Full list of North American price increases

These prices are so out of touch with reality that if I were working retail at a Lego store, I would feel embarrassed changing the sticker price. And these are pre-tax....

it's not even about being able to afford or not, it's about bad value. I really hope their 2022 revenue will tank.

.And if I pay these prices, might as well hunt some old 80s sets on eBay.

European friends, get the one you want before September. I also noticed it tppk Amazon Canada 24 hours to update pricing, so act fast if an unlisted set.got a price hike at.midnight.

My second Dark Age just got darker. Even Batman would be impressed.

I know this sounds really immature and/or dumb, but I really hope that Lego sales will drop so immensely that Lego never does this kind of thing ever again.

@Hammy_the_horrible said:
"I know this sounds really immature and/or dumb, but I really hope that Lego sales will drop so immensely that Lego never does this kind of thing ever again."

I'm on board with this. The only way companies as large as Lego take note of changes is if it hits them in the wallet.

They've not forgotten their dance with bankruptcy in the early 2000's.

Lego has made the biggest mistake ever in infuriating its largest demographic, the AFOL and ironically on its 90th anniversary. It will be a very different company for its 100th.
Thanks Huw for the chart, time to look over my 35 year inventory and decide what to open next.

This is pure greed and nothing else, sorry to say that... and I love Lego. The intention to milk us adults even more is obvious.

Feedstock prices dropping under pre-war level in the meanwhile with an outlook of a long-term drop due to the upcoming global recession.

Greed! Nothing more, nothing less. But you know, karma will come eventually !!!

Not liking spending more money either, but I think what will happen in reality is that people will grumble for a bit and then forget by next year, not the doomsday predictions laid out above.

This was coming for a while - my suspicion is that Lego was already facing cost pressures since 2020, bit didn't want to increase the prices while the pandemic was raging. Now coupled with the oil price shock (main component of Lego bricks) and further supply chain issues (note pieces for single set come from multiple factories), I am not surprised at all.

When costs rise this much, and not expected to return to lower levels for quite a while, price increases are inevitable. However, think about how many companies would give you a notice months in advance so that you can buy your priority sets still at the lower price? In most cases prices simply increase overnight. In my view, Lego played this very fair and transparent.

The most likely outcome is that Lego will scale back with the size of sets to keep prices in check, and not regularly release monstrosities like Titanic.

LEGO has been throwing money around in the last couple years, with 2 new factories in US and Vietnam at $1 billion each, as well as expanding their China factory and buying back to a point of having 50% shares in LEGOLAND ($6 billion investment deal)

@Grfxguy said:
"...its largest demographic, the AFOL..."
Loudest, most overdramatic and most self entitled demographic maybe. But Lego's largest demographic is kids and always will be.

They should decrese prices not increase, china knockoff brands will win this fight... and to fight them lego could do better, they have booming sales, but no i don't know. Hope they will get what they deserve - low sales.

As I see it, as long as there are enough fools that line up in droves at LEGO stores on release days to buy anything at RRP, or throw a fit over not being able to order a new extremely overpriced set five seconds after midnight, LEGO will keep raising prices, especially on 18+ sets.
Let's be real, who wouldn't?

It's when the majority of parents/relatives begin to rethink their purchase plans because they simply can't afford those prices anymore that TLG might start to see a drop in sales.

@inversion said:
"... The most likely outcome is that Lego will scale back with the size of sets to keep prices in check, and not regularly release monstrosities like Titanic."

Thanks for your thoughtful post and providing a different perspective. Concerning your last sentence: I would probably not even mind if LEGO would focus less on the super expensive sets. After having purchased and built the Colosseum 10276 last year, I came to the conclusion that three sets of 100-150 euro give me more joy than one large set of 500 euro.

Call me a cynic, but I presume it will be no more than a coincidence that all the items that are currently out of stock on the website (the Titanic - will this ever be in stock again?!, Delorean, Tallneck, ........) will magically be available in Europe after the price hikes!

@inversion said:
"...

The most likely outcome is that Lego will scale back with the size of sets to keep prices in check, and not regularly release monstrosities like Titanic."

I agree with nearly every you said, except for the final sentence. I love my Titanic - currently building it and it's truly a beauty.
It does feel like there has been an increase in the number of sets over the last few years, or at least sets that interest me and I wouldn't mind the number decreasing per annum. An article by Huw on the number and theme of sets released over the last 5 years or so would be interesting..,

The second thing I don't understand is the inconsistency across the themes. Some of them seem out of whack compared to others. I expected (hoped I was wrong) Lego to increase those sets most appealing to AFOL's. But am more surprised by some of the sets aimed at younger audiences, as those sets are their bread and butter.

Edit: ok read the article linked by the BrickNerd - very interesting, strangely not appeasing, but it does make sense. Sigh.

Yep, this is what Lego deserves for going to war with the Ukraine, after causing a worldwide pandemic.

Wait, what?

Oh, sorry, I assumed that must be what all the AFOL cry babies are accusing them of - because the cost of ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING ON THE PLANET HAS GONE UP.

But Lego going up? Oh noes, that just won't do.

Grow up, babies.

@AustinPowers said:
"As I see it, as long as there are enough fools that line up in droves at LEGO stores on release days to buy anything at RRP, or throw a fit over not being able to order a new extremely overpriced set five seconds after midnight, LEGO will keep raising prices, especially on 18+ sets.
Let's be real, who wouldn't?

It's when the majority of parents/relatives begin to rethink their purchase plans because they simply can't afford those prices anymore that TLG might start to see a drop in sales."

I have noticed many stores have begun putting LEGO’s rivals on the exact same aisle as them. Mainly Target and Wal-Mart. I wonder if parents will begin to view the other stuff as a better value in comparison.

Why pay $170+ for one obscure Star Wars ship when you could probably get a decent amount of stuff from the other brand with that money?

@Montyh7
I love the Titanic too - my comment only reflects that Lego may think twice, as the price of such sets now would be pushing it too far. But one never knows - luxury items are quite resilient to recessions, and big sets like Titanic or AT-AT were unthinkable 10 years ago in any event.

@darthsutius said:
"Yep, this is what Lego deserves for going to war with the Ukraine, after causing a worldwide pandemic.

Wait, what?

Oh, sorry, I assumed that must be what all the AFOL cry babies are accusing them of - because the cost of ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING ON THE PLANET HAS GONE UP.

But Lego going up? Oh noes, that just won't do.

Grow up, babies."
I bet comments like that would show up even if the prices went 100, 200, 500% up. "Because inflation".
I wonder if Tencent asked for an inflation update on the 1 billion deal they're getting from LEGO.

@TeriXeri said:
"LEGO has been throwing money around in the last couple years, with 2 new factories in US and Vietnam at $1 billion each, as well as expanding their China factory and buying back to a point of having 50% shares in LEGOLAND ($6 billion investment deal)
"
The analysis by Dr Craven at BrickNerd (link in Huw's intro above) shows pretty conclusively that the price increases are due to inflation and anticipated future inflation. We don't have to invoke LEGO's spending plans on capital projects and acquisitions to explain what's going on.

@sipuss said:
" @darthsutius said:
"Yep, this is what Lego deserves for going to war with the Ukraine, after causing a worldwide pandemic.

Wait, what?

Oh, sorry, I assumed that must be what all the AFOL cry babies are accusing them of - because the cost of ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING ON THE PLANET HAS GONE UP.

But Lego going up? Oh noes, that just won't do.

Grow up, babies."
I bet comments like that would show up even if the prices went 100, 200, 500% up. "Because inflation".
I wonder if Tencent asked for an inflation update on the 1 billion deal they're getting from LEGO."

Do you really want to argue with white knights? For them doesn’t matter what Lego does they will bash the people anyway.

@darthsutius said:
"Yep, this is what Lego deserves for going to war with the Ukraine, after causing a worldwide pandemic.

Wait, what?

Oh, sorry, I assumed that must be what all the AFOL cry babies are accusing them of - because the cost of ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING ON THE PLANET HAS GONE UP.

But Lego going up? Oh noes, that just won't do.

Grow up, babies."

Get off your high horse pal. LEGO prices have gone up regardless of Russia invading.

Meanwhile, the value and quality is constantly getting worse and worse. Then they announce wasting 1 BILLION dollars on Metaverse crap.

So yeah. I’m salty that prices are going up. LEGO has always been a premium product, but I no longer feel like the quality or value is there to justify that premium anymore.

Please, for the love of god, take a minute and learn about basic macroeconomic principles, or at least read the article they've linked.

Presumably, since you all have the money to spend on a luxury like Lego, you have a job that requires some education, which makes your collective pearl clutching that much sadder. I would have generally hoped that there was a certain level of ability to understand how business/manufacturing/retail actually works.

Stop whining as though a multinational corporation owes you something.

Don't like the price, don't buy it, but at least stop acting as though you are being personally attacked by the cost of a toy.

I love Lego, but man the fans make it hard.

Lots of negative comments here, especially those who live in a capitalism driven climate. Anyway, the bricknerd article is very well written and worthwile to read. Yes, the economy hurts our wallets in a big way now... But it was quite soft on our wallets for some time to be honest. So to me it feels like a postponed pain in a way. Brick on everyone!

It seems like a majority of the people who are commenting didn’t read the article (or only read some of it) This is what I got out of it:

There was a ~99% match when the new prices were compared to an inflation-only increase model. They also have other businesses and foundations they use the money from LEGO sales to help fund, absorbing the costs would affect these other groups. The majority of money from the increase will be going through LEGO directly to the businesses they purchase from. They likely won’t feel a direct impact from these increases.

I agree that they should have come up with a different solution than just hiking prices, but it seems like definitively the answer is NOT greed but rather keeping their entire network of business (including stuff we consumers don’t see) stable. It sucks, but the better solution would be throwing hands and shouting at the businesses that is charging LEGO these price increases which is then being passed on to us.

