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.

 

 

[Fenix_2k1]

59 minutes ago, OCD_Chad said:

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

Nice to know (I got one too) but did you actually have a point or is this just another one of these counterpoint trolling accounts that pops up every so often? 

[OCD_Chad]

7 minutes ago, Fenix_2k1 said:

Nice to know (I got one too) but did you actually have a point or is this just another one of these counterpoint trolling accounts that pops up every so often? 

Yes, that this adult collector isn't going to disappear because of re-releases.  If a more accurate model comes along I'll get it for any licensed Star Wars stuff.

[citymorgue]

I'm loving all this doom and gloom from you guys.  As a strict builder only, secondary value is purely that, secondary.  I don't really care what the value is, I love buying the sets and displaying them.

The fact that you think Lego is magically going to go belly up just like that is so over the top.  Like others have said, they are not here to protect your precious profits on sets.  They are here to release toys to their fans.  Of course they are wanting to get a chunk of the action, but so what.  All sets eventually retire anyways, and they obviously can't remake every single set every single year.

I'm fine with having an opportunity to buy a set that Lego stopped making years ago.  I don't look at older sets and think, oh man it's so rare I have to have that...No, I look at a set, and think, damn I want to build that.  There are plenty of retired sets that you couldn't give to me for free that I would want.  And I've said this before, those that have been holding on perpetually, well I have ZERO sympathy for you.  Greed bit you in the ass.

There are things that I've collected over the years that have no value whatsoever because I loved the product, not because of some notion it will be worth money down the road.  It just was a bonus on some stuff I've sold over the years that I was able to get my money back in a tight situation.  But that is never my primary motivation for buying a set.  And I can promise you, the vast majority of people who buy Lego don't immediately think, ohhhh, this will be worth money.  No it's usually, oh look a really cool set that I would like to build and enjoy.

I've been buying Lego for several years, and there are sets I had when I was a kid that I would love to have again.  Even if I still had them, I would still love to have an updated model.  It's always the minority that are the loudest, and quite frankly, I don't think Lego gives a crap what a few of you guys think about the perceived value.

I remember as a kid, my mom got me the ISD for Christmas, and others as well over the years prior, and never once in my head did I think man, what is this going to be worth years from now.  I still freaking have beanie babies for christs sake, and they are worthless. /rant

[OrangeChiliPeP]

12 minutes ago, KShine said:

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).

Maybe for short time. Losing the true collector`s that spend thousands of bugs a year will hurt TLG enormously. A fan of a theme or single set will never spend that amount of money like collector´s do. TM is no remake it´s a clone! 

[Fenix_2k1]

14 minutes ago, citymorgue said:

I'm loving all this doom and gloom from you guys.  As a strict builder only, secondary value is purely that, secondary.  I don't really care what the value is, I love buying the sets and displaying them.

The fact that you think Lego is magically going to go belly up just like that is so over the top.  Like others have said, they are not here to protect your precious profits on sets.  They are here to release toys to their fans.  Of course they are wanting to get a chunk of the action, but so what.  All sets eventually retire anyways, and they obviously can't remake every single set every single year.

I'm fine with having an opportunity to buy a set that Lego stopped making years ago.  I don't look at older sets and think, oh man it's so rare I have to have that...No, I look at a set, and think, damn I want to build that.  There are plenty of retired sets that you couldn't give to me for free that I would want.  And I've said this before, those that have been holding on perpetually, well I have ZERO sympathy for you.  Greed bit you in the ass.

There are things that I've collected over the years that have no value whatsoever because I loved the product, not because of some notion it will be worth money down the road.  It just was a bonus on some stuff I've sold over the years that I was able to get my money back in a tight situation.  But that is never my primary motivation for buying a set.  And I can promise you, the vast majority of people who buy Lego don't immediately think, ohhhh, this will be worth money.  No it's usually, oh look a really cool set that I would like to build and enjoy.

I've been buying Lego for several years, and there are sets I had when I was a kid that I would love to have again.  Even if I still had them, I would still love to have an updated model.  It's always the minority that are the loudest, and quite frankly, I don't think Lego gives a crap what a few of you guys think about the perceived value.

