LEGO achieves record revenue and increased profit in 1H 2026

What's that in Kellicams?

@stefwaffles said:
"But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

Do you mean it was cracked straight out of the package, or that it cracked as you were assembling the set for the first time, or something else?

@beyoda said:
"I don’t think I’ve bought a full-priced set since 2024. I guess this means they’ve got enough new people buying sets that it makes up for me and other long-time fans scaling back significantly. Makes me sad, though."

Mark another one down for the survey. But hey, that's the way it goes. With the size of my collection these days, I could stand to pare down as it is.

This said, consumer sales and profit are both up the same amount. It's possible that it's just new markets, and things are otherwise holding fairly steady.

@Alemas said:
"
I remember a comment from former LEGO designer James May, AKA poshhammer, who said people within the company disregarded the Chinese brands as knockoffs, so they didn't pay attention to them."

He says many things when the day is long. I would maybe not take everything former LEGO designers say for granted, or a fact.

I haven't purchased a set since 2024. The sets I've received for the last 18 months have all been gifts. I highly enjoy the gifts I've been given but sets have become underwhelming remakes or extravagant sets designed for the sake of people showing off they can buy expensive sets.

@PDelahanty said:
"“Hey! If we increase prices, the line goes up! Let’s do it again!”

Nothing here shows any hope for more reasonable pricing coming along in the future."

Because that was never the strategy. In many ways, it pays more to have less customers who pay more than more customers who pay less.

It also position LEGO as a "luxury" brand, which has many benefits. LEGO does not want to be "a" brick brand, they want to be seen as "the" brick brand. You cannot do that if you sell a "cheap product". They need to emphasize their greatness, and nothing does that more than high prices.

Really need to stop with that headline..we know this is gonna be the norm, they keep gouging us. The only number I want to know is how many sets they’re selling every year & how has it declined since the stupid price hike…

@legoDad42 said:
" @stefwaffles said:
"I agree with @CapnRex101 that it is in our interest for Lego to be financially strong.

The quantity of stickers is not a cost cutting issue, it’s a logistical issue of storing prints; we know this from factory tours etc, so there’s no point complaining unless we want to have fewer sets made overall.

But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

You see cracked bricks all the time?
I haven’t seen a cracked brick except specifically the reddish brown plates and tiles from ‘09, 10, etc.
Which they corrected.
Haven’t seen any before or since.
What sets are you buying that have so many cracked bricks?
"

That's from 2013 to 2015, for the dark red and reddish brown brittle issue, officially announced "fixed" in 2018. Never had that problem prior to 2013, and they have replaced all my worry-bricks without cost to me or complaint from them.

Very cool. I'm sure this means they'll transition fully to first world factory production.

No reason to not have Printed Pieces!!! Start a movement of NO more stickers

@eiffel006 said:
"I know LEGO is more expensive. But it also holds its value more than alternative brands. Even for those like me who are not toy companies or scalpers.

Years ago, I decided to set up a bricklink shop to sell sets I did not want anymore. Since then, I've bought countless sets I did not mean to keep, but that I wanted to build anyway. I am able to resell most of them for a good fraction of the original price (anywhere between 40%-100% even sometimes), recouping the original costs. Basically, I buy sets, build them, keep them a year or two and then decide if I want to keep them or not. And sell what I don't want to keep. Because of that, I bought way more sets than I ever would have otherwise.

This is not something that can't be done with other brands."

I met someone who buys the big sets like Icons and UCS, builds them, sells the minifigs separately from the models, and says he turns a profit.

I already cut back this year, because of higher prices. Spent about 2/3rds of what I normally do and the lowest I’ve spent since 2017. Not because I can’t afford, but because I refuse to pay Legos crazy asking price on as many sets. Seeing this I’ll be cutting back even more. I’ can’t quit completely because I do love building and collecting Lego, but I’m planning to cut my spending to 50% of what I usually spend.

“In short, ladies and gentlemen of the board, costs are down, revenues are up and our stock has never been higher.”

(Everybody on this comment page)

“You’re out, Lego”.

City didn't make the list of best selling themes??

@AhsokaTrooper08 said:
"City didn't make the list of best selling themes??"
Depends if 'best selling' is down to the number sold or the value sold. I have more 'City' sets than any of the others, but a lot are priced under £10 so the're worth a fraction of the 'best sellers'!

@merman said:
"So the consumer is willing to pay anything for Lego despite the insane price increases. This means Lego thinks they’re on the right track and will further increase the prices…"

You know full well that is hardly the case. Their continued growth & exposure is simply getting many, many new eyes. I don’t personally have many AFOL friends, but myself & another have drastically cut back f are way more choosy over what we buy. Just because we love the company doesn’t mean we blindly buy everything they offer.

@Kre_O said:
"Lego could be better environmentally, by getting rid of black ink used for the all black 18+ boxes, and also going back to simpler boxes instead of this dreadful tray and cover system."

Why? Blue, orange and yellow ink is no better for the environment than black.

@Hiratha said:
"The time elapsed between “slop” being a useful slang term with a specific, unique meaning to just being another pointless synonym for “thing I don’t like” was way too short."

You're saying "slop" is no longer cromulent?

@Rimefang said:
" @legoDad42 said:
" @stefwaffles said:
"I agree with @CapnRex101 that it is in our interest for Lego to be financially strong.

The quantity of stickers is not a cost cutting issue, it’s a logistical issue of storing prints; we know this from factory tours etc, so there’s no point complaining unless we want to have fewer sets made overall.

But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

You see cracked bricks all the time?
I haven’t seen a cracked brick except specifically the reddish brown plates and tiles from ‘09, 10, etc.
Which they corrected.
Haven’t seen any before or since.
What sets are you buying that have so many cracked bricks?
"

That's from 2013 to 2015, for the dark red and reddish brown brittle issue, officially announced "fixed" in 2018. Never had that problem prior to 2013, and they have replaced all my worry-bricks without cost to me or complaint from them."

I've had some Dark Brown and Earth Green parts break, but the rate is less than for Dark Red and Reddish Brown.

@Crux said:
" @560heliport said:
" @Rimefang said:
" @legoDad42 said:
" @stefwaffles said:
"I agree with @CapnRex101 that it is in our interest for Lego to be financially strong.

The quantity of stickers is not a cost cutting issue, it’s a logistical issue of storing prints; we know this from factory tours etc, so there’s no point complaining unless we want to have fewer sets made overall.

But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

You see cracked bricks all the time?
I haven’t seen a cracked brick except specifically the reddish brown plates and tiles from ‘09, 10, etc.
Which they corrected.
Haven’t seen any before or since.
What sets are you buying that have so many cracked bricks?
"

That's from 2013 to 2015, for the dark red and reddish brown brittle issue, officially announced "fixed" in 2018. Never had that problem prior to 2013, and they have replaced all my worry-bricks without cost to me or complaint from them."