@EvilTwin said:
" @Grfxguy said:
"...its largest demographic, the AFOL..."
Loudest, most overdramatic and most self entitled demographic maybe. But Lego's largest demographic is kids and always will be."

If ever a thread underlined this view then this is it.

From AskMoney:

"Greedflation is a term that refers to companies increasing prices purely to drive up profit margins. It implies that greed is the underlying reason behind a rise in the cost of goods and services and suggests that the price increases aren’t justified by a legitimate need for a price increase, such as a rise in the cost of materials or labor. Essentially, a price increase qualifies as greedflation when greed is the sole reason for the rise. Otherwise, inflation is likely behind the increase.

In some cases, greedflation is more common among companies with near-monopolies in their industries. In those instances, customers have little choice but to pay the listed price for the good or service because the number of alternatives is limited."

This is why I have, albeit with some exceptions, begun to get more involved with MOC building since late last year. It's now too expensive to be a collector.

Oh well, such is life.

@EvilTwin said:
" @Grfxguy said:
"...its largest demographic, the AFOL..."
Loudest, most overdramatic and most self entitled demographic maybe. But Lego's largest demographic is kids and always will be."

True, but who actually has to pay for the LEGO? Adults.

@PixelTheDragon said:
" @darthsutius said:
"Yep, this is what Lego deserves for going to war with the Ukraine, after causing a worldwide pandemic.

Wait, what?

Oh, sorry, I assumed that must be what all the AFOL cry babies are accusing them of - because the cost of ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING ON THE PLANET HAS GONE UP.

But Lego going up? Oh noes, that just won't do.

Grow up, babies."

Get off your high horse pal. LEGO prices have gone up regardless of Russia invading.

Meanwhile, the value and quality is constantly getting worse and worse. Then they announce wasting 1 BILLION dollars on Metaverse crap.

So yeah. I’m salty that prices are going up. LEGO has always been a premium product, but I no longer feel like the quality or value is there to justify that premium anymore. "

Regarding the quality, there was actually a discussion about that on the Lego Star Wars subreddit yesterday. And since that subject keeps coming up, I thought I'd chime in here.

Some quotes from that thread, posted by someone with experience in QA and fabrication:

"LEGO in 1999 was making a few hundred million parts per year. Assuming they were at "the best we can physically do" they had a 99,99% QA pass rate. This would result in a few tens of thousands of parts per year that had a measurable "off" element about them, be it color, fit, finish, sticker registration, etc."
"As of 2022 LEGO reported they were fabricating 70 billion bricks per year."

With a same 99,99% QA pass rate, that would result in seven million bricks per year, that are produced with something that's "off".
Adjusted for inflation, the bricks themselves have generally remained the same in price per dollar in purchasing power.
The quality itself has most likely not gone down, but the amount of "faulty" pieces has gone up, simply due to an enormous increase of production over the past two decades.

Value is debatable, but even that seems overblown. Adjust for inflation, sets in the past are just as expensive as today. If not even more so.
6984 from Space Police II, for example, was $60 in 1992. $126.72 in 2022 money, for 406 pieces. Many more examples like that.
Sets have become denser, sturdier and more detailed, but the value is not worse than it was 20, 30, 40 years ago.

@Graysmith said:
"In some cases, greedflation is more common among companies with near-monopolies in their industries. In those instances, customers have little choice but to pay the listed price for the good or service because the number of alternatives is limited.""
Unfortunately, that is a ridiculous comparison.
Lego do not have a "near monopoly"- there are loads of alternatives both in the specific area of construction toys and in the toy market in general.
You always have a choice whether to buy Lego or not. It is an entirely discretionary purchase.

@Huw will the set pages display the two different prices from the two time periods? For now, only the current prices are listed, but I for one would like to see the historical information. After all, these or other prices may change again…

While I am not happy about the price increases, we all knew this was coming and had a chance to buy at the old prices. I, for one, did.

Moreover, the analysis by Bricknerd linked in the article shows that what they are doing is only sensible from a business point of view. I do not want TLC to go out of business, or to have to shrink their operation.

Inflation is a real thing. We can thank our incompetent leadership all over the world for this. No need to blame TLC.

@EvilTwin said:
" @Graysmith said:
"In some cases, greedflation is more common among companies with near-monopolies in their industries. In those instances, customers have little choice but to pay the listed price for the good or service because the number of alternatives is limited.""
Unfortunately, that is a ridiculous comparison.
Lego do not have a "near monopoly"- there are loads of alternatives both in the specific area of construction toys and in the toy market in general.
You always have a choice whether to buy Lego or not. It is an entirely discretionary purchase."

I was quoting an article about "greedflation" in general. Obviously LEGO isn't a necessity to life like food or water. And it was the first paragraph that was the main point I wanted to make.

That said, I still think for many AFOLs the choice is either to buy LEGO or to buy nothing. Yeah, there are other brands that make similar brick-based toys but many of us wouldn't even consider buying those.

What I’m most curious about is whether all of us AFOL’s will actually alter our spending habits.

@cofaigh said:
" @Hammy_the_horrible said:
"I know this sounds really immature and/or dumb, but I really hope that Lego sales will drop so immensely that Lego never does this kind of thing ever again."

I'm on board with this. The only way companies as large as Lego take note of changes is if it hits them in the wallet.

They've not forgotten their dance with bankruptcy in the early 2000's."

There are really only a few sets that I didn't get pre-increase, so I'll get those and that's it. Boutique Hotel, the 90th castle, and the Speed Champions 512M. Waiting on some good GWPs for the first two, and then it's just hunting vintage stuff. I have more than enough Lego to enjoy for the rest of my life.

The linked article sounds reasonable until you start thinking about it. The price of a Lego set is almost independent of the production cost. The material and packing of a Lego set is probably less than 10% of the asked price. All the rest is marketing cost and greed. Even if (what the article assumes) Lego is hit by increasing costs from their suppliers, it would still be only a fraction of the sets price.

Thank you very much for compiling these lists, Huw, and for providing the link to the article. It's interesting and informative information, and it's very easy to read. Your time and effort are appreciated:)

@elangab:
You might want to peek out your window and see how much reality has shifted. Keep in mind that price per piece, in spite of two decades of Chicken Little-ing AFOLs, hasn’t really changed in over _FOUR_ decades. $0.10 USD per piece is still the gold standard we seek, while the price of gas has gone up over 5x what it cost when minifigs first showed up in 1978, in sets like 928/497 ($32 USD, 338pcs, $0.095 USD per piece).

AFOLs are addicted to artificial price stability, like McDonald’s Dollar Menu where they had to change the name to allow them to adjust prices and keep things profitable. This could be a short-term fix, like when 10221 hit the US at $0.127/pc on the tail end of the recession following the 2008 crash of the US housing market, followed by a return to “normal” pricing. Eventually, however, prices _will_ have to see permanent increases to keep up with the cost to bring a set to the register. AFOLs see a $20 price bump and assume that all goes into LEGO pockets, but they fail to factor in the rising cost of transportation (the trucking industry has seen fuel prices more than double during the pandemic, and there aren’t enough drivers to keep up with the surge in shipping), or how retailers have been impacted. Three years ago, US workers were demanding $15/hr federal minimum wage, and now retailers and restaurants can’t find prospective employees who are willing to apply for jobs at that wage. On a $20 MSRP bump, the wholesale might go up $10, and part of that will be used to pay higher shipping fees.

To those folks mocking/chastising people here for simply expressing their concerns/frustrations with these price changes, thank you so much as condescension and rudeness is so underrepresented online.

LEGO gave us a heads up. Yes. But LEGO did not tell us what was changing, though the list had most likely been finalized internally for months. They do not get kudos from me for providing us advanced notice that something will happen to some things sometime in August or September. The only reason we knew any details at all was that a 3rd party retailer jumped the gun.

If they had released the list, then I would have truly had legitimate fair warning and would have at least had the ability to make an informed choice in the lead up to the change. Keeping it vague may have helped reduce a potential scalping run but let’s not kid ourselves, it also likely drove indiscriminate AFOL sales increase across the whole portfolio as we all tried to shotgun an approach.

But who among us has the resources to immediately clear our wanted lists at the drop of a hat? Changing prices so dramatically on existing already released sets is mostly unprecedented with LEGO. Changing prices on newly announced sets between announcement and release is simply poor form.

This is a LEGO fan site where people come to discuss the hobby, our excitements and our frustrations. Calling folks names, belittling our concerns and then bucketing and dismissing us all in aggregate is both counter productive to the ethos of this site and plainly just mean.

Gotta pay to play.

Personally, I just need LEGO to release fewer amazing sets. The wish list continues to total a 5 digit figure, and my available budget to fulfill that is a 3 digit one. The adjusted prices are understandable (disappointing but sensible), however overall this has a marginal impact on my underlying dilemma.

@MainBricker said:
" @IgelCampus said:
"The linked article sounds reasonable until you start thinking about it. The price of a Lego set is almost independent of the production cost. The material and packing of a Lego set is probably less than 10% of the asked price. All the rest is marketing cost and greed. Even if (what the article assumes) Lego is hit by increasing costs from their suppliers, it would still be only a fraction of the sets price."

Urgh, another really basic understanding of running a business.

The cost of the product is the cost of materials and manufacturing, and no other costs?!? Who pays for the staff?

You have the initial costs such as design, prototyping etc, salaries of those designers. The actual cost of material and manufacturing, shipping costs, salaries of all staff, running costs of the business etc."

This is a great point and often overlooked by many here. All the employees at Lego are also facing the same inflation as we do (not just in Lego prices but also in daily expenses). These employees need inflation compensation too which, I know from experience, is quite a large rise in overhead costs. Firing employees while sales/production is booming, is not an option... So while I dislike price increases, I understand they are needed now.

Basic economics: raising prices diminishes demand. Doing business the way Lego has, further diminishes demand with atrocious promotional and customer relations.

First, they could've gone a different route by incorporating increased costs into the initial price. None of the inflationary increase was unforeseeable. Regardless, Lego™ chose to act in a manner which will diminish brand loyalty.

