Technic 2017 Set Discussion

[teos]

3 hours ago, TechnicRCRacer said:

I think this was also shown in the 2017 set discussion. 

The mods pinned it and put it at the top of the topics list with a bright red icon, so naturally I didn't see it.  :)

[Saberwing40k]

My reaction to the prices of some of the sets on Lego.com:

And some of this.

Oh boy, where do we start?

Oh, that's right. 42070 is $290 for a set with two motors. 42065 is a full $100, and 42066 is $160. Are you forking kidding me?!? All of these sets are insanely overpriced, for no readily apparent reason. Let's talk numbers.

42070 has 1862 parts, and so as a set without PF, it should cost about $180. Now, let's add in the Lego.com price of all the PF elements.

• x1 IR receiver= $14.99
• x1 M motor= $7.49
• x1 XL motor= $9.99
• x1 Remote= $9.49
• x1 AA battery box= $6.99
• Total = $48.95

So, add $48.95 to $180, and we get 228.95, which we can round up to $230. So, even if it cost Lego retail prices to include PF elements in the set, which it does not, this set should be $60 cheaper. But, it's not. So, what does the extra $60 get you? Absolutely nothing. No license, a poor looking model with low functionality, parts needlessly in a new color, and no new parts. What the hell? For the extra $60, they could have included 2 more motors to make a true RC set, or 600 more parts to make it look better, but no, let's jack up our price for no real reason. This also costs $40 more then the last PF full RC flagship,42030, again for no reason. 42070 is not licensed, not fully motorized, and does not have a large, single use new mold part.

42065 is almost as bad, it has 370 parts, and so as a set without PF, it would be in the $30 range. Now, let's do the same thing we did with 42070, and add the prices of the PF elements.

• x1 IR receiver= $14.99
• x2 M Motor= $7.49 each, or $14.98 for both.
• x1 Remote= $9.49
• x1 AA battery box= $6.99
• Total = $46.45

Now, add $46.45 to $30, and you get $76.45. So, Lego adds $25 to the set for no actual reason. The consumer gains nothing for the added cost. No lights, no gears, no new parts. Again, what the hell? For the extra $25 dollars, they could have easily included more parts to make this model more technical. I argue against this model, because who is it marketed towards? It has nothing on a $20 RC car, and has no real b model, and is a poor source of parts, so it is bad as a first PF set ,too expensive for the young builders who would be most interested in it, and not interesting for collectors.

Finally, we come to 42066, which has 1151 pieces, so as a set without PF, it should cost about $110. Now, the cost of a PF battery box and singular M motor should only add $14 to the price, but no, instead of costing $120-$125 dollars, the set is $40 more than what it should be, for a plane that does not do plane functions, and has no wings. And, this is especially egregious because of the fact that sets in the past that have been one motor PF sets have been only a bit more expensive, or the same price as their non PF brethren. Al;so, 42025, from only a couple of years ago, had more functions, and had almost all control surfaces. 42066 omitting them is like a truck having no steering.

I am more baffled than enraged by this pricing strategy, because we have plenty of sets, like 42069, that cost less. 42069 had 2382 parts, but only costs $180, making its price per part only 7 cents rather than the normal ten. If Lego can do it for that set, why not do it for PF sets as well? Lego jacking up the prices while giving consumers nothing in return is a bad thing, and I think we should complain, or not buy. I for one am doing that, as well as writing them a letter. Also, I do NOT want to hear the tired "It's the price of doing business" argument being dragged out. That is not a legitimate argument. The ideal business model from that standpoint would be to give customers nothing, and charge them lots of money. And I think Lego is above that. Also, the market doesn't work like that. People will only buy your products if they think it is worth it, and needlessly jacking up the price is a good way to drive away customers. If you disagree with my reasoning, fine, but bring out an actual counterargument if you do so. I, meanwhile, will be writing Lego a nice letter expressing my disappointment.

Also, why did Lego skip 42067? Skipped numbers annoy me so much.

