Biggest Losers - Class of 2014

[jerryherb]

Doubt any smack talkers have built it.

 

Im an investor, not a builder, like previous commentators stated its big, but its all it is. seen it at the lego store and not impressed. 10210 however was a great one, too bad i only bought two because i was late to the game. sea cow pie is what it should be called compared to the imperial flag ship.

[naf]

Doubt any smack talkers have built it.

 

I haven't built it, but I've seen it in person and I stand by my thoughts on it.  Not everyone has to like every set   Actually, it will probably be a decent investment but you'll have to hold onto it for a while.  Today's kids who have seen the movie might want this set later on when they're adults and Lego nostalgia hits them.

[DoNotInsertIntoMouth]

Well done on putting yourself out there.

 

My main points would be:

 

1. Disagree. See the set built and it will change your mind most likely. It is awesome.

 

Any furthermore, children growing up watching and loving the Lego movie are going to become lego AFOLs possibly one day after a dark age. They will come out with money wanting this set. It may take a bit, but depending on EOL (and thats a big one), this set could be huge down the road.

 

2. Completely disagree. It has seemed to sell well (250ish sold in the last three months on Ebay). Plus with them not doing a full Simpsons theme, I think this is an obvious winner.

 

3. Completely Disagree. Its a winner. The first one was, this one is bigger and better. May not look as good on the outside, but its a super set and huge and a lot of people will stay away at 300$ which is good. Movies will spark new interest. Maybe even more if they are terrible (people will say "go watch the old ones")

 

4. Im with you in a sense. I think the mixer looks like crap anyway. However, there are a lot of sets I hate that do well. So I will be watching this one.

 

5. Cargo Plane is an understandable theory and I am not sure where I am on this (not even out yet anyway, right?).

 

Here is why:

 

- You referenced the helicopter - good point, but you do have to take into account TRU's endless supply of these selling on Ebay at 100$. Thats why the price has gone down. Still only had a 1 year run, so patience will help here. I am still ok with the couple I have. But certainly that TRU hold-on after retirement hurt this set.

 

- Planes haven't done well, but there haven't been that many to really put in. 9394 just retired in December and has slowly climbed a bit (its a nice set by the way)

 

- Big misnomer/sleeper possibility here: The b build. Everyone I have talked to thinks the B build rocks on this one (Hovercraft). There aren't a lot of data points for boats, but snow does really well and there are some similarities. The small hovercraft in last years releases (its an awesome set) is really nice and sold really well during Christmas.

 

I am going to go down with the ship with several of these just in case. I would lean towards agreeing with you right now, but I think this one could surprise.

[stephen_rockefeller]

Everyone should be listening to the member who is the closest thing to an expert that BP has......I'll give you a hint. He posted only once in this thread.

[brickelements]

When it comes to investing in BIG sets it is common opinion that NONE of them will ever be a real loser. This is my opinion, too, but there are some popular big sets I think are fairly overrated and will in the end "lose" the race for becoming big investment winners after EOL. I do not intend to p*ss anyone off here, criticising their favorite sets. But as it is a common practice in this forum to tell people to "buy, buy, buy!" I thought it might not be a bad idea to make people think again about buying at least in some cases. In the end, of course, this is also to tell you my opinion on sets I just don't understand why they are being hyped the was they are - and to get to know what you think about it.

 

The following sets released in 2014 might - in my opinion - become disappointments after EOL (for the following reasons):

 

1. MetalBeard's Sea Cow (70810)

(My undisputed 1st place on this list. While I do have reservations about the whole LEGO Movie theme, this Cow imo might become an absolute grave for investors' money - maybe the only big set of 2014 you could indeed LOSE money on. Why: Ships generally have a very good reputation as investments - also for me -, my problem with this one here is that it is just "way too fantasy" and simply over the top - which worked in the movie but doesn't work for a set (you invest your bucks in). Neither is it a real ship nor a pirate ship nor is it looking like a historical one. How is any AFOL going to want this after EOL, when the movie hype is over? I mean even for fans of the movie, I don't see too many people pony up $250. Plus it is a LEGO own theme, which is ambiguous on its own already. Has there ever been a set from one of their own themes this expensive?)

