Aanchir

On another note, keep in mind that City is a HUGE theme. This year there are six police sets and eight fire sets (not counting accessory sets and polybags) out of 35 sets total. I don't think there are a lot of kids or even adults who can afford to get every City set year after year. But the sheer number of sets available means that while new City fans are buying police and fire sets, more experienced City fans can be buying the newer or less frequent subthemes like Airport and Volcano Explorers, or the more individualized sets from the Great Vehicles subtheme.

It's tough to tell because most "advanced" themes, like Architecture, Ideas, Ghostbusters, Mindstorms, Star Wars UCS, and Creator Expert, have age recommendations that include both AFOLs and TFOLs. So its hard to say how much of those sets' sales each of those age groups makes up. Generally, AFOLs make up a pretty small portion of the LEGO Group's audience and overall sales compared to kids, so it shouldn't be any surprise that the vast majority of themes are aimed at kids first and teens and adults second. That's not to say the LEGO Group ignores us. After all, many LEGO set designers are AFOLs themselves, and do their best to vouch for and cater to our perspectives, even in places we might not expect it. The LEGO Group continues to release AFOL and TFOL targeted sets to continue to test the strength of those audiences. With the Exo-Suit from LEGO Ideas, they even brought in a panel of AFOLs to help decide on that set's branding and marketing strategy. They've also done a lot to involve AFOLs in big changes like new versions of LEGO Mindstorms or the switch from 9V to Power Functions trains, because they recognize that AFOLs can bring a lot of expertise and firsthand experience to the table. But overall, LEGO is still a toy, and kids remain its strongest and most reliable audience. If that weren't the case then it honestly would be reason to worry, because today's KFOLs are tomorrow's AFOLs. Anyway, a lot of us are still drawn to LEGO by the same factors that drew us to it as kids. A set doesn't need to be geared primarily towards an older audience to scratch that particular itch.

Ionix isn't the first building toy brand they've licensed Pokémon out to, either. There were Pokémon Mega Bloks sets for several years.

Wu-Cru Mission 35: Your Vehicle But you guys seem to have missed something else interesting — there's a level 12 not shown directly on that page! Level 12 has all six ninja in robes like Sensei Wu's from the Temple of Airjitzu (though not like those their future selves wore in "Grave Danger"). I'm curious if these costumes will be appearing in the sets and show, or if they were just created as Wu-Cru rewards. The earlier levels 1 (Training), 2 (DX), 3 (Kendo), 4 (ZX), 5 (NRG), 6 (Elemental), 7 (Techno), and 8 (Jungle) also feature Lloyd and Nya in some costumes we haven't seen them in before, though some of these are just variations of costumes we have seen (like Nya's 2012 and 2014 samurai costumes or Skylor's Jungle costume). It's kind of a shame none of the levels use the Tournament robes, since it'd be neat to see what they'd come up with for Nya. None of the levels use the Skybound robes either, but we've seen all six ninja in those. Strangely, the level 2 and 3 versions of Lloyd here vary from those that appear in sets — Lloyd Level 2 has the thinner dragon head instead of the bulkier Golden Dragon head that appears on the Lloyd DX minifigure, and Lloyd Level 3 resembles a combination of Kai ZX's costume and Stone Armor Lloyd's costume, rather than Lloyd's own ZX costume from the 2012 sets.