I've had some Dark Brown and Earth Green parts break, but the rate is less than for Dark Red and Reddish Brown."

Patrick from 11386 would say "hello", had his HEAD NOT BEEN RENT IN TWAIN."

I don't get it. The set hasn't even been released yet, at least here in the U.S.

@TheOtherMike said:
"Yeah, there's a reason the Collectable Minifigures line has gone as long as it has. People *love* those little plastic people."

Well, there’s also surge pricing for new sets, when people are most eager to buy stuff. And there are people who want the sets but don’t care about the minifigs, and people who want the minifigs but don’t care about the sets. In either case, they should be able to buy the portion they want for less than MSRP and walk away happy, while someone who is willing to give up the entire contents could actually prove that the parts are greater than their sum.

Totally agree. And don't forget that TLG is a private company. They have no fiduciary responsibility to shareholders to constantly chase ever-increasing profits. They simply do so because they *can*.

@560heliport said:
" @Crux said:
" @560heliport said:
" @Rimefang said:
" @legoDad42 said:
" @stefwaffles said:
"I agree with @CapnRex101 that it is in our interest for Lego to be financially strong.

The quantity of stickers is not a cost cutting issue, it’s a logistical issue of storing prints; we know this from factory tours etc, so there’s no point complaining unless we want to have fewer sets made overall.

But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

You see cracked bricks all the time?
I haven’t seen a cracked brick except specifically the reddish brown plates and tiles from ‘09, 10, etc.
Which they corrected.
Haven’t seen any before or since.
What sets are you buying that have so many cracked bricks?
"

That's from 2013 to 2015, for the dark red and reddish brown brittle issue, officially announced "fixed" in 2018. Never had that problem prior to 2013, and they have replaced all my worry-bricks without cost to me or complaint from them."

I've had some Dark Brown and Earth Green parts break, but the rate is less than for Dark Red and Reddish Brown."

Patrick from 11386 would say "hello", had his HEAD NOT BEEN RENT IN TWAIN."

I don't get it. The set hasn't even been released yet, at least here in the U.S. "

Early copies have already been sent out for reviews - even on this site. Yes, the site you're on right now! It's exciting, I know.

Don't get too excited. I wasn't kidding about the ferocious break on Patrick's head. It seems to be a recurring problem, and the fact that this is happening on a set that's FROM THE FUTURE, does not bode well.

@stefwaffles said:
"I agree with @CapnRex101 that it is in our interest for Lego to be financially strong.

The quantity of stickers is not a cost cutting issue, it’s a logistical issue of storing prints; we know this from factory tours etc, so there’s no point complaining unless we want to have fewer sets made overall.

But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

What are a few of the sets that have cracked bricks? I haven’t noticed in any that I’ve bought.

@Vindicare said:
" @stefwaffles said:
"I agree with @CapnRex101 that it is in our interest for Lego to be financially strong.

The quantity of stickers is not a cost cutting issue, it’s a logistical issue of storing prints; we know this from factory tours etc, so there’s no point complaining unless we want to have fewer sets made overall.

But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

What are a few of the sets that have cracked bricks? I haven’t noticed in any that I’ve bought.
"

That's what I asked too. Which sets? And he's saying he's seeing it ALL the time?
I've only encountered the reddish brown brittle mid 2000's. They've corrected it for many years now.
Never saw a cracked brick before that. And never since. And it was only that one specific color and mine was the tiles and 1x4 and 6 plates I got off the PaB wall. And only one set with 1x1 reddish tiles that those specific tiles were fragile at that same time.

@560heliport
"That's from 2013 to 2015, for the dark red and reddish brown brittle issue, officially announced "fixed" in 2018. Never had that problem prior to 2013, and they have replaced all my worry-bricks without cost to me or complaint from them."
I've had some Dark Brown and Earth Green parts break, but the rate is less than for Dark Red and Reddish Brown."

Thx for the correction on the years.
That lines up to the only fragile parts I've EVER encountered with Lego. Specifically tiles, reddish brown and narrow plates reddish brown(1x etc.) I got off the PaB wall at my local Lego Store.
And only ONE set, a treehouse set, and it was only the 1x1 reddish brown tiles that broke.
No other colors before or since.
No other breaks, fragile before those years or since.
I was wondering with the guy I was responding too, what specific sets. He says he's encountering it all the time. I'm buying fairly regular and haven't had an issue with ANY sets parts.

@Bagelwolf said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @beyoda said:
"I don’t think I’ve bought a full-priced set since 2024. I guess this means they’ve got enough new people buying sets that it makes up for me and other long-time fans scaling back significantly. Makes me sad, though."

That's not how it works.

If you bought a set on sale, LEGO is still getting the same amount of money they would if you'd bought it for full price. A sale means the retailer you're buying it from is making a little less profit on a product. In fact, sales are often already calculated into the retail price to give retailers some leeway to mark down sets. It would only really affect LEGO if people wouldn't buy sets at all, but the numbers show that's clearly not happening."

I'm okay with these results only because it's creating a gap in the market for fairly-priced brick-built construction kits, which other companies are more than happy to fill. The price hikes by TLG have forced me to explore alternative brands and I've discovered those brands offer far greater value per dollar. I'm more than happy to spend my money elsewhere now, whereas previously I would've scoffed at the idea of buying anything but Lego."

Great take!

LEGO has always been a 'premium' product and is priced accordingly, which leaves room for competitors in the lower price ranges. I have no personal experience with other brick brands than LEGO and Mega, but from what I hear and see it appears the quality nowadays is getting more on par with the A-brands, depending on the manufacturer and corresponding price tag.

What's considered 'fairly priced' will vary from consumer to consumer, but people have to realize that bigger brands simply have to charge more for their products because bigger companies employ more people and operate on a greater scale, all of which is part of the price of what they produce. It's more than just brand recognition or corporate greed -- although companies will always try to take advantage of the popularity of their product range when they can.

@greenbacker said:
"Came here to read the comments from people upset that Lego is making alot of money, then those people continue to buy Lego from Lego. Lol."

Haha, same here. It's like people posting on social media how much they hate social media -- they're part of the thing they claim to despise. In this case, on a 'fan site' of the actual manufacturer, no less. I'm sure that if LEGO's management team is reading these comments, they're crying all the way to the bank. :'-)

@lordofdragonss said:
"Normies keep buying displayslops for full price. No wonder they gaining so much money."

I’m rather fond of your expression ‘displayslops’. Sums up contemporary Lego quite well. I suppose you can’t argue with the results, but displayslops is a perfect expression.

Sounds like they should lower prices. Don't be greedy Lego.

@pazza_inter said:
"so you can lower prices, aren't you?"

Why would they? The point of ANY business is to make money and The Lego Group is doing that very well right now. Sales grew by a healthy amount in spite of the higher prices. It doesn't mean they will raise prices but there is little to no reason for them to lower prices right now.