 

2. The Simpsons House (71006)

(The main issues here for me are the price and the target group. As a set it looks quite good and accurate to the series, I think, and Simpsons fans will surely love it. BUT: besides them - who else? Furthermore the series is (long) past its peak. It might be in its 20th season but interest is nothing like in the 90s. Anyone investing 200 dollars now might not get their money back for a long time, I fear.)

 

3. Sandcrawler (75059)

(I don't get why people like this set: it is brown, it is clumsy, it is ugly, it has never been an especially popular vehicle in the movies. And even now while being on the market I can't imagine too many people spending 300 bucks on this thing. Not to mention post-EOL performance. Even if you see it as a play set in the first place - which it is supposed to be, I guess. It just does not convince me to spend any money on it. And by the way: I AM a fan of the LEGO Star Wars theme...)

 

4. Fairground Mixer (10244)

(Yes, it might be the beginning of a new summer theme and yes, it might be a cool design idea and cool to construct - but, well, aesthetically it doesn't convince me at all. I saw it built in a LEGO shop and I have to say: That thing looks even more confusing live than it does on the package. If you don't know the name of this set and you look at it, it might actually take up to half a minute to get an idea what this "multi-colored set-up" could be all about. The Mixer might be nice for kids to play, but as an investment? No.)

 

5. Cargo Plane (42025)

(If you asked me I'd say: Don't waste your money on this! While it seems like a good investement at first glance, I doubt this set will ever become popular among TECHNIC fans and even among European TECHNIC fans. From what I know, TECHNIC enthusiasts love construction site equipment! Not too much besides that. Anything flying is quite rare is this theme - for a reason. Have a look at the EOL-gone Helicopter (9396): For a short time people thought it would really "take off" now it is retired, but the value graph tells another story - down from $130 to $100 in just TWO months. My conclusion: TECHNIC don't fly.)

 

Looking forward to your opinions and your personal list!

Well I am not as experienced as Emazers or the Macks but I have a slightly different opinion than the OP.

 

1.  Sea Cow : Agree  while not dead money, it may be a slow mover.

 

2. Simpsons House: Completely disagree with Simpsons house.  Based on the shows 20 yr run I think there is quite  fan base for this.  Personally I am not a fan but I think the set will do well.  If the Simpsons house is the beginning of sets to represent the town of Springfield then this set will be a fantastic money maker.

 

3. Sandcrawler:  Big winner.  I take a combo analysis of the Death Star (lots of figs) and the iconic status of the SSD and combine them.

Sure fire money maker.  Easy double not long after EOL IMO.

 

4. Fairground Mixer: I would agree it may be a little overpriced but If this is the beginning of a new theme you better stock up my friend.  We all know how completists are.  They need and will pay for all sets in a series.  Perfect example: Winter Village series.  I see no reason why a summer theme cannot experience the same growth.

 

5. Cargo plane: way to early.  It is not even in US store shelves yet.  Some of it will depend on your entry price into the set.  As a technic set discounts can be found.

[Ed Mack]

The OP has every right to express his opinion.  I think he is wrong on all counts.  Each of the sets he listed is rather unique to the LEGO world, so they usually stand out and appreciate quite well.  They are also big sets, which helps.  I don't see the logic in comparing them to other quality sets like the Maersk Triple E or Parisian Restaurant.  There is room for all to appreciate very well.  I put all of these sets in the same category...winners.  

[Bold-Arrow]

I haven't checked out the Technic set yet, so I wont weigh in on that one.

 

I will say that I've already made money on the Sea Cow so I would beg to differ with you on that one.

Simpsons and Crawler will do just fine..

Not sure about the Mixer yet.

 

I don't get the A vs B argument (Triple E v Sea Cow) as it is irrelevant IMO.  they barely have anything in common other than they are ships. Same with Slave I v Sandcrawler

[naf]

Well done on putting yourself out there.

