Cost of LEGO sets...

[Andy D]

I keep reading reviews and other posts about how expensive some sets are. One set may be considered a good buy because it costs $0.08 per part and another very expensive because it costs $0.13 per part.

I suggest that there is a more accurate way to determine the cost (not value) of a set. The value of a set varies, each of us may value a set differently, but cost is a numerical calculation.

With that in mind I decided to check the cost of several large parts count sets, both licensed and not licensed. I had some surprising results. All parts counts and weights are from Bricklink. Most of the non-licensed sets were in the same cost range, except the 10228 Haunted house. The 10228 Haunted House has a price per part of $0.088 per part (on the low end), but costs the most per gram at $0.063 per gram.

I noticed a range of prices from $0.056 per part for the 10214 Tower Bridge (lots of small parts, 556 tan cheese slopes) to a high of $0.13 per part for the 10221 Super Star Destroyer. But, the cost per gram is not that different for these two sets.

For the nine sets I examined the average cost per gram is $0.055. So instead of looking at an average of $0.10 per part as a measurement of cost for a set I suggest that looking at $0.055 per gram is a more accurate measurement. Reason, some sets have lots of larger parts, so the cost per part is going to be higher, but the cost per gram will hover around $0.055 per gram no matter how many parts.

The variation of cost for sets is really not that much when you consider the cost per gram.

Below is a list of the sets, costs and calculations I used for my example...

10234 Sydney Opera House $320, 2988 pieces, 5670 grams, $0.10 per part, $0.056 per gram

10214 Tower Bridge. $240, 4287 pieces, 4335 grams, $0.056 per part $0.055 per gram

9474 Helms Deep. $130, 1330 pieces, 2407 grams, $0.098 per part, $0.054 per gram

10211 Grand Emporium $150, 2154 pieces, 2905 grams, $0.075 per piece, $0.052 per gram

10221 Super Star Destroyer $400, 3124 pieces, 6965 grams, $.13 per part $0.057 per gram

10224 Town Hall $200, 2732 pieces, 3825 grams, $0.073 per part, $0.052 gram

10193 Medieval Village Market $100, 1565 pieces, 1935 grams, $0.064 per part, $0.052 per gram

10228 Haunted House $180, 2035 pieces, 2880 grams, $0.088 per part, $0.063 per gram

10213 Shuttle Adventure $100, 1204 pieces, 1960 grams, $0.083 per part, $0.051 per gram

If you are still reading, I hope you enjoyed the read,

Andy D

[parksroad]

This is really interesting. Particularly since price per part can vary up to $0.05 USD (from 8 to 13 cents) but the lowest to highest price per gram is only a one cent range. I guess price per part is still somewhat meaningful for AFOLs who tend to dislike larger specialized pieces (so a lower price per part implies more pieces and a possibly more interesting/detailed build). However the price per gram sample certainly suggests that LEGO is much more consistent in its pricing than they are perceived to be. Thanks for this!

[TheLegoDr]

Interesting idea. The main problem is when you're in a store and you don't know the mass of each set, it is much quicker/easier to do $0.10 price per piece.

I wonder how different these numbers would be with the mid-range sets or the cheaper $12.99-19.99 sets. Obviously the minifigure packs are very low piece to higher price ratio, but I would assume they would all have about the same mass.

[SnapLock]

Very interesting thanks for sharing

& a side note : if you live in Australia you can double all those prices & the price per piece/gram makes Lego not worth buying,Untill there is a sale on that matches the U.S prices.

[eurotrash]

Interesting Andy!

A couple of observations:

• Do these weights included packaging and instructions?
  
• There's no much variation in the price/gram rate across the various sets. You rightly point out that if you exclude Haunted House then you're looking at $0.051 to $0.057 and an Average of $0.055, but calculating the Standard Deviation will enable us to see how clustered it is around that average. (I'd do it, but I'm Excel-less on my Mac at home).
  
• Doing this analysis by theme (Licensed - SW, POTC, Modulars, Technic, etc.) might be interesting. If all the non-licensed ones cluster around one rate and the Licensed ones are around another cluster (or series of clusters) then that might give some insight into cost of Licensing.
  
