10189 Taj Mahal now available from LEGOshop.com!

 
 
 

Comments

Posted by Kulturkampf in United States, 08 Aug 2008 15:14

Just got this email. I won't be getting it, seeing as how it's 300 dollars. It looks awesome though! And Huw, if you check your email I sent you a pic of it.

Posted by brankell5566 in Canada, 08 Aug 2008 16:12

Well its too bad that it is $399 in Canada

Posted by Gus263 in Brazil, 08 Aug 2008 16:49

It will ship by 15 Sep 2008.
This set is great, but I heard that this isn't minifigure schale (and I know that it isn't), but the pieces are great in quantity and are useful. The new Death Star is more expensive but have less pieces, I know why, it is due to the royalty of SW. Great set, but I don't pretend to get this (and special editions aren't sold on my country).

Posted by Leggodt94 in United States, 08 Aug 2008 17:53

WOW! $300 USD? That is cheeeeeeap for a 6000 estimate piece set! Well, the Taj Mahal may be the biggest lego set in pieces, but the UCS Falcon still holds the title of most expensive set. You can't spend as much as $500 on a single set other than the UCS Falcon.

Posted by lego12 in United States, 08 Aug 2008 18:12

300!?! That is cheap Leggodt! I might get it next year!

Posted by brankell5566 in Canada, 08 Aug 2008 21:21

Why is there no instructions for it I searched it on Lego.com and it said that it had no matches ?

Posted by Gus263 in Brazil, 08 Aug 2008 21:35

I think that the instructions of the Taj Mahal will not appear because it is a expensive and "collectors'" set (it is too big). I think the instructions will not appear at Lego.com, but maybe in another site, if a consumer who get the set scans the instructions (what seems to be very hard and it will not probably happens).

I think it is very good, at least is cheaper than the Death Star, and have more pieces, it really seems to worth the money, but to me it is too hard. First because it will not come here to Brazil and because it is very expensive to me.

Posted by rockdog3, 08 Aug 2008 23:46

I agree with everyone. I wouldn't get it either although it is cool. I mean $300 dollars for that? I rather get the AT-TE and RGS.

Posted by Kulturkampf in United States, 09 Aug 2008 12:52

300 dollars for that is a GREAT deal rockdog3. It has 5922 pieces.

Posted by tontonsega in France, 09 Aug 2008 13:34

So 300$ who will become 300€ ...:( with Lego the change is 1$=1€.

Posted by ChefAgf in Netherlands, 09 Aug 2008 15:20

it is 299 euro's and available in europe.

Posted by Luke Skytalker in New Zealand, 09 Aug 2008 16:38

It is rather big, I can see that the four pillars around it are made out of those large cone pieces. I still can't beleive that it's a nearly 6000 piece set and yet is less than half price of the UCS falcon. I have actually emailed lego about their rediculously high NZ prices compared with America's prices and they replied saying that they are terribly sorry that I am unhappy with the price of their products and all the rest of it and then they said that it is hard for them to match prices that match because of taxes. And obviously now it all makes sense, seeing as the New Zealand government adds 12.5% to every product in the country that is legally identified. And of course I figured that lego would need to add some profit for themselves and the shops as well. But surelythat still isn't correct because there still remains $200 NZ worth of profit, but the starting sum was still $200 more than the US price, which still means that the profit and tax deduction still remained in the price!! But, they cann't get that much profit, can they? I still can't figure out lego's prices, but as they say it may not be their fault. Maybe the government is charging too much on it because it is a very large item?? My dad is a property developer and he plans to build a subdivision that, when sold, the government will take a third of it. That's a couple of million NZ dollars they are taking away from us, but it surely can't be the same for the Falcon, what did it do wrong? Anyone got any ideas?

Posted by Gus263 in Brazil, 09 Aug 2008 21:07

Luke Skytalker, I don't know exactly, but for example, here in Brazil I cannot comunicate the Lego Company directly because here the Lego stores does not exists, the sets are distributed by an enterprise in other toy stores, and the taxes are too high here. Also, this enterprise don't buy very expensive sets (like the Death Star, Millenium Falcon, any modular house or excluisive set) because these sets will not probably makes much profit to them, and here the government adds taxes of course.

