| ▲ | mmustapic 7 hours ago |
| Lego was always expensive, you can compare prices adjusted for inflation. For example, the 1979 Galaxy Explorer <https://brickset.com/sets/497-1> was around $32, that's $144 today. The reimagined set from 2023 <https://brickset.com/sets/10497-1> was sold at $99, $106 today. Not only it is cheaper, but much larger and with many more pieces. |
|
| ▲ | potatototoo99 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes, they have kept up with inflation, and that is the problem. Manufactured goods like Lego bricks should fall in price through innovation in processes, scale, etc. What does raise higher than the average inflation should be be labor-intensive products/services. In other words, it feels much stranger today how expensive Legos are compared to 47 years ago. |
| |
| ▲ | atomicnumber3 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Lego is branding, curation and quality bar, though. They're the Apple of bricks (weird sentence). There's tons of lego-knockoffs and of not even such lesser quality that the difference can be perceived by casual inspection. The set-to-set quality bar is really where it is, especially among their set lines not targeted at children or low-end of market. But none of those sets have any kind of staying power. There's Expert/Creator/Modular sets from 20 years ago that sell for $500-1000 _opened and pre-built/re-disassembled_. That's all brand power. So they're less about $/brick (though i know people scrutinize it) and more about price point and brand. Phrased differently, having your brick company race to the bottom sounds like a losing strategy. | | |
| ▲ | AdamN 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah I don't know what this person is on about. Lego is obviously premium and ... charges premium prices because ... they're a business. People (consumers) who want premium products ... pay the premium. I would be much more frustrated if they became cheaper and reduced the quality of the product. | | |
| ▲ | pibaker 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | There is a prevalent view of economy that insists businesses sell their products at the minimum price they can still make a profit at (but not lower or you are dumping.) A Marxist view of economy, if I must. Whenever I meet one of these people, I ask if they are willing to negotiate a wage reduction with his HR. My logic is simple. If you think it is wrong for a business to sell a product at the maximum price they can demonstrably get away with like Lego does, then why is it right for you, a professional worker selling your labor, to sell your labor at a price higher than what is necessary for subsistence? |
|
| |
| ▲ | sixo 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Prices are constrained by demand moreso than by cost of production. Lego pieces are expensive because they can be, they still sell, and this is largely due to the quality. As long as the quality moat persists, they can charge as much as people will pay, and--good for them! That you personally would prefer lower prices does not mean they "should" be lower. Those lower costs of production, to Lego company, "should" mean higher profits, not lower prices, and again--good for them! | | |
| ▲ | mcphage 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > As long as the quality moat persists The risk Lego faces is that they don't actually have a quality moat any longer. You can get non-lego sets with no stickers, plenty of prints, LED lighting, at a cheaper price, and with the exact same piece quality. I purchased this set: https://www.lumibricks.com/collections/steampunk-world/produ... over Christmas, and I paid $105 because it was on sale. The pieces were indistinguishable from Lego in quality, and the lights and lack of stickers was a quality increase from what Lego offers. What moat Lego has is: brand recognition and licenses. Which aren't nothing, but don't offer much protection. | | |
| ▲ | mmustapic 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | What you mention is true, but Lego sets are (almost always) very well designed, specially the ones for kids. | |
| ▲ | sixo an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | A reputation moat is still a moat. It seems to me that Lego prices will drop as soon as they are forced to by competition, and not before, and this is fine. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mytailorisrich 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Anything that has only kept up with inflation over the last 50 years is cheaper today than it was 50 years ago relative to people's incomes, which is the relevant definition of "cheaper". Not sure exactly how Lego prices have evolved but, as others have said, Lego is a brand and is unique. Their sale prices have little to do with their costs. | | |
| ▲ | autoexec 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | For most people anything that has only kept up with inflation over the last 50 years is more expense today than it was 50 years ago because wages have stagnated while prices have soared. | | |
| ▲ | mytailorisrich 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, that's not the case. For instance, the median household income in the United States in 1976 was $12,686. That's $72,857.55 today based on inflation (Google/Census Bureau Data + online inflation calculator). However, Google's AI overview says "As of early 2026, the median household income in the United States is estimated to be approximately $84,000." So the the median household income in the US today is about $11,000 ahead of inflation since 1976. People in the US are richer now that they were then. | | |
| ▲ | autoexec 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > in real terms average hourly earnings peaked more than 45 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 had the same purchasing power that $23.68 would today. (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/08/07/for-most-...) | |
| ▲ | rfrey 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Now what about the change in the number of earners per household? Houses don't earn wages, people do. | |
| ▲ | galaxyLogic 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ok, but, what about median household size? Shouldn't we calculate the "richness" based not on how much each household makes but how much each member of a household gets from it? My guess is that households are smaller these days, but don't know. | | |
| ▲ | mytailorisrich 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well if today's households are smaller that makes them even richer (more money split over fewer people). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | dclowd9901 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I have the re-release secondhand unopened and I think I paid about that much, so even in a collector's market, not terrible at all. An expensive toy to be sure but a deeply satisfying experience if you like that kind of thing. |
| |
| ▲ | Xerox9213 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Buying buckets of used bricks is pretty cheap, too. I bought an adult's old lifetime collection for $30 CAD. My 2 year old son and I are still sorting them. | | |
| ▲ | tylerflick 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Not to mention you can 3D print Duplo compatible bricks. | |
| ▲ | cruffle_duffle 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sorting Lego is such a pain in the ass. I have like a huge stash from when I was a kid. Back then we just had it all in a few tubs and dug to find a part. But somehow now I feel I must sort them… but the “right way” is ill defined and kind of sucks the joy out of playing (especially disassembling) And there is no “right way” that I’ve even found. Sort by color and now the little pieces fall to the bottom and are hard to dig for. The best I can see is part type and size… maybe… even then it sucks out the fun. I want to build cool shit with my daughter not spend every moment of Lego time sorting. There is no joy in sorting… Maybe I just revert back to the “big tub” approach. I dunno. Thanks for listening to my TED talk I guess. | | |
| ▲ | fifilura 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The evolution of lego sorting [2001] https://news.lugnet.com/storage/?n=707 (Bah Might as well submit that as a top level story, others may enjoy it) | |
| ▲ | orthoxerox 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Why sort by color if human eyes (unless colorblind) are great at recognizing different colors? Back when I was a kid, I used the big tub approach (with the Spyrius base octant as my shovel). | |
| ▲ | kroolik 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Build with what pieces you can find, rather than plan the perfect structure ahead. Improvising keeps the creativity going! Wheres fun if sorting legos sucks all the Joy from it |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | onlypassingthru 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Wow, childhood memory unlocked. I had set 497. And, yes, it was a very expensive toy in its day. |
| |
| ▲ | serallak 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | I still got it. Has been in storage for a long time. My child did build it some years ago, now it's in his room. |
|
|
| ▲ | Spooky23 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yes! We were never bougie enough to get Lego, I played with Sears bricks growing up. |
|
| ▲ | detourdog 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I remember the Lego 404 set being $40 in 1980. I actually can’t believe my Mom bought it for me. |
|
| ▲ | sbcorvus 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Thanks for this reminder about the cost variable. |
|
| ▲ | brazzy 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It has almost 4 times the number of pieces, but is only about 50% longer and wider - there's just way more smaller pieces. Price per piece is very misleading when comparing older and newer sets. The newer ones have more details, look slicker, but have a lot less "meat". Which is not that great for creative play. |
| |
| ▲ | StilesCrisis 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I bought a set recently which was definitely padding its piece counts. The interior structure of a solid shape was constructed out of dozens of small 1x2s and could easily have been a handful of much larger pieces with no downside. I didn't consider the "more pieces = more perceived value" logic until this comment. | | |
| ▲ | ijk 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | For a while the complaint was that Lego was making too many big, specialized pieces, so I'm amused that the current complaint seems to be that they're using too many small generic ones. | | |
| ▲ | cwillu 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | They're not saying that they should be using big specialized pieces, they're saying that they should be using bigger boring standard pieces. |
| |
| ▲ | gmueckl 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I had a weird build recently with the Luxo Jr model. There are a couple of cavities in the model that are partially filled in with very small parts. These parts don't connect in a way that makes then structural. I'm still puzzled why these parts are there. | | | |
| ▲ | nkrisc 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I always charitably assumed that they designed models to utilize surplus pieces for the internal structures, pieces that might be hard to use elsewhere. | | |
| ▲ | bombcar 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | They may do that (designers have a "part budget" they can spend in various ways) but the real reason for weird colors inside models is to make it easier to build; especially since many of the models consist entirely of various shades of grey and black. Various piece size also makes it easier to see if you got the wrong piece. |
|
| |
| ▲ | jdwithit 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Definitely agree on the reduced usefulness for creative play. My kids got a lot of Lego sets as gifts when they were younger. Which is great, I love them playing with Legos. But once they're done with the instructions that's just kinda it. A Star Wars or Frozen or Minecraft themed kit ends up being all weird one-off specialty pieces. They are necessary to make an extremely detailed replica of the Millenium Falcon. But they have no place if you just want to grab a handful of bricks and start building whatever your imagination comes up with. We have a tub full of thousands of pieces and it never gets used. I think it's a bummer that they've pivoted to pushing these intricate $120 kits to adults rather than designs featuring more reusable components. You need to go out of your way to buy tranches of generic bricks if you want to have free play. | | |
