astral brick

But this is not what we are discussing because Brickling is selling limited edition of the sets. Moreover in the crowdfunding model it is essential to have backers who preorder a project in order to start its production. And why not? Lego is not infallible and many decisions may be dictated by incomprehensible reasons. It is interesting to highlight that, amongst Bricklink's models, the classic castle is already sold out.

I never thought or wrote that this new business could be addressed to mass market. We would always talk about small numbers, but certainly higher than few fans who try to or manage to build advanced mocs. Exactly, and the designers who failed to receive the votes or the approval should be the first one to benefit from this new opportunities. Variety implies freedom of choice and this is never a downside.

I am in agreement with you, this should be the spirit.

Thinking of recent initiatives such as Lego Forma or Bricklink's celebration of the 60 years anniversary of Lego, I wonder if crowdfunding represents a true opportunity for afols. In fact, whilst Forma is a means to test a new product, minimizing the risk and using a different marketing strategy, Bricklink’s case is much more interesting. First of all which is the limit between an afol and an entrepreneur or, better said, between a passion and a business? And when a passion, taken to the extremes, becomes a way to earn money is it still a hobby? But let us not kid ourselves, the amount of hours that a high level afol invests to conceive a model and then to build it will never be repaid, neither by Bricklink nor by the tip that Lego may allocate to him if his Idea becomes a catalogue’s product. Therefore Bricklink’s attempt constitutes a fascinating mix of the (narcissistic?) will to show off and share with peers a hobby mastery, and a business in its purest form, spontaneously born to fill a gap. Whereas Lego, in spite of its formal approvals, cannot or simply don’t want to listen, then afols will step forward, kickstarting their own models, thus creating a parallel market. It is a win-win situation, at least for both Bricklink and afols (creators and supporters/buyers). How many times people gave up on building complex afols’ designs shown on Rebrickable, despite having the instructions for free, due to the impossibility or the high difficulty to find the proper parts? Maybe in the future Bricklink and Brickowl will take charge of this tedious procedure and, being paid for the trouble, they will sell their own sets regularly. Perhaps this hypothetical new market will also become the second chance for many rejected Ideas.

Given that I am not sure if it is a good idea to reply to this thread, why do you need to receive comments in order to feel appreciated? This is a narcissistic childish behaviour. You are the first judge of your work and, sharing it or not, you should be happy doing what you like, and that should be enough, regardless of the amount of feedback. This kind of attitude based on the number of "likes" or "views" or "followers" is dumbing down the internet. I cannot believe what I am about to say but sometimes I miss Usenet.

Maybe there is truly no hope for a Space theme comeback, which is surprising, considering that a neoclassic starship could intercept two different market segments at the same time, attracting both old customers, who will recognize the essence of the original model, and new ones, who will appreciate the modern snot design. Regarding this matter we should not have afols proposing ideas, Lego itself should make an attempt, at least with one model or two and then check the sales feedback. But then I think of the Macross model which reached the 10k votes and was dismissed.

Speaking of Macross (or Robotech if you prefer), there is another attempt of Vf-1 Valkyrie, this time submitted by len_d69. The author of Voltron is back with a marvellous model able to transform into the three different forms (aircraft, mecha and gerwalk). Let's support his idea and let's hope that this time Lego would approve the project. By the way, I know it has already been posted in this thread but, in my opinion, the LL 497 Galactic Explorer by Peter Reid, another habitue' of Ideas, is not getting the recognition it deserves, considering both the quality of the design and the fact that it would be a perfect model to be produced for the 40 years Space anniversary.

There is an essential difference between trading cards and minifigures. The first ones could exist per se, whereas, in my opinion, minifigures are, or should be, ontologically connected to their sets. Of course there are people who like collecting dolls or puppets, but Lego should be something else, something more, a way to carve using plastic. Minifigures, although well designed, are premade items and they should not represent the center of the attention in the creative process. That is why I cannot understand neither the craze about collecting them nor how could it be even possible to waste money without being able to see what it is purchased. Finally, if this mania have created speculators who remove minifigures from their sets - a monstruosity which ruins the conception behind the product - then many Lego fans should do some soul-searching. Can you blame a company for doing business thanks to customers who are willing to spend money?

I am in agreement with you. The current minifigures' mania is beyond me. I mean, I understand that from TLC point of view minifigures have become an important asset, but I find inconceivable that the presence of certain minifigures could constitute a reason to buy a set. And on top of that, it is somehow considered acceptable to buy minifigures in blind bags, just like trading cards. There is a fine line between collecting and obsession. Another sign that collecting minifigures has gone too far.

