BrickLink Designer Program crowdfunding round 1 update

I got 3 castles, 1 boat and 1 safe. I’m happy I got the stuff I wanted but damn the experience was stressful.

I expect it will be super difficult to get all the cool buildings in phase 2.

BTW : thanks to Brickset to reminding me the sale was happening yesterday at 5 CEST. I would have missed it otherwise.

I logged in, I had almost forgotten because I was working, a little after 11:30am EST in Ohio USA. I followed the preorder link for the Castle and I noted it was very close to full, but my order went in and I received a confirmation email from Lego that I had gotten it. The email confirmation came in around 1:30 pm EST. I am very excited to be a part of this particular set, Castle is my BAE.

After a little trouble at the start, while BrickLink got the funding process working, I got in early . Unfortunately I wanted the Particle Accelerator but that is the nature of the process so I'm not going to get overly disappointed. I did get the Fishing Boat, though, so happy with that.

A few going up on ebay I don't think is a huge problem, that could happen with a limit of 1pp, but if floods come up later (and on other resale sites) then there is a real problem.

I had reminders on my phone. I had a post-it on my monitor. Well, what I also had was a sick two year old I had to get to a doctor an hour before the crowdfunding started. We were back almost 3 hours later, with the castle and the boat already sold out. Many sighs were had... but at least the Kakapo will cheer me up.

I am naively hoping they increase the maximum number for the funded sets, or reduce preorders to up to 2 of the same set, freeing up some copies... but that won't happen, right?

Me: bionicle fans will win for sure
loses to a VAULT

Once gain I am left annoyed by lego. I really wanted the castle but was stuck in a meeting. 45 mins after opening the castle had gone, the boat wasn't maxed out but couldn't buy in the UK. I did manage to order a safe though. Why they don't do a 1 day timed purchase window and make as many as demanded I really don't know. That would prevent site crashing issues, and mitigate the scalpers.

in the end these sets are super limited editions. 5000 sets for 30 countries equals 170 sets per country ... also many people (scalpers?) buy the maximum possible number of sets (5). it means that for most Lego fans it will be impossible to buy the most interesting sets. seeing them resold at very high prices on ebay by scalpers is very frustrating...

Buying two sets and selling one will most likely result in no money loss or even financial benefits. It's just plain bad business from Bricklink's point of view. The price could've been higher with a limit of 1 per set. It still would've been a big success.

The ship will remain on my wanted list, I guess.

So what's with the 40 day window then? Did Lego seriously, seriously, underestimate demand for these sets? I can't imagine why they would limit orders to 5000 units total. Surely it would make more sense to have an open preorder window and produce as many as ordered? I just don't see how they expected anything other than an immediate sell out.

@taylors51 said:
"Once gain I am left annoyed by lego. I really wanted the castle but was stuck in a meeting. 45 mins after opening the castle had gone, the boat wasn't maxed out but couldn't buy in the UK. I did manage to order a safe though. Why they don't do a 1 day timed purchase window and make as many as demanded I really don't know. That would prevent site crashing issues, and mitigate the scalpers."

The castle sold out within the first two hours, if not the first hour. 1 day is far too long. Heck, the idea of making "as many as demanded in this span" wouldn't work for most high demand items in this world. Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101.

I wonder if there's a person who backed the safe specifically to send it to LockPickingLawyer.

Managed to get the castle to complement my Blacksmith set. 5 set limit is terrible, should be 2 max. Lego should extend it and allow more preorders at 1 per sale to the public again. That’ll bring up supply and the scalpers won’t be rewarded as much. Amazing how Lego get it so wrong, so regularly.

@TheBrickGuru24 said:
" @taylors51 said:
"Once gain I am left annoyed by lego. I really wanted the castle but was stuck in a meeting. 45 mins after opening the castle had gone, the boat wasn't maxed out but couldn't buy in the UK. I did manage to order a safe though. Why they don't do a 1 day timed purchase window and make as many as demanded I really don't know. That would prevent site crashing issues, and mitigate the scalpers."

The castle sold out within the first two hours, if not the first hour. 1 day is far too long. Heck, the idea of making "as many as demanded in this span" wouldn't work for most high demand items in this world. Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101."

Well kickstarters seem to manage with this model, they don't start turning people way. If lego know how many people want an item and even pay upfront before manufacturering it seems like an ideal situation and gives them time to plan. They don't have to deliver the item for quite a while. If something was super popular and required such high resources then it impacted other items then I can see that could be an issue. I wouldn't imagine that being a problem with the long lead times though.

Just seen the castle on sale on ebay for 450 gbp.
TLG doesn't have a single collective brain cell. 10k voted for these projects. Only 5k of each set and 5 per person! The stupidity is mind-blowing! How to upset your most loyal customers 101.

@taylors51 said:
" @TheBrickGuru24 said:
" @taylors51 said:
"Once gain I am left annoyed by lego. I really wanted the castle but was stuck in a meeting. 45 mins after opening the castle had gone, the boat wasn't maxed out but couldn't buy in the UK. I did manage to order a safe though. Why they don't do a 1 day timed purchase window and make as many as demanded I really don't know. That would prevent site crashing issues, and mitigate the scalpers."

The castle sold out within the first two hours, if not the first hour. 1 day is far too long. Heck, the idea of making "as many as demanded in this span" wouldn't work for most high demand items in this world. Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101."

Well kickstarters seem to manage with this model, they don't start turning people way. If lego know how many people want an item and even pay upfront before manufacturering it seems like an ideal situation and gives them time to plan. They don't have to deliver the item for quite a while. If something was super popular and required such high resources then it impacted other items then I can see that could be an issue. I wouldn't imagine that being a problem with the long lead times though."

I think you underestimate how far in advance production is planned. I wouldn't be surprised if they're running at least 12 months forward planning. And any that are produced for this offer necessarily displace other products. Or they could wait to plan the production until order numbers are known, then you have to wait 12-18 months for it.
As a first time trial, and to keep delivery lead times reasonable (plan was for about 4 months after end of funding, I think the 500 limit is entirely understandable. The 5pp, less so.

As for the comparison with typical crowdfunding, here Lego are covering all up-front costs, you won't be charged until shipping as with regular projects. Other crowdfunders take your money in advance and you hope you get a product at the end of it - many never deliver anything at all.

