MAB

I think the problem then is timing. From what I understand, their agreements (in the content of the range) are often settled at least a year in advance so an ideas set might take ages to come out and there may even be plans for sets over longer timelines than that for continuos licenses. Which would be why getting a new IP for one set can be quicker than renegotiating an existing contract. The new IP holder is either up for it or not. Whereas pushing back an agreed set might cause problems for the existing IP license. But I think a bigger problem is that LEGO can always use the excuse (which may be genuine) that they have thought about that idea and there is no business case, or they have already designed that one and it will be out in 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, etc. In that sense, any SW ship (or anything else) is not a good Ideas idea. I reckon LEGO / Lucasfilm have thought about every single ship and scene - and is there a business case for it? A fan saying make this (and even getting 10000 supporters) may show that there is some support for it, but I imagine LEGO have already decided whether or not every ship will sell (and how well in comparison to whatever else they will have on the shelf). Minifig scale X-wings keep on coming not to annoy AFOLs that have been collectors for 20 years, but because they sell and LEGO knows it. LEGO aren't going to put something else on the shelf that will sell OK, when they can put something that will sell well. But yes, we will never really know why they decided to make the changes. Just that they have made the changes. I cannot see them accepting any SW ideas, as it would just encourage people to try to upload new SW ideas.

I guess everyone sees these in a different light. With a little adjustment, the Captain's Cabin set can fit into either POTC ship, or can be played with as if it was in a room / cabin just that the cabin isn't there. The Jack Sparrow is a problem, but then I imagine that is down to the license agreement - the key character must be in every set. A bit like the Lone Ranger, he appeared in every set in the theme. But I think that is understandable given that the sets are so heavily tied to the movie advertising. The Dastan set, I think it is a great army builder. In fact, I bought six of them when they were cheap and I really wish I had bought more. Dastan with different legs makes a great generic fleshie warrior (I use them as Rohans) and the guards' torsos are good for castle / historic builds. Decent horse and the parts are ideal for desert landscapes. AT the price points these sets were sold at, I really cannot see any other option for a decent build. It then becomes either they do a set like that with minimal build or they don't do that price point at all. In a similar way, I loaded up on these (I think I bought 24 in the end): The build is insignificant, but each set contains a horse, a cannon and three decent generic army builders. Then just one figure I sold off. But again, I cannot see how they could have done any better at that price point. It is essentially a minifigure / battle pack to bulk out the more substantial sets. I'd have preferred that it didn't contain the Lone Ranger but like Jack Sparrow above, I understand why the studio would want him in every set. Plus it is a cheap set if a kid wants something from the movie, with some play value - riding the horse, shooting the cannon.

I guess it depends what he can find at the LEGO store. I know my local has the black 1x1 with 4 studs in stock on the PAB wall. If plentiful, you can just use a few of these on each edge of the cube.

The simplest way is to use these ones with studs on 4 sides, . https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=4733#T=S&O={"rpp":"500","iconly":0} You can get away with just 8 for a small box, but you will probably need more for strength if building a 16x16x16 cube. There is a new brick with studs on two adjacent sides, but these are more expensive. The 4-sides ones are often on the PAB wall in the LEGO store too.

It depends on their agreement with LEGO. Some get a catalogue that they can choose ranges from, with either the pictures of finalised sets or close to final sets with some placeholders or sometimes no image with just a very short description or title and occasionally just an in-house code, plus price points and rough part counts, etc. So where there is a spoiler, they might just indicate it is a big SW set with 1000 parts and the price point. Others (smaller stores and independents) sometimes get told what they can stock with very little choice. Normally stores cannot pick and choose within a range, they have to take the whole range of price points. So even if they think one set might be a bad seller, they still need to take it if they have that range.

I guess that also brings up another one ... the "he's not a real LEGO fan as he collects minifigures" attitude (or "he's not a real LEGO fan as he doesn't do what I do with LEGO" *). Some people enjoy building only, some people enjoy just collecting minifigures, many enjoy both building and using minifigures with their builds. Some like yellow skins, some like fleshies. Some like collecting sealed boxes. Some just use LDD. Some people use customs to enhance their LEGO. Some people cut, paint, glue or design their own stickers to enhance their LEGO. All are LEGO fans. * this can cover everything ... I build, he just displays minifigs. I MOC, he doesn't. I use bricks, he uses LDD. I'm purist, he isn't. ...

How do you know this? Is it speculation or did they state this. Couldn't it equally well be due to the bad press within the lego community that they got about the Ghostbusters HQ when they designed their own that coincided with timing of the Ideas one? It is just as likely that they agree to a number of sets and the subjects with the IP holder (either one off or continuous, with the IP holder getting a say in future sets for continuous licenses), and that they cannot make any more sets in that cycle no matter who designs them (either in-house or through ideas). If they wanted to preserve a small chance that a project based on an existing license could become a set, then surely they would continue to accept new projects based on all existing licenses. If there were some IPs that allow it and others that don't, then they could continue to accept all licenses through ideas and just reject any that make it if it is disallowed under the license.

What is wrong with that? In some cases the stars of the set are the minifigures and always will be. I don't see that as a problem. For example ... The hut is OK. It's a bit small, looks a little odd on it's own and I doubt many people would buy it for the build alone. Take Luke away and it is nothing recognizable. To me, this set is mainly about the old Luke minifigure, the porg and to a lesser extent Rey (as similar minifigs already exist). The hut can be improved using a lot more bricks or the bricks in this set can be used for something else. I would have been really annoyed if they had made the set two or three times the size to have a substantial build, as that would massively increase the price of old Luke.