I think that the size at much situations can change the prices, like here, it sometimes happens, the size of the box can change the price of the product to be more high than expected.

The taxes are higher when the size of the product is bigger. But as I don't saw any special edition or ultimate collector edition set, I don't know if the box of this set will be bigger than the box of some other special edition sets.

Maybe it happens because the item is very large, as it happens here, as I said the size of the box can change the price of all the item. I have no idea of what I can do change these problems, there have no lego stores and I know what are those taxes, they turns the sets very and very expensives, unfortunately for me and other lego fans there...

Posted by Luke Skytalker in New Zealand, 10 Aug 2008 03:19

Um, Gus263, I am as limited in lego stores as you are. I have no pure lego stores but only small warehouses. I have never seen the Falcon in its box in a store before. Largest set I have ever seen in its box is the 7662 MTT and that was when I bought it. I do agree with you however when you say that the box size contributes to the pricing, obviously this adds a few more complicated factors to the equation and ends up with a box that is almost unnecessarily too big for the product. obviously lego has to consider the chances of losing pieces which is why they are sealed in polybags. The box would be that large because of the issue of the pieces being crushed. Also there is classic marketing to consider as well. A bigger box easily justifies an expensive purchase. Nice ideas, Gus263.

Posted by Leggodt94 in United States, 10 Aug 2008 12:50

Well, frankly, I like it when I get a set with a big box. It means that I just got a big set. Also, I like uses the boxes of really big sets to store all of my instruction manuels. Just trying to be resourcefull. :)

Posted by Luke Skytalker in New Zealand, 11 Aug 2008 00:22

That is exactly what I do, Leggodt. I use large boxes to store instruction books. It is quite resourcefull, and there is basically nowhere elso to put them. But the first point you made confirms that people are happy with the box size, which does contribute to marketing. Still, has anyone here been suprised at how little content the box has compared with the box size itself? It is a bit like chip packets.

Posted by Leggodt94 in United States, 11 Aug 2008 18:49

No way, that's crazy, skytalker! :D But what I'm not happy with is that LEGO stopped making the large box design without the front-opening flap, like the MTT for example. The box opened from the side, but I do like the whole opening tab thing on the side of the box; it makes for the box to stay closed after opening.

Posted by STnL, 11 Aug 2008 22:59

Very excited by this. It'll be my most expensive Lego set to date and it makes me very glad that I held off on the Millenium Falcon. This is so much better and impressive to build. I really look forward to it and I have to admit that the price point is amazingly good.

Posted by Sam Butcher in New Zealand, 12 Aug 2008 03:36

OK, well im another Kiwi here, and flip im confused.NO marketing or anything to do with licencing junk could make the falcon $1000, yet this only $430.Man, thats strange...

Anyway, I might consider just getting the set for parts.Thats insanely cheap

I was lucky enough to see a UCS falcon in the flesh at a K-mart, they had 3, i went back to get one two days later - all gone! :-o

Posted by colin0906 in United States, 13 Aug 2008 14:09

This new Taj Mahal is awesome! I'm going to have to call my other Lego friends and tell them that the Falcon got kicked... And who thought that you could get about 6000 pieces for three hundred bucks! I need to buy this...

Posted by water jedi 17 in United States, 13 Aug 2008 18:29

as many of us have been saying the taj mahal is at a great price compared to the falcon but why??
1 it's not a licensed set unlike the falcon(star wars)
2 most of the pieces are the same/repeated such as the tile pieces)
3 the taj mahal has no figs the falcon comes with 5 rare figs
i myself don't like these types of sets because they have very little or no playability.The only thing I like about them is a long advanced build since most of the smaller sets are easier to build.
It's also interesting to note that a short while after the pics of new sets are released they appear on s@h such as what happened to 10186 annd 10188.For example only 4 days after the taj mahal pic was found it became availible on s@h

Posted by jonbuddy in United States, 13 Aug 2008 21:42

Some of you might think it's crazy that the Falcon, with only around 5,000 pieces, was $500, although this Taj Mahal set, with around 6,000 pieces is only $300.