Thank you very much for your help! Isn't a 3062b ? I believed the sequence of parts of the right front part of the roof was, starting from the left, redd. brown snot 4070 + 1x1 round plate + 3062b + 3 x 62462 (connected through 32062 ) + 43093 + light bl. grey 6541

I would like to ask some help in order to identify parts of Jason Alleman's Nativity mod for the pop-up book. I cant identify the following parts: 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vrCXTieHU#t=1m07s a) The reddish brown part between the snot brick (4070) and the 2l pin connector (62462) b) Besides is there a 1x1 round plate connected to the snot brick and the part that I cannot identify? 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vrCXTieHU#t=1m46s a) The reddish brown part attached to the light bluish gray snot brick 3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vrCXTieHU#t=3m50s a) The white body of infant Jesus 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vrCXTieHU#t=4m34s a) The black angle connector is the 45 deg or the 22,5 deg? 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vrCXTieHU#t=4m39s a) The transparent part connected to the Christmas star b) The connector between the light bluish grey pin hub 1 axle (is it correct? 22961?) and the star is a 3/4 pin (32002) or a 1/2 pin (4274)?

That's exactly what I meant when I said that the price per piece will always be too high (due to a rapacious pursuit of profits). I am afraid that you have just stated the naked truth.

Interesting ideas, especially the musical toys. Exactly, raceless and genderless, at least years ago. Sometimes I think that too many people have lost the skill of abstraction. In fact the purpose of using a smiling sexless yellow face was to let customers use their own imagination to visualize their own characters and stories. I I mean, isn't it the whole point of Lego? Children are able to do it with ease, teens and adults tend to loose this ability. According to my child's memories, afols always existed, it was a niche of course, nothing comparable to today's communities. Internet changed it all, visibility, communication, techniques learning, purchase of the wanted parts... I think that nowadays building with Lego as adults is much more accepted than it was years ago. However, in my opinion, this is not really connected to Lego's management decisions but to a general process of acceptance of what once was considered "nerd" material. Today superheroes, videogames, genre fiction (scifi and fantasy) and comics are part of the media culture . Said that, I think that Lego has almost lost this cultural boat risking the bankruptcy, so of course they know better than everyone here - unless there is some former ceo or some executive writing on this forum - but there are concerning signs and maybe they should getting off their high horse and start listening a bit more the suggestions from their most loyal customers.

What? Weight?!? I cant imagine Lego be treated like meat or flour! :-)

Thank you for having caught the key point of this thread. You have exactly described my concern towards the "high-end" attitude and its consequences. In fact, for a company it is much more easy to sell 10 items for 100 euros than 100 items for 10 euros or, as now I am afraid of, 50 items for 20 euros. This business model is not sustainable in the long term.

Summarizing, Creator 3-in-1 is not a solution because, in fact, there isn't any problem to solve at all, if I have understood correctly this reply and the following ones. Moreover, according to you, given that the pieces count is not conclusive and the inflaction's criterion demonstrates that there is no trend towards a generational or economical gap between customers, then there shouldn't be any risk of market's reduction in the long term. Just naive concerns from OLDER buyers, probably. I wonder if you believe that we are living in "the best of all possible worlds", speaking in Lego terms obviously. If we are not, then I would like to know if you think that there is room for improvement, and in this case, the ways to do it.

In my opinion the count of the pieces, related to the same or similar theme, is the most objective way to compare sets from different ages. Regarding the second factor, theme's similarity, it would be possible to create, for instance with 200 pieces of 1x1 plates, tiles and slopes a nice microscale landscape, however I doubt that it would be achievable to build a spaceship. This is a very useful suggestion, thank you The reason why I didn't use the price to compare sets is because, aside the inflation, there are many more elements to consider, starting with the technological advances. Producing plastic parts in the 70s or the 80s was much more expensive that it is nowadays, therefore we should pay a price per piece which should be a fraction of what we used to pay in the past. Moreover now Lego has many competitors in the construction's toy field, and the videogames' market is much more relevant than it was years ago. Despite all these factors the price per piece - apparently a recurring math in the reviews - is still (and probably will always be) too high. So, as I said, the pieces' count in sets of the same theme or similar, is the best criterion to make a comparison. Please see above considerations It is very interesting that you are quoting this model as an example whereas I have used it with a very different meaning. As a matter of fact the four 58846 parts are limiting the rebuild potential due to their size, and they are also a perfect representation of a nefarious tendency, the expensive production of pieces with a specific use, that played an important role when Lego almost went to bankrupt. Anyway, the purpose of my opening message was not to start a Space vs Star Wars polemic, but to share a concern that I am feeling in relation to a trend which is creating a generational gap between buyers, entailing, in the long term, a serious risk for TLC. I hope that Lego won't end as hifi did, a niche hobby for a few wealthy adults.

