New Versions of Older Exclusives - what does it mean to LEGO Investing

[zskid00]

He specifically said the F-150 was the #1 car driven by a millionaire.  Not sure where that came from but I guess it could be true.

[Mos_Eisley]

3 minutes ago, zskid00 said:

He specifically said the F-150 was the #1 car driven by a millionaire.  Not sure where that came from but I guess it could be true.

Aren't we all here in the States?

[jaisonline]

1 hour ago, inversion said:

 Now it is perfectly accepted by society to play with LEGOs, people look at it the same way as skiing. In some creative circles it is even hip.

just don't let my wife (and many others i assume) hear you say that.  she would love lego, amazon, etc... to drop the ban hammer on me. 

[Ed Mack]

1 hour ago, tjj1984 said:

Haha, fair enough. I guess a better way to phrase the question would have been what specifically has caused your opinion to change. That number alone is pretty persuasive.

 

More than anything else, the reissuing of major "exclusive" sets will destroy the market.  We will have to see what develops with the "Carousel" and "Snowspeeder" sets.

[Rimmit]

54 minutes ago, c_rpg said:

That's just plain silly  I'm not saying anyone who drives these types of cars is a millionaire, but it does show that most of them have some extra cash to spend. I think it's a perfectly good indicator of how well people are doing financially. Someone who is barely making a living is not going to be driving an expensive German car or buying overpriced plastic bricks.

I beg to differ.  It shows that you either:

1.) Have the credit to secure an expensive car

2.) Have have a relative (mom, dad, uncle) that was nice enough to buy you a car

3.) Actually have cash.

It is a TERRIBLE indicator how someone is doing on the whole financially.  While you might have the income to buy a car, it does not mean you are smart with money.  There are many people I have met over the years that drive Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Acura, or whatever vehicle you might insert here, but ultimately, they are not wealthy.  There are many people who feel the need to keep up with everyone else.  Many can afford a nice car, but ultimately it is not the best indicator. 

On the same front, I have met many people out there, who aren't flashy, don't own anything of consequence, but ultimately, they are more financially secure than people with six figure salaries.  There is a BIG difference between making a good salary and being financially secure.  Many people just feel the need to keep up with Jones'.  Ultimately, it's your bank statements and portfolio statements that truly tell you someone's worth.  Not what car you drive or what clothes you wear.

 

36 minutes ago, zskid00 said:

He specifically said the F-150 was the #1 car driven by a millionaire.  Not sure where that came from but I guess it could be true.

It was from a very famous book from the 1990's "The Millionaire Next Door."  It primarily discusses the attributes of millionaires.  The reason it is the F-150 is because the majority of millionaires in the US are not rock stars and actresses.  They are business owners.  Business owners need cars that are usable and have utility.  You aren't going to be moving much stock in a Ferrari or Porsche.

 

Edited April 21, 2016 by Rimmit

[KShine]

2 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

More than anything else, the reissuing of major "exclusive" sets will destroy the market.  We will have to see what develops with the "Carousel" and "Snowspeeder" sets.

I don't know that it will destroy the market, but it will stop $200 sets from going into the $1,000's.

[Phil B]

5 minutes ago, Rimmit said:

I beg to differ.  It shows that you either:

1.) Have the credit to secure an expensive car

2.) Have have a relative (mom, dad, uncle) that was nice enough to buy you a car

3.) Actually have cash.

It is a TERRIBLE indicator how someone is doing on the whole financially.  While you might have the income to buy a car, it does not mean you are smart with money.  There are many people I have met over the years that drive Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Acura, or whatever vehicle you might insert here, but ultimately, they are not wealthy.  There are many people who feel the need to keep up with everyone else.  Many can afford a nice car, but ultimately it is not the best indicator. 

