LEGO is reducing the air inside its boxes

 

  • LEGO is reducing the air inside its boxes

    Posted by Huw, 28 Feb 2011 11:49. Filed under Miscellaneous.

    20110227213531

    About time too, I hear you say! Most LEGO boxes could be half the volume and still fit everything in with room to spare, so it's very encouraging to read this article at Toys N Bricks about smaller box sizes hitting the shelves in the USA. The example photo, taken by TNB forum member cowbug shows 8093 Plo Koon’s Starfighter in a box that's about 3/4 of the height.

    If you had the choice, seeing the two side by side on the shelf like that, which would you buy and why?


    159 comments, latest one posted 26 months ago. (Commenting has ended on this article)
    1359 views


 
 

Comments

Posted by Matthew in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 12:01

The larger one because it's going to be rare and I could get a tidy profit from it :-)
But I have been complaining for years about the overlarge boxes so I will probably buy the smaller ones in reality :-)

Posted by Markey in Belgium, 28 Feb 2011 12:02

Finally, smaller boxes. I keep them in my collection, and they're taking too much space!

Posted by Bion in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:04

I'd buy the smaller one because it would be easier to store (at my house) and because it wouldn't be so unwieldy.

Posted by bernsa in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:05

The question I have is why is one marked as $24.96 and the newer one at $24.97. :P

Smaller boxes are good... especially if they don't damage the instructions. Space optimization is good, though the pyschological effect of bigger boxes is hard to ignore.

Posted by Matthew in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 12:10

@bernsa: Read the Toys'n'Bricks discussion: The larger box wasn't there it was on another shelf and that is the Battle of Naboo's price tag under it :-)

Posted by legoDad42 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:13

The bigger display box is the marketing to showcase the model better, be more attractive on the shelf and gives the appearance of getting more for your buck....BUT, if the prices don't come down, doesn't really matter what size of box they use. It'll give Lego more space for models on the shelf though.
I hope prices can come down a bit if they save on paper and shipping weight because of this. I hope....

Posted by Rpu4 in Slovakia, 28 Feb 2011 12:19

The small one, to spare some space.

Posted by voyanui8768 in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 12:19

Wow, Plo Koons starfighter actually looks like a BETTER in a rectangular box! That's strange...

Posted by adello25 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:22

Definitely the smaller. I have always complained about the emptiness inside all the boxes. I just got the Tower Bridge and upon opening it, half the box was air!

Posted by mission_zed in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 12:30

For a gift, I'd buy the big box. Nothing worse than spending £50 and only having a match box to show for it. For myself, anything will do. My wife just about puts up with me and my son's Lego's but all but one box (recent Hogwarts Castle) have beed binned.

Posted by lazlow3 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:32

I remember this being a question of the Lego survey from a few months ago. That is cool that they listened to us...

Posted by natro220 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:39

Smaller one, to save on space and also less likely the instructions and stickers are mangled. Let's hope a price reduction will follow...they should save a bundle on shipping, storage, and packaging costs.

Posted by camoran in Anonymous Proxy, 28 Feb 2011 12:41

Good news. it really gave me a headache to keep the oversized boxes. But I am curious if LEGO will also reduce the giant box size on the exclusive series or not.

Posted by JohnJoe in Ireland, 28 Feb 2011 12:42

The bigger box makes kids think there's more in it so thats why they do that and i agree that they should make the boxs smaller ( as long as the price comes down ).

Posted by OllieL in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 12:45

I'd get the bigger one since it's the original first box but I do like how LEGO has finally decided to reduce the box sizes.

Posted by legodude357 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:51

I'd buy the smaller one, it'll be easier to store and looks a lot better. But yes, the larger boxes could fetch a prettier penny. But its nice to know lego is finally doing this. A larger box will make you think your getting a bigger set. A smaller box will give you a better idea of what your really buying.

Posted by legodude357 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:52

Did you notice the price! The smaller box is exactly one penny more expensive than the big box!

Posted by LeiaR2D2 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:52

I'd get the smaller one because it will be SO much easier to store, and then Lego isn't wasting cardboard. :) Like for the Battle of Endor (SW) it came in this huge box, and there were only about 3 bags and the instructions in it. They could have fit it all in the Hoth Wampa cave box!

Posted by tontonsega in France, 28 Feb 2011 12:53

Finally!It was time! For me the smaller with no hesitation. Now, Prices have to moving down too!

Posted by Matthew in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 12:54

legodude357 Did YOU notice my last comment?

Posted by morteroa in Norway, 28 Feb 2011 12:54

A price reduction would be welcome but is highly unlikely I think... and if there was a reduction in prices, I think it'd be applied to other markets than the US one. In several european countries lego's cost about twice as much as in the US, and the difference is increasing as the US$ drops in value compared to the euro. For example with todays currency rates the Diagon Alley set costs $287 in Norway from lego direct. TheDeathstar costs a shocking $720. So to all the US AFOL's, you don't know how good you've got it. :)

Posted by iabstract in United States, 28 Feb 2011 12:59

Smaller makes a heck of a lot more sense both in terms of storage for consumers as well as lower shipping costs. Never could understand why they kept the big boxes when they got rid of the elaborate internal packaging and the alternate models on the box.

Plus, for those who give/get them as gifts, it's less to wrap, saving money there, too. :)

Posted by legodude357 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 13:03

Sorry Lego Coast Guard. I didn't. Sorry.

Posted by Okay in United States, 28 Feb 2011 13:11

Probably the small one, simply because it would be more convenient to carry home.

Posted by durins in United States, 28 Feb 2011 13:16

The smaller box will be easier to hide and get past my wife when I bring it in the house. :^)

Posted by Ypres in Canada, 28 Feb 2011 13:25

Well I bet Lego will save some money from smaller boxes... though I don't expect any savings to go back into my pocket. Personally I like bigger boxes just for show, but I'm always a little annoyed when I open the set to find it as empty as a bag of potato chips. Smaller boxes gives stores more space and hopefully will save us on our shipping costs... again I say hopefully! Lego (in Canada) ships Fed-Ex and always packs the sets in huge boxes with big sacks of air. I mean, it's not like the box comes perfectly mint from Lego.com so as long as there's some pading I wouldn't be bothered. Well back onto the box topic I'd have to say I'm looking forward to smaller boxes... I have way too many pushed under my stairs at home.

