Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, OCD_Chad said:

Why would it be?  I believe they are out to get sets to the people that want them, not to create rare collectibles.

Part of getting people to fork out cash on premium plastic is the exclusivity element and also the possibility to recoup after EOL should you choose to sell used sets.

Without those, Lego becomes Megablox.

If they wanted to reach everyone, they´d cut prices and stock the UCS Falcon in Costco.

Edited by Val-E
Posted
39 minutes ago, OCD_Chad said:

Why would it be?  I believe they are out to get sets to the people that want them, not to create rare collectibles.

So LEGO has been lying to us for almost two decades?  These are not the "Ultimate Collectible" sets?  Damn...That's disappointing.

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, OCD_Chad said:

Why would it be?  I believe they are out to get sets to the people that want them, not to create rare collectibles.

That "special" aspect played a big part for many buyers - It created a sense of true value, justifying their willingness (sometimes eagerness) to pay a hefty premium for some pieces of plastic.

  • Like 1
Posted

man, you guys are all doom-and-gloom. Sure, this set is not going to light the Lego investment scene on fire, but depending on buy-in price there's a very good chance netting a decent return. At $100 each I would have filled my car, at $160 I will buy one for my personal build collection and one for a local sale during the Christmas season . 

It's a nice set and a "must-have" for SW fans.

Posted
1 hour ago, eliminator said:

man, you guys are all doom-and-gloom. Sure, this set is not going to light the Lego investment scene on fire, but depending on buy-in price there's a very good chance netting a decent return. At $100 each I would have filled my car, at $160 I will buy one for my personal build collection and one for a local sale during the Christmas season . 

It's a nice set and a "must-have" for SW fans.

While I am not that negative about the set, the problem with your logic is that many STAR WARS fans already have the original, thus the apathy.  ?

  • Like 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

While I am not that negative about the set, the problem with your logic is that many STAR WARS fans already have the original, thus the apathy.  ?

Agreed, but an interesting piece of data to consider is that according to Brickset 5612 people (and counting) own the new version while only 1753 own the original UCS version from 2003.

Posted
7 hours ago, eliminator said:

Agreed, but an interesting piece of data to consider is that according to Brickset 5612 people (and counting) own the new version while only 1753 own the original UCS version from 2003.

But more people want the older one than the new one.

It´s not a bad investment at half price, I have some. But  am sure you´d rather have 4 Ocean Explorers at half price or Great Halls as both are way easier to sell and make a profit on.

Posted
16 hours ago, eliminator said:

Agreed, but an interesting piece of data to consider is that according to Brickset 5612 people (and counting) own the new version while only 1753 own the original UCS version from 2003.

I have two originals and never recorded them on Brickset.  Just sayin'...

Posted

I personally think this set is a good update to the original. I think there is just too many big sets release nowadays and people aren't buying like before for a number of reasons.

Just came back from my local smyths and noticed that they stocked almost all of the retiring soon sets and had multiple copies such as snowspeedor / ferris wheel / modulars / ninjago city and docks / potc shop etc 

Posted
On 1/12/2019 at 1:25 PM, Val-E said:

Part of getting people to fork out cash on premium plastic is the exclusivity element and also the possibility to recoup after EOL should you choose to sell used sets.

Without those, Lego becomes Megablox.

If they wanted to reach everyone, they´d cut prices and stock the UCS Falcon in Costco.

They haven't become that so far.  The reason I buy is because they have the Star Wars license.  I would rather have a re-release of anything than pay more than inflation plus original retail value on a retired set.

Posted
On 1/12/2019 at 2:51 PM, KShine said:

That "special" aspect played a big part for many buyers - It created a sense of true value, justifying their willingness (sometimes eagerness) to pay a hefty premium for some pieces of plastic.

I don't think it is that many given the current direction they are going with remakes.

Posted
13 hours ago, Val-E said:

But more people want the older one than the new one.

It´s not a bad investment at half price, I have some. But  am sure you´d rather have 4 Ocean Explorers at half price or Great Halls as both are way easier to sell and make a profit on.

I really doubt people actually want the older version over the new one. Brickset "want lists" aren't exactly the best; demand (and profit potential) is what brought this set back. 

While I'm against re-releases, it's a product of our capitalist society that we have to contend with. Now, in this case I can give Lego a pass considering the original one came out in 2003...fourteen years before the current edition. A hugely iconic vehicle from one of the most iconic and loved SW films. What did you expect?