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @greenbacker said:
"Came here to read the comments from people upset that Lego is making alot of money, then those people continue to buy Lego from Lego. Lol."

Haha, same here. It's like people posting on social media how much they hate social media -- they're part of the thing they claim to despise. In this case, on a 'fan site' of the actual manufacturer, no less. I'm sure that if LEGO's management team is reading these comments, they're crying all the way to the bank. :'-)"

Curious! I am very intelligent.

@legoDad42 said:
" @560heliport
"That's from 2013 to 2015, for the dark red and reddish brown brittle issue, officially announced "fixed" in 2018. Never had that problem prior to 2013, and they have replaced all my worry-bricks without cost to me or complaint from them."
I've had some Dark Brown and Earth Green parts break, but the rate is less than for Dark Red and Reddish Brown."

Thx for the correction on the years.
That lines up to the only fragile parts I've EVER encountered with Lego. Specifically tiles, reddish brown and narrow plates reddish brown(1x etc.) I got off the PaB wall at my local Lego Store.
And only ONE set, a treehouse set, and it was only the 1x1 reddish brown tiles that broke.
No other colors before or since.
No other breaks, fragile before those years or since.
I was wondering with the guy I was responding too, what specific sets. He says he's encountering it all the time. I'm buying fairly regular and haven't had an issue with ANY sets parts."

7598, sold 2010-2011, 6x8 reddish-brown plate snapped like a graham cracker.

Good for them, hopefully good for their workforce too.
Hardly anything of that money is coming from me these days, but I am happy that they are well off without me.
;-)

@Crux said:
" @ResIpsaLoquitur said:
"Guys.

As much as we all love Lego, none of us *have* to buy Lego or even any particular Lego sets. You can walk at any time."

H-hey, man... are you a builder? You got any plates on you? Maybe just some 1x1s? I'll take ABS-crumbs, man! I'll even take brittle brown! Don't hold out on me, I'm jonesing for my next bricks!"

You say this in jest, but I would really like to get my paws on stocks of unmolded ABS granules from the pre-mixed color era, particularly in various earth, stone, and foliage pigments.

Remember how good the old vegetation looked that was made out of granules glued on the tree trunks?

There are many possibilities…

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @beyoda said:
"
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:

That's not how it works.

If you bought a set on sale, LEGO is still getting the same amount of money they would if you'd bought it for full price. A sale means the retailer you're buying it from is making a little less profit on a product. In fact, sales are often already calculated into the retail price to give retailers some leeway to mark down sets."

That’s fine - it’s more a comment on the fact that the prices have increased to the point that my buying patterns have shifted, buying fewer sets and not unless they’re at a reduced price. Apparently there are enough people for whom that’s not true that it doesn’t make a difference on the balance sheet."

Prices will always increase, as money gets less valuable over time. Unfortunately, wages don't always match inflation. Comparatively, though, LEGO hasn't gotten (much) more expensive over the years, when you take inflation into account -- which you always should.

In fact, comparatively LEGO was much more expensive in the '80s and '90s, but if people only take the old price tags at face value it certainly looks as if LEGO is much more expensive now.. However, that's a very deceptive narrative, but unfortunately a lot of people still don't fully seem to understand basic economics."
I definitely understand basic economics. I've even studied the subject.
Yet the fact is (at least over here) that LEGO price increases in the last five to ten years have overtaken the general inflation rate by a factor of about three! Meaning relative to the average price increases of goods LEGO has become far more expensive, and it shows. LEGO sets need massive price reductions over here in order to shift at all. People have startet to notice the discrepancy between price and quality as well as alternatives which have become very prominent here over the past few years.
I know many people who have bought countless LEGO sets in the past who haven't bought a single LEGO set in at least five years.

I myself have a hard time these days finding anything enticing in the product lineup, and the more overabundant the new set announcements get the less interest I have in buying any.

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
"LEGO has always been a 'premium' product and is priced accordingly, which leaves room for competitors in the lower price ranges. I have no personal experience with other brick brands than LEGO and Mega, but from what I hear and see it appears the quality nowadays is getting more on par with the A-brands, depending on the manufacturer and corresponding price tag.

What's considered 'fairly priced' will vary from consumer to consumer, but people have to realize that bigger brands simply have to charge more for their products because bigger companies employ more people and operate on a greater scale, all of which is part of the price of what they produce."
That last argument makes zero sense.
Because that would also mean that a VW or Toyota would have to be more expensive than a Ferrari or Porsche.
The opposite is true. The larger a company the more they produce and the fewer each product needs to cost in order for them to be profitable. Economies of scale.

As for the premium quality and the alternative brands, as far as LEGO is concerned they haven't been quality leader for a long time. Many of the alternatives now offer much higher quality regardless of the price.

LEGO's only advantage is that many people still know them as the only brick brand and that's their greatest asset, which is why they are fighting all these legal battles against alternative brands all across the globe. These legal cases often seem petty or insignificant on an isolated basis, but keeping the competitors away from the consumers is imperative for TLG's longterm survival. The moment people realise en masse how much better value for money they get elsewhere, LEGO is done for.

Seems like an exaggeration, but from personal experience I see exactly that effect.
A colleague of mine had been a LEGO fan for decades. Then like myself he got disenchanted by the LEGO Technic line, which is when I introduced him to products from CaDa. He hasn't bought a single LEGO set ever since.

It's like with electric vehicles. Not a single person I know who has switched to BEVs would ever consider going back to gasoline or Diesel powered vehicles.

Sometimes you just have to become enlightened.

@AustinPowers said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"LEGO has always been a 'premium' product and is priced accordingly, which leaves room for competitors in the lower price ranges. I have no personal experience with other brick brands than LEGO and Mega, but from what I hear and see it appears the quality nowadays is getting more on par with the A-brands, depending on the manufacturer and corresponding price tag.

What's considered 'fairly priced' will vary from consumer to consumer, but people have to realize that bigger brands simply have to charge more for their products because bigger companies employ more people and operate on a greater scale, all of which is part of the price of what they produce."
That last argument makes zero sense.
Because that would also mean that a VW or Toyota would have to be more expensive than a Ferrari or Porsche.
The opposite is true. The larger a company the more they produce and the fewer each product needs to cost in order for them to be profitable. Economies of scale.

As for the premium quality and the alternative brands, as far as LEGO is concerned they haven't been quality leader for a long time. Many of the alternatives now offer much higher quality regardless of the price.

LEGO's only advantage is that many people still know them as the only brick brand and that's their greatest asset, which is why they are fighting all these legal battles against alternative brands all across the globe. These legal cases often seem petty or insignificant on an isolated basis, but keeping the competitors away from the consumers is imperative for TLG's longterm survival. The moment people realise en masse how much better value for money they get elsewhere, LEGO is done for.