Posted by Pepper in United States, 28 Feb 2011 13:26

I would buy the smaller one, as it is more efficient and easier to store. I just hope that this brings down prices.

Posted by Ulli in Germany, 28 Feb 2011 13:35

I take definitly the smaller Box! Easier to carry and stow. And less frustration as if I open a large box, and need a Flashlight, to see the parts far away at the bottom!

Posted by Aquapolis in United States, 28 Feb 2011 13:38

weight is more impt than volume!!!

Posted by princeofpersia in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 13:44

smaller one by far takes up less space in the house and looks better

Posted by Firox 5000 in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 13:49

Id buy the smaller one. I too keep the boxes of sets I buy and they are really space domintating.

Posted by schvatts in United States, 28 Feb 2011 14:01

Smaller boxes for me. I think the larger box idea of mentally getting more for your money gets destroyed once the box is opened and you (or a parent) sees that there is nothing inside. To me it is a big turn off to buying sets when I pick up a box and it just feels empty those sets are normally passed up until mark down.... a lot.

Up with the small boxes, down with the large ones. Oh, and I see no price reduction in the future, just hope there is no price increase. You need oil to make plastic.

Posted by TheLEGOmaniac in Denmark, 28 Feb 2011 14:01

Finally! Oversized boxes are annoying to have (I keep every box too).

Posted by LDM in United States, 28 Feb 2011 14:07

I'd buy the cute small one. :D

Posted by beefygrefe in United States, 28 Feb 2011 14:08

I have to admit that I kind of like to get a bigger box because it makes me feel like I'm getting more for my money. But it quickly turns into disappointment, like LeiaR2D2 mentioned with the Battle of Endor: "it came in this huge box, and there were only about 3 bags and the instructions in it. They could have fit it all in the Hoth Wampa cave box!"

It could be tough to convince people to shell out $100-$140 if the box isn't as big. There's that impression that you're buying a bigger set because the box is bigger. If you start putting 1,000-1,300 pieces in a box that's a third smaller, people might not think they're getting as much (even though everything on the box clearly says they are).

Personally, I am in favor of smaller boxes. For sets that I don't get around to building right away, it will save me some space. Plus it should, theoretically, save on shipping costs for Lego and maybe it'll help them hold off on our next price increase as oil goes up, again.

Posted by Gus263 in Brazil, 28 Feb 2011 14:19

I prefer the small boxes. They come with less taxes, and are easier to put together with other boxes. The size of the boxes aren't regular

Posted by merkinized75 in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 14:20

'bout damn time! I'm finally gonna have more space to store my boxes. :DDD

Posted by swlego@hf in United States, 28 Feb 2011 14:30

This is great that lego is doing this, it shows more of it's worth-plus it allows for more models on shelf! However, i must say that i would still buy the larger version. Why? Because the bigger version is $24.96, while the smaller is 1 cent more, $24.97. Haha. Wonder why.

Posted by MinifigureMan in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 14:30

Smaller as it is better for the environment! And you don't get as disappointed when you open a big box and get a small bag of pieces.

Posted by Xiaolong in Belgium, 28 Feb 2011 14:38

Finally saving air. i'm saying this already for ten years. All these trucks and containers (more than) half full of air do cost al ot of energy and causes traffic jams for no reason at all. And then all that space that is taken in warehouses all over the world. Th eglobal warming would have been a little less.
They just have to launch a huge, global campaign, something like 'a green line' and make people aware that they get just as much (for less money)

Posted by DrDaveWatford in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 14:40

Smaller box, every time.

Bravo LEGO for listening to your customers ! I suspect however that they're running an experiment right now, and will carefully examine the distribution of sales across the different packaging types. Given all the advantages to both LEGO (savings in distribution costs, raw materials) and the customer (easier to store), they would surely move to smaller boxes if their sales aren't negatively impacted by it, so I think we can guess the result of their little experiment if these boxes don't become the norm over the next year or two....

Posted by Phantom in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 14:48

Some collectors might frown as they would be forced to buy the set again-depends how completete they want their collection to be. Personally for me this dosent change anything in terms of storage as the size differance isnt alot but this is atleast helping the environment.

Posted by izziebitt in United States, 28 Feb 2011 14:52

it is great for us who work in LEGO stores too. we can get more product out in the store on shelves instead of having to store the huge boxes. we can only fit three police stations on a shelf, hopefully when we get the redesigned boxes, we can bump that up to five or six. it doesnt sound like much, but when you have 50 to 60 in storage, its really great to get more on the shelves not only in the store but in the stock room.

Posted by awesomestudios in United States, 28 Feb 2011 14:55

I suppose you are all right on your decision with the small box. But, most of us would probably never buy an imperial V-wing fighter in a battle pack size box, because of our pyshcological minds would think something like this: Bigger=Better! And when you get home with huge box, like me with the Battle of Endor, I was dissapointed with how big it was when actually built. So, I'd go with smaller box but I'm not sure about pyscho minds.

Posted by Matthew in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 14:57

@swlego@hf Read my last comment!

Posted by ensign_dave in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 15:07

I'd go for the smaller one - less room taken up in my collection. Just cheesed that Lego prices are sooooooooooo much cheaper in the US than rip off Britain as indicated on the shelf edge label. At least we get the promo sets though I guess..........

Posted by crazyawesomeyeah in United States, 28 Feb 2011 15:12

i like the smaller box version better.

Posted by rocao in United States, 28 Feb 2011 15:23

With the size of my collection, it's an easy choice for the smaller boxes.

As Huw said, I'm also surprised that it took TLG this long since less overall volume means cheaper distribution, and to a lesser extent material cost.

Another gripe I have is the VARIETY of sizes and types of Lego boxes. I wish they were more standard, and that most smaller boxes would fit within larger boxes (i.e. not the same width).

Posted by M-Tron Hero Kodiak in United States, 28 Feb 2011 15:35

I would probably buy the smaller one to confuse my wife.

But seriously, I'd say maybe a month-2 months ago I did a survey that asked quite a few questions on box sizes and if you would buy the item in a smaller box.

