10256 - Taj Mahal (2017)

[jaisonline]

OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE

10256 Taj Mahal

Ages 16+. 5,923 pieces.
US $369.99 – CA $449.99 – DE 329.99€ – UK £299.99 – DK 2699.00 DKK

Discover the architectural wonder of the Taj Mahal!

Build and discover the Taj Mahal! The huge ivory-white marble mausoleum, renowned as one of the world’s architectural wonders, was commissioned in 1631 by the Emperor Shah Jahan in memory of his wife, the Empress Mumtaz Mahal. This relaunched 2008 LEGO® Creator Expert interpretation features the structure’s 4 facades with sweeping arches, balconies and arched windows. The central dome, subsidiary domed chambers and surrounding minarets are topped with decorative finials, and the raised platform is lined with recessed arches. The model is finished with ornate detailing throughout and intricate tilework around the base. With more than 5,900 pieces, this set is designed to deliver a rewarding building experience and makes a great display piece for the home or office.

• LEGO® interpretation of the real-world architectural wonder, the Taj Mahal.
• Relaunched 2008 model, featuring 4 facades with arches and arched windows; central dome, 4 subsidiary domed chambers and 4 minarets, all topped with decorative finials; raised platform lined with recessed arches; ornate detailing throughout; and intricate tilework around the base.
• Divides into 7 modular sections for easier transportation.
• Put your LEGO® building skills to the test with one of the largest LEGO models ever created
• Special elements include 6 blue 16×32 baseplates, white 1x5x4 bricks with bow, lots of transparent elements, ‘Erling’ bricks and ‘jumper’ plates.
• Measures over 16” (43cm) high, 20” (51cm) wide and 20” (51cm) deep.

 

 

[OCD_Chad]

1 hour ago, snot said:

Why would I want to build or display something so common and available, and will probably stay common and available at msrp or cheaper forever? 

How about you just like the way it looks or how it makes you feel?  This seems like a hard concept for some here.

[OCD_Chad]

2 hours ago, cubfan78 said:

I agree, I am not an investor at all but I have a few retired sets that are still NIB that I have decided not to build, however, I am hoping to use them in trade for a set that I do want to build.  So yes, no matter what, appreciation of sets does matter on some level for everyone. 

No, it doesn't.

[Bold-Arrow]

15 minutes ago, OCD_Chad said:

How about you just like the way it looks or how it makes you feel?  This seems like a hard concept for some here.

Most of the folks here look at it from an investment point of view due to the nature of the site .. Lego makes some great displays and most of the folks here were  (still are )builders before investors however you will see a common theme is making $$$ ( or lack of). 

[waddamon]

Its the exact reason bogus bricks or most mega bloks aren't valuable, cuz its just plastic. Without collector value, game over and the retail price nose bleed will be forced to change or die.  Disney is doing the same thing to star wars.  Companies get so big those lose sight of what got them there.

[DadsAFOL]

It's interesting, but I tend to think this is more of an experiment than a committed strategy.  Lego got burned with the "Legend" re-releases in 2002.  The "fans demanded" rereleasing some great sets.  And then no one bought them.

They are either testing the waters for the "fan demand" to rerelease, or testing if they can beat bogus bricks at their game, or both.  I think someone went through a short list of sets from ~10 years ago, asked which one(s) used parts that are still in production, and picked Taj.

The biggest tell will be to see if Taj is readily available upon release, or out of stock for months (like Saturn V, MILF, etc.).  So before everyone starts dumping their collections, I would wait and see how 10256 actually sells.  Expect Lego to decide the future of rereleases based on this one.

 

[waddamon]

This coming from someone who partially owned amazing fantasy 15 white mountain pedigree.

3 hours ago, DadsAFOL said:

It's interesting, but I tend to think this is more of an experiment than a committed strategy.  Lego got burned with the "Legend" re-releases in 2002.  The "fans demanded" rereleasing some great sets.  And then no one bought them.

They are either testing the waters for the "fan demand" to rerelease, or testing if they can beat bogus bricks at their game, or both.  I think someone went through a short list of sets from ~10 years ago, asked which one(s) used parts that are still in production, and picked Taj.

The biggest tell will be to see if Taj is readily available upon release, or out of stock for months (like Saturn V, MILF, etc.).  So before everyone starts dumping their collections, I would wait and see how 10256 actually sells.  Expect Lego to decide the future of rereleases based on this one.

Except no one can possibly know sales figures since it is a wholly private company.