Seems like an exaggeration, but from personal experience I see exactly that effect.
A colleague of mine had been a LEGO fan for decades. Then like myself he got disenchanted by the LEGO Technic line, which is when I introduced him to products from CaDa. He hasn't bought a single LEGO set ever since.

It's like with electric vehicles. Not a single person I know who has switched to BEVs would ever consider going back to gasoline or Diesel powered vehicles.

Sometimes you just have to become enlightened. "

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/electric-fire-truck-burns-down-fire-station/

Not the specific story I was looking for, but much better.

@PurpleDave said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"LEGO has always been a 'premium' product and is priced accordingly, which leaves room for competitors in the lower price ranges. I have no personal experience with other brick brands than LEGO and Mega, but from what I hear and see it appears the quality nowadays is getting more on par with the A-brands, depending on the manufacturer and corresponding price tag.

What's considered 'fairly priced' will vary from consumer to consumer, but people have to realize that bigger brands simply have to charge more for their products because bigger companies employ more people and operate on a greater scale, all of which is part of the price of what they produce."
That last argument makes zero sense.
Because that would also mean that a VW or Toyota would have to be more expensive than a Ferrari or Porsche.
The opposite is true. The larger a company the more they produce and the fewer each product needs to cost in order for them to be profitable. Economies of scale.

As for the premium quality and the alternative brands, as far as LEGO is concerned they haven't been quality leader for a long time. Many of the alternatives now offer much higher quality regardless of the price.

LEGO's only advantage is that many people still know them as the only brick brand and that's their greatest asset, which is why they are fighting all these legal battles against alternative brands all across the globe. These legal cases often seem petty or insignificant on an isolated basis, but keeping the competitors away from the consumers is imperative for TLG's longterm survival. The moment people realise en masse how much better value for money they get elsewhere, LEGO is done for.

Seems like an exaggeration, but from personal experience I see exactly that effect.
A colleague of mine had been a LEGO fan for decades. Then like myself he got disenchanted by the LEGO Technic line, which is when I introduced him to products from CaDa. He hasn't bought a single LEGO set ever since.

It's like with electric vehicles. Not a single person I know who has switched to BEVs would ever consider going back to gasoline or Diesel powered vehicles.

Sometimes you just have to become enlightened. "

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/electric-fire-truck-burns-down-fire-station/

Not the specific story I was looking for, but much better."
Good thing gasoline powered vehicles never burn.
As a matter of fact, one of my greatest fears as a kid on holiday in England in the Eighties was getting caught in a coach fire, since going by news reports those were extremely common at the time, both for buses on public transport as well as long distance coaches. The images of all those burnt out bus wrecks are still in my mind to this day.

On the other end of the spectrum we have been driving BEVs for almond eight years now, and have seen countless neighbours, friends, colleagues etc. convert during that time, and not a single one has had their vehicle burn.

And as for the specific fire you mentioned, I just looked up the details and it turns out the vehicle where the fire originated wasn't even an electric fire truck. The fire was caused by batteries of electric equipment for firefighting purposes that was simply carried by the truck. The equipment appears to have been charging at the time, and a technical malfunction caused the fire which then spread quickly, partly due to the ironic fact that the fire station (which itself was brand new) didn't have fire detectors installed because those weren't mandatory.

@pazza_inter said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"In fact, comparatively LEGO was much more expensive in the '80s and '90s, but if people only take the old price tags at face value it certainly looks as if LEGO is much more expensive now.. However, that's a very deceptive narrative, but unfortunately a lot of people still don't fully seem to understand basic economics."

I got the unicorn... ehm... 6399 for Xmas '90. My father paid for it 200.000 LIT (Italian Lire), while he gained about 1.200.000 LIT per month as a cop. So he could buy 6 monorails, the most expensive set on the market at day, the non plus ultra...

Nowadays I absolutely can't buy 6 Deast Stars slice (the most expensive set TODAY), because I don't gain 6.000 € (i'm a teacher with 1600€ p/m)

so, something goes wrong..."

I'm not sure this is a fair comparison...

Yes, each of them were the most expensive new LEGO sets on the market at the time of their release, but back in 1990 LEGO didn't make 18+ sets, so there was a limit on what the retail price could be -- also because retailers had a limit set on price ranges. Nowadays, LEGO can sell these very expensive sets directly to consumers (although there might be retailers carrying the Death Star too, I'm not sure of that).

Also, there's inflation, which many people don't take into account when talking about prices of products from their childhoods. Adjusted for inflation, the monorail would now cost $350 (going by what's listed here on Brickset), while the Death Star is nearly trice that price. So, you can't compare the two.

The closest comparison we can make to 6399 Airport Shuttle (with its 767 pieces) is set 60337 Express Passenger Train, which has 3 less pieces, but comes in at $190. So, that's $160 less than the 1990 set when adjusted for inflation. This is just one example showing that LEGO has actually gotten cheaper compared to the 80s and 90s, but you can't just look at the price tags at face value.

So, with your teacher salary you can actually buy 10 Express Passenger Trains, which are €160 is the Euro zone. Either way, a great 'unicorn' to get for any Christmas. Lucky you!

@AustinPowers said:
"I definitely understand basic economics. I've even studied the subject.
Yet the fact is (at least over here) that LEGO price increases in the last five to ten years have overtaken the general inflation rate by a factor of about three! Meaning relative to the average price increases of goods LEGO has become far more expensive, and it shows. LEGO sets need massive price reductions over here in order to shift at all. People have startet to notice the discrepancy between price and quality as well as alternatives which have become very prominent here over the past few years.
I know many people who have bought countless LEGO sets in the past who haven't bought a single LEGO set in at least five years.

I myself have a hard time these days finding anything enticing in the product lineup, and the more overabundant the new set announcements get the less interest I have in buying any. "

I'd like to see the numbers you cite on LEGO price increases overtaking the general inflation rate, and how that's calculated. I've seen supermarket items (nearly) double in price, but I haven't seen many cases of LEGO sets with such a price hike.

It's obviously true that LEGO has been making more and more expensive sets (like silly Death Stars and whatnot), while also releasing a bunch of 'standard' licensed retail sets most people can agree on are massively overpriced, and as a result of which are quickly discounted. Some people have also been complaining about 'shrinkflation', but that hugely depends on the theme and price range. Many homegrown themes still manage to hit the coveted 10 cent per piece ratio, and often less, which I think is fair (not cheap, just fair).

With the costs of production going up (like basic materials and increasing wages in China), it makes sense getting less product for the same amount of money over time, or a (quite unfortunate) drop in quality. If it's both, that will be problematic in the long run. If that's the case, and it increasingly is, that creates room for competitors to bloom, which, in my opinion, is a very good thing. Once people start noticing these alternative brands and shift their spending habit towards products of those companies, LEGO has to be more competitive. For now, based on the numbers they're making, I don't think they're worrying about that too much.