• Doing this analysis by Price point ($12.99 sets vs $49.99 sets vs. $99.99 sets would also be interesting. You'd expect to see more efficiencies in the pricing model with larger weights (higher Price points).
  
• Lego's strategy of pricing sets ending in $9... $149, $159, etc. probably distorts that price/gram relationship.
  

This would be a perfect exercise to do during the Xmas/New Years lull.

But taking this one stage further maybe Lego should in future reward VIP members with grams and not points!

[WaysofSorting]

Andy - Great post. I've always used the .10 per piece as an "off the hip" measurement, but I think it's deep roots in the AFOL and community has influenced LEGO's set design. I feel like they've been able to keep a "perceived value" by maintaining the ratio of parts to price by doing just what you say (Using many repetitive lower cost pieces to greatly sway the ratio and offset the more expensive parts.)

Anyway, the price per gram definitely makes sense (Well, some sense - I'm American so metric always scrambles my mind for a bit) and is a formula that i'd like to see in more reviews! It does indeed make more sense as a value measurement for a set. I'd love to see an in depth comparison of incensed themes to non-incensed themes $/g ratio.

edit - And how does this work out with average Pick-a-Bricks tubs?

Edited December 20, 2013 by WaysofSorting

[Andy D]

Interesting idea. The main problem is when you're in a store and you don't know the mass of each set, it is much quicker/easier to do $0.10 price per piece.

I wonder how different these numbers would be with the mid-range sets or the cheaper $12.99-19.99 sets. Obviously the minifigure packs are very low piece to higher price ratio, but I would assume they would all have about the same mass.

For the larger sets it really doesn't matter. The cost is almost uniform, you don't need to calculate the cost per any unit. Just decide if the cost of the set is in the range what you want to spend vs the value of the set to you.

The cost for smaller sets and sets where the minifigure to builing part ratio may be different. Outside the cost of individual minifigures I wonder if the cost per part/gram is that much different regardless of minifigures. After the minifigure is designed and mold made I wonder if the sales price is that much different than sets without minifigures. I imagine the cost per gram/part may be higher in lower part count sets, I leave this as an exercise to someone who collects smaller sets or sets for minifigure content. I collect mainly larger sets.

Eurotrash --- I don't know if the packaging/instructions is included in the weight, I assume so, but since these are all larger sets the cost of packaging/instructions should be consistant across the sets.

I leave it to you to do the additional statistics and I look forward to reading the results.

If someone wants to tke several sets and weigh the parts without the packaging that would be interesting as well. I guess you could just weigh the assembled sets.

Waysofsorting... It all depeds on how well you stack the PAB tub, the price per unit of measure is how you buy any part at Legoland. So in LEGO stores it all depends on how well you stack.

Andy D

Edited December 20, 2013 by Andy D

[Sir Brickalot]

Great idea.

Interesting idea. The main problem is when you're in a store and you don't know the mass of each set, it is much quicker/easier to do $0.10 price per piece.

But I agree wih this. It's much easier to work out the PPP. But it is very interesting looking at your results- I wouldn't have the patience to work that out .

[Andy D]

This exercise was mainly just for fun, I guess just too much time on my hands that I didn't feel like doing much else and I had just read a review where one of ways the set was evaluated was price per part.

When I bought sets, I used to do the mental calculation of PPP, but lately my evaluation is just...

1. Do I want the set? (no matter why, build, display, parts, whatever)

2. Is the price of the set in the range of what I want to spend.

It was just interesting for me to see that the price I pay is fairly uniform across sets.

Andy D

Edited December 20, 2013 by Andy D

[JGW3000]

Addition of Power Functions to Technic sets might through off the calculations. Large sets w/out power functions, 42000 or 9396 vs. one with several motors and battery boxes, 9398, or just one motor, 8110 or 42009

42000 Grand Prix Racer (no PF) $130, 1141 parts, 1925 g, $0.11/part, $0.067/g

9396 Helicopter (no PF) $120, 1056 parts, 1710 g, $0.11/part, $0.070/g

9398 Crawler (3 motors, battery box) $200, 1327 parts, 2810 g., $0.15/part, $0.071/g

8110 Unimog (1 motor, battery box) $200, 2048 parts, 3610 g., $0.10/part, $0.055/g

42009 Mobile Crane Mk 11 (1 motor, 1 battery box) $220, 2601 parts, 4207 g., $0.08/part, $0.052/g

Seems like Technic sets, regards of included PF, are more expensive than brick sets

But the largest Technic sets, 8110 or 42009, although containing high value PF parts, are more in line with the brick sets on a weight basis, maybe due to the inclusion of large numbers of small, less complex, parts

I remember a LEGO interview in which was stated that cost of ABS plastic played a large role in cost of sets, the consistency in terms of cost per gram seems to support this

[Vee]

... if you live in Australia you can double all those prices & the price per piece/gram makes Lego not worth buying,Untill there is a sale on that matches the U.S prices.