[DadsAFOL]

4 minutes ago, waddamon said:

Except no one can possibly know sales figures since it is a wholly private company.

You should do some research...

https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/lego-group/annual-report

[whoisbiggles]

Lego - "this is how you troll resellers / investors / counterfeiters".

1 minute ago, DadsAFOL said:

You should do some research...

https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/lego-group/annual-report

but but but maths is hard

[Darth_Raichu]

On second thought, it is hard to believe LEGO released these remakes to spite the resellsers.  We are simply too little to matter.  A few thousand dollars of profit here and there is not enough to make a $2 billion company to change its ways. On the other hand, LEGO obviously noticed the volume of bogus bricks being sold on the market and how the demand grows by the day.  So they decided they wanted a piece of that pie.  Obviously LEGO has a library of instructions being used by the leeches to make money.  Why not do the same and at least cover part of the legal cost for fighting those leeches (it's not like they can win anytime soon) ?

Is this a way to fight bogus bricks? Honestly I do not think TLG's business analysts are capable of thinking that far ahead.   They saw a pie and wanted a piece, pure and simple.  

Again, since resellers do not matter, nobody at TLG could be bothered if a few were crushed in the chase for that piece of pie

ETA: Also, if a few fans can be satisfied in the process, that is just good for business 

 

 

[waddamon]

1 minute ago, DadsAFOL said:

You should do some research...

https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/lego-group/annual-report

Ive read every one, nothing actual there about actual sales.  If I was researching for an actual client to buy stock, sure.  Not set info at all.

[TheOrcKing]

17 hours ago, jaisonline said:

....I'm speechless.

[Val-E]

J2G´s take.

 

3 hours ago, waddamon said:

Ive read every one, nothing actual there about actual sales.  If I was researching for an actual client to buy stock, sure.  Not set info at all.

They do state the top 5 best selling sets but it is in a different PDF. No, we don´t know units sold buy Amazon sales ranking is your best way of estimating that.

[Pet-Brick-er]

at the legendary article end, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/shares/lego-a-better-investment-than-shares-and-gold/, there were the most expensive Lego sets.

Now it's clear Lego took from there their production plan.

Two years later the circle is closing. Next are ISD, CC, DS2.

Edited October 31, 2017 by Pet-Brick-er

[Cheese]

There will no doubt be some initial interest and some good sales but it wouldn’t surprise me, if after that, this then becomes a bit of a slow burner like the SOH. Price point is also a lot higher than other architecture sets so is a consideration for buyers.

 The reason why this was sought after by collectors (including myself) was because of its scarcity and until recently the largest set ever. As a result the price was what it was (apologies to those who have NISB versions in their inventory!) and ultimately another reason to have this in your collection. Now that it is being re-released I’m not actually too sure I will get one, due to:

 1) the size of it - where am I going to put it?

2) it looks like a very repetitive and boring build

3) there is no longer the wow factor of this being a rare piece, since people can just pick it up (no doubt from any retailer in six months time)

4) if it gets anywhere near sunlight it will lose it brilliant white shine

 A number of my fellow AFOLs at my LUG were discussing this and this seems to be the universal view. It is this demographic that ultimately is the buyers that lego are targeting for this set, not the masses. So in my opinion this is an own goal by Lego, since not only will sales of this be lacklustre but it will probably harm sales of other large exclusive sets that they would normally get from resellers and also from those builders who buy one to build/display and another mint one for storage to sell on in a few years for a bit of profit. This will just not happen now since the threat of remake is so big now. Those who fall into the latter category are probably much larger in numbers and sales volumes than the resellers.

Sorry Julia, but you and your corporate strategy team may have miscalculated. Having a large set on the shelf that has a high price point that doesn’t shift isnt going to get you back to double digit growth. It may have reduced your high cost base in terms of your R&D costs and to a certain extent improved your operating profit but ultimately not your revenues and NIBBT which is what is important to determine the health of a company. Maybe it’s time to get Mckinseys in and get rid of BCG?

[Val-E]

Record year for D2C sets at 11. Record average size and price too.

[fantomas007]

IT´S A SHAME and epic fail.

Just after making only SIX (!!!) landmarks, they are starting remakes. Not after 100 years and producing 30-40 famous landmarks. There are plenty of wonderful buildings around the world, but they are making a remake... and not a remake of older sets and bad designed - Eiffel, Liberty - but relatively new one. I am speechless.

Extremely lazy approach from TLG - just making the same set just after several years.