The reason is that the Falcon was so detailed, while the Taj Mahal isn't very detailed from what the picture shows.

Posted by water jedi 17 in United States, 13 Aug 2008 22:10

I agree and disagree with you jonbuddy,yes the falcon is very detailed but the taj mahal isn't as detailed on the outside than the inside.The taj mahal has stairs,minarets,domes,finials and arches but it's all inside the set.What we need is a view of inside the set to compare it to the falcon.

Posted by Sam Butcher in New Zealand, 14 Aug 2008 06:01

What does detail have to do with anything to do with price? Its still 5000 bits for $500 verses 6000 bits for $300.Detail isn't an extra that costs more.it's part of the set.Not an extra to costs more.The only excuses i can think of are the falcon has more big peices and harder to mold peices too (+ licencing costs of corse). Where as this taj mahal has many mass produced peices that are extremely small and common...

Posted by eros in Australia, 14 Aug 2008 11:09

So the taj is white right? Not tan, like I plan?

water jedi, are there stairs? I can only find 3 photos of the set and can't work out where the stairs are... and what is a finial?

Wonder when I will get my set here in western australia...

Posted by Leggodt94 in United States, 14 Aug 2008 11:47

Well, sammy1, it is possible that detail can make a set cost more. For example, on most of the reviews for the new AT-TE almost every time do I see a complaint about the gaps in the armour. Well, let's see, which is more detailed, gaps in the armour or no gaps in the armour? No gaps in the armour, right? Well, to fix those gaps in the armour to make it more DETAILED, you'll need more pieces, and more pieces means BIGGER PRICE. And there you have it!

Secondly, another reason why the falcon may cost more than the Taj Mahal is because, I mean think about it. Would you rather have a taj mahal or a millenium falcon. Personally, I go with the falcon. Now, LEGO relizes that the falcon(or any star wars set for that matter) is gona be more popular, so, they make a better profit by making the Falcon $500. Truthfully, the liscensing is why the Falcon costs more, but, hey, that doesn't mean that LEGO can't throw anything else in there. :)

Posted by ChefAgf in Netherlands, 14 Aug 2008 13:27

Eros the stairs are on the inside. look at the top view and you can see two gaps where the stairs are in the bottom of your screen :D

Posted by water jedi 17 in United States, 14 Aug 2008 14:08

@ eros :finial-decorated ornament on top of a pinnacle or spire
as i said before we need a pic of inside the taj mahal,maybe somebody who owns it can provide us a pic?

Posted by ngclarkiv in United States, 14 Aug 2008 21:25

My opinion: Taj Mahal cool... but not that cool. I mean the Falcon may be more expensive but Leggodt is exactly right, thats why it cost more. If you think about it the Falcon is priced right as is the Taj Mahal. Falcon has alot more different pieces, colors, the five rare Lego mini figures, the licensing as water jedi has said, the licensing. And believe or not Lego can knock the price up because of that reason because they know that its going to be bought even if its more pricey. The Taj Mahal is one of those sets that just stands there for looks, has almost the same color for every piece, and the mini figures are even too big for the set. The Taj Mahal would be greater in size for sure.

Posted by Sam Butcher in New Zealand, 15 Aug 2008 03:40

@ Leggodt Well, although i kinda get your point, i still dont get it.Aren't you kindof controdicting yourself? If a set with more detail has more peices (which of corse it does) then the falcon, with more detail, should have more peices.but that doesn't make any sence, because if that was right, the falcon should have more pieces - but it doesn't.Every piece still counts as a piece.even if its detail.

But apart from that, i fully agree with your reasons.I mean, any lego collector would probably get a falcon over this any day...

Posted by Leggodt94 in United States, 15 Aug 2008 19:23

Well, sammy1, I wasn't saying that the falcon should have more pieces than the taj mahal, I was simply proveing you wrong in that SOMETIMES detail CAN affect the price of a set. Really, the all-around reason why the falcon is more than the Taj is because of the liscensing. There's probably no other reason.

