75159 - UCS: Death Star (2016)

[gregpj]

This one is for you LEGO, inspired by @BrickLegacy and brought to you by Brickpickers everywhere.

[dcdfan]

So Timmy's mother goes to the Lego store & buys the new Death Star set. Brings it home, wraps it up & gives it to Timmy for Christmas. Timmy says "I have this one, it's the same one I got last year." Timmy's mother says "The woman at the Lego store said it was brand new." Timmy says "Why would Lego ruin Christmas?"

How many variations of this story will there be...?

[labfreak7]

I'd like to think that timmys mom will say to herself "doesn't Timmy have this one already?" before she plops $500 on it.

[jstodda]

I'd like to think that timmys mom will say to herself "doesn't Timmy have this one already?" before she plops $500 on it.

Or Timmy's mom doesn't know the difference and ends up buying 10188 for 500 because her boy asked for a Lego Death Star for Christmas and she doesn't know better.

It could be a Festivus miracle for all of us!

[gbg108]

4 minutes ago, Migration said:

This set is made for all the people over the next decade that don't own a 10188. Parents don't buy Lego because they think it will hold/go up in value, they buy it for their kids. I know several kids that go to school with mine who are not affluent but do have a 10188. We are not as influential or important as we think we are. All the parents that aren't members here have no clue 10188 ever existed, all they know is that their kid wants a Lego Death Star and, oh look, here's a 75159.

I tend to agree with you as to who the primary market for 10188/75159 is. This set was never the best for display so (EOL excluded) I'm not sure resellers ever played as big a role in sales as they did with say Red 5. I also agree it's clear LEGO is trying to push their UCS brand toward kids and playsets. Perhaps this motivation comes from seeing sets like 10188 sell better than some other display-only models.

That said, I still think this was a huge miscalculation and a mistake. Sure kids are still going to beg their parents for 75159 and some are going to get it. But there were also lots of AFOLs who did buy 10188 simply because it was the only DS they ever had access to for less than $1000.  None of them will be repeat customers. Not only that but they're pissed off and feel cheated for a second time this year. If you want these people to remain engaged with your brand and buying the Slave I's and Sandcrawler's and future UCS AT-ATs or Snowspeeders, it's probably a good idea not to completely marginalize them. 

In the end LEGO could have released a completely redesigned DS -- which was still a playset -- and you wouldn't have near this backlash. And if it had better displayability than 10188 AFOLs would have been lining up to throw money at it. Instead, it's now clear all LEGO really wanted to do was raise the price of 10188 $100 to account for market changes over the past 8 years as they had no intentions of "messing with success". And the only way to do that was faking retirement of 10188. Maybe I'm wrong and this will turn out to be a great financial move for LEGO but it seems very shortsighted to me. I'm betting it was decided by the same executive that thought it'd be a good idea to save some money and move all their IP storage servers to Shenzhen.

 

 

[landphieran]

This whole situation draws interesting parallels to my career. 

As a software developer working at an insurance company, I see results like the Death Star every day. We were tasked with rolling out a new application. An amazing opportunity, to be creative, improve on past failures and make insurance applications great again.

Project #1
Task 1 - The base                            :: Requirement - Structure it like the old system
Task 2 - The laser fast functionality :: Requirement - We require the same functionality
Task 3 - The diverse user base       :: Requirement - User base hasn't changed. Use the old look and feel...

Landphieran: Hey Project Manager, Yeah... soo none of these tasks are actually requirements.
Project Manager: Oh yeah? Huh, the business just wants the same functionality so make it like that.

.... Months goes by

Project Manager: Hey Landphieran, I think we have a bug.
Landphieran: What is the problem? 
Project Manager: Well, the app isn't doing what the old system did...
Landphieran: How exactly is it not working?
Project Manager: Well you know its not the same. Fix it.

This is a result of bad management, who is unwilling to change, unwilling to take risks, and it will eventually kill a company. 
 

[azalon]

Gotta admit, I am curious if there will be an extended, continuous wave of people dumping 10188's to get their money back, which will mean that 75159 sells like a slug and retires somewhat quickly, although I'm sure Disney prefers their logo on the iconic set box. I can see people selling 10188's for under the price of the new one (perhaps Craigslist vs retail + sales tax), so most buyers just getting the older one and saving a few bucks. And I don't understand why TLG pretty much created a scenario where they make their most expensive set compete with one of their own (indirectly, obviously) that people already have.

