Introducing StockX

I kinda wanna out my white metal krana kal on there and see what it goes for.

I came here to see an immature"StockX? more like *Stonks*" joke in the comment section, none was to be found :(

@blogzilly said:
"“ While counterfeiting is not a major issue in the LEGO world at the moment”

I’m honestly not trying to be a wise-ass here. I was under the impression that it’s a continual problem. I see knock-off product everywhere. Is that something altogether different?"
Yes. Bootleg products such as Lepin’s infringe LEGO’s IP and parasitically piggyback off of LEGO’s investment and expertise, but apart from some less-informed buyers, don’t fool or set out to trick most consumers. Connoisseurs such as LEGO collectors aren’t deceived by the knock-off brands.

So is this site legit? For instance the ISD is selling for $581 vs $700 on Lego.com so thats a 17% savings from the original price. If that is factory sealed then its a great deal, but if that is a used box, how does one know? I'm not sure yet about this site.

A friend of mine uses it for designer stuff and sneakers. It’s mostly for jackin’ up prices if you ask me. Lego-wise i think resellers could benefit because stuff on stockx brings some hype to those products what drives up the price.
My friend tells me that the younger generations use it. That’s all i know because i am old x-D

No thanks.

@Zander said:
"I can see StockX’s authentication system working for sealed sets, opened sets with factory sealed baggies or high-ticket collectibles such as Mr Gold. But for large numbers of loose parts, I don’t see this as a viable alternative to BrickLink or Brick Owl. The resource and expertise required of StockX would be too great."

They never claimed to offer large numbers of loose parts so I don't see how that's relevant.

Thanks for this Brickset.

Considering the amount of LEGO items showing a highest offer price 15-20% greater than what I can purchase them for in numerous other places and the company's inability (either through lack of knowledge, or choice) to identify and remove OBVIOUS seller price manipulation...
No thanks.

@fakespacesquid said:
" @Zander said:
"I can see StockX’s authentication system working for sealed sets, opened sets with factory sealed baggies or high-ticket collectibles such as Mr Gold. But for large numbers of loose parts, I don’t see this as a viable alternative to BrickLink or Brick Owl. The resource and expertise required of StockX would be too great."

They never claimed to offer large numbers of loose parts so I don't see how that's relevant. "

As far as I can tell, it doesn’t say it won’t. As long as the parts are new and unused, they would seem to fall within StockX’s ambit. It expresses a preference for items in their original packaging but that doesn’t apply to everything. For rare trading cards that can only be identified by removing them from their opaque packets for example, packaging would not seem to prevent them from being sold through StockX. And in the case of LEGO, you can get new parts through BAMs, PABs or Bricks and Pieces with the parts never having had any sealed packaging. So in theory, five thousand new 1 x 1 LEGO plates are in scope. Best of luck to StockX authenticating those parts in a credible and cost effective way!

@CCC said:
"I wonder how they authenticate sealed sets. There are ways of opening boxes and resealing them without it being obvious. "
I don't think they are any more proficient in "authenticating" sets than many long term Brickset users.
I'd go so far as to question the validity of their claims outright. To me this whole "service" seems to be just a quick and easy way to make money out of the increasing popularity of older LEGO sets, especially among people who apparently have way too much money on their hands and far too little experience in how to spend it wisely. I am often amazed at how such people came to such riches in the first place.
Then again, seeing what some hyped but basically useless stuff many people nowadays are willing to spend large amounts of money on, always leaves me gobsmacked. Go figure.

I heard many many bad stories about StockX regarding sneakers so I prefer to stay away from using them.

@AustinPowers said:
"Sorry to say, but I think this is totally daft when it comes to LEGO.

We are talking kids' toys here!

I can see services like this being sensible for something like art or other material that is very valuable, but when it comes to LEGO, something like this merely blows the importance of the brand out of proportion.
I have never had any issues with buying sets on Bricklink or ebay. If the images aren't clear enough, ask the seller for better ones. If he doesn't want to supply them, don't buy from him. To find a good and reliable seller is not rocket science.

Don't make LEGO stuff seem deserving of such a kind of treatment. It's not as if you need an expert to tell the difference between LEGO and Lepin (and the like). "

It is valuable. If people are willing to pay this much for sets, then the sets are valuable. Plus, many of these kids toys are now antiques in their own right. LEGO bricks were introduced over 60 years ago, and the minifigures just over 40 years ago. With age, in this case, comes scarcity, and with scarcity value.

This is awesome, we use stockx all the time for our kids.