Edited July 3, 2017 by Saberwing40k

[teos]

17 minutes ago, Saberwing40k said:

My reaction to the prices of some of the sets on Ld than enraged by this pricing strategy, because we have plenty of sets, like 42069, that cost less. 42069 had 2382 parts, but only costs $180, making its price per part only 7 cents rather than the normal ten. If Lego can do it for that set, why not do it for PF sets as well? Lego jacking up the prices while giving consumers nothing in return is a bad thing, and I think we should complain, or not buy. I for one am doing that, as well as writing them a letter. Also, I do NOT want to hear the tired "It's the price of doing business" argument being dragged out. That is not a legitimate argument. The ideal business model from that standpoint would be to give customers nothing, and charge them lots of money. And I think Lego is above that. Also, the market doesn't work like that. People will only buy your products if they think it is worth it, and needlessly jacking up the price is a good way to drive away customers. If you disagree with my reasoning, fine, but bring out an actual counterargument if you do so. I, meanwhile, will be writing Lego a nice letter expressing my disappointment.

Also, why did Lego skip 42067? Skipped numbers annoy me so much.

You forgot to fume over the fact that the bigger 1H sets will arrive in the USA about 6 months after Europe.  I'm excited because my wallet is going to be happy this year.  All the 2H sets suck and the major 1H aren't worth the price.  The Ocean Explorer set looks really nice, but it's a sham for the Technic line.    It should have been a creator set.  I'll probably just go with the Arocs, since it's more appealing than what's coming.

[Saberwing40k]

Oh right.

 

Also, why are almost all of the 2017 sets only showing up in the US in August? Do Americans really not buy Technic?

[therealjustin]

I had to look twice at those prices! Wow!

 

I think I'll grab the 42056 instead of the 2017 sets. It is also overpriced, but at least I like the subject matter.

[rm8]

We don't know economics of TLG, but you should look, for example, at car dealers. I never saw that new cars cost cheaper than previous. TLG is not an exception, even you think nothing changes: the same plastic and rubber...

For those who whines about high prices there are some advides:

1.     work harder - earn more money for hobby
2.     don't wanna work harder - buy cheaper sets

It's absurd, like when someone  have bought powerful car but complain about high fuel consumption...

 

Edited July 3, 2017 by rm8

[Frequenzberater]

Regarding the light issue:

The german store description also clearly indicates moveable headlights. 

Could there be some Kind of curve light, connected to the steering? 

[jorgeopesi]

We have problems when we pay more for new worst cars IMO.

[Vectormatic]

2 hours ago, rm8 said:

We don't know economics of TLG, but you should look, for example, at car dealers. I never saw that new cars cost cheaper than previous. TLG is not an exception, even you think nothing changes: the same plastic and rubber...

For those who whines about high prices there are some advides:

1.     work harder - earn more money for hobby
2.     don't wanna work harder - buy cheaper sets

It's absurd, like when someone  have bought powerful car but complain about high fuel consumption...

 

Oh come on, you can trot out that excuse for every price increase, you dont know the economics of nestle, so just work harder to pay $5 for your snickers bar, right? And its not like these sets are "more powerful" or anything, IMHO the 2017 lineup is exceptionally weak, compared to previous years.

 

Lego always has design costs for new models, they always have some new colour/part combos. And yes, there is inflation.. But if you look at the price/part ratios of the PF sets, something clearly doesnt add up, especially considering i'd say PF elements should cost LESS when included in a set then when purchased separate.

 

And my own personal gripe, i just checked out the new sets in the lego store, and for 42069, they are actually actively praising the fact that the jerry cans are a rare colour... If you need to stoop that low to think of selling points, you should pretty much know you designed a sub par set. That said, out of the bunch i like that set the most, its BIG, and has plenty of features, price/part ratio is excellent, i just dont like it :|

Ah well, roll on 2018 i guess

[rm8]

 Yes, new cars are not always better than previous.  I don't want to extend this discussion.

I just wanna say: relax your hobby, pay extra 20-30-50$ for quality product with excellent customer service, instead of complain on higher prices. TLG is not stupid: If they raise prices - theу have a reason for that, or they will loose money.

