Lord of the Rings Ongoing Discussion

[kuzyabricks]

1 hour ago, Altair1 said:

We already have all the dwarves from the Hobbit sets, so I would definitely prefer to get as many Shire hobbits as possible (except for the usual Frodo, Bilbo, Sam, Merry and Pippin of course)

Once again the sets came out 12 years ago and many current fans do not own them. Who cares about Shire hobbits when we can have modern dwarves. Currently all the dwarves are missing. Some hodge podge hobbit figures that can be built off of pick a brick is not enticing for a $300+ set.

Edited November 25, 2024 by kuzyabricks

[Balrogofmorgoth]

I don’t think getting figures over ten years ago counts much towards what they do now. That being said, I would still rather get characters they didn’t do yet first, but I would like them to revisit ones they did already because they all need updates

[Altair1]

20 minutes ago, kuzyabricks said:

Who cares about Shire hobbits 

Well I do, and I am not the only one :-)

[THELEGOBATMAN]

12 minutes ago, Altair1 said:

Well I do, and I am not the only one :-)

That may be so, but you're not the target group for this set. 

Those sets are targeted towards adult fans who like LotR enough to buy a set and display it. The people who are "truly" into LotR and completing their collection which started 12, 13 years ago are only a very small minority.

People won't be convinced to buy the set because of unnamed Hobbits—it needs big names and popular characters to make it sell well.

[RichardGoring]

2 minutes ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

That may be so, but you're not the target group for this set. 

Those sets are targeted towards adult fans who like LotR enough to buy a set and display it. The people who are "truly" into LotR and completing their collection which started 12, 13 years ago are only a very small minority.

People won't be convinced to buy the set because of unnamed Hobbits—it needs big names and popular characters to make it sell well.

I suspect you're right on this. Which is sort of a shame, because I think if they went down a LotR route with minimal major characters, they could do Bilbo's birthday and it would be a great build with some of the party stuff and the fireworks dragon.

But the full complement of dwarves will probably be more appealing.

[GeoBrick]

Here we are, discussing a D2C version of a hobbit dwelling, most likely based on the LOTR movie, and dwarves are the main topic.

[MAB]

2 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

We already have nearly all the characters, but that's not the point.

The theme has been dead for over ten years before we got any new sets—those minifigures are not easily obtainable, and when they are, the prices are cosmic.

It wasn't that long. Both The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit themes lasted into 2015. And Rivendell was out in 2023.

And we haven't had any new sets for The Hobbit in Icons or BH, so it might be that LEGO don't bring them back at all.

[Altair1]

40 minutes ago, GeoBrick said:

Here we are, discussing a D2C version of a hobbit dwelling, most likely based on the LOTR movie, and dwarves are the main topic.

Exactly... people can dream, but it is very unlikely that the new Bag End set includes any dwarves. 

[Balrogofmorgoth]

55 minutes ago, MAB said:

It wasn't that long. Both The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit themes lasted into 2015. And Rivendell was out in 2023.

And we haven't had any new sets for The Hobbit in Icons or BH, so it might be that LEGO don't bring them back at all.

LOTR sets stopped after 2013

I think normies would like hobbits to populate their display, instead of Dwarves they wouldn’t know what to do with 

[THELEGOBATMAN]

1 hour ago, MAB said:

It wasn't that long. Both The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit themes lasted into 2015. And Rivendell was out in 2023.

And we haven't had any new sets for The Hobbit in Icons or BH, so it might be that LEGO don't bring them back at all.

Uh, no they didn't. The last Lord of the Rings set released in 2013, while the last Hobbit one was in 2014.

But the point still stands, and it doesn't change anything—it's been a decade, and the sets are inaccessible now. They're going for crazy prices.

[MAB]

3 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

Uh, no they didn't. The last Lord of the Rings set released in 2013, while the last Hobbit one was in 2014.

But the point still stands, and it doesn't change anything—it's been a decade, and the sets are inaccessible now. They're going for crazy prices.

Yes they did. Both themes were on shelves until summer of 2015. A theme is not dead if sets were still readily available on shelves in retail stores.

Edited November 25, 2024 by MAB

[THELEGOBATMAN]

46 minutes ago, MAB said:

Yes they did. Both themes were on shelves until summer of 2015. A theme is not dead if sets were still readily available on shelves in retail stores.

I mean sure, in that case you're right.

Still, once again, this doesn't change anything and the point remains. It's been nearly a decade, and the sets aren't available.

