those i can understand since they added to the stability of the sets
2 Likes
I’d rather buy the 2014 version though. The main thing I don’t like about the new one is how oversimplified it is.
I understand that, but that’s also kind of the point of Minecraft. At least there’s Ninjago and Creator for anyone’s complex dragon needs.
1 Like
Also consider that sets are designed with price points in mind (i.e. a wave of sets from a theme will have a distribution of prices). The new Ender Dragon set was mandated to be at a smaller price point, and does not reflect the choice of a LEGO designer. Therefore, it is not a fair comparison. I think looking at the evolution of Star Wars snowspeeders (as mentioned above) is a better metric to measure change in quality and price.
LEGO has made seven minifigure-compatible snowspeeders since 1999.Three of which include just a snowspeeder with no large side builds.
1999: 7130 Snowspeeder
215 pcs, $20.00 USD
2004: 4500 Rebel Snowspeeder
214 pcs, $20.00 USD
2014: 75049 Snowspeeder
279 pcs, $29.99 USD
While LEGO snowspeeders have not changed drastically over the years, each update to the design brings increased accuracy to the movie version. This is due to the innovation of newer, smaller, and more versatile LEGO elements. Therefore, more parts are used to create the model.
A large price increase occurs between 2004 and 2014. While the base snowspeeder is roughly the same size in each set, the newer version has greater accuracy with newer parts. Also consider the 2014 set has four minifigures–two rebels and two snowtroopers–while the 2004 set only only two rebels. Additionally, the 2014 set has a more useful side build (a turret instead of a radar dish). These factors give the set better playability. While the price has increased, the quality and usefulness of the contents of the set as a whole has also increased.
If we compared the two UCS Snowspeeder models (10129 from 2003 and 75144 from 2017), the newer set has 246 more pieces and is $70.00 USD more expensive. However, the objective quality of 75144 is a massive increase over 10129, especially in the assembly, which uses more sophisticated techniques to achieve better looks.
6 Likes
While this may or may not apply to the same model, take my example:
I am comparing 2 50$ LEGO Techinic sets. While they have nothing in common with each other, they are the exact same price.
This new set fro 2019, has 579 pieces, and retalies for 50$
The other car, is a LEGO Racers set from 2006:
This set has 724 pieces and also used to retail for 50$.
While the set itself may be more detalied or whatever, the price is way to high compared to the Racers set. So, if II had to choose, I’l 100% choose Nitro Intimidator rather then the Chevrolet Corvette (because it has more pieces, and because it’s way cooler in my opinion lol.)
While the quality on the builds may be better then 10 years ago, the older set defenetly had a greater value.
However, this isn’t the main problem. Most of the new sets are way to overpriced and you just get a few pieces.
20$ for this… Yuk. Those are supposed to be micro fighters. But since when is that animal a Micro Fighter? And was the Escape Pod even a fighter ship? NO! This set is just a complete non sense with some cool minifigs trown in. The only reason people will buy this set is beacuse of the minifigs.
Ok, this set… would not be worth more then 12$ at it’s max, but weirdly enough it’s 20$. And all you get is a small spider and boring side build. Once again, minifigs.
I hope this explains good enough.
The Star Wars need in me insists to correct this, the radar dish is actually a turret as well, but for the Rebels
The new one also contains a conflict. Instead of all good guys, it throws in a few Snowtroopers and a turret for them.
I’d say the Racers is underpriced rather than the Technic being overpriced, though they each by themselves look worth $50. Also, one is Technic, and the other is Racers. I don’t know if this affects it, ut it may. And licensing fees.
Pretty funny, in the Brickfeed about this, Exx was talking about how he’d buy this despite not buying Microfighters literally for the Dewback itself. And me myself looks at this as one of the better Microfighters. Does it stick to its precedents? Not really. But the idea of tiny ships is kind of nonsensical in itself. LEGO made the “rule,” not Star Wars, so shouldn’t LEGO be able to push the boundaries? This one actually looks much more appealing (maybe it’s because C-3P0 is the only OG I don’t have, maybe it’s because I have a fondness for Dewbacks. But this set offers more than a pointless ship with a thrown in minifigure, and for that, I’d consider buying this more than any of the other Microfighters.
Okay… The set is $15 and can be found for less… But I’m inclined to get this more than other Harry Potter sets mainly because the scene in both the book and the movie was quite memorable. LEGO Shelob may be the best LEGO spider in my opinion, but this set is more movie-accurate than the two previous iterations. It’s cheap, fun, and better than tiny Forbidden Forest set in 2011 or whatever.
I don’t think the set itself is bad, but 20$ is a little too much for two little builds. If that was like 15$ maybe it would work better.[quote=“ToaNoah_Wafflemeister, post:658, topic:23000”]
Okay… The set is $15 and can be found for less…
[/quote]
It’s 25$ in my country. Forgot to point out, but in my country prices are usually at least 20% higher then in the US. So, it may be worth buying for you, but for the price in my country… not for me.
1 Like
Eh, considering it has about 180 pieces, I think $20 is a fine price for it if you include licensing
If you want to talk about a terribly priced set. Look at the General Grievous’ Combat Speeder set from last year:
It was a $30 set with only 157 pieces. Now I could possibly understand that price if it had some huge pieces, but it’s biggest pieces are the curved bricks that make up the body of the ship and they aren’t really that big. If that’s not a bad deal, I don’t know what is.
