Anyone else find the Mosaic theme boring?

[Mylenium]

12 hours ago, jxu said:

I thought for most sets (not old ones), sellers make more money selling parted out. For example, if I bought the Marilyn Monroe set and sold all the pink and medium azure tiles individually, I think I would profit. The drawback being it is much harder and takes much longer to sell individual parts. 

Unlikely. The market will soon be flooded with these items. What is now a "rare" color will become commonplace. And it's not that you couldn't already buy tons of tiles and studs in the more standard colors.

Mylenium

[MAB]

3 hours ago, Mylenium said:

Unlikely. The market will soon be flooded with these items. What is now a "rare" color will become commonplace. And it's not that you couldn't already buy tons of tiles and studs in the more standard colors.

Mylenium

True, and in fact being rare doesn't mean it is worth a lot, just that it is often expensive if it sells. Some rare to find and rare to use parts have very low sales volume because they are so expensive, and so people use alternatives. The inventory may appear to be valuable but in reality will not sell very quickly at the price. Again, this is where it is often better to have something that is less valuable but in much more demand, than something expensive with little demand.

13 hours ago, JintaiZ said:

It'd be easy to make profits right now since many of the colors are rare. However, it's fairly important to keep in mind that the value is very likely to drop significantly over time.

The tiles are now common parts and available on B+P for 4p, so probably about 4c/5c or so in the US and Europe. That will hold down the value of the tiles. I doubt the BL average will climb above double that.

[JintaiZ]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

True, and in fact being rare doesn't mean it is worth a lot, just that it is often expensive if it sells. Some rare to find and rare to use parts have very low sales volume because they are so expensive, and so people use alternatives. The inventory may appear to be valuable but in reality will not sell very quickly at the price. Again, this is where it is often better to have something that is less valuable but in much more demand, than something expensive with little demand.

The tiles are now common parts and available on B+P for 4p, so probably about 4c/5c or so in the US and Europe. That will hold down the value of the tiles. I doubt the BL average will climb above double that.

Perhaps LEGO investigating shouldn't be so safe anymore...

[MAB]

22 minutes ago, JintaiZ said:

Perhaps LEGO investigating shouldn't be so safe anymore...

LEGO investing isn't really safe. There are some sets that if you buy at the wrong time or price will not make a profit once sold after accounting for fees. Similarly some sets, if parted out, will not completely sell.  

 

[JintaiZ]

45 minutes ago, MAB said:

LEGO investing isn't really safe. There are some sets that if you buy at the wrong time or price will not make a profit once sold after accounting for fees. Similarly some sets, if parted out, will not completely sell.  

 

Not just that. The 2008 Taj Mahal did exceptionally well but after the re-release of 10256, something happened...

[karmajay]

To get back on topic - I think plenty of AFOLs will enjoy these. I enjoy building Lego stuff. I like the look of Lego aesthetic. I would rather look at a Lego SW ship then a plastic model of a SW ship. I don't mind paying for a cool mosaic to build just like I'd rather buy instructions for fan made sets then figure out how to build it myself. I think plenty of Lego fans will buy these. I'm glad non-Lego fans will buy them also!

If Lego did not try to branch out every so often with new products people would just be playing with Lego wooden trucks right now.

[Mylenium]

1 hour ago, JintaiZ said:

Perhaps LEGO investigating shouldn't be so safe anymore...

It never was. That's a general misconception people seem to have. Arguable anything can become a valuable collector's item, but ultimately very rarely does it happen in the LEGO world. People are blinding themselves about the economics in so many ways...

Mylenium

[JintaiZ]

2 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

It never was. That's a general misconception people seem to have. Arguable anything can become a valuable collector's item, but ultimately very rarely does it happen in the LEGO world. People are blinding themselves about the economics in so many ways...



Mylenium

Skyline investigating seems fairly safe to me.

[ShaydDeGrai]

2 minutes ago, karmajay said:

To get back on topic - I think plenty of AFOLs will enjoy these.  (...snip...)

If Lego did not try to branch out every so often with new products people would just be playing with Lego wooden trucks right now.

I'm not disagreeing, I just think that I'd like them a lot better if Lego had come out with a simple 48x48 baseplate in black and cut the price to a third to a quarter of what they are asking. The price point just isn't worth it,  I can build my own with parts on hand for a lot less.

 

[MAB]

40 minutes ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

I'm not disagreeing, I just think that I'd like them a lot better if Lego had come out with a simple 48x48 baseplate in black and cut the price to a third to a quarter of what they are asking. The price point just isn't worth it,  I can build my own with parts on hand for a lot less.

 

One problem then is how to hang it. Of course, DIY/MOCers have made loads of solutions for it but not ones using official LEGO parts. When covered in plates a 48x48 baseplate is heavy and is easily detached from a hanging plate if you only use a couple of plates with hole in.

Plus working on a 48x48 baseplate one stud at a time is quite hard, and very easy to make errors. Whereas working on smaller sections that attach together is less likely to lead to errors. I imagine play testing taught them that. Again mosaic MOCers have been able to do this fine in the past, but for people new to LEGO, I imagine they would find it hard to complete a 48x48 mosaic on one piece, but find it much easier to do 9 16x16 ones. It also gives natural break points.

But I agree about being able to build something similar for less money.

[ShaydDeGrai]

4 minutes ago, JintaiZ said:

Skyline investigating seems fairly safe to me.

If, by "safe" you mean that over time you'll likely get _most_ of your money back, not accounting for inflation, you're probably right.  There have always been a handful of sets and pieces that become choice collectables (SDCC exclusive mini-figs, early modulars, select licensed items, etc.)  and _someone_ is usually out there willing to grossly overpay for a rare or discontinued _set_ (with emphasis on the singular - the ONE right person, the ONE right set).  But if by "investing" you mean getting a good return on your money, time and effort, consider that in the past ten years (even with all the market ups and downs) a simple index fund in something like the S&P 500 would have appreciated 197% (basically double your money back)  The DJIA and the Russell have done even better (even with one-time blue chip vehicles like oil companies and airlines tanking in recent years).  

It's hard to look at Lego's current offerings and say with confidence, "That set is going to be worth twice as much a decade from now and if I buy $10,000 worth of them, I'll be able to sell them all on eBay without the price dropping and double my money"  There's just too much that can happen that you have no control over (sets get re-released, rare parts become common place, subjects get redone (better), licensed themes go out of fashion, etc) and, unlike stock index funds, you're not really broadly diversified to enable a profit here to offset a loss there, or if you are, by buying a broad range of sets in smaller quantities, you're effectively micromanaging a portfolio which makes greater demands on your time and storage capabilities; at that point, you have less of an investment and more of a hobby that strives to pay for itself (which is fine, but don't think of it as your retirement nest-egg too much time and effort for too little return).

When it comes to collectables, serious investors have a "rule of three" that they've been applying for ages to stamps, coins, toys, sports memorabilia, etc.  It was explained to me like this: If you think something is a good collectable, buy three copies.  The first one, you hold onto until it has tripled its value, then you sell it to get your money back.  The second one, you hold onto until you feel that you've made enough of a profit off the deal and want to cash out, then you sell it for three or more times your original investment.  The third one, you keep for yourself and enjoy it.  If you're considering a collectable and you either don't think it will ever triple in value or you wouldn't want one for yourself, personally, at three times current the price, don't buy it because it's not really an investment, it's a knickknack.

[JintaiZ]

5 minutes ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

If, by "safe" you mean that over time you'll likely get _most_ of your money back, not accounting for inflation, you're probably right.  There have always been a handful of sets and pieces that become choice collectables (SDCC exclusive mini-figs, early modulars, select licensed items, etc.)  and _someone_ is usually out there willing to grossly overpay for a rare or discontinued _set_ (with emphasis on the singular - the ONE right person, the ONE right set).  But if by "investing" you mean getting a good return on your money, time and effort, consider that in the past ten years (even with all the market ups and downs) a simple index fund in something like the S&P 500 would have appreciated 197% (basically double your money back)  The DJIA and the Russell have done even better (even with one-time blue chip vehicles like oil companies and airlines tanking in recent years).  