@Vassaleen said:
"Just seen the castle on sale on ebay for 450 gbp.
TLG doesn't have a single collective brain cell. 10k voted for these projects. Only 5k of each set and 5 per person! The stupidity is mind-blowing! How to upset your most loyal customers 101."
Hopefully, sales of 31120 Medieval Castle are good too and LEGO finally gets the idea that a (Black Falcons or similar) Castle line aimed at older kids/TFOLs/AFOLs would sell well.

Interestingly the Kakapo and Pursuit of Flight both now show as "This project is sold out in your region". I was awake about 3hrs after the ordering went live and ordered both of those sets without a problem. So now people in Australia at least and probably New Zealand will not be able to get the Kakapo even. So the program is only available for 30 countries to start with, then it looks like they have put a cap on availability to those countries and won't allow orders even though there is still room. Considering the program went live at 1am AEST, 3am in NZ, anyone who couldn't get to ordering till they got home from work will have missed out completely.

@Squidy74H, {tongue in cheek} Why would people in NZ want a kakapo set? What a crazy notion! {end tongue in cheek}

@TheBrickGuru24 said:
"...Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101."
Surely Economics 101 is about economies of scale?

Absolutely astonishing that they allowed people to buy 5 of each set while also putting such limited numbers on production as a whole and then further in each region. Will they even consider this a mistake? Will this be considered yet another data point to learn from going forward, or is it just marked down as a success? The number of frustrating releases over the past couple of years has been mind boggling - it doesn’t seem like they are learning at all from each round of releases. They definitely read these blogs, so the frustration must have registered, and one has to assume at this point that it’s an integral part of the business model, to create a sense of exclusivity and rarity amongst adult fans.

If I was being charitable I would say that previously it took much longer for the bricklink designer program to get up to the requisite numbers, but that was before lego owned bricklink, could advertise it to all its fans, and the designs had not been previously selected by 10,000 people on IDEAS so they had no previous resonance or proof of popularity.

Anyway. The machine rumbles on. My love wanes. The only thing I want from Lego at this point is retro style space sets. It’s a very specific niche longed for by only a few, so I’m not holding my breath!

By the time I was able to find the time to log in, every set I was interested in was sold out or no longer available in my region. So, I got none.

That 40 day crowd funding period combined with a 5000 limit is just silly.

I can understand the 5000 limit given Lego's production schedules but allowing more than one per person was madness.

I didn't get anything, because for whatever reason, they only shipped to 30 specific countries, and my country was not among those :-(

Managed to get a copy of the castle super early on, after some refreshing of bricklink. Then this morning I got a mail from LEGO telling me my payment wasn't accepted... After a call with the incredibly helpful costumer service they managed to put it onto a credit card with a guarantee of delivery! According to the guy I spoke to this happened to a lot of people in the netherlands, since they where overwhelmed by the amount of mails and calls they received since the pre sale started. I'm not complaining personally because I managed to get what I wanted, but it's a damn shame so many people got disappointed, scalpers get their dream scenario and errors occur en masse in payments. For the biggest toy company in the world LEGO really knows how to mess some things up beyond belief!

Oh, and just produce that new castle line already, if this isn't the evidence they need anything medieval will sell like crazy, I don't think they will ever get it!

The castle was always going to sell fast with the web site left hanging for most people. So next time they should do the same as the popular sport events and have a lottery taking maximum 1 order per item at a single address (matching the payment card) over say 48 hours, then choose 5000 random winners per item!

As for the 101 economics, there is a lot of Lego themes/sets which do not sell in the very large worldwide volumes that the marketing people hoped for, resulting in sales and discounts to clear stock. So if you find one avenue that does then go large on volumes and drop the others!

@Banners said:
" @TheBrickGuru24 said:
"...Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101."
Surely Economics 101 is about economies of scale?"

When your manufacturing plant is full to capacity (as I'm pretty sure Lego's is) then any change in product creates an opportunity cost associated with the displaced product. Economics 101.

To those people saying Lego cannot produce more than 5000 units because of limited production capacity: Based on Lego's annual turnover of over USD 5 billion, you can estimate that they sell well over 100 million sets per year. I cannot imagine a few thousand Bricklink sets causing much of a capacity problem when you are procuding at such a scale.

In my view, this project either went exactly like they planned, or they horribly underestimated the demand. Their response will tell us which of those is true.

A) I didn’t realise these sets would be so limited.
B) I didn’t know when they would be listed for sale.
C) The release time was not timezone friendly at all for New Zealand and the castle was already sold out when I got the announcement on my newsfeed when I woke up. I would have bought that Castle instantly. Now I never will get it thanks to scalpers and set hogs. I won’t pay artificially inflated prices for sets. Thanks guys. ??

@DearMisterLegoBreaker said:
"I got 3 castles, 1 boat and 1 safe. I’m happy I got the stuff I wanted but damn the experience was stressful.

I expect it will be super difficult to get all the cool buildings in phase 2. "

I got on the minute they were all released when the site crashed, when it came back up for me like 30-40 minutes later the castle was sold out. I honestly have no respect for people that buy more than one of one set because of the limited quantity. They really need to limit one per person to prevent scalpers from getting them. I don’t know if I should even bother trying again next time, but hopefully they rerelease the popular ones

@TheBrickGuru24 said:
" @taylors51 said:
"Once gain I am left annoyed by lego. I really wanted the castle but was stuck in a meeting. 45 mins after opening the castle had gone, the boat wasn't maxed out but couldn't buy in the UK. I did manage to order a safe though. Why they don't do a 1 day timed purchase window and make as many as demanded I really don't know. That would prevent site crashing issues, and mitigate the scalpers."

The castle sold out within the first two hours, if not the first hour. 1 day is far too long. Heck, the idea of making "as many as demanded in this span" wouldn't work for most high demand items in this world. Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101."

Interesting, thanks for clarifying that. It makes me wonder why then they decided to allow up to 5 copies per customer? How many copies they expect an average customer to buy? Or is their average target customer a scalper? I can imagine most people with no intentions of reselling going for 1, 2, or perhaps 3 copies, but 5, seriously?

Castle was sold out in Europe within 30 minutes, and sold out completely after like 1 hour.

10000 votes, 5000 sets, really LEGO???

Biggest flaw gotta be the Limit 5. Should've been 1 or 2 max.

If I were cynical I'd suggest that scalpers effectively provide free advertising for a brand. "Rare Lego set on sale for £500" is far more likely to be a headline on the type of gaming/geek sites I visit than "5000 happy customers buy reasonably priced set", and that might cause people to speculatively dip their toe in.

A bit like the "Lego worth more than gold" stuff a few years ago.

Luckily I'm not cynical, and there are many good reasons people may need five of any of these sets.

