Comic-Con figures confirmed to getting stolen by Scalpers days before

[Phoxtane]

And here I was being more shocked over the fact that someone had managed to get his hands on the exclusives and scalp them early. That's no good, whichever side of the argument you're on!

[ummester]

My point in all of this is that you are no more likely to find a Mr. Gold without spending an outrageous sum as you are an SDCC exclusive.

You can't 'find' and SDCC exclusive in the same way you can 'find' Mr Gold. But, I recon the idea of Mr Gold is pretty rude also. The idea of collectable minifigs is rude - where is the build ability in that? Where is the avenue for creativity in that?

Sometime during my dark ages the minifig changed from being a generic humanoid element from a build, to some kind of licensed, collectable and sought after action figure. I think what the modern minifig has become detracts from the quality of the LEGO product overall - but, without this shift, there would probably be no flesh toned parts, which I prefer to build with, so I guess you have to take the good with the bad.

[agoodfella77]

The chances of any one person finding a Mr. Gold out of 1 million bags total (assuming all 1 million bags are in one place, which they would not be) are 1 in 200. At a retail price of $2.99 USD before taxes, the lowest price in any country, you would have to spend $598 in hopes of finding 1 Mr. Gold.

My point in all of this is that you are no more likely to find a Mr. Gold without spending an outrageous sum as you are an SDCC exclusive.

The difference between Mr. Gold and SDCC figs is that the one is released world-wide, and the other isn't.

You have some nice numbers, but they don't really give the full picture. Sure, you could spend $598, and hope to find 1 Mr. Gold...or you could spend $2,989,850.50 before you found a single one. Or, you could walk into a store, and find one the very first packet you pick up. They were released world-wide randomly, and the chance to find one was as great in one place as it was in another(in concept).

But with SDCC figs, there are a very limited amount produced, and they are limited to only being available from SDCC, and from scalpers on the second hand market. There's just no way to compare the two.

There is another important difference between SDCC exclusives vs. Mr. Gold, which is simply this:

1) With Mr. Gold, every single LEGO customer has an equal shot to get him (or not get him); whereas

2) With SDCC Exclusives, it is a very limited subset of: A) Those lucky enough to go to SDCC and are successful in the raffle; B) Those who are willing to spend hundreds up to thousands of dollars for these SDCC exclusives

Now granted, you could go on eBay and buy Mr. Gold as well, but that is not the point or what the main difference is which is simply this:

Everyone has at least a fairly equal shot (now, granted that "shot" isn't that high -- but at least no one has a discernible advantage over another) at getting Mr. Gold whereas the ability to obtain an SDCC Exclusive is no where near as equitable -- in point of fact, it's nearly the polar opposite from a statistical point of view / probability of all available LEGO customers who want (either Mr. Gold or an SDCC Exclusive).

Edited August 1, 2014 by agoodfella

[opn2]

Edited September 27, 2014 by opn2

[MAB]

None of the collectible minifigures series, the Simpsons not withstanding, are licensed. You're correct in that the minifigure as a whole has lost it's generic properties, but I balk at your suggestion that collectible minifigures are 'rude':

What exactly are you implying with this? You ask where the 'build ability' has gone and what the 'avenue for creativity' for collectible minifigures would be. I submit that the minifigure is now more creative and features more possibilities than ever before in it's long history. There are literally hundreds of thousands of different minifigures in stock configurations and untold millions of combinations.

Now that our parts selection is no longer limited to a single expression, a handful of torsos and a smaller handful of headgear, the creative opportunities are virtually limitless. An element of imagination has been exchanged since the earlier days of the minifigure where one was made to imagine that a smiling, featureless face in relatively plain clothes might be a doctor or lawyer or construction worker.

In it's place, minifigures as they leave the factory have become increasingly specific in nature, but the vast variety available means that the combinations possible when you piece together your own - creatively - are mind-boggling to imagine. Not everyone is a fan of this - there are a number of fans who prefer the older style of minifig that is more of a blank canvas that you must imagine into some sort of profession or role without a torso or leg or face printing expressing it for you, but by no means does it detract from the creative possibilities.