Guess they went with the idea of smaller boxes after all.

Posted by Paul7819 in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 15:45

So glad they have finally done this, it never made sense the large box size, i never thought the box was a major issue in marketing and this is more environmentally friendly. But i do agree they are saving money with less packaging so why has the price not gone down?

Posted by vexorian in Bolivia, 28 Feb 2011 15:50

I would buy the smaller box. Better chance to store it. I want to promote LEGO doing this and I can tell a set's size by looking at the picture.
I love this reduction, prices for people living overseas are much higher than those in other places and the humongous boxes are a factor.

Posted by cjg in United States, 28 Feb 2011 15:51

^They can't make the price go down by much if they JUST reduce the box size a little. It would be less than a dollar.

Posted by (-)-Crushmaster-(-) in United States, 28 Feb 2011 15:55

Well, the bigger box is one cent cheaper. :-P I wouldn't buy a Star Wars set, though, unless maybe it was really cheap and had useful parts...

Posted by jarom_moroni in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:02

Smaller boxes ship cheaper. I'd chose the smaller one because I resell, and I'd love to be able to pass more savings to my customers.

Posted by Farmer_John in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:15

From a previous post:

"A price reduction would be welcome but is highly unlikely I think... and if there was a reduction in prices, I think it'd be applied to other markets than the US one. In several european countries lego's cost about twice as much as in the US, and the difference is increasing as the US$ drops in value compared to the euro. For example with todays currency rates the Diagon Alley set costs $287 in Norway from lego direct. TheDeathstar costs a shocking $720. So to all the US AFOL's, you don't know how good you've got it. :)"

This comment doesn't makes sense...a dropping US$ should result in the price increasing for people in the USA since their dollar will buy less (because the dollar is worth less). I think one reason the USA sets might be less expensive is due to the poor USA economy and the fact that the USA drives a large percentage of Lego's bottom-line sales. TLG may want to keep prices lower in the USA and make it up on volume. The alternative is raising their prices in the USA and killing their sales in their largest market. Remember, we are talking about plastic (which is inexpensive), so TLG's profit margin is large and derived primarily from their very well-known brand name.

All that said, I agree that prices outside the USA seem to be on the high side even after considering the exchange rate.

Posted by Greyface in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:15

Go environment, the smaller one!

Posted by Farmer_John in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:16

Oh yeah...I like smaller boxes too. ;-)

Posted by Orange Lemons in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:18

I'm glad LEGO went for the samller boxes, but for those with the mindset of a bigger box being better, LEGO will need some kind of "Environmentally Friendly" gimmick. The bigger the boxes, the heavier they fall, too bad there's not much weight to them. :P

Posted by Camo Hat in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:34

why does the smaller box cost $24.97 when the big one is $24.96

Posted by legofanatic2345 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:36

Lets see: the smaller one increases storage space, helps in shipping, and could potentially be cheaper, depending on the original size (this wouldn't be much of a difference, but money is money:) ) For the bigger one, I have to agree with bernsa: it would improve the physiological effect because you think you are getting more. Considering all of this, I would definitely have to go with the smaller boxes.

Posted by timbutnice in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 16:36

Smaller is better - less space, lower production costs, better for environment, easier to carry, and I think it also looks a lot better.

Posted by washen in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:39

I would definitely buy the smaller one for the following reasons: I keep all of my boxes for some reason and storage has become an issue. Perhaps if LEGO is able to save money by using smaller boxes then the prices of the sets may not increase as rapidly as other items. The environmentalists will quiet down even though every time a tree is cut down, two are planted to replace it... The piece to box size ratio makes me feel better (i.e. more pieces in the box per square unit). I've seen and held the boxes myself and because they are more compact they seem a bit more sound in structure. Also, the images on the front and back are less inflated meaning more visible detail (isn't that a bit contradictory?). I'm also quite certain that the retailers will be happy that they will need one less bag or one that's a size smaller for my weekly visits. :) I hope this overly-analytical review of LEGO's very wise decision is helpful to some of you all!

Posted by Cam'n'Stu in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 16:43

"The bigger box makes kids think there's more in it..." yes, until they open it and the disappointment is writ large on their faces!

I am glad Lego have started doing this it should save them and their retailers a lot in shipping as in the main they will be paying directly or indirectly by volume as the weight is minimal with most sets and lots in warehousing costs too. However, for those looking for price cuts, I doubt it somehow, as someone pointed out above it takes oil to make plastic and oil sure isn't cheap at the moment!

Posted by TooMuchLEGO in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:48

Finally, I'm actually happy about the change. A smaller box equals better in my opinion.

Posted by Darren Coppinger in Ireland, 28 Feb 2011 16:51

Hopefully This Reduces Prices

Posted by Dlakii in Australia, 28 Feb 2011 16:56

I'm definitely a fan of where these smaller boxes are going. With prices in Australia still abominable for reasons I assume are relevant to shipping, this looks like it could possibly ultimately cut shipping costs for stores and thus drive down the prices of sets; even if it's at a small margin it'll be a very welcome reprieve, as anything's better than what we're currently stuck with, and combined with Big W's pricing practices delightfulness will ensue. It wouldn't surprise me if these assumptions of mine were incorrect, but hey, a cash-strapped uni student can dream, can't he? :P

As to the matter of marketing and the downside induced by the loss of larger boxes, I'm sure it's entirely possible for LEGO to devise some delightful visual wizardry in the realm of box art to counteract the potential problem - say, dulling the background to give the set more focus, off the top of my head; I can't claim to know what will actually do it. Such measures may not be as effective as an oversized box, but if said boxes also serve to limit prices, that in itself could be just as strong a draw.

Posted by aragorn_10 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 16:56

Smaller. I know the price won't reduce at all, even though they are using less cardboard for the box, but I have had a problem storing boxes lately, and against my better judgement had to compact a bunch down just so I could have room for more! :( These smaller boxes are a relief!

Posted by ensign_dave in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 17:02

@Farmer_John - just like to say I enjoyed your summary on the pricing comparison.