@StereoBricks said:
"Gotta say, disappointed in the Brickset folks for this. In theory, yeah this kinda things sounds nice, but in reality this place is just a scalper haven.

For example, just a quick browse shows somebody selling 40460 for over DOUBLE the MSRP. A set that sells out almost immediately every time it comes in stock, just so scalpers can resell for a massive profit. I just want to buy that set so my wife can add it to her Bouquet set. But nope, guess we're cool with scalpers here now.

This affiliation and support does nothing positive for the Lego community."

I guess that also rules out eBay and Amazon and Bricklink and Brickowl, because all of those often (maybe more often than not) have sellers with items above the MSRP.

@8lackmagic, I’m genuinely curious how the bots get around limits per customer, not because I want to do the same, but because I’m surprised it’s possible. Do scalpers have dozens of addresses to which to send goods to, each with their dedicated credit cards? How do they manage that?

@LeeGoPieces said:
"Unfortunately I think you could be right. I've seen this go down in the Pokemon TCG community, where brand-new products are immediately bought out by resellers to sell on sites like StockX for double RRP or even more. I do worry that the same atmosphere is very possible with LEGO.

There's certainly nothing wrong with selling old retired products for higher than RRP --- that makes sense as they aren't in print anymore. The issue happens when people start buying out brand new products to immediately flip, which is what's happened with Pokemon. Hopefully LEGO produces enough of each product that any potential scalping issue won't become so bad, but I do worry that Direct to Consumer sets could be targetted at some point."

From what I can gather it's quite a different ballgame for Sneakers. For these tactics to really be effective, there needs to be some scarcity to begin with. Sneaker manufacturers play into this very well by offering al sorts of 'limited edition' shoes and while the don't offiially condone scalping, they do benefit heavily from the publicity.

Pokemon I don't quite get. There is definitely scarcity for earlier edition cards, later editions just follow regular print runs; as long as you're willing to wait a few weeks/months you should be fine. Of course this isn't to say that promotional items like the 25th anniversary McDonalds release won't do weird things, but even in that case Nintendo just announced that they'll print more.

Seeing as Lego a) has a very limited amount of 'limited edition' product (partly due to the nature of the product) and b) doesn't have a set time schedule wherein you need to by the product to stay competitive in tournaments, and c) the product takes up a heck of a lot of space, I think the margins for scalping is a lot slimmer. Of course there is always a potential if people NEED to have the set day one.

But let's be fair; the amount of scalping done has NOTHING to do with StockX or the service they provide; it's a balance between how much stock Lego creates prior to a release, and the capital and risk appetite of potential scalpers.

@Zander said:
" @8lackmagic, I’m genuinely curious how the bots get around limits per customer, not because I want to do the same, but because I’m surprised it’s possible. Do scalpers have dozens of addresses to which to send goods to, each with their dedicated credit cards? How do they manage that?"

I too am curious about how they do it, but the evidence suggests that they can. Take the PlayStation 5, many online retailers were limiting sales to just 1 unit, yet "Game" had to manually check through all PS5 orders to identify which ones were part of the scalping group, which again indicates that they are able to circumnavigate the websites' restrictions. It's limited release items that worry me the most, in particular anything from the Ideas range, where the product lifecycle is likely to be measured in months rather then years.

@dutchbrickdad said:
" @LeeGoPieces said:
"Unfortunately I think you could be right. I've seen this go down in the Pokemon TCG community, where brand-new products are immediately bought out by resellers to sell on sites like StockX for double RRP or even more. I do worry that the same atmosphere is very possible with LEGO.

There's certainly nothing wrong with selling old retired products for higher than RRP --- that makes sense as they aren't in print anymore. The issue happens when people start buying out brand new products to immediately flip, which is what's happened with Pokemon. Hopefully LEGO produces enough of each product that any potential scalping issue won't become so bad, but I do worry that Direct to Consumer sets could be targetted at some point."

From what I can gather it's quite a different ballgame for Sneakers. For these tactics to really be effective, there needs to be some scarcity to begin with. Sneaker manufacturers play into this very well by offering al sorts of 'limited edition' shoes and while the don't offiially condone scalping, they do benefit heavily from the publicity.

Pokemon I don't quite get. There is definitely scarcity for earlier edition cards, later editions just follow regular print runs; as long as you're willing to wait a few weeks/months you should be fine. Of course this isn't to say that promotional items like the 25th anniversary McDonalds release won't do weird things, but even in that case Nintendo just announced that they'll print more.

