MAB

Didn't LEGO pull out of Russia and close their stores there?

There are many possible reasons. It may be that they bought it then regretted it and cannot return it, they may be in a country where LEGO stores are franchises and not run by LEGO and give discounts, they may have bought it to get freebies, employee discount if they work or used to work in the factory, ... Sure you can, it just depends what price you are comparing to.

It is unrealistic to expect them to say you cannot submit a Snow White set if they have one in development. It would be akin to saying we are doing a Snow White set. To keep their development sets secret, they'd have to hide it by banning loads of submissions, whether they were in development or not.

In the same way that you cannot discount Dimensions sets, if you count anything with the LOTR branding on the box. When it comes to the listing of the brickheadz sets on bricklink, brickset, etc they are under Brickheadz (just like the Dimensions sets are under Dimensions). Same on LEGO's site, they are primarily under brickheadz, with just a link to them from the LOTR page. So anyone getting a list of all the LOTR sets on bricklink or brickset will not find these within the LOTR categories.

So either they are working on adding loads of new parts or they have totally broken it. It could be good or it could be bad!

Did it reach 10K and get rejected? Looking at what is archived on IDEAS, one person submitted in 2015 and got to about 1500 votes, then a different user submitted in 2018 and got to almost 2300, and a third user submitted later in 2018 and got to just over 600. Was there another one that is missing? Who did LEGO steal the idea from? The middle one that didn't make even 25% of the required vote, or the first one that had even less. And did the second submission steal the idea from the first? Maybe LEGO asked some train fans what adult builders might be interested in and they came up with that. The dates also don't quite match up. The official set was released July 2020, and the 2300 vote one was automatically rejected for not enough support in Oct 2019. So LEGO managed to design and produce one of the first ICONS sets and get it on shelves in a little over six months. Why would they be taking such a big risk on a train that didn't even get to 25% of the required vote to make it to the review stage? Surely they would have stolen an idea that actually achieved review status because they know there is some demand for it. Or do you think they stole the idea when it got to maybe 1000 votes and started planning their version then?

Yes, anything double curved should be. Even thin stickers are hard to apply.

Of course you can pick and choose. You buy what you like and don't buy what you don't like. They are brickheadz sets, so anyone wanting to be complete when it comes to minifig sets can choose to collect those and ignore the brickheadz theme. For example, I consider my collection complete even though I don't have the Dimensions sets.

I guess that is because they were aimed at the younger end of the fan base. Quite a few were 4+ / Juniors, and younger kids have even more trouble putting on stickers.

It isn't weird. LOTR was here before they made sets. It stayed here when they made sets. LOTR builds are of interest to medieval builders and vice versa. Leave it here. It has been named in the description of the historical forum for over a decade, even when there were no sets on shelves.

If LOTR is as big as we think, and this is also D2C, then LEGO might decide a GWP is unnecessary. The watermarked image is interesting though, as don't they normally appear only in retailer catalogues suggesting it might not be a D2C set.

The second one looks great.

I also really hope not. Those S24 orcs look more like Chima characters than LOTR characters

I only did a quick search, having remembered seeing the Bridge of Khazad-Dum and they are briefly discussed in the 2nd/3rd post but not shown here: There might still be links to the images somewhere in that long thread but often images will have disappeared from the links anyway. There is still a link to an image including the SW Watto bust quite early on, I had forgotten about that one.

It was ten years ago now that there were those leaked photos of LEGO offices where there were LOTR builds in the background and it was assumed by some that they were all genuine sets that would be produced. It is amazing that 10 years on there are similar discussions about the contents of leaked images.

I think they have. There was a time that there were 1x2 bricks and 1x4 bricks in some of the newer colours and 1x1 bricks or 2x2 corner bricks in another colour, which made building in a uniform colour hard. But I think that is no longer the case for most colours where you are likely to have enough even length bricks to build a decent sized wall or object. I tend to buy lots of 1x2 bricks then use either 1x1 or 1x3 bricks to fill in odd length gaps by doors or windows. If 1x2 bricks are expensive, I'll use 1x4 instead again filling in odd length gaps with 1x1 or 1x3. So I tent to buy a lot of even lengths, with maybe about 10-20% odd lengths. I think some roof tile colours are still a problem with respect to interior and exterior corners.

It is funny, but that is one of the most wanted minifigure parts I have for a re-release. They should hopefully be easy enough to get hold of to update existing Hobbits. The other parts I really want more of are the heads and hair of Merry and Pippin, especially as the hair parts were exclusives to the original figures. I have enough Frodo and Sam heads and hair and getting another Merry and Pippin would be good for putting them in different outfits.

To me, yes. A massive improvement now compared to "back then". Imagine a MOC of a river flowing over a rocky waterfall, with muddy riverbanks next to a lush green field. I think I prefer having more colours. I doubt LEGO would be anywhere near as popular today with adults if it did not have the colour range to be able to make realistic looking builds. Many City sets would be fine with maybe just black, white, and a single red, green, blue, yellow, brown and one grey. They'd also need some transparent colours. But I still think they'd be seriously lacking compared to modern sets. And as for 18+ sets, they'd look terrible with such a narrow colour palette. When I think what my kids can build today compared to what I used to build with a limited colour range, there is a vast improvement when it comes to colours.

The images I see have the confidential stamp on them, so nobody has it. Instead they have the images from a catalogue.

In many countries, the customer should return the product to where they bought it and not to the manufacturer. LEGO run the missing parts service (for free replacements) more for good customer service than for legal reasons. And of course some people abuse it, hence having restrictions when they spot unusual behaviour. I am still really surprise that such a big part was missing from a set, since their scales are meant to spot such errors during the packaging stage. That is probably why they flagged the user.

I imagine it is still down to "logistics" in some way. I think all the sets you mention have other decorated parts in them that require stickers, and adding another sticker to the sheet is simple. The fire station with the stickered panel also has multiples of them for use in for other locations, which probably plays a role in the decision to go for a stickered same part rather than a different printed part. Even if similar printed parts exist, having 3x of one part where one needs a sticker is presumably a time saving when robots are packaging the set compared to 2x one part and 1x another. Little modifications like this can sometimes make surprising cost savings that customers don't appreciate. I don't think there is someone at LEGO deciding to add stickers when there is a similar printed part just to be evil or annoy customers.

I'm similar. I also like to use dark red, dark blue and dark green more than I like red, blue and green. I think they are more 'adult' colours. Now they have 18+ sets, maybe they need to have distinct colour palettes for them, Let the kids have a range of bright colours, and adults get a more earthy set of colours! :-)

I agree that playsets are unlikely, and I imagine LEGO knows kids (in general, not specific individuals) are not interested in LOTR. They know what the sales numbers were like last time they did LOTR and The Hobbit. However, I'm not sure D2C is necessarily the best way to go. I have no issue with one set per year (if we get that lucky) in the ICONS range. It seems to me that having it D2C misses out on people that are not necessarily into LEGO but might buy it. If they don't visit the LEGO store or website, they are unlikely to see it. Whereas if it is a non-D2C set in other stores too, then non-LEGO fans who are nto actually looking for LEGO will also get to see it. Plus there is the advantage that it is more likely to be discounted if stocked by retailers other than LEGO!

There are also stickers like price lists that look good on any colour, like this one: In fact, this sticker was designed to be put on a different coloured piece:

You can use clear background stickers on parts that are not clear. I buy my daughter quite a few Friends sticker sheets which are often white backed and she tends to stick them on large white panels that she uses to build shops with. Just because you cannot work out how to use stickers on parts they were not intended for doesn't mean others cannot.