There's quite big price differences between those sets you name, though. BSB in 1989 cost $110, the equivalent of $214 in 2015 dollars — more than twice what The Brick Bounty cost. In terms of price in real value rather than just sticker price, The Brick Bounty is more comparable with Caribbean Clipper, which cost $54 in 1989, would've cost $105 in 2015 dollars… and I think it's easy to say which of those two sets offers the superior building and play experience. Likewise, Eldorado Fortress cost $66 in 1989, the equivalent of $114 in 2009 dollars — nearly three times what 6242 Soldier's Fort cost! 6242 is closer in price to 6267 Lagoon Lock-Up, which cost $29 in 1991 dollars or around $46 in 2009 dollars. Now, which of those sets really offers the better value? Obviously, it's quite normal for bigger and more expensive sets to be more fondly remembered than their smaller and less expensive counterparts. That's why M:Tron is remembered for the Mega Core Magnetizer rather than the Particle Ionizer, for example. But it's sometimes hard to tell how well these sets actually sold compared to their smaller and less impressive counterparts. The monorail sets were huge and expensive even by today's standards, and old-school AFOLs continue to beg LEGO to bring monorail sets back, but LEGO lost money on every single one of them. Considering that no Pirates set has ever had a higher dollar value than the Black Seas Barracuda, not even the Imperial Flagship, isn't it worth considering that just maybe a pirate ship as big and expensive as BSB was — and still is — beyond the means of most buyers? Of course, it can be argued that if a set the size of BSB came out today, it'd be much cheaper. At $180 (around $203 in today's money), Imperial Flagship remains the biggest historical pirate ship set. Moreover, At $120 (around $130 today), Queen Anne's Revenge still managed to be close to the same size and level of detail as BSB. So if LEGO were to release, say, a $150 pirate ship today, then sure, I could believe it might be able to surpass the BSB. But that's still roughly one and a half times what the Brick Bounty cost, and there's no telling whether a retail, non-licensed pirate ship released today could hope to turn a profit at those prices. There's never even been a Ninjago set that expensive that wasn't D2C! All in all, I don't think it's fair to expect modern Pirates sets to measure up to substantially more expensive classic sets. As for the will-LEGO-bring-Pirates-back-for-its-anniversary question, I think what LEGO thinks the market is ready for takes priority over whether it's a significant year from a historical standpoint. LEGO has gone to great lengths to celebrate the anniversary of the company as a whole and of the brick, but not so much the anniversaries of specific themes. However, if the Pirates theme came back in 2019 anyway, or came back before 2019 and continued into that year, I could see LEGO celebrating its anniversary in some way at that time.

That's a big assumption to make. This is toys we're talking about, after all. Look at other long-running toy lines like Transformers, TMNT, and My Little Pony. On a conceptual level, they repeat themselves all the time, and yet you don't see any kind of mass exodus of fans. Their longevity is based on ensuring they bring in new fans at the same rate old fans leave. Also, just because LEGO hasn't rebooted the story when you expected them to doesn't mean they will never have another opportunity. Tommy Andreasen has said on Twitter that he'd be open to rebooting the story if it ever becomes stale. So far, though, it doesn't seem like it has. The toys are still selling remarkably well and the fan community is quite strong. The fact that Ninjago continues to revisit past ideas doesn't mean the creators have run out of ideas. It just means that they still see new potential in ideas they've touched on before. "Rebooting the series with the movie" sounds like an OK idea at face value, but doing so would have probably meant either closing the door on future Ninjago movies or closing the door on future Ninjago TV seasons. It's pretty difficult to run a movie series and a TV series concurrently if they take place in the same universe and focus on the same cast of characters. And production issues aside, having the movie universe completely take the place of the existing TV universe would have generated widespread animosity for the movies among the theme's existing fanbase, whereas by keeping them separate it's more likely that fans will eventually come around to appreciate them as different universes that don't jeopardize one another's existence. I don't think Castle is all that different than City or Ninjago in that respect, to be honest. As much as the designers try to make each wave unlike the one immediately before it, they also aren't afraid to revisit the core ideas from past years whenever they see new potential in them. The thing that sets Castle apart from City and Ninjago is mostly that in the past decade or so it hasn't been able to sustain the same year-on-year sales. Which means that instead of coming out wave after wave like clockwork, the Castle theme has hiccups every few years when the previous take on Castle has lost momentum but the designers don't have an entirely new take ready to launch just yet. And of course, you do have AFOLs complaining about repetition in City and Ninjago just as you have AFOLs complaining about repetition in Castle. But AFOLs aren't the core audience for any of those themes. And while it's tempting to blame themes' successes and failures strictly on the things that we like or dislike about them, that isn't always how things work out. If kids and AFOLs felt the same way about sets, then City would be collapsing under the weight of its numerous police stations, and Ninjago might never have taken off in the first place due to its utter weirdness, while numerous short-lived but beloved themes like Kingdoms, Pharaoh's Quest, and Monster Fighters might've lasted years longer.

