rebelpilot

That's on me, I didn't check. Props to the video for sourcing its info.

That was the case that they were only produced in China. But circa 2019 was when CMF parts began being produced in Lego factories globally.

I think that's because, from my memory, the first time the goat mould was addressed publicly by a Lego representative was around the time of the release of the 21325 Medieval Blacksmith. Back in 2021 when it was revealed AFOLs being AFOLs were like "where's the goat?", LAN members asked the designers during a press event and designer Austin Carlson said: That was interpreted different ways. Some interpreted it as since it hadn't been used in 10 years since Mill Village Raid, Lego destroyed the mould after several years of no use and some interpreted it as it was literally lost while in storage. The answer is true in keeping with their policy for unused moulds, even if it wasn't accurate in the case of the goat. It was later clarified that it wasn't destroyed from lack of use but found to be damaged. But people still remember the destroyed or lost line. Fortunately, they brought back the goat and we don't have to keep hearing about it edit: my memory failed me, I got it backwards. The first time Lego addressed the goat was during the release of 75936 T. Rex Rampage in 2019, designer Mark Stafford said they wanted to include the goat but found the mould was damaged. I thought I better add an edit before I'm corrected. But I think people still remember the Medieval Blacksmith explanation, they really wanted it to include some goats. I don't want to watch a 15 minute video so I'll go one better: Like I said on the previous page I think 5 years is a good rule of thumb but I don't think it's strictly adhered to or there's some leeway. But I'll accept it as Lego's official line.

Absolutely. The point I was trying to make in the first part of my post was not the economies of storing moulds but theorising Lego could treat new CMF parts (which is what the mouse and flamingo are) differently because they sort of pay for themselves in the short term. Whether it's a decision to create a new part or retire it from their inventory.

What sets the flamingo and mouse apart from the original goat is they're CMF parts, Lego can create a new mould for a CMF part, produce millions of pieces, pack them, ship them and destroy the mould and they've still got their monies worth. CMF series seem to have the budget to do that and the mouse and flamingo might just be casualties of that. Also, I don't have the flamingo at hand but from memory both the mouse and flamingo have some flexible/rubbery plastic in them so they're made up of two types of plastic, which I assume means the piece is more expensive to produce. So when it comes time to put a mouse in a city set, the budget might dictate choosing to include a cheaper rat over a more expensive mouse. And I think the flamingo was only meant to be a garden ornament (although would pass for the animal in another colour) so less room for designers to reuse the part. So little reuse and expensive to produce one off parts could put them on the top of the Lego cull list. This is often repeated, is that based on the designer (only one part of the production chain) quoting that time frame when answering why the goat hadn't been brought back since 7189? I don't think it's necessarily true, although likely a good rule of thumb most of the time. The Queen's skirt was introduced in 2016 in S15, it wasn't reused again until 2023 for the S25 Aristocrat and Queen of Hearts. Of course Lego could have destroyed the mould and brought it back 7 years later, it has seen enough use since 2023 to warrant it. But another part from S15 and 2016, the crutch from Clumsy Guy was reused last year in BAM. I doubt Lego would go to the cost to reproduce the mould for BAM, especially when a newer piece exists. I happy to be corrected on either of those, there's likely other examples but those come to mind.

New 1st April BAM: Source New sunflower lanyard kid torso Koala rescue torso New Firefighter torso which oddly doesn't fit in with the modern City theme. Reintroduction of the metallic silver classic firefighter helmet I thought the race car driver torso might be reused for Stuntz and the balaclava head might be from Speed Champions or the F1 theme but that doesn't seem to be the case after a quick check. And obviously the reintroduction of the S24 CMF Koala and reuse of the arctic pup. Good job. I thought that was the torso but couldn't find the reference I saw it in, which was likely the post you linked to

I'm familiar with the running changes to the part, that's why my eye was drawn to it. My point was not that Lego are making running changes to the part (I should have probably picked a better example as to avoid confusion) but highlighting the issue of them making running changes to the part numbers in their inventory. In this case looking at the numbers to determine its release is not ideal. The majority of the time it will be correct but there are outliers, I'd say this is an outlier. It's my opinion that there are also outliers in the BAM parts. In regards to the chef torso specifically, there's crease/no crease, back printing/no back printing. Bricklink does a fine job documenting this which is why it's my go to reference. But if you were to go by Lego's (edit: online) inventory list for the Parisian Restaurant you'd only see a 2019 part in a 2014 set, I won't go as far to say it's inaccurate but it is unreliable.