On the same front, I have met many people out there, who aren't flashy, don't own anything of consequence, but ultimately, they are more financially secure than people with six figure salaries.  There is a BIG difference between making a good salary and being financially secure.  Many people just feel the need to keep up with Jones'.  Ultimately, it's your bank statements and portfolio statements that truly tell you someone's worth.  Not what car you drive or what clothes you wear.

 

It was from a very famous book from the 1990's "The Millionaire Next Door."  It primarily discusses the attributes of millionaires.  The reason it is the F-150 is because the majority of millionaires in the US are not rock stars and actresses.  They are business owners.  Business owners need cars that are usable and have utility.  You aren't going to be moving much stock in a Ferrari or Porsche.

 

And to add ... a lot of luxury cars in the US are lease vehicles ... an indication of the ability to set aside a monthly sum for a nice car (or offset those costs versus business income), not an indication of wealth overall.

[citymorgue]

18 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

More than anything else, the reissuing of major "exclusive" sets will destroy the market.  We will have to see what develops with the "Carousel" and "Snowspeeder" sets.

With some exceptions, I just don't see how remaking a set that is 10+ years old such a huge issue.  If it happens from time to time, but still release nice new fresh sets, it isn't that big of a deal.

If they were to come out and do a remake of a SSD or something along those lines, then yes, your point is very valid.  But look at the Xwing.  That set was 12 years old by the time the new one hit the market.  Sure it hurts the value, but it's not some major crash that's going to bring Lego to it's knees.  As others have said, there are a lot of casual people out there who don't follow it religiously, and just see a cool new set and buy it.  I've seen more parents and regular adults buying big exclusives for themselves than your investor.  Also not to mention, that for people that have held onto a sealed set for so long, and the market drops, well that's your own fault you couldn't cash in when you are making upwards of 10x the initial investment.

I just feel that you and others who share your view are being way over dramatic.  I feel what's honestly hurting the market more than anything are the millions of new 'investors' getting into the game.  The occasional remake isn't going to hurt nothing.

[Ed Mack]

17 minutes ago, KShine said:

I don't know that it will destroy the market, but it will stop $200 sets from going into the $1,000's.

The exclusives drive the secondary market.  If the potential value of high end LEGO sets decrease, all will suffer.

1 minute ago, citymorgue said:

With some exceptions, I just don't see how remaking a set that is 10+ years old such a huge issue.  If it happens from time to time, but still release nice new fresh sets, it isn't that big of a deal.

If they were to come out and do a remake of a SSD or something along those lines, then yes, your point is very valid.  But look at the Xwing.  That set was 12 years old by the time the new one hit the market.  Sure it hurts the value, but it's not some major crash that's going to bring Lego to it's knees.  As others have said, there are a lot of casual people out there who don't follow it religiously, and just see a cool new set and buy it.  I've seen more parents and regular adults buying big exclusives for themselves than your investor.  Also not to mention, that for people that have held onto a sealed set for so long, and the market drops, well that's your own fault you couldn't cash in when you are making upwards of 10x the initial investment.

I just feel that you and others who share your view are being way over dramatic.  I feel what's honestly hurting the market more than anything are the millions of new 'investors' getting into the game.  The occasional remake isn't going to hurt nothing.

Sure...A remake here or there is expected.  UCS X-Wing...Winter Toy Shop....OK.  Now we have a possible "Carousel" remake and a possible remake of the Holiday Train and UCS Snowspeeder, not to mention another Death Star and possible Falcon.   Why remake the Snowspeeder when there are dozens of potential candidates for a UCS model?  This is a disturbing trend any way you slice it. 

[Phil B]

1 minute ago, Ed Mack said:

The exclusives drive the secondary market.  If the potential value of high end LEGO sets decrease, all will suffer.

Sure...A remake here or there is expected.  UCS X-Wing...Winter Toy Shop....OK.  Now we have a possible "Carousel" remake and a possible remake of the Holiday Train and UCS Snowspeeder, not to mention another Death Star and possible Falcon.   Why remake the Snowspeeder when there are dozens of potential candidates for a UCS model?  This is a disturbing trend any way you slice it. 

