|
 |
| | | Author: | Lune  | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 20:08 | | Subject: | Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 157 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| Hello, fellas
I'm in the process of rebuilding old legos I got as a child. In building
those I ran into a problem I assume must be usual for such cases: many pieces
from those times are missing, broken, lost their grip, lost their stickers, raised
baseplates cracking, etc.
Now, of course, one can just buy parts here, and that's fine, but eventually
some pieces are gonna run out for good. For instance, there's only one right
door (30074) available for that big black truck (5571) right now.
I was thinking if it ever occurred to LEGO licensing the production of retired
parts, cloth parts, and baseplates to someone else. Perhaps even with enhancements
(thicker baseplates, reinforcement points, connections below). Pretty much as
it happens with car parts for classic models.
In the later case (raised baseplates) I read they actually did have a 3rd party
doing the raised baseplates at some point, so it doesn't strike me as impossible.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | kzinti | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 20:19 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| In LEGO, Lune writes:
| | Hello, fellas
I'm in the process of rebuilding old legos I got as a child. In building
those I ran into a problem I assume must be usual for such cases: many pieces
from those times are missing, broken, lost their grip, lost their stickers, raised
baseplates cracking, etc.
Now, of course, one can just buy parts here, and that's fine, but eventually
some pieces are gonna run out for good. For instance, there's only one right
door (30074) available for that big black truck (5571) right now.
I was thinking if it ever occurred to LEGO licensing the production of retired
parts, cloth parts, and baseplates to someone else. Perhaps even with enhancements
(thicker baseplates, reinforcement points, connections below). Pretty much as
it happens with car parts for classic models.
In the later case (raised baseplates) I read they actually did have a 3rd party
doing the raised baseplates at some point, so it doesn't strike me as impossible.
|
Can also looks for stickered versions, of which this part has several on sale.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 03:18 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| In LEGO, Lune writes:
| | Hello, fellas
I'm in the process of rebuilding old legos I got as a child. In building
those I ran into a problem I assume must be usual for such cases: many pieces
from those times are missing, broken, lost their grip, lost their stickers, raised
baseplates cracking, etc.
Now, of course, one can just buy parts here, and that's fine, but eventually
some pieces are gonna run out for good. For instance, there's only one right
door (30074) available for that big black truck (5571) right now.
I was thinking if it ever occurred to LEGO licensing the production of retired
parts, cloth parts, and baseplates to someone else. Perhaps even with enhancements
(thicker baseplates, reinforcement points, connections below). Pretty much as
it happens with car parts for classic models.
In the later case (raised baseplates) I read they actually did have a 3rd party
doing the raised baseplates at some point, so it doesn't strike me as impossible.
|
I doubt there is a big enough market for it but more importantly it undermines
bricklink.
There are also issues with quality and colour consistency, do lego give their
formulations to third party companies.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Lune | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 04:00 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| | |
I doubt there is a big enough market for it but more importantly it undermines
bricklink.
There are also issues with quality and colour consistency, do lego give their
formulations to third party companies.
|
I don't think it would undermine BL tbh, Pick-a-Brick has a similar purpose,
except it's for production parts, and you gotta pay that extra for using
it instead of BL. For instance, P-a-B charges 0.14 USD for part 3660/76959 in
white, while you can find the same element for less than (!) 0.01 USD here on
BL.
There would be a shift in price for some stuff, maybe, but I believe it would
only be the case for very rare parts.
Now, the point in doing that would be paying for a brand new part, possibly improved
(and maybe parts in specific colors that Lego itself isn't willing to produce).
Of course, small scale means it comes with a tad more expensive tag. A minor
part producer wouldn't be able to compete in cost with Lego itself for the
average stuff, nor with the used parts market.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 04:08 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| In LEGO, Lune writes:
| | | |
I doubt there is a big enough market for it but more importantly it undermines
bricklink.
There are also issues with quality and colour consistency, do lego give their
formulations to third party companies.
|
I don't think it would undermine BL tbh, Pick-a-Brick has a similar purpose,
except it's for production parts, and you gotta pay that extra for using
it instead of BL. For instance, P-a-B charges 0.14 USD for part 3660/76959 in
white, while you can find the same element for less than (!) 0.01 USD here on
BL.
There would be a shift in price for some stuff, maybe, but I believe it would
only be the case for very rare parts.
Now, the point in doing that would be paying for a brand new part, possibly improved
(and maybe parts in specific colors that Lego itself isn't willing to produce).
