Re:Lego price per part over the years – Brick Insights
by sandreas on Wednesday March 20, 2024 @03:50PM
(#39771229)
> Lego has a reputation because it built that reputation over decades of solid and reliable delivery.
Really? I'm not sure about that. I think LEGO built a reputation, because it was patented until 2008 and competitive products were not even a thing.
Mould King was founded 2012, also more than a decade ago.
> Pseudo-Lego brands built a reputation of competing on price while trading off quality and reliability.
This maybe true for chinese rip-offs, but the more modern approach is innovative, even with licensed models (see CADA MASTER Mercedes-AMG ONE 61503 or Mould King 12025 Orient Express). Features like LED lights, remote controls, remote controlled doors or REAL steam have not been approached by modern LEGO sets.
Re:Lego price per part over the years – Brick Insights
by ryukoposting on Sunday March 31, 2024 @09:17PM
(#39889927)
Where did LEGO have a patent? It certainly wasn't the US. Mega has been here for decades. LEGO tried to sue them under copyright law but lost. My experience with non-LEGO bricks has been extremely mixed, averaging negative.
I am not sure this is an accurate assessment. Lego has a reputation because it built that reputation over decades of solid and reliable delivery. Pseudo-Lego brands built a reputation of competing on price while trading off quality and reliability.
The real question is whether the price delta between Lego and pseudo-Lego can justify the quality delta. That's surely subjective up to a point.