When I was trying to understand the numbering conventions in regards to the hippie head and torso I noticed the chef torso also in Q2 2019: At a glance I couldn't understand why its assigned number was so high considering it's been around since 2014 in the Parisian Restaurant. It has 2019 numbering but was first released in 2014, that doesn't make sense. It seems to me Lego is renumbering select older parts and the inventory is only showing the current or latest number and name. Of course the set instructions still keep a record of the original element number. So if this is occurring, any part that is renumbered when it appears in BAM will be hard to identify if the old part number and picture is not longer in the inventory and the new one is incomplete. I also found it weird that in Q3 2018 the unidentified yellow legs has the same part number as the black police detective legs from TLBM (but different design and element number)

Thanks, good to know. I asked because Lego often changes a part number (the 7 digit one) when they bring a part back into production, when everything else is supposedly identical. I thought if they change the part number, why not the name i.e. MINI UPPER PART, NO. XXXX? But I no longer will pursue that line of thought. Several times. This image is from April 2019 from what I remember as a haul post on the old Brickset forum. I saved it as a reference because the TRU packs weren't available to me and I wanted to track down the parts for an alternate hippie in addition to the dark blue wizard. I'm using it as an example here because of the date and the other parts in the haul, I gives credence to my theory of it being Q2 2019. But it will be difficult to determine which unidentified head it actually is*. *edit: Searching for some of the missing legs (how hard can it be to find some bright yellow legs, there's so few of them?) I much better understand the sequential numbering going through the part lists by yearly release. It's easier to learn by doing. I say this because I can now see how the Hippie head (a part released in 2017) doesn't fit in the numbering structure of: MINI HEAD, NO. 2831 MINI HEAD, NO. 2833 MINI HEAD, NO. 2834 There's is no other quarter the head could fit in either. Yet it was released in BAM circa 2017-2019. There's got to be something else more at play here, but that's for another time. I just wanted to make this edit to say I've been enlightened

That's because the chimpanzee is not from 2018. It's categorised in that year on Bricklink but it's an easy mistake to make if a user found Chimpanzees in a BAM station around that time and labelled it such. The bricklink entry for the chimpanzee with reddish brown face has it added 9 Jan 2016 and this post reports them in store firmly in 2016. I now have a better understanding of what you refer to with the number sequences even if I don't know what numbers correspond to what time period with out getting in to the minutiae of it (I'm not asking you to explain it either). In reference to Ringo's legs brickset has them as 6175906 / 29841: MINI LOWER PART, NO. 1194, is it possible Lego generated another unique part number for the BAM release? Also I don't really see how the BAM inclusion can predate 2017 when the part was only produced for 21306 for a late 2016 release. From what I understand it wasn't a BAM debut. Also does the recoloured Hippie head fall out side of the number sequence because it was first released in 2017 in the Toy R Us pack (assuming it wasn't assigned a new part number)? A good indication of this would be the recoloured Hippie torso from Q2 2019, but that is beyond my understanding at this point in time. I single out these two parts because their origins aren't CMF. I do acknowledge that grouping parts just because they match is a bit of a folly, even if it is a common enough occurrence. Exemplified by the S17 Veterinarian legs in Q3 2018 and torso Q1 2019.

I'm operating under the assumption that each group is the collection of parts released that quarter not an assembly guide. Some do fit thematically but others do not. The sand blue mechanic shirt is in Q2 2018 and the pirate head in Q4 2018. Bricklink's BAM inventory is incomplete especially if they're re-released or reused parts, BL is pretty good with the exclusive parts. This is addressed. The website states: I'm not responsible for the website so I don't want to speak for who is but if the website scrapes Lego's data and Lego doesn't differentiate between the torso printing, then that's on Lego. @wadapan I've DM'ed you.

Yes. I've not seen those German PABfinder images, they would have been of real interest to me a few years ago but it's quite illuminating comparing them to photos taken from U.S stores for example. It's become more apparent to me that for each new release stores then were getting (as an example only) bags of 7 torsos, 7 headwear, 7 accessories etc. and as best they could, piece them together thematically. It's easy to get the same or similar result when the BAM parts were medieval, occupation or costume themed but can be fairly disparate when it's a bunch or City parts. To clarify, are you having trouble with a bunch of images you're trying to find part numbers to or you have a bunch of part numbers you're trying to match to images? Whenever there's a new BAM release I'm pretty good at sussing out the old (non-exclusive) parts like reused heads and torsos. If you want some assistance DM me with the specific info you might not be able to message as a new member, just post it here.

Well now I feel silly. I started going through pre 2020 parts and figures because I thought a lot of it was absent from your website, then I discovered the "Click here to view the raw inventories for the quarterly waves from 2017-2019." In my defence I was primarily looking at the pretty pictures and not reading the text Great job documenting all those parts though, really impressive. Check out this inventory if you haven't already done so, they all look to be there at a glance. I mentioned it because I thought it may be useful to you as a pre 2020 reference. But like you stated, there's some errors. I'm confident the person poster doing the photography is cataloguing the BAM in accordance to how their local store arranges them (edit: confirmation) but I see several mistakes. Right from the top Z-Blob Wrestler has a black arm where it should be transparent green. For whatever reason, on occasion, kids love to swap hands (and in this case arm) in store, so it could have just been luck of the draw when they picked up that torso. But the doctor has black legs and the child head from the lime green bunny costume, the bunny costume then has the wrong colour legs and the honeybee girl has Izzy's head and on and on it goes. Most of them are right though. Back to my example of the discrepancies with the teal brick suit. I thought to check jaysbrickblog because I was sure his review featured the girl with the two buns hair as opposed to the boy with the sweeping Rex hair. I mention Jay because he would have purchased the figures from AG Lego based on location. Well it turns out, oddly, he didn't review that release but he did feature the figures as assembled at the Legoland Discovery Centre. I mention this because the Legoland Discovery Centre in Melbourne was at the time owned by Merlin a completely different company from AG Lego. I wonder if the different store types (Lego stores, Legoland stores and Lego certified stores) are a reason for different BAM configurations? Last I'll hopefully say about the teal brick suit is that the boy with Rex hair is a weird build. The hair is too long to connect right. If the hair and head is connected then the head can't be pushed all the way down on the neck peg and if the head is pushed down on the neck peg then the hair won't attach to the head correctly. In summary, it's wrong and I hate it It's a good thing I don't care that much about the suggested builds, I keep a lot of the costumed and themed minifigures like Halloween that way but I'm happy to swap in a part I like better.

