75192 - UCS: Millennium Falcon 2017

[grackleflint]

LEGO has been hinting at a new UCS Falcon for a while (R5. new classic TIE, etc). If they are going to redo the DS and 10129, why would they leave out the top dog Falcon?

It's the reason I haven't bothered to pick up a 10179. It seems like there have been steadily more and more 10179 listings on eBay as more people realize that it is when, not if.

I'm hoping that the prices will eventually drop enough for me to pick up a used 10179 at a reasonable price that my wife won't kill me for. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to come up with a new excuse for keeping my 10129 that I paid a collector's price for.

 

 

Edited December 21, 2015 by grackleflint

[Ed Mack]

It really depends on the new UCS Falcon.  If the new version fails to live up to the old version, then it's up, up and away.  If it is better than the 10179...well, everyone had their chance to sell.  

[Pedilego]

If people are going to speculate that the new Death Star could be Starkiller Base then consider this the obligatory "it might be a UCS version of the TFA Falcon (that's already on shelves) with new antenna and characters" post. 

[grackleflint]

10 minutes ago, Pedilego said:

If people are going to speculate that the new Death Star could be Starkiller Base then consider this the obligatory "it might be a UCS version of the TFA Falcon (that's already on shelves) with new antenna and characters" post. 

Ha! Ha! Ha! Can I try (in vain) to shoot this down now?

All the recent Star Wars UCS-type sets. R5, Tie, Sandcrawler, Slave 1, EV, new 10129 (supposedly) are some version from the classic OT. Maybe we will get an Endor or Hoth version Falcon?

8-) 

Edited December 21, 2015 by grackleflint

[Ed Mack]

6 minutes ago, Pedilego said:

If people are going to speculate that the new Death Star could be Starkiller Base then consider this the obligatory "it might be a UCS version of the TFA Falcon (that's already on shelves) with new antenna and characters" post. 

Right, this is all speculation...The Death Star could be a Starkiller and the Hoth Base could be the AT-AT and the Snowspeeder could be a snowman and so on...People really cannot get upset about remaking these classic sets, because LEGO gave us plenty of time to resell the old ones.  What will happen though is the next versions of these sets will never appreciate like the old ones.  The new Falcon will never hit $5000.00 unless it is some sort of "Limited Edition."  

[Guest TabbyBoy]

Phew, so glad I sold my mint 10179 last year before values dropped a bit. My gut told me a new one is coming out but, there's a danger of hoarders adding to demand creating excess production and long shelf life. I think this is why R5 is still around everywhere.

[grackleflint]

10 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

What will happen though is the next versions of these sets will never appreciate like the old ones.  The new Falcon will never hit $5000.00 unless it is some sort of "Limited Edition."  

And I hope they don't. Anytime there is a mainstream article about what a great thing LEGO investing is, they invariably talk about 10179 and "it's going for more than 10 times its original price" so everyone can make tons of money. If it drops in value, then maybe that will keep some of the hordes away.

Selfishly, this may allow me to pick up a 10179 at a cheaper price and may put downward pressure on other classic sets  (e.g. 10030, 10129) and let others grab some of them that are currently out of reach, price-wise. Of course, it's a double-edged sword as I have some of those classics.

[inversion]

I won't take the risk of selling my sole falcon just to fall on my face if the new one stinks, is not getting released or is a whole different approach.

I can imagine one that is smaller and less detailed on the outside, but has full inside build with all the rooms etc. Then the 2 will be apples and oranges, however from the pure display point of view the old one would win. Looking at recent releases this seems to be the more likely route than a 10179 rehash.

Edited December 21, 2015 by inversion

[Mos_Eisley]

18 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

Right, this is all speculation...The Death Star could be a Starkiller and the Hoth Base could be the AT-AT and the Snowspeeder could be a snowman and so on...People really cannot get upset about remaking these classic sets, because LEGO gave us plenty of time to resell the old ones.  What will happen though is the next versions of these sets will never appreciate like the old ones.  The new Falcon will never hit $5000.00 unless it is some sort of "Limited Edition."  

So the new Falcon won't be the next Falcon?

[exciter1]

5 minutes ago, Mos_Eisley said:

So the new Falcon won't be the next Falcon?

We might get a TFA Microfighters version with Chewie piloting.

[Darth_Raichu]

IF the source movie is allowed to rehash old materials, why can't the same rules be applied to the toys based on the movie??

 

[KShine]

Excuses, excuses, and more excuses.

This one will be different, this one won't be as detailed, the old one will still be in demand by the serious collectors, the new one will just bring more attention to the old one increasing demand, bla bla bla bla bla.

Remakes are bad for business - The End.