No, I did not get, what I wanted!! :(
The castle sold out within less than an hour (within 36 Minutes as far as I saw it later!), which is a bad joke! Unfortunately I could not be online at the start, because of work.

I am still extremely annoyed and disappointed!! :(

They should do a second run on the castle, ideally without limitation and available to more countries!! It would even be okay, if we had to wait for another year for it to get delivered.
I dont want to have to hope for a chinese knockoff for the first time...

My two cents:

Personally I was happy to be able to order the Fishing Boat without any problems - in itself a strange experience after all the troubles I had in recent months when it came to anything LEGO-related.

Generally, I can second all the sentiments regarding the 5 per person limit. That's totally stupid and only helps scalpers.
Also, the low overall limit of 5K sets per project is laughable. Those were projects 10K people voted for, and even if not all of them would order in the end, 5K is far too low. Especially for something like the Castle. If LEGO by now hasn't learned that there is a gigantic demand for the return of a proper Castle theme (and not some BS like Nexo Knights), they will never learn.

Also, to all those who believe the fake argument of TLG being production constrained. This is a multi-billion Dollar company which produces millions of sets each year. These projects wouldn't make the slightest dent in the schedule even at 10K each.
It's the same people who fall for the "budget" argument prohibiting adding an extra minifig to a May the Fourth GWP set.
Seriously, the only reason they don't do it is because they would make a few cents less money from those promos. It's plain and simple greed. I know, there's enough gullible people who think a GWP should be taken as a charitable act by LEGO while in reality it is a multiplier for more profit as it makes people buy from LEGO direct at RRP, which no sane person would normally do compared to buying at regular retailers with the standard discounts.

Add another person irritated by the 5 per customer deal. If they expected 40 days to sell the max there is zero reason they could not have kept it to one per person for a week or two and then bump the max up to try to get to the max 5k.

-I'm not surprised that Castle was the best seller, and the detailed Fishing Boat was second. Detailed castle and "nondigital life" sets reliably do well with adults.

-I liked the Pursuit of Flight, though not fifty dollars of like, mainly because it is so small. I am glad it is getting made, though.

-The safe surprised me with how well it sold.

-The Kakapo fans should voice their appreciation to the observatory designer for delaying its release, because I don't think it could have made the top 5 if Mountain View had been in the mix this time. Cute little set, though, so again, I'm glad for those who could get one.

-Bionicle not making it, I understand. It has its vocal fans, but they are a smaller group than many other theme groups. Also, the images did not convey the size well. It would take up most of a 32x32 (10-inch) plate, but without minifigs or human objects for scale, it was hard to tell at a glance. And to speculate, perhaps a static display instead of a turntable could have reduced part count and cost to attract a few more buyers. Again, I can see why it did not make it to fully funded.

-The accelerator really was the best suited to not being made. In the original design it already required a large level surface, with sideways buildind ensuring a flat track. The released version made changes that probably helped with cost but reduced what appeal it had even more. The brick track was removed, so now it needs an area that is large, flat, and also SMOOTH. The final straw was probably taking out the motor, so now high particle speed requires continually turning a crank at high speed over the half a minute or more it takes to get up to speed, and if you want to simulate a collision, then you must maintain this speed with one hand while moving the target with the other. It would be a lot of setup and hassle for a limited play feature. I know a separate motor could be added to the set, but to hamstring the essential play feature in such a way cut into its marketing appeal so even if it had been made, many buyers would probably be disappointed within 15 minutes of final assembly. Nonproduction was probably the best thing for this version.

LEGO should not have allowed people to buy more than one copy.

I got one copy of the castle very early on. As I was checking BL and realizing how fast it was selling, I decided to purchase a second one to resell and repay the first one I bought.

Is this ethical? No. But do I feel bad? Unfortunately not.

People have a lot of bad things to say about resellers, but in the end, the person who’s going to by my second copy should be happy about their purchase.

How can people list them on eBay *already* when these aren't going to be made or shipped for another (x) number of months? Surely, SURELY there's some eBay rule about only selling items that you actually have available to ship as soon as the listing ends? When I sell things there, they always remind me to ship within two days of receiving payment, maximum, and they'd be on my case if I didn't.

I predict a lot of people - especially those who are only casual Lego fans and not super-dedicated like so many Bricksetters - not reading the fine-print, buying from the sellers, and then being very upset when they don't receive their order until half a year later.

I dunno, it feels shady to me generally; especially since I can easily envisage a scenario where it could quite possibly turn out badly for people who are desperate enough to buy them from resellers now (not going into detail, I don't want to give anyone ideas!). Regardless of inflated prices, I wouldn't trust anyone unofficial who was selling it so far in advance of release.

Disgusting.

@BaBa:
...and an undercooked chicken.

@DoonsterBuildsLego:
Hey, the one other person besides me who actually gets it! Yeah, when store shelves have remained half-empty for the past 16 months, any claims that they can “just produce more” are a load of hot air. They have much bigger customers (Walmart, Target, Amazon, and many other major retailers the world over) who probably have their orders backlogged due to the pandemic putting constraints on how many people could even be in the manufacturing plants (Mexico’s got completely shut down for about a month), plus production capacity that got diverted to make face shields for front-line medical workers, and a project like this just isn’t big enough to warrant telling some of the largest companies on the planet that they need to wait just a bit longer.

@PurpleDave said:
" @DoonsterBuildsLego:
Hey, the one other person besides me who actually gets it! Yeah, when store shelves have remained half-empty for the past 16 months, any claims that they can “just produce more” are a load of hot air. They have much bigger customers (Walmart, Target, Amazon, and many other major retailers the world over) who probably have their orders backlogged due to the pandemic putting constraints on how many people could even be in the manufacturing plants (Mexico’s got completely shut down for about a month), plus production capacity that got diverted to make face shields for front-line medical workers, and a project like this just isn’t big enough to warrant telling some of the largest companies on the planet that they need to wait just a bit longer."

It feels like this could easily be common knowledge, but people prefer to whinge on about Lego being soulless and greedy because they don't want to be operating at a loss.

Regular sets are planned months and months in advance, and >$100 sets can be in the works for years. That *anyone* could argue that Lego should just double or triple the amount produced, or produce an infinite amount, boggles my mind. We can all agree that the limit should've been 1 or 2, but it's comical to try and imply that Lego should just open the floodgates for whatever random amount gets bought.

The only way that someone could suggest that they just "get all the orders and make them later" is if you have absolutely no concept of how Lego (or any other company) operates or manufactures. I can't think of a single company that operates that way outside of Kickstarter, and heads up: most of those fail.