Then again, they could be abominations like the UCS Affront on Hoth which makes all AFOLs yearn for the good old versions, driving those prices up further.... pick your poison.

[ZULU]

The new grand carrousel will be very different from the old one. The original has been a pain to build and has flawed mechanics to make it turn. That was also why it had a very short production run (correct me if that's wrong). My kids played with mine until it didn't rotate at all anymore (didn't take them more than a week or so) - and that meant rebuilding most of that set again... and again... and more.

In the end, I've put it back in the box which is accumulating dust.

The new set, if as large and impressive, should be an easy improvement. At least that argument would be more valid than what they said for that WVM remake.... grrrrr

 

[Ed Mack]

4 minutes ago, Phil B said:

Then again, they could be abominations like the UCS Affront on Hoth which makes all AFOLs yearn for the good old versions, driving those prices up further.... pick your poison.

I consider the UCS ASSault on Hoth a certified "brain fart" and will forgive LEGO designers because they did such wonderful job on the Slave I and TIE Fighter. 

[Battrax]

8 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

I consider the UCS ASSault on Hoth a certified "brain fart" and will forgive LEGO designers because they did such wonderful job on the Slave I and TIE Fighter. 

If it sells well, though, will it matter what we think? I recall seeing a lot of excitement from non-LEGO sources when it was officially announced. I am trying not to think with the BP side of my brain.

[Rodeogeorge]

The new grand carrousel will be very different from the old one. The original has been a pain to build and has flawed mechanics to make it turn. That was also why it had a very short production run (correct me if that's wrong). My kids played with mine until it didn't rotate at all anymore (didn't take them more than a week or so) - and that meant rebuilding most of that set again... and again... and more.

In the end, I've put it back in the box which is accumulating dust.

The new set, if as large and impressive, should be an easy improvement. At least that argument would be more valid than what they said for that WVM remake.... grrrrr

 

This. I really like the looks of the old grand carousel but there is no way I am going to spend that money for a product that doesn't even function properly. If Lego releases a new functioning carousel that looks exactly the same as the old one I wouldn't complain. In fact, I would buy it.

[Fenix_2k1]

9 hours ago, Sprocket77 said:

You're right that the Technic Porsche might not take money out of the other areas because it's different enough and might open up new customers to Lego. But, @Val-E is right in that if they make too many high priced sets then those sets will end up cannabalising sales from each other. This is particularly true about Star Wars exclusives where by releasing too many of these sets each year they do reduce the market for each. Parents may be able to afford a €200 set and Timmy might get that for Christmas, but Timmy is probably getting a choice of the 3 sets, not one of each.

Another issue I see is that a new AFOL who wants to collect Star Wars, may buy all three of this year's exclusives, but then might not have the spare cash after that to go back and get the sets he missed, just hurting our market. 

So if 3 star wars sets come out and people don't manage to get all 3 before they retire,  how is that a bad situation for resellers? Would this not also lead to shorter product lives? 

[Mos_Eisley]

If they continue to remake large sets on a regular basis, they just won't be worth much after retirement. It's more than just people waiting it out for the next version though. These big sets aren't selling hundreds a day like can easily happen with the smaller sets.  Even a 10 year window won't be enough time to move all the inventory at prices that will make it worth all the hassle of dealing with them. The general mentality now seems to be to wait out the initial flippers then sell in 2-3 years after retirement.  That's going to be a problem when there's a possible remake a couple years after that and there's thousands of units that everyone is going to be trying to move at the same time. I'm just looking at it strictly from an investment point of view. Obviously, it's great for everyone who just wants a set to put on their shelf, but it is not good for people hoping to make a worthwhile return on them.

[exciter1]

I will go out on a limb and say the new Carousel will have standard horses, not brick built versions.  I also assume it will be lower in profile.  Those are just a couple of changes I would make.

