City 2010

[The Green Brick Giant]

I think he means 7897 Passenger Train released in 2006 for $90

Not bad if it weren't for all the batteries needed (11 or 12)

Yep that's the train, that's why I had old in quotes.

At the time that set was released it was $80, it didn't go up in price until the fall of 2007 I think. 12 batteries?! Ouch, still you can get that many rechargeable on sale for like $30 and that is still half the price for a full train.

So frankly I don't believe anything the people from LEGO might say, they are a company, they are not our friends.

[Piranha]

Yep that's the train, that's why I had old in quotes.

At the time that set was released it was $80, it didn't go up in price until the fall of 2007 I think. 12 batteries?! Ouch, still you can get that many rechargeable on sale for like $30 and that is still half the price for a full train.

So frankly I don't believe anything the people from LEGO might say, they are a company, they are not our friends.

Yea I was going to buy and use rechargeable batteries, because it has a nice shape and I liked it

Very true that Lego is not our friend, one example is the straight and curved baseplates being in different packs

On a different note, any news on what the train sets for 2010 will be?

Will they be PF?

Monorail or elevated trail?

I also wonder about the TRU exclusive

[UsernameMDM]

I think he means 7897 Passenger Train released in 2006 for $90

Not really a train guy myself, but that looks like a white turd compared to the awesomeness that is the Emerald Night. But if you like it, that's cool too.

[Legoist]

$100 for half a train that doesn't even run!

The "old" RC passenger train cost $80 and ran, sure it didn't have as many pieces, but for $80 you had a working train. This year to get a train to run it will cost you over $200 to make it run never mind the track. Also when LEGO goes "New Trains in summer 2009, I figured that meant stations, and rain crossings and such. The whole point of the new type of Train was for it to be cheaper than 9V, and LEGO had failed at that once again.

These are reasonable considerations. I wouldn't say that they failed tho, I think they made a deliberate choice: Emerald Night is for AFOL and therefore has an AFOL price.

I think someone pointed out last year that perhaps Trains will no longer be sold in retail sets but will become only exclusives for S&H and Lego brand stores.

On the other hand, City sets can be exclusives only if they are very large, with rare colours or pieces, and generally a ridiculous amount of bricks. Any City set below 100$/e is unlikely to be an exclusive.

Not really a train guy myself, but that looks like a white turd compared to the awesomeness that is the Emerald Night. But if you like it, that's cool too.

7897 may not have a high building value due to those large front pieces.

However the Emerald Night also benefits from a large "wow" factor that makes everyone wants it, but indeed it's got issues, starting from the fact that the engine and its tender is twice as long as the whole rest of the train. It would have made much more sense if they sold only the engine, and sold the wagon separately. But they probably needed to reach the 100$/e threshold to make it look more valuable.

[Klaus-Dieter]

Thank you very much for these pics, Legoliner!

On the other hand, City sets can be exclusives only if they are very large, with rare colours or pieces, and generally a ridiculous amount of bricks. Any City set below 100$/e is unlikely to be an exclusive.

Legomilk wrote "City Trains" - so these will be train sets belonging to the City theme, Legoist.

I can't imagine TLG releasing regular Train sets from now on only via S@H since this would surely shorten their sales.

Either they release a complete new Trains line (with the more to JFOLs orientated train sets like e. g. in 2006) of which the sets will be available in every toy shop - or they will not release a complete new Trains theme but only one or two exclusive Trains sets (mainly orientated on AFOL's wishes, e. g. as addition(s) to the Emerald Night) every year.

One very important fact is that he said City Trains.

This means we are very likely to see a Passenger type train and probably a cargo PF train

I also hope we see some more track side structures with the trains.

Wait on I suppose....

I totally agree with you, Macoco!

TLG will surely sell a cargo train and a passenger train. And I even think that they'll be in about the same price class like the ones from 2006 - perhaps they will even be a bit more expensive (about 10 or 20 Euros) if TLG hopefully designed them in a more classic style, with doors to open, a little track side structure, more minifigs and more additional stuff.

Trackside structures are indeed absolutely necessary!

In the last Trains theme there appeared only one - the train station from 2007 - which even had a very bad architectual style and nearly no interior.

I hope that we'll see next year or at least in 2011 a decent big train station (like the classic yellow train station from around 1990), a cargo loading station, a warehouse and a modern engine shed. If they came as regular sets or as Exclusives is imo equal as long as they will appear.

