Faefrost

The Bride is tricky as she is one of the few classic Universal Monsters that is not yet in some form Public Domain.

I could swear it looked like the CMF knight but with the BF shield from the Joust set. The marketing decorations sometimes run ahead of the lines. My Target had an aisle banner with the newer lion king months before we had even a hint of the last Castle wave. The other cutouts on the aisle included some I know we have never gotten as figs yet. They included a beret wearing director with a cone shaped megaphone and a lady with a business suit torso briefcase and long grey skirt not unlike the Statue of Liberty fig.

It's not dying by any stretch of the imagination. However we may be seeing the peak of the collectors and speculators market. Although Lego does seem to be taking steps to somewhat insulate themselves from that bubble. Not going to happen. However TLG does appear to be stepping up and taking ownership of the IP's. That is what Ninjago and Chima and atLM and the new Elves lines are. Not simply going back to the old days of unlicensed in house stuff, but rather they are licensed themes that Lego owns the IP to.

The contract probably expires in late 2015. Remember the contract has to cover the full expected lifecycle of all products produced. Once the contract ends the product must leave the shelves. So the contract will typically have at least a year remaining when the last wave is released in order to allow for sufficient retail cycle. By the same token they will not produce anything new once that 1 year threshold arrives as it will have insufficient time to be sold. Getting a single simple limited license for something like BttF or GB is orders of magnitude less involved than modifying or renegotiating an existing contract, or even in some cases extending a contract that would otherwise be allowed to expire. Plus think of it from a business perspective rather than a fans. What benefit would TLG gain from paying to extend a full retail license for multi years just to do one limited release D2C set? Whereas what benefit would WB gain from offering Lego a limited license extension just for that one set when it would prevent them from shopping the full retail IP to another potential suitor? GB and BttF are viable because there is no real expected current interest in a full retail license by the IP holder, and working with TLG this way both generates interest and income for the aging IP, but also gauges interest and primes the pump for growth. This is not the same with the Tolkien properties.

It's all speculation. But a lot of it is reasonable and informed speculation. We can make a couple of guesses based on past behaviors, what we know of the movies, and fairly typical business practices. - The license came into effect at some point in early 2011. Based on past behavior it is likely a 5 year license to start off. - the sudden last minute addition of a third Hobbit movie messed up whatever the original plans were and impacted several waves. Resulting in Hobbit product without a matching movie on store shelves, and likely some LotR products being switched to third wave Hobbit. - Lego will stop releasing new product at the one year mark for remaining time on the license. This give a years shelf life minimum to their last wave of product allowing it a full sales life. We are likely at that point for the Tolkien themes now. - The only time Lego has ever announced the ending of a theme was Harry Potter. Because they tacked on the 8th movie Lego had product still out there when the license was ending that had to be sold or pulled by x date. It's worth noting that Lego allowed that license to expire with no extension after the last movie. One of their most succesful lines. - Lego will never say a line or license has ended while product remains on the shelves. Doing so impacts sales of the remaining product. They will further never discuss licenses as doing so brings unwanted and unprofessional attention on the IP owners. - the normal expected shelf life of a retail set is 1 year. A D2C set is normally 2 years. So a D2C set would typically only be released if there was a confirmed 2 years remaining on a license, or an extension was in place. - we have never seen an instance where Lego does a partial or limited extension of a license just for a D2C set.(although given their extremely good relations with WB these days anything is possible.) The above are all assumptions and speculation. But they are based on simply observing what Lego does and says and getting a feel for their typical practices. The biggest hurdle to a Minas Tirith set is not the set itself. It is the timing. It is the business issues surrounding the existing license. One big unsaid issue is does the Ideas group have the ability to step in and re open or renovate an existing license contract in support of an ideas project? This is a very different animal than simply negotiating a one shot BttF or GB license with Paramount or Universal. Personally I think the project has an outside chance of making it through if somebody at WB likes it and wants it. But it is a very small chance at best. It's not an insta fail like the Helicarrier.

Wasn't the green fig planned for the Seatron sets, such as the Seatron Monorail?

I thought those rights expired from lack of development 10 years ago? And as others have said, where the licenses lie and what the merchandise split is has a direct impact on whether we see sets of a given subject. At this point we will NOT be seeing FF sets. Word is Marvel has exercised their veto power on all merchandising of the characters to distance themselves from the FF movie. We may see some X Men stuff since it is a cash cow, but as far from the Fox movie as they can get. Whereas Sony gave back most of their merchandise split in the last negotiations with ?Marvel, so Marvel will happily promote Spiderman.

Because they were just using some old stock photos of the design and prototype room? And here's the kicker. Like I said in the LotR thread. If this photo is from 2013, and they explored and prototyped that sort of Minas Tirith set back then, then they have prior exploration of the design under the license. Prior work locked to the IP contract. This actually decreases the chance of the Ideas set getting made, not increases it. License contracts are funny and complex things. The Ideas project would find itself in a license conflict with an unreleased official design. And in such conflicts the unreleased design made specifically under the licenses and vendors auspices wins out. To further add to the doom and gloom. Seeing that pre existing internal design means TLG looked at a near identical set/setting and opted not to make it at that time, for whatever reasons of business case. It is unlikely that those reasons have changed and just as likely that they will just forward that analysis over to the Ideas team. So in short don't get your hopes up.

Yes, that is the same room that we have seen that other photo of from 2013, that showed us all of the prototypes. That Minas Tirith looks like it was designed to hinge much like the Ideas project to form the curved outer wall. It is likely a prototype that they explored. I believe they would have produced it if they had had a third LotR wave. But they would not have done it back to back with Helms Deep. To similar. Hence we got Black Gate and Pirate ship. This is a not uncommon patern for TLG. Good Guy Castle followed by smaller Bad Guy Fortress and some sort of large vehicle such as a boat. And now for the bad news. The existence of that prototype in 2013 might be enough to kill any chances of Minas Tirith as an Ideas project. If TLG explored to subject in a similar manner under the IP license groups dominion then it may be locked as pre existing art and design and the contract may not permit the hand off. Remember how the CuuSoo/Ideas blogs have said existing licenses have added layers of complexity that may increase the chances of failing review? This is the sort of thing they mean. This is also why it is doubtful that any Star Wars or Batman subject that was seen on screen in a movie will pass review.

As a general rule Lego does not do direct sequels. They will revisit names, characters and symbols, but always as something fresh and new. They do not want the kid oriented play series to feel incomplete. Which is also why we get what seem to be retreads to us, every few years. As the primary target audience ages out the new audience grows into age range and they need to start with a nice Kings Castle etc. I think we have seen a few clues to potential color schemes however. Look at the CMF's. Series 13's King and Goblin and series 12's Wizard and Princess are a few good hints. At TRU the other day I noticed some figure cutouts on the aisles that included a knight in the black and white BF colors.

The problem with that is Ideas is still essentially crowd sourcing. The fans are voting on what is basically the presented idea. While Lego will scale up or down a bit to turn it into a marketable production set there are some fairly tight limits to that. One of the questions they ask at review is "is this still the set they voted on?" The majority of Lego's design changes tend to be more structural to better convert it to a build able set using currently available parts inventory as much as possible. So the size will grow or shrink some, but not too far. Now color tweaking the TLG designers would do. Just look at the Exo Suit. They would likely do a bit of subtle color balancing if they selected the museum. I think the Marble Maze is something that the designers have liked for a long time, but as you say, where is the market for it exactly? It's a hard one to predict. If they do the Piano they would probably turn it into a small minifig vignette, with the creators permission. I don't think there is anything else in that review period that has much chance. Maybe a real Hail Mary long shot for the Minas Tirith set, but doubtful.

Lego has not become more cautious. They have always been very cautious with licenses. They are the big dog in the room and can afford to pick and choose the best of the best. In one way that is reflected is they generally stear clear of untried IP's unless it has some very specific synergy. They prefer to license established franchises. So you will not typically see a Lego set until there are 1or 2 movies already out. There are exceptions. LR had a few things going for it. It was marketed as a western PotC and gave them an excuse for doing straight up western subjects. But it still was not a rousing success. Whereas they skipped Thor 2 sets because Thor 1 did poorly in the toy aisle. They have no problem doing Iron Man sets because IM is now a merchandise juggernaut alongside Batman and Spiderman. With Captain America not far behind. Right now the only real untried IP's that they did sets for in recent memory was GotG, for which "Marvel movie that's Star Wars meets the Avengers" is about as safe a bet in their territory as you can get. And not having as good of ties with Disney? Marvel = Disney. Star Wars = Disney. They are broadening their Minidoll Princess line. Their Duplo Princess line is roaring and they just added Spiderman to Duplo. I suspect the lack of a Frozen specific line is more based on research into how that audience plays and buys. The girls want Elsa + Jasmine + Aurora + Ariel etc. not so much specific scenes from the movie like Sven and the magical troll rocks

Tastes change. Pig farming seems to be all the rage with the Minecraft kiddies.

2 points towards what you are asking about. 1. Lego is very very conservative with what they license. They will only rarely license IP that does not have an established track record in some form. And this goes up to including some big name stuff. They carefully watch how the first film performs in the toy market and then may or m ay not jump on for the second if it seems worthwhile. Even with what would seemingly be major Disney blockbusters. So no they would not likely touch BH6 out of the box, or Wreck it Ralph, or Tangled or Frozen until they could guage interest. On the rare occasions that they violate this one suspects there is some back end deal, and they often get burned. (note The Lone Ranger). 2. Lego has a Sleeping Beauty set out now, so I am not sure what you are asking for? Set 41060.

One of those other little rules of CuuSoo and Ideas that we tend to forget or ignore. Well maybe not a rule so much as a guideline. I believe it was mentioned in one of those early blog posts regarding how to pass review. Projects that are add ons or expansions to already existing sets will not pass. The GB Firehouse was likely viewed as an add on to the Exto One, with little market as a standalone. Similarly the BTTF train is not really well known. The DeLorean is the core of the three movies. It is as much of a character as Christopher Lloyd and Michael J Fox. Everything revolves around it and it is instantly recognizable. The train appears for less than 1 minute of screen time, and only shows its full form for less than 10 seconds. It's not representative of the movie. It's just a thing that is in one of the movies. As such it does not have enough general appeal unless it was being used in a current release new movie. There is not enough nostalgia surrounding it for it to succeed as a nostalgia product the way the DeLorean does. That is my take on it as well. Lego has great data on the Modular line. Probably 90% of the Modulars sold in North America and Europe are bought by Lego VIP account holders. This means they not only know how many would buy it, but who precisely. Down to their street address and e-mail. Plus it is a line that has successfully supported a fan made set in the past. If Ideas is going to take a risk on a big set, it will be a big set like this. Not something like the Invisible Hand, for which they have either wildly conflicting or negative data, or the Batman or XMen mansions, for which they have none.

Actually the Wall-E set as presented looks to be a fairly substantial one if they don't shrink it too much in development. And there has been a pretty broad stretch of price points in the Ideas/CuuSoo line to date. (and yes it is easy to see that $49 seems to be the targeted sweet spot). Where everyone fails in understanding size and price is in taking into account "context" and "Target audience". Note that Lego's absolute best broadest and oldest selling line, City, does not go into the high end price points that Creator Expert or Technic do. The size of the set must match up with the target audience and their proven willingness to buy at the needed price point. The key thing to remember is Ideas is not going to go outside TLG's experience zones. Or at least not far outside them. Ideas IS a vast experiment for TLG they are not going to pile other experiments on top of that. At least not without some other ulterior benefit. (see; Big Bang Theory, The. Which we really don't factor much into. that is purely a fortuitous marketing synergy.) I figure a safe estimate for whether or not a set is viable is can it be made `20% smaller or cheaper than the largest or priciest similar successful example from TLG's released catalog? TLG is never ever going to equal or surpass their largest or top end offerings under the experimental Ideas program. So if you are offering a set of a broad category it should be within the rough average pricing of similar official sets. You can get away with a 2000 piece Modular. You will not get away with a 2000 piece set of something they have never seen or tried before. And even then it will all depend on the business case and analysis.

OK have almost have a full set, save the Hot Dog guy who seems hard to find. So final impressions with these in hand... Worst fig of series; Easily Female Cyclops. There just is not much you can do with the fig either as a fig or as parts. And nothing that you could not already do with the male. You may be able to re-purpose the torso as a SW Twileck Slave Girl? But that's about it. Good but least "useful" for MOC's and parts; The Fencer. Great fig. But a little goes a long way. The parts are a little too purpose specific to use for anything else, so unless you are doing a fencing MOC not much else there. Best Single fig; Gotta go with the King. The crown, beard and ermine cape sell it. Plus the classic Castle colors going on. He's the King we always wanted. Best Army Builders; I'm going to say this one is too close to call this time, depending on your preferences. It is a great Army building wave. The Elite Trooper, The Egyptian Soldier, The Goblin, The Alien, all are wonderful in numbers. Even the Snake Charmer can be a good option for the History guys wanting to explore the subcontinent, if you slap some curved scimitars on them. Most "useful"; Who is the easiest to make use of in MOC, builds or parted out?; a tough call as there are a few great ones this time. I am going to go with the Carpenter however. he's just perfect (I admit to bias as he's a near perfect representation of my Father in Law). Runner up status goes to the Disco Girl for useful parts and the Evil Wizard / Ming, because he is the best most universal villain we have yet seen in any line. You can use him anywhere. Space, Castle, Agents, Ninjago, heck send him on a reign of terror over in Friends. It's all cool. Near Miss; Goes to the Female Samurai. Almost a great figure, but not quite. While I can understand not doing a new mold for the armor, the old is still kind of yuch. The figure could have been much improved with a Naginata or long bow instead of swords, and a helmet option. Best New Part; tough call, but if we take the capes out of contention I will go with the Kings Crown as the most long term useful. Runner up goes to the Goblin Hat and Ears which opens up all kinds of useful possibilities in recolors. Just my 2c.

