more The Dark Knight (movie accurate Joker)

2.) DC Comics characters

A. Green Lantern (comic book and movie sets)

B. Superman (Christopher Reeve movies and comic book sets)

C. Wonder Woman

D. The Flash

E. Some Vertigo characters

3.) Marvel Comics Characters

A. Spiderman (comic book and new movie)

B. X-Men (comic book)

C. The Hulk (how cool would it be to be able to put a Bruce Banner minifig into a bigger Hulk minifig for the transformation)

D. Captain America (comic book and movie)

E. DareDevil (comic book)

F. Iron Man (comic book and movie)

G. The Avengers lineups (past and present)

4.) There are too many to list but this is just my personal wish list of sorts for the time being....

[Svelte]

If Lego continues with the licensed themes then what would you like to see come out? This is my list in no particular order....

There is a separate thread for wish lists about future licenses.

Let's keep this topic to the original point.

Thanks!

[vexorian]

Yes, absolutely. If I can remember, one of the first licensed lines were Star Wars. After its success, Lego probably hoped for the same results with some big names. Personally, I think Indiana Jones was a good idea and the Batman and Spiderman series were interesting concepts, but I think at this point they have gone too far. PoP was cool but for some reason I don't feel like it fits. Ben 10 or whatever it was called is too much. So was Cars.

I think Legos were best when all figure had the yellow, simple faces. I like the new pieces and designs, but I feel like they have gone too far and in some licensed sets I see less and less creativity (bigger pieces, stickers, etc.)

Aw come on, it is not like they are dropping the original themes altogether. In fact, there are a lot more themes and sets that are not licensed than licensed ones. Plus we have creator and the 16+ sets which are aimed 100% towards construction.

Maybe it is just me, but I miss the old sets like Black Knights, Forestmen, old Pirates, etc. I think Lego has changed tremendously over the years but after the 2001 Star Wars and Adventurers desert theme things started to change.

Just my .02, but I think TLG needs to go back to its roots before it becomes something its not. Maybe I am wrong - maybe today's kids really like this stuff. But as an adult builder I don't like it nearly as much.

A lot of us actually fall into the mistake of giving too much credit to nostalgic value. I mean, although I guess forestmen had good sets, it is not like the recent medieval themes didn't have great stuff, I am personally impressed by the latest king's castle. We had pirates back for a year last year and they released the incredible Imperial flag ship.

[David Thomsen]

Lately I was thinking about the pros and cons of licenced sets. It goes something like this:

Con:

Not as much world-building potential with licenced sets. If you collect city or castle or pirates, you get complete buildings and vehicles and if you put them all together you tend to get a complete 'world'. Licensed sets tend to have lots of bits of buildings, like 'Dobby's Release' and 'Jabba's Message', which don't really build a 'world' when you put them together.

This is my major beef, really. I have all the Indiana Jones sets, but have never built them all at once because the resulting scene would make no sense whatsoever. The inside of a temple in Egypt is next to the inside of a temple in Peru? And there is a flying wing inside them both? What?

Con:

Pink minifigs. Why divide minifigs between yellow and pink? It's absolutely pointless, and majorly reduces compatability.

Con:

Price. Licensed sets tend to cost at least 20% more than they seem to be worth.

Pro:

New parts that wouldn't have been made otherwise. The ever-useful lightsaber handle. Dastan's hair and katana holder. These pieces are used to enrich the regular sets, and I have no problem with this. Ooh, and the cowcatcher from the Toy Story train, which hopefully will be used when they bring back the Western theme. (Cough)

Pro/Con:

Characters. This may not appeal to everyone, but I like the idea of minifigs having set characters. Only a few figs from regular sets have 'characters', like Captain Brickbeard, General Broadside and all of the collectable minifigs. Lego is one of the few toys where the figures don't have biographical information, which is one of my favourite things about the other toys I collect.

At the moment it seems there are way too many licenced ranges for the few benefits.