Second, they could've gone the other way, and held the line on passing along increased costs. This would be the route advocated in the movie 'Mr. Mom' in order to boost sales and brand loyalty. The increased volume would likely offset the decreased profit per unit. They chose not to put their customers and brand first. It's a very foolish decision for a company like Lego™.

The fundamentals of this inflationary period are largely psychological. Companies have been raising prices because they can- given the strong wage and consumer debt numbers not because of underlying fundamentals. However, consumers have had enough, and are pushing back. One wonders what will happen to an expensive toy company like Lego™?

Personally, I'm outraged that they didn't provide us will a full list of price increases prior to Aug. I flat out refuse to pay more. I have plenty. If there are no forthcoming sales, so be it. Complete collections are a fool's game.

To quote the God of Thunder:

'Fare the well, morons!'

That was a really interesting article, thanks for linking! I'll add BrickNerd to my RSS feeds, I hadn't come across them before.

@yellowcastle said:
"To those folks mocking/chastising people here for simply expressing their concerns/frustrations with these price changes, thank you so much as condescension and rudeness is so underrepresented online.

LEGO gave us a heads up. Yes. But LEGO did not tell us what was changing, though the list had most likely been finalized internally for months. They do not get kudos from me for providing us advanced notice that something will happen to some things sometime in August or September. The only reason we knew any details at all was that a 3rd party retailer jumped the gun.

If they had released the list, then I would have truly had legitimate fair warning and would have at least had the ability to make an informed choice in the lead up to the change. Keeping it vague may have helped reduce a potential scalping run but let’s not kid ourselves, it also likely drove indiscriminate AFOL sales increase across the whole portfolio as we all tried to shotgun an approach.

But who among us has the resources to immediately clear our wanted lists at the drop of a hat? Changing prices so dramatically on existing already released sets is mostly unprecedented with LEGO. Changing prices on newly announced sets between announcement and release is simply poor form.

This is a LEGO fan site where people come to discuss the hobby, our excitements and our frustrations. Calling folks names, belittling our concerns and then bucketing and dismissing us all in aggregate is both counter productive to the ethos of this site and plainly just mean."

Well said! It's simply great writing like this that draws me to this site.

Edit: Also, it's the strong work from the BSet crew that draws me here. It's easy to spread good news. It takes journalistic chutzpah to tell the bad news. Thanks @Huw!

It's too bad there's not a dislike button. I love it when they make expensive sets even more expensive...ugh!

@Patrik78:
Grain prices are driven by the futures market, not actual demand on day of purchase. Wheat farmers in the US are looking at the volatility of the market caused by the invasion of Ukraine keeping them from shipping their harvest, and they can’t justify planting more to compensate. By the time they harvest a winter wheat crop come spring, the prices may drop to a level where they lose money on the additional crop, and there’s no way to know right now what to expect.

@EvilTwin:
I can see a future where AFOLs finally do account for more sales than kids (but probably not outnumber them by headcount). Of course, by the time that actually happens, these AFOLs will believe they account for 110% of all sales.

@Montyh7:
Between 2000 and 2020, their catalog has seen about a fivefold increase in the quantity of sets released annually, from around 100 to over 500, according to an article that was linked on BrickNerd several years ago. Many of those sets are well above the $100 max range that most genre themes had pre-2000, with the high end pressing up against the $1000 mark (I actually had to scan through the list and make sure World Map didn’t get even a slight bump).

@inversion:
Demand for D2C sets targeted at adult collectors has surged during the pandemic, so having much of the world furloughed for several months didn’t have any noticeable impact on sales, at least from where we sit.

@sipuss:
AFOLs have been whinging about price increases when it’s possible to demonstrate that there weren’t any. They have been whinging about the “Disney tax” when it’s possible to demonstrate that non-IP themes like City cost more per piece than Star Wars. This has been happening for over two decades, and is as predictable as seeing the sun rise in the morning. Until you can show us an instance of a 500% increase in MSRP on a single LEGO set, that’s just deflection.

@PixelTheDragon:
Your horse died 20 years ago.

@yui:
Adjusted for inflation, the price per LEGO piece has steadily declined since the late 70’s, not remained flat.

@IgelCampus:
…and transportation, and labor, and utilities, and rent/labor/utilities for the retailers they sell to, and…

@yellowcastle:
This is very much a two-way racetrack with no speed limit, and most of the drivers are wearing blindfolds. I’ve been branded an apologist in the past, there’s a post in this thread referring to “white knights”, and those are the relatively polite responses. I’ve said before that I don’t like price increases, but that I recognize they are overdue and therefore inevitable.

The partial list may have been due to some of those increases not being nailed down as early as the ones we got warned about. The BrickNerd article makes a clear case for new sets falling at the high end of the price increase, while sets that are close to retirement are absent from the list. There may have been one list of sets they needed to decide whether or not to raise prices, and another list where they needed to decide how much to raise them. The answers to both questions probably depended on how old the sets were vs how long they expected to keep producing them, while factoring in how much raising the price could impact sales and reduce the actual lifespan.

It's a toy, guys.

Frankly, I've been spending the month going through a pile of unused Lego sets in my garage and figuring out which ones I could purge, because it could be making some kid happy at a discount instead of occupying space in my materially overloaded house.

It's a toy.

@CCC said:
"LEGO are just as likely to be hit by people having to spend money on essentials and not on LEGO as they are by these price increases. And any drop in the rate of growth will likely refer to troubled global finances rather than price increases."
Absolutely! My Lego purchases may reduce in coming months, but this will only be, at most, 5% due to Lego price increases and at least 95% due to other price increases.

Looks like I picked the right time to run out of space.

@IgelCampus said:
"The linked article sounds reasonable until you start thinking about it. The price of a Lego set is almost independent of the production cost. The material and packing of a Lego set is probably less than 10% of the asked price. All the rest is marketing cost and greed. Even if (what the article assumes) Lego is hit by increasing costs from their suppliers, it would still be only a fraction of the sets price."

That is a factually inaccurate statement unless you are saying that TLC has a 90% profit margin, which no company in the world does, not even close. Shipping is a major cost and has been hugely hit by inflation. Their factories have salaried staff and maintenance costs. All aspects of delivering a LEGO set to you have been hit by inflation.

@inversion said:
"Not liking spending more money either, but I think what will happen in reality is that people will grumble for a bit and then forget by next year, not the doomsday predictions laid out above.

This was coming for a while - my suspicion is that Lego was already facing cost pressures since 2020, bit didn't want to increase the prices while the pandemic was raging. Now coupled with the oil price shock (main component of Lego bricks) and further supply chain issues (note pieces for single set come from multiple factories), I am not surprised at all.

When costs rise this much, and not expected to return to lower levels for quite a while, price increases are inevitable. However, think about how many companies would give you a notice months in advance so that you can buy your priority sets still at the lower price? In most cases prices simply increase overnight. In my view, Lego played this very fair and transparent.

The most likely outcome is that Lego will scale back with the size of sets to keep prices in check, and not regularly release monstrosities like Titanic."

Finally a reasonable take

They need the extra money to make a new goat mould.

@Capybara554321 said:
"They need the extra money to make a new goat mould. "

OMG! You just won this comments section!

@VincentVendetta said:
"Looks like I picked the right time to run out of space."
I did that a while ago. However, using Lego boxes as furniture saves space and money!

@JayCal:
I don’t think it’s a point that’s overlooked so much as it’s shoved in a closet that’s chained shut. The first time I remember people complaining about prices going up was right around 20 years ago, when I ran MaskofDestiny.com. The complaints also claimed that Star Wars sets cost more on average because the licensing fees got recouped by MSRP being higher. I did a thorough cost analysis at the time, ignoring obvious outliers (the minifig 3-packs on the low end, and anything with electronics on the high end), and Star Wars cost $0.09/pc at the time, while World City was $0.11/pc. Here we are, two decades later, and the song sounds exactly the same. BrickNerd linked to an article that did an even more exhaustive analysis over a much broader range of time, got the exact same results, and people still flooded the comment sections to complain about prices going up when factoring inflation in shows they’ve really gone down. What has gone up is the piece count and the range of sets produced. When you’re buying 10x as much product, of course you’re going to be paying more.

As for the wage increases, my employer rolls out annual raises every September, but this year we already got an unannounced “cost of living” raise simply due to inflation being so high, and this is at least the second or third time in the last two years we’ve seen off-schedule raises. We’ve received a few one-time pandemic bonuses for not quitting when we were some of the few people who were driving to work during the lockdowns of early 2020. That’s not even factoring in the effective raise many people expect to feel in their pocket when they transition to a work-from-home lifestyle that no longer requires daily commutes or eating out five or more meals per week. That may not impact TLG’s bottom line, but it does increase the spending power of the public, which further drives inflation.

@StyleCounselor:
So, you’re saying that five years ago, when they announced the second UCS Millennium Falcon, they should have predicted rampant inflation caused by a combination of a pandemic, people hoarding essential items, governments handing out “free” money to everyone to keep the economy afloat, the invasion of Ukraine cutting off much of the world’s wheat supply, and a labor force that doesn’t want to go back to work, and just charged $850 out of the gate?

There’s a story I’ve heard about Walmart and pickles, which you can read about here:

https://www.fastcompany.com/47593/wal-mart-you-dont-know

Basically, Vlasic was selling them gallon jars of pickles that cost less than their shelf-sized jars, and only making one or two cents in profit per jar. Walmart would include a clause in their purchasing contracts demanding prices go down each year. When you’re _losing_ five, ten cents per unit the following year, you can’t make it up on volume. Vlasic was heading towards their eventual bankruptcy by the time Walmart lost interest in pickles.