I remember as a kid, my mom got me the ISD for Christmas, and others as well over the years prior, and never once in my head did I think man, what is this going to be worth years from now.  I still freaking have beanie babies for christs sake, and they are worthless. /rant

 I've never understood the kind of person who signs up to brickpicker and then basically abuses those who buy and sell Lego for profit. Go  /rant somewhere else.

[OCD_Chad]

 

16 minutes ago, OrangeChiliPeP said:

Maybe for short time. Losing the true collector`s that spend thousands of bugs a year will hurt TLG enormously. A fan of a theme or single set will never spend that amount of money like collector´s do. TM is no remake it´s a clone! 

No it won't.  Look at the top selling sets on Amazon.  They aren't huge expensive sets for older people.

[fossilrock]

I agree with those saying this is killing the collectable aspect.  I will admit, that is one reason I got into lego.  There was a collectability factor, but when they start remaking set after set just because they have aftermarket value it starts to become redundant and look like a pathetic cash grab that ultimately collapses both markets. 

The Taj Mahal should have not been remade like this.  I could understand making an architecture model like the Capitol Building from last year... but I don't understand why they would just bring back the Taj Mahal, and do nothing to it but put it in a new box.  As many had said, they could have done many different models.

I'm now kind of glad I haven't bought any of these landmark sets.  There was a time I had Sydney Opera Houses in my cart, but thought twice about it and then emptied it.  Glad I did that.  The Death Star debacle was another blunder, and there have been others.  I dig the new Carousel (and I bought that one), but I also feel they could have skipped that and made a swing, or some other ride.

[OCD_Chad]

9 minutes ago, Fenix_2k1 said:

 I've never understood the kind of person who signs up to brickpicker and then basically abuses those who buy and sell Lego for profit. Go  /rant somewhere else.

By getting his opinion on the most places possible, it's more likely Lego listens.

[Fenix_2k1]

2 minutes ago, OCD_Chad said:

By getting his opinion on the most places possible, it's more likely Lego listens.

Definitely going With my earlier call. Trolling account.

[TANV]

17 minutes ago, citymorgue said:

I'm loving all this doom and gloom from you guys.  As a strict builder only, secondary value is purely that, secondary.  I don't really care what the value is, I love buying the sets and displaying them.

The fact that you think Lego is magically going to go belly up just like that is so over the top.  Like others have said, they are not here to protect your precious profits on sets.  They are here to release toys to their fans.  Of course they are wanting to get a chunk of the action, but so what.  All sets eventually retire anyways, and they obviously can't remake every single set every single year.

I'm fine with having an opportunity to buy a set that Lego stopped making years ago.  I don't look at older sets and think, oh man it's so rare I have to have that...No, I look at a set, and think, damn I want to build that.  There are plenty of retired sets that you couldn't give to me for free that I would want.  And I've said this before, those that have been holding on perpetually, well I have ZERO sympathy for you.  Greed bit you in the ass.

A large part of the doom and gloom is due to the change and tightening of market conditions for the re-seller market.  Furthermore, don't forget how well kept this was under wraps. We had only heard rumors of it recently but the release date was unexpected, throwing people for a shocking loop and outrage.  Some of us are seeing our profit margins shrink or forcing us to adapt in many ways which hurts the bottom line.

This site is meant as a guide for LEGO investing and how to profit and pick the best set.  Hence, this remake is a slap in the face for those who possess valuable, collectible sets only to see one of their most iconic assets plunge.  Honestly, it's been a long time since this set retired and people should've cashed out as soon as possible.  But the potential profits to be had is sometimes too tempting, which is why people hold out for 2x or 3x RRP or BEYOND for some sets. 

LEGO isn't the same as holding onto a Fidelity or Vanguard Mutual Fund for years and decades.  Sometimes, you just have to know when to sell and cash it in.  Furthermore, it's easy to be an armchair critic of a corporate business model since we're reacting as consumers as opposed to those who work in  the corporation itself. Who knows what goes on in the bowels of LEGO HQ?  I certainly can't claim any foresight or knowledge of their strategies of what happens.

You're right that we should just enjoy building the sets and displaying them.  But sometimes to finance that, you have to make money from said hobby.  The danger is when money becomes the sole factor and the hobby is a chore.

