While many LEGO pricing decisions are egregious, this one is surprisingly fair. Build quality is also much better. Looks more like what it's supposed to be, colors are more uniform, and the treasure chest isn't just a brown crate

all 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 28 points 17 hours ago (1 child)

Non-licensed lego pricing has always seemed very fair to me. Licensed sets are fukkin wild tho.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 19 hours ago* (1 child)

    Especially considering inflation, this seems pretty reasonable to me.

    edit: I assume these are USD?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

    What’s the brick count for each set? Bottom looks like a larger build.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

    That’s almost $15 above inflation-adjusted dollars.

    Highway robbery.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

    Not when you consider the quality of builds and part count

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 18 hours ago (2 children)
    1. I missed the brick count. Thank you for correcting me.
    2. It’s still a 6% increase over inflation.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 18 hours ago*

    It’s plastic brick produced by a machine. It probably costs Lego $1.25 to manufacture. The main expense is paying the designers who come up with these things.

    If I had kids, I’d probably buy used sets, or just the “bucket of bricks”, or wait until something went on sale. When I was a kid I got a suitcase of used legos at a garage sale one time and was in heaven. I don’t think kids really care about “sets” as much until they reach the Technics age and are using them to learn about how gear movements work. Little kids like to just mix and match to make stuff from their imagination.

    As an adult, I visited a Lego store recently and saw some neat stuff. But I’m not paying for these extravagant sets that cost a small fortune. I might consider buying something used if wasn’t a “collectible” that increased in value.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 19 hours ago (1 child)

    I do sometimes wonder if we calculate the prices of sets wrong, like, realistically we should allocate a portion of the cost for the design and research thst goes into a LEGO staff member (or more likely team) making the set, and then the actual cost

    But maybe that's me getting myself twisted up with how small sets seem reasonable but the large sets feel insane until you factor in Dev time

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 5 points 19 hours ago*

    That absolutely does count for something, and with the first set you can tell that there just wasn't as much thought put into the animals. The crab looks more like a red dot with legs holding scissors, and same for the shark's underdesigned fins and splotchy coloring in some portions like the tail

    The newer one feels less like a cartoonish playset, and more like it could have been designed by a genuine marine biology enthusiast with an affinity for sleek shaping techniques

    Neither sets are bad for their prices

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 9 hours ago

    Lego is just a big ripoff. They create artificial monopolies by taking exclusive licenses for IPs like Star wars and stuff. And then they can set the price almost arbitrarily. Or they hold onto the IP without ever releasing more than one or two sets, just to prevent other companies to be successful, such as with Star Trek.

    Well, how they get these non- licensed sets sold is beyond me. Guess there are no alternatives from less expensive brands yet.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (3 children)

    Lego is polypropylene made from petroleum. It would make sense if the prices are impacted by a global oil stoppage due to war.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

    Most LEGO elements are ABS, not polypropylene. According to this article, PP is used mostly for parts that require some flexibility, like living hinges:

    https://bricknerd.com/home/every-type-of-plastic-used-by-lego-2026-edition-3-12-26

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 16 hours ago

    Good to know, thanks for the correction, Although according to the Lego website, they use PP for Lego swords too, PP is normally not too flexible, especially compared to polyethylene and TPU.

    ABS is still a petroleum product, so my above point still stands.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 17 hours ago

    I'm still pissed that neither of these come with the real chest.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 18 hours ago

    My rule of thumb is pay no more than 10 cents per brick, so this ain't bad. Wait until you get into licenced sets lol.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 17 hours ago

    The manta is cooler than the shark

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

    The company is obviously still recovering from the COVID supply-chain shortage of plastic.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 18 hours ago

    @insanemantis cursed inflation photo

  • source