I must disagree with this. Last year LEGO released Medievel Market Village as an exclusive for the Castle line. Then not that much later they released the Emerald Night. I'm sure they will release at least two, probaly three exclusive 'city' sets next year (one will be a modular house).

MVV was released this year and not in 2008.

You're right that there surely won't be only the TRU Exclusive as City Exclusvie next year, Dr. Brick.

For 2010 I could well imagine to see as City Exclusives:

-one or two train car(s) as addition for the Emerald Night

-CC styled building (no idea what - but I even don't care about it)

-TRU Exclusive (either elevated train or City Square)

-Winter set (possibly a bakery?)

I do. You see, LEGO CITY isn't made for Afols but for children. Children like to play with toys they can relate to. If you do a poll on how many kids want to be a fire fighter and how many want to be a barber (or any other 'civilian' function) you will find that most of them want to be a fire fighter.

You should be happy that TLC gives us a few civilian sets. But never expect them to donate you a whole line of civilian sets, because they never will.

Dr. Brick

I'm not that sure about that, Dr. Brick.

Of course kids are more interested in fire, police, construction site and emergency than about some shops and family houses.

But that does not mean that they are not interested in some shops and family houses.

Legoliner and I do not demand from TLG to stop producing fire, police etc. sets and only sell civilian sets. We only complain about that it's getting boring when there is one year when we'll very supposably (apart from perhaps one set - or if we have got many luck two sets) get no civilian buildings. E. g. post office and a bank with security truck surely would be very demanded at kids, too!

And do only look at what Playmobil has been releasing in the last years for city sets: different shops, zoo sets, circus sets, family house(s) and school sets are all selling very well. So why shouldn't civilian Lego sets do, too?!

Klaus-Dieter

[aawsum]

I just was browsing brickshelf and sa3 an image of the set with the pigs that's crystal clear.

Brickshelf.

If this has been posted before then i'm sorry but please don't denounce my find without looking at the link.

This picture has been around for a while.....

[Legoist]

Legomilk wrote "City Trains" - so these will be train sets belonging to the City theme, Legoist.

I can't imagine TLG releasing regular Train sets from now on only via S@H since this would surely shorten their sales.

Either they release a complete new Trains line (with the more to JFOLs orientated train sets like e. g. in 2006) of which the sets will be available in every toy shop - or they will not release a complete new Trains theme but only one or two exclusive Trains sets (mainly orientated on AFOL's wishes, e. g. as addition(s) to the Emerald Night) every year.

Yeah I understood Legomilk... and I actually hope that this is what is going to happen. I hate exclusives because they cost me twice as much as normal sets I'm a train fan, but because of that I'd rather buy a *good* set from the shops like the Deluxe Cargo Train, rather than a *great* set from S&H spending twice as much. Speaking only for myself, because it's obvious that people with no budget limits would always prefer the second type of set...

But there were rumours on this forum about half a year ago that Trains was going to be exclusives-only from now on because of the difficulties of selling such high-priced sets from retail shops. Someone pointed out that stores might have given Lego some feedback that too big and expensive sets were hard to stock and sell, and at the moment it seems that the PF system would make a motorized train set even more expensive than the RC sets. It's easy to imagine big problems in selling a 200$ Lego set in a retail shop...

I definitely hope that they do release new train sets in shops in 2010. But they would need to be motor-less to contain the price. Otherwise the only other option would be to sell the locomotive separately from the wagons and the tracks.

--------------------

Regarding the releases of more fire sets...

While it sounds pointless for Lego to keep designing more fire, police and rescue sets, that only applies to AFOLs. Let's keep in mind that most KFOLs have something like 5-7 years of Lego fandom (e.g. from 8 to 14). Once they become teenagers, most of them stop playing with Lego. In that time span, you can easily sell them 2-3 fire stations or police stations, but you need to change them every 2-3 years to do so... you can't design 3 "ultimate" fire stations and keep them forever on the catalog, because you need the word NEW to advertise and boost sales. Also keep in mind that new kids are born all the time If a new version of recently discontinued sets like the building crane or the troll warship were produced, they will still be totally unprecedented to a lot of KFOLs.