[Val-E]

2 minutes ago, exciter1 said:

I will go out on a limb and say the new Carousel will have standard horses, not brick built versions.  I also assume it will be lower in profile.  Those are just a couple of changes I would make.

It might have helicopters!

[Darth_Raichu]

2 minutes ago, exciter1 said:

I would go out on a limb and say the new Carousel will have standard FRIENDS horses, not brick built versions.  I also assume it will be lower in profile.  Those are just a couple of changes I would make.

 

[inversion]

1 minute ago, exciter1 said:

I will go out on a limb and say the new Carousel will have standard horses, not brick built versions.  I also assume it will be lower in profile.  Those are just a couple of changes I would make.

Agree. I can't see it being above the Ferris Wheel. There are better ideas out there for the higher price points. But surprises can always come. If somebody told me a year ago that we will see a 4600 piece GBHQ I would have called that person an idiot.

[Sprocket77]

19 minutes ago, Fenix_2k1 said:

So if 3 star wars sets come out and people don't manage to get all 3 before they retire,  how is that a bad situation for resellers? Would this not also lead to shorter product lives? 

Because if Star Wars do 3 the next year and the next year then people are spending all their money just keeping up with the current stuff and not looking back.

[c_rpg]

1 hour ago, Rimmit said:

I beg to differ.  It shows that you either:

1.) Have the credit to secure an expensive car

2.) Have have a relative (mom, dad, uncle) that was nice enough to buy you a car

3.) Actually have cash.

It is a TERRIBLE indicator how someone is doing on the whole financially.  While you might have the income to buy a car, it does not mean you are smart with money.  There are many people I have met over the years that drive Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Acura, or whatever vehicle you might insert here, but ultimately, they are not wealthy.  There are many people who feel the need to keep up with everyone else.  Many can afford a nice car, but ultimately it is not the best indicator. 

On the same front, I have met many people out there, who aren't flashy, don't own anything of consequence, but ultimately, they are more financially secure than people with six figure salaries.  There is a BIG difference between making a good salary and being financially secure.  Many people just feel the need to keep up with Jones'.  Ultimately, it's your bank statements and portfolio statements that truly tell you someone's worth.  Not what car you drive or what clothes you wear.

As I said the car thing was an example. I'm talking about a large group of people that have a large disposable income, not about one single person. If you go to a wealthy neighbourhood, people tend to drive nicer cars, have bigger houses and wear expensive clothes. You're making it sound like all rich people wear rags and drive a Fiat.

42 minutes ago, ZULU said:

The new grand carrousel will be very different from the old one. The original has been a pain to build and has flawed mechanics to make it turn. That was also why it had a very short production run (correct me if that's wrong). My kids played with mine until it didn't rotate at all anymore (didn't take them more than a week or so) - and that meant rebuilding most of that set again... and again... and more.

In the end, I've put it back in the box which is accumulating dust.

The new set, if as large and impressive, should be an easy improvement. At least that argument would be more valid than what they said for that WVM remake.... grrrrr

Was the old one designed by Jamie Berard? I think he did a fantastic job on the Ferris Wheel and Fairground Mixer in terms of mechanics, so if it's as well designed as those it should be great.

[Val-E]

2 minutes ago, Sprocket77 said:

Because if Star Wars do 3 the next year and the next year then people are spending all their money just keeping up with the current stuff and not looking back.

Yeah, hard to complete a collection when they put 3 new ones out every year. At some point most people have to step back (divorce over lack of house space) and they are more likely to pass on the original version if there is a remake. Give no alternative and the dilemma is bigger.

[scuttfarkas]

Carousel is 7+ years old.  UCS Falcon is going on 10+.  They're obviously going in a theme park/ride direction and STAR WARS is experiencing a resurgence.  It'd be bad business for them to NOT remake these....particularly if the buying public/AFOL/people who have come out of their Dark Ages are asking for cheaper alternatives to the secondary market.

 

 

[trekgate502]

here is my theory on this whole situation of redoing old sets