I think it's fair to say though that fans like us are paying more attention to LEGO's product span than the average consumer, who might only buy a LEGO set once or twice a year. So, the quality drop will be more noticeable to us, just like the feeling of being overwhelmed by a massive amount of product that the typical AFOL or adult collector do not care for at all. But for every complaining AFOL on the internet there are an x-number of casual LEGO fans willing to buy sets for full price. I know the average Bricksetter balks at the very idea of buying sets for full price, but despite the fact that 'we' are the ones most obsessed with LEGO, 'we' are not the ones keeping TLG afloat, even if many seem to think 'we' are. What fans we are. ;-)

At the end of the day, facts about the actual numbers or the inflation rates aren't the things that will persuade people how to spend their money, but it's the sentiment of 'things getting more expensive', even if it is not (always) entirely true. I just compared two LEGO train sets one thread above (6399 Airport Shuttle from 1990 with 767 pieces and the current 60337 Express Passenger Train with 764 pieces), and it turns out that with inflation taken into account the older model would've cost nearly $200 more -- but the sentiment, with most people, will still be that everything was cheaper when they were young. At face value -- yes, it was. But that's not the full story. Nostalgia is like a Stockhom syndrome.

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @pazza_inter said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"In fact, comparatively LEGO was much more expensive in the '80s and '90s, but if people only take the old price tags at face value it certainly looks as if LEGO is much more expensive now.. However, that's a very deceptive narrative, but unfortunately a lot of people still don't fully seem to understand basic economics."

I got the unicorn... ehm... 6399 for Xmas '90. My father paid for it 200.000 LIT (Italian Lire), while he gained about 1.200.000 LIT per month as a cop. So he could buy 6 monorails, the most expensive set on the market at day, the non plus ultra...

Nowadays I absolutely can't buy 6 Deast Stars slice (the most expensive set TODAY), because I don't gain 6.000 € (i'm a teacher with 1600€ p/m)

so, something goes wrong..."

I'm not sure this is a fair comparison...

Yes, each of them were the most expensive new LEGO sets on the market at the time of their release, but back in 1990 LEGO didn't make 18+ sets, so there was a limit on what the retail price could be -- also because retailers had a limit set on price ranges. Nowadays, LEGO can sell these very expensive sets directly to consumers (although there might be retailers carrying the Death Star too, I'm not sure of that).

Also, there's inflation, which many people don't take into account when talking about prices of products from their childhoods. Adjusted for inflation, the monorail would now cost $350 (going by what's listed here on Brickset), while the Death Star is nearly trice that price. So, you can't compare the two.

The closest comparison we can make to 6399 Airport Shuttle (with its 767 pieces) is set 60337 Express Passenger Train, which has 3 less pieces, but comes in at $190. So, that's $160 less than the 1990 set when adjusted for inflation. This is just one example showing that LEGO has actually gotten cheaper compared to the 80s and 90s, but you can't just look at the price tags at face value.

So, with your teacher salary you can actually buy 10 Express Passenger Trains, which are €160 is the Euro zone. Either way, a great 'unicorn' to get for any Christmas. Lucky you!"

sorry, but you can't really compare that train (IMHO awfull: it's not the Metroliner!!!) with a myth, an unicorn...

and 350€ for a fully integrated mass transport, with 2 stations, tracks, a train motorized with 2 wagons, dozen of minifig, is a convenient value still today!

@ToysFromTheAttic : you are absolutely right that LEGO has never been cheap. Not now and not in my childhood.
It also doesn't matter that back then 500 pieces meant a gigantic set, often with up to two baseplates, sizeable buildings, several vehicles and a handful of minifigs. Better colour consistency than today was also a given, as were B-models (including printed instructions) for most Technic sets.
No matter.

Some people will definitely prefer today's sets with their higher level of detail due to an enormous amount of tiny 1x1 pieces. Others might prefer the older style, and the majority today won't even know it was ever completely different.

My point was that compared other goods, like stuff people buy for daily consumption (bread, milk, butter, beer, beverages, fruit and vegetables, sweets, or washing detergent to name but a few everyday items), LEGO has increased in price x-fold.
The average inflation rate is calculated (at least over here) on a specific mix of items that partly reflect what people actually buy and partly stuff that hardly anyone buys, at least not on a regular basis. Which leads to skewed results when using the average inflation rate as a comparison.
While something like milk or beer today costs only about ten percent more than ten years ago, some fruit and vegetables have risen in price far more, and certain types of bakery items have tripled or even quadrupled in price over the same period.

LEGO has risen sharply in price in several ways. First, direct price increases,like can be seen for example on Speed Champions sets.
Second, by shrinkflation, meaning more pieces but less weight and/or volume of material. Or simply fewer pieces for the same amount of money.
Third, by lower quality, like worse colour consistency, worse tech (like can be seen on Technic sets - no more remotes, worse compatability and usability out of the box) or more stickers instead of prints, or fewer minifigs with worse print quality.

In the end it will only get better once the alternatives get more traction and exposure - which LEGO is fighting countless legal battles to keep from happening.

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
"With the costs of production going up (like basic materials and increasing wages in China), it…"

And wages at the retail end of things, utilities, transportation, rent/property taxes, etc., etc., etc.

"…but the sentiment, with most people, will still be that everything was cheaper when they were young. At face value -- yes, it was. But that's not the full story. Nostalgia is like a Stockhom syndrome."

I’m pretty sure that, when I was a kid, everything was free. At least, I don’t remember ever having to spend money on LEGO sets. They just magically appeared under the Christmas tree, or on my birthday.

@AustinPowers said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic : you are absolutely right that LEGO has never been cheap. Not now and not in my childhood.
It also doesn't matter that back then 500 pieces meant a gigantic set, often with up to two baseplates, sizeable buildings, several vehicles and a handful of minifigs. Better colour consistency than today was also a given, as were B-models (including printed instructions) for most Technic sets.
No matter.

Some people will definitely prefer today's sets with their higher level of detail due to an enormous amount of tiny 1x1 pieces. Others might prefer the older style, and the majority today won't even know it was ever completely different.

My point was that compared other goods, like stuff people buy for daily consumption (bread, milk, butter, beer, beverages, fruit and vegetables, sweets, or washing detergent to name but a few everyday items), LEGO has increased in price x-fold.
The average inflation rate is calculated (at least over here) on a specific mix of items that partly reflect what people actually buy and partly stuff that hardly anyone buys, at least not on a regular basis. Which leads to skewed results when using the average inflation rate as a comparison.
While something like milk or beer today costs only about ten percent more than ten years ago, some fruit and vegetables have risen in price far more, and certain types of bakery items have tripled or even quadrupled in price over the same period.

