Prices versus Target Audience

[fredjh]

First of all, before anyone thinks that this is a whine about prices, that's not what I'm getting at (I'll happily whine about prices, though, but not here).

It seems to me they say the target audience for LEGO is children (mainly boys), from around toddlers (with duplo) to maybe 10 or 12 years old.

Now, maybe it's just me, but aren't most sets WAY too expensive for kids in that age group?

I mean, sure, they get sets as presents, but I don't know anyone spending more than $20 or so on presents (that's around our limit, although I'm flexible, for when our kids go to a birthday party). I realize parents buy their kids sets that might cost a lot more... but it seems they release a LOT of sets at prices that simply don't fit the demographic.

I realize, too, that they know there is an adult community out there... I guess what I'm thinking is that they might benefit actually trying to TARGET the adults more. Obviously the Eiffel Tower, the Volkswagon, the Taj Mahal... these are targeted at adults. But it seems to me that kids wouldn't be particularly interested in the Green Grocer or Cafe Corner, either. I read recently they are regressing; they are trying to get more of the duplo size market.... in other words, concentrating on a younger demographic.

Now, I will admit that my son (10 years old) bought a Twilight... but only because it was a whopping 50% off and he had some birthday money.

I don't know what I'm getting at... just seems to me they release an awful lot of UCS and extremely expensive sets considering their stated target audience. Is it mainly to actually appeal directly to AFOLs?

[donneyboy]

I know, if I get any sets for Christmas, or Birthday they are mostly under $60.00, most kids' parents aren't going to spend $100.00 on their kids (unless they are spoiled)

[ThinkingImpaired]

Growing up my parents never spent more than about $30 for a set for me (or when the huge ones were like half off)...but everyone is different and for many parents, when their kids tell them they want the huge $100 set, they'll buy it.

[Firespray]

I know, if I get any sets for Christmas, or Birthday they are mostly under $60.00, most kids' parents aren't going to spend $100.00 on their kids (unless they are spoiled)

I got a few $100 sets for birthday or Christmas. Rich uncle ftw

[Solo]

Now, maybe it's just me, but aren't most sets WAY too expensive for kids in that age group?

If you loved your kids the sets aren't too expensive.

[donneyboy]

although I got the republic gunship and AT-TE for christmas last year from my parents which really surprised me since my mom wasn't working, and my dad was laid off.

[Coret]

When I was growing up (which was in the 80s.) I know I would get people in my family that were buying me gifts to chip in so I could get an expensive set. There have always been sets in alot of different price ranges. From $150- $3.50 you could find something you like for a price you wanted to pay. (During my one birthday I had $100 in birthday money, and had to choose between getting the $100 Black Seas Barracuda or getting the $50 Carribian Clipper + Eldorado Fortress. I chose 2 get 2 sets.)

The thing LEGO has been doing differently recently is actually taking notice of those of us that did grow up in the 80s and still play with LEGO sets. They have given more sets to the AFOL. It's actually funny because people talk about the price of LEGO sets and how you get less, but what LEGO has done instead of raising prices as Inflation keeps rising, they kept most of the same prices and lowered the brick count per set.

[theJudeAbides]

I tend to agree with Fred here. A while back I stumbled upon my old LEGO catalogs from when I was a kid. Looking through at the various themes, each theme usually only had 1 set in the $50+ price range with the rest being under. Nowadays (especially with the Star Wars line), it seems like at least 50% of the sets are in that price range. Now, one could possibly make a case for inflation, but it's only been about 10-15 years. I don't think prices have increased that much in that time.

However, what kind of AFOL presence existed in the 80s-early 90s? At that time, the AFOLs of today were still children, and LEGO products hadn't really been around long enough to have garnered much of an AFOL following. One could easily argue that the AFOL community is several orders of magnitude larger today then it was back then.

One thing I am wondering about is whether LEGO will scale back in the following years to account for the current economy. Most of the sets out now were developed when the economy was far better than it is now. I won't be all that surprised if we see smaller sets and themes next year in response to the current situation.

[fredjh]

It would be interesting (although impossible) to see sales stats by set.

Oh well. Luckily I'm just not into Star Wars anymore, or I'd be getting a second mortgage right now.

[The Guy]

I'm not one of the guys who grew up around Star Wars LEGO (I'm 13). That was my brother(10). I got back into it this year. I was wondering how many pieces came in a 90 dollar set back then. The AT-TE has like 700 some pieces. Over 1000 pieces in a 119 dollar set (Republic Gunship). Are these just once in a great while sets, or did you mean like 90 dollar sets with 1000 pieces back in the 80's?

[Gingerbeard Man]

or did you mean like 90 dollar sets with 1000 pieces back in the 80's?

Back in the '80s there simply were no 1000 piece sets. The exception being 398 U.S.S. Constellation - 973 pieces and clearly aimed at adults.

The largest set I ever had as a kid (I'm 36 now) was the 8859 Tractor (Technic, 610 pieces). Most other sets were significantly smaller, even the "large" 928 Galaxy Explorer only weighs in at 318 pieces. I never got the 375 Castle because my parents thought it was too big (693 pieces) and too expensive.

Unfortunately neither BrickSet or Peeron have the MSRP for these early sets.

[bigkid24]

I think LEGO is pretty savy as a company and they recognize that their audience grows up and that many of them never stop loving LEGO. As their audience grows, one can assume that they would also make more money and be able to afford more expensive sets.

As a company they probably do better to offer a wider range of products rather than just sets in the under $50 range.

Also I feel that LEGO toys are just another medium to express creativity so it' s not a kids toy even though they are found in the toy aisle.

[The Brain]

If you loved your kids the sets aren't too expensive.

That's sooooooooooo going to be my excuse from now on!