[oneknightr]

I sold the only one I had a year ago for a nice profit. I was never going to open it anyway and I put that money in other sets. I just wish I had a loose one in my collection. I think 10179 prices may take a hit initially but it will bounce back. I don't think Lego will put out a 5000+ piece set although the new GBFH makes that scenario a little more real. UCS Snowspeeder and possible UCS Falcon on the horizon? It's like Lego was monitoring my dreams!

[inversion]

5 minutes ago, KShine said:

Remakes are bad for business - The End.

So what? For your business, and we know that. Not so much for LEGO's. Investing always carries risk. If you invested into oil companies 1.5 years ago you had it bad. Then US shale formations are bad for business? Yes, for some. There are always losers and without losers there are no winners. Pick the sets then that are unlikely to get a remake. There are remakes of some sets, and most don't have any. 

[dcdfan]

How is the word "rumor" not in the title...?

[Ed Mack]

11 minutes ago, Mos_Eisley said:

So the new Falcon won't be the next Falcon?

There is always the next.  Nothing is final with the new Disney/STAR WARS movie deal.  

 

7 minutes ago, KShine said:

Excuses, excuses, and more excuses.

This one will be different, this one won't be as detailed, the old one will still be in demand by the serious collectors, the new one will just bring more attention to the old one increasing demand, bla bla bla bla bla.

Remakes are bad for business - The End.

Yes.  That is true, unless the remake is inferior.  The bottom line is the once reliable UCS theme is becoming a hit or miss theme.

[redghostx]

How is the word "rumor" not in the title...?

Or UCS or Millennium?

[dcdfan]

8 minutes ago, inversion said:

So what? For your business, and we know that. Not so much for LEGO's.

People want justification for what they perceive as an "expensive toy." Rehashes lower their investments...

Edited December 21, 2015 by dcdfan

[Darth_Raichu]

6 minutes ago, inversion said:

So what? For your business, and we know that. Not so much for LEGO's. 

I am not sure about that, cf the stacks of 10249 still available at my LEGO store a few days before Christmas.

[dcdfan]

So, three or four UCS sets for next year. I'm not buying it. Err, I'm not believing it...

Edited December 21, 2015 by dcdfan

[inversion]

6 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

 The bottom line is the once reliable UCS theme is becoming a hit or miss theme.

Some are old school UCS, some are this play set style. We will still get both the display and play oriented ones as LEGO wants to cater for both audiences.

They could have labeled Cloud City or the old Sandcrawler as UCS if it was released now. All that happened is that the UCS moniker got broadened to include more stuff. After Slave I and the TIE I see no problems and I don't see that they would release significantly less display models. 

What you really call 'miss' were never meant to be UCS according to old standards, apples and oranges. As long as they release display models I don't give a damn about how they call other sets, which are actually excellent sets in their own rights and will gladly buy them

[Ed Mack]

Regardless of whatever is released and their effects on older sets...The remakes suck in my opinion.  There are so many other options for UCS sets, yet they choose to remake iconic sets.  I really could care less about another Snowspeeder or Falcon.  Been there...done that.  

[Veegs]

15 minutes ago, dcdfan said:

So, three or four UCS sets for next year. I'm not buying it. Err, I'm not believing it...

Seems like the right amount considering the box office haul of TFA and teasers/trailers in 2016 (leading up to the movie) for Rogue One (which will probably get a lot of views/fanfare, etc) to whet the appetite of SW fans.

If I paid 4 billion for SW, I would strike while the iron is red hot. Can't blame Disney for wanting to, too. While SW fatigue might be a problem in a couple years, it certainly doesn't look like 2016 will see a lot of buyer fatigue to me. 

[inversion]

5 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

Regardless...The remakes suck in my opinion.  There are so many other options for UCS sets, yet they choose to remake iconic sets.  I really could care less about another Snowspeeder or Falcon.  Been there...done that.  

Because these are the ones that sell, the iconic ones. Just how much percent of current potential buyers have the former releases? 1%? 0.5%? Just how many people collect these for straight 10 years? I understand your feelings that you want to expand your collection, but we know that this is business

It is obvious that the most iconic stuff will get a rehash every now and then, I don't know who would be that naive to assume otherwise. These are centerpieces of SW. 

[Veegs]

12 minutes ago, Ed Mack said:

Regardless of whatever is released and their effects on older sets...The remakes suck in my opinion.  There are so many other options for UCS sets, yet they choose to remake iconic sets.  I really could care less about another Snowspeeder or Falcon.  Been there...done that.  

Says the guy with every Lego set ever made

I wish TLG would let people vote on what they'd like to see get the SW UCS treatment. That would be interesting...