10237 - Tower of Orthanc

[justapilgrim]

HD is doing fine

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Brickpicker mobile app

[meowsmeowsmeows]

Posted this in the daily deals thread earlier when the Tower of Orthanc was briefly available at Lego, but my  order from Lego from late November when the status was OOS, ships 4 Jan is now listed as "Waiting on new stock."

 

Anybody who ordered recently have this status?  I assume this means a newer batch is still coming by the end of the year.

[teohwp85]

Posted this in the daily deals thread earlier when the Tower of Orthanc was briefly available at Lego, but my  order from Lego from late November when the status was OOS, ships 4 Jan is now listed as "Waiting on new stock."

 

Anybody who ordered recently have this status?  I assume this means a newer batch is still coming by the end of the year.

 

I got this status for my order on Dec 2. My MF had this status too before it got cancelled.

[meowsmeowsmeows]

I got this status for my order on Dec 2. My MF had this status too before it got cancelled.

Thanks, that is interesting.  Especially since it's OOS, ships in 30 days still.

 

If it's cancelled, hopefully Target will still have theirs at MSRP.

[Veegs]

Cram another run in before the New Year!

[meowsmeowsmeows]

Cram another run in before the New Year!

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, especially if the LOTR license may expire at the end of the year as others have suggested.  But, if orders start getting cancelled, then that's another issue.

[Veegs]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, especially if the LOTR license may expire at the end of the year as others have suggested.  But, if orders start getting cancelled, then that's another issue.

 

True...It might end up being like many 'last runs' where demand exceeds the size of the run and the last few get cancelled. 

[BrickLegacy]

Mine also flipped from backordered to waiting in stock.

[tractorboy]

Got one in today from LEGO Shop at Home, ordered 2 weeks ago, code 41S4.

[speedsausage]

Received my order of 2 from walmart.ca today.

I haven't opened it yet. I'm not liking that bottom corner there.

Predictions on the actual set box condition.

I'll open her up in a couple hours when the little guy is in bed.

[ravenb99]

Received my order of 2 from walmart.ca today. ImageUploadedByBrickpicker Forum1418609276.310703.jpg

I haven't opened it yet. I'm not liking that bottom corner there.

Predictions on the actual set box condition.

I'll open her up in a couple hours when the little guy is in bed.

shouldn't be to bad, little corner bend.  Nothing that will matter.  These sets will sell the same price with or without box damage. I have sold a very large amount of exclusives that were in demand with and without damage and never had any problems selling the damaged ones for the same price.  

[speedsausage]

shouldn't be to bad, little corner bend. Nothing that will matter. These sets will sell the same price with or without box damage. I have sold a very large amount of exclusives that were in demand with and without damage and never had any problems selling the damaged ones for the same price.

Pretty much right on the button. It was almost not worth taking the pic.

That tiny crease in the 2nd pic is about the worst of it. There are a couple of spots that have similar creased and a couple of pressure dents but really they are in really great condition.

Back in the box they go for now.

Edit: My bad if this should have been posted in the "packaging of excellence thread".

Edited December 15, 2014 by speedsausage

[banshee3]

i had only ordered one. But my question is. Do i build it. Or sell it? I'm unsure.

[bricketycricket]

i had only ordered one. But my question is. Do i build it. Or sell it? I'm unsure.

 

I'm in the same boat, I will just leave it in the closet and wait and see how this one does. If it spikes at EOL, you can probably get your hands on 1 more for retail price and the average cost of your 2 will still be pretty solid.

[inversion]

I'm in the same boat, I will just leave it in the closet and wait and see how this one does. If it spikes at EOL, you can probably get your hands on 1 more for retail price and the average cost of your 2 will still be pretty solid.

Sorry for blurping in, but arguing for a purchase on the basis of average cost is just against every principle of investing. You have to value each purchase individually. If you would not find a purchase attractive in itself then it shouldn't be also if you own another asset bought at a low price.  Otherwise you are just spending your profits from the previous purchase to unnecessarily justify an unprofitable one. This is one notorious type of irrational behaviour in economics. It is always about the opportunity costs, nothing else matters. Your previous purchases only matter in the sense if you want to reduce the overall risk of your portfolio which is actually a wise thing to do, but it involves buying different sets rather than the same one again.

[Veegs]

My four arrived today 2 by 2. One in the Lego original box, the other two put in an ugly monster of a box. All were in decent shape. I am very pleased - this might be the first time I am happy with the total number I have of an exclusive and all were bought at a discount or with S&**** double VIP + promos. 

[bricketycricket]

Sorry for blurping in, but arguing for a purchase on the basis of average cost is just against every principle of investing. You have to value each purchase individually. If you would not find a purchase attractive in itself then it shouldn't be also if you own another asset bought at a low price.  Otherwise you are just spending your profits from the previous purchase to unnecessarily justify an unprofitable one. This is one notorious type of irrational behaviour in economics. It is always about the opportunity costs, nothing else matters. Your previous purchases only matter in the sense if you want to reduce the overall risk of your portfolio which is actually a wise thing to do, but it involves buying different sets rather than the same one again.

