Leaderboard

I made my very FIRST sale ever! Sold a handful of polybags on Bricklink (IronMan, Martian Manhunter and Lake Town Guard). Wow, does that feel good.

I find all of this fascinating. So let's consider this seemingly widespread idea that Lego doesn't care about and/or maintains a positive view of resellers (financially, at least)... Just think of it this way: Assuming each individual buying Lego has a finite amount to spend on the product (because assuming otherwise would be insane), why on Earth or anywhere else would the company want to share any of that income with us? Let's take the Tumbler as an example, from Lego's perspective: Ideally, every individual who actually wants a Tumbler to keep will buy it directly from an authorized store - online or otherwise. It is foolishly shortsighted to think that "a sale is a sale", and that Lego shouldn't care what happens afterward; because for every Tumbler bought at $300 from a reseller there is $100 less that will be spent by someone on OTHER Lego products. Of course this is not strictly/directly true, but the concept is blatantly obvious to me and surely dominates the perspective. If you are an economics expert able to disprove this assumption, please be my guest. I like education. Otherwise, on the most obvious core business level, reselling hurts the manufacturer in a significant way ($$). But not all reselling is created equal. What sort of product is most susceptible to this kind of lost profit scenario for them? Certainly not the minor stuff. Mixels are not the concern here. Almost anyone buying Lego in the first place has another $5-20 to spare for whatever small set they want. It's the big exclusives, naturally, that hurt the worst. Expensive, difficult to find sets are not as widely distributed and therefore harder to deliver directly to the target consumer in the first place. Those consumers who want but can't afford it all, at least right away, or right now, may hesitate to buy... then one day find out they waited too long and suddenly TH at retail is a thing of the past. Perhaps they aren't even getting it for Christmas since the price went up so much. What happens if they really want it, though? They pay a premium to a reseller and then cannot afford to buy the PS or PC or PR as early as they planned, (read: at retail), if at all. That's what I'm calling the direct effect of reselling on Lego's profits. Indirectly, too, that person may become frustrated and give up on the modular line entirely. Perhaps they move on to another line of Legos, or perhaps another manufacturer gets their $$ next time. In almost any case, the end result is less money flowing from that consumer to Lego themselves. Again, I know it doesn't always work this way. The pattern of an immediate and drastic rise in value of EOL (or those soon to be) exclusive sets of 50% or more tells us that there seems to be plenty of demand to meet the supply (of reselling), so far. But I think, given that we are in a period of extreme Lego sales growth, it is a pattern that will eventually sputter and die. Nevertheless, this pattern just makes it that much more obvious how much more money the target consumer COULD be spending on Lego sets at retail. Anyone think Lego not paying fairly close attention to the secondary market at any time? Seriously? Oh and besides the whole losing money / sharing profits issue? When the average target consumer is pissed off at the whole reselling trend and tells Lego about it, possibly using lots of not-so-nice words, and/or threats to take their money elsewhere, guess what? Lego probably ought to do something about it. When brand store employees give constant feedback about dealing with all the phone calls from the same resellers each week, followed by the multitude of identical questions and disappointed visits from target consumers due to sets being unavailable, over and Over and OVER, it has got to have an impact. No one with any business sense at HQ is cackling with glee over shelves being empty when demand is still there. So, back to the Tumbler. I can't believe this and RI haven't substantially entered the "something wicked" discussions, yet (and Mars Rover, for that matter). Personally, I see the recent highly limited distribution practices as an experiment toward limiting the reselling phenomenon... in parallel to whatever exactly is going on with unpredictable retirement of exclusives. By controlling the rate of distribution of these limited production sets AND making it more random when they both appear and disappear, the target consumer who doesn't closely track such things stands a MUCH better chance of finding one for themselves at retail, do they not? Of course, other factors have to fall in line for it to happen... but personally I think I am seeing some evidence that this is exactly what is going on. And as Ed has said again and again and again, the savvy, dedicated reseller who rations their purchases out over time and chooses sets wisely based on empirical data more than the reactionary herd mentality, WILL be able to keep up with most of it, and perhaps even reap greater rewards (at the expense of the herd, no less). Meanwhile, Lego DOESN'T MIND this type of reseller quite as much, because they are not constantly emptying shelves and causing big hassles jumping from one EOL (or newly released limited production) set to another. Yes they do still steal some profits down the road, but if they do so acting more or less as the target consumer would, what can really be done about it?. Remember, no one likes drama. The wise ones around here have already camouflaged themselves from the hammer fairly well, and are now encouraging others to do the same, because the more that thing is swung around the less safe it is for everyone here. Sparks are beginning to fly. The number of "investors" is growing exponentially, it would seem, and acting so undisciplined at times that a threshold of tolerance (by the public, by retailers, and by Lego) is quickly being reached. If we are only 3.7% of overall sales (a completely random number, fyi), but 60% of the non-monetary problems (and rising), guess what? Action is going to be taken. Could Lego modify their business model to include and gain an advantage from a significant sector of individual resellers? Probably. Should they? I doubt it. The reasons go well beyond the current marketplace. Perhaps the hypothetical "experiments" going on lately are designed to answer just that question, though. All I know is, unless you are in this for a quickie, it's time to wake up. Your friendly, fatherly alarm clock has been ringing for a few weeks, now. Stop snoozing. Times are changing. Kudos to those who have already started to adapt.