| ▲ | crooked-v an hour ago | parent [-] | | The Creator 3-in-1 sets are basically what you're looking for, they just don't get advertised much. A lot of them are more generified and rebuildable, sometimes even more refined versions of more expensive sets or parts of more expensive sets. Maybe the most obvious are the 3-in-1 dragon and dinosaur sets, which to me feel obviously like more generic reworks of D&D and Jurassic Park builds respectively, and have a lot more in the way of generic tiles and bricks than the licensed sets they're derived from. |
| |
| ▲ | etrvic 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | A 50% increase in dimensions doesn't directly transform in a 50% increase in volume. >The newer ones have more details, look slicker, but have a lot less "meat" I presume that the 2022 model has as target audience nostalgic adults, but otherwise I agree, the new sets seem far more fragile then the ones released a decade ago. I think this is due to a recent focus towards adults from LEGO. | |
| ▲ | bombcar 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's the other way around - because pieces cost roughly based on their size (amount of material) modern Lego sets are "denser" and heavier on average than similar sized sets of the past, because as piece count (and detail) goes up, piece size has been going down. | |
| ▲ | mmustapic 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It is a set for nostalgic adults. In fact, it is 50% larger so a grown up can hold it in their hands and feel it massive, like kids did in the 80s. |
|
|
| ▲ | seqastian 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| There are so many better alternatives these days it’s mostly fanboys and people who don’t care who are still buying original Lego. |
| |
| ▲ | radpanda 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I feel like I’ve seen essentially this same comment every time a Lego thread comes up but there doesn’t seem to be unanimous agreement on which brick toys are better. Sure, some people have good experiences with brand X but others will say they’ve had bad luck with the construction. Someone else will talk up Brand Y and someone else will point out how terrible the instructions are. Are there any brands that actually do consistently deliver a Lego-quality experience without the Lego price? | | |
| ▲ | dsr_ 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No, you'll always give up something. If you want to spend some time looking at critiques from someone with experience, I find JANG's Youtube reviews of both LEGO and non-LEGO brick toys to be well-balanced. We have differing opinions, but he has decent rationales for most of his opinions. | |
| ▲ | alexriddle 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Lumibricks is fantastic, built in lighting (or rather you build it in as part of the model) and as someone who has always turned their nose up at off brand Lego, the parts are definitely 99% of the way there. Instructions the same quality, if not better, than Lego as well - all for about the third of the price. Minifigs are terrible but I have hundreds of those spare anyway! | |
| ▲ | CapricornNoble 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I guess it depends on what a "Lego-quality experience" means to you. I grew up with the mid 80s to mid 90s kits, mostly castles and pirate ships, a few space sets. I think it's a very different experience compared to the nightmares I read about building the Mould King Eclipse-class Star Destroyer ( https://www.reddit.com/r/lepin/comments/1pdfx5y/mould_king_e... ). The concept of "bad luck with construction" is foreign to me, because most of the kits I remember building as a child were comparatively simple. I'm working on this house with my 5yo daughter now: ( https://ja.aliexpress.com/item/1005006068361257.html ). Costs ~$20, we work on it about 30-45 minutes several times a week, so it takes months to finish. If she tears it apart 6 months from now to build something from her imagination, mission accomplished. I hear people rave about this Cyberpunk-style kit, maybe this is closer to what you expect? https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/_a_a4b2bvISsP6pyjkSxLw (Chinese language review) I plan to buy it at some point....for myself, not for my kids! |
| |
| ▲ | mmustapic 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Lego is some kind of cultural icon now, and many people want to participate. That's why they have tons of sets aimed at adults over many themes, like plastic flowers, formula 1 helmets, old video game consoles. Many of them are a really bad and expensive purchase if you only care about the theme itself, like the latest Death Star (or almost any Lego Star Wars set). You can usually buy a similar and cheaper non-lego model. Or the Titanic set too. | |
| ▲ | esafak 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Like what? | | |
| ▲ | CapricornNoble 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | The value proposition of the Chinese knockoffs is off the charts IMO. For what I spent buying JUST ( https://www.brickeconomy.com/set/60229-1/lego-city-space-roc... ) last year for my daughter, I've since bought her a 3-floor hospital, a firehouse, a pink villa with pool, and about 2 dozen doctor and engineer minifigs for the same ~$120 outlay. Only disappointment is the legs on the Chinese minifigs, they are difficult to seat properly on studs because the legs are at a slight angle (almost like manspreading). I have to stop myself from going on a spending spree on AliExpress, I might order an entire Age of Sail LEGO navy. | | |
| ▲ | tokai 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | You trust the Chinese knockoffs not to leach out poison? | | |
| ▲ | CapricornNoble 38 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yes. What "poison" do you think they are leaching? Has anyone ever done any instrumented/lab testing that has shown ABS plastic toys to pose a threat? |
|
|
|
|