Travel the dunes with the LEGO� Star Wars™ Ultimate Collector Series Sancrawler™

FBTB - From Bricks To Bothans

Follow us: RSS
News? Questions? Comments? Email!

Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Want to talk about how the LEGO company is doing, your recent visit to LEGOland, your local LEGO club, other resources in the online LEGO community, or about LEGO software and games? Come in here and join us!

Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby Staff » Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:10 pm

Money Money Money

It seems like Ace and I aren't the only ones feeling a bit burnt out on Lego lately... Lego released their earnings report for the first half of the year, and for the first time in a decade (perhaps even longer), Lego reported a drop in sales since the previous year. Last year was already the lowest growth they'd seen since their turnaround years in the mid 2000s, and there had been rumblings from retailers that there wasn't as much demand for sets recently. Specifically, it looks like the LEGO Batman movie was in particular a poor performer, but their original lines were the top performers in the period.
Knudstorp said brands that Lego invented, including Lego City, Lego Friends, Lego Duplo and Lego Technic, were the best performers in the period

That's a pretty telling little bit after years of Star Wars and similar lines being the powerhouses of the lineup, and big releases like the Lego Movie and Lego Batman getting all of the attention and marketing. Of course, if you've read my reviews for any of the licensed sets I've covered in recent history, you can probably guess that I'm not overly shocked to see them fall off. It has felt that Lego has a drought of creativity in a lot of set designs, with things like the Batcave feeling like a copy/paste and Star Wars being full of remakes coming out closer and closer together (looking at you, Force Awakens X-Wing).

The worst part about this news is that 1400 people are going to lose their jobs as Lego tries to corporate their way out of a product problem (as someone who has spent many years in a corporate environment... that has, to date, never worked). Hopefully they land on their feet (and they aren't out of the brand retail stores, those guys are overworked and underpaid as it is).

To quote their CEO...
We have added complexity into the organisation which now in turn makes it harder for us to grow further,” he said in a statement. “As a result, we have now pressed the reset-button for the entire Group.

I'm certain that's true on the front of complexity... Lego is the largest toymaker in the world and has grown to just about everything in recent years. But I fail to see the connection on too much organization complexity causing problems with people not wanting your sets. I'm going to go into my own personal guesses for some of it, and I won't claim any special insight, but I think there are a few things in there that should make anyone still following Lego very concerned about the future.

Another very telling line is the one that got the biggest eyebrow raise from me when I read it.
We will find more opportunities to engage with kids and parents, including innovative ways to blend physical building and digital experiences, such as our successful Lego Life social platform and Lego Boost building and coding set

This could mean any number of things. I actually don't know what Lego Boost is, so I can't speak to how great it is, but calling Lego Life successful feels like a bit of a stretch. Sure, I bet a lot of kids play with it, but that's a pretty far stretch from turning it into a money printing machine. And I can think of a number of times when Lego has tried to turn their digital offerings into that and failed... badly.

Possible Reason: The Failure of Lego Dimensions


I'm sure none of this is helped by the failure of Lego Dimensions. In part, it was Lego grabbing while the iron was already cooling... the toys-to-life market was already slowing by the time they jumped in. Worse than that, they came in as the most expensive toy on the market in that space and then made the decision to tie the majority of the products into licenses that AFOLs my age would enjoy, but your average eight year old isn't going to care about in the least. I mean, I love Gremlins, but my daughter only wanted to put Batman and Wonder Woman on the pad.

I could go on about Dimensions for awhile; I'm no fan of the Tt Lego games as it is, the gameplay is poorly designed and, at least to me, they're not all that fun to play. The writing was on the wall pretty quickly when they had to go on a permanent price cut at places like Best Buy and Target just to start selling. Even once they sold, they weren't being restocked at the stores. Why Lego turned that shaky start into introducing even more expensive packs, which had been discounted by 50% before they even released, is beyond me.

Stated Reason: The Failure of the Lego Batman Movie sets

Lego doesn't release sales numbers for individual lines (or really products in general), but they did call out the sets for their new movie by name. While, overall, I quite liked the sets I built (with a couple exceptions), I can understand why these didn't do as well. The first reason would be saturation of Batman, across two different lines. My daughter loves Lego, but she looks at sets like this and says things like "I already have a Batman" before asking for a different set. More than that, watching the movie itself, if you take out the Batmobile and the Scuttler, the rest of the first few sets probably were on screen less than five minutes combined (I refuse to count the Batcave as being from the movie).

