But that's the whole joke of the article ? I don't think it is intended to be that serious. It is kind of those "weird"/rare crime that newspaper have fun reporting on
if they got extracted from unopened Lego sets (e.g. to "launder" stolen Lego sets through the 2nd hand part market) they didn't even need to "take them off" (at least in the past) they did ship as separate parts.
It's an interesting, off-beat story about toys being stolen by a theft ring, how you managed to turn it into a whine about the "bourgeoisie" I'll never know.
Don't disagree, but let's be clear: the alternative is not (as might be implied) deep, introspective thought-pieces. It's chum for the other color of ignorant closed minds.
how about reporting on Kristy Noem stealing $172M from every American so she can have *two* luxury private jets? Thats....28666 stolen-lego rings worth.
im sure NYT reported on that as well, couched in typical "questions arise...." format which they reserve for those criminals whose crimes are so massive and so completely blatant, they couldn't possibly call them what they are. Those would be facts that their readers wouldn't accept. But a Latino man running a shoplifting ring, they'll nod their heads and dream of more Alligator Alcatrazes for "the illegals".
Dramatic beginning of the article. It's plastic figures designed so the head can come of, they talk about it like it's the most gruesome crime scene ever found.
I dunno, the original Lego movie had people's personalities permanently removed by using acetate to wipe off their faces. I don't see how headless Legos could be more disturbing than that...
When I was into LEGO a few years back, I noticed there were a lot of bulk items available in Eastern Europe. I always wondered if they were either counterfeits or just grey. I couldn’t distinguish them so I just assumed they were grey because these items were not available in bulk directly from LEGO via bricks and pieces. When LEGO bought bricklink I thought they were going after fake vendors.
Bricklink seems like a pretty lousy place to sell counterfeit Lego bricks. Sellers get reviewed by the buyers (and vice versa), and the buyers there are pretty much committed to genuine Lego bricks (and vocal of sellers not keeping up their end of the bargain). I doubt if there is much counterfeit stuff on there.
The economy for sellers lies more in picking up unopened new sets for bargain prices from local shops, both on and off-line, and reselling the individual bricks. New Lego sets just are cheaper in Eastern Europe. Part of this economy is that some bricks are much more sought after, which is reflected in the piece prices. This also means that more common pieces will be sold cheaper. It seems to balance out.
Personally, I rarely need to look beyond the Netherlands for bricks I buy for MOCs on Bricklink. Sometimes Germany or Belgium. The prices just are competitive.
not all eastern bulk vendors are fake/involved in some form a illegal action
there is some (small) money into taking Lego sets apart and selling the parts (1), but only if the sorting and for used sets taking apart, cleaning, damage/quality assessment are cheap enough. So countries with lower wages(2) are better suited. At the same parts people from less-wage countries have more motivation for "clever"/unusual business ventures weather legal or not.
(1): Naturally not for all sets, but every session there are some badly selling sets you might be able to buy both with large Rabatt and in bulk and have enough "good" parts to be worth it. "mini figure only" collectors and sometimes being able to buy for retail prices can help, too.
You can legally produce lego compatible bricks and many reputable companies like Cobi do so. There is nothing grey about it. Some of these companies offer better quality than Lego these days. Lego isn't the only game in town anymore.
It’s incredibly expensive to produce at LEGO’s tolerance levels. No manufacturer would do it unless you can sell it at such a high margin which, to my knowledge, is basically LEGO and certain high precision aeronautic parts makers.
Where did you hear that? This is completely false.
First of all, when buying a set from Lego you are mostly paying for the actual design of the set and the license for the franchise if it is based on a certain movie or video game. The actual cost of producing the plastic is negligible.
Secondly, those alternative manufacturers do exists and they offer vastly lower prices for the same or better quality. They evidently make money with it.
For example the German company Bluebrixx designs sets and then buys the bricks from Chinese producers like xingbao as a white label solution. Cobi, a polish company, on the other hand even manages to produce in the EU while Lego produces in China and Vietnam and they are still making a profit and have vastly superior quality compared to Lego.
I think this has been a big part of keeping Lego quality, specifically in the plastic. Unfortunately it's also been a huge pillar in their cross-promotional strategy which has meant a focus on IP tie-ins and dumbed-down sets. It's hugely profitable and also allows you to make a lot more protected pieces.