I sincerely doubt that people find the idea of collectible minifigures - or collectibles in general - as 'rude' aside from a handful of users in this thread and the other.

"Shot" or no, your insistence that exclusives either 1). cease altogether or 2). lose their exclusivity after a period of time is narrow-minded and childish. You claim that the idea isn't fair, but your suggestions aren't either. In the first case, it would mean that no one could have the items at all as they would not exist. In the second, you're not being fair to the recipients as you're taking away their exclusivity. Having an item earlier than others is not nearly as special as having an item many people do not.

These are rewards. Giveaways for attendees The Lego inside tour sets are no different and they are far more limited in number. You're not entitled to a chance to get one unless you attend the event Lego has chosen to give them away at. What the people who receive these items choose to do with them after they've gotten them - the people you like to cry 'scalper!' over - is their business. It was given to them at the venue at which Lego chose and it is now their property to sell for as much as they'd like, which is often as much as people are willing to pay. It's not as though they were dumped in a bin and people grabbed up armfuls to hold for ransom.

If some actually stole them, yes, that's unfair - to the people that attended the con and expected a chance to be given one. Throughout all of your posts in both threads I cannot see any further reasoning behind your logic, to paraphrase, other than 'it's not fair that other people should get the chance to get something that I won't' and that anyone who sells an item for a price higher than which you are willing to pay is a person to be loathed and despised. Life isn't fair. You're not entitled to a "shot" at everything, no matter how much you may think you are.

I agree with everything apart from the last sentence. He is perfectly entitled for a shot at getting them, the same way as everyone else that gets them has that chance. By attending SDCC. I have yet to see a good reason why anyone is stopped from attending SDCC.

[ummester]

opn2

rude may have been the wrong word if you want to get all technical - it was an expression of feeling more than precise grammar.

A single minifig does not have the same possibility for building, experimentation and creation as say a Mixel - or 50 pieces of LEGO which cost the same. The modern minifig is basically a sell out - it's pandering to a pop culture collection driven mindset which I personally find below the good points of LEGO. I like variety in minifg parts - I said that, I like that the pop culture driven minifig has given rise to flesh coloured parts, you can't have good without the bad. But the idea of either children or AFOLs putting more value on a Batman, or a Jabba, or a UniCat, or whatever or is exactly the type of mentality that gives rise to debates such as the one in this thread.

Edited August 1, 2014 by ummester

[obsidianheart]

I have yet to see a good reason why anyone is stopped from attending SDCC.

In the shut-down thread he compares it to going to the Moon, and then pats himself on the back for being smarter than anyone who thinks it's silly.

This is almost the same thread.

[BlueberryWaffles]

I know it's all meta and stuff that the Collector was a collectible exclusive to put in collections but after seeing GOTG I really wish he was widely available. A perfect GOTG exclusive would have been

dark blue Nova Corps Star-Lord. He is only in the film for like 5 min at the end. If you complain about that I can't help you.

EDIT: I'm a count! Why didn't I see this earlier? Woohoo!

Edited August 1, 2014 by Tolkien

[8BrickMario]

This has gotten totally out of hand. This used to be reasonable points as to why people think these are unfair, now it's an argument about why the other guy is wrong. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, and if said opinion isn't offensive or otherwise rude, there's no need to go after everbody because you don't agree. Can't we try to be civil?

Edited August 1, 2014 by 8BrickMario

[agoodfella77]

In the shut-down thread he compares it to going to the Moon, and then pats himself on the back for being smarter than anyone who thinks it's silly.

When did I ever pat myself on the back? Rather, I simply pointed out that satire (not something literal) went over your head (and continues to).

In the end, people continue to attack the person not the issue -- which happens when a person can't argue on the merits of their own view / points.

This has gotten totally out of hand. This used to be reasonable points as to why people think these are unfair, now it's an argument about why the other guy is wrong. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, and if said opinion isn't offensive or otherwise rude, there's no need to go after everbody because you don't agree. Can't we try to be civil?