Why are you selling your T1 Polys? They should have no problem going right back to $50+ in no time at all.

Let's not! Sale prices are a good enough gauge for the purpose of this thread. It lets folks know what's selling and for what price. Everyone can keep their profit numbers to themselves.

At least the next Idea review sets are cool.

The Town Hall is retired as far as I know and I do not believe it will make a comeback with the exception of a sporadic and short lived in stock appearance. While LEGO can indeed change their core philosophy and reproduce retired sets, I haven't heard such a drastic change is coming. But a change is coming nonetheless. Reproducing retired sets would reduce the value of LEGO sets on the secondary market and I don't believe LEGO wants to reduce the value of their product, either on the primary or secondary markets. LEGO is very smart and does pay attention to the values of their sets on the secondary markets regardless what many think. The two work hand in hand with one another. The perceived high values on the secondary market filters over to the primary market every day. Many LEGO fans or collectors will pay $400 for a set because they know it increases in value after retirement. If this sets dropped in value after use and time, how would buying patterns change? Quite a bit I would say. LEGO has ALWAYS been an expensive product. When I was a kid 40 years ago, till now, it has been an expensive product. But like with anything that is of high caliber and finely produced, there is an increased price tag. You get what you pay for is very true with LEGO sets and people don't seem to mind paying for this higher cost, because they know they are buying a product made with the highest standards and the potential to increase in value after purchase. Should you buy a Town Hall now at $300 if you don't have one? Probably. I bought a Cafe Corner at $575 and a Taj Mahal at $400 and that has turned out well. I'm not saying the Town Hall will reach those levels, but it will be a non hoarded, short production run Modular, so I say there is a good chance of this set hitting lofty numbers.

I brought this one back to discuss the old grey/new grey editions. I had noticed that you were lashing out at Danny (2 years later), but after seeing how much effort you put into it - I just didn't have the heart to tell you.

I don't think Danny will be responding since the thread is from over 2 years ago.

Sales are starting to pick up for sure. Just yesterday sold: Cap America Avenging cycle $43 2x Wolverine Chopper for $95 each 2 x Umbaran MHC for $50 each Hulk minifig promo polybag for $39 Clone Troopers Battle pack for $34 Makes me feel like I priced the 6866 too low, but I only paid $15 each. Had 10 only have one left.

Not really liking either of these. Pretty disappointed.

This article will help educate you: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-see-sneakers-these-guys-see-hundreds-of-millions-in-resale-profit/

That

You don't think it's a bad idea them coming to your house?

Seriously? Don't return it. I know I want a TH to build. I'm sure there are others as well that would take this set off you hands at retail plus shipping.

