http://www.wired.com/2014/08/lego-cost/

Thanks for posting.  I guess the average price of a piece is about $0.10 if you take a look at most sets(non polybag).

This is interesting, thanks for posting!  I would really like to see the numbers ran without the Duplo.  I really think adding the Duplo reduces the value of the statistics provided.  If I was a better statistician, I would love to see some more analysis with minifigures included.  

Interesting read, thanks for posting. After reading all those equations I'll probably have nightmares about my last Calc class tonight.

Interesting that he mentions the Trevi Fountain as being a good deal for price per parts...  I picked one up over the weekend, and the box is deceptively heavier than you would think...

Interesting read, thanks for posting. After reading all those equations I'll probably have nightmares about my last Calc class tonight.

 

Just remember, the average price per piece is only the derivative of the equation calculated

Interesting that he mentions the Trevi Fountain as being a good deal for price per parts...  I picked one up over the weekend, and the box is deceptively heavier than you would think...

 

Agreed - I built it this weekend and it's great.  But the PPP is so skewed for all Architecture sets since the pieces are almost all really small.  Sets with 831 1x1 and 1x2 tiles and plates can hardly be compared to large UCS sets on a PPP level.

Agreed.  I think you need to look at price per gram if comparing a box of 1x1 tiles and a city ship that has a one piece hull.

Agreed - I built it this weekend and it's great.  But the PPP is so skewed for all Architecture sets since the pieces are almost all really small.  Sets with 831 1x1 and 1x2 tiles and plates can hardly be compared to large UCS sets on a PPP level.

 

Perhaps it would be interesting to compare weight of a set rather than piece count?  Or even do analysis on piece count versus weight.

I think weight of a set is the best way to calculate value.  More ABS plastic...higher price.  CITY sets cost more relatively speaking because some of the pieces are huge.  The boat hulls, train tracks and airplane wings/body parts are very large and count as one piece.  

Great and interesting read!

 

Thanks for sharing!

Agreed.  I think you need to look at price per gram if comparing a box of 1x1 tiles and a city ship that has a one piece hull.

agreed. price per gram (or per oz or lb)  is the way to way.

interesting read!

Thanks for the article, a good read.

 

I've written a series of 8 blogs examining some basic stats for some of the main Lego themes.  Included in that are PPP and PPG,.  I also think that PPG is usually the better indicator of relative set value.

 

Here's a link to the last blog article, that in turn has links to the other 7 in it.

http://blog.brickpicker.com/benchmarks-lego-movie-themes-potter-jones-pirates/

Price-per-piece is an 'on the fly' formula you can calculate while in store that works in a general sense but it shouldn't be the definitive value. Price-per-gram is probably the more scientific approach and better guide to follow but unless you carry an electronic scale with you then you won't know how much a set weighs to figure out the equation. Each has their advantages well as disadvantages. I think the best way is to try both and average the values to see for yourself whether the set is a good value to you.

(ok, I've thrown too much "like this" on this topic, I stop now, lol...)

 

Like many of you I do not agree with what I've read.

 

For example the trevi fountain is full of small parts... and so are minecraft sets.

 

IMO the best way is to compare sets which use the same kind of bricks.

 

On the other side, a duplo set can't be compared with a technic set. Weight is a good way to compare but the tiny little mecanism in technic sets are certainly way more difficult to create compared to a 2x4 duplo brick.

 

SW, Super heroes, LOTR... can be compared because it's the same kind of pieces.

Technics have some bricks but also tons of tiny little parts so they can't be compared with other lego themes.

City sometimes have big elements (boats, planes...)

Trains have both big elements (canopy...) and motors.

 

And of course, it may vary according to what the set is composed of.

(and we are even not talking about exclusive pieces or printed parts)

 

The more accurate way would be to calculate the price of each piece and then add everything to determine if the set is a deal or not. Good luck with that.

 

Overall, if we put aside Duplos, I think a good way to compare sets' prices is to average both the PPP and the PPG.

This may be an interesting compromise.

I would imagine the type of pieces and even the colours would come into it too. Rarer pieces and colours would add value, especially if you're parting out or a hardcore MOC builder.

Meaningless to a 7 year old kid though, who might get more 'value' out of a tub of bricks.

So many variables...

I have wondered if certain colors are somewhat more costly than others to produce but then again in this day & age, creating colors shouldn't be that much of a problem when you have the chemical composition down to a finely tuned science with machines programmed only for that function.

Just thought I'd share this

 

http://www.wired.com/2014/08/lego-cost/

 

The writer only takes a few currently available sets, and not from every theme it seems, from LEGO Shop at Home and does some calculations.

 

Most expensive bricks are the Duplo ones, and rightly so after you stop and think about it for a bit.

Just thought I'd share this

 

http://www.wired.com/2014/08/lego-cost/

 

The writer only takes a few currently available sets, and not from every theme it seems, from S@H and does some calculations.

 

Most expensive bricks are the Duplo ones, and rightly so after you stop and think about it for a bit.

 

thanks for the share.

i merged the threads.

thanks for the share.

i merged the threads.

 

Thanks for that, I didn't know it had already been posted here