I would love to have a civil conversation on these issues without people getting personal or attacking someone.

Edited August 1, 2014 by agoodfella

[opn2]

Edited September 27, 2014 by opn2

[Faefrost]

A couple of questions to ask yourselves, just to help you all understand the truth about how these things work. Remember, these things are Marketing Materials.

1. Who or what is the product that is actually being marketed with "SDCC exclusive Minifigs? "

2. Based on 1. Who is likely paying for these Marketing Materials?

3. Who is the actual customer in these arrangements, and through what manner is the customer being serviced?

4. What are the benefits in all of this to Lego?

[obsidianheart]

When did I ever pat myself on the back? Rather, I simply pointed out that satire (not something literal) went over your head (and continues to).

In the end, people continue to attack the person not the issue -- which happens when a person can't argue on the merits of their own view / points.

I suppose I took your "Don't beat yourself up about it" as condescending. Let us be clear: Your satire did not go over my head. I will say no more on the subject.

I am not attacking any person. The issue is silly, and has become redundant in its arguments. Some of you are convinced that LEGO should acquiesce to your desires for representations of popular characters without having to pay excessive prices on the secondary market. I get that. Must be frustrating. Every collector deals with that at some point, though. Then, you get a guy with actual convention experience who agrees with you telling you why it is the way it is, and you just echo-chamber right over him without skipping a beat. There have been a lot of very good points as to why it is a bad practice. There have been a few pretty insightful points as to why it is a practice that will most likely continue despite opposition, but mostly, there has been a lot of "It's not fair! I want it! I want it!" poorly disguised as logic.

The point I'm trying to make here is: Yes, we understand. You feel very strongly that LEGO has somehow wronged you by not giving you an opportunity to own a rare collectible. It is difficult and disappointing. Some of us agree, and some of us do not. Stop trying to out-argue the ones who have a different opinion. If you disagree with someone, you do not necessarily need to offer a point-by-point tear-down of their opinion that shows why you are right and they are not. You can disagree without being snarky or rude.

I am not innocent of this behavior, I am aware.

Edited August 1, 2014 by obsidianheart

[ummester]

A couple of questions to ask yourselves, just to help you all understand the truth about how these things work. Remember, these things are Marketing Materials.

1. Who or what is the product that is actually being marketed with "SDCC exclusive Minifigs? "

2. Based on 1. Who is likely paying for these Marketing Materials?

3. Who is the actual customer in these arrangements, and through what manner is the customer being serviced?

4. What are the benefits in all of this to Lego?

These are good questions. I would say.

1. LEGO and the comic/IP represented.

2. The organizers/investment body for the convention.

3. Primarily the convention attendees. They are being serviced with getting something special for attending the convention.

4. Increases hype for super hero based products, with a definite slant towards the minifig as a collectible item.

My only issue with all of this is that a marketing strategy that generates more interest in the minifig undermines the brick. LEGO is far greater than the minifg but both the company and, it seems to me, the larger percentage of fans, now promote/prize the minifig above the brick.

Instead of giving a minifg away at these conventions, why doesn't LEGO give a small build away? A tiny Batman car smaller than minifig scale. A little invisible jet, smaller than what a Wonder Women minifg could sit in? In my eyes, either of these give aways would play more to the strengths of the LEGO product and this would solve any issues people have about it not being fair because, although the packaging for the convention may be unique, the parts would be readily available to anyone wo wanted to assemble their own and there is no way they would fetch $500 on Ebay.

Edited August 2, 2014 by ummester

[Faefrost]

These are good questions. I would say.

1. LEGO and the comic/IP represented.

2. The organizers/investment body for the convention.

3. Primarily the convention attendees. They are being serviced with getting something special for attending the convention.

4. Increases hype for super hero based products, with a definite slant towards the minifig as a collectible item.

My only issue with all of this is that a marketing strategy that generates more interest in the minifig undermines the brick. LEGO is far greater than the minifg but both the company and, it seems to me, the larger percentage of fans, now promote/prize the minifig above the brick.