I'm curious if there will be any changes to the base colors on the new "good guy" vehicles to set them apart from this year's, like how the second year of Atlantis sets used Bright Yellow and Transparent Yellow instead of Bright Yellowish Green and Transparent Bright Green, or how the second year of Power Miners sets used Bright Blue instead of Bright Orange. I wouldn't want the changes to feel too drastic, because the current color scheme looks quite nice, but something as simple as differently colored windscreens could both open up lots more MOCing potential and make the new sets stand out.

I disagree about that. I haven't seen any indication that the Ninjago team is running out of ideas. If there's any weakness to the current wave, it's probably due to them having to develop it more hastily than usual due to the movie (originally scheduled for Fall 2016) being delayed a year. A similar thing happened when they decided to continue Ninjago in 2014 — it was on too short notice to commit the same amount of development time they'd normally have for a new year of sets and stories, so the 2014 sets were weaker than usual, but by 2015 they were back on track and it ended up being one of their five top-selling themes. There's been some grousing about the movie being a separate continuity with different voice actors, but I haven't seen any indication that this will change the course of the TV series. Some people speculated that "Day of the Departed" (the 2HY 2016 story arc with the returning villains) would be a "grand finale", but we now know for certain that this is not the case, because they've already announced the 1HY 2017 story arc "The Hands of Time", which will focus on Kai and Nya and involve them learning more about their parents. Moreover, I don't think there's any sense in thinking that a separate movie universe will hurt the theme as a whole. When the first Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie came out in 1990, they had already existed in comic books for six years and in cartoons for three. All three forms of media had separate continuities, but starting fresh with the movie didn't jeopardize any of them. In fact, the movie ended up getting two sequels in 1991 and 1993, the cartoon series ended up getting six more seasons from 1991 to 1996, and the comics persisted all the way to 2014! So I fail to see how a Ninjago movie that starts fresh with a separate continuity from the TV series is expected to deal a killing blow to the existing continuity and its fanbase. Ninjago might die out one day, but I don't see any signs that it's already moving in that direction, and the movie strikes me as an indication that Ninjago is growing, rather than on the verge of decline. All that said: I don't exactly see Ninjago being a huge threat to the future of LEGO Castle. After all, if LEGO had the confidence to invest heavily in launching Nexo Knights, which is more similar to Ninjago than past Castle themes, then why would they or their fans consider Ninjago and traditional Castle, or Ninjago and The Lord of the Rings, too similar in subject matter to coexist? Ninjago has no more in common with Castle, The Lord of the Rings, or The Hobbit than with Nexo Knights, Legends of Chima, or Elves, all of which have experienced respectable success. Ninjago has also proven itself to be highly mutable. If LEGO wants to launch a new Castle theme without competition from Ninjago, they just have to differentiate the corresponding waves of Ninjago to be that much less castle-ish. It's the same as how they have managed to keep diving, space, and mining subthemes of City (another long-running, massively successful theme that dabbles in very diverse subjects) visually and contextually distinct from themes like Atlantis, Galaxy Squad, and Power Miners.

So instead of a gearbox, K-2SO apparently has a function like Skull Basher's! That's nice. I'm surprised that all three figures are $25, though. Would've expected Jyn to cost $20 like Rey did, since she has more or less the same proportions. But I guess her gun and whatever that is built onto her back add to the cost.