There was also a big lag between that initial wave, which came out around Christmas, the release of the movie, and the second wave. That second round of sets missed the big holiday window by a wide margin, and by the time Christmas comes around again, the movie will be out of kid's minds (and replaced with the Ninjago movie... though I have my doubts it'll have the staying power).

There were also a lot of tie-in products to this, and while I'm not the target market... most of them were bad. The giant head costumes where just awful looking (or "yucky" according to my sample size of one, who would much rather have the costumes from the DC Super Heroes Girls line), and a lot of the other stuff, like pencils and similar things, were released in March instead of during back-to-school shopping.

Of course, the biggest missing item was an official Lego Batman Movie video game. There was a Dimensions level pack, but by the time it came out (and, honestly, months before that), Dimensions had died off. There were products announced, but nothing in the future. That there wasn't a true Lego Batman movie game in the works was odd, to say the least, and feels like a huge miss on their part. Sure, these games aren't my thing, but they were popular.

Possible Reason: A Lack of Creativity and Innovation. 


I called it out in my post about going in to a dark age, but I think there's a much more basic reason why the demand for Lego is softening... the products just aren't overly compelling right now. While re-releases have always been part of Lego's cycle, in the big lines we cover here, Star Wars and Super Heroes, it feels like they've gotten worse. For me and Star Wars, the breaking point was when we got two different X-Wings within a few months of each other, where it was basically just a reason to put in some extra minifigs and change colors.

The UCS series has suffered as well, with three of the last four sets being remakes of previous sets. Sure, some people likely missed out of them, but plenty of long-time collectors didn't and are less likely to buy another one. The one unique set, the Hoth Base, was effectively just a repackage of a lot of different system scale sets, and was very easy to pass on for long-time collectors. Among the others, the Death Star playset was a re-release that was around for eight years and was out of print for less than a year before its re-release, and the upcoming Falcon jacks up the price out of the reach for a huge chunk of buyers.

I don't have any special insight to how the design process works, but in the past few years, it felt like LEGO moved to a very formulaic system for new sets. I don't know if its true, but it feels like a lot of the sets were spit out by a computer and not a designer working on it. At the very least, there's obviously a template that's being used that makes up the basic shape and form of the set, and the rest gets tacked on. I'm sure that lowers the amount of time in designing a set and getting it to market, but it also makes a huge chunk of the product line start to feel "the same." Super Heroes suffers from this the worst, with so many of the sets only being differentiated by the figures, and a lot of the core figures being repeated. You can only get so many variations of jet, truck, and playset with big doors before the money just isn't worth it.

There certainly are some very nice sets out there, but some of the best new sets have come from places like Ideas, where fans came up with something great like the Saturn V or Wall-E. There are other nice looking sets, but if the hegemony makes it hard for an AFOL like myself to get excited, how does it look to normal parents looking to get something for their kids?

Stated Reason: Organizational Problems


I have no particular insight into Lego's organization. I'm a few years removed from my time working at a certain smiling retailer, but there was precisely one person from Lego at the time who worked with the buyer from toys. It was a sort of afterthought for the most part, while other retailers like Hasbro and Mattel had a much larger presence in the area. It's hard to know where the 1400 jobs are going to come from, but it's a safe bet that it's not going to come from upper management (past the CEO they canned last month). Middle managers and sales, probably anyone internal that was working on Dimensions, things like that.

Like I said above, though, I don't buy that this is the cause of any of the issues they've had in sales growth. It's a stop-gap when you're trying to make sure you keep making money... and that's kind of curious, given that Lego isn't a publicly-traded company. I guess the Kristiansen's needed that money pretty badly.

Possible Reason: Lego is Pricing Itself Out of Parent's (and therefore Kid's) minds


Lego has always been a high-end toy, even when it was a lot cheaper. There's nothing wrong with having a premium product... but part of having a product like that is to accept that the price premium will drive a portion of your customers away. However, Lego seems to be chasing after all corners of the market, and it worked, to a point, in the size they grew towards. The problem is that there's been a shift in the average price of sets that's been gradually creeping upwards over the year. Collectible minifigs are now at $4, the smallest sets are Brickheadz, a niche product for the most part, while base sets have hit $15 or even $20 in most of the themes.

Let's look at the averages for the 2016 Starwars Lineup:

  • LEGO released 27 sets that fit the criteria above

  • 13 sets were re-releases, 14 were new (48%)

  • Averages...