I like this...try try try and finally get it/them....wonderful Well done Sent from my GT-I9000 using Brickpicker mobile app

I needed 3 pizza palaces to complete my sets, had no problem finding them for $25 on ebay to buy. Figure it is worth the 5 extra bucks instead of hunting them down. I don't want to sell sets at $115, I'm gambling they will go up from here although it sounds like there are tons sitting out on shelves at TRUs around the country now.

On Wednesday, I was able to find 15 of the Arctic polybags at 90% off due to the Halloween clearance. That's $0.34 each!

Maybe we can add a "how much did you lose on an ebay or amazon lego sale today?" thread. We can compete to be the best or worst of those reports. Separate but related I'm cleaning out my tumblers at cost, I just do not want the risk of holding these things seeing LEGO Shop at Home Europe now being in stock (I think someone said in Europe). The boat of them may be on the way.

OK, nobody but trekgate. Better yet, summarize it in the daily summary.

There's no way they're going to make a Big Bang Theory set and underproduce it.

Wow, you found a way to be way more polite to the "wrong" comment than I would have. Well done, sir.

Well, they did it with super Heroes http://www.brickverse.com/2013/09/super-heroes-invade-death-star.html They should totally do the same with Friends

I read it as "Death Star & friends", which would be a very strange children's show.

2 piece = carton in US (walmart)

Yeah but for every vet I sell, I sell 4 rovers. Rovers move faster so is the vet really a better investment?

This was my favorite set way back when. The original instructions got lost/misplaced, and I remember convincing my dad to send the $3 check to Lego and order another copy. That was probably '91 or so. A couple of years after Blacktron, when Pirates 1 came out, I took the all-black head from a ghost and used it to replace the standard yellow head on my Blacktron minifig. He's had that look for almost 20 years now.

Last Dec we saw Heartlake Vet and Stable go and they have both done very well. I'm not seeing a big winner from friends go this Dec. Olivia could but it's been around a long time, it will do ok but I don't see triple in the first year like the vet. I think the cruiser will stick another year, it's only 18 months old. Am I sleeping on a big friends retirement? The cheapest Heartlake Vet on amazon right now is 139.99 This set could be had last fall for $35. Was a better investment than the mars rover (so far) and way easier to get. Don't sleep on friends my friends

So siehts bei mit zur Zeit aus.... Ein bunter Mix aus allem, aber normaler Weise Kauf ich lieber Exclusiv Sets, wenns die anderen aber zum halben Preis gibt kann man ja nicht nein sagen: Wie siehts bei euch aus ??

@Marzipan: Also you should take into consideration that most people who happen to think about LEGO investment will ask the same questions and a lot of them will wonder if it really is worth it with all those risks and WORK involved. I would say that the majority is not willing or able to store a lot of LEGO sets and also is rather limited when it comes to spending money on it and holding it for several years. So all those 1.000$ investors won't trouble the market (though there might be a lot more investors today, the number of high end investors didn't grow that much I'd guess, since at a certain point of money stock market and other things might be more profitable with less tax/work involved (not to mention the storing room! ever stored LEGO products worth 100.000$? I didn't (yet))). Another point is that TLG (or was it TLC?) is expanding what they have. You see new themes popping up and a much greater variety than before (and I guess that this trend will go on for a while). So as investor you actually have to chose what you want to buy. For example: SSD seems to be worth an investment so as investor you will probably want to buy some. How many? Putting all my money on one set is a higher risk so I won't. So let's say I buy 10xSSD = 10x 400$ = 4.000$ (for !!!10!!! SSD) Another set might be the Tumbler, Evok Village, R2D2 and let's also take all the modular available SSD 10x400$ Tumbler 10x200$ Evok Village 10x250$ GE 10x150$ TH 10x180$ PR 10x150$ PS 10x150$ PC 10x150$ 16.300$ this list can go on and on buying only other exclusives (ToO, Simpsons House, Seacow, UCS X-Wing, AA, HE, T1Camper Van, Mini Cooper, UCS Sandcrawler, WVM, DS, SWC, TB) This leaves us with a variety of other sets that also might appreciate after EOL, including the ideas theme! So most investors probably won't have 10x of each set, also most investors probably do not have the time and space for all this. So are there risks? Yes! Are there still good investment chances though we face a lot of more investors today? Absolutely! That's only my opinion, but reading about other peoples investments here (e.***. Emazer, I bet Ed'******'Ed have quite a lot as well, etc.) makes me believe that others share this opinion in some way.