 

My main points would be:

 

1. Disagree. See the set built and it will change your mind most likely. It is awesome.

 

Any furthermore, children growing up watching and loving the Lego movie are going to become lego AFOLs possibly one day after a dark age. They will come out with money wanting this set. It may take a bit, but depending on EOL (and thats a big one), this set could be huge down the road.

 

 

I think this is a true statement, but how long are you going to have to hold onto those Sea Cows until kids today come out of their dark age?  If a 10 year old is into the movie today, that kid may not want to, or be in the position to buy a retired Sea Cow until they're in their mid 20's to 30's.  15 years is a lot of time to have that money tied up even if the set doubles in price.

[tonysbricks]

Everyone should be listening to the member who is the closest thing to an expert that BP has......I'll give you a hint. He posted only once in this thread.

 

I posted twice bro! l2count! 

[DoNotInsertIntoMouth]

Everyone should be listening to the member who is the closest thing to an expert that BP has......I'll give you a hint. He posted only once in this thread.

 

Well thanks Stephen I really appreciate that !!!

 

(Disclaimer: Its not me, I am being sarcastic. And Stephen is right.)

[KShine]

IMO, The Metalbeard has "LEGO markdown potential" written all over it. Now if they ever did a Metalbeard spinoff (a movie, or some type of Metalbeards adventure's TV series), that would be a different story. The Simpsons House seems as if it might have a short life, and will do great.

[Svartath]

About the Maersk Triple E, what growth rate do you expect guys?

[exciter1]

Regardless of what's great, who likes what, and which sets have growth potential.  You guys are very good at spending my money.

[Crustybeaver]

People have different opinions of what is considered a loser. Is a set that doubles in price after five years a bad set? Some may say yes, I know there are some on here that think if a set isn't giving Fire Brigade, Wolverine Chopper, Zombies or Mars Rovers returns after six months it's a big disappointment. I personally think that all the mentioned sets will make decent profits with time. The first three will most likely give the tidiest returns.

[jerryherb]

About the Maersk Triple E, what growth rate do you expect guys?

at least 100% within a year of EOL, heck you cant buy it at retail now because its out of stock for most of its production run. it took over a month for my SINGLE SET to get filled by LEGO Shop at Home. 10219 (purchased my stash on sale, not 119 MSRP) is already above that and barely retired a bit more than half a year.

 

 

btw the main picture of triple-e on brickpicker is of the previous boat 10155, $119 msrp, $350 on amazon today, EOL sometime 2012(?)

 

 

Edit: apparently its available now at LEGO Shop at Home

[Frank Brickowski]

Saying one set will not perform because you like another set better makes zero sense. Sounds like more excuses not to spend big bucks on big sets. Once again Mars rovers for everyone!!

 

Saying there are worse and better sets to spend your money on makes perfect sense. It's a hint as to which big sets you should spend big bucks.

 

Had I included every big set in this list, you would have been right. But I didn't. I just recommend people better buy the good sets, not the bad or the ugly.

[Frank Brickowski]

Doubt any smack talkers have built it.

 

Have you read the title of this thread? It was meant to be about investing, not building. Investing money primarily in sets that are fun to build might not be the best of ideas. So why do you consider building this set so important when discussing investing in it? When you sell the set post-EOL your target group are people who don't know about how much fun the building process is, anyway. The see what it looks like. And if it looks like it does (which is "impressively weird") and people are lookign for a cool ship to buy, then they will rather pick up something thats does in fact look better - this is not too hard, if you have a look at the competition. As a fan of ships I would even prefer the Pirate Ship from LOTR to the Cow. Or the Ice Breaker from the arctic theme...

 

I mean, maybe you built the Cow, but did you afterwards also take a close look at it? It looks just like a "80s Hulk Hogan" equivalent of a ship. "Flamboyant", to put it in one word. No one will buy this post-EOL imo.