Posted by The_Rizulli in United States, 28 Feb 2011 17:18

Sorry in advance for all the dry analysis below; some have wondered about shipping and I happen to work in shipping (not for whichever companies Lego uses though). So here goes...

Regarding shipping's impact on Lego prices: shipping to the US is cheaper due to volume, plain and simple. There are more people in the US than in other markets where Lego is sold. Higher volume means cheaper cost of shipping per unit, which means lower prices. Distance is not nearly as big a factor which is why despite the closer proximity to the manufacturing center, Lego prices in Europe are so much higher than in the US.

Further, shipping costs are also determined by "charge weight." A shipping company can charge according to either the actual physical weight or according to the dimensions of what's being shipped; typically whichever is higher. I would be willing to bet that Lego gets charged according to dimensional weight due to the size of the boxes relative to how much is in them. Therefore, the smaller box dimensions would mean smaller charge weight, which means lower shipping costs which could mean lower prices overall. Huzzah!

However, this savings will likely be offset by the rise in costs for plastics manufacturing due to higher oil prices, so any savings from lower shipping costs is likely to be negated. So, ultimately, this box-size change means prices very well could stay the same (at least in the short-term) despite a likely forthcoming increase in manufacturing costs, so huzzah still! :-)

As others have said, this is a wise business decision on TLG's part.

Posted by LeGoB12A21 in Canada, 28 Feb 2011 17:24

lol it gets annoying reading --the smaller box is 1 cent more!--it has been mentioned a lot, and people still keep saying it....they aren`t more money, the bix box was in a different isle, so to take the picture to compare them, the guy brought the big box to the little box...
Also, LEGO put the sets in big boxes is so that kids and parents think they are getting a huge set,not just a little one. But then, it gets opened and you see air, so, in my opinion, the smaller boxes are a good thing(and they are better for the enviroment because they are smaller :p....kinda)

Posted by Unknown User2596 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 17:25

I also noticed that some of the 2011 sets (Atlantis, Ninjago) have boxes that are more thinner than usual.

Still, this is great news!

Posted by szww in Poland, 28 Feb 2011 17:27

Well done LEGO finally smaller boxes :)

Posted by deadtree103 in Canada, 28 Feb 2011 17:46

I'd buy the smaller box in a heartbeat, recently I've been keeping my boxes, and free space is beginning to shrink,so smaller boxes are VERY welcome :)

Posted by skherbeck in United States, 28 Feb 2011 17:47

As an AFOL, I would definitely buy the smaller box to save space. If my 8yr old son was choosing, he'd go BIG!

Posted by jonbuddy in United States, 28 Feb 2011 17:51

I'll admit I would buy the larger box. I kind of feel embarrassed about it.

@Unknown User2596, I noticed that on 7307, which is Pharaoh's Quest.

Posted by Binary Code in United States, 28 Feb 2011 17:55

All conventional wisdom aside, I'd buy the smaller one to support this green initiative. I'd like to think that was the reason for the change.

Posted by Jayr17 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 18:06

I definately appreciate the smaller box. I think someone mentioned it before but part of the reason for the bigger box, is the size of the picture. Especially with large sets. My wife and I are getting ready to move, and we have to find some semi-durable containers to hold the original boxes. Normal cardboard gets beaten up by movers and basically destroys what is in side, or at least reduces its value. A smaller box, means we can fit more in each container. The only issue I see is with the instructions, but a smaller box may actually work in TLGs favor as the instrcutions get bent up sliding around in the current box. Keeping the price down will also help.
I also agree with someone else's earlier comment that a smaller box makes it easier to hide and sneak in to the house.

Posted by kc14 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 18:25

I would definitely buy the smaller box.

Posted by AitchJay in Australia, 28 Feb 2011 18:58

Absolutely right, it's about time!

I would buy the smaller box, because the weight of bricks in there will feel like better value. I know I'm being taken advantage of when the box is big and light.

For example, the Agents Mobile Command Centre (8635) feels like a good weight in the box, whereas the Clone Turbo Tank (8098) is more expensive and weighs less, for a similar size package.

Posted by Zordboy in Australia, 28 Feb 2011 19:00

"If you had the choice, seeing the two side by side on the shelf like that, which would you buy and why?"
I'd buy the set that I wanted. Box size has never mattered to me in the slightest.
Value for money and cost are important, but they're different questions.

Posted by surfboy100 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 19:06

I would buy the smaller one anyday. I don't really care if it is one cent more expensvie

Posted by Farmer_John in United States, 28 Feb 2011 19:18

Thanks ensign_dave...

To The_Rizulli's point:

Smaller boxes will basically mean more profit (higher contribution margin) for TLG due to everything mentioned by Rizulli...which they will pocket. Hopefully that will mean that they will not raise prices as quickly.

The amount of oil consumed to make a lego set is relatively little, so the impact to prices from rising oil prices won't be large. The impact of smaller boxes will add more to TLG's bottom-line than the rising oil prices will take away. TLG will come out ahead.

So will everyone who buys and stores these sets (especially in an environmentally-controlled area) because square footage (or square meters if you prefer) costs money too, and personally I am running out of space. ;-)

Glad to see smaller boxes!!!

Posted by legos in United States, 28 Feb 2011 19:22

I am kind of in the middle because sometimes I can store more sets {pieces} inside them , but I think I can start collecting the boxes { I only have the HP Burrow , quidditch match} and my mom and dad will let me keep them. Great news!

Posted by flump in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 19:22

@The_Rizulli in U - Exactly! Summed it up perfectly.

A very smart move by Lego. They keep the majority happy by reducing the box size - this helps save on storage space and to deceive the wife. Most Lego buyers understand that 1000 pcs is a 1000 pcs. There will be those buying who'd prefer to receive a bigger box for the less enthusiastic Legoers who's probably going to bin the box anyway, but I think the majority will be pleased with the smaller size.

Given the global rise in the cost of oil and other materials, the money Lego save on their shipping rates means the manufacturing of the bricks can stay the same. The saving made on the physical reduction in cardboard used would be a couple of pence I'd suspect - barely nothing. On a single purchase, it would make no difference in the UK since eveything is usually rounded up to £0.99 anyway, on a bulk/global scale the saving would be considerable. This I would hope Lego could put towards keeping the cost of sets down long term.