    Average Price $63.69
    Median Price $49.99
    Without Micros $75.62
    Without UCS $51.67
    Without Battle Packs $86.51
    Without BP/UCS $60.74

  • Two new subthemes (Freemaker Adventures and Rogue One)

  • Sets had, on average, 5.26 minifigs including the UCS, 4 minifigs without it

This flies in the face of a lot of other toys they share an aisle with. While things like action figures and dolls have also gone up in price, there have been new variations of figures, sizes and features, that come in at different price points. The Star Wars Black Series 6" figures are $20, but there are less detailed 12" and 4" figures available for less money as well. Lego is also missing out on a lot of the bigger things for their target market as well... the loss of the Nickelodeon license was actually a pretty big blow (and my wallet is glad there aren't Paw Patrol sets on the shelves).

Honestly, there's another problem with the pricing of Lego sets, and that one seems to fit squarely on greed. Economies of scale drive down the cost of production, and there aren't any other toy companies that operate at the scale Lego does at this point. Even the old oil price argument doesn't really work these days (and really never did)... oil has been at its lowest prices in years over the same time that Lego has seen its downturn.

In short, it feels like Lego pushed to see how much they could charge, and then decided to push it even further. Maybe it worked for awhile, but it is never sustainable, and this would be one of the most likely things I'd pin the downturn of sales on.


I'll be honest, I don't have any good answers to how it's going to turn out past "Lego will survive." A toy doesn't stick around for decades, and it's still one of the single most recognizable toy brands on Earth. But this article on the layoffs said it best... this isn't a surprise and the writing was on the wall for awhile on it. Dimensions, last years sales falling, and sales reports from retailers all pointed a dip and maybe even a crash coming. Looking over a lot of the the recent trends for Lego, it seems like Lego has been exceptionally reactionary and not innovative. Dimensions followed after Skylanders had started to level, Brickheadz tries to eat into things like PopVinyl and similar products, and the build-able figures try to pull dollars away from action figures by charging more for arguably less.

Even things like Mindstorms, which are still big in the robotics circles, have been losing ground as both simpler and more-advanced options are available for less. One of the managers where I work is a coordinator for several teams in the area, and they've gone to full robotic kits over the Lego options because they give far more bang for the buck. Not a scientific sample, sure, but a quick run through places like Fry's or even Target to look at their STEM toys show a whole lot of products going after that space, and those same companies are making a push into educational markets too. My daughter hasn't gone to a beebots class in months, but will still talk about it when we see any robot toys.

Lego has certainly been in a similar place before... though they certainly haven't taken a tumble from this kind of height before. Ultimately, after their market started to crater back in the early 2000s, they fixed it not just by fixing up their supply chain and putting a structure in process for their designers to innovate, but also by turning around and starting to deliver an awesome product that got people interested again. It was the burst in 2006 that drug me out of the last time I hit some dark ages. Ironically, it was picking up a remake of a set in an A-Wing, but it was also a set that looked cool and unique compared to what came before it and delivered outstanding value for the money.

My fear is that Lego will try to reorg their way out of this problem. My hope is they will remember what got them there in the first place, and make everything awesome again.
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:19 pm

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby Trooper10 » Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:53 pm

A couple of observations and comments.
First up, Dimensions is not actually a Lego product. What? I've been reliably informed (by an employee of TLG) that Lego effectively licensed their brand to WB and they don't own the product and hence it had minimal presence in LBR stores and they were never allowed to discount them. I never got details on the arrangement but it fits with the dumping of Wave one in the 99c stores (hasn't happened with any other Lego product).

2 What have been the financial results of the other big toy makers? - again I've been told (I don't know where to research the numbers myself nor do I care to) that worldwide, toy markets have been down 10%-15% this year. So TLG being down 5% is still better than all their competition. And 95% of last years $560 million profit, is still a pretty healthy situation.

3 - hearing that TLG has expanded to more than 18,000 employees and seeing the explosion in the parts list and return to many highly specialized parts, is a big concern and rings a warning bell in my mind - perhaps some cuts would be in due order. In 2000 their loss of focus on the core product was a big part of the problem - now Lego is a kind of everywhere product, perhaps the same issue exists at a corporate Lego - listening to the shiny-suit brigade and trying to do too much "Branding".