[Bold-Arrow]

Have you read the title of this thread? It was meant to be about investing, not building. Investing money primarily in sets that are fun to build might not be the best of ideas. So why do you consider building this set so important when discussing investing in it? When you sell the set post-EOL your target group are people who don't know about how much fun the building process is, anyway. The see what it looks like. And if it looks like it does (which is "impressively weird") and people are lookign for a cool ship to buy, then they will rather pick up something thats does in fact look better - this is not too hard, if you have a look at the competition. As a fan of ships I would even prefer the Pirate Ship from LOTR to the Cow. Or the Ice Breaker from the arctic theme...

I mean, maybe you built the Cow, but did you afterwards also take a close look at it? It looks just like a "80s Hulk Hogan" equivalent of a ship. "Flamboyant", to put it in one word. No one will buy this post-EOL imo.

The vast majority of your buyers will build their sets, that is why a fun/solid build is important in the reselling world.

The Sea Cow is unique, nothing else like it. It is whacky, crazy and fun and that's why "nerds" like me drove 50 minutes on launch day to grab one. Yes I can grab a lotr pirate ship, a triple E , or a POTC ship but it is just not the same .

My two cents

 

edited to ad: I cared more about the design over the role it played in the move

[naf]

The Sea Cow is one of those sets that people either love or are "meh" about it, which could translate to a reduced audience to sell to post eol.  I'm a huge nerd and it doesn't interest me.  But I like the Sand Crawler, yet others dislike that one.  Both of these sets will make money post EOL, I think it's just a matter of how much money you will make and how long you'll need to hold onto them.

 

There is also the possibility of getting a new large exclusive pirate ship, which is hinted at with the "name a pirate ship" contest.  Do you guys think this could be big competition for the Sea Cow?

[Frank Brickowski]

Well done on putting yourself out there.

 

My main points would be:

 

1. Disagree. See the set built and it will change your mind most likely. It is awesome.

 

Any furthermore, children growing up watching and loving the Lego movie are going to become lego AFOLs possibly one day after a dark age. They will come out with money wanting this set. It may take a bit, but depending on EOL (and thats a big one), this set could be huge down the road.

 

The problem with the LEGO movie is that it is a comedy about itself. It is a parody of LEGO, people's image of LEGO and some other movies - no ORIGINAL stuff at all. A great topic for a movie, indeed. But a pretty lame topic for LEGO sets. How long will people want to build sets that spoof the sets they have bought over the last decades? Benny's spaceship parody of a classic spaceship? The idea is new now, but will pretty soon get old.

 

I know from experience how merchandise from TV series performs while the series is running. You missed the 1st series of McFarlane figures from The Walking Dead? Hard luck - some of the figures sell for $250 now. BUT: when the series is over, interest will vanish quickly. The same happened to the LOST figures. Prices went up, up, up while the series was on TV. And when it was over, you sat on all the stuff you hadn't sold early enough while the hype was still on.

 

So, when the movie's hype is over, no one will care about the 1st wave of sets ever again. If there is a second movie people will rather buy those new sets. The only scenario I see in which the Cow and other weird stuff might end up STAYING popular, would be if the LEGO movies become really iconic, legendary stuff - like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Indiana Jones. But they just won't. Because the LEGO movies won't ever have an epic story, no epic universe around them, as I said before, they are only a parody. Or am I just not aware of the big fanbase of the "Superhero Movie" or "Scary Movie". I don't think so,

[DoNotInsertIntoMouth]

The problem with the LEGO movie is that it is a comedy about itself. It is a parody of LEGO, people's image of LEGO and some other movies - no ORIGINAL stuff at all. A great topic for a movie, indeed. But a pretty lame topic for LEGO sets. How long will people want to build sets that spoof the sets they have bought over the last decades? Benny's spaceship parody of a classic spaceship? The idea is new now, but will pretty soon get old.