I wasn't interested in buying any of these so I don't really have a dog in this round specifically but I agree a 5 set limit on a 5000 qty preorder is really ridiculous. I hope they rectify this in later rounds.

I thought about it, but decided I've spent enough on other things this past month. Nothing really interested me either. Best to leave a spot open for someone who really REALLY wants a set

@eiffel006 said:
"People have a lot of bad things to say about resellers, but in the end, the person who’s going to by my second copy should be happy about their purchase."
You are exactly the type of person I find most disgusting.
Profiting from people who for whatever reason didn't have a chance to pre-order a set, yet thinking you even deserve their gratitude on top of your profits.
Sorry to say, but I absolutely hate people with such an attitude.

All the more reason there should have been a 1 per person limit.
They have this for non limited sets often enough on their Shop at Home website, yet not here for some highly limited sets. Questionable to say the least.

I think they should have limited sales to 1 per person for the first few days and if any were remaining after that, allow the limit to increase to 2 or even 5 after everyone had a reasonable chance to place an initial order.

@ThatBionicleGuy said:
"How can people list them on eBay *already* when these aren't going to be made or shipped for another (x) number of months? Surely, SURELY there's some eBay rule about only selling items that you actually have available to ship as soon as the listing ends? When I sell things there, they always remind me to ship within two days of receiving payment, maximum, and they'd be on my case if I didn't.

I predict a lot of people - especially those who are only casual Lego fans and not super-dedicated like so many Bricksetters - not reading the fine-print, buying from the sellers, and then being very upset when they don't receive their order until half a year later.

I dunno, it feels shady to me generally; especially since I can easily envisage a scenario where it could quite possibly turn out badly for people who are desperate enough to buy them from resellers now (not going into detail, I don't want to give anyone ideas!). Regardless of inflated prices, I wouldn't trust anyone unofficial who was selling it so far in advance of release."
Ebay does actually prevent pre-sale of items more than 30 days ahead of release.
Feel free to find the auction and report it.
All that will do is shift the sale till later

@taylors51 said:
" @fakespacesquid said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @DoonsterBuildsLego :
Hey, the one other person besides me who actually gets it! Yeah, when store shelves have remained half-empty for the past 16 months, any claims that they can “just produce more” are a load of hot air. They have much bigger customers (Walmart, Target, Amazon, and many other major retailers the world over) who probably have their orders backlogged due to the pandemic putting constraints on how many people could even be in the manufacturing plants (Mexico’s got completely shut down for about a month), plus production capacity that got diverted to make face shields for front-line medical workers, and a project like this just isn’t big enough to warrant telling some of the largest companies on the planet that they need to wait just a bit longer."

It feels like this could easily be common knowledge, but people prefer to whinge on about Lego being soulless and greedy because they don't want to be operating at a loss.

Regular sets are planned months and months in advance, and >$100 sets can be in the works for years. That *anyone* could argue that Lego should just double or triple the amount produced, or produce an infinite amount, boggles my mind. We can all agree that the limit should've been 1 or 2, but it's comical to try and imply that Lego should just open the floodgates for whatever random amount gets bought.

The only way that someone could suggest that they just "get all the orders and make them later" is if you have absolutely no concept of how Lego (or any other company) operates or manufactures. I can't think of a single company that operates that way outside of Kickstarter, and heads up: most of those fail. "

It's not just kickstarter. Other art companies do timed exclusive print runs for example. Granted it's not quite the same as lego. I'm sure they could make such a model work if they really tried though. Otherwise they are just leaving money on the table and disappointing fans. Though hopefully the demand shows the way to release the more population sets more widely at a later date. It can be hard to separate the exclusive aspect from the desire for the actual set though with such small numbers and 5pp scalpers on the scene. I also don't think you can say no one is allowed to say why didn't they make more? I think they either woefully underestimated demand or just played it really safe to see how it did. Of course they could have made more if they thought it'd be a good seller, and obviously made less of something else. "

The Castle project has almost 2,000 parts, 557 unique parts. That's not on the same level as a t-shirt. The biggest reasonable option that I could see would be making 10k sets with a limit of one per person. Given that it got those votes once, it could possibly get those numbers sold (although most people on Ideas treat it like a 'thumbs up' button rather than an 'I would purchase this product' button). But especially given how cheap these options were compared to the previous ADP, I find it incredibly likely that increasing the numbers of sets made isn't worth the trouble. Part of the reason most sets are organized a year ahead of time is to optimize part usage so that they aren't wasting time or needing to coordinate extra molding runs. Other than ensuring that the models weren't using nonexistent pieces, there was no optimization with any of the projects. With the Castle, that's 557 minimum molding runs. That's not a number that you can just bump up on the day. Heck, the minifig setup got changed the day before crowdfunding went live because the project designer was using parts from ***Build-A-Mini***. This is not the regular tight ship. These aren't regular sets, and there's a long list of reasons as to why they aren't being produced in the same volume as regular sets.

@jlskywalker said:
"Good morning Huw,

I was trying to buy the Castle, and now I see it listed for 450 euros. I hope the scalpers can make their profit...

This really makes me stay way from this kind of initiative, that I recognize value because there are some very good ones. Keeping the frustration away.

Still have a long wanted list to buy... Lol"

There is now one selling it for 625 EUR.
5 units per person was a horrible decision.

I got what i wanted but only because I was home from work.

What a mess Lego created. What an absolute mess. However much Lego is paying the marketing department is too much.

Turns out Bionicle isn't as popular as the fanboys want us to believe.

I first put money to the Bionicle project, then seeing it stagger behind I put money on the fishing boat. I will at least enjoy the boat.

Looking back on Sokoda's project though, I wonder if the Bionicle fandom got a bad case of tunnel vision while trying to pursue it. Sokoda's project was born from an earlier fan project sponsored on the TTV Forums called "Brickonicle" that was based on two assumptions:

1) Lego would not sell Bionicle as a Technic or CCBS based system again due to low sales last time

2) Bionicle fans would willingly transition to System if the lore they loved was intact

I think while the TTV Brickonicle goals was as stated a good response to what we understood to being the leading factors of Bionicle's death(s) it failed to account for the fact the Technic and CCBS build style WAS the most iconic factor of Bionicle, and making a lore heavy set while pleasing to the type of franchise fans who regularly check BioSector01, listen to two hour interviews with Christian Faber, and replay MNOG on the regular; was not going to reignite the appeal of Bionicle to more casual fans who only remember the action figure sets and have no connection to the lore. Not surprisingly one of the most active TTV members contributing to Brickonicle was Sokoda and its were they cut their teeth in on making Bionicle dioramas in System bricks. Sokoda did wisely chose perhaps the three most iconic moments of Bionicle's lore (the opening beach, Matoro's death and the final battle between the two great robots); but it didn't change the fact that was still inaccessible to people who didn't know the story.