Posted by Gus263 in Brazil, 15 Aug 2008 21:19

Well, I don't own and I don't played with a UCS Millenium Falcon, and I also don't saw builted, played with and by extension I don't own the Taj Mahal, but I think that the Millenium Falcon is just more expensive, (as Leggodt said) because the licensing, all the minifigures, names and things with Star Wars logo makes it more expensive. The size of the box can also affects it, but I don't know exactly about the size of the box, I don't saw these sets in any store.

And about details, I think that the Taj Mahal and Millenium Falcon are very different to be compared, one is a great spaceship of the Star Wars theme and the other is a great real building. So, It is hard to know what is more detailed, the two are very different, though both are big sets.

Posted by Da_LegoBuilder in United States, 16 Aug 2008 10:00

hmm... i'm not sure about this set, it would be so much better if they had a white house or something to go with the theme. Very expensive, not likely i'm gonna get it. I do agree with Gus263, maybe because of all that legal stufff...

Posted by Jimmy Hopkins, 18 Aug 2008 13:17

Maybe it is the detail, but maybe the falcon has more expensive pieces than the taj mahal. I won't get it because although it looks nice, it isn't minifigure scale, another reason why the falcon is more expensive.

Posted by colin0906 in United States, 18 Aug 2008 15:24

I'm assuming that this is one of those sets that is impossible to move after you've built it...

Posted by richard180275 in United Kingdom, 19 Aug 2008 02:33

The big dome comes off and the main bilding lifts off of the base. Then the base and the wall divided into 4 sections held together with black tecnic friction pins.

If you're lucky enough to be a Brickish member, there are some pictures of the box in the Events section.

Richard.

Posted by DanteG in Netherlands, 19 Aug 2008 04:40

@ Sammy1: "...any lego collector would probably get a falcon over this any day..."
Nope, I'm a LEGO collector since I emerged from my Dark Ages a bit over a year ago, but would prefer the Taj Mahal 10 times over the UCS MF. On the other hand, I don't take too much interest in LEGO SW sets. Apart from the fact that they cost generally more for the same amount of pieces compared to a regular set. So yeah, it's purely the licensing that makes these SW products more expensive.

@ colin0906: Yup. Just like 10181 Eiffel Tower. Unmovable when the 3 parts are joined, but movable with the top bit (~70cm) removed.

Posted by DanteG in Netherlands, 19 Aug 2008 08:25

LOL Colin0906! A bit out of proportion & MiniFigs would have to crawl into it (which could be quite easy considering there's a cafe next door ;-), but yeah I get your point.

Posted by colin0906 in United States, 20 Aug 2008 12:59

@DanteG: I agree. The majority of the UCS Lego Star Wars sets are plain boring to build, and are ugly for the eye to look at. As a matter of fact, the UCS Millennium Falcon actually is ugly due to detail. It's onion dome vs. gun turret. Relatively expensive vs. relatively cheap. 5100 pieces vs. 5900.

Posted by Leggodt94 in United States, 20 Aug 2008 13:04

@colin0906: If the UCS Falcon is so bad, then why do you want it?

Posted by mars4life in United States, 21 Aug 2008 00:05

Weird(but good) that it's so cheap for the amount of pieces. It seems that with rising gas prices Lego prices would go up.

Posted by DanteG in Netherlands, 22 Aug 2008 07:23

@ mars4life:
That seems logical to, as TLC needs oil to make plastic ;-)

Posted by bluemoose in United Kingdom, 22 Aug 2008 13:58

The cost of the raw materials to make bricks is only a small part of the overall cost of a set - the heating bill for the factories, the electricity for running the factories, the fuel costs for shipping the bricks around the world by truck, ship & plane, etc., are all affected by the current problems.

Posted by legocarnut2 in United States, 30 Aug 2008 15:39

hopefully they will make a line like this with things like the sphynx empire state building big ben and such. but this is pretty cool, for some reason the minarets look kinda small

Posted by bluemoose in United Kingdom, 30 Aug 2008 18:25

This is already kind-of the 3rd in the 'series', after the Statue of Liberty & The Eiffel Tower.

Commenting has ended on this article.