[Joebot]

All in all, the 2010 city sets are very disappointing. Sure, we will get a few cool vehicles such as the Smart and the tanker, or maybe even the repair truck, but now the only structures we are getting are a pig pen (), lackluster airport, and an upgraded 7945

Agreed. In my opinion, it's a pretty underwhelming group of sets.

I don't get why Lego releases so many vehicles for the CITY line yet so little actual buildings. Sure, the vehicles are great, but vehicles don't make up a town, structures do. We have cars, but cars are used to drive somewhere, yet our minifigures have nearly no buildings to go to.

Personally, I think it's a result of the "enbiggening" (to quote the Simpsons) of the city vehicles. As vehicles continue to get bigger, wider, and more detailed, the corresponding buildings have not followed suit. I suppose it's an issue of marketing, and trying to get their specified price points. You can make a massive, super-detailed Octans tanker, and sell it by itself for $25, and it looks great. But what if you want a gas station to go with it?? At an appropriate scale relative to the new tanker, it would have to be huge, and would probably run $100. I doubt there's much of a market for a $100 gas station, so they just skip it.

You can see this problem with the garage set this past year. The tow trucks and other vehicles were HUGE! Rather than try to make a correspondingly gigantic building, they just made an "open-air" structure that gives the vague impression of a garage.

The disparity between the gigantic vehicles and the relatively small buildings has gotten way out of whack. It's particularly absurd in the new airport, where the airplane dwarfs the terminal.

The solution?? A return to good ol' fashioned 4-wide vehicles!!

Compare this set (a classic that I owned and dearly loved):

With the recent Garage set:

I'm not suggesting that we should return to set designs like 6363; I think it's too simplistic for a modern audience. But there has to be a happy medium somewhere -- sets with enclosed, complete buildings that are at an appropriate scale to the included vehicles. 6363 might be pretty simple, but at least it was an actual building with walls and a roof, AND you could fit a car inside it!

[gormadoc]

Well I will definetley buy that 3178 airoplane from the 2010 city sets,it will fit right in with my proppeller plane collection.

Edited October 5, 2009 by gormadoc

[Capt. Tavares]

Personally, I think it's a result of the "enbiggening" (to quote the Simpsons) of the city vehicles. As vehicles continue to get bigger, wider, and more detailed, the corresponding buildings have not followed suit. I suppose it's an issue of marketing, and trying to get their specified price points. You can make a massive, super-detailed Octans tanker, and sell it by itself for $25, and it looks great. But what if you want a gas station to go with it?? At an appropriate scale relative to the new tanker, it would have to be huge, and would probably run $100. I doubt there's much of a market for a $100 gas station, so they just skip it.

You can see this problem with the garage set this past year. The tow trucks and other vehicles were HUGE! Rather than try to make a correspondingly gigantic building, they just made an "open-air" structure that gives the vague impression of a garage.

The disparity between the gigantic vehicles and the relatively small buildings has gotten way out of whack. It's particularly absurd in the new airport, where the airplane dwarfs the terminal.

The solution?? A return to good ol' fashioned 4-wide vehicles!!

Compare this set (a classic that I owned and dearly loved):

With the recent Garage set:

I'm not suggesting that we should return to set designs like 6363; I think it's too simplistic for a modern audience. But there has to be a happy medium somewhere -- sets with enclosed, complete buildings that are at an appropriate scale to the included vehicles. 6363 might be pretty simple, but at least it was an actual building with walls and a roof, AND you could fit a car inside it!

While I agree that it is difficult and expensive to make buildings to scale with the 6-wide vehicles, i totally disagree that we should go back to 4-wide, as you cannot possibly get that much detail in. There is a way to make buildings to scale.Customize it to fit your needs! TLG shouldn't do all the work for you, it takes the fun out of building and playing with lego! Lego does their best to make city buildings as realistic as possible while keeping them in a normal price range. No 5 year old is going to spend $299.99 on a garage. Chances are the kid may not even build it the right way and customize it, or for a TFOL and AFOL they probably have enough bricks to complete it the way they want it.