Three years ago, people in the US were pressing for a $15/hr federal minimum wage. One year ago I stopped at a Wendy’s that had a sign listed offering $16.50/hr and only had eight employees. That’s not eight employees working there at the time, but eight employees on payroll. Most times of the day they had no more than two on the clock, they had to cut back hours of operation so they wouldn’t work those few to death, and the story was pretty much the same across the board for retail and restaurants in the area (those that hadn’t gone out of business, at least). This was not something you predict years in advance. Neither is the surge in inflation that’s happened since the invasion of Ukraine started, which only added to the rising inflation we’ve seen since the start of the pandemic. In the US, our government has fed a higher percentage of GDP into the economy, and inflation is commensurately higher than the rest of the world, which probably explains why we got hit with this a month before Europe.

@starflyer59:
More likely it’s closer to retirement than you’d think. It would be interesting to see a comp

So many people calling out TLG for greed! The linked article does a thoroughly comprehensive job of explaining and charting the increases relative to inflation. In short, they're still not 100% up to speed with the rate of inflation. I think the outcry comes down to perceived value, which was already strained. Lego sets have always been a bit of an aberration by not increasing their prices throughout their lifespan. Automobiles receive price hikes on an annual - and sometimes semi-annual - basis. Food and fuel prices fluctuate all the time. Why should Lego be any different?

(All that being said, these prices have caused me to seriously curtail my Lego purchases.)

Whether greed or inflation, the cost is the cost and I can only afford so much. Whether I clutch my pearls and complain, I'll just be smarter about which sets I truly want. I've already removed a handful from my wantlist because I can't justify the price increase. I had a hard enough time justifying the initial price.

This is how the world is. It's a toy for the target audience, it's a sophisticated interlocking brick for us AFOLs. Either way, it costs money and we only have so much to go around.

Let's be happy we can afford such a luxury while also affording housing and food.

@yellowcastle said:
"... as condescension and rudeness is so underrepresented online."

As is people talking about things of which they really don't have a basic understanding or lack anywhere near enough information to make a reasoned argument.

This thread appears to have much more of those.

My last Lego order was placed a few days ago. Do not anticipate ordering anything again for quite some time.

Capitalism can work both ways.

@ShinyBidoof said:
" @yellowcastle said:
"... as condescension and rudeness is so underrepresented online."

As is people talking about things of which they really don't have a basic understanding or lack anywhere near enough information to make a reasoned argument.

This thread appears to have much more of those."

As we've seen above, there's a respectful and productive way to help educate this group. Many thanks to the likes of @inversion, @CCC, @Gylman, @PurpleDave, @StyleCounselor, @PixelTheDragon, @yui and many others in the great Brickset community.

Thanks for the BrickNerd article! Very informative.

That being said, yeah, I'll be buying less and really considering the value of what I buy. Sucks to see prices increase, but literally everything is more expensive these days, so it was only a matter of time.

@Huw said:
" @Squidy74H said:
"Australia has just had the same price increases hit Aug 1st too and the list and percentage increases looks very much like the American list."

I would have liked to have compiled a list for AU but LEGO still does not provide an affiliate feed for Australia so we have to gather the prices differently and don't automatically update them: there's been no need to develop code to do so, until now!

"

Oddly enough, I wrote such code the day before the price changes and have csv files containing before and after prices for 30 or so countries. If the Brickset staff would like a peak I'd be willing to share.

@Grfxguy said:
"Lego has made the biggest mistake ever in infuriating its largest demographic, the AFOL and ironically on its 90th anniversary. It will be a very different company for its 100th.
Thanks Huw for the chart, time to look over my 35 year inventory and decide what to open next. "

the AFOL is not their biggest demographic

Just more overpriced B.S for Canadians once again! As our dollar keeps dancing back and forth with the American dollar we still pay way more than they are even when the Canadian dollar peaks over the American dollar.

Also anyone ever notice that when your country raises its minimum wage by a nickel everything else goes up in price by $5-$10's. What the dam @%**.

The BrickNerd wrote an excellent and well researched article on LEGO inflation and price increases. It doesn't take the sting away from the price increases, but it does put things into some perspective. LEGO is an expensive hobby, and it REALLY hurts to see it become more expensive, but we also want more LEGO sets to be produced, so maybe we don't want TLG to lose out on some profit, right? Profit drives more production, and if profit goes down, so does the production of sets!

Just a thought...

@PurpleDave

In case you failed to notice, they didn't just raise the price of the UCS MF. What they did do was shoot themselves in the foot at a time when most of the world is looking for ways to cut expenses. Lego is an easy cut for most people. Respecting customers should be paramount for a luxury brand during an economic downturn. Sadly it is Not!

Please tell us that you're not such an appologist for Billund that you're going to argue that this move shows how great Lego™ is and how they're putting their customers first?

@Graysmith said:
"That said, I still think for many AFOLs the choice is either to buy LEGO or to buy nothing. Yeah, there are other brands that make similar brick-based toys but many of us wouldn't even consider buying those."
And that is a totally stupid and arrogant mindset, one which helps TLG to keep on doing what they do at the moment, reduce quality while raising prices because they can count on their hardcore fanbase in many countries.

I bet most of these people who "wouldn't even consider buying those" have never even had any hands on experience with alternatives and even if, it was perhaps many years ago when the few alternatives that were available back then were indeed total crap.
Nowadays there are many alternatives that offer better quality and/or better value for money. One really has to try to find an alternative as crappy as those of say ten or more years ago.
When I look at my collection for example, I have brick sets from 14 different manufacturers. And only one of them turned out to be total crap, which is why I only have one single set from that one.
Even if one loves LEGO, one can still broaden one's horizon.

Considering what others can do with far less money this is insane. I decided a few months ago to drop on Lego at all, not supporting anymore this kind of greed.

@Mr__Thrawn:
Before the VIP Red program kicked off, many AFOLs compared their direct spending habits with those of any individual family with kids, and (incorrectly) assumed we outspent them on the whole. TLG looked at market surveys (I assume) and based on headcount assumed (also incorrectly) we were no more than maybe 5% of their total sales. Shortly after VIP Red went live, they were able to start comparing who was buying with how much they were spending, and they did let the AFOL community know some of that information. I think we were determined to be around 5% of their customer base, but more like 25% of their total sales. Not the majority by a long shot, but definitely a big enough piece of the pie that they sat up and took notice.

Since then, many programs have been rolled out to engage the AFOL community, and the product offerings at the high D2C levels have gone up considerably, so they clearly care about the AFOL market when we were basically being written off two decades ago. However, we don’t know how things balance out between the surge in popularity following The LEGO Movie vs the surge in pandemic-buyers, the gradual drop in both of those groups as kids aged out post-TLM and adult life slowly returns to a more pre-pandemic state, or the massive increase in licensed sets targeted at younger fans vs the similarly massive increase in huge D2C sets meant purely for display. My gut says that whether AFOLs account for a larger or smaller share of total sales, it hasn’t shifted significantly from that 25% mark. We almost certainly don’t account for over half of all sales, nor are we just a drop in the bucket.

@foxprimus101:
Like Australia (probably all of Oceania, for that matter), Canada definitely gets the short end of the stick. There have been rare times when this was not the case, like when Simon Liu (the AFOL, not Simu Liu the actor) told me Canadians on the border had better purchasing power than anyone else in the world. At the time, the Canadian dollar was worth more than the USD, so you could take money that was more valuable across the border where prices were much cheaper.

As for the nickel, that same nickel has to be paid to the line worker, the warehouse worker, the packer, the loader, the truck driver, the other warehouse worker, the retail employee, all of the people who provide these companies with raw materials, fuel, utilities…. Well, it adds up pretty quickly.

@ResIpsaLoquitur:
Contractually, LEGO Brand Retail is probably banned from discounting prices to draw in business. As the supplier, they have more ability to undercut the competition on their own product line, so it’s a safety measure often demanded by anyone before they’ll put your product on their shelves. The VIP program, GWPs, and free make-and-take builds are three ways they can offset their inability to directly compete when other chains do discount prices on their sets.

@StyleCounselor:
I’m telling you that if you actually read the article (the whole thing, word for word, and not just skimming through it), it looks like not raising these prices could result in them losing money on every unit sold as these sets approach retirement. If they lose money on each set, they lose money on the whole, and next thing you know, Mattel is making another offer to buy the company. And AFOLs everywhere start complaining that all they needed to do was raise the price on a few sets to keep the company solvent, and all of this could have been avoided.

They’ve avoided keeping pace with inflation for over four decades. That is a fact. It’s also the main reason why any slight price increase is met with accusations of greed, because there are AFOLs (some with kids of their own) whose parents weren’t born before sets started costing $0.10/pc, and they’ve been addicted to the idea that this is the forever-price of LEGO sets. Think about that. How many industries can see the birth of THREE GENERATIONS without raising prices?

Disney keeps raising prices on admission to their theme parks. People keep complaining that they can’t afford to go as much as they used to, or even not at all. You know what happens on Disney’s end? Attendance is kept in check. They raise prices when demand exceeds the ideal capacity of their parks. It tempers demand, attendance returns to a better level, and they probably hand out most of that money in wage increases* and higher prices from their suppliers anyways. Yes, it definitely cuts out many people of more modest means, but those aren’t the customers who were going once per year, or more. It has more effect on the once-in-a-lifetime customers who simply won’t go now.

That’s probably similar to the effect that TLG will experience from this. Demand will taper off, but this list is missing over 2/3rds of their current product line. Nobody will notice a price bump on those because it didn’t happen. It’s also missing any sets that haven’t been announced yet. Nobody will really notice those price bumps because they can’t compare the before and after prices. Many will complain that everything got a massive increase, many will say they didn’t have any, and the truth will probably lie somewhere in the middle. As we come out of this pandemic, and the labor force is basically forced to go back to work (eventually governments will have to stop handing out money to help people ride out the pandemic, and prices have been going up across the board), we may even see a return to the $0.10/pc mark. I definitely wouldn’t bet on it, unless the prices on essentials also comes back down, but I wouldn’t rule it out.

