I highly respect Mos Eisley and his opinions on LEGO investing. He is a valued member on this site as indicated by his Moderator status and I know he speaks from experience. His collection far exceeds mine and he is one person I always look to for wise tips and comments. But don't let his perspective dampen your view on LEGO investing.
Mos Eisley is a "one percenter." In other words, he owns more LEGO sets than 99% of the AFOL population. He is at the top of the LEGO investment food chain. So what's my point? My point is that Mos Eisley has been doing this for quite some time, long before it was coined "LEGO investing." He has seen the days where any person with a pulse could buy an exclusive LEGO set and flip it quickly for a profit. His point of view is an extreme one, from the very top, so his risks are greater than most on this site. With LEGO investing becoming more mainstream, it would appear to be more difficult to make quick profits, so I cannot blame him for being at least slightly pessimistic on the future of LEGO investing. But is the pessimism really warranted for the average investor?
One only has to look at the recent Minecraft and SE Crawler as examples of the health of LEGO investing. I know that Mos Eisley is referring to other large sets, like the Fire Brigade and Tower Bridge, when he speaks of the market being saturated with sets. In the "good ole' days," those sets would be easy peasy LEGO investment winners, but with the mass amounts in storage across the world, who knows what will happen to these sets after EOL. Also, with more restrictive rules from retailers, it is harder for the big time investor like Mos Eisley to buy multiple exclusive LEGO sets at discounted prices.
But for the average LEGO investor, buying 20 of each LEGO set is not practical. There are ample opportunities to make nice profits if you choose under the radar sets and on a smaller scale. Who would have thought that back in 2007 that a rather unimpressive $89.99 set called Market Street would end up selling for $1300 six years later? Maybe a handful of people, but point is that there are still Market Streets out there, you just have to be the one who is smart enough to find them. Many long term LEGO investors have been spoiled by huge and easy profits, but there are still plenty of new and RETIRED sets that are viable investments.
I wrote about the Toy Story Construct-a-Zurg yesterday. A year ago, it was the set with the worst CAGR in the entire catalog of LEGO sets, yet over the last six months, it appreciated over 40%. Some smart people might have bought a couple and made some quick money. This is just one example of many potential great investments out there. It might be a little more difficult to predict winners and losers now and to make a quick buck, but the possibility is still there.
Now I know what you are saying...Ed Mack owns a LEGO investing site, so his positive outlook is self serving. Well, there might be a smidgen of truth to that, but I also know the impression that everyone owns 50 Fire Brigades, Haunted Houses and Tower Bridges is an exaggerated one. I know that the internet enables people to lie and stretch the truth. The perception that many members on this site go out and buy 10, 20 or 30 of each set is contradicted by actual sales data we see from LEGO, Amazon and eBay. Just because you hear LEGO profits are up again, doesn't necessarily mean it is because of resellers and investors.
In no way is this response an anti-Mos Eisley one. I just wanted to explain where he is coming from and that many of you are not in the same boat as he is. The smaller investor has more options and less risk, but there is still room to hit a home run on occasion. Good luck...