All lego does is give you the basis, you can make it however you want.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Capt. Tavares

[Joebot]

While I agree that it is difficult and expensive to make buildings to scale with the 6-wide vehicles, i totally disagree that we should go back to 4-wide, as you cannot possibly get that much detail in. There is a way to make buildings to scale.Customize it to fit your needs! TLG shouldn't do all the work for you, it takes the fun out of building and playing with lego! Lego does their best to make city buildings as realistic as possible while keeping them in a normal price range. No 5 year old is going to spend $299.99 on a garage. Chances are the kid may not even build it the right way and customize it, or for a TFOL and AFOL they probably have enough bricks to complete it the way they want it.

All lego does is give you the basis, you can make it however you want.

4-wide vs. 6-wide is a never-ending debate that has been argued to death. It's like Cubs vs. Cardinals, Marvel vs. DC, or Mac vs. Windows. There's no wrong answer (right answers: Cardinals, Marvel, Mac). I'm old-school, I guess. I prefer 4-wide. Others disagree. <shrug>

Yes, I do realize that people can make any buildings they want with Lego bricks. That's an argument that gets brought up on this forum whenever anywhere dares to criticize Lego's product offerings. "Don't like it? Then build something else!" Of course it's a valid point ... but then why are we all eagerly anticipating new pictures of upcoming sets?? By this logic, we shouldn't care at all. We should simply be perusing the pick-a-brick site and buying bulk bricks.

The fact is, even though I rarely ever keep my City sets intact, I still LOVE seeing what Lego is coming out with next. Their product lines are the raw materials that I use as jumping off points for my own ideas. For example, I think the Farm set is freaking awful (that barn is really terrible), but it's a great starting point -- the cows, tractor, and mini-figs are awesome. So, I got the Farm set, and I built my own farmhouse, barn, etc. I'm not looking to TLC for final products. I'm looking for inspiration, new designs, new parts, and new ideas. I'm not getting any of that from the '10 lineup so far. I see a lot of boring rehashes of things they've already done.

[The Green Brick Giant]

These are reasonable considerations. I wouldn't say that they failed tho, I think they made a deliberate choice: Emerald Night is for AFOL and therefore has an AFOL price.

That doesn't make any sense through either.

AFOL would rather have kept the 9V style of train! It's much MUCH cheaper and is a true train.

The whole point of have RC trains were to make Train sets that children could afford to buy. If LEGO wanted to make AFOL happy then we would have grey and not bley, and we would still have 9V trains. I don't understand any reason for LEGO to have a $250 train, nor will I believe anything they say.

it's not like they can make a $80-$90 train anymore, the parts to make the train move alone cost well over $100.

[missouri_bb63]

That doesn't make any sense through either.

AFOL would rather have kept the 9V style of train! It's much MUCH cheaper and is a true train.

The whole point of have RC trains were to make Train sets that children could afford to buy. If LEGO wanted to make AFOL happy then we would have grey and not bley, and we would still have 9V trains. I don't understand any reason for LEGO to have a $250 train, nor will I believe anything they say.

it's not like they can make a $80-$90 train anymore, the parts to make the train move alone cost well over $100.

I have read that Lego regreted the color changes (I think it was Brickjournal but I am not sure), but it was too expensive to go back (scrapping, re-packing inventories, supplier changes etc), plus they already had quite a few sets with the blueisch gray out by then which would have made a phase out more difficult. I think that really was at a time when AFOLs didn't have the weight in decision making they do now. The huge color pallet they created was one of the reasons they lost so much money during a certain period (that and the explosion of one off parts)

I love the power functions because it can not only be used by trains but also anything else you want motorized. The motors themselves are powerful and cheap. For my Steamer MOCs it is perfect as I could hide the motors in the boiler. The train looks better for it. Don't get me wrong, I grew up with 12V which is still my favorite, and 9V was great too. Like you said, PF really is too expensive for most people though, so I am not sure how parents will justify the cost for their kids. Plus trying to hide all the electronics can be a pain.

I think that Lego will continue to develop this however (just like the new battery pack), and that it will all get smaller, and cheaper. I think being able to use one type of electric system no matter what you are building is a great thing for AFOLs too.

Edited October 5, 2009 by missouri_bb63

[Svelte]

I have read that Lego regreted the color changes (I think it was Brickjournal but I am not sure), but it was too expensive to go back (scrapping, re-packing inventories, supplier changes etc), plus they already had quite a few sets with the blueisch gray out by then which would have made a phase out more difficult. I think that really was at a time when AFOLs didn't have the weight in decision making they do now.