[Guest TabbyBoy]

This is a LEGO builder's, collector's and investor's website. We all know that there's doom on the horizon, but it doesn't stop us being nice to each other ;-)

[fuzzy_bricks]

I realize we're focused on value here, but how many AFOLs view Lego like @citymorgue.  I'm not a collector and I honestly don't fully understand that mindset so sets that I buy for personal consumption are sets that I want to build and keep for their current market price.  If I think the price is too high, I'm able to pass on them.   If others can justify paying the high price, that's their business, but sinking a ton of money into anything that has collectible value doesn't seem that sound to me.

As others have said, sellers had 10 years to offload the sets, seems generous compared to the Death Star situation.

I understand the argument that this may hurt Lego long term and think that is totally valid.

[Clintonjoseph]

I'm loving all this doom and gloom from you guys.  As a strict builder only, secondary value is purely that, secondary.  I don't really care what the value is, I love buying the sets and displaying them.

The fact that you think Lego is magically going to go belly up just like that is so over the top.  Like others have said, they are not here to protect your precious profits on sets.  They are here to release toys to their fans.  Of course they are wanting to get a chunk of the action, but so what.  All sets eventually retire anyways, and they obviously can't remake every single set every single year.

I'm fine with having an opportunity to buy a set that Lego stopped making years ago.  I don't look at older sets and think, oh man it's so rare I have to have that...No, I look at a set, and think, damn I want to build that.  There are plenty of retired sets that you couldn't give to me for free that I would want.  And I've said this before, those that have been holding on perpetually, well I have ZERO sympathy for you.  Greed bit you in the ass.

There are things that I've collected over the years that have no value whatsoever because I loved the product, not because of some notion it will be worth money down the road.  It just was a bonus on some stuff I've sold over the years that I was able to get my money back in a tight situation.  But that is never my primary motivation for buying a set.  And I can promise you, the vast majority of people who buy Lego don't immediately think, ohhhh, this will be worth money.  No it's usually, oh look a really cool set that I would like to build and enjoy.
I've been buying Lego for several years, and there are sets I had when I was a kid that I would love to have again.  Even if I still had them, I would still love to have an updated model.  It's always the minority that are the loudest, and quite frankly, I don't think Lego gives a crap what a few of you guys think about the perceived value.

I remember as a kid, my mom got me the ISD for Christmas, and others as well over the years prior, and never once in my head did I think man, what is this going to be worth years from now.  I still freaking have beanie babies for christs sake, and they are worthless. /rant

It's not greed. It was the expectation that a collectible was worth something. This remake makes fans collections, that they were proud to own, worth...less. It's not the fact that it can't be sold for thousands of dollars, its that it's just not special anymore. Ever been to a classic car show? How would they feel if car companies re-released some some of their prized possessions? If brand new 1957 Ford Thunderbirds were being produced again, that would be devastating to owners of the originals. Not because it's worth less money, because it's not special.

[Phil B]

Definitely going With my earlier call. Trolling account.

Major dislike.@citymorgue is no troll. Just because he has a different PoV does not warrant name-calling. I find the various opinions on LEGOs recent move refreshing, and welcome them any time of the day. Personally, I think this is a dumb move, because how many people are really interested in this set? It had interest because it was unattainable, but now that it is, I don't think it will be a top seller. I'm definitely not even remotely interested.

[minicoopers11]

Come on kids, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a troll. Let's act grown-up a bit here.

[eliminator]

There could be a silver lining to this set being re-released. If it ends up being a sales flop (after an initial sales surge), perhaps TLG will pass on future re-releases.

Beyond some AFOLs that lust for this set, I really don't see it being on anyone's must-have list.

[gregpj]

1 hour ago, citymorgue said:

I'm loving all this doom and gloom from you guys.  As a strict builder only, secondary value is purely that, secondary.  I don't really care what the value is, I love buying the sets and displaying them.

The fact that you think Lego is magically going to go belly up just like that is so over the top.  Like others have said, they are not here to protect your precious profits on sets.  They are here to release toys to their fans.  Of course they are wanting to get a chunk of the action, but so what.  All sets eventually retire anyways, and they obviously can't remake every single set every single year.