So I have to congratulate Sokoda, they got a 10,000 support project on Lego Ideas, managed to get it on the Bricklink Designer Program; gave it a solid shot; but ultimately I think it failed in the final hour for all the same reasons it succeeded early on. At the end of the day, dioramas of little Bionicle lore scenes lacked the simple appeal of say "A Fishing Boat" "A Safe" or "A Rare Parrot that likes to Shag Heads" and I think Bionicle's best bet for 10,000 project that would also sell would be a return to a buildable action figure since most of the general public remembers Bionicle as "those Lego robot things." A good example of that being done in a modern parts palate, take a look at Lego Master's competitor Aaron Newman's take on the original 2001 Toa here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nujumetru/49069112078

Extraordinary.
I'd love to see a proper analysis of the thinking behind this.
I can see why AFOLs would go for this idea in a big way.
I can't see what LEGO get out of it: I don't know production numbers for a typical set, but to set a batch run for 5000 items seems a very expensive way of annoying a lot more people than it pleased and, presumably, not making a lot of money.

I never took Economics 101, but would be fascinated to see a statistical analysis of what's going on.

Perhaps some of the excellent advice give above will be listened to and make this a happier experience in future.

I think in the future, pre-orders should be limited to 1pp. A few friends of mine and myself really wanted the castle, and I think we may have had a fighting chance if everyone could only order 1. As it was, not a single one of us got it.

@SinKiller_Nick said:
"Turns out Bionicle isn't as popular as the fanboys want us to believe."

It was popular enough to make it as far as it did. I’d say that’s no small feat for a project that couldn’t even use construction.

I would’ve bought one if I had the chance.

@AustinPowers said:
" @eiffel006 said:
"People have a lot of bad things to say about resellers, but in the end, the person who’s going to by my second copy should be happy about their purchase."
You are exactly the type of person I find most disgusting.
Profiting from people who for whatever reason didn't have a chance to pre-order a set, yet thinking you even deserve their gratitude on top of your profits.
Sorry to say, but I absolutely hate people with such an attitude.

All the more reason there should have been a 1 per person limit.
They have this for non limited sets often enough on their Shop at Home website, yet not here for some highly limited sets. Questionable to say the least. "

Thank you @AustinPowers for saying what most of us were thinking.

Like a lot of this kind of stuff Lego should have had a sales window where you could buy the set and you will get it but the more they sold the longer it would take for the later buyers to get it. I think most people would be happy to wait if they know its coming.

And the arguments about Lego not being able to keep up with demand just makes me wonder why they are making so many different sets especially large sets if they cant keep up. It was the same with these, they could have made a lot more of each set but had less sets make the cut.

@dtobin123 said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @eiffel006 said:
"People have a lot of bad things to say about resellers, but in the end, the person who’s going to by my second copy should be happy about their purchase."
You are exactly the type of person I find most disgusting.
Profiting from people who for whatever reason didn't have a chance to pre-order a set, yet thinking you even deserve their gratitude on top of your profits.
Sorry to say, but I absolutely hate people with such an attitude.

All the more reason there should have been a 1 per person limit.
They have this for non limited sets often enough on their Shop at Home website, yet not here for some highly limited sets. Questionable to say the least. "

Thank you @AustinPowers for saying what most of us were thinking.

"

I know it’s kind of useless to defend myself here, but because context was removed from the post, I fell like I need to restate what I said in my original post:
1) I agree, the limit should have been one set. The five limit is dumb.
2) I originally bought one. Then a second one to resell (and not 5). I will keep one.
3) I agree that my decision was not ethical. But I’m not sorry for doing it. It was well within the rules, whether you like it or not.
4) People who buy from resellers don’t have to. Judging their intent is condescending.
That is all.

@dtobin123 said:
"Thank you @AustinPowers for saying what most of us were thinking."
You're welcome :-)

BTW, eBay's pre-sale rules require that the seller expect to have the product within 30 days. So anyone reporting such listings to eBay that violate those rules would be helping them out.

@eiffel006 said:
"I know it’s kind of useless to defend myself here..."

You should have stopped right there. Don't act like you're doing someone a favor by reselling for double. You took one from someone else at regular price so you could get your copy for free. A completely legal thing to do within the parameters Lego set...but don't come in here where commenters are disappointed they didn't get a copy and act like you're doing a service.

Nothing short of an organisational disaster, a bunch of five year olds could have organised it better. I won’t even bother looking in future to avoid my hopes being raised then dashed! Massive own goal!

10,000 votes from individual people are required...

to sell 5,000 sets...

to 1,000 people.

@TeriXeri said:
"And LEGO Castles aren't banned on IDEAS yet (some Pirates ideas were), the next big review has like 5 that at least 1 might come to more AFOL programs in the future if denied."

I might prefer it if Castle projects get banned. People talk about bringing the line back as if there's something stopping you from just building a castle. That's the point of Lego! You don't need every single design to be pre-made and all of the pieces pre-packaged! You do have the ability to work outside of the literal box.

@PixelTheDragon said:
" @SinKiller_Nick said:
"Turns out Bionicle isn't as popular as the fanboys want us to believe."

It was popular enough to make it as far as it did. I’d say that’s no small feat for a project that couldn’t even use construction.

I would’ve bought one if I had the chance. "

You were given the chance. This was your chance.

@fakespacesquid Anyone can build castles yes, it is the minifigures that over time get so inflated with value that it can be hard to populate the structures. They need to make the minifigures more available and not just knights but general figures for villages and animals for farms. Thank god for the mickey farm and black falcons now out but we need more. I am a huge castle fan, forestmen were my favorite as a child and I had to pay a healthy chunk to get a small number of them complete with feathers. I also paid a chunk of change for a bunch of wolfpack. I recognize that I am lucky to have the resources to do this but not everyone does and retail battle packs and maybe a medieval town pack like the city sets would help keep a theme alive and profitable without taking 10 sets produced in a year. Parts for castle can easily be acquired but the people to live in it not so much.