@IgelCampus:
Transportation and retail shelf space are the two biggest costs in manufacturing a toy line. Both industries have been hammered by the pandemic. Back in the early 00’s, TLG tried to start up production in China for Clikits. What they eventually determined was that, even at significantly lower labor rates, the cost to ship everything to Europe (either overland from Asia, or across the two largest oceans and another continent) were so high that they offset the savings on labor. This is how Hungary and the Czech Republic got manufacturing plants, because it was more cost-effective to pay those wages in Denmark’s backyard than Chinese wages in China. When production did return to China, it was on stuff that had less tolerance issues, like theme-exclusive molded minifig parts (Buzz’ head, helmet, jet pack, bubble, and wings, or Woody’s head and elongated limbs), or for a period of time 100% of all CMF parts. Even that is no longer the case, with CMF production being spread across the globe, eliminating the need to maintain duplicate sets of (very expensive) molds for widely-used minifig parts.

* That’s not saying Disney park cast members get huge paychecks, but that they probably maintain the same barely-scraping-by lifestyle they have for years, even as the cost of living keeps rising.

Icons got hit hard. Looks like they think they know who they can milk...

@inversion is right, though, on all points. Very well put. I think while all companies have been hit by supply chain, it feels like Lego is being a bit drastic in its increases. But that's just how it feels, this stuff is complicated. And yes, most companies would not have warned us ahead of time. I think he's even right about less large sets. I think I'd prefer that. Remember when a new, super-big set was a special thing?

@PurpleDave

If you read my comments, and didn't just skim them, you'd realize that I didn't address whether there is any economic basis for the price increases. We all know that you're in love with Lego raising prices and have been forecasting it for awhile.

On the other hand, my comments regard the tactics Lego has employed to raise those prices and the wisdom of doing so. An action can easily be justified and also completely unwise. That is Lego. Their management has shown time after time to be both reactionary and over-broad. Have fun watching "The Toys that Made Us."

Lego shows no sign of learning lessons and their arrogance is breathtaking. Don't follow in their footsteps. I hope Lego sends you a check for all your propaganda.

Greed, inflation, something else - doesn't matter.

Simply put, my income won't get a 25% raise anytime soon.

And living costs takes precedence over lego sets.

Every time I see something like this happen with anything in the market, I always wonder why companies don't just raise prices every year just a little bit? Instead they wait until S is hitting the fan and jump everything at once. If they'd just use the frog in a slow boiling pot idea, no one would probably notice. I think it would be a great model for Lego actually. New releases at base price. Get em in the first year or they will go up. It would definitely take sets off the shelf that much quicker if people knew the plan ahead of time. But to try this subterfuge where we have to find out by leaks on fansites is not good for customer sentiment, beyond the price increase itself.

Curious to see if the people who designed the Ideas set will also get a bump in the amount they get....
Ill admit Im no financial expert, but my observations, that I feel ruin their inflation argument, are these:
1) Why was this announced? LEGO has obviously raised their prices on their product over the years, but why announce this now (other than people questioning with point 2)?
2) Why aren't ALL sets then increasing and at the same amount? I mean we can quibble over this part costs more to make then that part, but still? and before someone says "this set is larger than that" Ok, but that's already factored into the cost of the set to begin with which means 'inflation' should really hit everything essentially equally.
3) If oil is one of the reasons, then I challenge with simple fact that oil prices go up and down, it happened during Covid; Oil prices fell like a stone... Maybe I missed it, but I do not recall LEGO dropping prices then due to the cheap oil...
Again Im not a financial expert, if someone can really refute those points using mathematics then Ill shut up, but I think people are salty because they feel that LEGO's inflation argument does not really hold water due to the points above (and Im sure other reasons). Sorry if the 'cheerleaders' are all upset their idol is being called out on this, but everyone has the right to gripe if they wish.

@gylman said:
" @IgelCampus said:
"The linked article sounds reasonable until you start thinking about it. The price of a Lego set is almost independent of the production cost. The material and packing of a Lego set is probably less than 10% of the asked price. All the rest is marketing cost and greed. Even if (what the article assumes) Lego is hit by increasing costs from their suppliers, it would still be only a fraction of the sets price."

That is a factually inaccurate statement unless you are saying that TLC has a 90% profit margin, which no company in the world does, not even close. Shipping is a major cost and has been hugely hit by inflation. Their factories have salaried staff and maintenance costs. All aspects of delivering a LEGO set to you have been hit by inflation. "

No, no, it's fine. LEGO has hardly any manufacturing or overhead costs because they staffs their factories with elves, who work for free to bring joy to children, and fairies who wave their magic wands to power the machines. And they have a squad of pixies that carry the sets and run to the warehouse with them. Paid designers are a myth, and are actually a front for Santa who designs every set for them during his quieter months from January to November.

Meanwhile in the real world the price of everything is rising. Raw materials, power, fuel, salaries - everything a business needs to function.

@PurpleDave said:
" @elangab:
You might want to peek out your window and see how much reality has shifted. Keep in mind that price per piece, in spite of two decades of Chicken Little-ing AFOLs, hasn’t really changed in over _FOUR_ decades. $0.10 USD per piece is still the gold standard we seek, while the price of gas has gone up over 5x what it cost when minifigs first showed up in 1978, in sets like 928/497 ($32 USD, 338pcs, $0.095 USD per piece).

AFOLs are addicted to artificial price stability, like McDonald’s Dollar Menu where they had to change the name to allow them to adjust prices and keep things profitable. This could be a short-term fix, like when 10221 hit the US at $0.127/pc on the tail end of the recession following the 2008 crash of the US housing market, followed by a return to “normal” pricing. Eventually, however, prices _will_ have to see permanent increases to keep up with the cost to bring a set to the register. AFOLs see a $20 price bump and assume that all goes into LEGO pockets, but they fail to factor in the rising cost of transportation (the trucking industry has seen fuel prices more than double during the pandemic, and there aren’t enough drivers to keep up with the surge in shipping), or how retailers have been impacted. Three years ago, US workers were demanding $15/hr federal minimum wage, and now retailers and restaurants can’t find prospective employees who are willing to apply for jobs at that wage. On a $20 MSRP bump, the wholesale might go up $10, and part of that will be used to pay higher shipping fees."

Thanks, I'll print it out and explain it to the people skipping the sets while browsing the store :)

Joking aside, this is a very academic reply that doesn't change the bottom line - products are more expensive. I don't think a 30% increase was needed, and I don't think it was right to increase pricing of old sets. They could've just increased the pricing of new sets and be done with it. They can do what they want (hike prices) and I can do what I want (Stop buying).

Their whole marketing shifted in the last two years as they're trying to be more adult oriented than they used to. They are playing on the nostalgic factors of the 80s kids now, and they brand themselves as premium experience product, not even a toy. They think that they can get away with the price increases of AFOL oriented sets, which I think is a wrong strategy. We'll have to wait and see their 2022 earnings, as by the end of the day people will vote with their wallets, and the academics won't matter.

I stopped reading the Bricknerd article after the first table.

To say Lego would have a total loss of value of those sets he has analsyed is incorrect. Or it should be if their finance team were doing their job properly and therefore I lost all credibility in the article

I would have hoped that when Lego were building their cost models on top of their wanted profit margin for that set, and then to work out a sales price for a set, they would have included an anticipated inflation increase for the time period they expected to have the set on sale for. They Probably would have based this on the historical trend of the inflation rate. Therefore the price the set went on sale at would have been overinflated for the current market but right for when it was still on sale, at say a years time for example, for them to maintain the desired profit margin.

Now with the newer sets Lego should have also included expected inflation costs but I doubt they would have anticipated just by how much

When reading the comments, it seems as if those critical of the price increase are being put down by price hike supporters based on three arguments:
1) Read the frakkin' article linked above;
2) It is a luxurious product, hence a likewise problem;
3) Don't whine, be 'thankful' they even bother making the product.

==> 1) I did read the full article and it does have its merits. Of course Lego doesn't simply blindly slap some new and higher prices on there. There are concrete reasons to do so. But in my opinion the article navigates from descriptive to biased supportive. Inflation is a big issue right now but every economist paper/site can tell you that this isn't going to last and that a recession is on the horizon. And the argument that since Lego is a family owned company so the profit margin has to be different from a public company is completely lost on me. The whole article looks tainted by 'greenwashing' the whole price hike.

==>2)This argument is complete logical nonsense. This is a site and channel were everyone is in on buying and collecting the same luxury product. You can't use the premise of the whole product/fanbase/and what not as an argument against itself.

==>3)Yeah, of course. Thanks Lego. How 'devoted' can one be...?

Sure, the company has to follow good principles of business and maintain margins for now and for growth. But to me it is as if they got accustomed to the exceptional growth from the last years and they wont to maintain it nevertheless. Not 'Build The World' but 'Build Danish Profit Margins'.

I will keep buying Lego since I love the product and the fun times that come with it. My purchases will be less however and even more so through channels like Amazon. Why would one even bother to buy through Lego anyway (apart from very few exceptions).

I can't but recognise a formidable degree of hubris in the Lego group. Not just now but over the last few years as a whole. Perhaps it would be best if the Hubris-snake bit them in the ass for once.

The "Greed or Inflation?" article that was linked in @HUW's post was well written, and I agree with most of it. However, there are blatant examples of LEGO price gouging with reasons having nothing to do with inflation. A great example is the Collectible minifigures. Those were initially released in May 2010 for $1.99/pack. As of January 2020, the price had risen by a whopping 250% to $4.99/pack. The inflation in the USA between these dates was about 18.7%, so LEGO increased the price of a CMF package by more than 13 times the cumulative rate of inflation.

Whether LEGO is price gouging or their price increases are legitimate inflation, I guess the real question now is: Are Lego Products Only for the Rich?

@ra226:
Icons got hit hard because of the nature of the theme. There aren’t many sub-$50 Icons sets that are gone after a year. Many of them are less than a year old at this point, and should be available for upwards of another two years from now. Even if a theme like CMF gets a price increase, it wouldn’t make this list because they roll out a completely new product under that line three times each year. They can change the price every four months without ever changing the price of any specific release wave.