I'm fine with having an opportunity to buy a set that Lego stopped making years ago.  I don't look at older sets and think, oh man it's so rare I have to have that...No, I look at a set, and think, damn I want to build that.  There are plenty of retired sets that you couldn't give to me for free that I would want.  And I've said this before, those that have been holding on perpetually, well I have ZERO sympathy for you.  Greed bit you in the ass.

There are things that I've collected over the years that have no value whatsoever because I loved the product, not because of some notion it will be worth money down the road.  It just was a bonus on some stuff I've sold over the years that I was able to get my money back in a tight situation.  But that is never my primary motivation for buying a set.  And I can promise you, the vast majority of people who buy Lego don't immediately think, ohhhh, this will be worth money.  No it's usually, oh look a really cool set that I would like to build and enjoy.

I've been buying Lego for several years, and there are sets I had when I was a kid that I would love to have again.  Even if I still had them, I would still love to have an updated model.  It's always the minority that are the loudest, and quite frankly, I don't think Lego gives a crap what a few of you guys think about the perceived value.

I remember as a kid, my mom got me the ISD for Christmas, and others as well over the years prior, and never once in my head did I think man, what is this going to be worth years from now.  I still freaking have beanie babies for christs sake, and they are worthless. /rant

I don't really feel like going over your entire post, but let's put things into perspective... WHY do people collect things? A couple of reasons come to mind..

1) It's cool and they really like it.

2) It has some value.

3) It is a collectible with some status attached to it.

You're right that #1 is the least affected .. but how has LEGO managed to be "cool" especially for adults? By coming up with awesome ideas and wowing people.... The new MF was a wow. The Porsche was a wow. So many others were too... then this? Really?

1) LEGO stops becoming cool to many people if all they do is rehash old ideas.

2) Value drops.

3) People don't wow at a collection anymore because everyone has it.

All I'm saying is that it was a lazy move and I think this is a long term plan that's going to bite them in the ass. Not in 2017, maybe not in 2018 but beyond that they better take those short term profits and reinvest them into a strategy that brings fans/customers IN instead of pushing them OUT.

[gregpj]

2 minutes ago, minicoopers11 said:

Come on kids, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a troll. Let's act grown-up a bit here.

It's because "members" are openly throwing it in the face of investors - and I quote...

Quote

The fact that you think Lego is magically going to go belly up just like that is so over the top.  Like others have said, they are not here to protect your precious profits on sets.

Who's not acting like a grown up? I know it's hard to judge what people are really thinking through only typed words, but we can make some logical inferences from previous posts especially when they are consistently "you all have no idea what you're talking about" type of posts. I also think that if you held Taj for 10 years hoping for another spike you're being greedy and foolish given LEGO's rereleases of Toy Shop, Snowspeeder, Death Star and the super long life span of sets such as the T1 and Tower Bridge.. but I won't refer to them as "precious profits" just to spite them.

On the flip side, investors who've thrown it in the face of the wonderful collectors who pay those outrageous secondary market prices also get told to play nice.

[citymorgue]

42 minutes ago, Fenix_2k1 said:

 I've never understood the kind of person who signs up to brickpicker and then basically abuses those who buy and sell Lego for profit. Go  /rant somewhere else.

I'm not abusing you guys.  I'm just stating that Lego doesn't owe you any profit or to cater to your need to make money.  Lego is a toy first and foremost.  I follow several different sites for different takes and news on stuff.  It's nice to follow this for particular information I find useful, and one of that is not how much I can potentially gain on a set.  You guys might need to check your feelings a bit if someone like me doesn't fully agree with everything on here.  You guys live in your own little bubble world out here, and miss that there are more people who buy Lego to play and enjoy than purely as an investment vehicle.

That's the thing too though, if you treat it like an investment, you are going to get burned.  Simple as that.  It's like that with anything you treat as an investment.  You win some you lose some.  I've had many things that I spent a lot of money on, to only have it be worthless and it burned me.  It happens.  I've also had things that were little gold mines for me as well.

