Retiring Soon - open speculation

[tonysbricks]

The SSD is probably one of the most impressive display LEGO sets ever created. It is elegant and nasty looking at the same time. The 10188 is really not a display set...it is a play set. It's my opinion that AFOLs with the discretionary income to buy either set will choose the SSD more often than not. As a serious LEGO and STAR WARS fan, I like serious sets. SSD is as serious as they come.

 

I was typing a similar reply but couldn't figure out how to say it. Basically, what you said but I apply it in terms of how a remake will impact demand for the original. They can make a significant upgrade to the DS today with modern figs and modern building techniques. I don't see building techniques in the near future improving the SSD much. Maybe in 5 years. I see the DS as the sandcrawler and SSD as the sail barge. One remake was OMFG good and the other was meh compared to the originals.

[Ed Mack]

I was typing a similar reply but couldn't figure out how to say it. Basically, what you said but I apply it in terms of how a remake will impact demand for the original. They can make a significant upgrade to the DS today with modern figs and modern building techniques. I don't see building techniques in the near future improving the SSD much. Maybe in 5 years. I see the DS as the sandcrawler and SSD as the sail barge. One remake was OMFG good and the other was meh compared to the originals.

With the new movies coming out, remakes will become less of an issue for a lot of these sets, with the Falcon as the obvious exception. We won't really know if the new movies have a Death Star or SSD/Star Destroyer. They probably won't, but you can't count them out. JJ Abrams does a nice job of blending the old with the new, so I'm sure we will see some classic vehicles and characters. I just really believe that big time STAR WARS collectors look for accurate models and are extremely anal like myself, so a set like the 10188 is not a must have set.

Sent from my iPad using Brickpicker

[tonysbricks]

The only movie the sail barge appeared in was episode VI...while an iconic scene I think TLG cares more about how well a set sold and less if it's featured in a current movie when deciding what to make.

[trekgate502]

With the new movies coming out, remakes will become less of an issue for a lot of these sets, with the Falcon as the obvious exception. We won't really know if the new movies have a Death Star or SSD/Star Destroyer. They probably won't, but you can't count them out. JJ Abrams does a nice job of blending the old with the new, so I'm sure we will see some classic vehicles and characters. I just really believe that big time STAR WARS collectors look for accurate models and are extremely anal like myself, so a set like the 10188 is not a must have set.

Sent from my iPad using Brickpicker

 

While I think the SSD will perform better, that is why I am also banking on the Death Star doing well.  That is serious investors seem to think it is Not to Scale, Not UCS, A Play Toy, No one wants, and it needs to be redone, and many people will not want.  That is why I think it means perhaps it is not being stocked up as well, and hopefully can have a very good return.  I hope no investors want to buy any DS's.    Personally, I love the set.  I can see it appreciate fairly well.  Serious AFOL buyers will pay the $2k for the SSD.  Parents of people who can spend money for a death star as a toy, will spend a significant amount too.  If my kid wanted to have a SSD or DS, I would pay a premium for him for the DS, but not the SSD.  No I would not pay $2k for the Death Star, but I would pay $800 and for a flip situation buying it near the end of life, that is good appreciation.  That is the DS, its a toys and I don't see the SSD as a toy but as a AFOL display set.  The DS takes a lot less room and is more practical to keep out and play with.  In the end, yes if I could afford 40 SSD's instead of 40 DS's, I would.  But since that is not an easy option, I am getting some of both and think I can make good money off the DS in time.

[Ed Mack]

While I think the SSD will perform better, that is why I am also banking on the Death Star doing well. That is serious investors seem to think it is Not to Scale, Not UCS, A Play Toy, No one wants, and it needs to be redone, and many people will not want. That is why I think it means perhaps it is not being stocked up as well, and hopefully can have a very good return. I hope no investors want to buy any DS's. Personally, I love the set. I can see it appreciate fairly well. Serious AFOL buyers will pay the $2k for the SSD. Parents of people who can spend money for a death star as a toy, will spend a significant amount too. If my kid wanted to have a SSD or DS, I would pay a premium for him for the DS, but not the SSD. No I would not pay $2k for the Death Star, but I would pay $800 and for a flip situation buying it near the end of life, that is good appreciation. That is the DS, its a toys and I don't see the SSD as a toy but as a AFOL display set. The SSD takes a lot less room and is more practical to keep out and play with. In the end, yes if I could afford 40 SSD's instead of 40 DS's, I would. But since that is not an easy option, I am getting some of both and think I can make good money off the DS in time.

I have my share of 10188s and might pick up a couple of more. If I could buy 100 SSDs or 10188s, I would buy 60 SSDs and 40 10188s if that makes any sense.

Sent from my iPad using Brickpicker

[trekgate502]

I have my share of 10188s and might pick up a couple of more. If I could buy 100 SSDs or 10188s, I would buy 60 SSDs and 40 10188s if that makes any sense.

Sent from my iPad using Brickpicker

 

 

Sounds like a wise strategy.

[Miami Bomb Squad]

The only movie the sail barge appeared in was episode VI...while an iconic scene I think TLG cares more about how well a set sold and less if it's featured in a current movie when deciding what to make.