4 - I mentioned elsewhere the "tale of two products" with Lego sets IMO. I think they have come up with a bunch of great sets in recent years and a pile of stinkers. For every reissued UCS Death Star or Hoth combo box we have a Ferris Wheel or Ninjago City, or even the new UCS Falcon, despite it's price...(which IMO is reasonable considering the part count and inflation and Lego-flation)

5 - TLG will always have the re-issue dilemma for lines like Star Wars as there are new generations of kids growing up and wanting the core cast of characters. This is hard on long-time fans and AFOLs, but we are still only up to ~10% of their market, 90% is kids. And they have a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't issue with comic licenses - mainly Batman and Spiderman - they'll lose as many sales of kids wanting their hero is a set as parents who look and think "you already have one of those".

Overall it seems there has been a whole bunch of freak-out (based on seeing stuff posted in other places on the net) over a drop in profits - image if they'd made a loss....
Posts: 383
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 1:58 am

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby dWhisper » Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:43 am

The game development is published by WB and by their wholly-owned developer Tt, who itself was founded by developers from Lego's shuttered game studio back in the early 2000s. But the physical product is still manufactured by Lego, and they're the ones that have to negotiate with rights-holders for the IP content in there, not WB. It's a partnership, to be sure, but not one that's hands-off for Lego.

Even if it was just a brand licensing deal, there's still an effect of their brand being on a product that ultimately didn't pan out. I also wouldn't look at the clear-out in dollar stores and resellers as an indication of Lego not being involved... there are a lot of stores that buy pallet repacks of sets after they've bombed out in stores. Places like Tuesday Morning, Half Price Books, etc, are decent sources of sets at deep discounts. After the first Batman license failed (and it did for the most part) I remember picking up several of the Batcave and Arkham Asylum sets at a Tuesday morning for $25 each.
If the above post didn't offend you, you're probably reading it wrong.
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:56 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby banthafodder » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:28 pm

Trooper 10 does have a good point in number 2 (hee hee) in that yesterday TRU hired a bankruptcy firm to try to re-organize 400 million n debt. It is likely this downturn is hitting everyone.
Posts: 984
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby jaisonline » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:04 am

@staff, great article.
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 2:53 am

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby WillyWampa » Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:28 am

Lots of interesting discussion on this topic. Below are comments I made on earlier this year which sums up my opinions on some of the issues the LEGO company is currently facing.

Quoted from another posting "I will always be a LEGO fan, through thick and thin. No doubt about that. My gripe today, though, is that I believe precisely the latter is the situation; LEGO is losing its touch. Their vision is thinning"

My response:

Well said. After 40+ years of being a fan of LEGO and an avid collector I have found that my enthusiasm for the product has waned in recent years. There is no one reason or thing to blame for this but rather what I see as a gradual departure from the toy I fell in love with decades ago. Here are some factors that I think have contributed to LEGO losing its focus.

Short Product runs- Whether it is LEGO's own themes or licensed product lines, the shelf life seems to be less than 6 months after which sets are gone for good to be replaced with the next wave of products. I like that there are new products appearing regularly, but it seems if you blink you miss finding sets on the retail shelves and have to resort to the aftermarket to find items. I've backed off on collecting some themes and sets for the simple reason that I can't afford to keep up with the torrent of "new" products.

Lack of really new sets - Any theme that lasts longer than 6 months faces rehashed variants of sets that have already been made several times. Worst example of this is the City line of sets with the annual police or fire stations and an assortment of vehicle based sets that while technically new are little different from ones produced the year before.

Overly complex models - The sets you find today are a far cry from the minifigure based models that were introduced decades ago. Complex building techniques that require highly detailed instructions to complete are now the norm. While the models are amazing, being too complex can be a turn off for kids. It is not unusual to find LEGO sets at second hand stores or yard sales where the child has started the build, but given up partway through, even leaving some bags of parts unopened. I miss the days of one page building plans.

Too Much focus on LIcensed products - Fair enough, licensing has saved LEGO's bacon! However (rough estimate) more than half of their product lines are now licensed. Starwars, Disney and the comic superhero themes while big sellers are not for everyone. I wonder are the fans of these sets fans of LEGO, or just fans of the licensed brand. Too much focus and reliance on a license agreement leaves the TLG vulnerable to the demands of the owners of that license.

In keeping with the focus on licensed products, some of the licensed lines have been poor sellers and some have been real stinkers. Considering the cost of the license and the cost of producing new model designs and in some cases parts to support the license this has got to hurt the company's bottom line. It was/is not unusual to find these sets having to be marked down in order to sell. Lone Ranger, Prince of Persia, Cars, Ben 10, Airbender, SpongeBob, LOTR, Hobbit and others I can't recall. Some of these had a strong, but narrow target audience and were good sets, but not long term money makers.