Of course, small scale means it comes with a tad more expensive tag. A minor
part producer wouldn't be able to compete in cost with Lego itself for the
average stuff, nor with the used parts market.
|
For current parts, sellers expect LEGO to continue producing those parts so there
will be continual flow of stock coming to BL.
But for retired parts, it is a different situation. If someone has rare parts,
why manipulate the market to produce lots of new parts that are the same. And
it is not just parts, it affects sets too. If you complete a vintage set with
modern repro parts, then it undermines the genuine set price.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Lune | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 04:54 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| | | For current parts, sellers expect LEGO to continue producing those parts so there
will be continual flow of stock coming to BL.
But for retired parts, it is a different situation. If someone has rare parts,
why manipulate the market to produce lots of new parts that are the same. And
it is not just parts, it affects sets too. If you complete a vintage set with
modern repro parts, then it undermines the genuine set price.
|
Well, one can play that card the opposite direction: why manipulate the market
by allowing no influx of new parts? Price can then be controlled by simply hoarding
& limiting the availability of parts.
Certainly, someone interested on it can hoard all those 6+1 right black doors
to drive up their prices, but I certainly don't see that as the spirit of
Lego.
As for the reproduction parts, I don't think it would have that effect on
genuine set prices if those parts were improved. Those rare sets are sought by
hardcore collectors, who would still look for original parts instead of the modified
ones. Even a simple 'year of production' stamp would probably already
kill it for vintage collectors.
What it does, imo, is prevent common people from getting an old set they wished
for as a kid, or rebuilding their collections. In that case, people are not going
to buy the collector's set anyway, as it is just too expensive.
I understand it, I really do. If the rare parts depreciated it would suck for
people who grabbed them for reselling. Yet, at the same time, it was a personal
decision to try profitting out of retired parts, which means that if someone
is playing stock market with Lego parts then they accept the risks that come
with it.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 06:03 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| | |
Well, one can play that card the opposite direction: why manipulate the market
by allowing no influx of new parts? Price can then be controlled by simply hoarding
& limiting the availability of parts.
|
Because LEGO's business is selling current parts in new sets.
| | Certainly, someone interested on it can hoard all those 6+1 right black doors
to drive up their prices, but I certainly don't see that as the spirit of
Lego.
As for the reproduction parts, I don't think it would have that effect on
genuine set prices if those parts were improved. Those rare sets are sought by
hardcore collectors, who would still look for original parts instead of the modified
ones. Even a simple 'year of production' stamp would probably already
kill it for vintage collectors.
|
I don't know what improved here means. How do you improve a door but still
have it match the original? If you are happy with a different part that fits
why not use an alternative.
| |
What it does, imo, is prevent common people from getting an old set they wished
for as a kid, or rebuilding their collections. In that case, people are not going
to buy the collector's set anyway, as it is just too expensive.
|
LEGO's business is selling new sets. Why would they want you to buy parts
produced by another manufacturer instead of their sets?
| |
I understand it, I really do. If the rare parts depreciated it would suck for
people who grabbed them for reselling. Yet, at the same time, it was a personal
decision to try profitting out of retired parts, which means that if someone
is playing stock market with Lego parts then they accept the risks that come
with it.
|
Yes that is part of the risk. But given rarely bring back old parts in exactly
the same form, it is a mitigated risk. If they choose to let other companies
produce and profit from old parts to undermine the prices and/or availability
then they damage this market (that they benefit from) for little gain. If they
really wanted to have alternative / modified / improved versions of vintage parts
then they are better off designing them in house and using them in and producing
them for modern sets.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Lune | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 08:46 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| | |
Because LEGO's business is selling current parts in new sets.
|
Lego is a business, they'll take profits from anything their team deems profitable,
regardless of the used parts market. A perfect example of that are the vintage
sets that have been brought back at times, including collectors' favorites
such as the Black Seas Barracuda. I'm quite sure someone somewhere screamed
so loud he could be heard from another city when Lego re-released that. They
don't care about collectors in this sense.
| |
I don't know what improved here means. How do you improve a door but still
have it match the original? If you are happy with a different part that fits
why not use an alternative.
|
I'm not proposing that licensed parts should necessarily be identical to
retired parts, if anything, I support improved versions. For instance, I feel
raised baseplates would benefit GREATLY from extra reinforcement structures below
(think honeycomb-like reinforcements) and thicker plastic below the raised studs.