Posted

To eliminator’s point, in 2003 I was in grade 10 and had zero interest in Lego. 14 years later I’m still not wealthy enough for the original. There’s a large group of people in my age bracket that missed out on the first iteration and would never consider the aftermarket price it was holding. That made the re-release very desirable for me.

  • Like 4
Posted
1 minute ago, Zelgazra said:

To eliminator’s point, in 2003 I was in grade 10 and had zero interest in Lego. 14 years later I’m still not wealthy enough for the original. There’s a large group of people in my age bracket that missed out on the first iteration and would never consider the aftermarket price it was holding. That made the re-release very desirable for me.

Seems you are in the minority otherwise why would they have binned it after only a year and a half? Only the B Wing has had a shorter life and we know how popular that one was.

It´s logical more people want the original as there has been more time to vote for it on Brickset.

Posted
55 minutes ago, Val-E said:

Seems you are in the minority otherwise why would they have binned it after only a year and a half? Only the B Wing has had a shorter life and we know how popular that one was.

It´s logical more people want the original as there has been more time to vote for it on Brickset.

And how much is that bwing now?

Posted
1 hour ago, Val-E said:

Seems you are in the minority otherwise why would they have binned it after only a year and a half? Only the B Wing has had a shorter life and we know how popular that one was.

It´s logical more people want the original as there has been more time to vote for it on Brickset.

i'm sure the current UCS Snowspeeder is selling in decent numbers, the crux of the matter is that Lego can make more $$$ selling other themes, especially those without licensing kickbacks.

I'll take this "shorter than usual production run" as a positive chance of this set turning a decent long-term profit. But like other have indicated, there's lots of other sets I'd invest in for better ROI.

Posted

I find it quite amusing how everybody is discussing and fighting over " is the 75144 going to make some $$$" .. should I buy it - before it is too late.. and NOBODY NOTICING why in the hell did LEGO find it important to change the style, box art and design of the NEXT new UCS SW set / which was the Y-wing.. ? Is there anybody who thinks in his right mind that ".. it just happened.. they had a business lunch, got talking . and two weeks after a designer came with an absolutely new, distinctive box art.. " - woo-hoo!.. to anybody who swallows that..  being in marketing I could tell that you just do not renew / restart a box art / design FOR A SINGLE ITEM.. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, mizeur said:

...they've repeatedly changed the UCS box art. And he Y-Wing box design was first used on 75192.

yes, you are right. that new "Exclusive Mdnight Black" (my description) was truly used on MF.. - but like 20 months ago?? .. and what did you get in UCS series since then? only Y-Wing.. can you present another example during a shelf life. when e.g. Slave I or Tie Fighter would come out in different looking box sets?

Posted

.. so you got yourself another pick in your sleeve or what? Cloud City wasnt fabricated before MF.. so how much does that add to you theory that mine is wrong?. Im telling you.. if LEGO found it worth establishing a new exclusive look for SW UCS series - namely MF, Y-Wing.. and (yours) Cloud City.. even THREE sets are not enough to justify the marketing costs.. I hope you get it.. 

Posted (edited)

Well, we've only had 3 scheduled releases since Snowspeeder and they all have the new design. Guess we'll see what they use for Tantive IV and then ISD. I'm guessing more of the same.

They literally changed the box art from the first X-Wing and TIE Interceptor to the first ISD and Blockade Runner. Then again for the first Snowspeeder. And again for the first Y-Wing and Death Star II. And again for the TIE Advanced through SSD. And again for B-Wing. Then again for X-Wing through Snowspeeder.

Obviously their UCS sales are mostly terrible.

ETA: the art redux for MF2 was part of a huge marketing push for the set redesign. And we don't need a conspiracy theory to explain it or why the 2 other releases since stayed on-trend. 

 

 

Edited by mizeur
Posted

Original used UCS Snowspeeder with box and instructions just went for under $200 in an ebay auction: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-2003-Lego-Star-Wars-Snowspeeder-Set-10129-UCS-W-Box-Instructions-NR-/323638067662?nma=true&si=DjTS9ettKJczMcGFZyTHvrxj3b0%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

As someone who could not afford the original, I was glad when the remake came out and I love it.  It is curious how it's not really selling, even with 20% off from LEGO.  Is the original really that much better?  Or is this just an unpopular set?

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...