 

Then in a year or two, where did all the original ones, the 10188's go? They're all bought and out of the box and played with. And I'd love to say the price of 10188 goes up drastically due to scarcity . . . rewarding patience and those with storage space

[JDLego324]

I am tempted to return a 10188 or 2 to my local Lego Store.

[imirish11]

Disney's agreement with Lego requires all Star Wars sets that were not previously branded with Disney info to be phased out so that they can collect their cut. If you owned the rights to Star Wars would you not do the same? The new price reflects the Disney tax. Both Disney and Lego take a ZFG policy towards the resale value of your precious 10188. The idea, as complicated as it may seem, is to continue offering a highly profitable set for sale, while adhering to contractual agreements.

[JDLego324]

1 minute ago, imirish11 said:

Disney's agreement with Lego requires all Star Wars sets that were not previously branded with Disney info to be phased out so that they can collect their cut. If you owned the rights to Star Wars would you not do the same? The new price reflects the Disney tax. Both Disney and Lego take a ZFG policy towards the resale value of your precious 10188. The idea, as complicated as it may seem, is to continue offering a highly profitable set for sale, while adhering to contractual agreements.

They didn't have to fake a retirement to give Disney their cut.

[harrismiles]

Wow TLG certainly could have done more with the update of this old playset if they really wanted to keep it going for Disney and Lego to cash in. Lego has a pretty stellar reputation for creativity and quality. They have the talent, the money, and the smarts to do something great.  This is underwhelming on so many levels.  I hope it's not true that they retired the set just to come out with this? And to call it a UCS?  Epic fail.

[harrismiles]

If I was Lego I would want this community buzzing about the new castle and which

set might retire next. Right now there is a lot of bad buzz. If they slack off with the next Lego movie or game it will only 

get worse.   At the end of the day they are either awesome and creative or ....not. There choice

t

[Alpinemaps]

Hopefully this will cheer everyone up...

[Average Guy]

3 hours ago, dcdfan said:

So Timmy's mother goes to the Lego store & buys the new Death Star set. Brings it home, wraps it up & gives it to Timmy for Christmas. Timmy says "I have this one, it's the same one I got last year." Timmy's mother says "The woman at the Lego store said it was brand new." Timmy says "Why would Lego ruin Christmas?"

How many variations of this story will there be...?

Any kid that has both Death Star sets should be able to console himself with the hundreds of other gizmos, gadgets, and gifts he already has too.

Edited August 19, 2016 by Average Guy
spelling-derp

[legoverzamelen]

What really scares me is that they are now 0 for 2. If they are really planning to ramp up to the giant Millennium Falcon UCS remake I am scared to death to see what that's going to look like. Imagine The fallout if they simply relaunched the UCS falcon with updated figures and 200 more pieces. Exclusive pieces would not be exclusive anymore and I think that would be the final nail in the coffin.

Frankly, with this 75159 trend setting through, the new 10179 will be exactly like the old one exept for a few extra cheese slopes and updated (but no way exclusive) minifigs.

Interesting enough, that is exactly what everybody wants. The 10179 is an iconic set and an iconic design which is considered hard to be improved, so everybody loves a shot at this set for 'only' $ 600,- instead of the current market values. So if TLG decides to reissue 10179 everybody would be cheering.

[c_rpg]

18 minutes ago, Alpinemaps said:

Hopefully this will cheer everyone up...

Y-Wing's always cheer me up, but the grey ball underneath it doesn't.

[legoverzamelen]

^

These aren't like Tie's or X-Wings where you can have a fleet. There is only one Death Star (per movie)... and unless Rogue One reveals there are two identical Death Stars in parallel universes or something, why would anyone want two?

New sport: Death Star Bowling

Put down a fleet of TIE fighters with a Tower of Orthanc in the middle. You get two shots: one with the 10188 and another with the 75159. At the end of each turn, the person that destroyed the most (counted by loose pieces on the floor) wins. Should keep them kids and angry reseller fathers busy for a day or two ...