One of the points in my "demand" thinking.

Got to ask yourself, why the DS has a shelf life of 6 years?...........its demand driven.

If the sales # are not there, they would have pulled it. 

Therefore, when the DS is gone........future demand will still be there.

And yes, I am afraid of a nice remake too. This is why I am not going to stock pile it (30+ sets)

 

 

The SSD is probably one of the most impressive display LEGO sets ever created. It is elegant and nasty looking at the same time. The 10188 is really not a display set...it is a play set. It's my opinion that AFOLs with the discretionary income to buy either set will choose the SSD more often than not. As a serious LEGO and STAR WARS fan, I like serious sets. SSD is as serious as they come.

Sent from my iPad using Brickpicker

I totally agree with you.

As a AFOL, I would also pick the SSD.

But as an Investor, I have to look at the entire "demand" variable.

I'm not saying the DS will out perform the SSD (they both will do well), I just think the DS is a better investment.

Higher demand = Liquidity.

 

 

[stephen_rockefeller]

So you are saying the DS will be the better investment by saying it will out perform the SSD.

[exciter1]

I can't wait for the Retiring Soon - Closed Speculation thread.

[Darth_Raichu]

I can't wait for the Retiring Soon - Closed Speculation thread.

No way. What we need is Retiring Soon - The Masters Speculation thread or Retiring Soon - US PGA Speculation thread 

[hendrikdejager]

Is #9516 Jabba's Palace gone? I am not sure what to think of this set, i have yet to buy one for investment. My local Toy Store has them on "clearance" for 

[33Lego]

I have my share of 10188s and might pick up a couple of more. If I could buy 100 SSDs or 10188s, I would buy 60 SSDs and 40 10188s if that makes any sense.

Sent from my iPad using Brickpicker

You have 60 SSDs?

 

Oh, that's how rumor started.

 

I just started one

[Guest]

Volkswagen 10220 Out of stock, will ship in 30 days at LEGO Shop at Home

[biniou]

The 10188 is really not a display set...it is a play set. It's my opinion that AFOLs with the discretionary income to buy either set will choose the SSD more often than not. As a serious LEGO and STAR WARS fan, I like serious sets.

I absolutely agree.

 

When a set is worth more than (let's say) 100$, the fact that it is a play set is ok since the display is great (I'm thinking of the modular buildings).

 

But if the playability is good but the display is not (DS 10188), I don't think there will be an awesome ROI for such sets.

I mean, nothing to be compared with the DS II 10143 for instance.

 

The SSD is more to be compared with the DS II than the DS IMO, even if it's far to be as cool as the DS II (too big, hard to display, less iconic).

[MartinP]

I absolutely agree.

 

When a set is worth more than (let's say) 100$, the fact that it is a play set is ok since the display is great (I'm thinking of the modular buildings).

 

But if the playability is good but the display is not (DS 10188), I don't think there will be an awesome ROI for such sets.

I mean, nothing to be compared with the DS II 10143 for instance.

 

The SSD is more to be compared with the DS II than the DS IMO.

I agree with most of what you are saying. There probably won't be a amazing ROI for the set, but that may be also due to the fact that the set has been out for 6 years. Also, if you look into the past, almost all $200+ sets have done well, and I think that the DS will continue the trend.

[mudcatsfan]

While i get that many 'adults' would prefer something that looks 'adult',,,,,,,,,,,,,the Death Star is so freaking cool.

 

When people see my UCS stuff, THAT"S what they gravitate to.

 

I really don't think the majority of Lego fans (with the funding to do so) would pick the DS2 over teh DS1 even though it looks more like the movie model.

 

Heck, if the DS1 looks so lame, you can go spend 60 bucks at the pick a brick store and cover it up and it would look just like the death star, and incredibly boring

[djim]

Coming out of my dark ages, I was disappointed that the DS didn't have the same look as the movie, like the previous DS.  It looked to me like a play set on display with everything exposed.  I wasn't into it.  Then I watched the movies again while building R2D2.   Then I watched a review of the DS online.  Then I realized this IS a display piece; it captures like a dozen scenes from the movie each in their own diorama, in 1 set.  

 

I don't think it is a matter of either/or here.  If you can afford to drop $1k+ on one set, you can likely do it for 2 sets.  These will both be sought after long after retirement.

 

As for supply/demand:  Let's assume the DS is 2x as "in-demand" as the SSD since it has been out 2x as long.  I know there is some flaw in that logic, but just assume 2x for this example (I think we all agree the DS is the more popular set).  So 2x the demand with 2x the supply of the SSD. We are also assuming they share the same supply/demand curve.  If those 2 assumptions are correct, they will perform equally well in the aftermarket, assuming those curves remain the same.  In other words, a $400 investment in either will yield roughly the same results, making a 3rd assumption that they both retire at the same time (this december?).  

 

I had a conversation with a respected member of this community a couple months ago and he pointed out that this is a special year: 2 sets that _could_ hit $2k are possibly retiring this year and we won't have an investment opportunity in Legos that looks like this for the next couple years.  Those 2 sets are the SSD and the DS.  