Even some of LEGO's own product lines haven't been great sellers. Chima and Nexo Knights are the current duds in my opinion. These sets can normally be found marked down in short order as seen to lack play value or are overpriced to begin with.

Brick Quality - Maybe I'm just getting picky, but It seems like the quality of the LEGO bricks has been decreasing over the past years. The colours don't seem to be as strong and the plastic itself doesn't seem to be as good as it was years ago. Ironically, the "lower quality" brands such as Megobloks have steadily improved the manufacture of the bricks and sets over the years to where they are nearly on par with LEGO's product. Even the clone knock offs of the LEGO sets are now difficult to distinguish from genuine products.

Oh well, just a few rants that seemed to fit in with this discussion. It may just be that I've reached the point where I'm nostalgic for the LEGO sets and designs I remember from my youth. :) Get off my lawn!

Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:10 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby The Phantom Menace » Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:00 pm

Lego has just become too expensive for what it is.

I usually buy the Xmas sets, but I won't this year as the train station is excessively priced for what it is. It's not a licensed set, but they know AFOLs want it so that jack up the price.

It amazes me at how much the SW sets have gone up in recent years. Most retailers discount Lego nearly all year round because the RRP is too much.
The Phantom Menace
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby Diddly » Fri Sep 08, 2017 2:02 pm

I agree with a lot of what has been said. I'm primarily a Star Wars collector, have been since I was 10 years old in 1999, but also pick up my fair share of Marvel and DC sets, as well as City. Just keeping up with the Star Wars line over the last few years has been a chore, insomuch that I've given up on City, and only pick up the comic based Heroes sets, which are very rare.

The prices jumped to "expensive" around 2010, but that was when they started improving the minifigures, and added new sleeker parts, so the slight cost increases made sense. But starting with the Force Awakens line, it has just been too much product for too high of a price. In 2015, we got the new winter sets in March, followed by the summer wave in May, then the TFA wave in September. Each of those waves had at least 1 $100+ set, and as pointed out, the cheapest TFA set was $20 (Rey's speeder).

Same thing happened in 2016, new TFA wave in January, then the OT/PT sets in March, another summer wave, then Rogue One in September, all with expensive sets. And a lot of these sets (mainly the $25 range) were out for 6 months before being retired. What's even the point?

I've resorted to doing a TON of buying on Amazon at Walmart, where discounts are the norm now. I used to LOVE buying from LEGO Stores and LEGO Shop, due to the bonus deals and VIP bonuses, but those are few and far between now, and you save too much money buying from Amazon or Walmart. I think I only bought 1 set from 2016 at full retail, and that was to get the free Darth Revan for Force Friday.

I hope this results in a scaling back of the amount of product released, but we'll see.
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:54 pm

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby Marty » Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:17 pm

Hi, like most, I’ve been reading in the press about how bad thing’s are with the “Lego” company of late.

It’s a sad day when you hear that kids are turning away from this toy, as at the end of the day it’s a really good product one that I and many others like me grew up & played with for almost half a decade.

I’d like to offer some free advice but wether-or-not Lego choose’s to use it, it’s up to them.

First, the way I see it, there are too-many super-hero themes, as they say, “too many eggs in one basket?” And kids are over-whelmed.

The main Star Wars theme, although they have tried to keep it interesting with each film, has been done to death.
It’s lost it’s character and to put it bluntly, kids are over it.

If Lego does want to hold kids/adults interest, stop making sets that cost a fortune, most parents, (including myself) dread when you walk into a store and most of the sets that kids want cost over a $100 bucks, I remember when you bought a Lego set you got value for money, not now, and parents know this.

The only thing I think has some spark of the old Lego is the Ideas theme, though again price comes into that and the bigger more elaborate the pricer and out of reach it gets. Don’t get me wrong, I love the sets, I have most of these, would like to get more but that’s not the point, what is, is you have to keep changing, peeking their interest, for example depending on who you talk too the dimensions was a failure, but the characters it came up with, weren’t.

Let’s take a look for example; Power Puff Girls, Adventure time, Teen Titans, Doctor Who, Wizard of OZ, okay the game might not be great but the promise in the game play of what sets might be made because of these, did hold interest. But they never happened?

As for the older theme’s, Castle’s, Pirates, Western & space to name a few they have had their time, what about something new or at least based on them.

I know there are good sets that get released then you never hear from them again, that’s why I think Lego has failed, it failed in that it didn’t see the potential in that. The Lunar Lander was one.