In Brazil, prices of Legos are also out of this world.

Ex. Lego 42009 - retail price in US = $220, price in Brazil = R$1100 = ~US$ 460

[Andy D]

Addition of Power Functions to Technic sets might through off the calculations. Large sets w/out power functions, 42000 or 9396 vs. one with several motors and battery boxes, 9398, or just one motor, 8110 or 42009

42000 Grand Prix Racer (no PF) $130, 1141 parts, 1925 g, $0.11/part, $0.067/g

9396 Helicopter (no PF) $120, 1056 parts, 1710 g, $0.11/part, $0.070/g

9398 Crawler (3 motors, battery box) $200, 1327 parts, 2810 g., $0.15/part, $0.071/g

8110 Unimog (1 motor, battery box) $200, 2048 parts, 3610 g., $0.10/part, $0.055/g

42009 Mobile Crane Mk 11 (1 motor, 1 battery box) $220, 2601 parts, 4207 g., $0.08/part, $0.052/g

Seems like Technic sets, regards of included PF, are more expensive than brick sets

But the largest Technic sets, 8110 or 42009, although containing high value PF parts, are more in line with the brick sets on a weight basis, maybe due to the inclusion of large numbers of small, less complex, parts

I remember a LEGO interview in which was stated that cost of ABS plastic played a large role in cost of sets, the consistency in terms of cost per gram seems to support this

In the larger sets it looks like the cost per gram is about the same as brick only sets regardless of PF. The smaller parts count sets seem more expensive than larger sets.

Andy D

Edited December 21, 2013 by Andy D

[Deathleech]

This is very interesting and obviously a much more accurate measure of a set's value than price per piece. I always thought it was kind of weird some people just looked at the PPP, but not the actual pieces. Obviously a big base plate in a set is going to cost Lego (and us) much more than a 1x1 brick, yet both are considered one piece in the piece count.

I would love to see this taken further. Gram counts for every Lego price range, for licensed sets vs non-licensed, and for all themes in general.

[Andy D]

This is very interesting and obviously a much more accurate measure of a set's value than price per piece. I always thought it was kind of weird some people just looked at the PPP, but not the actual pieces. Obviously a big base plate in a set is going to cost Lego (and us) much more than a 1x1 brick, yet both are considered one piece in the piece count.

I would love to see this taken further. Gram counts for every Lego price range, for licensed sets vs non-licensed, and for all themes in general.

Good idea, anyone can just go to Bricklink with sets you are interested in and do the math, and it is fun to share with the rest of us.

Thanks,

Andy

[Vee]

Speaking of cost of a set, Café Corner just became a bargain!

Let's say you pay $1400 for a new Café Corner set (minimum ebay price that I found). That's 68 cents a piece (dunno about price per gram).

Then you want to buy set 4000002. The one offering in ebay is for $405 and it has 174 pieces. That's $2.33 dollar a piece!

Who in this world would be fool enough to pay such a price for such a set with only common pieces except for the 2 printed tiles?

[DrJB]

I started a related thread few weeks back and my observation was that, over the past several years, there have been a great emphasis on 'large part count' advertised on boxes (e.g., largest set ever) ... when in fact, at the same time, Lego was using smaller and smaller parts ... (some of them too small for my fingers). In the Technic theme, I found that, consistently, about 50% of parts were 'nails and glue' i.e. the 2L/3L pins that hold beams together. Thus, if a set is advertised with 2000 parts, only half of those are bound to be useful as for me, the nails&glue do not count.

Edited February 23, 2014 by DrJB

[Darth Dino]

Hi

thank you for starting this topic. This is exactly what i ever thought. Price per piece is nonsense or often missleading.

