Oh the data! I love the blacktron renegade. Maybe more than galaxy explorer. It’s a shame it retired early and likely didn’t sell as well as expected. Such a great set.

@Elcascador said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
""I kind of had to giggle when I read the T-Rex fossil was considered 'too big' for many Brickset users, as being big was pretty much the point of a minifig-scale T-Rex skeleton.""

Not to be pedantic (or just a bit), but the LEGO T-Rex skeleton is apparently at scale 1:12 and a minifigure at scale 1:42. A minifig scale T-Rex skeleton would be closer to the size of the 76956 Jurassic Park diorama"

Well, then that settles that, I guess. :-)

Isn’t ‘it is too expensive’ kind of the same as ‘I’ll wait for a discount’?

10357 Really surprised me. I still really like it, but with the price tag, I’m pretty surprised it was received (here) so well. Other than that, there aren’t any other big surprises imo.

Once again, thank you to Huw, Capn, and the rest of the Brickset team!

Only two stand out to me: I would have thought Enterprise D would have been higher and Neuschwanstein Castle would have been lower.

Big thanks to @Huw for putting in the time and effort to collect, analyse and publish this kind of data for us Bricksetters to enjoy.
I'm sure many of us appreciate this greatly as I do.

And I'm not suprised by how bad the 2025 Winter Village set 10361 did in the results.
What's supposed to be one of the highlights of the year turned out to be an incredibly noisey set when you have it motorised due to the movement of the Polar Bear and smoke stack.
Hopefully this year will present a better offering.

@AustinPowers said:
" @biffuz said:
"I think the "No, but I like it" option is more popular nowadays because of the ridicolous number of new large sets that Lego is releasing. Even the most die-hard collectors now cannot afford all of them or have no room to store them!
As a result, we have to make more precise choices and leave many beautiful sets on the shelves."
Same here.
Years ago, for example when the first UCS Millennium Falcon launched, it was a true highlight in every sense, compared to what else was in the lineup.
These days, gigantic sets are launched so frequently that they have lost their "special" status,and many people, myself included, are simply oversaturated. "

This !!!! LEGO is steadily de-value-ing itself as a brand.

I can’t help but wonder which sets of the last year The Lego Group thought would be big hits and turned out to be flops.

Like di they really think 31214 LOVE was going to be something people loved? Maybe some did, but not many of us.

@LegoMike said:
" @SMC said:
""yes, as soon as it's released" has to be impacted by any GWP. The shire for example had a good gift if you bought it straight away."

Oh yeh, completely agree with that. Great point.
I bought Tudor Corner, River Steamboat, The Goonies, Black Pearl, Enterprise, Death Star and Stranger Things (I know 2026) at the midnight points purely for the GWP’s. I would have waited for many but the GWP’s flipped me"

I do on occasion, but it's enough that it can matter. I think having a flag for "came with unique GWP at launch" would be notable. Sometimes I get a GWP I think I can sell for a decent discount on the set I bought. Others are for me. But it certainly does impact purchase timing.

@AustinPowers said:
" @biffuz said:
"I think the "No, but I like it" option is more popular nowadays because of the ridicolous number of new large sets that Lego is releasing. Even the most die-hard collectors now cannot afford all of them or have no room to store them!
As a result, we have to make more precise choices and leave many beautiful sets on the shelves."
Same here.
Years ago, for example when the first UCS Millennium Falcon launched, it was a true highlight in every sense, compared to what else was in the lineup.
These days, gigantic sets are launched so frequently that they have lost their "special" status,and many people, myself included, are simply oversaturated. "

*waves*

I'm mostly a vintage collector, but I have modulars and plenty of Icons/Expert sets that I want to grab before aftermarket pricing sets in. So my backlog of entirely unopened sets is probably nearing 50k bricks? And I'm quite behind on buying stuff I'd like, because it's expensive and life is too. As much as I'd love to build and have a lot of sets, I just can't justify it, so I have to be picky.

I will agree with a fair few here about there just being TOO MANY large sets, so none really leave an impact. Can't afford them all, can't display them all, so have to be choosy on what actually buy.

Looking at my collection analysis, I have bought significantly fewer sets in 2025 and 2024 than previous years. There are just too many releases of amazing sets, but still, too much of a good thing ends up being bad.

But as for the poll, I usually choose the "no, but I like it" or "yes, eventually" since even having good GWPs still won't entice me to spend money right away on something I like since I have such a huge backlog of sets collecting dust in their boxes. No sense in bringing more in. I will literally never have the time to finish the sets I have.

The only set I bought right at launch in recent years was the Enterprise D, and only because I got three GWPs with it, including the Shuttle.