The appearance and function are the same, but it's a better part (engineering-wise).
Collectors get to keep their true/authentic/whatever plates and price tags.
Personally I don't mind for minor differences such as 'hollow' studs
vs 'filled' studs and the likes, but for some parts there is no alternative.
Again, suppose I need the Big Truck door sometime from now, should I just sandcast
or 3d print a copy of it? :/
| |
LEGO's business is selling new sets. Why would they want you to buy parts
produced by another manufacturer instead of their sets?
|
Because keeping old sets alive is also a market. As Lego has said in the past,
too many parts in production at the same time is expensive, but licensing means
they don't have to deal with potential losses from that. Instead, that potential
loss is on the 3rd party that agreed to produce the parts. Lego would only have
to cash in from the licensing and a cut from the sales. No money spent on machinery
from Lego's side.
It doesn't conflict in any way with newer sets since the parts are different.
| |
Yes that is part of the risk. But given rarely bring back old parts in exactly
the same form, it is a mitigated risk. If they choose to let other companies
produce and profit from old parts to undermine the prices and/or availability
then they damage this market (that they benefit from) for little gain. If they
really wanted to have alternative / modified / improved versions of vintage parts
then they are better off designing them in house and using them in and producing
them for modern sets.
|
Let's remember it's not only form, but also color. Old grays and printed
pieces come to mind. There are already people selling sticker sheets, and, again,
for the average folk, a good copy is worth buying, while a vintage sheet is not.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 10:05 | | Subject: | Re: Licensing retired pieces | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | LEGO products | |
|
| In LEGO, Lune writes:
| | | |
Because LEGO's business is selling current parts in new sets.
|
Lego is a business, they'll take profits from anything their team deems profitable,
regardless of the used parts market. A perfect example of that are the vintage
sets that have been brought back at times, including collectors' favorites
such as the Black Seas Barracuda. I'm quite sure someone somewhere screamed
so loud he could be heard from another city when Lego re-released that. They
don't care about collectors in this sense.
|
When they remake older sets, they make money from them. They don't license
out the designs to other companies to make them.
| | | |
I don't know what improved here means. How do you improve a door but still
have it match the original? If you are happy with a different part that fits
why not use an alternative.
|
I'm not proposing that licensed parts should necessarily be identical to
retired parts, if anything, I support improved versions. For instance, I feel
raised baseplates would benefit GREATLY from extra reinforcement structures below
(think honeycomb-like reinforcements) and thicker plastic below the raised studs.
The appearance and function are the same, but it's a better part (engineering-wise).
Collectors get to keep their true/authentic/whatever plates and price tags.
Personally I don't mind for minor differences such as 'hollow' studs
vs 'filled' studs and the likes, but for some parts there is no alternative.
Again, suppose I need the Big Truck door sometime from now, should I just sandcast
or 3d print a copy of it? :/
| |
LEGO's business is selling new sets. Why would they want you to buy parts
produced by another manufacturer instead of their sets?
|
Because keeping old sets alive is also a market. As Lego has said in the past,
too many parts in production at the same time is expensive, but licensing means
they don't have to deal with potential losses from that. Instead, that potential
loss is on the 3rd party that agreed to produce the parts. Lego would only have
to cash in from the licensing and a cut from the sales. No money spent on machinery
from Lego's side.
It doesn't conflict in any way with newer sets since the parts are different.
| |
Yes that is part of the risk. But given rarely bring back old parts in exactly
the same form, it is a mitigated risk. If they choose to let other companies
produce and profit from old parts to undermine the prices and/or availability
then they damage this market (that they benefit from) for little gain. If they
really wanted to have alternative / modified / improved versions of vintage parts
then they are better off designing them in house and using them in and producing
them for modern sets.
|
Let's remember it's not only form, but also color. Old grays and printed
pieces come to mind. There are already people selling sticker sheets, and, again,
for the average folk, a good copy is worth buying, while a vintage sheet is not.
|
People selling replacement (not real) sticker sheets are not licensed. They either
steal lego's designs or make their own very similar designs. There is nothing
stopping a clone company making a door the same size as an old lego one in a
slightly different style. Of course, it wouldn't be lego and wouldn't
be acceptable to a collector but then neither would a licensed out design.
If you want one, 3D print it, or use something alternative to fill in the gap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brazil, Rio Grande do Sul
USA, Missouri
United Kingdom, England