Photographer explains the 1cent price difference "No, same price, I moved the bigger box from its spot on the shelf to the spot next to the little box for the picture, $24.96 is Battle of Naboo's price tag."

Good move Lego.

Posted by TopperTwist in United States, 28 Feb 2011 19:24

It doesn't really matter to me, because I only store the boxes of Exclusive, big, rare, limited/special edition, and those of sets I really love. I feel that bigger boxes look a heck of a lot nicer and it APPEARS as if your getting a bigger set, but I myself would know what I'm getting by looking at the peice count, price, and set value. Maybe prices will go down with smaller boxes. Truthfully, I don't care too much as long as they keep the Exclusive boxes big :D

Posted by shaase@rogers.com in Canada, 28 Feb 2011 19:24

I believe from a marketing stand point Lego wanted larger boxes so that they had more shelf space in stores. Now that stores have set aside a certain amount of room for Lego; I hope with smaller boxes this means more variety at stores and I'll be able to pick up everything locally as opposed to having to sometimes resort to Lego.com.

Perhaps some environmental motivation was also part of the reason. I doubt costs would go down.

Posted by wolfgang514 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 19:30

I'd buy the smaller one since I keep all my boxes and the smaller one would take up less space in my closet!

Posted by R4-G9 in Canada, 28 Feb 2011 19:40

i think that a parent would buy a bigger box because they would think that a smaller box would have less stuff in it especialy if they are side by side.

Posted by BioFreak877 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 19:55

I would buy the smaller one because I am tree hugger! :)

Posted by TBOC in United States, 28 Feb 2011 20:01

I always liked big boxes...

Posted by mrdoofa in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 20:03

I much prefer the idea of smaller boxes. I would much prefer to open a small box that is full rather than a large box which is half air. I think smaller boxes would also stand for stacking much better as they will probably be structurally stronger, I've always hated how easily large boxes get dents and creases on the thin top panel.

There is less chance of damaged instructions as they won't be flopping all around a half empty box. It is almost guaranteed that less packaging won't mean lower prices though sadly.

Good things come in small packages!!!

Posted by mars4life in United States, 28 Feb 2011 20:35

Smaller, because i keep them and they take up lots of space

Posted by brixton in Canada, 28 Feb 2011 20:36

I prefer the smaller boxes. Easier to transport from store to home than a massive box that is mostly empty space. I agree with mrdoofa in that less packaging should result in lower prices (but we all know that won't happen).

Posted by Moebius in United States, 28 Feb 2011 20:41

Hey I pay alot for my air dammit! Gimme my air back!

Posted by TangDynasty in Singapore, 28 Feb 2011 20:52

I am not sure about this...

On one hand, a smaller more compact box saves on space and paper. On the other hand, the 'feeling' of getting such a small box for so much money is 'painful'. However, I must add that though it feels good to have a bigger box initially but like some have said, the disappointment of emptiness jumped in when there are so much air inside.

The practical me will ask, does this translate into savings for me? As the price of Lego here is really expensive, I certainly would like to have a cheaper priced one. Maybe Lego can have a no-frills version without all the fancy box and packaging? :) That will be even better for me because ultimately, it is what's inside that I am after.

Posted by Seagull in United States, 28 Feb 2011 21:12

The smaller one, to be eco- friendly. :P

Posted by bus962 in Hong Kong, 28 Feb 2011 21:25

absolutely the smaller one

Posted by mark251172 in United Kingdom, 28 Feb 2011 21:28

I know this would never happen but I would like the Lego company to make and pack the boxes like they used to during the 80's and 90's with plastic tray compartments inside the boxes and the top lid flap can be lifted so you can take a peek inside the window. Of course doing this would be more costly for the Lego company to do and is also probably more environmentally unfriendly with the extra plastic being produced. I guess I'm just being nostalgic.
Anyway,back to the main point. Smaller boxes is in my opinion deffinately the right way to go and makes more sense.

Posted by Da_LegoBuilder in United States, 28 Feb 2011 21:53

Well, I do agree with the idea of the smaller box :)

Before: It seemed like you were getting "more" for your money. However, when you opened it, you found little bags and found more empty space. Lots of collectors would eventually notice this and figure that its supposed to appeal to the younger audience that its a BIG set, when it really isn't.

After: The box is definately the same; except the size. I think this would mean more sets on the shelves since it saves more room. Meaning less shortages of sought-after sets that are usually sold out.

There are some good pros about the new box;
They would save cardboard! There would be less space to make a box, therefore saving cardboard and trees! :)
And also, the Lego company would save lots of mone shipping; it would be easier to ship more boxs now for the same price as before.
Its easier to store the boxes! I collasp my lego boxes, but some are just too big to be stored in the closet. Plus, my closet is mainly filled with collasped lego boxes. This would definately save some more space as well as the chances of keeping the box

I would also like to add in, that this directly applies to the survey most of us took last year. One question was something like; "would the box size change the likihood of buying a set?" Some question like that. I personally put no, that a smaller box would not change the chances of me buying a set. Its encouraging to know that Lego is listening to our feedback and input and are using it to make changes in their company. :)

Posted by lego luvu247 in United States, 28 Feb 2011 22:00

I think that the regular boxes were cool, but i sure would like to get one of those new boxes. (and just like what Markley said. the new boxes will be easier to store).

Posted by slfroden in United States, 28 Feb 2011 22:15

I recently travelled to the US for business. As Lego is about half the price in the US vs in Australia, I decided to order some Lego and got it delivered to a friend, and I picked it up while I was over there. The shipping box from Lego S@H was huge, with lots of those air bubble things taking up a good proportion of the box. As mush as I would have liked to keep the boxes, by removing the Lego from their boxes I was able to pack them in a standard USPS shipping box. Shipping a standard USPS box cost about one third as much rather than shipping the Lego back in their original boxes. In this case, I really didn't want to pay for shipping the air back. Surely smaller boxes would also save Lego in it's shipping costs too.