@StyleCounselor:
I have read them. I understand them, and you sound like some German members with how you react to any slight changes (and this coming from someone who only recently got back into the hobby after a prolonged Dark Ages, IIRC).

Compare this to the US postage stamp. Like LEGO sets, people expect stamps to stay the same price for unreasonably long periods of time, and raise a fuss whenever when an increasingly tiny price increase happens. In their case, however, the cost to raise the price one cent not only has to factor in printing costs on new First Class stamps, but ramping up production on penny stamps (cost just as much to manufacture as First Class, in some cases), and more importantly lobbying US Congress to raise the price in the first place. By the time they finally manage to get approval for a small increase, they’re back to the point of needing to do it all over again. Two things have helped offset this. One is the introduction of the Forever Stamp. It eliminates the need for wasteful use of penny stamps to make up a price difference, and people don’t push back against necessary increases as much. The other is that sometimes someone in DC shows a lick of sense and raises the price of stamps enough to put them ahead for a few years, so they can bankroll the extra and delay further increases for even longer. This means they aren’t wasting all the money associated with price increases every 6-12 months just to keep their head above water.

Again, we have seen the birth of THREE GENERATIONS whose LEGO sets have cost $0.10/pc. At some point that becomes untenable. So, here’s some questions for you to answer (publicly or privately, just as long as you answer them):

1. How much does TLG need to subsidize your hobby before you’ll agree that it’s not just about being greedy?
2. If they do the same for everyone, how long will it be before they go bankrupt?

I get raises annually. The products my employer sells go up in price every year as well. All of that cost gets passed on to our customers to keep my employer solvent. Our customers then pass that additional cost in to their customers. Our suppliers are using that extra money to raise wages for their employees, and pay higher material costs to their own suppliers. That’s how inflation works. Like it or not, you can’t avoid it by conventional means.

I mean, I’d love to be getting raises every year and see gas prices stay below $1/gal, but I’m not delusional. I’m paying 25% more for a bag of chicken (that may be smaller now) than I was just two years ago, but food is a necessity. I don’t want to pay that, but that’s what it costs if I don’t want to starve (or worse, live off of instant ramen). I already temper my LEGO purchases based on price. If everything cost $5, I’d probably buy everything they make. But I’m not delusional, and know that’ll never happen. There are several sets I want that have just had their prices go up, and I’m not happy about paying more to get them, but I’m not delusional enough to think this is something that could be avoided for another three generations.

@Sale:
I mean, cover the necessities first, of course. I know someone who had to bury his brother because the guy had four storage units full off model train stuff and wasn’t paying for his heart meds.

@Kev17 said:
"..I would have hoped that when Lego were building their cost models on top of their wanted profit margin for that set, and then to work out a sales price for a set, they would have included an anticipated inflation increase for the time period they expected to have the set on sale for. They Probably would have based this on the historical trend of the inflation rate. Therefore the price the set went on sale at would have been overinflated for the current market but right for when it was still on sale, at say a years time for example, for them to maintain the desired profit margin."
I can't believe we haven't touched on this before now. This is a great point. Everyone does this, including my own company. Escalations based on market research, historical trends and product lifespan are built into product pricing. I strongly believe that many companies out there (not all) are leveraging the current market conditions to modify pricing on their product portfolio for any number of reasons unrelated to the current market volatility. And nothing I've seen/read/heard gives me confidence that LEGO is not doing the same thing. And this comes from someone normally branded a "LEGO Apologist."

I've seen videos on Instagram showing people opening the 71410 Super Mario characters in the new "environmentally friendly" packaging, showing their remorse or disgust in the fact that inside the cardboard box is a plastic bag that isn't marked as recyclable and pointing out that the cardboard boxes aren't recyclable either because of the glossy finish/paint.

Virtue signaling about the environment and price increases by Lego are showing their hypocrisy. :-(

@Kev17:
If you hadn’t bailed, you’d have read the part where they discuss that. And how inflation is outpacing the anticipated rate by enough to chew away any profit margin on the tail end of production of these multi-year sets. For brand-new sets, it would do this by a significant margin, which would explain why sets that hadn’t even released yet got bigger hikes and sets that have been out for a few years aren’t even on this list. When we see a list of sets that are retiring this year, come back and compare it to this list and see how many are on both.

Back when the 2008 housing market crash happened, and fuel prices skyrocketed, my employer failed to meet budget in transportation. So did every other facility in the company. They had all factored in a historical rate of inflation, and when things changed more than they padded for, everyone ended up losing money in that one category. During the pandemic, we were considered an essential business, but shifts in buying habits and rising costs on far more than just fuel meant that the company as a whole took a shot to the chin. We’re surviving, but part of that means we’re probably raising prices faster than normal. TLG almost never raises the cost on a given set even one time. If it launches at $199.99, it almost always retires at $199.99. If the few real price changes that have happened historically, a lot have been price reductions (UK AT-AT, Dimensions packs, etc). People tend to forget those pretty quickly, but hold grudges for over price increases (whether real or imagined) for years.

@graymattr:
This is the first I’ve heard about glossy cardboard being unrecyclable. I know that magazines had to be sorted separately from newspaper because of their glossy pages, but if what you say is true, it makes me wonder if they only requested that so they could more easily dispose of them rather than recycling them in a different manner.

@PurpleDave said:
" @madforLEGO :
Sort of? Ideas pays a percentage of the sales, right? Any set that had a price increase should then pay more per copy, even though the percentage remains consistent. As for the other questions:

1. Have you seen how AFOLs react to even the false perception of a price increase?
2. There is a cost associated with raising prices, and the closer a set is to retirement, the less return they’ll get on that investment. At current inflation, however, they could start losing money on a new D2C set before it has finished paying off what it cost to bring that product to market.
3. They’re trying to get away from oil for environmental reasons, which will likely make future sets cost even more than if they were oil-based, but the price of gas is an easy metric to demonstrate inflation. People pay more attention to it, and there’s less difference between a gallon of two different brands than, say, a gourmet loaf of bread vs the store-brand.

People are salty because they have been crying about price increases for two decades, when sets cost the same per piece as they did two weeks ago. And the same as they did two years ago. So when an actual price increase really happens for the first time in many AFOLs’ lives, it’s just rubbing salt in self-inflicted wounds.
"
1. That's irrelevant to my point, LEGO has done plenty of increases silently in the past, and doubt LEGO thought of this as a PR of alerting people and more trying to C.Y.A (and once again failed) about their 'hardships' -especially when this occurs soon after their owner brags about his Ferrari collection.
2. Once again, these prices are set at production (factoring in costs and risks, if not they, have a poor planning dept), and even if there is an 'unexpected increase' if they are really going up due to inflation, then they should go up uniformly. Why do I say this? Again LEGO has uniformly raised the prices of their sets in the past, right?
3.Trying to get away from oil, but they are still using it, correct? They were 2 years ago, they likely are now. (and AGAIN if that's the case, ALL prices should be rising at the same rate).

People are salty due to the partial increases, the odd distribution of percentages of the increases), and the obvious questions (that really are not answered) behind it (and stop using price per piece cost is really is not an accurate measurement).
Finally the argument about the cost of a set years later is on LEGO, not the consumer. They also have shown, on at least two notable examples, that they can 'retire' a set and release it at a higher cost with only a minimal redesign.

Hmm, interesting and well researched, calculated article by Bricknerd on this. Learned some general economics too!

"if you're wondering why it was necessary for LEGO to take this unprecedented step"

It wasn't. But LEGO didn't want to jeopardise their profits in 2022. The excuses made in the article for the rising prices would work if LEGO was selling their products at production cost. But LEGO isn't. Each set already have a considerable profit margin in it. All together, they gave LEGO 2 billion euros in profits in 2021.
So LEGO DOES have room to accommodate for inflation and still keep their prices the same. 'cause their products are already overpriced. But that would cut on their net profits in 2022. And they don't want that.

I for one, as an European, will be looking extremely closely at what State help LEGO might end up getting. Because the EU will likely issue programs to help European companies to face the inflation problems caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And I'm going to bet LEGO will be amongst the first Danish company's at the doorsteps of the Danish government to get some of those funds.
Which they better NOT receive. 'cause you can't expect to get State aids (paid by, lest we forget, European taxpayers) and still be able to rip-off your customers further.

@LegoBoi69 said:
"BTW - I miss Lepin. "
Why? They were a manufacturer of illegal counterfeit products and may be one of the reasons why many people on Brickset look down on alternatives, as they probably assume that all of them are like Lepin.

Nowadays there are so many legal alternatives with value for money at least as good as Lepin that there's absolutely no reason to miss those crooks.

The more time passes the more I realize that I don't really need all the sets as they kind of eat into each others role. I was building the Simpsons house to an airing of Home Alone during christmas 2016 and wished Lego would do a Home Alone house. Now that the thing exists I wonder if I really need two houses of that style, especially since they dwarf modulars who are supposed to represent a town with much bigger houses.

And I also feel like my Modular collection is getting to the point that I better pick and choose what fits the citys style. The Hotel is nice but also kind of strange with its skin colored facade, triangle shape and palm tree that would need to be placed in the vicinity of a parisian restaurant oder 50s diner

I am grateful that I was fast enough to get UCS AT-AT for 620€ from some online stores quick sale.

And I got Diagon Alley with the moving stairs gift set because it seemed obvious that it will never get sales since it is one of the few sets truly available only through legos site.

I really wonder what sets Lego can offer to keep me hooked indefinitely. Even disregarding rising prices and similar products being released, at some point I will also be missing the room to store these in. Always found it a sign of disinterest when people mentioned having unopened sets. Now my grail model the AT-AT came out and I have yet to unbox it and 50 other sets too, because I don't have the space to display it. I guess no fun is forever and nothing good is eternal.