[Balrogofmorgoth]

Again, I would rather they focus on characters they never made before, but at the end of the day I also want updated remakes of past figures. But to be honest I don’t even want them to touch The Hobbit unless they will actually do something with it. If they’re only going to do one scene, that’s the best choice, but it still feels empty if we don’t get remakes of Smaug and Azog and finally get characters like Bolg and the trolls. So I’d really rather they just stick with LOTR since it seems like it might actually go somewhere

[Timobricko]

I haven't been keeping up with the news on Lego lotr but I saw something speculating about two sets next year. Isn't the assumption that one will be another brickheads like it's been past two times? Or am I missing something and it's confirmed they will be different 

[zoth33]

2 hours ago, Timobricko said:

I haven't been keeping up with the news on Lego lotr but I saw something speculating about two sets next year. Isn't the assumption that one will be another brickheads like it's been past two times? Or am I missing something and it's confirmed they will be different 

One is Bagend and the is rumor of another set not Brickheads

[Lordhelmet]

I think it is safe to say we want the set to include all of the dwarves with their proper molded facial hair, plus the 5 hobbits, Gandalf, two ring wraiths and 10-12 additional hobbits.  

In reality, I don't see why a set like this couldn't justify having 20 or so minifigures.  Hobbits are just torso and face prints as they have roughly the same hair and legs.  I think we should expect more from Lego with some of the prices going up this much, and when there is a lot of uniformity in the characters.  My ideal line up would be the following (and I am thinking like the Falcon in both eras being represented). Gandalf, old and young Bilbo (not old Bilbo from Rivendell, but with the hobbit hair piece in grey), the four hobbits, Thorin, Dwalin, bofur, fili, kili, balin, two Ringwraith's, and then five or six hobbits (Rosie, Farmer Maggot, Odo Proudfoot, Lobelia, plus two others).  ten of these minifugres would have the same hobbit hair (Lobelia and Rosie would have different hair). Three of the dwarves would have the same hair and no special beard.  So we would need four new molds for this list (Bofur, Dwalin, Balin, Thori/kili/fili), there would be six repeat figures from recent sets (Gandalf, four hobbits, Ringwraith)

I realize that Lego will not do something like this, and our expectations of Lego are generally low based on their track record, but this list is not unreasonable for $350 considering the repeats and simplicity for the hobbit designs in my opinion. 

 

[kuzyabricks]

10 hours ago, MAB said:

Yes they did. Both themes were on shelves until summer of 2015. A theme is not dead if sets were still readily available on shelves in retail stores.

What sets from LOTR apart from Orthanc were on shelves in 2015? Only some desolation of Smaug/bofa sets were on shelves at best until July. Either way it’s been a decade and Lego absolutely should create more sets with remade dwarves. The prices are INSANE currently. Beyond anything reasonable. Quite honestly disgusting, people are forgetting this is a toy at the end of the day. 

[MAB]

3 minutes ago, kuzyabricks said:

What sets from LOTR apart from Orthanc were on shelves in 2015? Only some desolation of Smaug/bofa sets were on shelves at best until July. Either way it’s been a decade and Lego absolutely should create more sets with remade dwarves.

Orthanc was on the shelves in 2015. That is LOTR. The theme was still being sold in summer  2015. Therefore not dead iin 2015. 

The dwarves are from The Hobbit. We don't know if they will produce The Hobbit sets again. It is a less popular movie series, and merchandise didn't sell well. It is Fantastic Beasts to Harry Potter.

5 minutes ago, kuzyabricks said:

The prices are INSANE currently. Beyond anything reasonable. Quite honestly disgusting, people are forgetting this is a toy at the end of the day. 

There are plenty of cheap toys available if you want a toy. Don't forget that.

The original LOTR and Hobbit sets are not toys any more. They are collectables, with prices governed by high demand and low supply. They are being sold to adult collectors, not children. If they sell, the price was reasonable to the buyer otherwise they would not have bought it. If people were not into LEGO LOTR or Hobbit when it was available and only recently got into the theme, they have no right to buy at 'toy' prices of the past. I have sold probably 60 LOTR and Hobbit sealed sets in the past 18 months. I think I have had 7 or 8 messages from buyers after receiving them thanking me for selling them, something that rarely happens with other themes. They were not disgusted that they were able to purchase sealed sets at a price they were willing to pay that would not have been possible if I hadn't bought and stored them carefully.

[kuzyabricks]

14 minutes ago, MAB said:

Orthanc was on the shelves in 2015. That is LOTR. The theme was still being sold in summer  2015. Therefore not dead iin 2015. 

The dwarves are from The Hobbit. We don't know if they will produce The Hobbit sets again. It is a less popular movie series, and merchandise didn't sell well. It is Fantastic Beasts to Harry Potter.

