all 44 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 25 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Where's Bev's lantern? And no O'Brien?!

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    They have Spot but no O'Brien?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 18 points 1 year ago

    They forgot another character:

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    400 bucks for that? LEGO is out of their fucking minds, it's worth maybe half that.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    How long did you not look at Lego's pricing? XD

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    You seem to have mistaken greed for value.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    No, I don't think so. Compared to other companies, Lego is massively overpriced and has been for years (and no, Lego does not offer better quality).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    But then I don't get your comment, at least not your second one.

    First, you criticise Lego's pricing, which I extend ("has been for a long time") but then you say I mistake greed for value? I don't get it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    LEGO is being greedy by charging more money than their product is worth. I'm not sure what you don't seem to understand. LEGO wants you to pay 400 dollars for a set that has a value of 200 tops and the actual value likely much less than that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    "Look at all this money. Boy do I have so much money. What will I ever do with this much money?"

    Anyway, this is what I believe our typical customers are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Does the saucer pop off to reveal a bridge? For that price I need a bridge.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    For $400 I'd expect the saucer section to be detachable.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    So looks like Bluebrixx lost the Star Trek license to Lego then...
    Shame, they had some really nice models :-(

    I have a small (~300pcs each) Enterprise-A and a Bird of Prey.
    And a 1:1 klingon d'k tahg knife with movable parts, which is really cool looking.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    From other angles it looks a bit better than the image they released a couple of days ago... but not much.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    There's a Westly Sweater minifig.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I wish they had made a bridge set instead. Also, sad there is no Q. :(

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    So it begins… soon Lego will have all of our wealth and organs.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Lego just keeps making cool sets that I can't justify paying the premium for.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Give me a Speed Champions-esque line of starships, maybe each coming with one minifigure, and I'd buy the heck out of that!

  • source
  • They should sell it exactly how much it costs money wise for the the enterprise to make in the show! That would be cool!

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I hope the stickers are just a prototype thing...

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    This is gonna look great next to our Mega Bloks Enterprise-D

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I guess my dreams of an enterprise E kit are long off

  • source
  • I feel weird that even Ensign Ro Laren gets a Lego character... I guess anyone can be a Lego character these days.

  • source