Hi. It's interesting to see your post. I've been perusing your site the past few days, it's a good resource and back up of all the BAM figures photographed by AG Lego for sale. You've catalogued it so extensively that I thought you might be Australian, but I now see you're British. A word of caution, AG Lego's BAM figure configuration is usually pretty uniform across their Australian stores but not always so. A good example of this is the teal brick suit. @cacacolito photo is the configuration I got at the time. And the AG Lego configurations do differ sometimes from Europe and North America, although less in recent years. I read through a lot of your notations already and there is nothing that stood out to be incorrect. But if you have specific questions please ask. I presume you sourced (or secondary sourced) some of the Dreamzzz accessory swaps and the Puffer Jacket info from the discussion here in the forum. There's quite a few of photos in earlier pages of store displays which could be helpful. If memory serves they're from around the Covid period when stores didn't want people sifting through the parts. I also have some photos from the now defunct Brickset forums to reference earlier BAM stuff, I'll sort through it and see if there's anything you might find interesting. I bought my first BAM in 2020, basically when we got our first Lego store in my city, and I wanted to go back and see what I had missed. There was very little information to do so, bricklink now has a lot of the parts and/or figures listed but it certainly didn't then. edit: This is a post worth revisiting and the subsequent discussion. There's a good flickr page linked if you haven't seen it already. But trying to document some of the earlier BAM when it was more a random assortment of parts can be an exercise in madness.

I know who you are I'm always using your IG as a reference and linking to it here, it's a great resource! And thanks for doing the count. It's interesting to see the past few years were about the same number of figures released, it's not what I would have guessed. Hopefully we can anticipate for about 27 more for 2026.

It is mostly the standard for the "seasonal" releases e.g. Halloween and Christmas. These March BAM are "Spring" themed. Sometimes the seasonal releases are incorporated into that quarter, sometimes they're separate. Think of the dark red and orange honey bee girl, lime green bunny costume in overalls and the magenta chili pepper farmer from 12 months ago. Halloween figures usually get a separate release but they didn't in '24. I haven't counted but it seems 2025 saw the most BAM figures released and they did more than the usual quarterly schedule. It's a good idea if the plan is to get customers in store more frequently. BAM is the only reason I visit a Lego store, as an example.

Spring BAM (available 1st March) Source: 853958 Comparison Mushroom Sprite CMF

A better photo from @lego_bam I still don't know what the colours are. Reddish orange head and torso, red legs and arms for the elephant suit and coral for the bricksuit? The minifigure head from S28 Frog Suit CMF is reused here for the elephant's minifigure head. edit: Source:

The part of the statement in question is "brought back from the dead". The part originated from Vidiyo like several others but it was never dead, it's had a life for several years in Dreamzzz. From 2023 to last years BAM.

Dreamzzz erasure.

I think it's coral, dark pink has already been done. The pic is a bit washed out colour wise, as noted, it's hard to tell if the elephant is made up of red, dark red or reddish orange parts. It could be. It does look like warm pink which is probably why it's coral, all the colours in the picture look a shade off.

I'm going to post this as a potential spoiler for season 3, I'll remove the image if necessary, keeping in mind it's not water marked and TLG has previously allowed Lego Ambassadors to post cancelled sets like 77014. I don't feel like I'm missing much because of its cancellation. It reminds me of the top level of Ninjago modular sets, it's not me. I don't mind stickers normally but the 9 2x2 tile grids look like alignment sticker hell.

July BAM figures Not much new here other than the wetsuit torso, printed surfboard and dark blue/yellow dual moulded legs. The Encanto and Wicked hair and the pineapple printed torso are reused parts along with all the heads, double bass and peach. The Halloween BAM figures were provided by Lego to the Instagramer, so they're not leaks. The witch hat/hair combo is not the same one from the Hocus Pocus set because it's missing the printing on the band and appears to be orange and not dark orange. But it's good to get the previously 'licensed' black cat from the same set. I thought the ghost lady's head might be a reuse from one of the Harry Potter Hogwarts ghosts but it looks like I'm wrong on that. It does look familiar.

Just quoting my post from the BAM thread in case people haven't seen it and are interested in the Dreamzzz minifigs: