Another Brick In The Wall

You really have to wonder how much of the structure is going to be compromised in the final set given the fact they will also need to produce new minifig molds.

REPLAY OF ANNOUNCEMENT TIMESTAMP 17:09 ANNOUNCEMENT OF LEGO DESIGNERS (IN PIRATE GARB!) TIMESTAMP 22:05

Does anybody know anything about the the designers? (They appeared in the live stream) I hope they do the design justice.

Playable Piano was technically from the previous review period.

The structure is pretty bland to be honest, a bit like Ghostbusters HQ. Winnie the Pooh and Seven Dwarves had better building designs.

Winnie the Pooh and Seven Dwarves were both better sets, but I can understand why they gave the nod to Sesame Street instead.

brothers-brick.com/2019/09/26/the-pirate-bay-project-is-the-new-lego-ideas-set-news/

LEGO Ideas Page Official Announcement Special congratulations goes to Eurobricker @paokus REPLAY OF ANNOUNCEMENT TIMESTAMP 17:09 ANNOUNCEMENT OF LEGO DESIGNERS (IN PIRATE GARB!) TIMESTAMP 22:05 WOOOOOOT!

Why is it listed as an acceptable IP then? (and, for example, Transformers is not)? https://ideas.lego.com/projects/96cd8f79-24e3-4a03-a63f-b3f6cee3f6e3/edit

Thanks for the correction. Serves me right for repeating for something without fact-checking. Even the stand is fantastic. I can't see LEGO replicating it in an actual set though..

Planet Express Delivery Ship is on track to be the fastest project to 10K.....ever!

If you follow the discussion from the previous page (end of page 153), I am suggesting that precisely this happened. It is too much of a coincidence that a TV show that has been in hiatus for six years grants a construction set license to a clone company in the same month as it has a LEGO IDEAS project under review. The resulting set even has many similarities with the IDEAS project.

When will Seinfeld by reviewed? The next batch has some intriguing projects, like The Pirate Bay.

Φοβερό! Please submit it to LEGO IDEAS!

(1) TLG losing good projects, because a third party beat them to the license because of the protracted review process is not a good business practice either. It's also doubly unfair on the designer. (2) It means licenses can be negotiated and acquired faster. The probability that a project that reaches ,000 votes in a month, not reaching 10,000, is very low. I am happy to be proven wrong on this point. (3) I agree on this point.

Even if it was true, here are three solutions to the problem of third parties leeching off LEGO IDEAS: (1)Review a project as soon as it reaches 10K votes, acquire the license, stagger the production and release date. Have predetermined LEGO IDEA release dates throughout the year.. (2) Set different review selection criteria for a project depending on how quickly it acquires votes, e.g. 5,000 votes in a month, 7,500 votes 3 months, etc (3) Remove the project from public domain as soon as it reaches 10K votes and show it again after the review stage is complete.

I find that hard to believe that within an organisation, where economies of scale, economies of integration and other business synergies are rife, this would be a problem.

[1] I think the Snowspeeder is a much more complex as it had some slopes around the shoulders which the designers could not quite replicate, even on a UCS Model. By contrast, the 4+ A-Wing model was quite accurate for such a limited piece model. [3] My point here is, that despite the outstanding design, demand for the set has not been extraordinary. [5] I regard Yavin IV or Jedi Temple to be high-risk play-sets. Irrespective of this, TLG need to get Marcos Bessa back to designing UCS SW sets, asap, because the bad PR from the last two UCS playsets may adversely affect the viability of future sets.

Let's do a cost benefit analysis on this: Positives -- As you point out, 10175 is a very dated design and can definitely benefit from a refresh. (The flatter hull (compared to the standard TIE) means the designers can incorporate more SNOT elements to the design). -- New sealed versions of 10175 are currently selling at 12-18% CAGR of RRP, which is quite a lot (but may be more indicative of the period the model was released). -- Synonymous with the best known character in the franchise. -- It is a much more visually appealing design than the standard TIE. -- 10175 came out about 13 years ago, which roughly the same length of time between UCS X-Wing refreshes. Negatives -- It is likely to have limited appeal to the younger generation of Star Wars, which as a UCS set is not a huge detraction as AFOLs are likely to be the target market segment. -- 75095 sold just okay and the build wasn't the most interesting. -- It is debatable whether or not it is an iconic ship of the SW franchise, despite the identity of the person who flew it, because of its limited on-screen presence. Perhaps this point is the biggest detraction. I don't follow Rebels or the Clone Wars series, but I assume it has appeared in at least the former.

Five points in retort: (1) A-Wing is such a simple design that a UCS version is hard to justify and I doubt it will sell very well.. (2) cavegod's AT-AT is way bigger than minifig scale. Raskolnikov' AT-AT is closer to minifig scale and only around 2500 pieces. (3) Ewok Village is close to perfect and is going for a smidgen over RRP price. Absolutely no reason for a re-issue (4) Obi-wan's Starfighter didn't sell well from all reports, so TLG is probably snakebitten about doing another UCS set from the Prequel era (5) After the bad press Cloud City and Hoth got, I am skeptical whether another UCS playset will be made in the next two years. However, if they do, I can see a UCS Cantina given how well the two recent sets sold.

Cavegod's is greater than minifig scale. It's inconceivable that a UCS model would approach such proportions. The standard AT-AT is daunting at just over 1000 pieces, so even if they go up to 3,000 pieces in a hypothetical UCS model it would represent a great balance between stability and size. The large hike in price over RRP is the most likely reason TLG will revisit the UCS Imperial Shuttle given their pricing practices with the re-issued Death Star and Falcon A revision to the TIE Advanced is probably more urgent from strictly a build perspective but I don't think the last UCS Tie Fighter sold that well. All excellent points. I am naturally pessimistic that these things will be rectified and the existing design could potentially be further compromised with the introduction of play features.

Interview with the creator https://ideas.lego.com/blogs/a4ae09b6-0d4c-4307-9da8-3ee9f3d368d6/post/2601781f-ad25-44a1-91ef-46ce144133ea

My understanding is that licenses usually pertain to specific toys. Action figures, construction block sets, and pop culture collectibles (i.e. Funko) are usually separate licenses. The Office set in question is clearly a construction block set, including minifigs almost identical to LEGO.

My point is that nothing is preventing other construction brick manufacturers from getting the Seinfeld license now, thus, making an otherwise excellent project ineligible. In other words, LEGO IDEAS is free market research for other construction brick companies and the fact that the review process is so protracted, means there is very little they can do about it. EDIT: The only solution is that a project is reviewed immediately after it reaches 10K votes. It makes very little sense for projects to be reviewed en masse, since the decision to market a particular project no longer depends on other projects. e.g. in some view periods multiple projects are selected, some are held over for further review, and theoretically no projects may be selected.

Another UCs take on the Imperial Shuttle is a certainty. It can only go one way, though, because 10212 was close to perfection in my view.