10188 - UCS: Death Star

[ravenb99]

Respectfully I disagree.  R2 D2 has been and will be a popular set.

popularity and big sales don't always correlate.

 

From individuals whose opinions I respect R2 never kept up with DS sales in store even with the big price point difference.

 

Yes R2 is a popular character but that does not mean it sold well while in stores.

 

Now when something disappears then it becomes more desirable as you always want something you can't have

Edited December 16, 2014 by ravenb99

[stephen_rockefeller]

You all know that the team of Ed and Ed promotes buying sets earlier than later. But as asharerin stated earlier, I believe the Death Star will probably be around until the next large STAR WARS play set is released, which as rumors hint at is a large Millennium Falcon play set.

Still, the 10188 is a great value and every collector should have one.

I just heard a collective gasp from all the 7965 fans that thought the sky was the limit........start selling those 7965s folks the real prophet has spoken. (Looking at you trek) ;)

[trekgate502]

popularity and big sales don't always correlate.

 

From individuals whose opinions I respect R2 never kept up with DS sales in store even with the big price point difference.

 

Yes R2 is a popular character but that does not mean it sold well while in stores.

 

Now when something disappears then it becomes more desirable as you always want something you can't have

 

R2 it is still #73 on Amazons category list a month after they stopped selling it themselves AND I guess I was getting more to the point of the original comment "Lego was retiring "old unpopular sets".  I know we can take it that TH was not a big mover.  But MF, GE, TH, SC, AA, R2, SSD and many many more that have gone I would categorize some as old unpopular but not all by any means.  The comment took me as they are not getting rid of any good sets just all the bad ones and that is not the case.   By the way yet another LEGO Shop at Home iego employee stated again that both MF and Republic Gunship are gone this year.

[trekgate502]

I just heard a collective gasp from all the 7965 fans that thought the sky was the limit........start selling those 7965s folks the real prophet has spoken. (Looking at you trek)

 

I do not see it still, I knew what Ed said (and has said before) when I started piling on the 7965's.  "Large Millennium Falcon Playset".  Perhaps it will be another non UCS UCS like the Death Star.  In any event I've always professed the 7965 as a medium term gain.  I plan to sell in the Spring before it becomes a problem.  Of course keep in mind I hope the new MF is $400, is an exclusive with no discounts.  That should keep the price of 7965 up at $295 in my opinion.

[Ed Mack]

I think the 7965 will have a window here to be very profitable. But I have heard about this Millennium Falcon play set too many times for it ignored. I for one would love it. It keeps my 10179s appreciating and replaces the 10188 with another highly collectible set.

Regardless, there will be another Falcon released.

[stephen_rockefeller]

I do not see it still, I knew what Ed said (and has said before) when I started piling on the 7965's.  "Large Millennium Falcon Playset".  Perhaps it will be another non UCS UCS like the Death Star.  In any event I've always professed the 7965 as a medium term gain.  I plan to sell in the Spring before it becomes a problem.  Of course keep in mind I hope the new MF is $400, is an exclusive with no discounts.  That should keep the price of 7965 up at $295 in my opinion.

lol you don't have to explain yourself buddy I just like giving you a hard time. It's all in good fun!

[Ed Mack]

Also, don't forget the Falcon in the new movie has a different radar dish, so older versions of the Falcon will not be affected as much.

[redcell]

The DS has just got to go this year.  It's just got to. Of course, I'm sure that was said last year and the year before.

 

I've been saying that for 4 years now.

[trekgate502]

lol you don't have to explain yourself buddy I just like giving you a hard time. It's all in good fun!

 

I meant to tell you on your post the other day you are absolutely right you normally do not have this strong of an opinion, so it was quite amusing to see you voice it.

You are normally a cook hand luke on things!  VBG.  By the way I am not so naive that I went ahead and posted 2 of the $80 7965's I got at $199.95 on eBay and I am within about 4 units of people buying them.  I'll take the quick flip on them that's for sure.  If it keeps going I may post a few more.  I think I have about 15 or 20 of them acquired in the last few weeks.  By the way I am actually most excited I have 10 10245 Santa Workshop and 3 Gamestop GameCube Wii U Adapters showing up tomorrow and Wednesday.  I am planning to turbo flip those puppies!  If I could get enough of both of those things right now I would mail you my 7965's for free but alas neither of those things is going to happen.  