@madforLEGO said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @madforLEGO :
Sort of? Ideas pays a percentage of the sales, right? Any set that had a price increase should then pay more per copy, even though the percentage remains consistent. As for the other questions:

1. Have you seen how AFOLs react to even the false perception of a price increase?
2. There is a cost associated with raising prices, and the closer a set is to retirement, the less return they’ll get on that investment. At current inflation, however, they could start losing money on a new D2C set before it has finished paying off what it cost to bring that product to market.
3. They’re trying to get away from oil for environmental reasons, which will likely make future sets cost even more than if they were oil-based, but the price of gas is an easy metric to demonstrate inflation. People pay more attention to it, and there’s less difference between a gallon of two different brands than, say, a gourmet loaf of bread vs the store-brand.

People are salty because they have been crying about price increases for two decades, when sets cost the same per piece as they did two weeks ago. And the same as they did two years ago. So when an actual price increase really happens for the first time in many AFOLs’ lives, it’s just rubbing salt in self-inflicted wounds.
"
1. That's irrelevant to my point, LEGO has done plenty of increases silently in the past, and doubt LEGO thought of this as a PR of alerting people and more trying to C.Y.A (and once again failed) about their 'hardships' -especially when this occurs soon after their owner brags about his Ferrari collection.
2. Once again, these prices are set at production (factoring in costs and risks, if not they, have a poor planning dept), and even if there is an 'unexpected increase' if they are really going up due to inflation, then they should go up uniformly. Why do I say this? Again LEGO has uniformly raised the prices of their sets in the past, right?
3.Trying to get away from oil, but they are still using it, correct? They were 2 years ago, they likely are now. (and AGAIN if that's the case, ALL prices should be rising at the same rate).

People are salty due to the partial increases, the odd distribution of percentages of the increases), and the obvious questions (that really are not answered) behind it (and stop using price per piece cost is really is not an accurate measurement).
Finally the argument about the cost of a set years later is on LEGO, not the consumer. They also have shown, on at least two notable examples, that they can 'retire' a set and release it at a higher cost with only a minimal redesign.
"

LEGO could eat into their profits to keep prices below inflation and avoid price rises but that's not a sustainable business model. Ultimately, that path leads to business failure and bankruptcy.

Price increases, while designed overall to match inflation and expected inflation, do not - and sometimes cannot - go up exactly in line with inflation at the level of individual sets. As @PurpleDave and the linked-to article have pointed out, this is partly to do with where any particular set is in its lifecycle. There are other considerations too such as the marginal unit sale reduction at any given percentage increase in price. This is a trade-off that will vary by set size, availability, desirability etc. Lastly, LEGO may be limited by the licensing it has with IP owners; it may be bound to sell sets within certain price brackets.

Oil as a raw material is not the only determinant of the increase in costs for LEGO. Inflation is rising in all of LEGO's major markets across almost all goods and services.

All this complaining and yet on Aug 1st I saw the longest release day lines I’ve ever seen. The only way to show Lego how disappointed you are is to stop buying their product. Yet a huge majority of AFOLs continue to buy from Lego. Just accept that you don’t have any control of their pricing other than refusing to buy it. Or possibly accept that maybe you don’t get every single set you wanted to at a particular time. As long as the current issues with oil, supply chains, labor costs, etc, continue to create worldwide inflation not much is going to change. I hated seeing the prices go up but I also hated the price of gas, milk, bread eggs etc go up also. It’s hard for me to blame Lego and then not go to the grocery store and complain about every brand they are selling.
Gonna be tough to stick to the budget. And I’m sure I’ll miss out on more sets this year.
With most of us probably cutting back some it should help us all appreciate more the Lego we do have.

@AustinPowers said:
" @LegoBoi69 said:
"BTW - I miss Lepin. "
Why? They were a manufacturer of illegal counterfeit products and may be one of the reasons why many people on Brickset look down on alternatives, as they probably assume that all of them are like Lepin.

Nowadays there are so many legal alternatives with value for money at least as good as Lepin that there's absolutely no reason to miss those crooks. "

Ah, there it is, sneaking in a comment about alternatives. Can always count on you for that.

In regards to everyone saying Lego shot themselves in the foot and will see a drop in customers, will lose money, etc etc, I suspect most will keep buying Lego at full price, they’ll just continue to complain about it here.

@monkyby87 said:
"In regards to everyone saying Lego shot themselves in the foot and will see a drop in customers, will lose money, etc etc, I suspect most will keep buying Lego at full price, they’ll just continue to complain about it here. "
I like to set my watch by it. :o)

@ChrisBricks81 said:
"Greed! Nothing more, nothing less. But you know, karma will come eventually !!!"

I would say read the well-researched and well-written article linked in this page that proves your entire statement wrong, but that's a little more difficult than just complaining so you probably wouldn't do it anyways.

@Zoniax said:
"Adults buy Lego sets, for kids and for themselves. When you start pricing adults out of their own hobbies.... they'll find a cheaper hobby.

These increases are nothing more than pure greed. Give it a few quarters, Lego will change their tune. I know I'm not buying at increased prices, I hope most of you can stick to it too."

You can always tell when someone hasn’t read the article explaining, with data, that it’s not greed. But keep feeling that way.

The linked economic analysis article is excellent - and addresses/invalidates most of the more reactive/angry criticisms being posted in this thread.

It's totally understandable to be upset about price increases, and cutting back on planned Lego purchases is understandable, and a drag to have to do - and obviously something TLG knows will happen in some cases and are not happy about it either. It's not like they simply thought, "let's raise prices, and for sure it will have zero effect on customers' willingness to buy our products." Clearly they did it because they felt they had no choice.

The linked analysis shows conclusively that TLG is not using inflation as an excuse to price-gouge. Similarly, some of the complaints about higher prices in markets outside the US and EU/UK might be valid, but they're not directly relevant to these increases, as they pre-existed the increases and to my knowledge are not being worsened by the increases.

The article also explains why TLG's structure and foundation mandate a higher official profit margin than other toymakers like Hasbro.

We all have choices - we can buy less, buy from other Lego-compatible brands, get more rigorous about waiting for sales or discounts, ask for sets as gifts from family members instead of running out to buy them ourselves, and so on. But once we all agreed to engage in an expensive hobby using a product supplied by a for-profit company, this was always going to be a possibility if inflation spiked. Remember, the last time inflation was this high, global production and distribution chains, computer technology, financial markets, and so on were not like they are now. This is uncharted territory for TLG and many other companies.

@monkyby87 said:
" @Zoniax said:
"Adults buy Lego sets, for kids and for themselves. When you start pricing adults out of their own hobbies.... they'll find a cheaper hobby.

These increases are nothing more than pure greed. Give it a few quarters, Lego will change their tune. I know I'm not buying at increased prices, I hope most of you can stick to it too."

You can always tell when someone hasn’t read the article explaining, with data, that it’s not greed. But keep feeling that way. "

I read the article and it's poorly written with a bad conclusion.

@PurpleDave

Now, you're just repeating yourself. I have no wish to do so.

I will merely make the point (again) that Lego has very stupidly and needlessly (there were other ways) enraged its most loyal fan base at a precarious economic point for everyone. The comments above are obvious and sufficient evidence of that (as are the numerous articles on the subject (including this one)).

Yet, I suppose you're like the little Danish boy trying to put a finger in every hole in the leaking dike. Good luck! Or, enjoy your trolling of everyone in this comment section. Whatever makes you happy.

As for myself- since you intimated- I'm a builder/collector who came back to Lego through my son's childhood. He's almost ready for college now. I have also been a long-time fan of BSet. So, I am only a 'recent' returnee to Lego if you count 15 years as 'recent.'

Nevertheless, my background has absolutely nothing to do with the absolute logic of my arguments. Remember, 'ad hominem' is the most classic of fallacies and the refuge of the rhetorical scoundrel.

Finally, making blanket, nationalistic slurs about Germans isn't kind, and you shouldn't do it. I, however, take no umbrage. I enjoy clear-headed, unvarnished criticism, and my maternal great-grandmother was born in Bavaria.

BTW, comments like 'Lego subsidizing my hobby' only shows the silliness of your argumentative skills. I assure your Ferrari KKK has no interest in subsidizing any part of MY lifestyle.

Most of the Minecraft sets in USA haven't gone up by much, so the main place that hurts me here is Icons. The latest wave of Ninjago hasn't been up to tastes and the Mario sets seem missing from this list. Most of the other things I had already bought!

Of course, that's just for sets that were already available and got a price increase. No doubt a lot of the sets that launched with this wave were overpriced right out of the gate.

Biggest regret here is the Haunted House. Been putting that one off for a while, and 50 bucks extra is just too much.

For those complaining about the Lego price increases.......ask yourself this. What toy do you know of that you can play with and enjoy it, keep the box, and then 5 yrs later (if that) sell it on the secondary market for what you paid for it or in most cases more? Everything has gone up due to inflation! I'm 59yrs old and when I was a kid Lego was nothing like it is today. Today being much better! Back then what 10 different color bricks? Damn if I had only bought more of the trains back then! Happy Building!

@StyleCounselor said:
" @PurpleDave

In case you failed to notice, they didn't just raise the price of the UCS MF. What they did do was shoot themselves in the foot at a time when most of the world is looking for ways to cut expenses. Lego is an easy cut for most people. Respecting customers should be paramount for a luxury brand during an economic downturn. Sadly it is Not!

Please tell us that you're not such an appologist for Billund that you're going to argue that this move shows how great Lego™ is and how they're putting their customers first?"

So you understand that the rest of the world is trying to cut expenses. But you don't understand why this specific company would also be trying to help the bottom line? Which part isn't clicking?

And I find it hard to believe that you honestly think """respecting customers""" would work better for Lego in the short or long run. You said yourself, everyone is looking to make cuts. Do we honestly think that not having these increases would make people spend /more/ on Lego, either now or in the future? Really? That kind of brand loyalty is both monstrously unshakable (if it can resist every other financial issue going on in the world), and worthlessly flimsy (if it can't resist mostly single-digit percentage increases for about 15% of the product line)

And do you have any examples of luxury (or non-luxury) brands that have been """respecting customers""" consistently through the last few years? Because I can't think of a single company that hasn't raised prices somehow since 2020.