For example the Robie House, it is NOT a parts pack - exept for dark red 1x2 plates lovers.There are over 700 tiny pieces in it. Compared to the Sidney Opera House which has many very large plates and bricks.

I see the trend of sets getting more end more smaller pieces. Yes, small pieces add more details and blew up the building time but they are not a waranty for bigger sets or higher value.

Dino

[ronenson]

I have had similar thoughts earlier, but never did the calculations. Funny thing is: because it almost doesn't vary over the sets, it doesn't tell you anything. At least the price per part tells me that if it's low, there's a lot of tiny parts in it, and if it's high, I'm looking at a box with larger pieces. That's all how I use the price per part.

Value of a set should in my opinion still be seen as a total price. If you're willing to pay the total for the set, great, if not, then price per part never convinces me to pay it anyway.

[Darth Dino]

Hi

i dont know how you get the data to calvulate this, but could you do this for "Duel on Geonosis" 75017?

I expect the costs per gramm to be ridiculous high. The MRSP is 50€$ but you get not much more than two figs, some walls and a column.

Dino

Edited December 22, 2013 by Darth Dino

[Vee]

I guess the steps to calculate the weight of a set is to go to Rebrickable, build the set, upload the full material list to Bricklink in a temporary wanted list (usually there will be errors during the conversion Rebrickable->Bricklink that are a PITA to correct), then find enough stores that have all pieces, put them in the cart (which also can be a big PITA because even with auto-filling, you can't trust it because it will add used AND new pieces if available in the same vendor) and see how much the weights are, sum them up. Don't worry about prices because it is just a simulation so I would use the stores with the most unique lots.

If there is an easier way, I'd like to know.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Vee

[62Bricks]

I guess the steps to calculate the weight of a set is to go to Rebrickable, build the set, upload the full material list to Bricklink in a temporary wanted list (usually there will be errors during the conversion Rebrickable->Bricklink that are a PITA to correct), then find enough stores that have all pieces, put them in the cart (which also can be a big PITA because even with auto-filling, you can't trust it because it will add used AND new pieces if available in the same vendor) and see how much the weights are, sum them up. Don't worry about prices because it is just a simulation so I would use the stores with the most unique lots.

If there is an easier way, I'd like to know.

You could just use the API at Brickset, which includes package weight and retail prices in its records.

[Vee]

Didn't know about an API at Brickset but a quick search tells me it is not free to use it.

By the way, Brickset seems to retrieve its data "directly from Lego databases". So instead of getting info from an intermediate, how to get it from the main source (Lego)?

[62Bricks]

Didn't know about an API at Brickset but a quick search tells me it is not free to use it.

By the way, Brickset seems to retrieve its data "directly from Lego databases". So instead of getting info from an intermediate, how to get it from the main source (Lego)?

You need to request an API key to use Brickset's API, but there is no charge. It requires a bit of programming, though, so is not necessarily the simplest solution.

Shipping weights for currently available sets are also given on many shopping sites such as amazon. I don't see that LEGO includes this information on its own shop site, but it may be included when shipping charges are calculated.

[Vee]

Oh, ok, thanks for the explanation. When I read about the API Key I assumed it was not free. A bit of programming would not be a problem for me but I am not sure I am interested in doing this, just curious about the idea. Shipping weights from amazon, etc, includes packaging (box), AFAIK.

[62Bricks]

Hi

i dont know how you get the data to calvulate this, but could you do this for "Duel on Geonosis" 75017?

I expect the costs per gramm to be ridiculous high. The MRSP is 50€$ but you get not much more than two figs, some walls and a column.

Dino

According to Brickset this set weighs 0.6 kg and has a retail price of $39.99 USD. That comes to $.067 per gram, which is quite a bit higher than the average Andy calculated.

... Shipping weights from amazon, etc, includes packaging (box), AFAIK.

Yes, that seems to be the case with all the weight information I can find. The weights given on amazon seem to be the same as those given at Brickset (but amazon rounds them up to the nearest tenth of an ounce.

To get only the weight of the pieces, you'd have to do something like you suggested earlier. Because almost every set comes in a box with an instruction book, though, it is fairly constant across all sets. It would make up a larger proportion of the weight of smaller sets.