If they think this is the way how to struggle with resellers or clones, they are absolutelly out of logic:

1) its still safe to sell sets 2-3 years after EOL (except DS)

2) they are just irritating the collectors, who spent thousands bucks for something, which is now losing the 80-90% of value... After such experience, i would f**k lego and buy nothing at all...

3) people can ask - if TLG can remake a set again and again, why not buy cheaper remake - bogus bricks - for less money. Since the collector value of a set, which can be remade in future, is zero.

If this is the way how to struggle with the secondary market, they are more stupid than we think. Secondary market is something, which keep sets alive longer and allow collectors to find the old sets. The problem are prices and absolutely incompetent distribution and production policy.

So what is next? New tower bridge 1 year after EOL with new 20 cheese slopes for 50 bucks more?

Or remake of Fire brigade and Town hall in modulars?

 

 

[Ed Mack]

9 hours ago, ravenb99 said:

quit making to many themes, to many BS sets, way to much overproduction to where the stuff gets liquidated heavily at retail and in bulk through other avenues.  Quit extending retirement dates because of a sales spike.  Quit holding products who knows where then releasing 75,000 of a poly on a retailer months after it has no interest.  Quit releasing the holiday sets that you retire on your website one year after with new print / batch codes.  Quit giving out the same promos years later.   Make some new concepts instead of just retiring the previous smaller set then releasing another.  

Those are all things that would help right the ship over re releasing the same set you've already offered before.   People want new stuff when it comes to big sets.   There are plenty of ways to get the retired sets that go to high for a cheaper price whether it be used or bricklinking if you are a collector and really wanted something you missed out on.   

The sales decline has everything to do with a glut of average or subpar / rehashed products and product that has been out way to long and should of been retired years ago.

People only have so much money and 600 active sets just overwhelms customers and causes disinterest in the brand as well as retailers having to do drastic sales to move it.  

  

This.  More is not always better.  Too many choices breeds apathy.  If they continue down this path of reissuing older classic sets, nothing will be special or exclusive.  How can you pitch things as "Hard to Find"...""Retiring Soon"..."Collectible" when you can wait a few years and get a similar or exact set?  Go ahead, release a Cafe Corner, Eiffel Tower or Green Grocer.  Eventually, nobody will care and instead of having "perceived value," LEGO will be perceived like every knockoff brick company...just a box of cheap ABS plastic.  

 

[Ed Mack]

2 hours ago, Cheese said:

There will no doubt be some initial interest and some good sales but it wouldn’t surprise me, if after that, this then becomes a bit of a slow burner like the SOH. Price point is also a lot higher than other architecture sets so is a consideration for buyers.

 The reason why this was sought after by collectors (including myself) was because of its scarcity and until recently the largest set ever. As a result the price was what it was (apologies to those who have NISB versions in their inventory!) and ultimately another reason to have this in your collection. Now that it is being re-released I’m not actually too sure I will get one, due to:

 1) the size of it - where am I going to put it?

2) it looks like a very repetitive and boring build

3) there is no longer the wow factor of this being a rare piece, since people can just pick it up (no doubt from any retailer in six months time)

4) if it gets anywhere near sunlight it will lose it brilliant white shine

 A number of my fellow AFOLs at my LUG were discussing this and this seems to be the universal view. It is this demographic that ultimately is the buyers that lego are targeting for this set, not the masses. So in my opinion this is an own goal by Lego, since not only will sales of this be lacklustre but it will probably harm sales of other large exclusive sets that they would normally get from resellers and also from those builders who buy one to build/display and another mint one for storage to sell on in a few years for a bit of profit. This will just not happen now since the threat of remake is so big now. Those who fall into the latter category are probably much larger in numbers and sales volumes than the resellers.

Sorry Julia, but you and your corporate strategy team may have miscalculated. Having a large set on the shelf that has a high price point that doesn’t shift isnt going to get you back to double digit growth. It may have reduced your high cost base in terms of your R&D costs and to a certain extent improved your operating profit but ultimately not your revenues and NIBBT which is what is important to determine the health of a company. Maybe it’s time to get Mckinseys in and get rid of BCG?

I agree.  The new corporate world and philosophy is all about quick fixes.  Bump up profits,  get bought out by someone bigger and the CEOs, CFOs, etc... move onto another victim and business for more and more money.  I see it everyday in my world.  Companies that used to produce excellent products are a shell of what they once were.  They still have the name, but that is it.  Once The LEGO  Group started going to "non-LEGO" type of people to stir short term profits, the long term prospects of the company are looking worse by the day IMO.  