There are plenty of cheap toys available if you want a toy. Don't forget that.

The original LOTR and Hobbit sets are not toys any more. They are collectables, with prices governed by high demand and low supply. They are being sold to adult collectors, not children. If they sell, the price was reasonable to the buyer otherwise they would not have bought it. If people were not into LEGO LOTR or Hobbit when it was available and only recently got into the theme, they have no right to buy at 'toy' prices of the past. I have sold probably 60 LOTR and Hobbit sealed sets in the past 18 months. I think I have had 7 or 8 messages from buyers after receiving them thanking me for selling them, something that rarely happens with other themes. They were not disgusted that they were able to purchase sealed sets at a price they were willing to pay that would not have been possible if I hadn't bought and stored them carefully.

I even specifically pointed out that orthanc was selling in 2015. However the rest of the theme was dead then. I was talking about how “they’ve been released” is not a proper excuse for not releasing specific figures 10 years on. I understand how supply and demand works, the prices are still ridiculous.  Just because someone bought it doesn’t mean it isn’t  ridiculous. My dream set is the imperial flagship. Obviously high demand and low supply but $1400+ is a ridiculous price no matter what way you look at it. I’m not asking for the prices to be cut I’m simply asking for sets and figures to be remade because they’re way too expensive now. I’m not saying that old sets should be msrp that would be foolish, but having them release a decade ago isn’t an excuse to not release them again in the future that is all.

Edited November 26, 2024 by kuzyabricks

[MAB]

2 hours ago, kuzyabricks said:

I even specifically pointed out that orthanc was selling in 2015. However the rest of the theme was dead then. I was talking about how “they’ve been released” is not a proper excuse for not releasing specific figures 10 years on. I understand how supply and demand works, the prices are still ridiculous.  Just because someone bought it doesn’t mean it isn’t  ridiculous. My dream set is the imperial flagship. Obviously high demand and low supply but $1400+ is a ridiculous price no matter what way you look at it. I’m not asking for the prices to be cut I’m simply asking for sets and figures to be remade because they’re way too expensive now. I’m not saying that old sets should be msrp that would be foolish, but having them release a decade ago isn’t an excuse to not release them again in the future that is all.

Those prices are not ridiculous to other people though. That is why transactions take place. If sellers want to sell, then prices have to be realistic not ridiculous. But they only have to be realistic to the people willing to pay most. If I have ten items to sell and 100 people want it, I don't care what 90% of the people are willing to pay. I'm selling to the people in the top 10%, even if the other 90% think those people are paying ridiculous prices. The 90% can go without as they are not willing to pay the going rate. I'd even say that what many of the 90% are wanting to pay is ridiculously low. I see it all the time selling on ebay, people making offers way below the market value. But they can go without. About a year ago, I sold my last spare Palantir. LEGO were selling them for about 50p when they were current. I had one in my BL store for £50. Someone messaged me asking if I would accept £10. I refused and they messaged again with a rant about price gouging and a crazy price for a toy ball. I offered to sell them a different coloured marbled Zamor sphere for the price they were willing to pay. But they weren't actually interested in getting a toy ball, they wanted a specific coloured one that is very hard to find now because of demand. I blocked them, re-priced at £60 and it sold within a few months. Now the going price for new is £100+, a used one recently sold on BL in the UK for nearly £80. My £60 price for a toy ball was not disgusting or ridiculous, and actually looks like it was a decent price for the buyer now.

As to whether they should re-release sets that were released 10 years ago, what LEGO cares about is whether they would sell now. They obviously believe that there is an adult market for LOTR sets now, as they have released two large predominantly display sets aimed at adults, plus further Brickheadz display sets with little play value other than the build process. I assume that they don't think there is a marker for LOTR children's playset toys though as they have not attempted to reboot the theme with any sets aimed at children. I also assume that they do not believe there is a market for either children's toys or adult display sets for The Hobbit, as they have not done any. In that case, the reason for not releasing them again in future is not because they have been released before but because they don't believe they will sell well enough. And I can understand that, as The Hobbit fandom, especially among adults, is not in the same league as for LOTR, and I cannot remember the last time I saw The Hobbit movie merchandise for sale. It doesn't matter if there are some people willing to pay high prices on the secondary market, that does not show that there is sufficient demand for re-releasing old sets.

If LEGO believe that there is a large enough market for adult aimed display sets for The Hobbit, or children's sets, then there is nothing stopping them making those sets (if they get agreement from Warner/New Line). Having made them before and some people wanting the sets or just the figures as the few available are too expensive for them to afford is not a business case for that. Having released them before is not an excuse to release them again, if there is no real market for them. I imagine it is far more lucrative for LEGO to be releasing sets with larger fan bases that buy merchandise such as Home Alone, various Disney movies, Indy, BTTF, Ghostbusters, and of course Star Wars and Marvel. And LOTR.