Really? I've never heard that. The only thing I heard was that, post the outcry, they regretted not telling the AFOL community first. This has always sounded like PR damage control to me, and I doubt it would have changed anything. They also seem to be quite happy to introduce new colours (dark brown) or tweak existing ones (the new browner but more consistent dark red) without feeling the need to consult AFOLs. If you have a link to that article, I'd like to read it

[Legoliner Pilot]

Wow, I'm gone for 8 hours and a whole page appears. Well, lets get to work..

Very true that Lego is not our friend, one example is the straight and curved baseplates being in different packs

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to dramatize this, no matter how immature it may seem. I think TLC put the T-Junctions and Quad-Junctions in with the curved and straits because no one wanted to buy them. I mean honestly TLC, two roadplates for $14.99 USD?

Thank you very much for these pics, Legoliner!

No problem Klaus.

Legomilk wrote "City Trains" - so these will be train sets belonging to the City theme, Legoist.

I can't imagine TLG releasing regular Train sets from now on only via S@H since this would surely shorten their sales.

Either they release a complete new Trains line (with the more to JFOLs orientated train sets like e. g. in 2006) of which the sets will be available in every toy shop - or they will not release a complete new Trains theme but only one or two exclusive Trains sets (mainly orientated on AFOL's wishes, e. g. as addition(s) to the Emerald Night) every year.

I don't get why everyone was saying that the train was too expensive (not saying you said it, Klaus) for toy stores and other shops. The Passenger Train is $89.99 and the 7642 Garage is $99.99 USD, yet it's in every Toy store and Target (it's a shop in the US) in my area. ???

I totally agree with you, Macoco!

TLG will surely sell a cargo train and a passenger train. And I even think that they'll be in about the same price class like the ones from 2006 - perhaps they will even be a bit more expensive (about 10 or 20 Euros) if TLG hopefully designed them in a more classic style, with doors to open, a little track side structure, more minifigs and more additional stuff.

Seconded. TLG need to go back to this beautiful style of work:

I mean, that was a beauty. Two cabins, and seats with tables ontop, making a double decked pice of art. No cons at all.

Trackside structures are indeed absolutely necessary!

In the last Trains theme there appeared only one - the train station from 2007 - which even had a very bad architectual style and nearly no interior.

I hope that we'll see next year or at least in 2011 a decent big train station (like the classic yellow train station from around 1990), a cargo loading station, a warehouse and a modern engine shed. If they came as regular sets or as Exclusives is imo equal as long as they will appear.

The interior wasn't that bad- It had plenty of seats, E-Check-in machine, detailed Cafe, and a rooftop with table and chairs. I agree with your thoughts about the architecture of the station though, Klaus.

I'm not that sure about that, Dr. Brick.

Of course kids are more interested in fire, police, construction site and emergency than about some shops and family houses.

But that does not mean that they are not interested in some shops and family houses.

Legoliner and I do not demand from TLG to stop producing fire, police etc. sets and only sell civilian sets. We only complain about that it's getting boring when there is one year when we'll very supposably (apart from perhaps one set - or if we have got many luck two sets) get no civilian buildings. E. g. post office and a bank with security truck surely would be very demanded at kids, too!

And do only look at what Playmobil has been releasing in the last years for city sets: different shops, zoo sets, circus sets, family house(s) and school sets are all selling very well. So why shouldn't civilian Lego sets do, too?!

Klaus-Dieter

Agreed. In fact, I kind of like the Police and Fire line -I own both stations and while they may &lt;insert that tiresome argument&gt; they have a lot of accessories and columns. Also, the police station has a lot of detail. But recently TLC has gone overboard - I mean, what kind of police force operates Pontoon planes... And what kind of Fire Department operates hovercrafts? That is why me and Klaus we are so hard on these themes- While Fire and Police have gotten so much resources thrown at them, from marketing to money to design, Civilian sets are lackluster ( take a look at this year's camper, 7642 Garage, etc.) and are poorly designed most of the time. The only exceptions I can think of are 7641 City Corner, 10184 Town Plan, all of the modular houses, and 10199 Winter Toy Shop.

Agreed. In my opinion, it's a pretty underwhelming group of sets.

