Mainly because it's irrelevant to do so.

 

Average wages in US:

1984 $16,135.07
2010 $41,673.83

source: National Average Wage Index

so there is something to the fact that our parents were paying $30 or whatever for optimus compared to today, based on the snapshot of average wages.

 

need cost of living comparison too, at least the ratio of housing/food to income

 

I'm not sure why you're so gung ho about constantly ignoring inflation, economics, and reality in this thread.

An earlier poster helped to put into terms that do not change over the years: the time value of the dollar. While times change, the scarcity of time doesn't: 24 hours in a day in 1984 and 24 hours a day in 2012.

In 1984, the federal minimum wage was $3.35. A minimum wage earner would have to work roughly 4.5 hours to buy a $15 transformer. In 2012, the minimum wage is $7.25. A $15 transformer today takes 2 hours to earn.

There is no avoiding the fact that transformers today, in terms of time, cost half as much as what they did in 1984. A parent buying their kid a G1 transformer was making a much bigger investment, timewise, than one bought today.

In contrast, a gallon of gas in 1984 was $1.24. That's a roughly 22 minutes of work for a 1984 minimum wage earner. Today, it costs a minimum wage earner 30 minutes of time to earn. That's outpacing (a bit) inflation (both in wages and costs) than most things.

Transformers cost over the years have gone down substantially in terms of the time value.

Whether a basic G1 was more of a value than a deluxe today is a separate discussion. But there's no use pretending that $15 dollars in 1984 means the same as $15 dollars today.

 

I don't complain about the price of modern Transformers since I buy only what I like and spend a lot of money on 3rd Party figures to boot...

The only flaw I find in your post is that though you adjusted the prices based on inflation, I find money was much easier to come by back in the 80's and early 90's than it is now. Wealth was a bit more evenly distributed than it is now, the poverty rate is higher now as well, most people have to make their money stretch further, with all the job losses and the rising cost of fuel the working middle class is almost non-existent and facing struggles not seen since the Great Depression...

Also you have to consider the materials used in the toys then, like metal parts, rubber tires, chromed parts, sticker sheet, etc...IMHO modern Transformers are made from cheaper materials to try and keep costs down inspite of inflation because Hasbro knows most parents probably won't pay $20 for a deluxe figure that a kid will rip open and tear apart.

 

U.S. inflation statistics (as released by the Federal Reserve) are calculated off of the consumer price index. Accordingly, inflation does already take into account cost of living (e.g., housing and staple goods). It's basically what inflation is all about: the buying power of the dollar in terms of major consumer expenditures.

 

Minimal articulation. small pieces easily lost (fists), fragile hinges. Don't get me wrong, I love Gen 1 Prime. Have fond memories of him, but looking back, if I had ROTF Prime as he is today, back in 1984, I would have had insane adventures. That was my biggest beef with G1 toys as a child, was the fact that robot mode was treated like an afterthought for the first two waves, so those toys often looked nothing like the cartoon or were not fun to play with as toys (yes, I realize they were recycled Japanese product, but still)...

To get Battle Blades Prime with G1 features and manufacturing, it would cost approximately $120 for a toy in mass retail, considering tooling, molds, materials, etc. Also remember that G1 toys had almost zero paint apps. Most were two toned with tons of stickers. Today's Transformers have a lot more detail than their G1 counterparts.

 

Please leave the political diatribes out of this. Political discourse is not allowed on this site. Adjusting for inflation is the most accurate way of comparing the value of the dollar at different points in time.

Materials science has advanced significatly in the past 25+ years. Yes, they are lower cost materials, but that does not mean they are inferior. Plastics are stronger, lighter and more durable today. That lets Hasbro make designs today that were impossible in the G1 era. It also lets them make the same toy at a lower cost today than it would have been back then.

 

It's quite simple: it does not matter what anything was then, we live in the here and now. Back then, I only had a few. These days, I have a bunch. So yes- they are cheaper. But now they are getting more expensive, which means I will be buying fewer and fewer again.

So, analyzing inflation, daddy's wages, cost of gas, etc. from 25 years ago does nothing to put more money in my pocket now.

Don't you get that yet?

Fuck that entitlement shit and the attitude behind it: it's a hobby that I'll have to keep curbing until I drop it and take on another. Tell me why I am supposed to enjoy it.

 

By your reasoning, there's no point in discussing the price of Transformers, at all. No matter what the price, $10, $100, $1000, it won't "put more money" in your pocket.

If you want to say that all price is irrelevant, sure. Any price more than free is too much. So, what's the point that we're discussing again?

OP's post is about perspective: people complaining about the high price of transformers are doing in a knee-jerk way, without perspective. You, on the other hand, apparently want to discuss something completely unrelated. I'm honestly not sure what the point you're trying to make is, exactly. That the economy sucks and money is tight, so any price is too much?

 

There's a name for people like you. It's called a troll. Clearly, if you don't agree with what's being said about inflation, economics, etc. in this thread, then GTFO. Jesus. This thread isn't about putting effing money in your pocket, it's about how TF's prices have varied over the years. No one gives a crap about your pocket.

 

Sorry but I don't see how any thing I said was political in nature, I'm not here running for office nor do I care about public opinion, I just stated the truth of the matter...but you know what they say, "you can't handle the truth".

I disagree with you about the materials, like I said I actually collect modern figures like the classics and some Encore reissues and have no problem with their price. However anyone who has held/owned an original Bruticus can clearly see when compared side by side to the newer Encore reissue that it is made with inferior plastic. But I also understand, as I said before, companies like Takara and Hasbro have to be able to compete in the market place and in doing so will do what ever it takes to cut costs on a product to provide the lowest possible price to consumers yet still remain profitable...including using cheaper materials if possible. In doing so I do feel durability is lost, I can tell you as others might, I have never had an original G1 crumble in my hands like I have had happen with a newer figure...but I guess that's a matter of opinion so we'll agree to disagree.

 

No, it's the whole "take it and love it- or else" attitude that comes down. It pisses me off.
I don't like being told I have no right to dislike something.

 

Have you read my reply from the last 1 or 2 pages?

Pretty much the only toy the past few years that crumbled on its own was that telescope doctor from ROTF scout class, which was a design flaw coupled with the plastic used.

Take a G1 Jazz [reissue, original, whichever you want] and drop him a meter high from the ground, then take almost any modern deluxe you want and do the exact same thing. Tell me which one you can assemble back without glue.

As for original G1 not crumbling, Monstructor pieces, Black Zarak, Skyquake, G2 Slingshot, G1 Mirage [at the waist if you're not careful], G1 Metroplex, G1 Megatron...

Last figure from the past 6 years that crumbled or broke extremely easily was Scalpel.

Your example is correct in the sense that most Encores are made of very poorly maintained moulds, with Bruticus being the weakest example considering how many re-uses that mould has had in the early 2000-2004 lines.

 

You know, I'm not sure if it's been said yet but maybe this thread would have more relevance if the comparisons were more accurate. Why are we comparing apples (G1) to oranges (modern deluxe/voyager/leader). Why not compare the MSRP of the original G1 figures to their modern reissue counterparts? Like the SDCC Soundwave or Blaster that were $49.99 each, 25th Anniversary Prime at $69.99, or Perceptor which was $34.99? I think such comparisons would have more credence.

 

What did I tell you guys, eh? What'd I tell ya? I'm a goddamn PROPHET.

 

One issue with doing this would be the limited release nature of the reissues. Their pricing doesn't reflect the mass retail pricing, which will have a significant volume discount. The G1's being discussed were mass retail as are the 2012 deluxes.

 

No, I'm not Jesus.
But thank you tho.