Ridiculous? If I buy something then I expect good condition. Big noticeable damages are not something you need to keep (Eol excluded). I didn't pay $200 for a box that's been through the meat grinder.

Picked up another 50 or so today. It's good to see that these are for sale again.

@sjbdeebo2 Scraping (Extracting raw data from a page) 1, Download the page or if using an API, query for the product. 2, Parse the HTML using XPath or CSS selectors. The SelectorGadget add on is useful for working out XPath to elements in a page. You'll need to find a library to do this such as Nokogiri for Ruby. If you are using an API you have to basically do the same thing using XPath or parsing JSON to get the data you want. 3, Extract the price value and compare against a list, CSV or Database using Regex such as [0-9.]+ 4, Send a notification, sound an alert whatever. Thats basically the process. Simple right . Also if you are going to use Amazon Product API, try to find a library that handles the requests, that thing has tight security , had to write 150 lines of ObjC just to generate the URL with Auth last week. @TheBrickClique How much have you benefited from your program? Have you scored some great deals from it?

It is reasonable. LEGO introduced about 8 exclusives this year, they have to keep the outflow at the same rate if they don't want to inflate their exclusive selection. The question is which of these two scenarios will happen: LEGO will keep up current rate of incoming new exclusives which will have shorter production runs. Recent retirements happened to restore the balance of inflow-outflow. LEGO will introduce less exclusives per year and trims its overall offers. To understand this phenomenon you have to think about why LEGO has such a large selection now. I believe they extended the lifetime of older exclusives to discourage resellers, however this resulted in an inflated supply. The exclusives were imagined with a ~1-2 year lifetime initially and they only changed their minds because of the resellers. They had to see by now that this strategy is useless, since FB, GE and other old stuff still have the same behaviour as if they were only 2 years old when retirement is felt in the air. The date of the retirement doesn't matter overall, because mass buying occurs mostly when the signs are there. However keeping this many sets in production increases costs significantly and the demand is fragmented between them. I don't say capacity issues because if there are less sets then more of the same ones will be bought, however that makes logistics and planning much easier while reducing occupied shelf space. With these in mind and the fact that the "extended lifetime strategy" turned out to be basically useless LEGO can only win by trimming its exclusive selection. On the other hand we can firmly guess that the new golden age is partly a result of the rise of the AFOL market, mainly because those people probably buy much more sets to their children than an average parent. To draw in adults they need some kind of diversity. Trimming the market too much could kill this effect. Also what I see is that new exclusives are top sellers for months after introduction, even go out of stock, I think casual collectors buy the new stuff first because those are conceived to be the best and are represented best in the related media. The demand over time is U shaped: first the collectors, then a flat line with little activity and resellers at the end. LEGO wants to reduce the duration of the low demand phase. Therefore it is reasonable to speed up the circulation of sets. So this is what I believe LEGO will do: Introduce exclusives at the same rate as now to exploit the large demand after introduction but returns to 1.5-2 year long production cycles to reduce costs. Battling resellers will be done by other methods, for example selling exclusives online etc. We will see.

Makes sense if they need to put their resources into kids' sets until production capacities are upped.

This looks amazing. Hopefully it will spark some additional interest in both the LOTR and the Hobbit line....not real sure how anyone can like one but not the other.

I think this is maybe the most hoarded set of lego at the moment.

What's your Amazon store name? I would like to buy a bunch and cancel. :)

Well I thought I sold few TH @ Amazon today and every single one was cancelled . Yes I'm accusing anyone that can read this. Lol

Listen to the market. Sometimes it will show you a demand you never anticipated.