It's hard to look at Lego's current offerings and say with confidence, "That set is going to be worth twice as much a decade from now and if I buy $10,000 worth of them, I'll be able to sell them all on eBay without the price dropping and double my money"  There's just too much that can happen that you have no control over (sets get re-released, rare parts become common place, subjects get redone (better), licensed themes go out of fashion, etc) and, unlike stock index funds, you're not really broadly diversified to enable a profit here to offset a loss there, or if you are, by buying a broad range of sets in smaller quantities, you're effectively micromanaging a portfolio which makes greater demands on your time and storage capabilities; at that point, you have less of an investment and more of a hobby that strives to pay for itself (which is fine, but don't think of it as your retirement nest-egg too much time and effort for too little return).

When it comes to collectables, serious investors have a "rule of three" that they've been applying for ages to stamps, coins, toys, sports memorabilia, etc.  It was explained to me like this: If you think something is a good collectable, buy three copies.  The first one, you hold onto until it has tripled its value, then you sell it to get your money back.  The second one, you hold onto until you feel that you've made enough of a profit off the deal and want to cash out, then you sell it for three or more times your original investment.  The third one, you keep for yourself and enjoy it.  If you're considering a collectable and you either don't think it will ever triple in value or you wouldn't want one for yourself, personally, at three times current the price, don't buy it because it's not really an investment, it's a knickknack.

I picked up some skylines at a 25% discount so I should make some money anyways ;)

Edited September 3, 2020 by JintaiZ

[MAB]

1 minute ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

 

It's hard to look at Lego's current offerings and say with confidence, "That set is going to be worth twice as much a decade from now and if I buy $10,000 worth of them, I'll be able to sell them all on eBay without the price dropping and double my money"

Plus many sets don't smoothly rise. There is typically a step in price just after retirement and then either a long plateau or more likely a slow increase and then, depending on the set, severe drops where sets are re-released or better or just new versions come out. I would never hold a set released now for a decade. It is better to take the money after the initial fast increase and re-invest than hold for the long term. This is where 30 or 50% after retirement is better than 100% after ten. Especially if you got a significant discount just before the set is retired.

It will be interesting to see what LEGO does with the mosaics in the long term. If they continue doing them, then these ones could well rise in value after retirement, at least as complete sets. There will be collectors that get into them late and want the boxes and instructions to go with the common parts they are made from, and some that want sealed copies never to open. If they do a Star Wars heroes set, that makes Luke, Han, Leia and Rey or similar, then some people will want the Sith set and it will be too much hassle to order the 1000s of parts on BL so they will be after the complete set.

 

 

12 minutes ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

.When it comes to collectables, serious investors have a "rule of three" that they've been applying for ages to stamps, coins, toys, sports memorabilia, etc.  It was explained to me like this: If you think something is a good collectable, buy three copies.  The first one, you hold onto until it has tripled its value, then you sell it to get your money back.  The second one, you hold onto until you feel that you've made enough of a profit off the deal and want to cash out, then you sell it for three or more times your original investment.  The third one, you keep for yourself and enjoy it.  If you're considering a collectable and you either don't think it will ever triple in value or you wouldn't want one for yourself, personally, at three times current the price, don't buy it because it's not really an investment, it's a knickknack.

I think a number of LEGO collectors (as opposed to full on re-sellers) also do it with twos. That is buy two, sell one at double price. Or even buy three, sell two at 1.5x price. Those are still reasonably feasible with many but not all LEGO sets. They are do a little work, get my set for free. They are not strictly investments for profit, more investments to get a free set. Being able to sell current sets at 3x in future is quite unlikely these days, even though it was relatively easy in the past, so the rule of threes is not going to work for most sets.

[ShaydDeGrai]

11 minutes ago, MAB said:

I think a number of LEGO collectors (as opposed to full on re-sellers) also do it with twos. That is buy two, sell one at double price. Or even buy three, sell two at 1.5x price. Those are still reasonably feasible with many but not all LEGO sets. They are do a little work, get my set for free. They are not strictly investments for profit, more investments to get a free set. Being able to sell current sets at 3x in future is quite unlikely these days, even though it was relatively easy in the past, so the rule of threes is not going to work for most sets.

I concur, that why I split the hairs between "investing" and "a hobby that pays for itself."   With a few rare exceptions, Lego has never been a truly "profitable investment" collectable.  Certainly people can and do make money from reselling it but the question is, are those people working for their money, or is their money working for them?  I _think_ (nothing but anecdotes to support this) that for most people it's the former, but to really qualify as an "investment" it _should be_ the latter.

I know several AFOLs who follow the "I'll pick up a spare or two to subsidize my own copy" model.  They either wait for a set to get a retirement bump or resell rare mini-figs while keeping the parts (or, conversely, keep the figs and part out the rest at the BL stores).  This is great, it works for them and how can anyone find fault with a plan the ends up with free lego?  I guess the real difference in my mind is that these people are AFOLs first, and they are looking to subsidize what can be a very expensive hobby (and "investing" in this way is really just an extension of that hobby).  When I think of "LEGO investors" my mind quickly jumps to set scalpers and speculators whose first thought is turning a profit and the fact that the item appreciating (or not) is Lego is more of a secondary factor.  

As for the Mosaics as collectables, I'm certain that somewhere down the line someone will have missed the chance to get something that, in hindsight, they really want, and will pay well above MSRP to get it.  The only question in my mind on that front is, will the demand be high enough and the supply small enough to command a serious return on investment (at ~120 USD each) to support the number of "investors" who, today, _think_ they'll be making a tidy profit if they tie up their capital squirreling these kits away?

As for building mosaics on a 48x48 baseplate, certainly it can be easy to get lost.  I have a fried who likes build (photoshop assisted) Lego mosaics (often for sale at craft shows or on commission) and her secret weapon is a little cardboard template that she just clips onto the baseplate to only expose a 12x12 section at time (and she glues her baseplates to 1/8" hardboard for strength and mounting purposes).  I'm sure these official offerings were designed to be accessible and more in keeping with the spirit of Lego while still be "art pieces" for non-AFOLs, and I'm sure they look great in person (I haven't seen one up close yet) but for what they are, I still think they're just too pricy - I feel they could have been done cheaper without the need for new molds and without compromising quality or stability.

[jxu]

It's certainly far easier to invest traditionally in the stock market such as index funds than to store thousands of pieces and ship out packages all the time. I'm just a hobbyist and it's not worth my time or energy to really try to squeeze out profit on a small scale. There are so many complications with paypal fees and shipping issues and such. I am just speculating for those thousands feedback Bricklink sellers who do this as a real business.

[MAB]

18 hours ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

 As for the Mosaics as collectables, I'm certain that somewhere down the line someone will have missed the chance to get something that, in hindsight, they really want, and will pay well above MSRP to get it.  The only question in my mind on that front is, will the demand be high enough and the supply small enough to command a serious return on investment (at ~120 USD each) to support the number of "investors" who, today, _think_ they'll be making a tidy profit if they tie up their capital squirreling these kits away?

I'm not going to squirrel any away, and definitely not now. Maybe towards the end if they have decent discounts. But not now.

18 hours ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

As for building mosaics on a 48x48 baseplate, certainly it can be easy to get lost.  I have a fried who likes build (photoshop assisted) Lego mosaics (often for sale at craft shows or on commission) and her secret weapon is a little cardboard template that she just clips onto the baseplate to only expose a 12x12 section at time (and she glues her baseplates to 1/8" hardboard for strength and mounting purposes).  I'm sure these official offerings were designed to be accessible and more in keeping with the spirit of Lego while still be "art pieces" for non-AFOLs, and I'm sure they look great in person (I haven't seen one up close yet) but for what they are, I still think they're just too pricy - I feel they could have been done cheaper without the need for new molds and without compromising quality or stability.

That's a good tip about templates. I know in the past I've had to remove 100s of plates due to a 1 plate shift error that propagated before I realised.

18 hours ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

When I think of "LEGO investors" my mind quickly jumps to set scalpers and speculators whose first thought is turning a profit and the fact that the item appreciating (or not) is Lego is more of a secondary factor.  

I think many LEGO collectors/investors are midway between extremes. I'll invest medium term (1-2 years) when there are discounts on sets I like and I think will sell. But then I'll also invest - and scalp - on items that I am sure will do well at Christmas, or that I can take from one country and sell in another.