75313 - UCS AT-AT - $799.99 - 6,782 pieces

The pics are out there. We hid them for now.

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Alpinemaps said:

LEGO cracking down on LEGO products being sold on eBay, ignores fake LEGO on eBay.

They know they can scare legitimate "legal" sellers with a letter from legal. They know the thieves in China don't give a F*. 

 

I really appreciate Jang. My favourite YouTube reviewer hands down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

3 hours ago, Harley Quinn said:

I really appreciate Jang. My favourite YouTube reviewer hands down.

Interesting to hear.  For me his voice seems very breathy, it drives me up the wall.  Also, someone else mentioned how handsy he can get with the models and now I cant un-see it.  Seems like an all around nice dude though.

 

 

4 hours ago, Harley Quinn said:

I really appreciate Jang. My favourite YouTube reviewer hands down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's definitely my favorite, not annoying like many channels.

It’s nice that he actually BUYS the product. Many of these guys are getting the sets for free from LEGO. Some of them are better than others, but many of them come off as schills.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jangs reviews are highly subjective which is fine. He focuses heavily on what he perceives as “The amount of stuff” you get for your money. It’s no surprise that he finds the AT-AT UCS set a poor value based on that metric. As someone who just did the deed in buying this set I tend to agree that it’s overpriced. I’m not sure the comparison to the UCS Falcon is fair. That’s a 2017 pre-Covid set. Inflation is bad across the board. If released today the UCS Falcon would be a $900 set. With that said UCS sets have always been a luxury item.  The question is can you afford it and what is it worth to you. I’ve always wanted a minifig scale version of the AT-AT and this is as close as I’ll get. 

Edited December 14, 20214 yr by Mathew

2 hours ago, Harley Quinn said:

It’s nice that he actually BUYS the product. Many of these guys are getting the sets for free from LEGO. Some of them are better than others, but many of them come off as schills.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, there are very few TRUE reviewers of LEGO sets.  I am a strong believer in Conflict of Interest...ANYONE that gets something for free is not going to be able to be objective...the mere fact they pretend to be so is a huge mislead.  In most other fields someone getting the product for free is a huge No No...consider reading an Amazon review or a Yelp review that starts w/ "so I got it for free/ YUP most folks stop reading right there.

Its a sham really.  Props to Jang.  

That said Jang's pet peeves are not everyone's pet peeves, so his constant fixation on certain elements can get a bit whiney; but he is consistent and his longevity makes him an excellent resource.  He's also Local, well representing the Bay, CA, Americans, and Human Beings in general

1 minute ago, $20 on joe vs dan said:

.consider reading an Amazon review or a Yelp review that starts w/ "so I got it for free/ YUP most folks stop reading right there.

 

Google Amazon Vine 

Wow a hot topic here in the SW forum!

First, the ask.  I have no idea if anyone has taken delivery and had to time build it yet but if so can you put a recent snowspeeder under it and post the photo?  I missed the Black Friday sale and see it's back in stock online but without the extras, I am holding off for now. I have an earlier model that fits in an IKEA glass case with some Hoth stuff around it.  I have no idea where I will park this guy.

Someone asked the difference between a scalper and a re-seller.  My opinion, a scalper's only interest is in flipping the item and is buying as many as they can as available to turn a profit.  The re-seller is probably not buying the entire inventory from the store shelf and instantly relisting on an auction site in hopes of making a living.  Maybe they bought an extra in hopes of recovering the cost of one they kept.  Maybe the bought one to play with and one to sell in 20 years still MISB. 

Personally, I don't watch many review videos, I prefer to read them. Reading them removes the annoying nuances, many mentioned above. Plus, I can read a review without having my wife ask me to turn it down, its distracting her.

 

2 minutes ago, cardensb said:

First, the ask.  I have no idea if anyone has taken delivery and had to time build it yet but if so can you put a recent snowspeeder under it and post the photo? 

21 minute mark 

2 minutes ago, cardensb said:

Personally, I don't watch many review videos,

 

For me, Jangbricks is a mellow fellow of a reviewer ....and sometimes he looks like how I feel. Ha. He can 'overfocus' in some areas or go on longer than a written review with a plentitude of images but at the end of the day he is an everyman sort of YouTuber. So long as he does not start shilling Raid Shadow Legends, I think we're fine. Now be sure to Like the video and smash that Subscribe button!

Additionally, the part where he places the smaller non-UCS AT-AT underneath made the whole thing look like a mother protecting her cub. Aw.

1 hour ago, cardensb said:

 

First, the ask.  I have no idea if anyone has taken delivery and had to time build it yet but if so can you put a recent snowspeeder under it and post the photo?  I missed the Black Friday sale and see it's back in stock online but without the extras, I am holding off for now. I have an earlier model that fits in an IKEA glass case with some Hoth stuff around it.  I have no idea where I will park this guy.

 

I grabbed this image from an YT review.  This and the interior is what sold me on the set.