So, if the change in policy is along the lines of complete unpredictability of set retirement (or demand-driven retirement, which means "unpredictable", since we would not know exact numbers), the smart resellers would be the ones that buy "right" sets regularly, rather than try to time the EOL

In the expanded universe, he escapes the Sarlac. If he shows up in VII - I may or may not squee like a schoolgirl at a boy band concert.

You make a good point. But you forgot to consider that if Lego makes a predetermined amount of sets, they are still getting the same amount of money. Let's pretend Lego sells a predetermined amount of 500 sets. In the first case you buy set #300 and the guy buys set #301. Eventually Lego will sell it's 500 sets and make $100000. In the second case you buy the 500th set. Lego still made $100000. In both cases Lego is happy. I believe Lego likes us resellers (to a degree) because we clean out the remaining stock that they want to retire and free up space for newer products. We also increase the value of Legos in the adult world. This value lets resellers and collectors have hope and keep buying more Legos to their collection. How many of us tell ourselves that it's okay to spend thousands of dollars because in the worst case I can just sell it at retail price? How many of us hold onto a Haunted house because it looks cool and in the worst case I'll just build it? They just want to control us to a degree that we don't crash our own market and affect their Lego value in the future. We are all tiny pawns in their grand scheme of things.

It's currently on 'Call to check' status. Which, as we know, will result in further heartbreak.

Aaand Nov 4 order got cancelled, too. At least they gave me 400 VIP points for free to easy my mental torture.

I brought the excessive buying/coupon use/return topic to everyone's attention so that a few people might listen. It wasn't really directed at anyone specifically. I usually stay out of these conversations, but TRU and their policies and how members interpret them and/or take advantage of them is always a hot topic around here, so let's try to come up with a reasonable approach to the topic. I am not here to dictate to people how to spend their money or run their business, but being that we are all in this together in a non-direct way, I think it is wise to help some inexperienced members out. First off, we are not all flippers who buy in massive quantities for a short term gain. Many of these conversations(this one included) on this site are leaning towards the short term angle, which LEGO does not like to be quite honest. I don't want a novice investor to think that this is the only way to invest. A promo like the recent Bricktober event was a mess and it should have been implemented more clearly from the start. I cannot fault a buyer for acquiring multiples of these sets if given the chance, but realize there could be consequences to those actions. It is situations like this which can lead to other consumers complaining to corporate TRU or LEGO about the evil resellers buying up massive quantities of sets. It is my opinion that resellers in general have to be more discreet in their buying habits. As more and more people enter the world of LEGO investing, I know it will be difficult to control some yahoos. Some people don't care about the collectible or commodity they resell and change from collectible to collectible as much as they change underwear. I get it. Not everyone views LEGO sets and bricks in the same way. Unfortunately, the situation has already caused many retailers to respond to this sort of excessive buying, return and coupon use. I think if we all could be a little more careful moving forward, harsher restrictions and retailer policies won't be implemented.

nothing lego related but bought 93" teddy bear for my daughter

Maybe the Town Hall retiring had nothing to do with sales.

I have 6 Town Halls. Will pick up four more to make my goal, from B&M stores, as they are still receiving TH shipments. Am good to go there, but thank you for your literary critique and insinuation. I do nearly all my purchasing from multiple Lego stores in Southern California (6 total) and two in Arizona, and though it is the often-critiqued "heard it from a store employee" - I see these folks nearly weekly and have a good pulse on what is happening, at least, in the stores. The managers of these stores speak very highly of PS sales, and speak about the slow-movement of the TH. Three managers that I highly trust and respect feel this is the very basic reason for the TH retiring out of order. It takes up a lot of shelf space. It is expensive. It isn't selling nearly as much as the other modulars. That is the basis of my opinion. I know nothing of internet sales and trends; My opinion of what is happening at Lego B&M's is qualified. Until six weeks ago, in the B&M stores, the TH was still warming shelves, as it has done for a long time. The PS has been a consistent seller. More so than PC still, less so than PR.