Blondie-Wan

Assuming this is indeed the case, thanks for the news! I'd wondered whether they might do something like that. I'd note that Disney itself is also responsible for these decisions; they undoubtedly pick and choose their various licensing partners for each project, and undoubtedly have their own reasons for choosing a given partner for this project but not for that one (and like you, I don't pretend to know what the reasons are inside either company).

Ermm... I'd be willing to create a MOC of something I'd like to see as an official set and then post it somewhere where people could vote on it? Considering that the process of making a CUUSOO proposal is not all that different from what people do here on EB all the time just for fun (make something with LEGO, post pictures of it) without any expectation of compensation anyway, I just thought there's no harm in proposing projects, and if one actually has a project accepted and made into a set, it's a wonderful bonus. My post was responding to what I perhaps erroneously took to be a statement about CUUSOO generally (along the lines of "why bother?"), and not addressing this thing with BrickQueen at all. I didn't really want to add anything to the discussion of her; it strikes me as an ugly, unfortunate situation that doesn't reflect well on anyone, and I'd rather just ignore it. I just wanted to talk about CUUSOO's workings in a more general way, not with regard to this brouhaha. Wow, that's very unexpected; based upon the several times the product was briefly available for a matter of hours or days, then sold out and got placed on backorder or whatever, to become available again and then unavailable again, it seemed pretty clear to me it was selling large numbers of copies, but I certainly don't claim to be privvy to TLG's inner workings. If I may ask, how long ago was it that you spoke to the Community Rep? Thanks for the info about Hayabusa (re: maintaining its price because of the original agreement). Though disappointing, it does explain the set's longevity at its original MSRP. It's too bad there apparently aren't that many LEGO fans who realize what a cool set it actually is.

Apologies for not being able to answer your question, but what 2012 Olympics set?

Wow, how... unexpected! Indeed. It's worth noting the three previous comparable minifigure + accessory packs - the beach party one, the rock band and the Halloween / Monster Fighters one - included three minifigures apiece, whereas this one has four. Even if the second striped-shirted pirate is rather redundant, it's still more arguably more generous than the three figures (excluding single-piece animals and such) of each of the other three. The tradeoff seems to be that this one comes with less in the way of additional parts to build the little scenic accessory items, but that's not a huge knock (certainly it's easy enough to find basic bricks and whatnot). I'd bet it does indeed include the chrome gold bars.

Indeed, they make a point of saying so:

Well sure, but that said it's still a nice prize, considering most of us build LEGO projects all the time and get paid squat for them. Even if it's all the designer makes, $3499 isn't a trivial amount of money for some of us (I know I could sorely use that kind of money right now). Moreover, as far as I can tell all of the CUUSOO projects released after the first one (since Shinkai 6500 was a limited edition set) have wound up doing better than that - the Minecraft Micro World has obviously been a huge success, with numerous additional production runs needed to meet the immense demand, and the Back to the Future Time Machine appears to be doing extremely well also, from what we can see so far. Hayabusa is undoubtedly a slower mover, but given that it's been out for well over a year and hasn't had a price drop, I suspect it's selling well enough that it's done more than 10,000 units too (as surely if it were taking this long to go through just a single initial production run of 10k units, they'd have clearanced it by now). Getting a set through CUUSOO may not guarantee that more than 10k copies of your baby will be made and sold, but so far it appears that all the ones that have made it through the process actually have had just that very thing happen (excepting the limited-edition, Japan-only initial set). CUUSOO royalties won't let anyone retire, obviously, but I think it's fair to say they'll make life a fair bit easier, at least for a little while. (Of course, the Back to the Future set isn't bringing a payday for the designer anyway, but for the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research.)

Oh, I think you're saying it pretty well, and I believe I understand where you're coming from. I just do think I see the product "working" as a product even setting aside the impetus driving it. Certainly I see it selling enough copies to justify it from the business case perspective, anyway (with the caveat that of course it would depend upon how much / which part(s) of the proposal TLG elected to include in the finished product, of course).

Ok, I get what you're saying, but I still don't see a compelling reason for them to decline it now that it's garnered the 10000 votes. The "political / social interest" aspect represents a view that virtually all relevant parties including LEGO itself agree is a good and desirable one (i.e., strong representation of women & girls in sets, and in roles that don't reflect stereotypes); it's a very different thing from a model that represents, say, one side of a polarizing debate (an abortion clinic, say, or a medical marijuana dispensary). Moreover, what sort of message do you think people would take from it if it were declined? I think that would be a much more problematic situation for TLG to place itself in than anything arising from approving this project. Beyond that, the set is appealing in and of itself, and I think it has genuine potential as a LEGO product - I know I'd buy it, anyway. I don't see that a case can really be made against it using the traditional CUUSOO criteria - brand fit, legal viability, business case and so on.

As Gryphon Ink notes, they definitely look like two alternate models from the same set (and quite likely the "B" and "C" models from a typical "3 in 1" set whose "A" model we haven't seen; the image likely comes from one of those secondary instruction booklets included alongside a separate booklet dedicated to the primary model).

Why would this proposal failing review be the best possible outcome? Do you mean that you think it flat-out has no chance (and therefore getting made a set isn't a possible outcome), or that this set getting rejected is better than it being approved?

Aww. Back in the day I bought a total of six copies of the original Ewok Attack (set 7139, from 2002), and one of them is still unopened; I also have one copy apiece of the 2011 version (set 7956) and 2009's The Battle of Endor (set 8038) unopened as well. Now that there's this awesome set, I think I'll keep each of those other three unopened until I get this one, and can have a big Ewokriffic Endor building fest, doing all four sets back-to-back. It'll have to wait a little while, though, as I still don't have the 10188 Death Star and that's my immediate priority as far as extra-large, ultra-expensive Star Wars sets go. Hopefully I'll be able to get that one before too much longer, and then I'll turn my sights to this (well, this and the UCS X-Wing and R2-D2).