 

Snowspeeder looks great with it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

7 minutes ago, Harley Quinn said:

Snowspeeder looks great with it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of course.  Which is why it makes no sense for Lego to not have one available for retail.

I understand why everyone wants to use the PPP ratio, but sometimes it just doesn't fully reflect accurately what you are getting with some of these larger sets.
(According to the weights on bricklink)

75192 Millennium falcon: 13150 grams / 28.99 lbs = $27.60 per lb of plastic

75252 Imperial Star Destroyer: 12480 grams / 27.51 lbs = $25.45 per lb of plastic

75313 AT-AT: 10708 grams / 23.61 lbs = $33.88 per lb of plastic

75309 Republic Gunship: 5620 grams / 12.39 lbs = $28.25 per lb of plastic

I do find it interesting though that the AT-AT comes out to a good chunk higher price for the amount of material you get in the set. We all know there is the huge Disney/Star Wars tax, but I do agree that the AT-AT does appear to be unnecessarily expensive.  I think that at the price of $700 it would be a bit more of a reasonable deal.  That said, I did buy the set, and it's a beautifully big set as well, but I can understand why the idea of it being too expensive comes from.

Sure, if you want to factor in inflation from 2017 the Millennium falcon would cost roughly $907 in todays rates.  Which roughly equals out too $31.29 per lb of plastic.  In all honesty, in those terms, the AT-AT really isn't that bad of deal.  (obviously this is all subjective and everyone's value of worth is completely different.)

But this puts it a little better in perspective about where Lego is coming up with the prices, and in all honestly, isn't super out of the line for them and still within reason for the other massive UCS sets that Lego has released recently.

For comparison of other big sets:

10276 Colosseum: 10780 grams / 23.76 lbs = $23.15 per lb of plastic

10294 Titanic: 14000 grams / 30.86 lbs = $20.41 per lb of plastic

Edited December 15, 20214 yr by citymorgue
added the gunship

13 minutes ago, citymorgue said:

I understand why everyone wants to use the PPP ratio, but sometimes it just doesn't fully reflect accurately what you are getting with some of these larger sets.
(According to the weights on bricklink)
75192 Millennium falcon: 13150 grams / 28.99 lbs = $27.60 per lb of plastic
75252 Imperial Star Destroyer: 12480 grams / 27.51 lbs = $25.45 per lb of plastic75313 AT-AT: 10708 grams / 23.61 lbs = $33.88 per lb of plastic

Agreed, I posted previously that I prefer PPG and to remove the SW tax but leave the Disney tax:

21330 Home Alone 5390 grams / 11.88 lbs = $21 per lb

And to remove both:

10294 Titanic 14000 grams / 30.86 lbs = $20.38 per lb

So AT-AT is 65% more expensive than the Titanic based on weight. 

Edited December 15, 20214 yr by Pseudoty

12 minutes ago, Pseudoty said:

Agreed, I posted previously that I prefer PPG and to remove the SW tax but leave the Disney tax:

21330 Home Alone 5390 grams / 11.88 lbs = $21 per lb

And to remove both:

10294 Titanic 14000 grams / 30.86 lbs = $20.38 per lb

hahaha, yeah, I had to edit it because I accidentally hit submit before finishing my reply, but we both came to the same conclusion.

What gets me in some circles of the Lego community the focus so heavily on PPP not realizing that a 16 x16 plate =/= a 1x1 round plate and is not the best metric to determine the value of a set.

Edited December 15, 20214 yr by citymorgue

I think Lego also has a undisclosed “Middle aged Man-child Star Wars fan with disposable income” tax. 

36 minutes ago, Mathew said:

I think Lego also has a undisclosed “Middle aged Man-child Star Wars fan with disposable income” tax. 

Pretty much every other high end SW products have that tax baked in the price.  Look at the Razor Crest and Rancor from Haslab for comparison

6 hours ago, Pseudoty said:

Agreed, I posted previously that I prefer PPG and to remove the SW tax but leave the Disney tax:

21330 Home Alone 5390 grams / 11.88 lbs = $21 per lb

And to remove both:

10294 Titanic 14000 grams / 30.86 lbs = $20.38 per lb

So AT-AT is 65% more expensive than the Titanic based on weight. 

They priced Titanic lower probably because it’s aimed at a broader demo including women who are less likely to spend a lot on Lego. That and the IP is probably next to nothing. No direct movie tie ins. Honestly while it’s a nice set, like the World Map, I have zero interest in owning. 

On 12/15/2021 at 1:18 PM, Mathew said:

They priced Titanic lower probably because it’s aimed at a broader demo including women who are less likely to spend a lot on Lego

😂😂😂

52 minutes ago, Pseudoty said:

😂😂😂

Perfectly balanced. As all things should be.

7 hours ago, spener90 said:

Perfectly balanced. As all things should be.

Like the Titanic itself this relationship is doomed. 

1 hour ago, Mathew said:

Like the Titanic itself this relationship is doomed. 

talk about "Iceberg AHEAD!"