3 ms·

>buying something premium that could also be an investment, more of a collector's item Am I the only one getting fed up with this mentality? What's the point b

>buying something premium that could also be an investment, more of a collector's item Am I the only one getting fed up with this mentality? What's the point buying toys and not use them? How are you supposed to create memories and have fun if you are buying to bank on it later? Because the logic will be: if a big part sees this as an easy flip, then no one uses it, enjoys it, has fun and creates memories with it, and down the line you'll have less people to sell this to. There are two groups of collectibles at the moment imo - highly speculative ones, where every one thinks they will get rich from hoarding and flipping shit, and true collectibles that were played with and have a solid fan base, where people used the products and have an emotional attachment to the brand. They are rare because people played with them (broke parts, lost others, trashed them), and very few people chose to not use the sets (most of them out of love for the brand, not to flip it down the line - and they were kids, not adults). If a big part is seeing this as investment vehicles, then they aren't rare - they are just perceived to be rare. If kids aren't building memories around it today, how will they crave it down the line when they're grown ups? Anyway, Lego is banking on it alright! Good on them.

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
>How are you supposed to create memories and have fun if you are buying to bank on it later? I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with their Lego sets, as long as people keep buying more sets and at higher prices. Same how Nvidia doesn't care that their GPUs end up in the hands of miners and scalpers, instead of gamers to enjoy, create memories and have fun. All corporations have the same purpose, to generate value for their shareholders, using whichever way generates more revenue.
- libertine 5y ago
  I disagree, I do think they care about what people do with their Legos, to the point of having the whole etiquette around how to properly use Lego parts. But to the point of caring if people are actually building their limited edition sets? After the purchase people are free to do what ever they want with it, and like I said, they are making bank on it. If they wanted to throw panic they just had to re-release limited edition sets. >Same how Nvidia doesn't care that their GPUs end up in the hands of miners and scalpers, instead of gamers to enjoy, create memories and have fun. And that's the fuel of change, AMD could have been capturing gamers but they're too focused on CPUs. But Intel got a taste of what it feels like not caring about consumers. Maximizing shareholder value is a short term strategy for B2C, usually doesn't go well. Shareholder value is a consequence from generating value to consumers, not the other way around.
- the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
  > I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with their Lego sets, as long as people keep buying more sets and at higher prices. Strongly disagreeing. Lego clearly is very interested in curating the brand. They also didn’t buy BrickLink without reasons. Lego wants to control and shape the entire ecosystem even outside of where they make money.

ChuckNorris89 5y ago

>How are you supposed to create memories and have fun if you are buying to bank on it later? I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with their Lego sets, as long as people keep buying more sets and at higher prices. Same how Nvidia doesn't care that their GPUs end up in the hands of miners and scalpers, instead of gamers to enjoy, create memories and have fun. All corporations have the same purpose, to generate value for their shareholders, using whichever way generates more revenue.

libertine 5y ago
I disagree, I do think they care about what people do with their Legos, to the point of having the whole etiquette around how to properly use Lego parts. But to the point of caring if people are actually building their limited edition sets? After the purchase people are free to do what ever they want with it, and like I said, they are making bank on it. If they wanted to throw panic they just had to re-release limited edition sets. >Same how Nvidia doesn't care that their GPUs end up in the hands of miners and scalpers, instead of gamers to enjoy, create memories and have fun. And that's the fuel of change, AMD could have been capturing gamers but they're too focused on CPUs. But Intel got a taste of what it feels like not caring about consumers. Maximizing shareholder value is a short term strategy for B2C, usually doesn't go well. Shareholder value is a consequence from generating value to consumers, not the other way around.
the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
> I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with their Lego sets, as long as people keep buying more sets and at higher prices. Strongly disagreeing. Lego clearly is very interested in curating the brand. They also didn’t buy BrickLink without reasons. Lego wants to control and shape the entire ecosystem even outside of where they make money.