LEGO has risen sharply in price in several ways. First, direct price increases,like can be seen for example on Speed Champions sets.
Second, by shrinkflation, meaning more pieces but less weight and/or volume of material. Or simply fewer pieces for the same amount of money.
Third, by lower quality, like worse colour consistency, worse tech (like can be seen on Technic sets - no more remotes, worse compatability and usability out of the box) or more stickers instead of prints, or fewer minifigs with worse print quality.

In the end it will only get better once the alternatives get more traction and exposure - which LEGO is fighting countless legal battles to keep from happening. "

I can clearly remember when in 2022 almost all the sets' prices were raised about the 25% (but few sets up to 40%!!!) in August, but anoter small raise were in the same January
so Speed Champions from 20 to 25 (and now are 28€!) and old sets too, like Assembly Square, passed from 240 to 260 to 300€, or the Pirate Ship, passed from 100 to 130 in few months...
while in 2021 you can afford a big modular building on 1,5 baseplate for 240€, today this is the price for a normal single-baseplate modular (from 160€ in 2021...)!!!

Instead from 2022 to day, the real inflation is just 10,6% (in Italy)...

@pazza_inter said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic : you are absolutely right that LEGO has never been cheap. Not now and not in my childhood.
It also doesn't matter that back then 500 pieces meant a gigantic set, often with up to two baseplates, sizeable buildings, several vehicles and a handful of minifigs. Better colour consistency than today was also a given, as were B-models (including printed instructions) for most Technic sets.
No matter.

Some people will definitely prefer today's sets with their higher level of detail due to an enormous amount of tiny 1x1 pieces. Others might prefer the older style, and the majority today won't even know it was ever completely different.

My point was that compared other goods, like stuff people buy for daily consumption (bread, milk, butter, beer, beverages, fruit and vegetables, sweets, or washing detergent to name but a few everyday items), LEGO has increased in price x-fold.
The average inflation rate is calculated (at least over here) on a specific mix of items that partly reflect what people actually buy and partly stuff that hardly anyone buys, at least not on a regular basis. Which leads to skewed results when using the average inflation rate as a comparison.
While something like milk or beer today costs only about ten percent more than ten years ago, some fruit and vegetables have risen in price far more, and certain types of bakery items have tripled or even quadrupled in price over the same period.

LEGO has risen sharply in price in several ways. First, direct price increases,like can be seen for example on Speed Champions sets.
Second, by shrinkflation, meaning more pieces but less weight and/or volume of material. Or simply fewer pieces for the same amount of money.
Third, by lower quality, like worse colour consistency, worse tech (like can be seen on Technic sets - no more remotes, worse compatability and usability out of the box) or more stickers instead of prints, or fewer minifigs with worse print quality.

In the end it will only get better once the alternatives get more traction and exposure - which LEGO is fighting countless legal battles to keep from happening. "

I can clearly remember when in 2022 almost all the sets' prices were raised about the 25% (but few sets up to 40%!!!) in August, but anoter small raise were in the same January
so Speed Champions from 20 to 25 (and now are 28€!) and old sets too, like Assembly Square, passed from 240 to 260 to 300€, or the Pirate Ship, passed from 100 to 130 in few months...
while in 2021 you can afford a big modular building on 1,5 baseplate for 240€, today this is the price for a normal single-baseplate modular (from 160€ in 2021...)!!!

Instead from 2022 to day, the real inflation is just 10,6% (in Italy)... "
My point exactly.

@pazza_inter said:
"I can clearly remember when in 2022 almost all the sets' prices were raised about the 25% (but few sets up to 40%!!!) in August, but anoter small raise were in the same January
so Speed Champions from 20 to 25 (and now are 28€!) and old sets too, like Assembly Square, passed from 240 to 260 to 300€, or the Pirate Ship, passed from 100 to 130 in few months...
while in 2021 you can afford a big modular building on 1,5 baseplate for 240€, today this is the price for a normal single-baseplate modular (from 160€ in 2021...)!!!

Instead from 2022 to day, the real inflation is just 10,6% (in Italy)... "

I remember a massive price adjustment taking place in 2022, but that’s the only time I remember sets that were already past street date getting higher MSRP. Anything after that was just applied to future releases, with current releases remaining unchanged. They’re not quite the same thing. And Italy’s inflation rate doesn’t tell the full story. The company is based in Denmark, so that’s where all the accounting needs to be sorted out. Parts are made in Denmark, Hungary, Czech Republic, Mexico, US, China, Vietnam(?), and maybe one other country, so that’s where manufacturing costs are going to factor in the heaviest. The US is the largest single market, and the home of their largest retail partners, so they have a thumb on the scale when it comes to determining MSRP. And Italy is part of the EU, where they once promised to keep MSRP flat across the board…even though they haven’t managed to do so.

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @beyoda said:
"I don’t think I’ve bought a full-priced set since 2024. I guess this means they’ve got enough new people buying sets that it makes up for me and other long-time fans scaling back significantly. Makes me sad, though."

That's not how it works.

If you bought a set on sale, LEGO is still getting the same amount of money they would if you'd bought it for full price. A sale means the retailer you're buying it from is making a little less profit on a product. In fact, sales are often already calculated into the retail price to give retailers some leeway to mark down sets. It would only really affect LEGO if people wouldn't buy sets at all, but the numbers show that's clearly not happening."

That doesn't make sense.
If you buy from retailer for 0,7x or 0,6x (where x is full price) DOESN'T matter for Lego because they sell it to reailer for (for example) 0,4x and earn the same.
But if you buy from Lego for full price (X) they earn more.

@Briczk said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @beyoda said:
"I don’t think I’ve bought a full-priced set since 2024. I guess this means they’ve got enough new people buying sets that it makes up for me and other long-time fans scaling back significantly. Makes me sad, though."

That's not how it works.

If you bought a set on sale, LEGO is still getting the same amount of money they would if you'd bought it for full price. A sale means the retailer you're buying it from is making a little less profit on a product. In fact, sales are often already calculated into the retail price to give retailers some leeway to mark down sets. It would only really affect LEGO if people wouldn't buy sets at all, but the numbers show that's clearly not happening."

That doesn't make sense.
If you buy from retailer for 0,7x or 0,6x (where x is full price) DOESN'T matter for Lego because they sell it to reailer for (for example) 0,4x and earn the same.
But if you buy from Lego for full price (X) they earn more. "

When they sell a batch of sets to a retailer, they get paid up front. If the retailer decides to mark the sets down, that doesn’t change what they paid TLG for them, so the reduction comes out of the retailer’s profit margin. That’s what @ToysFromTheAttic was saying.

How direct sales factors in is a different matter. Yes, they get to keep more of the money, but they also have to pay for all the overhead that makes that possible. Normally, those costs are covered by their retail partners, but LEGO Brand Retail is effectively both themselves and their retail partner. Exactly how much more they make on direct sales is not something I expect they’ve ever published publicly, but it has to be generating some additional profit or it wouldn’t be worth the effort to manage direct sales.