Many years ago at school, I had an assignment to work out the best way to save packaging for breakfast cereal boxes. The best shape for volume vs surface area is a sphere, but that is a bit hard to manufacture/ship. If we stick with rectangular shapes, then the best is a cube (all sides square), but that doesn't give the most visible surface area on a shelf in the store. Which is why cereal boxes are the shape that they are, big front/back surfaces, and smaller sides and top/bottom, to get exposure on the shelf at the store. But how would you feel if you bought a breakfast cereal box that was more than half empty?

What I would really like to see is the ability to have the boxes nest nicely within each other. For example the 8258 (Technic Crane Truck) has the same size box as the 8043 (Technic Motorized Excavator), so they take up a lot of room. If one was slightly smaller than the other, then I could put one box inside the other for storage. I know this raises problems when Lego needs to keep the carton size the same for shipping multiple sets in a large shipping container, and for packing the boxes on shelves in stores, but it would help me save lots of space at home. :o)

I think that Lego boxes have been getting progressively bigger over the years. Comparing the box of the 8865 (Technic Test Car) from 1988 to the box of the 8043 (Technic Motorized Excavator) from 2010, both flagship models in their respective year, the 8043 box is a lot bigger.

If Lego changed all box sizes at the same time, that might help with the 'this set is better because it is in a bigger box' issue. Perhaps the box size should be directly related to the number of pieces in the set or the cost of the set. For example, if the set has 600 pieces, the volume of the box could be 600 square cm, or if it cost $100, it could be 1000 square cm, or something like that.

Sorry for the rant - my vote is for smaller boxes.

Posted by voypro in United States, 28 Feb 2011 22:19

While I wish this were about "Lego Listening to us", I don't think so. The fact why this is happening should be obvious, higher profits for lego, by paying lower shipping cost. Considering bricks weigh very little, Volume is far more important these days regarding shipping. TLG has production facilities all over the world if the manufacturing plant can fit twice as many units inside a shipping container, so much the better. Also, if you half the size of the box, you decrease not only its volume in half but the weight of the cardboard in half as well.

Posted by Dash Justice in United States, 28 Feb 2011 22:32

All I can say is: IT'S ABOUT TIME!!!

Posted by Sky-guardian in United States, 28 Feb 2011 22:37

^I totally agree, I hated when a lego set was as big as me!

Posted by refriedbeans in United States, 28 Feb 2011 22:55

Wish they would've done this before christmas! Now I've got Lego Atlantis boxes everywhere! (I got all the sets!)

Posted by jatonaz in Taiwan, Province of China, 28 Feb 2011 23:13

Smaller boxes definitely. They should've done this a long long time ago, it's much more environment friendly, which I'm shocked that barely anybody has said, and which is also why during the TLG survey I voted for a smaller box.

Posted by jwsmart in United States, 28 Feb 2011 23:13

Smaller boxes are better. I hope it does well.

Posted by AETerry in United States, 28 Feb 2011 23:21

I'd buy the smaller one on the self delusion it's less waste going into the recycle bin.

Posted by Gowinkle in New Zealand, 28 Feb 2011 23:30

in general smaller as here in nz we don't get the labels that tell the number of peices so it's just a guess, if i have not researched (smaller box is a better representation). if i have reasearched i don't mind. gi

Posted by Dodge in Canada, 28 Feb 2011 23:38

110 comments is a lot to say about air... just sayin'.

I cut the fronts off my boxes (sacrilege, I know) and then recycle the rest of the box. I agree with M-Tron Hero Kodiak though... fooling the wife is a big upside.

Size matters not. Judge the set on it's size do you?

Posted by MisterFubar in United States, 28 Feb 2011 23:54

Now I'm going to have to cut down a couple trees to make up for all the waste I won't be getting with my LEGO boxes. Thanks a lot LEGO.

Posted by TeamEnergy in United States, 01 Mar 2011 00:12

Honestly I would buy the smaller because it feels more full, and that is one of the things I like about LEGOs before opening them, shaking the box or holding just to feel what is inside and with more air the contents move around more makign it feel less full, or more empty, so keep at it LEGO, as long as the sets don't get smaller.

Posted by Mycroft42 in United States, 01 Mar 2011 00:22

I like the idea of the smaller boxes..... BUT I do also like some of the bigger ones. The reason is this: I quite frequently store the smaller kits (in their own boxes) in with the larger kits. That way, get several kits all in one box, thus saving space in the long run AND keeping things rather well organized. A perfect example of this is the number of Lego Agents kits you can fit in with the mobile command center.

Just my worthless two bits.....

Posted by Exar Kun in Australia, 01 Mar 2011 00:41

Smaller box every time. The large versus small both being on the shelf argument should be moot once all sets get their boxes downsized. Relatively speaking, the largest sets will still have the largest boxes. It's only during the transition phase that people might think twice about a smaller box due to the presence of a larger one.

Posted by legoC&C in United States, 01 Mar 2011 01:10

Personally, box size doesn't matter. But to the average passerby, bigger can mean better. In the case of box sizes, it may seem like there are more parts inside and may encourage more purchases. This idea is still great though.

Posted by CharlieTheFunEngine in Australia, 01 Mar 2011 01:24

Great job on LEGO's part here. I too keep all the boxes and they're taking up a lot of space.

Posted by Buckbrick in Singapore, 01 Mar 2011 01:27

Small boxes of course. Whatever I can do to reduce waste. It's about time that Lego does this, albeit a little late IMO. I recall reading from somewhere that the reason Lego used large boxes is to increase its product presence while on the shelves. A small box just wouldn't create the same effect. Another case of marketing vs. pragmatism IMO.

I used to store boxes in tact and nest the smaller ones in the larger until they took a ridiculous amount of space. But the largest boxes cannot be nested. I got so frustrated that I started flattening them and threw out boxes of non-exclusive sets. It's good news for those who recycle the boxes, but I doubt it'll change anything for those who keep them, in tact or otherwise.

It does look like the width has correspondingly increased as well. I recently came across the new Maersk ship that used such a box - short and wide. My next wish is that Lego will stop using those pizza boxes that cannot be collapsed.

Posted by Nikola Bathory in Bulgaria, 01 Mar 2011 03:19

Is this real?? Great! I want smaller boxes, like the ones form the 80's! I keep all my LEGO boxes and those HUGE boxes from recent years are a real pain, I'm running out of place, it was about time for LEGO to switch back to smaller ones, after all smaller boxes cost a bit less, right? And are easier to transport around the world.