@davos said:
"
At least we were given a heads up on these price increases.
"

Technically we didn't as it was just leaks. They never published in advance a full list of all sets getting a hike.

@StyleCounselor said:
"Now, you're just repeating yourself. I have no wish to do so.

I will merely make the point (again) that..."

Oh the irony! :-)
I love this thread!

Anyway, since you are of German descent, please respect your neighbouring heritage and let us Dutchies keep the American made myth about young boys, fingers and dykes (instead of falsely crediting the Danes for that):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Brinker,_or_The_Silver_Skates

And although @PurpleDave is a master debater himself to respond to this: I'm seriously having a hard time to find any "blanket, nationalistic slurs about Germans" when reading his original comment.

To each their own I guess.

@PurpleDave said:
"... You want to make that work, you have to take care of your employees well enough that they don’t want to go union."

What a weird statement about unions. I make a decent wage, work at a place with very nice benefits and I'm still in a union. Not because I personally necessarily need the protection, but to ensure all my fellow workers are protected, as well as ensuring that there is a minimum standard industry wide. Unions are not, nor have ever been about the individual, they are about ensuring that those weakest in our economy get a fair shake; the key is in the name.

Interesting stats on the increase in number of sets released in the last few years. That's something that I do think needs to be reevaluated by Lego.

@monkyby87 : ah yes, your pet pieve, always trying to insinuate that I brought up the subject, when in fact it was already mentioned several times before in the comments and I was merely reacting. But funny to see that this apparently always gets you ticked off. Can always count on you too. :-)

@PurpleDave : from what I gathered, unions have quite a different effect (and standing) in the US compared to Germany. And dare I say I prefer our way in that regard.

Oh and in general, I don't think we would have been having this entire discussion if TLG had simply increased the prices evenly by some margin across the entire product range, as every other company normally does when citing inflation as the reason for the need to raise the price.
Or, as is often the case, keep the same price but make the contents smaller so that in effect the customer is tricked into thinking he still got the same deal. Works with LEGO too, as many think 10 cents per piece today has the same value as 10 cents per piece 20 years ago, when in fact nowadays you simply get tons of 1x1 greebling pieces instead of proper bricks. The volume of stuff, as Jang always calls it so nicely, that you get for a certain amount of money has definitely gone down drastically. And that's not even factoring in all the cost cutting that by now is making itself apparent in the quality issues that are abundant these days.

And many sets cost far more than 10 cents per piece nowadays anyway, even before the new price increases.

@davos said:
"Thankfully LEGO didn't do what Hasbro did. Their transformers toys have more than doubled in price compared to 2019. Even the card games have gone up by 20%!
At least we were given a heads up on these price increases.
"

Hasbros price increases are honestly so much worse as they increase the prices by 7 to 20% with every newly announced product since 2021. And new announcements are weekly or monthly. Slapping 50 bucks on a 300$ set you had the chance to buy for around 2 years already is so much more reasonable than going from 49,99 to 65,99 in 5 steps in less than 1 year.

@Montyh7:
No company on Earth seeks union involvement. That happens because their employees feel they are being mistreated. The thing is, if they can afford to do a thing under a union contract, they can afford to do it without one. The ones that realize this can establish a good working relationship with their employees, and the ones that don’t can go the route Amazon is taking.

However, being in a union does not ensure everything is puppies and unicorns. The Teamsters just got a government bailout of their pension, which was insolvent in 3/4 of the US, in part because they tended to get hired by small companies that would go out of business without paying what they owed to the pension fund. The UAW is having a major shakeup right now because their leadership recently got outed for graft and corruption. Jimmy Hoffa is a household name over here, following his disappearance years ago amid rumors of mafia entanglement.

@AustinPowers:
I have no idea how unions work outside of the US, and a very general knowledge of how things work in the US.

Anyways, if you produce something like groceries, where the same thing is sold year after year, you can’t factor inflation in to your initial cost because you might be selling the same thing a century later. Auto companies technically roll out a new lineup every year, even though they might only have minor changes to the trim, and the product names stay the same every year, so most of their price bumps happen as the new lineup launches, while the old one gets clearances to make room for new models.

There are very few companies that are comparable to the LEGO business model, where they technically sell a single product line, but the yearly offerings change wildly. Home decor may change the colors of their towels, but they still sell towels every year, and those towels still serve the same purpose. You’d be hard pressed to back up a claim that an Art Deco 50’s diner is essentially the same as a stately city hall. TLG operates on a format where price changes happen on the front end of each product launch, so this is something they try to avoid doing at all. Being forced into it, they can either drain the bank account while they wait for the current lineup (including unreleased sets that they’ve announced pricing for, even if it’s just to retailers), accelerate the retirement of large D2C sets to beat the break even point, or do a one-time adjustment that factors for where each affected product is in its lifespan.

I really hate Jang’s “volume of stuff” metric because it’s so arbitrary that people whip it out to justify whinging about price on anything that’s just too expensive for their budget, or from a theme that doesn’t interest them. It’s a meaningless metric because it’s entirely subjective. Ask a kid, and these sets seem huge. Ask Andre the Giant and even 10179 is a delicate trinket. Ask someone who despises Star Wars and you won’t many sets that provide enough value to justify the price. Compare 10179 to 75192, and the latter costs significantly more for the exact same volume of “stuff”, but the piece count is objectively 60% bigger, the model is a lot more detailed, and the structure is (hopefully) sturdier the second time around. Volume of “stuff” also fails to account for the significant increase in labor and production time involved in producing UCS MF2 vs UCS MF1, and essentially suggests that cost should be absorbed across the entire product line so entitled AFOLs can pass some of the cost on to kids playing with Duplo.

Even on the price per piece metric, AFOLs fudge the numbers, like claiming all the trans-green tiles from 75330 don’t count because they don’t want them. It costs TLG more to put a 2L Technic friction pin into a set than they sell for on Bricklink, so they absolutely have to be counted by set designers, even if they get written out of any “stuff” equation.

@Meppers said:
""Lego is going to lose sales from this! They are so stupid!"
Meanwhile, in reality:
https://new.reddit.com/r/lego/comments/wdmqof/lego_store_at_south_coast_plaza_costa_mesa_ca/ "

Always nice to see my local mall in the spotlight! :D

Joking aside, this comments section makes me realize how much of "rich man's hobby" LEGO collecting can be. I see AFOL's complaining about how they'll "only" be able to buy half a dozen D2C sets (each costing $200-800). I'm "middle class" (and thus pretty well off), but I'm lucky if I'll get any *one* of those D2C sets - in the 15 years I've been collecting LEGO, only two sets that I've bought have cost more than $170. I don't even entertain the thought of buying more, because it's such a pipe dream.

Nevermind the price - the simple truth is that I don't have the space for a lot of sets.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being wealthy or owning a lot of D2C sets - I'm just pointing out that these price hikes might force "hardcore collectors" to live like every other LEGO fan.

I love seeing all of the armchair economists that seem to think they know more simply because they’ve bought Lego before.

I have enjoyed this discussion. Thank you all for your insights.

I made it to a LEGO store a week or two back. I do not go regularly as my toddlers keep me plenty busy. Nonetheless, the store had the new Loop coaster, UCS MF and UCS AT-AT on display. I had not seen those models live before. I'm a big guy but the sheer size of those models made me accept the fact that even though I could, over time, save up enough money, there is simply not enough space in my house that I would be willing to dedicate to display these sets.

Problem solved for me. House footage and shelf space.

no one seems to think its as simple as putting numbers into an inflation calculator to see if the prices are fair. I used a website called in2013dollars.com and used the old price of the millenium falcon in canada (899.99$ CAD) and the site said that the set would be worth 1047.52$ CAD. The new lego price is only 2$ more than normal inflation suggests, which is more than reasonable. I'm a 17 year old and it's laughable reading a bunch of adults bicker over the more than reasonable price increases of a childrens toy, when it's easy to either read the article, or do your own research to understand these prices are understandable and that we are lucky they have waited to do this for so long. With all the terrible stuff going on in the world, its funny to see people crying over the prices of a toy that is mainly for children. {By the way children are still the number 1 demographic and most of the sets that kids will be getting, only saw a 5-10$ price increase or none at all} also if your in a space to spend 200$, is 30$ extra really that big of an issue when some people can barely afford 10$ groceries??

@spectacularminifigs
Thank you for that comment - it's refreshing to read something like this.

@spectacularminifigs said:
"it's laughable reading a bunch of adults bicker over the more than reasonable price increases of a childrens toy"
It's just a temporary diversion, which will soon return to the really important stuff, like the colour of 18+ boxes.

@sjr60 said:
" @spectacularminifigs said:
"it's laughable reading a bunch of adults bicker over the more than reasonable price increases of a childrens toy"
It's just a temporary diversion, which will soon return to the really important stuff, like the colour of 18+ boxes."

I think the original post is too simplistic. Sets that go for several hundred dollars + are hardly meant for children. The recommended age for many sets is 14+, 16+, 18+. These are meant for well-heeled adults. Adult being anything over 18.

Btw., being a cog in a big corporate world I an assure you that adults in big fancy corporate boardrooms bicker about how much coffee to give to employees, where the employees should sit, how to increase prices, who to promote, etc.

This particular discussion about likely happened many times with various degree of intensity in the boardrooms of TLG, where adults essentially bickered about reasonable prices for children toys.

Going forward, we should start every comments section with a disclaimer that says, “The following is a discussion of a luxury toy brand. We understand that LEGO Collecting is not more important than real world issues and that adult collectors, while an important demographic, trail children as the most important demographic for sets aimed at children.”

This way, we can then skip all the simplistic, sanctimonious mic drops while we try to discuss our hobby.