 

edit: a word

[No More Monkeys]

Coming out of my dark ages, I was disappointed that the DS didn't have the same look as the movie, like the previous DS.  It looked to me like a play set on display with everything exposed.  I wasn't into it.  Then I watched the movies again while building R2D2.   Then I watched a review of the DS online.  Then I realized this IS a display piece; it captures like a dozen scenes from the movie each in their own diorama, in 1 set.  

 

I don't think it is a matter of either/or here.  If you can afford to drop $1k+ on one set, you can likely do it for 2 sets.  These will both be sought after long after retirement.

 

As for supply/demand:  Let's assume the DS is 2x as "in-demand" as the SSD since it has been out 2x as long.  I know there is some flaw in that logic, but just assume 2x for this example (I think we all agree the DS is the more popular set).  So 2x the demand with 2x the supply of the SSD. We are also assuming they share the same supply/demand curve.  If those 2 assumptions are correct, they will perform equally well in the aftermarket, assuming those curves remain the same.  In other words, a $400 investment in either will yield roughly the same results, making a 3rd assumption that they both retire at the same time (this december?).  

 

I had a conversation with a respected member of this community a couple months ago and he pointed out that this is a special year: 2 sets that _could_ hit $2k are possibly retiring this year and we won't have an investment opportunity in Legos that looks like this for the next couple years.  Those 2 sets are the SSD and the DS.  

 

edit: a word

If the speculations about SSD and DS retirement are correct, it boggles my mind that Lego would do that before the new movie. Unless maybe Disney is pushing (via licensing) Lego to release something special for the movie, and SSD and DS would compete with that new thing too much...

[stephen_rockefeller]

We see the signs of the SSD retiring but why would anyone think the DS is on its way out? Am I missing something?

[No More Monkeys]

We see the signs of the SSD retiring but why would anyone think the DS is on its way out? Am I missing something?

Amazon is OOS, SAH is "30 days", Walmart is OOS, 

But obviously, another production run is coming, since SAH allows ordering

[djim]

We see the signs of the SSD retiring but why would anyone think the DS is on its way out? Am I missing something?

 

It has been out since 2008.  It is a licensed set.  It was explained to me that Lego has never licensed a set beyond 6 or 7 years (I think it was 6, but can't remember specifically), and the DS is reaching that limit this year.  If not this year, how long can it live on?

[holleman67]

6 years is the longest, ed knows what set as he told us the other day but I don't remember what set

[stephen_rockefeller]

But the theme is licensed not the actual set right? I'm not sure licensing has anything to do with the DS.

[djim]

another data point is the # of UCS/enormous sets currently available:

 

DS

SSD

Ewok Village

R5XW

Sand Crawler

R2-D2

and another coming this summer....?

 

Top of the market is saturated.  Makes sense to trim down some fat.  Where do you trim?  To me the SSD and DS makes sense. 

 

I hope both stick around longer since I just got started with this game and realized you can't just go buy 10 DS/SSD.  It takes planning and a long period of time to pick up significant inventory.  So I hope this speculation is wrong but it makes sense to me. 

[biniou]

Interesting post djim.

 

(about DS) Then I realized this IS a display piece; it captures like a dozen scenes from the movie each in their own diorama, in 1 set.  

 

You have a good point. Afterall, it's playable and is some kind of a display set because of display scenes. What I meant is that it's not a UCS display set.

I own a movie theater room and I would be glad to put a UCS SW set inside, but there's no way I put a set with minifigs having some battles in a lego round rack. It would look like some huge SW polypocket or housedoll. Not appealing IMO.

That's a point you have to consider: not everyobody is as much as a huge fan to be ok to have such sets to be displayed.

IMO the fact that a SW set is impressive, accurate etc is ruined since you put minifigs on display.

There are two ways of thinking about legos: with and without minifigs. I'm sure it will make mad a lot of people here but that's my opinion.

 

I asked some friends about the DS set  (they like legos, they like SW, but are not 100% in it) and they think it's fun but not so good looking. Paying 500$ and more to this set ? No way !

About the SSD they would not pay such money either but... ok, they easily understand some people can be ok with it.

i don't think we will see again such a big and impressive SSD until the next 10 years.

2k $ is a bit much IMO but indeed I wouldn't be so surprised if the value reaches 1k $ before 2020.

IT'S SO HUGE ! (though I would have prefered an imperial star destroyer that size)

 

 

As for supply/demand:  Let's assume the DS is 2x as "in-demand" as the SSD since it has been out 2x as long.  I know there is some flaw in that logic, but just assume 2x for this example (I think we all agree the DS is the more popular set).  So 2x the demand with 2x the supply of the SSD. We are also assuming they share the same supply/demand curve.  If those 2 assumptions are correct, they will perform equally well in the aftermarket, assuming those curves remain the same.  In other words, a $400 investment in either will yield roughly the same results, making a 3rd assumption that they both retire at the same time (this december?). 

Hmmm... another question is: what about the number of each set that are sleeping in investors' rooms ?