 

5 minutes ago, Clintonjoseph said:

 

 

It's not greed. It was the expectation that a collectible was worth something. This remake makes fans collections, that they were proud to own, worth...less. It's not the fact that it can't be sold for thousands of dollars, its that it's just not special anymore. Ever been to a classic car show? How would they feel if car companies re-released some some of their prized possessions? If brand new 1957 Ford Thunderbirds were being produced again, that would be devastating to owners of the originals. Not because it's worth less money, because it's not special.

 

For me, when I buy a product, I buy it for my enjoyment, whether it be movies, video games, what have you.  Some of my prized possessions aren't worth a dime.  Money isn't the only factor in something that I will spend my money on.  I don't care how special it is to other people, because it's special to me, and that's all that really matters in the end.

I'm not trying to start a fight, I'm just saying, that the investors prospective isn't the only one, and Lego I'm sure figures they will gain more catering to their bigger market, the non-investors like me out here.

 

4 minutes ago, gregpj said:

I don't really feel like going over your entire post, but let's put things into perspective... WHY do people collect things? A couple of reasons come to mind..

1) It's cool and they really like it.

2) It has some value.

3) It is a collectible with some status attached to it.

You're right that #1 is the least affected .. but how has LEGO managed to be "cool" especially for adults? By coming up with awesome ideas and wowing people.... The new MF was a wow. The Porsche was a wow. So many others were too... then this? Really?

1) LEGO stops becoming cool to many people if all they do is rehash old ideas.

2) Value drops.

3) People don't wow at a collection anymore because everyone has it.

All I'm saying is that it was a lazy move and I think this is a long term plan that's going to bite them in the ass. Not in 2017, maybe not in 2018 but beyond that they better take those short term profits and reinvest them into a strategy that brings fans/customers IN instead of pushing them OUT.

Yes, I will agree that it potentially having some value will get people to collect things, but that's not even remotely always the case.  Some people collect bottle caps, are those worth much?  Nope, so why do they do it then?  For the love of something.  For people like me, it's the love of Lego, not the value.  I buy Lego even expensive Lego, because I personally get the value out of it.  Not in monetary fashion.

Sure some people might stop buying Lego because of this, but it's a revolving door.  For every person that stops buying Lego, they could be bringing in one or more people new to the hobby and buying Lego.

You might see it as a lazy move, and that's fine, nothing wrong with your opinion, but I would personally be worried if every single set in a year was a complete re-release.  They still put out lots of original new sets every year, so I just think this screaming from the mountain tops that Lego is going to go belly up for a couple of re-makes a year is a little over the top. 

[gregpj]

1 minute ago, citymorgue said:

I'm not abusing you guys.  I'm just stating that Lego doesn't owe you any profit or to cater to your need to make money.  Lego is a toy first and foremost.  I follow several different sites for different takes and news on stuff.  It's nice to follow this for particular information I find useful, and one of that is not how much I can potentially gain on a set.  You guys might need to check your feelings a bit if someone like me doesn't fully agree with everything on here.  You guys live in your own little bubble world out here, and miss that there are more people who buy Lego to play and enjoy than purely as an investment vehicle.

That's the thing too though, if you treat it like an investment, you are going to get burned.  Simple as that.  It's like that with anything you treat as an investment.  You win some you lose some.  I've had many things that I spent a lot of money on, to only have it be worthless and it burned me.  It happens.  I've also had things that were little gold mines for me as well.

 

For me, when I buy a product, I buy it for my enjoyment, whether it be movies, video games, what have you.  Some of my prized possessions aren't worth a dime.  Money isn't the only factor in something that I will spend my money on.  I don't care how special it is to other people, because it's special to me, and that's all that really matters in the end.

I'm not trying to start a fight, I'm just saying, that the investors prospective isn't the only one, and Lego I'm sure figures they will gain more catering to their bigger market, the non-investors like me out here.

 

Yes, I will agree that it potentially having some value will get people to collect things, but that's not even remotely always the case.  Some people collect bottle caps, are those worth much?  Nope, so why do they do it then?  For the love of something.  For people like me, it's the love of Lego, not the value.  I buy Lego even expensive Lego, because I personally get the value out of it.  Not in monetary fashion.

Sure some people might stop buying Lego because of this, but it's a revolving door.  For every person that stops buying Lego, they could be bringing in one or more people new to the hobby and buying Lego.