@TheBrickGuru24 said:
" @taylors51 said:
"Once gain I am left annoyed by lego. I really wanted the castle but was stuck in a meeting. 45 mins after opening the castle had gone, the boat wasn't maxed out but couldn't buy in the UK. I did manage to order a safe though. Why they don't do a 1 day timed purchase window and make as many as demanded I really don't know. That would prevent site crashing issues, and mitigate the scalpers."

The castle sold out within the first two hours, if not the first hour. 1 day is far too long. Heck, the idea of making "as many as demanded in this span" wouldn't work for most high demand items in this world. Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101."

Sony sold 114 million PS4 consoles. The sales for PS5 are going well, so much so that you can't get one if you want. If it turns out that 200 million of PS5 are required, rest assured that Sony will produce 200 million of it. Lego has all the time it wants to prepare for that. If 15000 are required, start now and continue producing until all are made and shipped - it does not matter if it comes late the product is already pre-purchased.

When you are doing a program to try to compensate for bad decisions that were made on the Idea platform (these sets should have been made in the first place) you try not to screw up your clientele even more with another botched up program. Personally, I don't care much, I would have liked to get the castle and I will (try) get it if Lego decide to fix this and allow for more but otherwise I sleep very well at night thank you. It is just a matter of principle - you try to please a disgruntled crowd - you better do it right (i.e. perfect) or don't do it at all.

@fakespacesquid said:
" @HOBBES said:
" you better do it right (i.e. perfect) or don't do it at all."

What a ridiculous mindset. "

Not to mention the fact that "perfect" just means "exactly what this guy thinks should be done."

"pre purchased" isn't really valid here, as Lego doesn't charge anyone until the products ship

Not producing certain Ideas projects isn't a "bad decision," that's the point of the platform. It would be utterly ridiculous to produce everything that hits 10k, things are going to be rejected.

How many different consoles does Sony currently produce? I'd be willing to bet that it's not even 1/100th of the number of different sets that Lego produces.

@jaredhinton said:
"I’m not too bothered about the quantity available, I’m just curious how they chose the match up of this top 8 (7). Anyone know they process?
It just seems unfair to have some rejected because of random luck of being against sure winners. If the particle accelerator was against a different bunch in the next round it’s chances may be much higher if making it.
And that one that got pulled, that’s going in a different round, is that fair? It may not have stood a chance against this bunch, but (as my understanding goes) the designers decided it wasn’t ready and pulled it. Maybe they decided they’d stand a better chance against other sets.
I feel bad for the fans and designers of the ones that missed out based on random placing (or the fact that they were ready faster than other designers).

I wish they did it the same as last time and had them all at once, or not announced them all and saved some for a second round they’d announce later if they thought the full list was too long. "

As a program participant, I can say we get no information about the project selection and it has nothing to do with whether a fan designer was finished sooner. Since my project is small, I was one of the first finished, but it still didn't end up in the first round. We will probably never know why.

I can also say that most of us are frustrated about the randomness and the fact it's not exactly a fair competition. This round had 7 sets of which 5 are produced. The next rounds may have 9 or 10 sets, but they will still only produce 5 sets. It's very frustrating, because most fan designers invest a huge amount of time into this, but there is a rather arbitrary chance that a set will be produced in the end. The rules of the original AFOL BDP were much more fair to the fan designers (and to the genuinely interested buyers too).

Given that there are an average of 166 sets per country and a limit of 5 copies per person the entirety of a country's stock could be cornered by just 33 people.
That can't be a good idea and should have made Lego reconsider this business model.

@CDM said:
" @eiffel006 said:
"I know it’s kind of useless to defend myself here..."

You should have stopped right there. Don't act like you're doing someone a favor by reselling for double. You took one from someone else at regular price so you could get your copy for free. A completely legal thing to do within the parameters Lego set...but don't come in here where commenters are disappointed they didn't get a copy and act like you're doing a service. "
This!

Couldn't agree more.

@gylman said:
"I find it interesting that the two most expensive sets sold out the fastest. Tells me that AFOLs are willing to pay good money for good sets.

Maybe that encourage TLC to bring forward more of the very large and elaborate Ideas sets, which in the past I think would have been less likely to get approved.

"

See, that's the thing, Lego is a tanker, it does not turn around very fast. Eventually, the Creator line started with cars - those are/were very popular - so they keep producing them (latest one being an all sorts of dark red pickup truck that seems to be an old Ford) - this is just fine. Now, how about boats? many moccers (especially in the Netherlands for some unknown reasons) do fantastic boats. How about planes (Sopwith Camel, Red Baron and Wright brothers) were very popular.

Lego does that - it kills a theme. I.e. it starts a theme, does lots of models, flood the market, some are definitely less good than the others,some people can't get them all. Eventually interests fades out and they discontinue it - i.e. killing the theme. How about: 3 sets per theme per year (small cost, medium cost, large cost - maybe once in a blue moon when you have a terrific design: a huge cost item), you vary things a bit for exemple, let's say "historic/legendary vehicle" theme, first year: a car, name it what you want, second year: a plane Let's say Spirit of St.Louis, third year: a locomotive; many to choose from... You get the idea. Instead of depleting completely a theme they should produce less of it, better models (don't force it) and keep them running longer (longer also helps getting better ideas). they could run twice as many themes with half as many sets (allowing people to buy them all) making significantly more people happy but I suppose they are not interested in that.

@morvit said:
"I’m happy with the limit, was able to snag 5 castles. I would be unhappy with Lego if they decide to increase the production limit over 5000 units or restrict buying to only 1 unit per person."

Why? Because the value of the sets you’re reselling will decrease? Of course you’re happy with the limit, you got 5 of them lol.

I don’t know if you personally are reselling them or not, but for those that are, I know it’s not like you’re doing anything illegal. You’re making a profit, which I get, but on something as limited as these sets just seems greedy and inconsiderate.

@ericb_ said:
"People will criticize you, but will justify their own decision to buy Lepin modular buildings because, a: they're outrageously expensive on the secondary market, and b: LEGO will no longer produce them, so the company must not want their money. They're cool when someone lifts a set design when it helps them get what they want, but ostracize you for doing nothing illegal."

On one hand we have a limited edition that sold out in less than 60 minutes and on the other we have a run of tens of thousands with a production lifespan of over 2 years...great strawman though.

And for the record I wouldn't touch a Lepin brick with your fingers.

I’d don’t know exactly how a LEGO factory works, but I know enough that it isn’t just “Hey Siri, make some more of set X…” and here they come down the production line.