[Maaboo the Witch]

42070 is £219.99?! To think I got the CLAAS for £94.99! What the actual fork?! (Think I'll take a sip of that Nerd Rage now, Saberwing)

Edited July 3, 2017 by Maaboo35

[Ivan_M]

You are comparing apples and oranges, RRP vs online sale price, just wait till the shops are supplied and first batch is sold, prices will stabilize then. RRP for Xerion is 149,99€, cheapest online sub 100€.

[Jim]

On 03/07/2017 at 11:24 AM, Ivan_M said:

You are comparing apples and oranges, RRP vs online sale price, just wait till the shops are supplied and first batch is sold, prices will stabilize then. RRP for Xerion is 149,99€, cheapest online sub 100€.

Exactly! Let's not continue the MSRP discussion, because at the end of the day you will probably be able to buy the sets a lot cheaper.

[Maaboo the Witch]

12 minutes ago, Jim said:

Exactly! Let's not coninue the MSRP discussion, because at the end of the day you will probably be able to buy the sets a lot cheaper.

That does offer some comfort...

[HallBricks]

While 42070 being insanely expensive, 42069 is actually very valuable. At least here in Sweden the price per part ratio is very good, I checked some other large technic sets, and some from other themes as well, and found no other set with better value. I will definitely get that one, it has the most interesting functions in my opinion with proper suspension, drivetrain, and interesting doors etc.

Edited July 3, 2017 by HallBricks

[Lakop]

Note to self: Find a way to justify the cost of 42069.

H

Edited July 3, 2017 by Horace T

[Jim]

On 2017-7-1 at 5:10 PM, LvdH said:

I don't see anything that can move around the lights area...

How about the lights on the roof of the cabin?

There is no mention of "head lights", it simply states "movable lights".

[Ngoc Nguyen]

@Jim Headlights seem to be just system parts mounted on perpendicular 1 axle hole and 3 pin holes. Nothing special.

I think the most likely candidates for movable light are the orange lights under the transclear L-shaped panel. Maybe they are mounted on a 3L axle which connects to a 3L pin with 1L bush and 2L pins, so they can pivot up and down around the axles.

Edited July 3, 2017 by nguyengiangoc

[Cumulonimbus]

4 minutes ago, nguyengiangoc said:

@Jim Headlights seem to be just system parts mounted on perpendicular 1 axle hole and 3 pin holes. Nothing special.

I think the most likely candidates for movable light are the orange lights under the transclear L-shaped panel. Maybe they are mounted on a 3L axle which connects to a 3L pin with 1L bush and 2L pins, so they can pivot up and down around the axles.

I think you're overcomplicating it. In my opinion, the PF LED lights will simply be mounted on the arm of the extinguishing apparatus and since the arm is movable, hence the lights will be movable.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

@Cumulonimbus But there are no PF Led lights in the set, nor are they suggested to be incorporated into the set, as evidenced by the packaging.

[Cumulonimbus]

True, but the set is optimised for the optional PF expansion pack.

[valenciaeric]

No centre diff for 42069, it seems.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

@Cumulonimbus I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I'm talking about "movable lights" in the description of 42070, not 42068. THere's no PF expansion for 42070.

[Jim]

17 minutes ago, nguyengiangoc said:

@Jim Headlights seem to be just system parts mounted on perpendicular 1 axle hole and 3 pin holes. Nothing special.

You are right. I thought they were mounted on a pivotable axle, but they are not. 
(would be a lame feature to mention btw)

[HallBricks]

20 minutes ago, nguyengiangoc said:

I think the most likely candidates for movable light are the orange lights under the transclear L-shaped panel. Maybe they are mounted on a 3L axle which connects to a 3L pin with 1L bush and 2L pins, so they can pivot up and down around the axles.

They seem to be fixed in place as well, the axle is connected to a axle/pin cross block and a red #1 connector.

And I can't see any other lights on the model, which is strange.