Instead of giving a minifg away at these conventions, why doesn't LEGO give a small build away? A tiny Batman car smaller than minifig scale. A little invisible jet, smaller than what a Wonder Women minifg could sit in? In my eyes, either of these give aways would play more to the strengths of the LEGO product and this would solve any issues people have about it not being fair because, although the packaging for the convention may be unique, the parts would be readily available to anyone wo wanted to assemble their own and there is no way they would fetch $500 on Ebay.

Some good guesses. That's what it looks like at first glance, until you start to realize how a lot of the back end deals and Marketing flow works. In truth it is probably closer to this.

1. The product actually being marketed via SDCC exclusive figures is SDCC itself. The pay to attend event.

2. SDCC is probably providing the contract for the show exclusives. They want them as crowd pullers. So they get certain vendors to make SDCC exclusive products and giveaways. The cash flow is probably something like Lego has no booth fees and a ton of convention costs are comped and such if they do the figs. (ask yourself, otherwise why would a toy company do so much for SDCC?)

3. The customer is SDCC. That's who Lego probably has the exclusivity contract with. Lego gains the benefit of free advertising at the biggest nerd show. The people that get the figures are not the "customers" they are the recipients. They are ultimately the product being sold. With the Figs Lego is helping to pull in more paying attendees to SDCC and altering how other vendors see the show and what they spend.

4. Lego benefits via cheap if not free exposure at the worlds best known largest nerd fast. Not bad for a run of 8000 custom figs.

The figs are exclusive because SDCC benefits from them being exclusive and they are willing to reward that exclusivity. Lego goes along with it because the reward is something that is worthwhile to them and serves their purpose.

[ummester]

SDCC exclusive minifigs - when pandering to nerdism creates economic unrest

I have no vested interest in this beyond the issue that I can buy 50 cheese slopes for the price of 1 flesh toned hand. I don't mind that a cost of a MOC is determined by the rarity of the parts involved, I'm opposed to that rarity being influenced by the promotion of and desire to have a wall full of little plastic characters, when the characters are comprised of elements from a toy designed for construction and imaginative creation.

Edited August 2, 2014 by ummester

[KazeMonsuta]

Just something to the actual topic of this thread:

Any word from Lego about the theft? Was it a theft? Was it just a promo-guy making a picture of the figures?

I saw CopMike reporting to Lego, thus the question.

I'd be really interested what TLG thinks.

Don't remember them ever giving any kind of statement about this rather big uproar about the figures.

[legoman19892]

Its not a big issue if this is the only place I heard about it from.

[Navy Trooper Fenson]

Its not a big issue if this is the only place I heard about it from.

I contacted Fbtb, Brickset and multiple other sites about this too. Especially after Fbtbs unrest last year I had thought at least they would run something on this since it is kinda more important than the whole moving the line thing but apparently nobody wants to run risk of not getting review copies of the 400$ sets except the smaller no name blogs that don´t get them in the first place and solely depend on click-baiting.

The whole thing of employees being accused of giving the figures according to their whims was discussed within the week it happened but this is just getting ignored on all sides. I didn´t even get a reply from the customer service I sent this to, not even one of those no effort pre-written ones that totally ignore the subject. And that some people on here have the need to defend every person as just joking despite the evidence to the contrary isn´t helping either. You only have yourselves to blame.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Navy Trooper Fenson

[agoodfella77]

I contacted Fbtb, Brickset and multiple other sites about this too. Especially after Fbtbs unrest last year I had thought at least they would run something on this since it is kinda more important than the whole moving the line thing but apparently nobody wants to run risk of not getting review copies of the 400$ sets except the smaller no name blogs that don´t get them in the first place and solely depend on click-baiting.

The whole thing of employees being accused of giving the figures according to their whims was discussed within the week it happened but this is just getting ignored on all sides. I didn´t even get a reply from the customer service I sent this to, not even one of those no effort pre-written ones that totally ignore the subject. And that some people on here have the need to defend every person as just joking despite the evidence to the contrary isn´t helping either. You only have yourselves to blame.

This is precisely why it's important to raise awareness within the LEGO / AFOL community.