Moulds, plastics, pigments sourced and set. Papers and inks. Paying for the labor. Loads more, again I’m not in the business. I am sure that LEGO has run all of the numbers and looked at all of the production schedules and figured out the number of sets they could produce to turn some kind of profit.

AWFOLs here are saying that “LEGO doesn’t want my money…” to produce more of these sets. Not an economist at all, but I’m betting the regular Star Wars, Ninjago, Friends, and DUPLO sets that would have to be cancelled to make more of these sets would be bringing in much more money than the money AFOLs bring to LEGO.

@ericb_ said:
" @CDM, I don't understand the point you're trying to make regarding production quantities.

People shouldn't blame others because they didn't get what they wanted. Doing so is unhealthy and immature. I feel a bit immature myself debating this in an online forum."

You brought up Lepin...something that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of the post nor the discussion you weighed in on. Someone choosing to buy a knock-off has zero to do with someone else's ability, or lack thereof due to scarcity, to purchase an extremely limited genuine product for retail price. That is what is being talked about here.

@ericb_ said:
" @CDM , I don't understand the point you're trying to make regarding production quantities."

I think it comes down to, why did LEGO/Bricklink require sets to get 10,000 people to show support if they had no intention of making the sets available to at least 10,000 people? It creates the expectation that those 10,000 people who want it and showed support will be able to buy it. What's their reason for voting again in the future if their experience is that it won't be available to them?

Why not make the threshold 5,000 votes, since that's how many will be made? Or even 1,000? Since that's potentially how few people might have been able to buy the sets at 5 copies each.

Telling your customers, "We need 10,000 people to show interest in this to make it," then only making 5,000 copies already alienates half the people who expressed interest in it. Allowing people to buy 5 copies each alienates even more of your customers.

Some of the arbitrary decisions that have been made throughout this process are ridiculous. They aren't good business practices and only serve to discourage their customers.

@taylors51 said:
" @TheBrickGuru24 said:
" @taylors51 said:
"Once gain I am left annoyed by lego. I really wanted the castle but was stuck in a meeting. 45 mins after opening the castle had gone, the boat wasn't maxed out but couldn't buy in the UK. I did manage to order a safe though. Why they don't do a 1 day timed purchase window and make as many as demanded I really don't know. That would prevent site crashing issues, and mitigate the scalpers."

The castle sold out within the first two hours, if not the first hour. 1 day is far too long. Heck, the idea of making "as many as demanded in this span" wouldn't work for most high demand items in this world. Resources, time and labor are finite. 5,000 was not made the number to tick people off, it was made the number because it's what they can afford on top of everything else they have going on. It's Economics 101."

Well kickstarters seem to manage with this model, they don't start turning people way. If lego know how many people want an item and even pay upfront before manufacturering it seems like an ideal situation and gives them time to plan. They don't have to deliver the item for quite a while. If something was super popular and required such high resources then it impacted other items then I can see that could be an issue. I wouldn't imagine that being a problem with the long lead times though."

Kickstarters are one product. LEGO sells several hundred. Big companies are often stretched thin in what they produce. Tbh, the production of these items probably HAS already affected the production of other items. They likely stemmed production of several less popular items to make room. We have no way of knowing for sure of course. But it wouldn't surprise me.

I mean seriously, what benefit does LEGO get from setting production numbers lower than they can afford? Piss fans off? Certainly not. Less money than possible? Why would they do either? The quantity of 5,000 was set for unknown reasons, but chances are, those reasons are sound. It sure makes a lot more sense than denying any potential profit and angering fans in the process. That's one terrible business model, in fact, it's an anti-business model.

With such a long funding period why not allow 1 per person until the last week/10 days or something to give us all a chance! Gutted I missed the castle xx

Bricklink posted on Facebook that they hear our concerns and there will be an update next week. Hopefully that means I can get a castle!

@eiffel006 said:
" @dtobin123 said:
" @AustinPowers said:
" @eiffel006 said:
"People have a lot of bad things to say about resellers, but in the end, the person who’s going to by my second copy should be happy about their purchase."
You are exactly the type of person I find most disgusting.
Profiting from people who for whatever reason didn't have a chance to pre-order a set, yet thinking you even deserve their gratitude on top of your profits.
Sorry to say, but I absolutely hate people with such an attitude.

All the more reason there should have been a 1 per person limit.
They have this for non limited sets often enough on their Shop at Home website, yet not here for some highly limited sets. Questionable to say the least. "

Thank you @AustinPowers for saying what most of us were thinking.

"

I know it’s kind of useless to defend myself here, but because context was removed from the post, I fell like I need to restate what I said in my original post:
1) I agree, the limit should have been one set. The five limit is dumb.
2) I originally bought one. Then a second one to resell (and not 5). I will keep one.
3) I agree that my decision was not ethical. But I’m not sorry for doing it. It was well within the rules, whether you like it or not.
4) People who buy from resellers don’t have to. Judging their intent is condescending.
That is all.
"

I've been flipping LEGO and other toys for two years now. I take advantage of limited runs, early morning/late night Ebay bids and listings from people who haven't the slightest idea about LEGO and what it's worth. I'm currently sitting on a LEGO nest egg of I'd say $12,000 at the moment. When my (mostly built, because LEGO is a hobby first) collection is sold off, it will ALL, and I mean ALL, go into college tuition and my hopeful future career. If people have a problem with that, so be it. If anyone is the villain here, it's the tuition, where I can work my butt off 40+ hours a week, work my butt off in school for scholarships, and still not make enough money to pay out of state costs without help.

Honestly the hatred towards scalping is pretty absurd here. I see a whole lot of people, more than likely older, who just can't stand the idea of buying to resell for profit. Even though that's literally how general stores, concessions, vending machines and the like all work, and I'm sure 99.% of them have used all three. Don't feel bad about making profit legally. Never let anyone else make you feel bad about it. And you are exactly right about the person who buys your second set more than likely feeling satisfied with their purchase. That's their choice after all. Chances are, the person who buys it probably doesn't even know the set exists right now.

@eMouse said:
" @ericb_ said:
" @CDM , I don't understand the point you're trying to make regarding production quantities."

I think it comes down to, why did LEGO/Bricklink require sets to get 10,000 people to show support if they had no intention of making the sets available to at least 10,000 people? It creates the expectation that those 10,000 people who want it and showed support will be able to buy it. What's their reason for voting again in the future if their experience is that it won't be available to them?

Why not make the threshold 5,000 votes, since that's how many will be made? Or even 1,000? Since that's potentially how few people might have been able to buy the sets at 5 copies each.