Personally, I think it's a result of the "enbiggening" (to quote the Simpsons) of the city vehicles. As vehicles continue to get bigger, wider, and more detailed, the corresponding buildings have not followed suit. I suppose it's an issue of marketing, and trying to get their specified price points. You can make a massive, super-detailed Octans tanker, and sell it by itself for $25, and it looks great. But what if you want a gas station to go with it?? At an appropriate scale relative to the new tanker, it would have to be huge, and would probably run $100. I doubt there's much of a market for a $100 gas station, so they just skip it.

You can see this problem with the garage set this past year. The tow trucks and other vehicles were HUGE! Rather than try to make a correspondingly gigantic building, they just made an "open-air" structure that gives the vague impression of a garage.

The disparity between the gigantic vehicles and the relatively small buildings has gotten way out of whack. It's particularly absurd in the new airport, where the airplane dwarfs the terminal.

The solution?? A return to good ol' fashioned 4-wide vehicles!!

Compare this set (a classic that I owned and dearly loved):

With the recent Garage set:

I'm not suggesting that we should return to set designs like 6363; I think it's too simplistic for a modern audience. But there has to be a happy medium somewhere -- sets with enclosed, complete buildings that are at an appropriate scale to the included vehicles. 6363 might be pretty simple, but at least it was an actual building with walls and a roof, AND you could fit a car inside it!

Agreed.

[Svelte]

Legoliner Pilot, please don't quote pics when making replies.

You may also wish to edit down the quotes you're referring to and just pluck out the relevant sentences, in order to make your own posts more readable.

Thanks!

[peterab]

I can't imagine TLG releasing regular Train sets from now on only via S@H since this would surely shorten their sales.

Either they release a complete new Trains line (with the more to JFOLs orientated train sets like e. g. in 2006) of which the sets will be available in every toy shop - or they will not release a complete new Trains theme but only one or two exclusive Trains sets (mainly orientated on AFOL's wishes, e. g. as addition(s) to the Emerald Night) every year.

Trackside structures are indeed absolutely necessary!

In the last Trains theme there appeared only one - the train station from 2007 - which even had a very bad architectual style and nearly no interior.

I hope that we'll see next year or at least in 2011 a decent big train station (like the classic yellow train station from around 1990), a cargo loading station, a warehouse and a modern engine shed. If they came as regular sets or as Exclusives is imo equal as long as they will appear.

Of course kids are more interested in fire, police, construction site and emergency than about some shops and family houses.

But that does not mean that they are not interested in some shops and family houses.

Legoliner and I do not demand from TLG to stop producing fire, police etc. sets and only sell civilian sets. We only complain about that it's getting boring when there is one year when we'll very supposably (apart from perhaps one set - or if we have got many luck two sets) get no civilian buildings. E. g. post office and a bank with security truck surely would be very demanded at kids, too!

And do only look at what Playmobil has been releasing in the last years for city sets: different shops, zoo sets, circus sets, family house(s) and school sets are all selling very well. So why shouldn't civilian Lego sets do, too?!

I'm not sure about the trains being available in every shop, in Australia trains are rarely available, and mostly in limited numbers, and not the whole range. In effect they are exclusives to S@H.

Playmobile sells a lot less product than Lego worldwide. What is a worthwhile theme for playmobile may be a marginal theme for Lego. I think you are assuming European buying habits are worldwide, but clearly from their pricing Lego values the US market more, how else can you explain Bionicals.

[CP5670]

Really? I've never heard that. The only thing I heard was that, post the outcry, they regretted not telling the AFOL community first. This has always sounded like PR damage control to me, and I doubt it would have changed anything. They also seem to be quite happy to introduce new colours (dark brown) or tweak existing ones (the new browner but more consistent dark red) without feeling the need to consult AFOLs. If you have a link to that article, I'd like to read it

Steve Witt said something to that effect at this year's Brickfair. He said that their "design group" was told to cut down the total number of colors and somehow decided that the grays were not colorful enough to fit in with the reduced palette, and they changed them without telling anyone. He also said that the company's attitude towards AFOLs was also very different back then and that in hindsight, it was a mistake. At last year's event, the TLG quality guy also said that "some people higher up have admitted that it probably wasn't the brightest decision they made."

As you said, I think it's ultimately just PR talk, and TLG would do it all again today if it suited them to do so. On the other hand, the original 2004 color changes would have been a terrible decision from even a business point of view (cost of retooling machines, kids didn't notice, AFOLs stopped buying Lego for a year), so I think they would certainly regret that.