@PurpleDave said:
"I’m pretty sure that, when I was a kid, everything was free. At least, I don’t remember ever having to spend money on LEGO sets. They just magically appeared under the Christmas tree, or on my birthday."

LOL. Despite being a joke, I think there's actually a lot of truth in this, in that people have no idea what the cost of living was when they were kids. I'm sure that when we were growing up, our parents already had a sense of things being more expensive than back when they were young. It's one of those universal sentiments, because in our minds certain things have certain prices, based on what we know, but once that price tag goes up, people hardly ever think of the economics behind it, rather than 'greed', 'shrinkflation', or 'things used to be better'. Not saying none of these things are true, but it's only a small part of the story.

@Briczk said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"That's not how it works.

If you bought a set on sale, LEGO is still getting the same amount of money they would if you'd bought it for full price. A sale means the retailer you're buying it from is making a little less profit on a product. In fact, sales are often already calculated into the retail price to give retailers some leeway to mark down sets. It would only really affect LEGO if people wouldn't buy sets at all, but the numbers show that's clearly not happening."

That doesn't make sense.
If you buy from retailer for 0,7x or 0,6x (where x is full price) DOESN'T matter for Lego because they sell it to reailer for (for example) 0,4x and earn the same.
But if you buy from Lego for full price (X) they earn more. "

Of course, LEGO earns more from a set when you buy it directly from them, but the extra margin on those sets goes to things like store rent and wages of their staff. But otherwise we're saying the exact same thing.

@pazza_inter said:
"sorry, but you can't really compare that train (IMHO awfull: it's not the Metroliner!!!) with a myth, an unicorn...

and 350€ for a fully integrated mass transport, with 2 stations, tracks, a train motorized with 2 wagons, dozen of minifig, is a convenient value still today!"

I can and I did. ;-)

While I realize that to many people in a certain age bracket (let's be fair here) the monorail is one of those holy grails of LEGO, I'm not comparing the two based on quality, aesthetics, charm, or playability, but purely on what a 'comparable' train set would've cost then versus today. I know it's not an exact parallel, with the 1990 set indeed being motorized and having a lot more minifigs, but is all of that worth an additional $200? If it is, it shows that LEGO prices really are on par with what people paid back in the 80s and 90s -- in other words, it always was expensive.

@pazza_inter said:
"I can clearly remember when in 2022 almost all the sets' prices were raised about the 25% (but few sets up to 40%!!!) in August, but anoter small raise were in the same January
so Speed Champions from 20 to 25 (and now are 28€!) and old sets too, like Assembly Square, passed from 240 to 260 to 300€, or the Pirate Ship, passed from 100 to 130 in few months...
while in 2021 you can afford a big modular building on 1,5 baseplate for 240€, today this is the price for a normal single-baseplate modular (from 160€ in 2021...)!!!

Instead from 2022 to day, the real inflation is just 10,6% (in Italy)... "

I remember this too, but I also remember the pandemic that preceded this and the invasion of Ukraine, all of which affected prices everywhere. At some point, as a company, you have to pass the extra costs onto your customers. I realize this comes of as greedy, especially with TLG raking in money by the billions, but this was a once in a generation (or lifetime even) price hike for a selection of sets meant as a course correction for the rising prices of basic materials, wages, transport, etc. I'm sure LEGO wasn't happy about it either, but they also don't like losing money on sets.

@AustinPowers said:
"LEGO has risen sharply in price in several ways. First, direct price increases,like can be seen for example on Speed Champions sets.
Second, by shrinkflation, meaning more pieces but less weight and/or volume of material. Or simply fewer pieces for the same amount of money.
Third, by lower quality, like worse colour consistency, worse tech (like can be seen on Technic sets - no more remotes, worse compatability and usability out of the box) or more stickers instead of prints, or fewer minifigs with worse print quality.

In the end it will only get better once the alternatives get more traction and exposure - which LEGO is fighting countless legal battles to keep from happening. "

We're saying the same thing, but we also have to understand why these things are happening. Yes, LEGO was always expensive, as we've established, but has it gotten significantly more expensive compared to the (g)olden days when inflation is taken into account? No, definitely not, although price hikes were certainly bigger in the last half a decade. Then again, considering the world we're living in, that also shouldn't be much of a surprise.

The quality issue has been addressed too, but I think this isn't so much a price-gouging thing. It probably has to do with scaled-up production due to the increasing number of sets. This is me speculating, so take it with a grain of salt, but I can't imagine the number of annually released sets are going up by the hundreds per year because new LEGO factories keep popping up. That's not happening. LEGO probably has to resort to some other factories to keep up with demand, which may not be up to par to LEGO's (formerly) high standards, or they have to crank out more amount of stuff in the same facilities, meaning fast turnarounds and thus lower quality control. I'm not defending them for doing this, but it would at least explain why we see this happening.

LEGO can have all the court battles they want, and they will, but as long as competitors know what they can and what they can't copy (as LEGO themselves has done in the past) those products will go to market -- or at least as long as they have enough resources to fight LEGO in court. At the end of the day, it's up to the consumer. Despite everybody here complaining about LEGO products and their prices, I'm also sure we'd all be sad to see the company go under, or venture into other products.

(That last thing might sound odd now, but try buying a new CD player, for instance, from some of the most trusted and beloved electronica brands of two or three decades ago -- Spoiler alert: most of them don't make those products anymore!)

@ToysFromTheAttic: completely agree.

The hypothesis about LEGO outsourcing part of their production capacity is interesting. On the one hand it sounds plausible, on the other hand I can't imagine them being willing to do so, particularly for the risk of product information getting into the wrong hands, plus for logistical reasons.

As for the last point, I guess that's simply a supply and demand issue. Since very few people still buy physical media, those companies just don't see the point in producing the players anymore.
Then again, there appears to be a resurgence of physical media, at least in the enthusiast market, particularly since more people notice that digital purchases don't mean ownership. See the recent Sony PSN debacle.

@AustinPowers
Yes, supply and demand, but that was what I was suggesting with LEGO too: if the demand drops below a certain point because of competition getting too big and resulting in way less profit, or even losses, a big company like LEGO will eventually pivot to other markets. To some degree we've already been seeing this trend for decades. Sure, LEGO still makes little plastic bricks, but they've largely abandoned the themes most of us grew up with, because other things sell better. Now and then they'll throw old fans like us a nostalgia bone for us to gush over (or hate), but the demand for those type of sets at retail simply isn't big enough for them to keep afloat.

LEGO's main appeal, beyond simple nostalgia, is that is has this wide variety of licenses that appeal to multiple demographics (like it or not), and they pretty much had a monopoly on brick-based construction toys for decades. But in the last few years we're seeing competitively-priced alternatives from other brands, often with licensed themes as well. I don't think anyone of these could ever topple LEGO, because the brand recognition simply isn't there -- especially with LEGO's main competitor changing its name every five years or so. Then again, I thought the same thing about Sony and Philips years ago when it comes to audio and TV, but they're almost completely gone from that territory because the market has shifted, so it was no longer profitable (enough) for them. It could happen to any brand.