I don't really see the issue here. In my case, I'm unsure as to the ToO's investment potential so I bought just one (at significant discount) to mitigate risk by having the option to just keep it for collection. If in the future it appears to be a good investment AND I want to open one, I can buy another at MSRP to do so, and I still effectively paid below MSRP for both. The alternative would be to have bought 2 now at significant discount but potentially higher (opinion) risk.

[inversion]

I still effectively paid below MSRP for both. 

I understand your intention, but your argument is wrong. You can't say that you effectively paid below MSRP for both. First of all the first set is for collection purposes only, you shouldn't even consider it as investment but if you even do it doesn't change the logic. You only should buy a second at MSRP if it is a good investment at MSRP, that's all. Otherwise you are losing money in either real or opportunity terms.

 

If you don't deem it is a good investment at MSRP, but you do at below MSRP then you still shouldn't buy it on the basis of the averages because you are doing nothing more than just cross-subsidising it from your previous purchase. That's why the average price argument doesn't make sense. Just value purchases individually if we are talking about the same set.

 

The alternative would be to have bought 2 now at significant discount but potentially higher (opinion) risk.

 

No. You bought one at a discount, that's already happened, you can't change the fact. Nothing compels you to buy the second.You will only have two possible actions in the future: to buy or not to buy. What you will have to do then is to ask yourself this question:  is the return (~with the same variance) the highest I can get on this amount of money I plan to spend on ToO? And the answer has nothing to do with what you have done before.

Edited December 16, 2014 by inversion

[Grynn]

Or in simpler terms, mentally devaluing a great past investment to justify a less great new investment is just silly.

[steakyboy]

i had only ordered one. But my question is. Do i build it. Or sell it? I'm unsure.

Big fan of lotr and not raining on any parades but not a fun build. Put this black piece on that black piece 1x 4x 8x 12x rinse and repeat over and over. Looks bad ass in my ikea detolf but lots of the same thing.

[bricketycricket]

I understand your intention, but your argument is wrong. You can't say that you effectively paid below MSRP for both. First of all the first set is for collection purposes only, you shouldn't even consider it as investment but if you even do it doesn't change the logic. You only should buy a second at MSRP if it is a good investment at MSRP, that's all. Otherwise you are losing money in either real or opportunity terms.

 

If you don't deem it is a good investment at MSRP, but you do at below MSRP then you still shouldn't buy it on the basis of the averages because you are doing nothing more than just cross-subsidising it from your previous purchase. That's why the average price argument doesn't make sense. Just value purchases individually if we are talking about the same set.

Like I said, I only bought 1 because I see it as somewhat of a risky investment. If I was to buy a second one, obviously I suddenly view it as a good investment which heavily implies a return that is substantially above MSRP. So yes, you are correct that the return needs to be measured against the price paid for the second one. But stop ignoring the context here. We're talking about a set that is $250 CAD, where the discounted one is purchased for $210. If it ends up being worth $245, then the first one was worth buying and the second one isn't, but obviously in that case a second one would not be purchased. This is also operating under the current assumption that the ToO is nearing EOL.

[inversion]

Like I said, I only bought 1 because I see it as somewhat of a risky investment. If I was to buy a second one, obviously I suddenly view it as a good investment which heavily implies a return that is substantially above MSRP. So yes, you are correct that the return needs to be measured against the price paid for the second one. But stop ignoring the context here. We're talking about a set that is $250 CAD, where the discounted one is purchased for $210. If it ends up being worth $245, then the first one was worth buying and the second one isn't, but obviously in that case a second one would not be purchased. This is also operating under the current assumption that the ToO is nearing EOL.

And with this comment you just refuted the average price argument which I was criticising. It would mean that if $250 is not a good investment, but $230 is then buying the second set at $250 if you already have one bought at $210 would be a good choice. This obviously is not the case.

 

Also I don't know which context I am missing. I did not say about ToO being a good buy or not. I just wanted to point out why you shouldn't use average price in investment decisions. Nothing to do with ToO itself. Could have been about real estate, oil, gold etc.

Edited December 16, 2014 by inversion

[bricketycricket]

And with this comment you just refuted the average price argument which I was criticising. It would mean that if $250 is not a good investment, but $230 is then buying the second set at $250 if you already have one bought at $210 would be a good choice. This obviously is not the case.

 

Also I don't know which context I am missing. I did not say about ToO being a good buy or not. I just wanted to point out why you shouldn't use average price in investment decisions. Nothing to do with ToO itself. Could have been about real estate, oil, gold etc.

I am saying I agree with you but in this context it is a moot point. I bought 1 ToO because I view it as risky. If I buy a second one, obviously my opinion has changed and I am expecting it to sell for substantially more than MSRP. Why would I suddenly buy a second one if it was going to be resold in the vicinity of MSRP? And for my intents and purposes, if I bought 2 of a set at different prices within a close enough time frame, I would just average the costs.

[inversion]

if I bought 2 of a set at different prices within a close enough time frame, I would just average the costs.

For keeping track of the return of your portfolio, it is okay. For making investment decisions, it is totally wrong. Ex post there is no difference, ex ante there is.

Edited December 16, 2014 by inversion

[MillerTime]

Inversion is 100% correct from a logic perspective, though I'm not sure making your point was worth 6 posts and a 30,000 word essay.