Posted by Surya in Belgium, 01 Mar 2011 04:27

I'm not sure if this is voluntarily. I head from someone who produces board games that there will fines if your boxes contain more than X percent of air. Some new law or regulation.

Posted by bic3 in United Kingdom, 01 Mar 2011 04:27

If I had a choice I would only buy the smaller boxed sets. Like the majority of other people I would much prefer to save space storing them. The sets I bought in the late 1970's were great. Crammed full of Lego and much easier to store. I find it harder to keep the bigger boxes in good condition due to the size, lack of space and weight of boxes on top of them, sadly a few have crushed which is very annoying.

Posted by Roketah in Australia, 01 Mar 2011 04:38

I hope there cramed not reduced space

Posted by albero78 in Belgium, 01 Mar 2011 05:30

small box without any doubt

Posted by J. B. in United States, 01 Mar 2011 08:04

In Kmart today, I noticed the boxes were smaller. For some strange reason, it seemed like the quality of LEGO had gone way up. I'm not sure why... but that's what it felt like.

Posted by AZFIREWOLF in United States, 01 Mar 2011 08:28

I for one think the smaller boxes are a great thing. The cost of shipping air around the world is crazy. I however don't see a decline in the price that we as the consumers will be paying for sets.

Posted by yellowcastle in United States, 01 Mar 2011 09:34

I seriously doubt that the savings gained in box size reduction will lower our current price points. Once the consumer is willing to pay XYZ for a product, I can't imagine any company lowering that baseline and giving back margin. That being said, streamlining any facet of production or distribution could definitely help TLG hold current pricing levels for a longer period of time.

Posted by obisky in United States, 01 Mar 2011 09:55

I'm kind of annnoyed by this, because the sticker sheets are usually all bent up, due to how they're packaged, so I can't imagine that a smaller box will help that at all. I hope they re-design their packageing process at LEGO, too, so maybe the sticker sheet problem comes to a hault.

Posted by KLS in Singapore, 01 Mar 2011 10:25

Small all the way! Yeah!

Posted by skherbeck in United States, 01 Mar 2011 10:43

Solution to bent-up sticker sheets... NO MORE STICKERS!

Posted by Murdoch17 in United States, 01 Mar 2011 11:10

LEGO Pirates of the Caribbean mini site is here! Currrentley avalible only from the front page of the LEGO main site, the site is releasing figures in photo form much like the Harry Potter site did. Here is the Link: http://www.lego.com/piratesofthecaribbean/en-us/characters/default.aspx?icmp=COHomeNewsUSPirates#Captain+Jack+Sparrow+is+dueling+to+the+death+for+the+key
Enjoy the site!

Posted by brix in United Kingdom, 01 Mar 2011 11:40

I have always thought what a joke some box sizes are and i'm so glad they made them smaller. I don't collect boxes or anything but I do think that helping the environment and all that is great, plus, it's nice to have a change

Posted by barrenaaron in United States, 01 Mar 2011 11:54

A smaller box should HELP the instruction manual and sticker sheet from flailing around and getting bent up. It's my biggest pet peeve. The new HP Diagon Alley actually came with a cardboard and plastic sleeve for the manual; I thought it was about time for THAT. If they could do that for ALL sets, with smaller boxes, win win ... WIN.

Posted by flump in United Kingdom, 01 Mar 2011 12:03

The Mechanical Excavator (8043) I recently bought had the cardboard and plastic sleeve also. I assumed this would now be the norm for the more expensive sets.

Posted by modena in Italy, 01 Mar 2011 12:06

I would buy the smaller one. Because:
It is more environmentally friendly!!
It will take less space in my cupboard and make space for clothes, etc!
It would be easier to keep all the pieces in place.

Posted by Nelly7072 in United States, 01 Mar 2011 12:26

Though smaller boxes will take up less space in storage and closets, it is always nice to be able to put a partially disassembled set back in the box. Some sets do not require any disassembly when I put them back in the box. Now it seems a more thorough disassembly would be required to fit those parts back in the box. I guess that just means more rebuilding in the end.

Posted by TheKingOfBuilding in United Kingdom, 01 Mar 2011 12:28

Big Lego boxes can still be used: take smaller and thinner Lego boxes and store them inside the larger ones! It saves lots of space!!! Oh, and I think Lego sets will sell better if they keep them the original size because of child Lego fans; the bigger the box, the better the set is what most children will think!!!

Posted by C-Fish in United States, 01 Mar 2011 13:32

It's about time! Personally, I don't really care how big the box is; I just throw it away no matter how enormous it is.

Posted by pop3465 in United States, 01 Mar 2011 14:32

I like the bigger boxes,They work as shelf's, :-)
But I agree with TheKingOfBuilding,Maby not the put the littel boxes in the Bigger Ones But that kids will think the bigger the box the better.

Posted by Lego Architect in United States, 01 Mar 2011 16:15

I really like the idea of smaller boxes. I think this particular example is disappointing though. The wording, warnings, piece count, etc. are still so large they are practically taking over the entire cover. Which is a shame because Lego does great box art.

I would like to see Lego's new boxes designed similar to how they were done in the 1990s. Which a large Lego Logo, a large full sized end to end set picture, with minimal and small neccessary signage.

I also miss the old flip up box lids on the large sets. I hope to see a return of those as well.

Although my comment is mostly negative I am still excited to see further smaller boxes, and will still be purchasing as many sets are I currently do, bigger box or not.

Posted by jonbuddy in United States, 01 Mar 2011 16:37

If smaller boxes means lower prices, than by all means make them as small as possible! I mean, you know the prices are high even for the smallest sets because of the box size, which means a higher cost for cardboard, shipping, etc.
@modena, If you are losing space for clothes, then its time to throw away old boxes. :P

Posted by atkinsar in United Kingdom, 01 Mar 2011 16:42

A fantastic initiative by TLG. As a collector, I would appreciate the boxes being as small as possible for space saving in storage, great for the environment too. The larger boxes also get damaged much more easily in transit/storage. I'm always amazed at the box sizes when I buy older SW sets from ebay/bricklink. Smaller is definitely better in this case. As for TLG lowering prices as a result, not a chance I'm afraid!