You might see it as a lazy move, and that's fine, nothing wrong with your opinion, but I would personally be worried if every single set in a year was a complete re-release.  They still put out lots of original new sets every year, so I just think this screaming from the mountain tops that Lego is going to go belly up for a couple of re-makes a year is a little over the top. 

But I don't think anyone said they were going to go belly up? I certainly didn't  .. I said it was "short sighted" and I don't see it as a good long term strategy.

I think bottle caps goes back to #1... people think it's cool and really like them, no worries about lack of value. But LEGO makes EXPENSIVE collectibles by most standards which is why I think it's different. You said it yourself .. you even buy expensive LEGO sets. Their potential market is much smaller than collectibles such as funko pops and beanie babies.... why risk it? It just doesn't make sense to me.

[jerphisch]

2 hours ago, TabbyBoy said:

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.

What's funny about this is you were DONE investing in Lego not that long ago, and now you are ready to go deep on 2 sets.  Your actions are saying something completely opposite from your words.

[citymorgue]

2 minutes ago, gregpj said:

It's because "members" are openly throwing it in the face of investors - and I quote...

Who's not acting like a grown up? I know it's hard to judge what people are really thinking through only typed words, but we can make some logical inferences from previous posts especially when they are consistently "you all have no idea what you're talking about" type of posts. I also think that if you held Taj for 10 years hoping for another spike you're being greedy and foolish given LEGO's rereleases of Toy Shop, Snowspeeder, Death Star and the super long life span of sets such as the T1 and Tower Bridge.. but I won't refer to them as "precious profits" just to spite them.

On the flip side, investors who've thrown it in the face of the wonderful collectors who pay those outrageous secondary market prices also get told to play nice.

I apologize for being a bit over the top.  But the thing is, Lego isn't here to cater to the secondary market.  That's the thing with stuff like this, it's only worth that on paper, and someone who thinks that they have thousands in profit without actually selling it and putting it to hard cash, is playing with fire.  That's the same with any investment.

As with all things, something has a ceiling, and this set on top of many others, eventually top out.  I still don't fully begrudge you guys making money, I've said that many times here, but I just don't feel bad because you've had plenty of opportunity to make a **** ton of money on these sets.

 

2 minutes ago, gregpj said:

But I don't think anyone said they were going to go belly up? I certainly didn't  .. I said it was "short sighted" and I don't see it as a good long term strategy.

I think bottle caps goes back to #1... people think it's cool and really like them, no worries about lack of value. But LEGO makes EXPENSIVE TOYS by most standards which is why I think it's different. You said it yourself .. you even buy expensive LEGO sets. Their potential market is much smaller than collectibles such as funko pops and beanie babies.... why risk it? It just doesn't make sense to me.

I agree that if all they do from here on out is re-release sets, then yes, it will leave a sour note.  But doing this to the ridiculous amount of new AFOLS that come to buy Lego over the last few years is not a big deal.  Lego is a toy company first and foremost.  It being a collectable is a natural outcome to it being such a desirable and well made toy.  Don't lose site of that.   It's only in the last few years, that the collectors market really exploded, but for decades, it was just a Toy like any other company.

I buy expensive Lego because I love building the big sets and displaying them and showing them off to friends.  I buy it because I find the value to be worth it in my eyes.  I had no problem dropping $800 on the MF because I love Lego, I love building Lego, and it's what I enjoy.  I don't drop even $5 on those Funko Pop things because I don't like them, nor do they hold any value in my eyes. (Again not just monetarily.)  Everyone has different motivations on what's valuable/collectable to themselves.

[KShine]

2 minutes ago, jerphisch said:

What's funny about this is you were DONE investing in Lego not that long ago, and now you are ready to go deep on 2 sets.  Your actions are saying something completely opposite from your words.

You do not seem to know the TabbyBoy.

[KShine]

8 minutes ago, citymorgue said:

I apologize for being a bit over the top.

You're not as much being a bit over the top, as you are looking to dance on graves - No Grave Dancing!

 

Edited October 31, 2017 by KShine

[exciter1]

10 minutes ago, jerphisch said:

What's funny about this is you were DONE investing in Lego not that long ago, and now you are ready to go deep on 2 sets.  Your actions are saying something completely opposite from your words.