[trekgate502]

Since Ed M is monitoring the forum tonight, I thought I would ask -

 

I am near my limits on expenditures this season (actually over them).  

 

If I want to add a few more DS to my inventory - I would think, cutting it close but not to close.

 

I have heard this is supposed to EOL in March of 2016.

I think they will not have enough and with the movie and Christmas it will be nuts even if no DS in it.

So back that up to October 2015 running out.

I would think I could still pick up a few next May before it is gone.

Opinions Ed or anyone?

[Ed Mack]

There are other sets right now that take priority over the 10188. But you should have at least one for the Hell of it. Catch my drift.

[redcell]

Lego investing is like anything else involving prediction.  People just take the past and carry it forward in their heads.  So with the exception of emazers, most folks just say 'DS hasn't retired yet, so it never will'.  Not unlike all the predictions that surely HH would make it to Halloween, or AA couldn't retire because it only came out last year.  It's funny.  emazers keeps giving the same advice, incredibly simple and incredibly useful, and people keep ignoring it.  Fine by me.  It's just... weird.

 

The thing is that Emazers' advice and strategy will only work as long as the amount of capital invested in the sets that he continually touts remains -- on an aggregate basis -- near historical levels (or demand grows in proportion to the amount of capital invested).  As more money flows into that type of set, there will be more of those sets on the secondary market and the longer they will take to appreciate.  Don't get me wrong, it's still a good strategy and one that I certainly practice to a degree, but the Emazers of the world seem to assume that the world as it exists today is static and unchanging such that what has historically been a sure thing will now and forever more remain a sure thing.  However, as more resellers generate more money from this strategy, the more money there will be out there searching for a place to land and if that money is continually re-invested into this strategy, the strategy becomes unsustainable.  I'm already seeing this happen.  I had a very modest number of FBs and they have been very slow to move this year.  I'm deeper on GE and will be interested to see if the pattern repeats.  The next few years will be very revealing as to the long-term viability of that strategy.  

Edited December 16, 2014 by Pacific493

[stephen_rockefeller]

The thing is that Emazers' advice and strategy will only work as long as the amount of capital invested in the sets that he continually touts remains -- on an aggregate basis -- near historical levels. As more money flows into that type of set, there will be more of those sets on the secondary market and the longer they will take to appreciate. Don't get me wrong, it's still a good strategy and one that I certainly practice to a degree, but the Emazers of the world seem to assume that the world as it exists today is static and unchanging such that what has historically been a sure thing will now and forever more remain a sure thing. However, as more resellers generate more money from this strategy, the more money there will be out there searching for a place to land and if that money is continually re-invested into this strategy, the strategy becomes unsustainable. I'm already seeing this happen. I had a very modest number of FBs and they have been very slow to move this year. I'm deeper on GE and will be interested to see if the pattern repeats. The next few years will be very revealing as to the long-term viability of that strategy.

Thank you for this.....even though people will scoff at this, it is spot on. Adapt and evolve or die.

[comicblast]

Respectfully I disagree.  R2 D2 has been and will be a popular set.

R2 it is still #73 on Amazons category list a month after they stopped selling it themselves

You are looking at it from a very biased point of view. Looking at the numbers now, the DS is ranked #13, and R2 is at #89. Same category.

 

Also we can look at eBay sales - over the last 12 months an average of 56.1 DS's were sold, and 42.6 R2's.

 

AND I guess I was getting more to the point of the original comment "Lego was retiring "old unpopular sets".  I know we can take it that TH was not a big mover.  But MF, GE, TH, SC, AA, R2, SSD and many many more that have gone I would categorize some as old unpopular but not all by any means.  The comment took me as they are not getting rid of any good sets just all the bad ones and that is not the case.

 

I do concede that based on the feedback of the forum and what speculators and trolls have posted on this board, that there are definitely some sets in the list of large exclusives that don't fit the "old, unpopular set" picture. 

