It’s a tricky rope for them to tread, sharpshooter. On one hand, cheaper items would get the brand more recognition; on the other hand, it may ‘cheapen’ the brand and bring down the perception that james bond stands for luxury. That being said, they’ve slapped Bond on monopoly, pop vinyls and aftershave in recent years… I think they’re loosening their careful curation of Bond merchandise a bit.
All of which were marketed as high end collectibles. Given this is in partnership was Aston Martin, not exactly what you’d call the car company for the Everyman, expect the Lego to be the same thing.
None of those were high end collectables, and nor were they marketed as such. Monopoly was just like any other edition with bond slapped on it; nothing about it was marketed as a ‘premium’ version of monopoly. Pop vinyls are cheap mass-market products that anyone can afford easily; they’re the definition of pop culture merch for the everyman. The aftershave that i’m referring to was also a cheap-ish variety of scent.
Examples of luxury bond products would be the bond figures that go for ~300 dollars, barbour jacket, crocket and jones shoes, omega watch, aston etc…
I’d strongly argue that Lego fall into the category of Bond product for the everyman. Even the more expensive ‘creator’ sets like the modulars aren’t marketed as luxury items, and it’s likely not going to be any more expensive than the ‘standard’ millenium falcon sets that I imagine most kids are able to obtain from their parents.
I agree that most of the more recent 007 merchandise was aimed at a certain ‘affordable’ sector of the market as a whole, swatches, bathing trunks, collectible cars and so on. But I’m not entirely sure the more expensive stuff you mention isn’t chiefly much the same, only with a 0 or 00 more on the price tag. Often the jackets and shoes have certain quality issues, showing out-of-the-box wear or other flaws. In effect they are collector items not so much to be worn but owned and shown in a cabinet.
And the difference between an 007-themed Swatch and an 007-themed Omega is more in the eye of the beholder. Since today everybody has a little black-mirror item showing the time both would be likewise superfluous.
In the end I suspect all of these things tend to end up in glass vitrines and on cupboards - only some were a bit more expensive than others. If this Lego-thingy is an actual toy kids can have fun with it’s probably more useful than most of the other stuff.
What I mean is, up to a point most of these items are more or less a luxury, varying only in price tags, not so much in the individual worth they have for the people possessing them.
But all those are marketed as collectibles, they clearly have zero intention of revisiting (I say revisiting as that’s what they went for in the 60’s) the disposable produduct market. They are aiming at aftershaves, razors, and items known for being kept in boxes on a shelf.
Also, Is Bond really a brand needing a foothold? When you are the go to series for example of a whole genre, and the first thing said for when you want to recast a lead actor, I think it’s a safe assumption people know who you are.
Could be that’s no longer the point, getting to be known. At least not with the big brands, Marvel, Star Wars, Bond. Merchandising itself is a veritable percentage of the business, a sideline that turned into a mainline business plan and returns in its own right. Therefore it’s not a question of keeping the brand afloat and in the media; rather of balancing the number of items and choosing those with the best profit margins.
The comics are a good example, they’re not likely to ever corner the market, far from. But with the fans they seem popular enough, so much so that they branch out into spin-offs - in a shrinking market and against heavy competition. For Bond that’s quite extraordinary.
From what little we know this Lego set will likely also be of that particular nature, a collectible for die-hard fans with plenty of potential for successors.
That’s a point, Bond is in a rare situation with the books rights and the adaptation rights being held by different groups, yet having Merchandise that has a symbiotic relationship with each other so one can always be seen as promotion for the other, unlike the two you stated where all the merch is now under under the mouse eared shaped banner. I gather that this sort of relationship at Marvel with Fox was causing friction a few years ago, Marvel not wanting to be promoting what they saw as rival films.
If it’s over $100, it’s not much of a “toy.” And if it does cost that much, it’s still a Lego set, so it won’t be anything close to “screen accurate.” So either it’s a toy kids won’t be able to afford or a “high-end collectible” that looks like a toy, which you’d think would turn off adult collectors.
Then again, what do I know? My kids have a friend who, at age 11, saved up and bought a $400 “Death Star” Lego kit. Obviously there’s a lot of people out there – young and old – with more disposable income than I’ll ever have.
That’s what I mean with ‘collectible’ - the Lego market is an odd kettle of fish where items are priced beyond what we would normally expect to be toys, where models have their very own look and style - and can yet end up as presentation pieces on the desk of an architect or engineer. Or in the sandbox next to some battered Matchbox models.
Thing is, merchandise today turns up in every price segment of the market, there is nothing really exclusive any more, just varying degrees of walking as an add. The trick is to work all segments of the market, to offer something for everybody. That’s why comic figures and game characters come in ridiculously priced limited edition models these days. Articles whose worth is solely defined by what their customers want to shell out for them.
By the by, some images - as yet unverified - appeared on Instagram.
What’s the board’s policy on leaked images? I have a picture but will not upload it directly to the board it if it’s a violation of the board’s rules.
Here’s an outside link to the picture under the spoiler tag.
If this too is a violation I’ll delete.
If that’s really it, better display it with the box or no one will ever guess what it’s supposed to be.
No specific policy as such. Leaked though is always difficult to judge; could be anything from legit to photoshop.
Anyway, no violation here.
Which Lego figures do you think could come with the Aston Martin? I’m thinking Connery or Craig 007, Goldfinger and Oddjob, M and Silva are most possible.
If it’s really part of the (relatively higher end) “Technic” line, then there won’t be any figures.
And more’s the pity: I’d rather see more whimsy-oriented “Creator” kits with figures, given (he said beating the drum again) Lego offerings are never going to look screen-accurate, anyway.
I’m sure if this goes well they’ll broaden their use of the licence.
I hope so. I don’t now nor have I ever had a problem with EON marketing kid-friendly Bond merchandise. My complaint has been that when they have done so, they’ve granted the license to some truly crappy, third-rate companies (like “Exclusive Premiere”). If they exercised a little quality control, we could see some awesome stuff that doesn’t break the bank.
At the very least, it’d be fun to have some product to look forward to in the long, long waits between movies.
Meanwhile, the Lego set is out…
Seems like the leaked pictures were pretty spot-on:
BTS Video from LEGO
Looks great from some angles and not so great from others. I’m a huge LEGO fan so I’ll still pick it up but I think it’s could have been better. Might be better in person.
I think the commitment to having the gadgets was commendable, even if it did necessitate the model being a bit boxier in some areas than it could’ve been otherwise.