Telling your customers, "We need 10,000 people to show interest in this to make it," then only making 5,000 copies already alienates half the people who expressed interest in it. Allowing people to buy 5 copies each alienates even more of your customers.

Some of the arbitrary decisions that have been made throughout this process are ridiculous. They aren't good business practices and only serve to discourage their customers."

On the surface what you're saying makes sense, but in all reality 10k is a better mark than 5k, and it's not related to the 5k made for production at all. The 10k votes requires no resources. It's a number that they decided on would be best to weed out all the sets down to a very limited few and make the process/refunding as simple as possible. 5k meanwhile is the number that they landed on with regards to what they could reasonably produce of each set. Completely unrelated.

With that said, I'm stepping out of the "Economics 101" conversation, as I've said my piece and it all seems very straightforward to me. I'm glad that common sense and logic is mainly prevailing here. And maybe that BrickLink announcement a week from now will make people happy. Take care.

@fakespacesquid said:
"
You're aware that the Ideas program has been going on for a decade longer than the ADP program, right? The comparison doesn't make sense, the 5k number was specifically chosen for Ideas projects that didn't get approved. The benchmarks are different. 10k is the front end to get it made as a regular production set, and they make a decent amount more than 10k copies.

Granted, it would make more sense to make 10k in the ADP, but Ideas didn't select their numbers for the purposes of the ADP. ALL of these sets were sets that they had no intention of making.
"

What doesn't make sense is seeing 10,000+ people support an idea and deciding to make only 5,000 copies to sell to 1,000 people.

Even if you're going to base your selection on another program, at least look at the amount of interest generated by that program and use it to gauge what the production numbers and attribution should be.

And again, it's all kickstarter style pre-sale. These purchase commitments are being made before production even begins. There is no loss to them if they decided to say, "Okay, 10,000 people liked this idea, let's see if 10,000 will pre-purchase" and then base final production on the number of actual sales. What reason is there for making only 5,000 copies of each? They know they'd sell. They're priced so that LEGO is making a profit on every set sold. So what's their reason for voluntarily irritating fans in order to make less money?

@TheBrickGuru24 said:
" On the surface what you're saying makes sense, but in all reality 10k is a better mark than 5k, and it's not related to the 5k made for production at all. The 10k votes requires no resources. It's a number that they decided on would be best to weed out all the sets down to a very limited few and make the process/refunding as simple as possible. 5k meanwhile is the number that they landed on with regards to what they could reasonably produce of each set. Completely unrelated.

With that said, I'm stepping out of the "Economics 101" conversation, as I've said my piece and it all seems very straightforward to me. I'm glad that common sense and logic is mainly prevailing here. And maybe that BrickLink announcement a week from now will make people happy. Take care."

It's entirely possible that a set that got 10,000 votes might not get 10,000 orders. However, this is all pre-sales, so as long as LEGO picks a minimum run they're willing to go with, which was apparently 3,000, and produce to meet the presale numbers, they're going to be making a profit.

The main limiter for them is likely production scheduling. I would guess that they're squeezing these sets into their production schedule when there's a lull, which could account for an arbitrary number like 5,000.

It's very much in LEGO's interest to adjust production to meet demand, whether that's 3,000 to 5,000 or 5,000 to 10,000.

And keep in mind that the 5,000 preorders that was reached for several of these sets was reached in 1-2 hours out of 1000 hours scheduled for solicitation. There are 40 days remaining and the only set still available is the Kakapo, which is almost sold out at this time. That is a tremendous sign for any production manager that you've completely underestimated demand and are abandoning a lot of money.

Since Bricklink has some sort of pending announcement, I wouldn't be surprised if they're possibly going to consider doing waves, the way LEGO currently produces a lot of their product. With each wave being produced if 3,000 to 5,000 presales are made.

Ok, it looks like I’m going to present an unpopular opinion: I loved almost everything about this opportunity. The main thing that gives me pause is the Qty 5 allowance. I believe lowering that to 1 or 2 would be prudent to give the most number of unique users a chance to buy. The only other concern relates to the regional distribution. I don’t, however, know enough about how it works or why to have a strong feeling. That being said, being unable to order an item that is clearly still available seems misguided. Lastly, and like any competitive pool, matchups cant be dismissed. Particle might have destroyed a number of other entrants but ran into 3 lower priced slam dunks.

But like I said, I just loved this:

-We had several months heads up including most (not all) important details
-We were able to order/pay through S @H though it would have helped to know that earlier
-We get VIP points
-We get free shipping
-While certainly not perfect, the ordering process worked much better than other recent LEGO promotions
-We get a chance to buy sets that otherwise would never have been made available
-The whole thing was exciting and fun and I’m very much looking forward to Rounds 2 and 3
-I feel like I finally had an opportunity to make my voice heard with LEGO on what I want
-This was only Round 1. LEGO may apply lessons learned to future rounds.
-I love supporting LEGO in trying new/different things and hope they keep them coming.
-Rewards designers whose entries didn’t make the cut
-Creates strong buzz/excitement (even if not all positive)
-I like that these are limited edition. These aren’t wide releases. Having them limited, right or wrong, adds to their specialness.

@SonofLight said:
"I can understand adjusting limits down to 3 or 2, but this idea of "they should have made a bazillion of them" would have definitely lowered the desirability and value of the sets."

"If everyone can get one then I don't want one" seems like a bizarre way to decide if you like something or not.

Nothing but hasn't been said a dozen times so far, but, man, come on. The 5/customer limit and low number of available units only helps scalpers. If they were trying to set this up to only put sets on the secondary market, they couldn't have done a better job.

Also, what does it take to get a revived Castle series? That Castle here sold out in single-digit minutes. Between that, the sales of the Blacksmith Shop, and the excitement for the 3-in-1 Castle, how much more market research do they need to realize there is an audience ready to spend?

@bernsa said:
" @Antoine_23 said:
"And that is why we as fans, should hate that lego bought bricklink, it was our « safe haven », sort of"

This ^^^^ is why I left the hobby. It was the "line in the sand", the "straw that broke the camel's back"."

If that’s your line in the sand then why are you here?

I managed to place an order for the safe while there were still more than 1000 left, but more than 30 hours later I still have no confirmation email.

Emailed lego and they told me my order fell in a group that was canceled because it was placed after everything sold out even though my order was placed well before it sold out

Called lego and they told me my order is in a group under review. So I really have no idea what is going on and am pretty ticked off.

Lego really botched all of this.