I think that’s more of an exchange rate or shipping problem then it is a Lego problem, but I may be wrong. I think Australia might be the same way
2 Likes
Then it’s not fair to judge the set as you are. That’s most likely your country’s problem and not LEGO’s, so you can’t blame them for making a reasonably priced set and then finding it marked up thanks to your local retailers.
Now, for $25 I probably wouldn’t get that set either, but the $20 most retailers sell it for is great. It’d be the same as buying two Microfighters, but without having to pay tax on two sets, just one. It saves money in the long run. Of course that’s still all dependent on the prices you’re able to find it for, but still. The price that LEGO values it as is $20, which is perfectly reasonable, and the builds are cute.
2 Likes
You guys are all also forgetting the fact (or glossing over) that ten years make a lot of difference. Production costs have gone up not down, same as with everything else. A 20 dollar set from 2005 with 400 pieces might be more bang for your buck than a 20 dollar set from 2018 with 300, but if you account for inflation that 400 piece set is probably more like 30 dollars in todays money.
It is critical to remember when talking about prices that things increase, in addition to acknowledging the exchange rates your individual country might have. Our money is worth less, not more, than it was ten years ago.
Just look at the CAD dollar, which is what I use. Three or four years ago we were more or less on par with USD, meaning 1 dollar = 1 dollar. Now we’re somewhere in the realm of 1 CAD = 0.75 USD. It has an effect. Unfortunately, while this means that in local currency you pay more money, the actual worth of what you’re buying hasn’t changed at all. It’s not the products fault, it’s your currency that’s the problem.
7 Likes
Yeah, that sounds about rigt.
Plus, you have to factor in all the new prints on the figures, as.well as.the new pieces that are being churned out so much. That’s expensive, too.
Also, like you said, different country’s money will differ. The price can go up or down.depending of the translation from one currency to another.
1 Like
It’s not only the exchange rates. 20 USD is equal to around 80 RON (my currency). But usually the retail price for 20 USD sets is around 100 RON, which is about 25 USD. So actually not the currency might be the actual problem. I don’t know, a lot of countries seem to have the same problem.
Fair priced by today’s standard, that is. It’s kind of unfair to say that an older set was more fairly priced than its modern counterparts because a lot has changed since then. There’s also another very important piece to this price, and I’ll get to that soon.
So you show a joke minifigure, a small disney princess set and a $20 ender dragon set for your case of lego not being the same quality they used to be. Compare almost every single new set to an older one, they’re going to be better as a toy. After all, this a child’s source of play. If they can’t play with it because it’s always breaking, then that’s going to be a problem.
New set is $20, old was $70, and is around double its retail price now. What were you expecting?
I mean you’re right, but the point still stands.
Well with inflation taken into account, the increase in quality of the lego product in the last 12 years (don’t deny that Lego’s quality has increased with time), and the licensing of the product, I think 50 dollars is pretty fair for what you’re getting. It’s not my cup of tea, but I know a lot of people will be willing to pay that much for this set.
Piece count has nothing to do when justifying the price of a set unless there’s a significant difference. 724 vs 579 isn’t that big of a difference.
Anyway, I’ll start wrapping this up. When mentioning the price of a product, it’s important to know that this is about the business its itself, which like any other major corporation, has employees. With all of the factories and employees the company has (around 20,000), there can be a major impact if the company decides to decrease their prices. I can’t say how big it is, but I’m certain that this would result in employees being cut because they can’t afford to keep them. There are most certainly rip-off’s that lego is making, and i also understand that it is our money we’re giving them, but sometimes it’s an extreme. You can only complain to a certain extent, I suppose.
I don’t know if lego could sell enough products to counter this. It’s not like they can wake up one morning and say “let’s decrease the prices of our products for 20%”.
The way I view it at least, I don’t want anyone to lose their job. I’m not advocating that people buy more lego, but they’re just a toy company and not some evil monopoly out to screw us over and put us in financial burden.
It’s ok to have an opinion on the matter. Believe me, I have complained about some prices myself, but I think we’ve seen a looot of stuff on this site about lego being too expensive, not as good as it once was, etc.
End rant.
5 Likes
Okay (holds breath) Gali Mistika is unironically one of my favourite sets
1 Like
Clearly you have been corrupted by the dark powers of chaos.
4 Likes
Idk what’s so bad about that, I’m obsessed with Phantoka, especially Antroz
2 Likes
They didn’t have a very well thought out in universe purpose either. To paraphrase South Park, Rhotuka Spinners are the Dr. Pepper of Bionicle Gimmick Weapons.
1 Like
knock dr pepper one more time and i’ll break your legs
but yeah rhotukas are kinda weird
4 Likes
I actually adore Dr. Pepper. Lmao
I was just using a South Park analogy in the context of Rhotuka Spinners
1 Like
Depends on what are you talking about: the general idea doesnt. It’s creative. That “Go Brick Me” is a cool set actually. The problem is that they are overpriced, mostly non accurate, and 99% licensed (The Lego ninjago movie, probably considering the Lego movie 2)
2 Likes