Seeing as Lego a) has a very limited amount of 'limited edition' product (partly due to the nature of the product) and b) doesn't have a set time schedule wherein you need to by the product to stay competitive in tournaments, and c) the product takes up a heck of a lot of space, I think the margins for scalping is a lot slimmer. Of course there is always a potential if people NEED to have the set day one.

But let's be fair; the amount of scalping done has NOTHING to do with StockX or the service they provide; it's a balance between how much stock Lego creates prior to a release, and the capital and risk appetite of potential scalpers. "

Yeah, that's definitely a key difference and the hope I'm holding onto: LEGO product supply seems higher than shoes or Pokemon cards, and therefore hopefully the supply-and-demand issue won't get to the point where there will be a situation for scalpers to take advantage of.

With Pokemon cards, currently Covid has meant that supply isn't as high as before, which has been a perfect storm because of coinciding with card openings getting big online and such. As a result scalpers jumped onto it and are taking advantage of things to inflate the prices of brand new products. So people are unable to order new cards when they come out (due often to bots mass-buying) and unfortunately some people are so desperate for the new products that they pay the scalpers exorbitant prices for them. It's a shame, I guess it's a similar thing that's happened with PlayStation and Xbox.

I agree though, hopefully LEGO mass-produces to the extent that this wouldn't be possible with LEGO. And if it does happen, if nobody buys from scalpers they won't be encouraged to continue.

@Yorick:
I kinda want to hang on to mine, along with the rest of my "only known complete set in the wild" Krana collection. But I'd love to pick up a few more chrome Krana Kal, so I have enough for six Bohrok Kal.

@meesajarjar72:
I tried looking for a set on eBay recently, and couldn't find a single listing that wasn't obviously counterfeit. Maybe not for new sets, but for vintage sets I could see this being successful. Ironically, most of the missteps Bricklink has taken in the last decade have been tied to their attempt to compete with Amazon for one-time buyers of retired sets. This site could beat them at their own game, in that regard.

@dutchbrickdad:
Yeah, if someone is trying to buy a set years after it has retired, what do they expect? Do they think someone is going to just buy a bunch of copies to sit on and resell for cost ten years down the road? This is part of the reason Bricklink doesn't include MSRP for sets like Brickset does.

@Zander:
Joe Public might not be able to identify the difference from a listing on Amazon or eBay. The only reliable means I've found is to just assume that if the price looks tempting, it's probably fake as a $3 bill.

@AustinPowers:
By the time you get your hands on the physical item, it may be too late. The best you can hope for would be a refund of your money, and I've read a few stories from people saying they got stiffed on the refund because the seller proved that they sent "something", and even their own bank wouldn't go to bat for them and issue a chargeback. Heck, even this isn't proof positive against that. I bought five copies of Weathertop on clearance, and when I opened them I found that someone had gotten into one copy (_without_ tampering with the seals), stolen the bag with the Ringwraiths and their horses, plus all the minifig parts out of the other three bags, and sealed the whole thing back up so you couldn't tell anyone had done anything except by comparing the weights against each other.

@8lackmagic:
Quantity limits are now lifetime as opposed to per order. This means every time the Bonsai comes into stock, they'd have to have new accounts set up to place enough orders to clean up all the stock, and the next time the Bonsai comes into stock, they'd need a new set of new accounts set up. If you order them again, they'll just cancel your order. If they think you're using LEGO.com to obtain sets just to flip them, they'll ban you from buying anything. Are there ways to get around this? Sure, but they might not be worth the effort if they start flagging your credit cards, addresses, and any other means they can use to identify who's making the purchase.

@LeeGoPieces:
A year ago, this would have still been easy even on LEGO.com. If there's a limit of three, you just place orders for three copies at a time until the set sells out. This was allowed. I've actually done it a couple times when I wanted a bit more than the posted limit allowed, like getting four copies of Exo-Suit (two orders for two copies each), but now they've figured out how to prevent that for online orders. In person, you can make as many purchases of the same set as you want, as long as you don't try to do more than one purchase per store per day.

@8lackmagic:
Research Institute is the last Ideas set I can recall that was particularly difficult to just buy directly from LEGO.com. That was a one-and-done production run. Exo-Suit got a second round, which helped take the edge off of demand. Since then, they seem to have figured out that just because only 10k people voted that they wanted to buy a set isn't an indication that no more than 10k people would actually do so. Ideas sets generally last at least a year, and a few have lasted even longer. Two have now been rereleased because demand still wasn't satisfied.