I know Lego depends too much on license themes we get that, SW being their biggest, but there are lesser ones out there that could pay off.

On the non-licence themes, stick to history based ones, Rome, Greek Gods, a rooster theme, never been done, famous character from books / history, dioramas based on these. A build your own tiny house theme.

These are just a few ideas, I'm sure there are better ones out there.

My Personal fav, an old Battlestar viper & raider, or a Buck Rogers theme?

Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:44 pm

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby Marty » Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:04 pm

Marty wrote:
On the non-licence themes, stick to history based ones, Rome, Greek Gods, a rooster theme, never been done,


Now I know I'm getting old when predictive text, changes my words and I didn't even notice it?
Think of who wrote A Christmas Carol?
That's what it was supposed to say, instead of rooster, it makes more sense.

Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:44 pm

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby Flynn » Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:21 pm

I think a big thing affecting the pricing, particularly with Star Wars sets, is that a lot of long-running lines don't really seem to be designed to hit specific price-points anymore. Like, going way back to the original Star Wars line in 1999, you had sets designed at the 6, 10, 20, 30, 50, and 100 dollar price points (and I think some other points in between, but those were the major ones), and this was fairly standard across all themes--in a given year you could expect to see an Adventurers, Star Wars, Life on Mars, Harry Potter, City, or what have you set priced at those given points.

What has been happening to Star Wars for years, and affecting other long-running lines, is that sets seem to be designed first with the price-point happening later. Which, to be fair, can result in great sets--the best of the Super Hero line was likely designed like this, and the Falcon is very probably going to be a great set. But when this nets you sets that are going well above the 100 or even 150 range, it becomes hard to justify that many prestige-figure sets. Which is the issue with something like the Falcon--it's not as if the set isn't going to be worth 800 dollars, it's that realistically LEGO sets probably shouldn't be hitting above the 200 mark as often as they are.

It also means that there's a lot less sets aimed at price points under 30 bucks or so, leaving that mostly for battle packs or planet sets, or whatever the next wave of minifig-centered minisets will be. Which also means we're getting less sets consciously connected to a price point--again to go back to the start of the line, you generally felt like sets were being designed at a price point relative to their worth in the franchise. A basic ship like the X-Wing would be 30 bucks, a TIE fighter 20, your tiny sets would be speeders or the like, and the Falcon would net 100 because that's a substantially larger ship. Now, you get really wonky redesigns like a 20 dollar Landspeeder or a 100 dollar Imperial Shuttle. The TFA sets seemed the most arbitrary--the TIE Fighter was 70 dollars because that's just what the set ended up being priced at. And it's an honestly fantastic set--but there's no way a 70-dollar TIE fighter was ever an idea that should've been allowed to happen.

It makes it so that there's just not a lot on the lower price ends for kids to buy, which especially hurts a popular line like Star Wars. Sure, parents can buy their kids sets, but at least for me I generally only received 6-20 sets as a kid, and 50-100 sets were saved for particularly special Christmas presents or the like. And I was raised in a firmly middle class family, so I can't even speak to what it would be like for less privileged families. Like, really, the only Star Wars sets priced under 20 bucks right now are battlepacks and microfighters? Hell, there's more sets in the Last Jedi wave 100 dollars and over than there are under 100 dollars. That's ridiculous, and really makes me wonder who exactly these sets are being marketed towards these days.
joecrowaz on Flickr wrote:Flynn you little wussy with a purple robed fairy for an icon,

Flickr Brickshelf
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:38 am

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby banthafodder » Fri Sep 08, 2017 9:41 pm

Don't discount the price of mouse food in the Star Wars sets. Gotta feed the mouse!
Posts: 984
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: Lego Sales Drop, Layoffs, and Speculating About Why

Postby dWhisper » Sat Sep 09, 2017 11:05 am

WillyWampa wrote:Lots of interesting discussion on this topic. Below are comments I made on earlier this year which sums up my opinions on some of the issues the LEGO company is currently facing.

I cannot even imagine being a Castle fan these days. For a long time, it was really my main love, even more than Star Wars, but LEGO very clearly gave up on it years ago. It was a real shame, because there were a couple of sets towards the end that gave me hope, like the Blacksmith Shop or the Village, and then the exceedingly lackluster Lord of the Rings seemingly killed it. Worse, things like Nexo Nights are so far removed from the old castle lines (and, like all the other castle replacements LEGO has ever made, seemingly failed ingloriously.
If the above post didn't offend you, you're probably reading it wrong.
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:56 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Return to General LEGO Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests