MAB

More than 20 years. What will be more interesting is when do they decide to stop making bricks, and why.

I guess you could submit Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Diff'rent Strokes, or The Cosby Show and see how they do.

Keep the ones from expensive sets. Chuck / recycle / reuse the small set ones. With my kids, we made lots of LEGO themed storage boxes for their rooms. Heavy duty cardboard boxes from the supermarket, spray glue and pages from their old instructions.

Think also of the demographic. 20, 30, 40 year old women watch Friends. That demographic have not been so well served by Ghostbusters, BTTF, TBBT, etc.

If they haven't sent it yet, then they know it isn't lost yet and so no need to re-ship it.

I don't know about the external website as I've never used it, but it is over 12 years since they posted here. The last copyright date on the site is 2007, and the last "evaluations" 2010. Similarly the stuff that appears "New in Shop" are about a decade out of date. So probably not active.

How much do the other $20US sets cost in Romania? Do they all tend to be $30 or do they vary? This is a four character set, with 155 parts that make a reasonably substantial build compared to, say, a SW battle pack which tend to have 4 minifigs pls about 100-110 parts for $15 in the US. So I don't really see how you can claim it should be $12 max. You are getting 40-50 more parts (so about $4-5 on the US price at 10c per part) compared to a SW battle pack. So $20 for the US set makes sense. Of course, US headline prices don't include taxes, whereas your $30 price does.

My feeling too. Also the app could be a weak point. Let's hope they learnt from their experiences with LEGO Fusion how not to do it. Plus I hope the app runs on tablets that are fairly basic that kids own, rather than them expecting people to buy the latest ipad or have an android tablet produced in the last six months only.

Even small sets such as this one were pretty decent for the number of bricks they contain. They are simple, but the Penguin's duck-boat is great.

Yeah, there were also those good articles in Hispabrick comparing aspects of minidolls and minifigs ... ending in a draw!

The scene is also an important one - it marks Anakin's turn to the dark side. As for licenses vs non-licenses, the SW scenes are no worse than, for example, two knights fighting.

I find the scale of minidolls closer to reality than minifigures. It is especially noticeable in vehicles, a two person car (sitting side by side) looks way too wide for minifigures, but much better for minidolls.

Yet still Batman sets sell well. Why is that? I reckon the answer is because people keep buying them. So LEGO keep making them.

I would imagine it is more to do with sales in the US Bible Belt. Any City or Friends type set (that is, non-licensed, so not story based) that contained two dads would be likely jumped on as a political statement and would have a portion of the world up in arms about it, while another portion would be buying it up even if they have no interest in the contents to show support that Lego have made a set with gay men in it.

Would you show them the rape and pillage that is about to go on here?

I'm not sure media is necessarily as much part of a theme as the sets, as in many countries the media is not very widespread. It is perfectly possible for a child to want and play with the sets without knowing anything about the storyline that is portrayed in a cartoon that is not on TV in their country. In that case, why would they necessarily make the link. The box doesn't indicate the storyline, although if the child reads the description of it on the lego website or elsewhere, they can see that they are the parents. However, there is no reason to believe they are married based on knowing they are the parents. Plenty of people live together and are parents of children without being married. I don't follow the media for Ninjago. Do they get married in the show or is it stated that they are married, or is it just a cultural thing, making the assumption that they are married as they have children together?

There was a spreadsheet and guide available about 5 years ago for free, but I think it went commercial as an ebook.

I think there is a bit of a difference in what is thought about the licenses. Mention Indiana Jones and people will think action and adventure, rather than the few scary scenes. Mention Game of Thrones and people will think about swords and boobs. Or maybe that's just me. What is the problem there? I see the backs of the shoulder blades, then scales down the back as they approach the fish tail section. What is not child friendly in that picture.

It varies. I've had orders where 100 small parts are in their own bag, but then I have had orders where 200 small parts have been mixed with 200 other small parts.

There is a big difference between an AFOL / long term collector and a kid here. Why go back 10+ years and re-release things that haven't been made for that long and presumably haven't been made for that long as they don't sell that well, when they can go back 2-3 years and re-release things that continue to sell well to kids. Kids want a playable Millennium Falcon and an X-wing, for example. If either is missing from the shelves, then LEGO is missing a large chunk of the market. Those aren't stale if they are big sellers. They may be boring to the long term collector, but not to the kids just getting into LEGO SW. They are expected. It is the same with most licenses - for example, younger kids know of Batman and Spiderman. Those characters will help sell the same or similar products year after year, probably better than some of the lesser known characters in current movies.

Ideas submissions very similar to this have been done many times in the past: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/2f3abd39-368c-4cdb-b261-a267b5894fba https://ideas.lego.com/projects/e47bc5b0-7515-47e6-add4-64a26974fa11 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/b5ca0cbd-0552-4b85-b4da-43f86fe08108 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/7c96e2e5-43f2-4a12-86f4-4613648941d8 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/a6415fe2-d26e-4fdf-94a2-8ef0cd4f9a86 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/8f4b920c-ad97-4132-a423-cc877cb6637e https://ideas.lego.com/projects/f0a8436e-f3f4-4ed9-8c04-152fe8feef62 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/d51ff3f6-7794-49b2-8ac8-52f5c5199301 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/a535e527-a0d2-41d4-8c8e-3f9fad0f1b33 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/d3614149-f2f8-4551-8d2c-b1bb49e69712

Why? They don't act out all the source material in the set. In the set they are just sitting around with their food. You don't see Leonard and Penny in bed together in a LEGO set, for example. Many licenses will have some source material that is not suitable for a child. So long as this doesn't make it into a LEGO set, what is the problem? Daleks and Cybermen kill people in Doctor Who, yet they appear in sets. Same with Star Wars, Indiana Jones, etc.

You are wrong. The set is not kid unfriendly. It is a group of people eating food around a table. Even the show is rather tame, mainly innuendo.

Hits on youtube. Only after you've exhausted the supply of yellow ones ...

Why would they need to be outed as LGBT? Don't many LGBT people look just like "normal" people in real life. In that case, if a child or AFOL wants a particular minifigure to be gay, then that is their choice. So for example, in this set: Is the fireman gay or straight? And the BBQ man? Are they partners, or strangers? It is very rare that we are told that a character is straight, so why the need to say a character is not? Personally, I think it is fine to leave the choice about sexual orientation of the characters to the people that buy the toys. For example, why would LEGO need to indicate that the fireman in the set above goes home and has sex with a man? If someone wants him to, that is fine. If someone wants him to have sex with a woman, fine. If someone wants him to just be a fireman and not care about his sexual orientation, also fine.