[Fenix_2k1]

9 hours ago, ravenb99 said:

quit making to many themes, to many BS sets, way to much overproduction to where the stuff gets liquidated heavily at retail and in bulk through other avenues.  Quit extending retirement dates because of a sales spike.  Quit holding products who knows where then releasing 75,000 of a poly on a retailer months after it has no interest.  Quit releasing the holiday sets that you retire on your website one year after with new print / batch codes.  Quit giving out the same promos years later.   Make some new concepts instead of just retiring the previous smaller set then releasing another.  

Those are all things that would help right the ship over re releasing the same set you've already offered before.   People want new stuff when it comes to big sets.   There are plenty of ways to get the retired sets that go to high for a cheaper price whether it be used or bricklinking if you are a collector and really wanted something you missed out on.   

The sales decline has everything to do with a glut of average or subpar / rehashed products and product that has been out way to long and should of been retired years ago.

People only have so much money and 600 active sets just overwhelms customers and causes disinterest in the brand as well as retailers having to do drastic sales to move it.  

  

Too true.

Far too many sets now for any child to take interest in a theme to collect them all is their biggest problem. 

For example. To collect all Lego Batman Movie sets would cost almost £1300 at RRP. This isn't including the minifigures series or dimensions. That's a hell of a lot of money and sets to complete a theme that's only been around for 1 year.

Similar with Ninjago Movie. Its only on its first set of releases and the collection would already cost £900.

That's their bread & butter right there, not high end halo sets for Afols. After all re-release too many colleactor sets and afols will start to disappear as their collections depreciate. 

Lego will struggle until it gets its annual cost per theme targeted at children back around £500. Then people can afford to collect them all which will continue to drive demand for themes. The smash and grab scattergun approach with heavy discounting at retail within months isn't a model that will ever help them. 

[OCD_Chad]

40 minutes ago, Fenix_2k1 said:

Too true.

Far too many sets now for any child to take interest in a theme to collect them all is their biggest problem. 

For example. To collect all Lego Batman Movie sets would cost almost £1300 at RRP. This isn't including the minifigures series or dimensions. That's a hell of a lot of money and sets to complete a theme that's only been around for 1 year.

Similar with Ninjago Movie. Its only on its first set of releases and the collection would already cost £900.

That's their bread & butter right there, not high end halo sets for Afols. After all re-release too many colleactor sets and afols will start to disappear as their collections depreciate. 

Lego will struggle until it gets its annual cost per theme targeted at children back around £500. Then people can afford to collect them all which will continue to drive demand for themes. The smash and grab scattergun approach with heavy discounting at retail within months isn't a model that will ever help them. 

I bought a 75192.  If Lego released another Millennium Falcon that's 10,000 pieces next year I would get it.

[KShine]

Turning someone's rare collection of UCS, Modulars, Taj, Liberty, Eiffel, Christmas, etc. sets into 100-200 sets will have a lasting effect on buyers.

Many will want nothing to do with LEGO going forward, as it will only serve as a reminder that they are getting screwed.

[Guest TabbyBoy]

I wonder how many of us will be commenting on here this time next year? Apart from Saturn V and NASA Women, I'm not buying any other set. If these two are a dead cert, what's the point of investing in any other set? I know there's often huge discounts available on other sets, but others have access to those discounts too. Of course, I still buy for my personal use and collection. I did sense a while back that there was big trouble ahead, for us and the LEGO company, which is why I decided to cool it for a while.

[Furious_george]

4 minutes ago, KShine said:

Turning someone's rare collection of UCS, Modulars, Taj, Liberty, Eiffel, Christmas, etc. sets into 100-200 sets will have a lasting effect on buyers.

Many will want nothing to do with LEGO going forward, as it will only serve as a reminder that they are getting screwed.

Yep. I’m selling our UCS collection while it still has some value. Won’t be buying anymore UCS sets from now on.  My son has grown older and lost interest in LEGO and with the remakes and value drops, I think I’m out.  

[OrangeChiliPeP]

12 minutes ago, Furious_george said:

Yep. I’m selling our UCS collection while it still has some value. Won’t be buying anymore UCS sets from now on.  My son has grown older and lost interest in LEGO and with the remakes and value drops, I think I’m out.  

The end of the brand.

[KShine]

11 minutes ago, OrangeChiliPeP said:

The end of the brand.

LEGO the company will be just fine, and the LEGO fans will be happy - but LEGO collectors (as we've known them) will not exist.

This mega growth was never planned or expected, and being a family owned company - they will be fine with less success (maybe even a bit relieved).