Posted by Brickmatic in United States, 01 Mar 2011 21:26

I like the smaller boxes for all of the reasons already mentioned.

In terms of box design, I like the boxes that have the tabs on the end and flatten relatively easily. I do not like the ones that are glued together so you have to rip the box apart to open it.

One the things I think I will really like about the smaller box is how it will feel when it is picked up. I think the denser product will feel better when than picking up a box full of air, conveying a sense of quality. And since LEGO is about quality, not quantity, this makes a lot of sense.

Posted by Legozz in Hungary, 02 Mar 2011 01:24

Beside the fact that smaller boxes take less space in my collection, I think we have to keep in mind the enviromental aspects as well. If a box is smaller, more fits in one truck, that means less pollution, less paper, less garbage etc. Go greener LEGO!

Posted by wilderness77 in United States, 02 Mar 2011 02:56

The smaller one. Enough with wasting our trees. It is about time this happend. I hope they stick with it. It is all about marketing the bigger box makes people feel better for spending all that money. It is a mind trick. The smaller box is better for the enviornment and everyone whether they think so or not.

Posted by Zrath in United States, 02 Mar 2011 03:23

I was at the Glendale, California, Lego store tonight and I saw several of the new smaller boxes. The Spongebob Squarepants Krusty Krab box is positively adorable! :D
Personally, I'm all for the smaller boxes. I don't like it when the box is 2/3rds empty air. It's time for Emballage Vérité! :D
(Truthful Packaging)

Posted by Ravenxl7 in United States, 02 Mar 2011 13:51

Smaller boxes is definitely a good thing, imo. I don't keep them, but it'll be nice to pick up a box and have it not feel so light in comparison to it's size. If this also has an affect on the price of the sets, that's another plus (not sure it will, but it would be great).

Posted by legover in United Kingdom, 02 Mar 2011 15:01

I don't think that smaller will equal cheeper. Many companies employ this strategy in a bid to save on production costs, either to increase profits or prevent an increase in the price to the customer. Publishers will shave a few mill off the size off their magazines to save money, just line up any long standing collection of monthlies and you should see the difference. Smaller will be better for me as i'm running out of storage space. :-(

Posted by Sword2211 in United States, 02 Mar 2011 18:51

Can anyone tell me the reason why I've been saving my boxes for 5 years now?
To me it just feels like I should but I out of space so what to do?

Posted by Brickmatic in United States, 02 Mar 2011 20:50

@Sword2211, You should flatten them.

Posted by cowbug in United States, 03 Mar 2011 03:14

Just got home from the same WalMart and they were doing a massive store wide re-stock/re-organization so I checked out the lego section and there were A LOT more sets with smaller packaging, I know some people are reporting seeing them at LEGO Brand Stores, I added a couple examples of the new battle pack sizes on my Flicker, just click the picture in the article above, they are roughly 4.5 inches by 5 inches, they also had Pharoes Quest sets, Harry Potter sets, Toy Story (as shown), more Star Wars, Imperial V-wing in the same size box as the Starfighter, they had not only new Clone and Mando battle pack's but both the Hoth battle pack's were in smaller boxes. Even the Clone Turbo Tank box appeared to be smaller, still tall but not as long. I did not see any of the normal size boxes for the sets that had smaller boxes, I checked the clearance aisle but did not see any, not sure what happened to them, I doubt they sold them all in a few days, unless they did go on sale and I missed them. I think they look a lot better and make a lot more sense. Sorry I don't have exact dimensions but it looks like, from the comments, they are rolling out all over.

Posted by Sword2211 in United States, 03 Mar 2011 09:52

@brickmatic I already did :(

Posted by vynsane in United States, 03 Mar 2011 15:18

Personally, I'm going to miss the bit of Danish air that I get when I open the box for the first time. Makes me feel like I'm smelling another country.

Posted by QuickBricks in United States, 04 Mar 2011 09:46

Very interesting, many a time have I been disappointed with the size of a Lego set because I anticipated it being bigger (because the box was bigger). Pretty cool!

Posted by ditonthouikwel in Belgium, 04 Mar 2011 13:27

I'd pick the box that opens up from the top instead of the side, wether it's the larger or the smaller. Because if it's a box that you need to break open from the side, it's ugly for storing. in most of my top opening boxes i now store multiple sets, and it's easy to recognize which ones without having to dump out evertyhing from the side and then slide it back in. So smaller is better, but not if they make them destruct-to-open.

Posted by cs38135 in United States, 04 Mar 2011 23:15

I agree with probably the majority of people here. I'd get the smaller box since it uses less materials and it is easier to store, since I keep the boxes of all my sets.

Posted by vpustote in United States, 05 Mar 2011 00:24

Wow, I love this little community. I seriously thought I was the only person my age still building Legos. Then I thought I was weird for keeping the boxes.

It's like LEGO mentality.

Posted by LegoC10 in United States, 07 Mar 2011 08:42

In truth I would prefer buying the larger box just because it gives the impression of a larger set.

Posted by Bion in United States, 07 Mar 2011 16:11

@vpustote Ditto :)

Posted by Lexhoya in Netherlands, 09 Mar 2011 07:54

@durins, You got the same issue as I have... My wife thinks it's enough now while I think it isn't. The only thing is, I do throw away the box afterwards, so smaller or bigger, don't really care. I think if you would look at the faces of the little children, I'd say, keep 'm big. I can recall from when I was a kids: the bigger the better.

Posted by raydent in Indonesia, 10 Mar 2011 11:13

Of course I'll choose smaller box,why?
1. It might less cost for LEGO factory to make this smaller box,and I hope the price of the set going cheaper too:)
2. For the collector especially who doesn't have big room to keep his collection,smaller box is easier and more efficient to keep.
3. Less paper to use is less paper garbage(for whose who throw the unused box to garbage),and I'm thinking is more friendly to our earth:)
4. And till now,like other person think,I'm thinking there is so much useless space in every LEGO set,and for me is more tidy if the measure of the box is totally fit with items inside(there is already plastic covered inside box,right?)
Thanks

Commenting has ended on this article.