I do agree with you. This is a very interesting suggestion.

The more I deepen into Lego Ideas the more sad I get. Specifically: 1) In 2014 the wonderful Macross Vf-1 Valkyrie, by maxvf1, reached the 10000 supporters but Lego did not approve the model. This hypothetical set could have represented the way in to a competition against Hasbro Kre-o Transformers but Lego decided to back out. I wonder which was the reason. Low profitability? Macross' license was too expensive? Risks of a legal dispute with Hasbro due to the similarity with Transformers' ip? (By the way, didn't Macross ip come first?) I don't understand if nowadays Kre-O is still a true competitor, perhaps this could be a good moment for Lego to give Macross a chance and therefore to take a first step towards considering the purchase of other Japanese ips, in my opinion an endless source of ispiration and, on a business level, a good investment thanks to their large fanbases. I have found out that another Macross Valkyrie's project - by len_d69, the same designer of Voltron - is underway and I have immediately supported it. Fingers crossed. 2) Respectively in 2016 and 2017 two stunning mocs, the Merchant's House (by bigboy99899) and the Medieval Watermill (by Ben Pitchford) got the 10000 supporters, however Lego rejected the submissions. Both mocs shown the most advanced building techniques, such as angled walls, curved roofs and a great level of snot details. But no, sorry, what could have been a huge kickstart to a modernised Castle line is not going to happen. Other good potential incomes lost considering that, if contests like CCC are held and the inherent mocs are showcased at the conventions, is because there is a vast fanbase of Castle theme. The most depressing element of the previous examples is that a pioneering company like Lego is asking for innovative concepts but then feels afraid of putting them in practice.

In my opinion Star Wars license has been the death sentence of the Space line. I don't know if there are explicit clauses that forbid to sell other pure scifi models or if it is just a market decision to avoid overlapping, but considering the amount of new parts and the amazing level of current building techniques - I think of Jonathan Walker magnificent spaceships' designs - I would like to see in some official set a tiny fraction of what I admire in the Shiptember's competitions. A couple of days ago, by complete accident, I have stumbled upon Peter Reid's submission in Lego Ideas, and I have immediately supported his marvellous model. Will he succeed? I hope he will, but I can't help asking myself why I have to rely on a probability. Either new designs or remakes, I think there may still exist a market for the Space theme, and one proof is represented by the general appreciation of Benny's spaceship (70816), in terms of both reviews and sales. But I am afraid that, due to the current Lego's business policy, we will never know. Regarding this matter, please see my reply to Mylenium.

Amongst many hobbies, I like hifi and I know where the same self-destructive pattern that I have described in relation to Lego can lead. That's why I feel concerned. Unlike the past, nowadays it would be technically possible to create a good stereo system without spending a fortune (for example I think of class-t amplifiers, true game changers). However too many brands have decided that it is much more easy to address expensive products to few customers than try to sell low or even mid-range components to a bigger audience. But this strategy works only in the short term, and the final outcome is a small market, inexorably declining because potential new customers can't get past the high entry point. As a consequence many young people will never buy their first true system and will keep believing that listening to an online audio stream - i.e. songs that they don't own - from their cellphones, through overpriced earphones - maybe even wireless - is the best possible way to appreciate music. I didn't want to go off-topic in my own message but when I was writing it the Technic Universal sets came immediately back to my mind (by the way I am pretty sure I own at least a couple of those sets). I miss that Lego philosophy and if my reasoning implies that I am a nostalgic then yes, I miss "the good old times". Currently I can only see a (weak) revival of that past spirit in the 3-in-1 Creators sets, which I consider they are mostly addressed to children. Once, in the Lego catalogue, there was a middle step before getting to the flagship models, today I am not so convinced.