Oh, I'm quite sure it wasn't designed as a theme for Halloween specifically; I just think it complements the holiday well enough that they might well have considered extending its run just enough to fully cover a second Halloween's worth of availability. Certainly it didn't exactly escape occurring to TLG that the theme is suited for Halloween - note how one of the minifigure / accessory collections utilized the Monster Fighters artwork and theming, while being labelled the "Halloween Minifigures Collection," or some such thing.

Well, as noted, this isn't even that much of an '80s theme itself - unless you count "the 1980s" as including 1990, there is exactly one episode released in the 1980s, and over 500 released in the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s. Star Wars, Indiana Jones and Marvel and DC Superheroes are all much more 1980s themes than The Simpsons.

30 years ago (that would be 1983), The Simpsons didn't exist. The show began in 1989, with the Christmas episode - just barely sneaking into 1989 under the wire with the series debut, and that was the only episode seen before 1990, unless you count the original shorts from The Tracey Ullman Show, and even that only began in 1987. Moreover, unlike The A-Team, Buck Rogers and Knight Rider, The Simpsons is still running, without having been rebooted or anything like that. It's a special case, as is Star Wars. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making your own set from your regular pile and fill in the blanks and inaccuracies with imagination, but the question of whether to license or not was decidedly, definitively resolved over a decade ago.

That does happen, but I also think that with LEGO a set is about a lot more than the design of the model; it's also about the parts selection. I don't have this set yet, but I fully intend to get it, even though I also fully intend to MOC my own Sail Barge; I'll simply do it in large part using elements from this set. I think the set is a great starting point for someone wanting to build a larger, more fully-featured and/or more accurate Sail Barge, while also still being a perfectly decent rendition for the average target customer of LEGO (that is, a kid) who just wants to be able to get a set that will make a version of the Sail Barge.

Pardon the tangent, but what double points promotion?

Well, yes, that was exactly my point - LEGO isn't going to get a license from Hasbro to make My Little Pony sets; it'd be like Volkswagen getting a license from Ford to make VW-branded Mustangs. That's what I meant by "a not-entirely-dissimilar reason we won't see ever see sets based on My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic." If MLP construction toys happen at all, they'll be part of Hasbro's KRE-O line.

And they haven't gotten any more in after selling out of the initial stock, over a year ago? That surprises me; the set's not discontinued or anything like that, as far as I know. I just bought it two months ago at the LEGO Store at Downtown Disney in Orlando, and it's still available from Shop at Home, at least in the US (for example). I don't know where you're traveling from, rollermonkey, but you might try seeing if you can get it locally first.

I'd have thought that they're wanted simply because people want them to be in sets and MOCs depicting scenes in which they appeared - the same reason for which they'd typically want any other minifigure. I'm really surprised to learn it was anything more complicated than that for anyone else.

Wait, what discounts were these?

Part of me thinks they might bend the "one-per-quarter" rule if there were models approved that used only basic elements they already regularly produce / stock anyway, and no unique prints or funky colors. But maybe not...

A lot of people seem to be focused on the fact there are two guards in the set, but I have to admit I actually prefer it that way. For some reason it just feels to me that they should always be in even numbers, for symmetrical formations and such. Note that every set in which Imperial guards appear has featured two of them - just one feels wrong, somehow. That said, it is an odd choice for a battlepack, and I'm not exactly crazy about them being redesigned, either...

I was actually wondering whether they might do another production run on the Monster Fighters line since they're so appropriate for the season; I could see retailers wanting to temporarily restock them in September / October. I suppose we'd have heard about it already if it were going to happen, though.

Wow!! That's absolutely lovely. I actually have seen . From the outside, though, that one looks not like an actual book but a LEGO product box. Inspired in part by that one, I've been planning a pop-up book of my own (a seasonally-themed one) for the five years or so since then, but I still haven't gotten around to actually building it. Yours has some wonderful book-like details, like the flag used for the bookmark ribbon - I love that! And your cover is beautiful. The detail in the scene you're depicting in the book is also very well-done, and it would be a noteworthy creation even without the fold-out, pop-up function. That pop-up function itself also works so smoothly - very impressive. I haven't seen any of the other contenders in the building contest, but it's hard to imagine something that would beat this. And thanks for the historical background information.

Whoa! I like the MicroFighters and the Death Star Troopers battlepack, but... good grief, are they changing the printing on the Rebel pilots again?! Blast it, I was happy with the previous redesign from the Hoth Rebel Trooper battlepack, and it hasn't been that long since it came out. Now, though, just as I'm finally about to get more of them than I have of the old ones, they go and change them and I have to pick and choose whether to try to get as many of the about-to-be-obsoleted ones as I can, or abandon them for the new ones. And I see that's not the only "NEW!" version of a uniform... This constant "updating" of uniformed characters is pretty frustrating to those of us trying to army-build with limited funds, patiently amassing as many sets as one can, whenever one is able, over a period of years, only to suddenly have to deal with a change in the look of the stormtroopers / pilots / whatever partway along - forced to choose whether to forever stick with however many of the "old" ones one was able to get and just ignoring the new ones in sets released from this point on, or to retire the old ones, painstakingly acquired over years, in favor of the new ones one hopes one will be able to get "enough" of, and in either case not being able to quite make the most of one's investment. Argh. LEGO Star Wars, I wish I knew how to quit you...