As for the physical media resurgence -- it's not as big as some media outlets make it out to be. Percentage-wise these increases seem massive, but they're only a drop in the bucket for the entertainment industry as a whole. I saw some numbers from a report just yesterday, which stated CD sales have overtaken vinyl sales in the US in the first half of 2026, while revenue from vinyl also appears to have risen. Seems impressive at first, but then the same report also mentioned that this surge was largely driven by lovers of K-pop, of which less than half even own CD players -- so definitely not 'enthusiasts', but rather fans that want to own something physical of their favourite artist. They still listen to the music on Spotify.

The PSP thing certainly caused a lot of commotion, but if anyone of those commenters had been paying attention to the entertainment or tech industries at large, they should've seen this coming years ago. The CD/DVD/Blue-Ray drive in the PSP was a value proposition while physical media was still popular, but that's no longer the case, so they got rid of it. Interestingly, Xbox announced they were offering digital copies of game discs that people could add to their libraries, which seemed like a direct strike towards Sony, but in actuality Microsoft is likely planning to do the same thing, but they're just smarter in their delivery by first offering something that 'ensures' value to people who've bought physical games -- before killing it off as well.

@ToysFromTheAttic said:
"I remember this too, but I also remember the pandemic that preceded this and the invasion of Ukraine, all of which affected prices everywhere. At some point, as a company, you have to pass the extra costs onto your customers."

First rule of business is the customer pays for everything, or the company goes bankrupt.

"I realize this comes of as greedy, especially with TLG raking in money by the billions, but this was a once in a generation (or lifetime even) price hike for a selection of sets meant as a course correction for the rising prices of basic materials, wages, transport, etc. I'm sure LEGO wasn't happy about it either, but they also don't like losing money on sets."

We learned during that incident that TLG prices their sets according to projected inflation over the lifetime of the set. This does, ironically, mean you are way overpaying if you buy on day of release, because you’re paying for the next year (or several) of inflation that hasn’t happened yet, while last day buyers have seen their purchasing power grow over the lifetime of the same set.

"LEGO probably has to resort to some other factories to keep up with demand, which may not be up to par to LEGO's (formerly) high standards, or they have to crank out more amount of stuff in the same facilities, meaning fast turnarounds and thus lower quality control."

They do outsource some things, but all I’ve heard of is stuff that doesn’t fall within their realm of expertise. So baseplates are vacuformed, not injection molded, and those were outsourced. Electronics are another thing they’re known to outsource. But, probably to comply with various laws and regulations, they list the country of origin for included parts on every set box/bag, and those don’t change much. If they are outsourcing basic brick production, they’re sticking to the same countries where their own factories are located. More likely, what they’re do is the same thing they did when Bionicle created a surge in demand back in 2001, which is just install another production line in an existing factory.

This year I've bought the orange CMF series... and that's been it so far. Dreamzzz starts at 50,- now. City mostly doesn't interest me and the only set that does is 60,-. Nothing from Ninjago I really wanted to get (I'm sick of every wave being the same). Nothing from Friends (usually I don't like the current colors). Nothing from Creator. And especially nothing from licenses I don't care for. Which happens to be all of them if you remove 300+ sets.

I like playsets, as I have always done. I'm not really a display guy. I like fantasy stuff and soft sci-fi. So I've been focussing on collecting Elves, the occasional Fantasy Era Castle set, Aquazone subs. The occasional wave 1 Dreamzzz set I missed. I also went for Paradisa sets. I like the relaxing summer leisure sets. Oh, and some bionicle sets.

Thus, I've bought second hand retired sets. A lot actually.

Here's the weird thing:

As Lego ALSO owns Bricklink they still made a profit off of me. It feels quite... idk, a conflict of interest? The aftermarket is getting more and more expensive too. Although I mainly try to avoid using Bricklink, it just so happens to be the best service right now next to maybe Brickowl. I often use a local online marketplace but I often need to order missing parts because the sellers aren't experts. So, I still end up on Bricklink.
Right now they can't lose as long as people buy lego.

I wonder if they deliberately do things to drive up aftermarket demand too. Castle sets are crazy expensive right now. Yet, occasionally you find a regular person selling them for good prices outside of Bricklink because it's just a toy, right? (That was the only way I could buy FE Castle sets, and they still took a huge chunk of budget each time, mind you).

I'n glad Lego isn't going anywhere, but I just hope next year there's something affordable I like again.

And yes, it's my own choice to buy as I do. But in my case I almost don't even buy from Lego at all.

@Binnekamp:
If I’m remembering the DKK-USD exchange rate correctly at ~5:1, that means they raked in about $8 billion-with-a-“B” last half-year. Pretty sure the main benefit they get from owning Bricklink is being able to control what gets sold there, more than the revenue it generates.

Sounds like they have plenty of money to start taking some risks, perhaps on, I don't know, some new original adventure themes? Perhaps some Castle or Space? No? Just more giant expensive dust-collecting statues for adult collectors?

@Binnekamp said:"Yet, occasionally you find a regular person selling them for good prices outside of Bricklink because it's just a toy, right?"

Of course, occasionally, you find someone who heard that aftermarket Lego is really valuable, and asks for *way* more than their stuff is worth.

@TheOtherMike said:
" @Binnekamp said:"Yet, occasionally you find a regular person selling them for good prices outside of Bricklink because it's just a toy, right?"

Of course, occasionally, you find someone who heard that aftermarket Lego is really valuable, and asks for *way* more than their stuff is worth."

More often than not :(

I of course never buy off those people, but when it's something rare it's really patience testing. I guess I'll wait years for anyone else to put it for sale....

What??

Will someone PLEASE, tell me again how all this works?

@TheOtherMike said:
" @stefwaffles said:
"But I do worry about the quality of modern bricks. I saw my first cracked brick in 2009 and it was a rarity. Now I see them all the time. Are recycled plastic bricks possibly just not as strong?"

Do you mean it was cracked straight out of the package, or that it cracked as you were assembling the set for the first time, or something else?"

Sorry, I missed this reply! So the first time I experienced it, I was building the original medieval market village, and I had several 1x bricks develop hairline cracks on their first use.

The most memorable time recently, I bought three of the 3 in 1 noodle shop creator set to moc with, and a whole bunch of the light nougat 1x1 and 1x2 bricks got the same hairline cracks during assembly. I tried to tell Lego CS as I thought they could investigate it, but then they just sent out replacements with no comment.

I’ve also seen random 1x bricks with the same issue from bulk lots of modern parts. Either I’m unlucky, or people just haven’t noticed this yet. But I have 50 year old 1x bricks that are still fine, so something has changed.