Edited July 10, 2010 by David Thomsen

[Aanchir]

Lately I was thinking about the pros and cons of licenced sets. It goes something like this:

Con:

Not as much world-building potential with licenced sets. If you collect city or castle or pirates, you get complete buildings and vehicles and if you put them all together you tend to get a complete 'world'. Licensed sets tend to have lots of bits of buildings, like 'Dobby's Release' and 'Jabba's Message', which don't really build a 'world' when you put them together.

This is my major beef, really. I have all the Indiana Jones sets, but have never built them all at once because the resulting scene would make no sense whatsoever. The inside of a temple in Egypt is next to the inside of a temple in Peru? And there is a flying wing inside them both? What?

Con:

Pink minifigs. Why divide minifigs between yellow and pink? It's absolutely pointless, and majorly reduces compatability.

Con:

Price. Licensed sets tend to cost at least 20% more than they seem to be worth.

Pro:

New parts that wouldn't have been made otherwise. The ever-useful lightsaber handle. Dastan's hair and katana holder. These pieces are used to enrich the regular sets, and I have no problem with this. Ooh, and the cowcatcher from the Toy Story train, which hopefully will be used when they bring back the Western theme. (Cough)

Pro/Con:

Characters. This may not appeal to everyone, but I like the idea of minifigs having set characters. Only a few figs from regular sets have 'characters', like Captain Brickbeard, General Broadside and all of the collectable minifigs. Lego is one of the few toys where the figures don't have biographical information, which is one of my favourite things about the other toys I collect.

At the moment it seems there are way too many licenced ranges for the few benefits.

Your first point is a good one-- the only licensed theme that was designed with world-building in mind was Harry Potter for the first two films. Of course, the "world" you'd build was a precipitous multi-story Hogwarts Castle. Very nice while it lasted, but if they'd kept that going it would have been hard to keep the sets from falling. Not to mention that newer fans couldn't benefit from the ad/diagrams that came with the sets, since there's no way they could have gotten the older sets unless LEGO rereleased them.

And, of course, the Indiana Jones problem would still apply. Any theme that has both below-ground and above-ground settings gets difficult in that respect. Some clever builders built a mountain around the belowground portions of Hogwarts so their Privet Drive would make more sense in the same display.

This year's Harry Potter theme focuses more on variety. The only sets that show Hogwarts Castle are "Dobby's Release" and, obviously, "Hogwarts Castle". All the other sets are placed in decidedly different locales (the Quidditch set is still on the Hogwarts grounds, but isn't really a part of the castle). Clearly the modularity gimmick didn't work all that well in the long run.

As for flesh minifigs, they came about as a result of the Basketball theme, the first to depict multiracial figures. At first Star Wars kept yellow figs for white characters and just added brown figs for black characters like Lando, but the double-standard there was obvious, and LEGO opted to depict the races of non-LEGO characters and individuals realistically from 2003 on.

Your closing statement depends on the assumption that all of these pros and cons are equal in importance. I, personally, see nothing wrong with flesh minifigs, since I didn't much like using licensed minifig parts on generic figs anyway. World-building potential only matters if you have enough of a budget for world-building, and not everyone does. Otherwise, you're just likely to shelve your sets the way they come, with no interaction between them. Thus, price is the only con that people are likely to agree on being particularly important.

[Delta 38]

I agree with most of David's points. I don't have an issue with the fact that there are only small parts of buildings as I don't buy large sets, but it could be less random. The price seems about the same here to me, because it's all inflated anyway. I also don't mind having flesh minifigs, and in most cases prefer them if they're part of a licensed theme.

I don't really have a problem with licensed sets in general unless I don't like them (that Ben 10 line, for example).

Quick edit: did that come out wrong? Of course people won't buy sets if they don't like them.

What I specifically meant was if I didn't like whatever the theme was based on to begin with.

Edited July 13, 2010 by Delta 38