If you want that version in your collection, then yes. If you want any Hogwarts, I'd wait and buy the new one. It will probably have updated (and hopefully better) print, parts and minifigures.

They've often paired up male and female before, Bavarians, lifeguards, robots, etc so maybe they will do a female one.

Yes, it is a gamble. Some parts they will say yes, others no. Sometimes they can offer a similar part in the same colour or the same part in a different colour. You are less likely to be successful with licensed parts but occasionally they allow it, just like on B+P.

They'll just dump it out due to the current policy. I don't really understand why they didn't remove existing projects like this that contravene their current rules. It looks bad to let people get to 10,000 then drop it.

There is one already ... There are loads of other dress torsos with old slope combinations with very fine detail printing and not all in red... stick a ruff on any of these and this is probably what any new Baroque / Renaissance / Tudor woman would look like. Maybe they'd use the newish large dress piece again, although I prefer the new version of the slope one. I find the large queen's one too big.

You call them using the number online and say that you would like to place an order for some parts. It means that the part is not in the "for sale" database, so you cannot find or buy it. However, it might still be in the missing parts section.

You can sell however you like. If you are just doing a few, stick the remnants on ebay calling them opened but sets without the minifigures. If you are doing a lot of sets, you can sell part by part via bricklink. Job lots of mixed up parts are not worth much, since nobody knows what is in there and it could just be junk. AT least if you sell sets minus figures, people know what they are getting.

SW and fleshie heads are different times though. And I don't think that either SW or fleshies they were the first minifigures that were collectable. People collected classic space figures, they army built with castle, etc before SW came along. Remember some people want the minfiigures and not necessarily the bricks. Some people want to build an army of stormtroopers. Why should LEGO not also cater for them? I don't think every set should be a decent sized set that could be played or displayed without figures, as not everyone wants that. Of course, lego should cater for those people that want decent builds, but they should also cater for people that don't. Otherwise, they lose those people as buyers possibly across the whole range. Not every set has to be a detailed or even decent build. So long as people wanting to build decent builds are catered for, there is no reason not to also cater for those that want just minifigures. Take away the licensed minifigures and you still have an airport tower, a few small trucks and a plane (even amend it to make it non-licensed). Of course the set is licensed, so the figures are specific characters and make the set more fun to play with. But even without them there is a decent enough build for the "plane", the tower is adequate and reasonably quick to build. The giant minifigure is also a decent build. Is that more or less playable than, for example, any of these: They are all a swooshable plane, along with a tower or other accessory. You can play with them with or without the minifigures, but they are more fun with the figures. The only real difference then is that the licensed set has defined characters, whereas the unlicensed one has generic figures. Will some people buy the Civil War set just for the minifigures? I'm sure they do. But I reckon more people would buy the set if it contained minifigures than if it had none.

Even though it has appeared in one exclusive set and they may well have stocks for future use, they don't have "for sale" stock yet. If it will appear in future sets, they are likely to hold stocks until those sets are produced. There is no reason to add it to B+P yet, as nobody is likely to be missing it. They may even class it as a licensed part, since it only appears in that colour in a licensed set. In reality, they probably know if they add them at a price similar to the other colours, people will just buy up all stock and sell at a large mark-up on BL.

Consider the distribution though ... 8 pawns to 2 rooks, knights and bishops and 1 king and queen per colour. So they'd probably need boxes of 32 / 64 to get the right distribution. Then there would be the complaints about rarity and not being able to complete a chess set, or the price to complete the whole set. Would many people be willing to pay out £100 or so for a basic chess set without the board? I'd also imagine that the pawns would be fairly plain, maybe just a monochrome figure, so possibly boring to most children especially given the frequency required. I think it is better that they stick to making complete chess sets like in the past rather than doing them as blind bagged series. What sort of outfit do you mean by baroque? I doubt they'd get any more detailed than this dress ... Remove the crown and cape and she is no longer a queen.

Yes, and that is probably why LEGO started minifigures. I don't think it was at all uncommon in the 1970s for kids to build things from lego, then use other manufacturers figures for the action. Nowdays it seems that kids don't need other figures to play with their lego. So Star Wars with the yellow skins was OK, but not when they went down the fleshie route? It's funny, many (minifig based) SW sets are still a reasonable build around a location or ship / vehicle.

Did they object to the church? It seems strange given that St Marks is in the Venice architecture set.

Then there is the really big issue - would Jesus be a licensed minifigure or not? I want a fleshie Jesus not a yellow skinned one.

I think this is a really good point. It is like amazon not selling officially selling google products (chromecast, etc). Unless, of course, they make the LEGO sets Amazon exclusives too!

That doesn't make them any less collectable. It just means that there are lots of them. There are plenty of sets in which the minifigures play a minor role, or are absent. In many cases the minifigures allow for imaginative play or display. For example, the modulars could easily be done without minifigures. However, including them enhances the display of the buildings, making streets look more alive than if there were no figures. Depending on your point of view, an alternative answer is 1978. Would this set have been as much fun if it had no minifigures? Would people have bought it at all? So was this set mainly about the castle, or the minifigures that came with the castle?

I don't think it damages the clip, any more than putting a round cross section bar in the clip. The stress is mainly on putting the piece in / taking it out. Once it is in, I doubt that there is any additional stress compared to a bar in it.

A lot of camera lens cleaners are based on isopropyl alcohol, usually with some added water. But a very expensive way of buying it!