One element that I have noticed, comparing the current sets with the ones of the late 80s and early 90s, is the disappearance of the middle-range models. I remember, for instance, spaceships like Gamma V Laser Craft (6891, 144 pieces) or FX Star Patroller (6931, 239 pieces), quite large hulls considering the number of pieces, with many functions, great playability and, most importantly, after taking them apart, the chance of building the alternate models or create the new ones we had in mind. Summarizing, the quintessence of Lego. Since the Space line doesn’t exist anymore, the immediate comparison would be with Star Wars, however, in relation to the aforementioned number of pieces, I see models, in my opinion overpriced, lacking details or functions (id est – and I stress, as I see it - 75199, made of 157 pieces, or 75214, based on 247 pieces). For better or for worse, these are probably the implications of SW license. There is no need to design new models starting from zero, because the movies have already established the guidelines, but these savings are counterbalanced by the costs of the license, thus the inherent profits are mandatory. Hence the high prices. Besides, why bothering wasting time and money to conceive alternate models if customers may just buy new sets? Depending on the point of view, a virtuous or a vicious circle, whose main feature is way too underestimated. As a matter of fact, the lack of middle-range models at reasonable prices implies that a child, who expresses his imagination through affordable models, will struggle to find sets that could suit his needs when growing up, unless having a family with good financial resources. The middle-range sets represent the necessary step between the basic models and the more sophisticated ones, or maybe the threshold towards the Technic world. And TLC is repeating one of the mistakes that almost led it to the bankruptcy, namely giving up on the generational turnover of its customers, therefore losing potential incomes and reducing its market position. In the end, the teenager who has stopped building will never become the adult buyer of a Ucs Millennium Falcon or a Bugatti Chiron.

Talking about quality, just wondering, are the Lego bricks lighter than they used to be? I have recently built my first model after many years and this was exactly the impression I have received in relation to the plastic which is currently used. It is very likely that my memory is failing, however, considering that I have seen videos in which many kind of tests were achieved, has someone ever tried to weigh the same brick taken from two untouched sets from different ages?

Hello! A few months ago my interest towards Lego came back and I have tried to keep-up to date with what happened in the last 25 years. I was astonished to see how much parts and techniques have improved. Snot, studless designs and angled/curved pieces changed it all and I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw on flickr the stellar current level of afols’ creations. I stopped building at the beginning of my teenage years in the early 90s, I started as a child with Space and then I switched to Technic. Probably my favourite sets ever are the spaceship Galaxy Commander (6980) and the Backhoe Grader (8862). During these years I was tempted a couple of times, the first one was with the first Ucs X-Wing and the second one was with the Sopwith Camel (10226), but at the end I didn’t buy any of those sets. Now I maybe regret not to have purchased the biplane but I feel no regrets towards the X-Wing, I couldn’t stand the lack of details of the end parts of its laser cannons in such an expensive model (at that time). As a matter of fact – and I hope I won’t start a flame – I know that Star Wars sets contributed to save Lego from the bankrupt but they had – and still have in my opinion – a very negative impact in terms of creativity, considering that SW license was the main reason why the production of the Space line declined and eventually, due to the vicious circle, stopped. Anyway a few weeks ago I built the amazing Jk Brickworks’ Sisyphus and then I bought his Pop-up book. I believe Jason Alleman’s mocs represent, in the Lego field, the exemplary link between engineering, the complexity of the technic mechanisms, and architecture, the aesthetics of the highly detailed models. Besides I find so commendable that he releases his instructions for free, he is not only a master builder but a true pillar of Lego community. I would like to build the Nativity, his pop-up book variation, nevertheless it is a very difficult goal for me because of the lack of the parts list. Actually I understand the video instructions but I cannot identify many parts because they didn’t even exist decades ago. Moreover a small childhood’s dream that I would like to fulfill is to build a Transformer with Lego. Many years ago the level of robots was the one of the set 6951, I spent so many time trying to figure out how to build a Transfomer but I eventually gave up, coming to the conclusion that the needed pieces did not exist. Nowadays, thanks to the socket-ball joints and other parts, this kind of models are finally feasable. My last objective would be to build a neo classic spaceship, some mocs are stunning and that shows how deeply loved and thus missed the Space line is. I especially appreciate Peter Reid’mocs – my favourite one is the Ll-497 - and I hope that some day he would release the instructions of at least one of his wonderful creations, trying to understand the structure of his models through some pictures is beyond my level. I dont know if I will be able to achieve any of the previous goals and I am not even sure if I am (or want to be) out of the dark age, I certainly know that, as a child, to build using plastic bricks brought me a happiness that no other toy or videogame could match and I will always be grateful to Lego for these joyful memories.