[RichardGoring]

2 hours ago, kuzyabricks said:

I even specifically pointed out that orthanc was selling in 2015. However the rest of the theme was dead then. I was talking about how “they’ve been released” is not a proper excuse for not releasing specific figures 10 years on. I understand how supply and demand works, the prices are still ridiculous.  Just because someone bought it doesn’t mean it isn’t  ridiculous. My dream set is the imperial flagship. Obviously high demand and low supply but $1400+ is a ridiculous price no matter what way you look at it. I’m not asking for the prices to be cut I’m simply asking for sets and figures to be remade because they’re way too expensive now. I’m not saying that old sets should be msrp that would be foolish, but having them release a decade ago isn’t an excuse to not release them again in the future that is all.

The secondary market price for old sets and the length of time since sets were last available are both factors that LEGO will take into account, but so is current market demand.

Indiana Jones sets were last available a long time ago and prices on the secondary market are really high. They released some good sets - one of which was truly excellent - and all at a decent price and range of price points. And it flopped. The market demand isn't there and LEGO would probably make a lot more money with something that is currently popular and is new, so they have a larger target market of everyone, rather than the smaller (but still decently sized) subset of people who don't have it from when it was first released.

On the other hand, Star Wars and Harry Potter keep getting the same things released year after year which seem to sell in vulgar numbers and make billions for LEGO, all while older sets are still priced incredibly high, but also boatloads of them are available for cheap on Craigslist as people clear out old toys they no longer use.

History suggests that LEGO don't like to release the same thing again for some themes.

History suggests that LEGO churn out the same thing year after year for other themes.

My point is, it's a cyclical argument where both things can be true, depending your view point. Wish lists are nice, but logic can be hard to apply. Let alone the more complex nuances like licensing agreements (Bombur not being a named character in Rivendell, for example), parts budgets, logistics, opportunity cost, and lots of other stuff.

[RichardGoring]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

...About a year ago, I sold my last spare Palantir. LEGO were selling them for about 50p when they were current. I had one in my BL store for £50. Someone messaged me asking if I would accept £10. I refused and they messaged again with a rant about price gouging and a crazy price for a toy ball. I offered to sell them a different coloured marbled Zamor sphere for the price they were willing to pay. But they weren't actually interested in getting a toy ball, they wanted a specific coloured one that is very hard to find now because of demand. I blocked them, re-priced at £60 and it sold within a few months. Now the going price for new is £100+, a used one recently sold on BL in the UK for nearly £80. My £60 price for a toy ball was not disgusting or ridiculous, and actually looks like it was a decent price for the buyer now.

Ha! We wrote something similar at about the same time. This story is crazy though! I understand it can be frustrating when things become expensive, but it's a non-essential rare item, so, as you say, people can charge what they like. I don't personally value these kinds of things to anything like that extent, and so would do without, but to accuse a seller like this is pretty awful.

[kuzyabricks]

3 hours ago, MAB said:

Those prices are not ridiculous to other people though. That is why transactions take place. If sellers want to sell, then prices have to be realistic not ridiculous. But they only have to be realistic to the people willing to pay most. If I have ten items to sell and 100 people want it, I don't care what 90% of the people are willing to pay. I'm selling to the people in the top 10%, even if the other 90% think those people are paying ridiculous prices. The 90% can go without as they are not willing to pay the going rate. I'd even say that what many of the 90% are wanting to pay is ridiculously low. I see it all the time selling on ebay, people making offers way below the market value. But they can go without. About a year ago, I sold my last spare Palantir. LEGO were selling them for about 50p when they were current. I had one in my BL store for £50. Someone messaged me asking if I would accept £10. I refused and they messaged again with a rant about price gouging and a crazy price for a toy ball. I offered to sell them a different coloured marbled Zamor sphere for the price they were willing to pay. But they weren't actually interested in getting a toy ball, they wanted a specific coloured one that is very hard to find now because of demand. I blocked them, re-priced at £60 and it sold within a few months. Now the going price for new is £100+, a used one recently sold on BL in the UK for nearly £80. My £60 price for a toy ball was not disgusting or ridiculous, and actually looks like it was a decent price for the buyer now.