Yes, I do realize that people can make any buildings they want with Lego bricks. That's an argument that gets brought up on this forum whenever anywhere dares to criticize Lego's product offerings. "Don't like it? Then build something else!" Of course it's a valid point ... but then why are we all eagerly anticipating new pictures of upcoming sets?? By this logic, we shouldn't care at all. We should simply be perusing the pick-a-brick site and buying bulk bricks.

As far as City buildings go, the special pieces are one attraction for me. If a set is lame but contains lots of unusual but versatile pieces for a good price, I would still buy it and use it as a platform for mods. However, this has rarely been the case in recent years due to all the quality issues, coupled with the distinct lack of printed pieces.

I almost always mod my sets in some way. There are very few sets that are perfect to me in their original form, and I can only think of two or three City buildings like that.

[peterab]

I don't get why everyone was saying that the train was too expensive (not saying you said it, Klaus) for toy stores and other shops. The Passenger Train is $89.99 and the 7642 Garage is $99.99 USD, yet it's in every Toy store and Target (it's a shop in the US) in my area. ???

Dont use US pricing as any guide. The rest of the world subsidizes your market. Most lego train prices in Australia are nearly double US prices at the moment yet our dollar has been varying between 85-95 US cents for the last few years. Pricing in Europe is similar. Add to that, the trains are not normally available in stores, so to be sure of getting them I'm going to pay $150 dollars for the train and $35 for shipping. Thats double what you're paying. Thats why we think these prices are too expensive.

[Legoist]

That doesn't make any sense through either.

AFOL would rather have kept the 9V style of train! It's much MUCH cheaper and is a true train.

The whole point of have RC trains were to make Train sets that children could afford to buy. If LEGO wanted to make AFOL happy then we would have grey and not bley, and we would still have 9V trains. I don't understand any reason for LEGO to have a $250 train, nor will I believe anything they say.

it's not like they can make a $80-$90 train anymore, the parts to make the train move alone cost well over $100.

But they did do what AFOL wanted... Perhaps the majority of Trains AFOL would have wanted to stay 9V, but the truth is that the whole Trains AFOL community is anyway characterized by being split between 12V fans, 9V fans, and people who wanted something new. So TLG did one of the best thing they could do: started selling locomotives (the 2 Santa Fe) and trains (Emerald Night) without any motor at all, and then let each AFOL motorize them the way he wants. The absolute best would have been if they didn't discontinue the 9V accessories productions of course, but probably they realized that AFOLs were already relying enough on the second-hand market. They instead went for PF because another chunk of the Trains AFOL community wanted more versatility than 9V.

You're right that the RC system was made for KFOL. If you want to sell a whole train set to a KFOL, it'd better be motorized and have a track. That nowadays easily makes the set 100$+ with RC, and PR is even more expensive. But RC doesn't sell to AFOL well because of its limitations, and PF would be too expensive for shops... This is why I'm thinking that either they will sell unmotorized City Trains next year (with motor separately) or they won't sell anything at all in shops and go full-exclusive. Unless they found a way to drop the production costs of PF elements, which I doubt.

BTW, there is a way to significantly drop the price of a train by 20-30%, and it's based on reducing the number of pieces, starting from using larger pieces in place of the smallest ones. I don't mean LARGE pieces like the RC passenger train's front, I just mean to avoid using hundreds of 1x1 plates/tiles and cheese slopes, and use 2-studs or 4-studs sized parts. But I guess that many AFOL would then complain for the lack of details in the result. But if we take classic locomotives like 7760 (only 150 pieces in the set), 7750 (263) or 7710 (447 including the track), can you honestly say that they SUCKED?

[Legoliner Pilot]

Dont use US pricing as any guide. The rest of the world subsidizes your market. Most lego train prices in Australia are nearly double US prices at the moment yet our dollar has been varying between 85-95 US cents for the last few years. Pricing in Europe is similar. Add to that, the trains are not normally available in stores, so to be sure of getting them I'm going to pay $150 dollars for the train and $35 for shipping. Thats double what you're paying. Thats why we think these prices are too expensive.

Does the garage (7642) cost more than the passenger train (?) in your area?

[Joebot]

BTW, there is a way to significantly drop the price of a train by 20-30%, and it's based on reducing the number of pieces, starting from using larger pieces in place of the smallest ones.