 

I know from experience how merchandise from TV series performs while the series is running. You missed the 1st series of McFarlane figures from The Walking Dead? Hard luck - some of the figures sell for $250 now. BUT: when the series is over, interest will vanish quickly. The same happened to the LOST figures. Prices went up, up, up while the series was on TV. And when it was over, you sat on all the stuff you hadn't sold early enough while the hype was still on.

 

So, when the movie's hype is over, no one will care about the 1st wave of sets ever again. If there is a second movie people will rather buy those new sets. The only scenario I see in which the Cow and other weird stuff might end up STAYING popular, would be if the LEGO movies become really iconic, legendary stuff - like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Indiana Jones. But they just won't. Because the LEGO movies won't ever have an epic story, no epic universe around them, as I said before, they are only a parody. Or am I just not aware of the big fanbase of the "Superhero Movie" or "Scary Movie". I don't think so,

 

I mean you are comparing Apples to oranges. The Lego movie had much more time and care put into it that scary movie or superhero movie (which are really just awful).

 

Thats a fair point, but I just don't agree with it. Only reason I am holding off Movie stuff is I want to see what they do with the extra lines, etc. But from what I have heard, the Lego movie was epic and will continue to be a legend. Why do I love power rangers stuff? because I saw the badass Ivan Ooze movie when I was like 12 and still until this day think its one of the best movies of all time.

 

All the arguments you have made have been made about Ninjago and Friends as well. "Its a niche line". "Its a now thing - people wont remember these sets down the road"

 

Lets take a look at those theme's CAGR.

[Alpinemaps]

Interesting points all around.  I think those that aren't saying much or anything at all in this thread are speaking as loudly as those that are.

[Ed Mack]

IMO, The Metalbeard has "LEGO markdown potential" written all over it. Now if they ever did a Metalbeard spinoff (a movie, or some type of Metalbeards adventure's TV series), that would be a different story. The Simpsons House seems as if it might have a short life, and will do great.

The Sea Cow  is on the exclusives, no discount, list.  It cannot be marked down until 2015, unless LEGO changes or renews the policy for 2015.

[Frank Brickowski]

The vast majority of your buyers will build their sets, that is why a fun/solid build is important in the reselling world.

 

I'd say it is a big misconception to refer to the actual PROCESS of building when (rightly) talking about "post-EOL buyers buy to BUILD their sets". Yes, they do! But that does not refer to the building PROCESS but to the finished set being DISPLAYED (and therefore you HAVE to BUILD it).

 

It's hard to imagine buyers paying hundreds of dollars for some hours of building, instead of rather paying that money for looking at the finished build for years afterwards. Meaning: It is fairly unimportant if the build is fun or not. In the end what really counts is what the built set looks like. If it was only the building process itself, why don't they dismantle and build the set over and over again then?

 

And like I said before: This is why I dont cheer for the sea cow. It is fun to build but a pain to look at. Who in the world would pay big bucks for something that looks ugly or embarassing - just because they can remember "oh, those couple of hours I built it were so much fun" every time they have to suppress their urge to gag looking at it?

[Bold-Arrow]

I'd say it is a big misconception to refer to the actual PROCESS of building when (rightly) talking about "post-EOL buyers buy to BUILD their sets". Yes, they do! But that does not refer to the building PROCESS but to the finished set being DISPLAYED (and therefore you HAVE to BUILD it).

It's hard to imagine buyers paying hundreds of dollars for some hours of building, instead of rather paying that money for looking at the finished build for years afterwards. Meaning: It is fairly unimportant if the build is fun or not. In the end what really counts is what the built set looks like. If it was only the building process itself, why don't they dismantle and build the set over and over again then?

And like I said before: This is why I dont cheer for the sea cow. It is fun to build but a pain to look at. Who in the world would pay big bucks for something that looks ugly or embarassing - just because they can remember "oh, those couple of hours I built it were so much fun" every time they have to suppress their urge to gag looking at it?

I think the set looks great - and the fun build is a plus-but I can see why others would see it as ugly.

Also there will be a sequel to the Lego Movie so there will be interest in the first/second wave sets.