As to whether they should re-release sets that were released 10 years ago, what LEGO cares about is whether they would sell now. They obviously believe that there is an adult market for LOTR sets now, as they have released two large predominantly display sets aimed at adults, plus further Brickheadz display sets with little play value other than the build process. I assume that they don't think there is a marker for LOTR children's playset toys though as they have not attempted to reboot the theme with any sets aimed at children. I also assume that they do not believe there is a market for either children's toys or adult display sets for The Hobbit, as they have not done any. In that case, the reason for not releasing them again in future is not because they have been released before but because they don't believe they will sell well enough. And I can understand that, as The Hobbit fandom, especially among adults, is not in the same league as for LOTR, and I cannot remember the last time I saw The Hobbit movie merchandise for sale. It doesn't matter if there are some people willing to pay high prices on the secondary market, that does not show that there is sufficient demand for re-releasing old sets.

If LEGO believe that there is a large enough market for adult aimed display sets for The Hobbit, or children's sets, then there is nothing stopping them making those sets (if they get agreement from Warner/New Line). Having made them before and some people wanting the sets or just the figures as the few available are too expensive for them to afford is not a business case for that. Having released them before is not an excuse to release them again, if there is no real market for them. I imagine it is far more lucrative for LEGO to be releasing sets with larger fan bases that buy merchandise such as Home Alone, various Disney movies, Indy, BTTF, Ghostbusters, and of course Star Wars and Marvel. And LOTR.

My friend I don’t doubt that it is worth that much. I’m sorry that you as a business owner have people lowballing you way below the market value. That’s not cool. They shouldn’t be wasting your time.  I’m not arguing with the market, it is what it is. I will however stand my ground on that the prices are ridiculous. Just because someone does buy them doesn’t mean the prices aren’t insane. And hey good for them for getting those sets, at the end of the day they get to enjoy them! What I am trying to say is that if there is a slim chance that we got Thorins company in the upcoming set, “they already came out” is not an excuse to not remake them. I’m not begging Lego to rerelease old sets, I agree that I doubt that the hobbit would sell as well as LOTR (still would sell well overall in my opinion) but if we are paying a high price for Lego why shouldn’t we hope for a lot of figures? I’m still holding out for the whole group AND characters from the beginning of LOTR such as the four hobbits with new prints))). That would make it a much more enticing set overall. 

3 hours ago, RichardGoring said:

The secondary market price for old sets and the length of time since sets were last available are both factors that LEGO will take into account, but so is current market demand.

Indiana Jones sets were last available a long time ago and prices on the secondary market are really high. They released some good sets - one of which was truly excellent - and all at a decent price and range of price points. And it flopped. The market demand isn't there and LEGO would probably make a lot more money with something that is currently popular and is new, so they have a larger target market of everyone, rather than the smaller (but still decently sized) subset of people who don't have it from when it was first released.

On the other hand, Star Wars and Harry Potter keep getting the same things released year after year which seem to sell in vulgar numbers and make billions for LEGO, all while older sets are still priced incredibly high, but also boatloads of them are available for cheap on Craigslist as people clear out old toys they no longer use.

History suggests that LEGO don't like to release the same thing again for some themes.

History suggests that LEGO churn out the same thing year after year for other themes.

My point is, it's a cyclical argument where both things can be true, depending your view point. Wish lists are nice, but logic can be hard to apply. Let alone the more complex nuances like licensing agreements (Bombur not being a named character in Rivendell, for example), parts budgets, logistics, opportunity cost, and lots of other stuff.

Good point on the last part I forgot he wasn’t named! Puts a new perspective on that they might indeed not be able to have some characters because of licensing! I agree that my ideas are still in fact a wishlist, however people stating that Lego shouldn’t remake those characters because they were already released 10+ years ago and are now triple their price are what I’m disagreeing with. I have the Drax figure from the 2017 Gotg set. He blew up in price up to 50 bucks because of his popularity. They recently released an updated version of him. I’m not complaining that instead of thin we didn’t get a brand new yondu or another character like the James Gunn brother character. I’m glad people can get his brand new version without having to spend 50 bucks for the old one. I don’t get that outlook whatsoever and hope Lego doesn’t follow it this March/April)))

[RichardGoring]

3 hours ago, kuzyabricks said:

...I agree that my ideas are still in fact a wishlist, however people stating that Lego shouldn’t remake those characters because they were already released 10+ years ago and are now triple their price are what I’m disagreeing with...

It's a fair point. But the problem when a toy becomes a collectable is that you then have two polar opposite views on stuff like this. And the thing is, neither are wrong.

Ultimately, I hope they do a decent job of the new set. And more the people they make happy, the better it will sell, the more we will get in the future.

[Lordhelmet]

Do were remember why Gloin wasn't named in the set?  Was it a conflict with the Hobbit IP, or just because he was not named in the film?

Edited November 26, 2024 by Lordhelmet