I have doubts about them taking the place of Mixels since they're aimed at a very different demographic. Mixels are 5+ like City or Friends sets, these are 10+ more like Ideas or Architecture sets. The BrickHeadz are also a very different type of product (a static display figure rather than a posable creature). That was not directed at you, more at comments like CaptainNemo's above that call the concept "unoriginal", as well as similar comments I've seen on other sites that seem to suggest LEGO is ripping off Funko by introducing a similar product. When you get right down to it, cutesy figurines are not a particularly novel concept. For comparison's sake, I've never seen people accuse LEGO Architecture of being unoriginal or ripping off "Puzz-3D", a brand which has been producing buildable miniature 3D buildings and cityscapes since the 90s. In that case, people understood that the concept of a miniature landmark was not a novel idea, and that building such a landmark out of LEGO bricks was enough to set it apart from similar products.

I find it weird how many people are saying these are derivative of Funko Pop figures. While the Funko Pop figures are one of the dominant licensed figurine brands today, and I'm sure they played a role in inspiring LEGO to launch their own line of "chibi/superdeformed" figurines, they were far from the first company to create those. In fact, Funko Pop figures date back only to SDCC 2010, the same year that LEGO began releasing licensed "CubeDudes" based on a template Angus MacLane had created in 2009. And the Funko Pops themselves are inspired heavily by the customizable "Dunny" and "Munny" templates launched around 2004 by Kidrobot. This is not an category of products Funko invented, nor one that they have any kind of monopoly on. And it's not as if the BrickHeadz somehow innovate less than the Funko Pops did. Just as the Funko Pops are squarer and more minimalist than figurines that preceded them, the BrickHeadz have an even more profoundly blocky look. Anyway, thanks for sharing detailed box, instruction, and build photos! These models really show off how useful those 1x2x1⅔ SNOT bricks are, and the little pink brains are a clever surprise! These are a great and easily customizable template that should inspire all kinds of MOCs, just as the CubeDude did previously. I'm noticing that the back of the box doesn't have the star on Captain America's back. Did the instructions tell you to have the star facing outwards? Seems to me that having it face inwards would feel more authentic. The price of these figures at SDCC was quite high, but I'm sure as with past exclusives, that has more to do with their exclusive status than with the expected price point future BrickHeadz will have at retail. I imagine future BrickHeadz will be priced at more around $15 or $20 for a pair, though I'm curious if they'll be sold individually or continue to be sold in pairs. The preview for next year's BrickHeadz shows twelve figures, which is a nice big number to start out with. I hope that LEGO will create BrickHeadz based not only on licensed IP like Super Heroes and Star Wars, but also on their own in-house IP like Ninjago and The LEGO Movie. Even if they don't, though, I'd be happy to make my own BrickHeadz to represent my own favorite themes. Thanks again for the review!

It's tough to compare 90s themes with later, more fully-realized IPs, since a lot of the time the stories and character names in the 90s varied by region. So for example, the American marketing materials for Insectoids said they were "led by their clever queen, Gypsy Moth". In the UK she is merely "Insector 2, the female member of the reconnaissance crew". The story also fundamentally varies from region to region: in the European story, the Insectoids are spacefaring refugees who settle on a distant planet (called Armeron in the UK) populated by giant insects, and that they use their insect-shaped vehicles to blend in so they can harvest Voltstones. But the American LEGO Mania Magazine just says that "no place in space wanted these part-robot, part-insect aliens" and that they're "on a mission of intergalactic mayhem and mischief". It wasn't until the early 2000s that LEGO really started to standardize character names, set names, and storylines from region to region instead of just passing that duty to regional marketing teams. Incidentally, this is why so many Adventurers character names appeared to change around the Dino Island arc — some characters' American names became their new worldwide names (like Johnny Thunder and Harry Cane), while other characters took their new worldwide names from other regions (like Dr. Kilroy and Pippin Reed). Of course, the determination of characters' sex/gender usually happens on the design end of things, not the marketing end, but even so the lack of consistent marketing for those early themes, and the poor records of the marketing in some regions, can make it tricky to even pin down which figures qualify as named characters and which are mere stock characters.

Sorry, I guess my wording was a bit unclear. I'm saying that there HASN'T been confirmation of any new constraction-exclusive themes, not that there HAS been confirmation of there NOT being any new constraction-exclusive themes.