 

I do see how my initial post could have been misinterpreted. I was addressing the likes of SC, TH, and AA (which wasn't really on anyone's radar until recently - after TLG pulled the plug).

 

By the way yet another LEGO Shop at Home iego employee stated again that both MF and Republic Gunship are gone this year.

 

I haven't paid as much attention to the forums as before, but have we established that we can trust TLG CS/employees?

[trekgate502]

Comicblast maybe it was me, if so sorry, was thinking it was a blanket statement on everything retiring and not directed at a few specific sets...

[Mathew]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this new Millennium Falcon play set that people are supposing is planned.  Isn't 7965 a play set?  You can open it up and recreate scenes from the movies.  Wouldn't a $400 Falcon play set be extremely large in layout?  Where would kids play with it at?  The kitchen table?  A large all-in-one Lego built play set would probably be somewhat fragile so moving it around would be problematic.  Also unlike the Death Star there are very few scenes that would require a giant play set.  Just doesn't make sense to me.  

 

The reason the Death Star is still around is because it's a ingenious design that holds up well and would be difficult to top with something else.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Mathew

[oneknightr]

Also, don't forget the Falcon in the new movie has a different radar dish, so older versions of the Falcon will not be affected as much.

So are you saying that this new MF Playset is going to be the new version with the rectangular radar dish?

 

I sold my MISB 10179 Falcon about six months ago at $3200. Kind of regretting it now, but I still made a nice chunk of change that is now invested in other sets that are EOL right now.

[Guest TabbyBoy]

At least I'm not getting stuck with a DS taking up space in a crowded aftermarket. More for you lot.

[mscheaf]

Cool, one less impatient undercutter when it finally does eol

[Guest TabbyBoy]

Cool, one less impatient undercutter when it finally does eol

No comment

[Ed Mack]

So are you saying that this new MF Playset is going to be the new version with the rectangular radar dish?

 

I sold my MISB 10179 Falcon about six months ago at $3200. Kind of regretting it now, but I still made a nice chunk of change that is now invested in other sets that are EOL right now.

Well, logic would dictate that the new versions, small or large, would have the rectangular dish.  I have no proof of either, but I am assuming the new Falcon will have new minifigures, based on old man Han Solo and whoever else is associated with it as well.  The new STAR WARS movie trailer, with the rectangular dish MF, is the best news that one can get if they own a 10179 or 7965.  Older versions will increase in value from added interest and new versions will be highly collectible.  Thank JJ for this!

[LegoSteve]

Cool, one less impatient undercutter when it finally does eol

I bet you're a load fun around the dinner table during the holidays.

[Guest TabbyBoy]

I bet you're a load fun around the dinner table during the holidays.

As much fun as haemorrhoids.

[mscheaf]

I bet you're a load fun around the dinner table during the holidays.

Oooo burn

[biniou]

Wouldn't a $400 Falcon play set be extremely large in layout?  Where would kids play with it at?  The kitchen table?  A large all-in-one Lego built play set would probably be somewhat fragile so moving it around would be problematic.

 

IMO you have to think in space (I mean, "X,Y,Z" not "in a galaxy far, far away" ^^ ).

 

Consider the MF 7965 which is 58.20 x 37.80 x 8.70 cm long (sorry I can't handle inches) and has 1254 pieces. So its volume is about 19.1 cm3.

 

Just having it a little bigger (raise only 10% length, width and high) it does not raise up to 21cm3 but [64 x 41.6 x 9.6] = 26.7cm3

 

So if I'm not mistaking, it will not be 125 pieces bigger (10% of 1254) but 499 pieces bigger (39%).

Considering a MF $400 could be around 3000 pieces (2.4 times more pieces), it means it would be 45.7cm3 in volume, and so... 78 x 50.6 x 11.7 cm long (34% longer compared to the 7965 MF).

 

34% longer is not that huge.

The only "problem" for a kid would be the weight which remains the same.

 

But come on... stupid maths apart... how many people will buy a $400 set to a 8 years kid ?

Edited December 18, 2014 by biniou