Good points all around. I would just add that another way to lower the cost of entry into Lego trains is to sell more smaller sets. The past few years have seen mostly big, expensive, complete train sets (engine, cars, track, accessories). Back in ye olden days, Lego also sold individual cars. That's not something we see much anymore, and I think that's a mistake.

A train is, by it's very nature, "modular." Lego would be wise to embrace that, and to sell separate engines, cars, and accessories. That lowers the cost of entry. A parent could start by buying their child an engine, a car, and some track. Yeah, it's not much of a train, but it works. Then the next birthday or Christmas, the parent can easily expand on it by buying another car or two.

I look back on the glory days of the 9V era, and there was so much more variety available, both in the styles of trains, and in the prices and sizes of the available sets.

[Matt Dawson]

Good points all around. I would just add that another way to lower the cost of entry into Lego trains is to sell more smaller sets. The past few years have seen mostly big, expensive, complete train sets (engine, cars, track, accessories). Back in ye olden days, Lego also sold individual cars. That's not something we see much anymore, and I think that's a mistake.

A train is, by it's very nature, "modular." Lego would be wise to embrace that, and to sell separate engines, cars, and accessories. That lowers the cost of entry. A parent could start by buying their child an engine, a car, and some track. Yeah, it's not much of a train, but it works. Then the next birthday or Christmas, the parent can easily expand on it by buying another car or two.

I look back on the glory days of the 9V era, and there was so much more variety available, both in the styles of trains, and in the prices and sizes of the available sets.

I quite agree! The Metroliner was sold for £100 (or thereabouts) where as the freight rail runner was sold for £60.

What lego really need to do is go down the Tomy style: Train packs and seperate track sets and controller. That way, you can buy a nice big train then have the incentive to buy the track, rather then go "£120? That's too much!" you can go "£80 for the train? kerching!". (or similar - I need caffiene!)

[Klaus-Dieter]

I, too, was already thinking about the price problems that would appear if TLG really released its regular Train sets with only PF.

Fact is that if TLG releases the regular Train sets (meaning the Train sets which you can often find in regular toy shops, too) with the PF train motor, recharegeable battery, battery recharger, light bricks, rechargeable battery box, infrared sensor, remote control and tracks these sets won't be sold very much (at least not in the regular toy shops) because most people wouldn't be aible to afford these sets.

But fact is even that if TLG will sell the regular train sets without motor, RC and tracks they surely won't be sold very much in regular toy shops since the main audience (namely JFOLs) want a set with which they can immediately play - plus adults surely don't want to buy hundreds of additional sets only in order to that the train runs.

But that TLG will disconinue selling regular train sets sounds to me unbelievable since trains have been one of the themes - like Fire, Police, ... - which appear again and again. And I even bet that the regular train sets are sold very well (although they are of course not cheap - but what is today stil cheap?!). The items which do not sell very well on regular toy shops are single locomotives, single train cars etc. which do not belong to a certain big train set being only a short while ago released.

I can well imagine the solution:

TLG released this new train motor this year. In the set description it says that it works with the new PFs as well as with a regular battery box (like in the RC sets). TLG will take that train motor, add a regular battery box and a remote control and tracks to it - meaning: for the regular train sets there won't be changing that much - at least no complete change from RC to PF but a mixture between both. For the additional Train sets we might hopefully get (such as e. g. a cargo loading station) I could well imagine TLG including the new PF functions.

And of course there will be some new exclusive train sets, too.

Klaus-Dieter

[peterab]

Does the garage (7642) cost more than the passenger train (?) in your area?

The garage is recommended retail price AU$140, the passenger train AU$150. The garage is widely available in retail stores, including those that discount a bit from RRP, I'd expect to be able to buy it today for AU$130. Also these stores will have 20% lego sales where I'd pay approx AU$105 for it. By comparrison I've never seen the passenger train in a retail store. This means I dont have to pay shipping on the garage but I do on the train.

I have seen the freight train in a store (and bought it) for AU$200. Later that week it went on sale for AU$160. Generally that only happens when TLG wants to sell off the last of a set, they often offer them to retail in Australia at a good enough price for the retailers to heavily discount them. Retailers use these heavily discounted sets as a lure to their Lego sales. The Australian market is unimportant to Lego so it is safe to get rid of remaining stock here.