> Notoriously Expensive Lego Prices Scale Linearly, Remain Constant Over Time
> If there’s one big gripe common among brickheads, it’s that the prices of LEGO sets are quite lofty (plus maybe not enough spaceships). But two disparate people interested in the plastique fantastique eschewed conjecture in favor of hard data, and found that LEGO prices scale linearly with piece count, and that on average, prices of sets have actually remained constant over the last couple of decades.
FWIW with some of the bigger sets they seemed to make it needlessly complex and tedious. You have to assemble little pointless pieces together that they could have easily delivered as one piece. If they really do charge per piece then it makes sense to me now.
They don't charge per piece. The price per piece is calculated backwards from the sets and number of pieces. Of course it correlates, but the price per piece varies significantly based on the size etc. of the pieces.
But LEGO has always favoured pieces that even when they look very specific usually have a significant level of reusability in other contexts. Hence "pointless" pieces that aren't actually pointless because their appearance is sufficiently generic.
> If there’s one big gripe common among brickheads, it’s that the prices of LEGO sets are quite lofty (plus maybe not enough spaceships). But two disparate people interested in the plastique fantastique eschewed conjecture in favor of hard data, and found that LEGO prices scale linearly with piece count, and that on average, prices of sets have actually remained constant over the last couple of decades.
https://nerdist.com/article/notoriously-expensive-lego-price...