Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lego price per part over the years

brickinsights.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–179 of 179 posts

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#171

Post by sandreas »

chipdart wrote: post #169
WilTimSon wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's a learned behaviour, and one learned specifically thanks to decades of marketing. Sure, LEGO is quality, but it's not some unbeatable gold standard. At some point it simply becomes one of those things where people ask for Coke instead of Pepsi, even if they can't tell them apart - brand loyalty trumping the desire to simply get the product.

> But that's a learned behaviour, and one learned specifically thanks to decades of marketing. I am not sure this is an accurate assessment. Lego has a reputation because it built that reputation over decades of solid and reliable delivery. Pseudo-Lego brands built a reputation of competing on price while trading off quality and reliability. The real question is whether the price delta between Lego and pseudo-Lego ca…

> Lego has a reputation because it built that reputation over decades of solid and reliable delivery.

Really? I'm not sure about that. I think LEGO built a reputation, because it was patented until 2008 and competitive products were not even a thing.

Mould King was founded 2012, also more than a decade ago.

> Pseudo-Lego brands built a reputation of competing on price while trading off quality and reliability.

This maybe true for chinese rip-offs, but the more modern approach is innovative, even with licensed models (see CADA MASTER Mercedes-AMG ONE 61503 or Mould King 12025 Orient Express). Features like LED lights, remote controls, remote controlled doors or REAL steam have not been approached by modern LEGO sets.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#172

Post by irrational »

lostlogin wrote: post #130
irrational wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to my Mother. She threw away all of our 1970s and 1980s legos, transformers, Star Wars, He-man, etc. toys after we left home. Didn’t even donate them - straight to the landfill.

One day an archeologist is going to be grateful.

Unfortunately, this was in South Florida. The landfill will be underwater at some point.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#173

Post by vr46 »

4ggr0 wrote: post #138
vr46 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve seen how much attention Lego puts into designing and making their bricks and sets, as well as their general outlook, so combined with their better quality, fake Lego bricks is not something I want polluting or diluting my/my kid’s Lego.

Why are you so sure that the other bricks are of lesser quality?

Well, simple: we have some

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#174

Post by MagicMoonlight »

beAbU wrote: post #126
sandreas wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LEGO is indeed pretty expensive these times. Not every set is that bad, but the most cars are not only expensive, but not even the best sets on the market... There is a lot of comparisons, but the most convincing one maybe the LEGO Ferarri (42125) vs. CADA Italian Super Car (C61042W) video[1] of "Held der Steine" (german youtube channel). The LEGO is "parts only" - the CADA is remote controlled with led lights near d…

I don't think you can compare LEGO with not-LEGO... Firstly it feels a little sacrilegious, but religion aside quality is often uncomparable and there was this common meme from my childhood that your parents did not love you if you got knockoff LEGOs. Part of the reason why we buy LEGO is because it's LEGO. Buying some other brand (regardless of quality) does not hit the same way.

That’s a cope. It comes from the same factory. It’s just small mass produced plastic, it’s not exactly complicated.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#175

Post by nuancebydefault »

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #116
sharkweek wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any advice for someone developing a problem? But seriously, the cost is so worth it for me. As someone who has attention span challenges from time to time, LEGO puts me into a flow state like almost nothing else. I love a good 2-3 night session putting together a big set.

If you want to experience true frustration, try buying one of those 3d metal kits which require a set of pliers to assemble. The instructions are incredibly sparse and an incredible amount of precision is required. If you want a bit of an increased challenge, Gundam models tend to be a bit more difficult than Lego while still feeling stimulating and fun.

I've built a few metal earth models. It is not very easy, but if you have a good plier set, perfectly doable! It puts you in a flow, just like with Lego, and the result looks nicer than Lego, for less money.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#176

Post by Ma8ee »

pcthrowaway wrote: post #72
thomastjeffery wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet it's more likely that a given Lego set that is missing pieces was produced, packaged, shipped, and sold, nearby other piece-missing sets. In other words, I would not expect the distribution of Lego sets that are missing pieces to be evenly or randomly distributed.

Yes I was thinking the same thing. Certain factories may have worse quality control, and those sets end up in different regions from sets that come from better production facilities

Are they really producing the same sets in different factories? It would surprise me.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#178

Post by Fire-Dragon-DoL »

WilTimSon wrote: post #134
beAbU wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you can compare LEGO with not-LEGO... Firstly it feels a little sacrilegious, but religion aside quality is often uncomparable and there was this common meme from my childhood that your parents did not love you if you got knockoff LEGOs. Part of the reason why we buy LEGO is because it's LEGO. Buying some other brand (regardless of quality) does not hit the same way.

But that's a learned behaviour, and one learned specifically thanks to decades of marketing. Sure, LEGO is quality, but it's not some unbeatable gold standard. At some point it simply becomes one of those things where people ask for Coke instead of Pepsi, even if they can't tell them apart - brand loyalty trumping the desire to simply get the product.

Show me a lego ripoff that has the same quality and thoughtfulness in parts and we can discuss.

My experience with the 5 brands I tried has been horrendous: parts don't stick together, parts are too small, parts are incorrect.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#179

Post by ryukoposting »

sandreas wrote: post #171
chipdart wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's a learned behaviour, and one learned specifically thanks to decades of marketing. I am not sure this is an accurate assessment. Lego has a reputation because it built that reputation over decades of solid and reliable delivery. Pseudo-Lego brands built a reputation of competing on price while trading off quality and reliability. The real question is whether the price delta between Lego and pseudo-Lego ca…

> Lego has a reputation because it built that reputation over decades of solid and reliable delivery. Really? I'm not sure about that. I think LEGO built a reputation, because it was patented until 2008 and competitive products were not even a thing. Mould King was founded 2012, also more than a decade ago. > Pseudo-Lego brands built a reputation of competing on price while trading off quality and reliability. This m…

Where did LEGO have a patent? It certainly wasn't the US. Mega has been here for decades. LEGO tried to sue them under copyright law but lost. My experience with non-LEGO bricks has been extremely mixed, averaging negative.
Post reply on HN