Exo-Force has one female character, Hitomi (Sensei Keiken's granddaughter). So Exo-Force's human cast is 1/7 female. Chima has a pretty diverse range of female characters: Eris (5 costumes), Crooler, G'loona, Windra, Rinona (2 costumes), Spinlyn, Li'ella (2 costumes), Maula, Sibress, Vultrix, and an unnamed Lioness Soldier. But Chima also has a very large cast overall. The total ratio of female minifigure characters comes to 11/80 characters, or 10/72 named characters. Four of the named female characters in Chima are heroes and six are villains. I forgive you for not wanting to tackle Bionicle. The typical set of six Bionicle characters includes one female character, but all too often when this rule was broken, it was in favor of more male characters, not more female ones. So of non-animal characters in sets who could be said to have a specific gender, only 14 out of 115 or so in generation one (2001-2010) are female, and in generation two (2015–2016), only two out of 17 are female. This does not count characters who exist only as alternate models or combination models. Hero Factory sets had one female hero out of nine, and one female villain out of the 21 that can be considered individuals and not species. None of the named Mixels characters who appear in sets are female.

Soul Archer actually is a named character even though he doesn't sound like it. Some of the more minor named ghosts are hard to really count as discrete characters, though, because there are around a dozen named ghost minions who share just three designs. Some share the same entry in the Brickset database, but others have their own entries due to having varying neck accessories. But you're right that Ninjago has between 70 and 80 discrete minifigure characters so far. I'm certainly frustrated with the imbalanced gender ratios among Ninjago baddies, particularly since many in the show are mere stock characters, and many like the snake and ghost underlings have designs that could be either gender. The sky pirates are better than most earlier villain factions, with two female baddies (Dogshank and Cyren) out of eight named crew members (counting Monkey Wretch, who is not listed as a minifigure on BrickLink). But even then, there are some choices that puzzle me. The show has at least one additional unnamed female crew member, yet instead of her, one polybag this year has a completely different and unique costume for Cyren that never appears in the show. The total number of female Ninjago characters who exist as minifigures is eight: Nya (9 costumes), Pixal, Skylor, Bansha, Misako, Claire, Dogshank, and Cyren (2 costumes). Nexo Knights is off to a better start, with 3 female heroes and 2 female villains out of 10 hero characters (counting Merlok) and 11 villain characters (counting the Book of Monsters and the "buildable figure" villains) in just its first year. Still far from balanced, but better than Ninjago's overall track record, if LEGO can keep it up that is.

Only we didn't. We had evidence that made a 2016 cancelation seem unlikely, we had confirmation that they started out with a 3-year plan, and we had word that the Bionicle designers were working on 2017 sets as of October of last year (they didn't specify that they were Bionicle sets, a nuance I admittedly failed to pick up on). That's a whole different matter than hearing in no uncertain terms that "this is not the end for constraction." It's true, no more constraction-exclusive themes are confirmed. But LEGO still has a team of designers working specifically in the constraction department. Maybe spin-offs of other themes are in fact how constraction will persist for a year or longer. That's different than "constraction is over", though. I do not feel like continuing to evolve the CCBS would be a priority for LEGO if they no longer planned to have any themes using it as a foundation.

There's been confirmation from multiple sources that constraction is not going away, so continuing to insist otherwise is starting to sound really obtuse. Whether or not we get Nexo Knights constraction doesn't change that broader point.