That's next cycle. Although it's a fairly safe bet that the Helicarrier project is kind of obviously a non starter.

I suspect the issue with the Invisible Hand is largely two points. The project as proposed was an overly ambitious wish list that would make it one of the larger SW sets ever made. And the ship itself is very similar as you say to the Malevolence, the recent release of which sold horribly.

Not surprising. The shows are made by essentially the same teams, and Rebels has not been that shy about reusing art assets where they can get away with it.

It's not a matter of whether or not GW would have had a leg to stand on. It is that WB as the license holder split up the IP in such a way and segmented the licenses such that conflicts do not occur. There is no direct issue between GW and TLG. WB lays out very specifically in the contracts what the boundaries and requirements are. There was an interview with one of the Lego Reps at one of the brickshows from a year or two ago where they talked a little bit about this without going into specifics by line. Each license specifies things like ration of build to minifigs, number of named minifigs etc. Each is different so what applies to one does not apply to any others. These contracts are painstakingly specific. and they are often so in order to subdivide the merchandise property more cleanly between vendors. Do we have any direct and specific evidence of this? No. Neither TLG nor pretty much any vendor will ever discuss such things publicly. But if you have ever had any experience with licensed properties and are able to look at what is actually being said in public statements through a business speak filter it is pretty obvious how it all works. And it works the same for any vendor. And yet the Lego and Hasbro Star Wars licenses are the only ones that we have actual evidence of having come into direct conflict at one point. Hasbro filed a complaint with Lucasfilms about the magnet sets.

You can get them on BL although they get kind of pricey, especially fro the odd mounting brackets. They also dont have a lot of torque but put out a tremendous amount of noise. Those sounds on that video. That's not a sound effect. That's the micro motor.

From what I have read the big problem was not the "fiber optics" so much as it was the micro motors that drove them and required third party sourcing. Any of the sets with micro motors lost money. It just happens that they were typically related to the fiber optics. And the sum cost of all was enough to exceed the MSRP selling price.

It's a great book if you are interested in the business side of Lego or similar industries. Professor Robinson also did a great lecture on the subject that has been floating around the interwebz on video. or another version This is also an interview with Prof Robinson at the Wharton School about Lego http://knowledge.wha...side-the-brick/ Oh and BTW, in a shocking example of how fortunes change, in 2003 Lego had pursued Mattel as a potential suitor/buyer. As of last Friday Mattel's CEO has been kicked to the curb on the news of just how badly Mattel is struggling. Loss of 6% sales overall. Traditional lines like Barbie declining badly. Losing their highest profit license, Disney Princesses and Frozen, to Hasbro, and stunningly loss of the #1 toymaker slot to Lego. In short Mattel is sitting in the same place that Lego was in 2003.

Sigh! Ok first up Hasbro (or whoever holds the action figure license). That only effects selling minifigs as standalone product. And yes Hasbro did get on Lego over that with Star Wars. It is why Battlepacks have builds. It's also why Lego had to start gluing minifigs down in the magnet sets. Nothing done in either LotR nor The Hobbit lines would brush up against anyone else's action figure license. I am sure the major issue with LotR Battlepacks was Games Workshop. They hold the LotR and Hobbit license for build able custom armies as part of their miniatures game. And they tend to very aggressively pursue anyone that comes even close to a license or IP they are involved in. So the Lego license for the properties is in all liklihood written such that any conflict will be avoided. Each license is different. It is clear that the Middle a Earth ones are a bit more restrictive in what TLG can do (greater minimum build per minifig req's etc) typically the restrictions will come from how the IP owner has broken down their IP for licensing. As for the lack of generic figures? It's simple. Generic figures do not drive set sales the way named identifiable characters do. Army builders may individually buy a lot, but collectively they are a drop in the bucket compared to the number of figure collectors out there. The army builders, both the sets and the AFOL type are nice to have, but their limited numbers do not make it where TLG would be pushing the boundaries of an IP license just to appease them.