[Scatterbug]

37 minutes ago, harrismiles said:

If I was Lego I would want this community buzzing about the new castle and which

set might retire next. Right now there is a lot of bad buzz. If they slack off with the next Lego movie or game it will only 

get worse.   At the end of the day they are either awesome and creative or ....not. There choice

t

This thread is full of hyperbole. From the death knell of LEGO's creativity to ruining Christmas. Blame 75159. Much of the ire is sour grapes that 10188 will no longer generate a massive profit (forgetting they will still make a profit). Yes, this and AOH are disappointing but TLG consistently pump out many great sets.

[MathBuilder]

1 hour ago, Alpinemaps said:

Hopefully this will cheer everyone up...

Stop "borrowing" your kid's ceiling decorations.

[legoverzamelen]

@Scatterbug (sorry, forgot to quote)

There you have it. Lego consistenly pump out many great sets, so why did they not with 75159 (presumably)? Why just upgrading minifigs and adding a 100 bucks to the MSRP and keeping the rest of this 8-year old set the same? The way I read these posts, the majority of the beef is regarding the missed creative opportunity and not per se the missed investor bucks.

[MathBuilder]

45 minutes ago, legoverzamelen said:

New sport: Death Star Bowling

Put down a fleet of TIE fighters with a Tower of Orthanc in the middle. You get two shots: one with the 10188 and another with the 75159. At the end of each turn, the person that destroyed the most (counted by loose pieces on the floor) wins. Should keep them kids and angry reseller fathers busy for a day or two ...

Time for 10188 to answer the question: Will it blend? 

Edited August 19, 2016 by MathBuilder

[Stud-Flipper]

Don't worry guys. We just have to wait until they update it with the new neck-joint fix. Lol jk. 

[Fenix_2k1]

5 hours ago, jstodda said:

 

What really scares me is that they are now 0 for 2. If they are really planning to ramp up to the giant Millennium Falcon UCS remake I am scared to death to see what that's going to look like. Imagine The fallout if they simply relaunched the UCS falcon with updated figures and 200 more pieces. Exclusive pieces would not be exclusive anymore and I think that would be the final nail in the coffin.

 

This is the stupid thing.  Most collectors could accept that. Because it's been 10 years not 1. Everyone expects sets to be remade at some point but a pretty much direct copy of something that was available for 8 years and only retired last year is just an insult. 

For disclosure i have precisely 1 10188 and built it the day I got given it. This isn't an i'm about to lose my investment rant, this is simply a disappointed collector who has seen no SW UCS sets worth adding to my collection this year.

Lego are capable of great things GBHQ, Disney Castle,Big Ben show that but 3 large scale howlers in a year (batcave, aoh and now this shower of sh##, the most exciting ones when we saw rumours start) is just beyond me.

The really worrying thing is poor sales in those models might make the execs think there's no value in developing the big sets, rather than realising they just made bad products. 

 

Edited August 19, 2016 by Fenix_2k1

[Val-E]

1 hour ago, Scatterbug said:

This thread is full of hyperbole. From the death knell of LEGO's creativity to ruining Christmas. Blame 75159. Much of the ire is sour grapes that 10188 will no longer generate a massive profit (forgetting they will still make a profit). Yes, this and AOH are disappointing but TLG consistently pump out many great sets.

Facts, whether we like them or not:

• We had 9 months to ditch 10188 - same as 7965. A remake was a definite possibility based on a lot of recent ones yet some of us chose to be too greedy.
• This new set will sell well, same as WTS and 75105. There are enough new buyers that missed out on 10188 to keep it going. Maybe not 8 years, but for a good while. It may even be a stopgap till a new Rogue One version comes out.
• Lepin has a clone version out and this will probably have more of an impact on 75159 sales than a reseller veto.
• The trend for lazy remakes continues. There will likely be a knock-on effect for other retired sets on the secondary market.
• While a lot of resellers are going to take a hit on this, as long as the new one´s RRP is 500 or more, there is enough wiggle room to sell 10188´s and still turn a profit if you bought at discount.
• If you bought 10188 at RRP or above with the intention of reselling, you are screwed.

 

Edited August 19, 2016 by Val-E

[Fenix_2k1]

4 hours ago, Alpinemaps said:

Hopefully this will cheer everyone up...

Is that the Why Oh Y-Wing?

[c_rpg]

Wait what? I didn't even notice the cheese wedge before