Not sure what policies you're referring to here, because BZPower's policies have changed a LOT over the years, and IMO, for the better. Once upon a time there were all kinds of dumb and restrictive rules that the site's managed to get rid of in the intervening years. We are constantly listening to feedback and trying to evolve, but it's difficult sometimes when so many of the staff are spread thin between BZPower and other obligations, particularly with the Bionicle fanbase likewise spread so thin that it's hard to tell which of our changes make a positive difference. The BZPower policy I've seen criticized the most in the past two years was the "no leaks" policy, but that's one we were and still are in the right about, as evidenced by Eurobricks and TTV (the two sites presented as counterpoints) tightening their own rules about leaks in response to both outside pressure and inside observations about how runaway rumor-mongering was hurting the quality of discussion. If any BZPower members have an issue with how the site is currently run, please take it up with the staff. For my part I will see about getting transcripts for these and future interviews. As a member of the news team I can even transcribe them myself if it comes down to it. As one of the few news team members who doesn't have a proper job I might be better equipped to make time for that than my colleagues. But it's frustrating to hear them talked about in this way on account of problems they may not have even been approached about. Sorry for furthering this tangent, but hopefully things can get back on topic now.

Interesting! Unless there's another big reveal between now and then, this might give us our first really good look at what to expect from the new movie in terms of voices and visual style (even though Jackie Chan is seemingly the only one voicing the same character he will be voicing in the movie). Incidentally, Storks comes out on the day The LEGO Ninjago Movie was originally scheduled to premiere before it got delayed to 2017.

There's a pretty clear pattern if you look only at when new Castle themes start and not at where they end. In the years you listed there's been a new take on LEGO Castle every three or four years. If that pattern continues, another new take on LEGO Castle would be expected in 2019 or 2020. I don't think there's a specific pattern as to what KIND of new take on castle we get each time, though. That's probably based more on what sort of Castle theme they think it's the right time for, not on what they've done in the past. Back on the subject of Nexo Knights, the rumored set names seem very preliminary, but I kind of hope the "action" knights are actual constraction/buildable figure sets. I think those would be a good fit for LEGO Nexo Knights, and it would help fill the void left in Bionicle's absence. The other set names and descriptions sound very vague and preliminary still. Not much to speculate on there.

Unless Nexo Knights has far exceeded expectations (which I haven't seen anything to indicate). I imagine they'll just stick with a three-year plan. Chima managed to last three years, but I don't think it was such a resounding success that they'd lengthen their forecast for this theme. Also, if Nexo Knights is in fact being treated as the current iteration of Castle, Castle has been on a three-year renewal cycle for years now. We might get some more insight into how Nexo Knights is performing next month when the the LEGO Group's interim report is released. Overall, though, there's a lot of potential the theme could explore in three years. I certainly don't see it becoming evergreen like Ninjago did. Ninjago was an extraordinary case.

My understanding was that he sold it so that it could stay in business. It's nice having wealthy friends to bail you out when you're deep in debt. The fancy vehicles were just a bonus.