I'm not sure it makes sense to substract positive with negative. just rank from highest to lowest positive. like a set that is 50-50 will score 0, so it sounds like no one wants it

@merman said:
"Isn’t ‘it is too expensive’ kind of the same as ‘I’ll wait for a discount’?"

Not necessarily. The death star at $1000 might be too expensive for many even if you got a 40% discount. If you do not buy Lego over a certain threshold (say $100 or $150), there will be quite a few sets that are simply too expensive (for that person) even with a decent discount.

The T-Rex fossil being deemed too big is kind of ridiculous in other words Lego should’ve made a smaller one? It’s massive size is what makes it cool!

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
"I wonder how these stats correlate to sales numbers, though. I consider Brickset members to only be a small section of LEGO's customer base, but it would be interesting to see how our opinions measure up against numbers of copies sold."
Indeed, and also Brickset members poll responders are a tiny sub-section of Brickset members! Mainly a sub-section who come here just to state how much they hate Lego and everything it produces. Quite bizarre then that 31214 LOVE is owned by a quite respectable 2000+ Brickset members, not huge but certainly not a flop.

In years past you've combined this post with stats for listed ownership to confirm the "yes"/"no" interests to see which ones actually followed through or not. Any chance of that?

I liked this article, but I don't plan to buy it.

(silliness aside, love the number crunching stuff!)

"It is interesting what a difference interpreting 'No, but I like it' as a positive has made. Last year only 14% of sets had a positive anticipation score; this year only 23% had a negative one. That suggests that you generally like what LEGO is producing but, for one reason or another, you did not intend to buy it."

Makes sense, as I would say there are millions of things that I think are nice (Some cars, art, electronics, clothing items etc..), but will never buy them for reason A or B, so Lego is no different.

Interesting, wonderful statistics. Thanks for all your effort, @Huw !

I will say that I remain skeptical of treating the "No, but I like it" votes as positive. This option implies you like the look of the set but feel no need to own a copy yourself. It's the same as browsing cool MOCs on social media and upvoting ones you like, and this is how I tend to use this option: it's a cool set, but I have no interest in buying it. (Notably, I thus treat the "No, it doesn't interest me" option as the "No, I don't like it" option.) Since the poll is asking, "Will you be buying this set?" and you have answered "No, it just looks cool", that should be taken as a negative response; saying a model looks cool does not equate to anticipation for its release, in my view, because you're not planning to buy it.

On another note, while I don't recall the rationale last year behind adding the "No, it's too big" option, it evidently seems to have been a bit redundant. I suspect that, while a lot of sets are arguably bigger than needed (e.g. 41843, 75419, 10366, 76968), those votes get swallowed by the other "No" options, particularly the "it's too expensive" one, since I doubt most people will complain about getting more bricks if the price is good. I'd say this option could be scrapped for 2026 polls (even though we've already done a couple).

@merman said:
"Isn’t ‘it is too expensive’ kind of the same as ‘I’ll wait for a discount’?"
Indeed: both imply you want the set but are unwilling to pay RRP for it. Theoretically, any set could get a deep enough discount to induce you to buy it, so while it's too expensive *now* (and from LEGO itself) it might not be later; i.e., these options are the same. Realistically, however, many regions do not ever see steep discounts on LEGO, even from third party retailers, so an expensive set will remain too expensive. The distinction, then, comes from whether you view the poll in a theoretical context - wherein any discount is possible - or as a realistic statement of intent.

Thanks @Huw. These polls and the end of year analysis are some of my favorite Brickset things and I’ve greatly appreciated the expanded offerings and analysis changes.

I’m perfectly fine with the current response options as they offer more granularity than Yes/No. I agree, though, with @BLProductions in that there could be some redundancy and/or they could obfuscate some results.

For example, I suspect that very few US members will reasonably expect future discounts on Icons types sets as those have mostly disappeared for us. So we may be inorganically more inclined to vote “No, it’s too expensive” over “Yes, once it’s discounted.”

Nuance is always lost in aggregated data, so it doesn’t greatly bother me. The larger a set, the greater the price. The frustration with 75419 Death Slice may have been split by too expensive and too large, depending on which reaction was more visceral for the member, though both could have been in play. GWPs may also play a role, but I honestly think that they impact our final buying decision more than our initial poll response.

There is one type poll response I still feel I’m missing; something like “No. but I really, really, wanted to say Yes until I saw the final finished product”. There’s got to be a way to encapsulate that more succinctly and I suspect I’m not the only one yearning for this option. I would have selected this option for 21063 Neuschwanstein Castle, 21359 Italian Riviera, 76968 T-Rex, 10365 Black Pearl, 10354 The Shire, 21356 Steamboat, 21363 The Goonies, 75419 Death Slice. and 21360 Willy Wonka.