Cobi (producing in the EU), Cada, Mould King, Bluebrixx (Germany based, not producing the bricks themselves so quality can vary but sets are pretty good.) I could go on.
Lego has really bad quality these days. They used to have a good reputation but it has been a sharp downturn these days. Just look at the new $1000 Death Star set they recently release. The most expensive set ever and shit tier quality.
Mould King and Cada do not have the same consistency of fit that LEGO does
that's simply not true. i have mould king bricks that are indistinguishable in quality from lego. and many other brands as well. i have been buying other brands in china and i haven't seen a difference in quality for about a decade or so. the last issue i remember reading about was that some factory produced bricks with varying tolerances depending on the season, because the factories were not climate controlled. and that story is already several years old.
so yes, you could have an old set from a bad charge. but the times where lego was guaranteed to be better are gone.
Mostly prints vs sticker, color consistency, building techniques, visible sprue points, whether figurines has special prints on arms and stuff like that.
For a child most sets will be fine if you don't need to care about the price. Though some sets want to install an Smartphone app for full functionality which I think is a pretty shite idea as most good parents want to get their children away from the screens.
However a lot of adults are also collecting Lego. And the 1000 Dollar Death Start is aimed at them, not children. It is an UCS set, which normally means higher quality.
The problem is that a lot of cost cutting measures have been used to save up a few cents here and there for the most expensive set ever. The figurines are trash. The sets includes stickers. The problem with stickers is that they look like ass over time so not really suited for serious collecting.
The backside of the set looks absolutely disgusting. Which would be fine as you could put it in front of a wall but alas you can only access certain features by the backside. The elevator mechanic is trash. Honestly just watch a video of the thing.
And worst of all, the Tie Fighter needed for the set to be complete was only available as an extra goodie for early buyers to spread FOMO. One thousand dollars and you don't even get the whole thing. Scalpers sell that Tie Fighter for like two hundred.
I inherited a rare vintage LEGO advent calendar set, unopened and still in its plastic sleeve. I tried to 'cash in' on this find but there was a surprising lack of interest and we ended up keeping it in the family. Maybe I was just trying to sell at the wrong time of the year.
Regardless, this made me wonder about how strong the secondary marketplace for LEGO actually is. How much of it is people buying LEGO for their kids and how much is it adults buying for their inner nine year old selves?
Nonetheless, LEGO definitely is attractive to thieves when there are these secondary marketplaces. With stolen goods the goal is to get rid as quickly as possible to get cash as quickly as possible. With the price of LEGO being what it is, with $1000 sets, the thief only has to undercut legitimate retailers. For the likes of myself with a rare and collectable set to find a buyer for, I want the premium and I am not going to sell cheap, hence I might have been understandably disappointed by the secondary market for LEGO.
The secondary market for LEGO is pretty healthy, meaning the prices are kept relatively sane.
And unless you’re specifically collecting unopened sets, what you really have to pay for is rare pieces in rare colors, which LEGO actually monitors and releases again from time-to-time.
> Lego bought brick link to keep it alive after the founders family tired of running it after he died.
that makes a nice story but was not at all Legos core motivation
taking control over the main secondary market is a grate way to
- gain positive sentiment through things like the creator program
- bolster you product prices by making sure the prices of 2nd hand sells stay high (which is both good and bed for the consumer, it's good as part of it is about consumer protection and reseller quality, but it's bad because there is a lot of insensitive to drive prices up beyond that)
- systematically exclude all brick competition from the most dominant 2nd hand market, a typical consumer hostile marked power abuse move which by the removal of competition allows artificial higher part resell prices which then can be used to reason for higher prices of new products and also allows better enforcement of other abuse strategies, like how they systematically abuse trade mark law wrt. mini figures
- by subtle support for one particular 2nd hand store and supple opposition(1) to others they can further enhance their monopoly position. (1: Or for anything reselling non Lego brick often not at all subtle legal harassment)
- some degree of influence on information flowing through the market place, they can't abuse it that much but it's still a factor
so they have a lot of money reasons which sadly most likely won't be good for the consumer to buy it, any story about "saving it" (weather real or not) is a bonus on top which by itself is unlikely to have made them buy it.