[MAB]

My only issue with all of this is that a marketing strategy that generates more interest in the minifig undermines the brick. LEGO is far greater than the minifg but both the company and, it seems to me, the larger percentage of fans, now promote/prize the minifig above the brick.

That has been the way for quite a while now. Licensed sets stopped the company from disappearing completely. Many sets are purchased because of the minifigs, not the bricks.

SDCC exclusive minifigs - when pandering to nerdism creates economic unrest

I have no vested interest in this beyond the issue that I can buy 50 cheese slopes for the price of 1 flesh toned hand.

They have stopped selling them direct now, but that was not true last year. Lego were still selling the fleshie hands by themselves (without the torso) through customer services at 6p each in the UK. That is the same price as a cheese slope. I know as I bought 200 of them. The yellow ones were cheaper at 5p each.

[ummester]

That has been the way for quite a while now. Licensed sets stopped the company from disappearing completely. Many sets are purchased because of the minifigs, not the bricks.

I must admit that licensed sets (Star Wars) pulled me out of my dark ages. I can see how and why the shift happened - a necessary evil, perhaps. It would be nice if it shifted back the other way though - now that LEGO is on it's feet again.

They have stopped selling them direct now, but that was not true last year. Lego were still selling the fleshie hands by themselves (without the torso) through customer services at 6p each in the UK. That is the same price as a cheese slope. I know as I bought 200 of them. The yellow ones were cheaper at 5p each.

I didn't notice that - every time I have tried to order parts from LEGO direct (which is only really in the last year) it has been more cumbersome and expensive than Bricklink. It was Bricklink where I had to pay 50c per fleshy hand, vs 1c per cheese slope.

[Heppeng]

A little invisible jet, smaller than what a Wonder Women minifg could sit in?

That's brilliant! They could give away an empty sealed box! The box itself would be exclusive, there would be no unique parts for people to get upset about not having, and the collectors can't open the box to prove its not there!!! And even if they did, you could just send them another empty sealed box!!

[ummester]

I didn't mean it like that Heppeng (I meant made out of Trans clear parts) - but that is brilliant. An Exclusive nothing. Edited August 4, 2014 by ummester

[Faefrost]

I contacted Fbtb, Brickset and multiple other sites about this too. Especially after Fbtbs unrest last year I had thought at least they would run something on this since it is kinda more important than the whole moving the line thing but apparently nobody wants to run risk of not getting review copies of the 400$ sets except the smaller no name blogs that don´t get them in the first place and solely depend on click-baiting.

The whole thing of employees being accused of giving the figures according to their whims was discussed within the week it happened but this is just getting ignored on all sides. I didn´t even get a reply from the customer service I sent this to, not even one of those no effort pre-written ones that totally ignore the subject. And that some people on here have the need to defend every person as just joking despite the evidence to the contrary isn´t helping either. You only have yourselves to blame.

At best from Customer Service you will get a polite reply that basically comes down to they have no idea what you are talking about. CS would have no knowledge of anything involving SDCC figs. They are not product. They are not merchandise. They do not go through the sales or distribution channel. They are exclusively the domain of, and never leave the control of, the marketing sub group that handles SDCC. It is doubtful they even appear in CS's computer system. You know more about these figures than anyone at Lego positioned to speak with the public. At best they may have enough peripheral knowledge to think to forward your request to someone in Marketing.

Your letter probably has the marketing people a bit confused. They really have no concept of end users, or honestly reality, on a good day (granted Lego may be different, they may have a top notch marketing department fully in tune with every aspect of the company the business and the customer base, rather than the typical assortment of shady characters and refugees from behind a Starbucks counter, but I doubt it.) you may actually get a reply from them at some point, if they ever sober up enough. I would not however count on them reading it. I have never encountered anyone in marketing that would read anything past the second sentence. They tend to only make it that far if there are pictures.

Once again, to Lego these are valueless marketing fluff to be distributed by the marketing fluffers. Typically they really don't care who gets fluffed as long as somebody gets fluffed.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Faefrost