Err… I wouldn't say that. The licensed sets helped compensate for the larger failings in the company's business and build confidence in LEGO both internally and externally, but I wouldn't call them their saving grace, especially since that confidence led them down a road of reckless and costly innovations which nearly made them go bankrupt in 2003. "By late 2003, the LEGO Group's leaders finally began to concede that the glowing success of LEGO Star Wars, as one executive put it, was ultimately a 'thick, fat layer of cosmetics' hiding the raw blemishes of a sickly core business." (Brick by Brick, p90) According to the CEO Jorgen Vig Knudstorp, who was responsible for getting the company back on track beginning in 2004, "the toy that saved LEGO" was not LEGO Star Wars but rather LEGO Bionicle. "In 2003—the year the rest of LEGO came crashing down—Bionicle's soaring sales accounted for approximately 25 percent of the company's total revenue and more than 100 percent of its profit (as the rest of the company was tumbling to a net loss), making it a financial anchor in turbulent times." (Brick by Brick, p155) While Bionicle itself is no longer the fixture in the LEGO Group's portfolio that it was back then, its development has been used as a road map for strategic innovation in the development of most subsequent LEGO themes, including modern-day mega-hits like LEGO Friends and LEGO Ninjago. Today, licensed themes are certainly still a big deal for the LEGO Group, but the company no longer relies on them the way they did in the years leading up to 2003. According to Jorgen Vig Knudstorp in an interview from earlier this year: "Licensing partners are a huge opportunity for us but today they are about a third of our portfolio and that has been the case for more than 10 years now, so they are an important, let's say spice, an interesting way of developing our portfolio, providing some novelty. But among our top five selling themes there's only one licensed theme and that's Star Wars which has been with us since 1999." As for the future of LEGO, I see no reason to worry about that at present — both the company's value and their profits are sky-high, and they seem to have learned from the mistakes of the late 90s and early naughts, so if they do decline it won't be due to "history repeating itself" in that sense. Any factors that might potentially lead to a decline are not yet apparent, since even the risks the LEGO Group does take presently are a lot more calculated than the huge risks they took around the turn of the millennium. I don't see 3D printing being any more of a threat to LEGO than home paper-and-ink printers were to book publishers, particularly since the LEGO Group will be just as equipped to take advantage of improving 3D printing technologies as their competitors or the general public. Economies of scale dictate that if the time ever comes that individuals can 3D print their own bricks at the same quality as LEGO, The LEGO Group will also be able to use the same technology at a lower materials and operations cost per brick, simply by being able to buy their materials at a bulk rate and pool the other costs associated with their production line. Will sticker prices on sets continue to rise? Oh, yes, almost inevitably. Inflation alone practically guarantees that. However, the rise of sticker prices on LEGO sets hardly seems as out of control as some people seem to believe. Case in point, 7190 Millennium Falcon from the year 2000 cost $100 USD new, which is about $140 USD in 2015 dollars. 75105 Millennium Falcon from last year costs $150 USD, so the "real" price has risen by just $10 USD. But the piece count of the new Millennium Falcon is double that of the original, the weight is 20% higher, and it even has more minifigures. Euro prices on older sets are hard to come by, but for the past five years (comparing 7965 with 75105 as a point of reference), Euro prices for LEGO in most countries seem to have remained fairly stable. If the price of a 20 Euro set ever rises to 200 Euros, it will probably have more to do with changes in the local value of the Euro than changes in the value of LEGO.

Again, I think we'll be more likely to hear more about Nexo Knights' performance when the interim results are announced next month. For now, the only thing I've heard about Nexo Knights in terms of actual performance is that the Nexo Knights magazine is the UK's top-performing new magazine title for the first half of 2016, although its sales haven't risen to the same level of sales as the Star Wars and Ninjago magazines. I have no idea whether sales for these magazines would correlate directly to things like sales of the sets or TV viewership, let alone whether Nexo Knights is more or less popular in other parts of the world. I can't think of any strict reason there COULDN'T be a LEGO cartoon with a more historical setting, although TV networks and other media partners are often big on novelty, so might be more enthusiastic about "classic genre with a wacky modern twist" than just "classic genre played straight". Also, the "tween" age range that Nexo Knights and Ninjago target (slightly older than the age range for general City/Castle/Pirates) also generally respond well to that sort of mash-up since it gives them the sense of being something that no kids have seen or played with before, as opposed to the kind of toy or storyline that's been around for decades. Even though there have been previous attempts at "cyber-knight" series like Visionaries, seven-year-olds aren't as likely to have heard of them as they are to have heard of more traditional knight storylines, so Nexo Knights will still convey that sense of novelty. So to achieve peak popularity, a more historical LEGO cartoon might need to be aimed slightly younger, at an audience that isn't so used to classic traditional knights-and-dragons stories. Also, on a personal note, I kind of like the way the more wacky modern themes tend to be more character-driven and the way the "classic themes" remain more archetypical and open-ended. It sort of makes them feel more faithful to their roots that way. I realize that might be hypocritical of me, though, since the themes I personally collect are almost always the more character-driven ones. So while it comforts me to know that more open-ended and less character-driven themes exist, I'm not really in much of a position to vouch for them.

Really there's not much more to the rumors than what I've said: that it might involve time travel. The main thing we know for sure is that Kai and Nya are the main characters for that story arc, and the story will involve them learning more about their parents, including some of the "secrets" Master Chen bribed Kai with in Season Four. Between that and the title, there's been some speculation it might involve time travel.