Subject:
|
The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 07:50:57 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
4120 times
|
| |
|
|
I just know I'm going to get flamed for this. I'm putting on my flame suit
early. What follows are my opinions. Take them as you wish. I don't plan on
doing much with this thread, so don't expect too many replies from me.
It seems to me, for some people at least, the change of color issue is only a
part of the problem. I think, for some people, the bigger problem is with LEGO
company's frame of mind. I know there are a few people at least who's problem
with the color change issue is not with the color change itself, but the idea
that LEGO never asked the AFOL for input before.
But the LEGO company has said that "We know what we're doing," it was "based off
good thinking." Ok, if you say so. Look at Bionicle, they know what they're
doing, don't they?
So very frequently we hear how much Bionicle was a nasty risk and it took off.
Bionicle is such a success. Bionicle is the thing that probably is saving LEGO
right now. I'm not going to argue that. I agree, for the most part, that
Bionicle is a great success.
But let's look at the bigger picture here. Yes, LEGO has been a successful
company for many many years. Yes, LEGO has taken mighty big risks in it's day.
Plastic instead of wood? Heresy! Minfigs with arms? Blasphemy! New colors
besides the basic 6? Profanity! But what about the other risks LEGO has taken
in the last ten years?
Yes, Bionicle was huge risk. Yes, Bionicle has made LEGO an awful lot of money.
But what about the imfamous Galidor. That was a risk. LEGO knew what they were
doing then, right? Galidor tested with with all the focus groups, right? That
wasn't a really great success.
Changing Duplo for to Explore... that was a risk. LEGO knew what they were
doing then, too, right? Explore sounds so much better than Duplo, it sounds so
much more educational. Did it test well with the focus groups too? LEGO turned
around on its decision there, it's back to Duploe. That wasn't really a great
success.
Scala, Belville and the other LEGO for girl buiding sets (Clickits aside)? LEGO
knew what they were doing, didn't they? Girls love LEGO! They love pinks and
purples and barbie doll sized figs! Girls love pink and purple LEGO with barbie
doll sized figs, right? Bet it tested well with the focus groups. I've never
seen Scala or Belville on store shelves, and it's always going on sale on
shop.lego.com, but LEGO knows what it's doing, right? I don't know if I'd call
it a success.
ZNAP! LEGO knew what they were doing, didn't they? They were going to compete
and blow connects and all the other beam oriented buiding set companies out of
the water with this new product! It tested well with the focus groups perhaps?
I wouldn't call it a great success either.
Throwbots and Robo-riders were a good idea, right? Robots and cars that were
almost violent! Boys would love that, and it would introduce them to Technic!
Did it test well with the focus groups? There are still Robo-riders at my local
hole-in-the-Wal-Mart. I'm not sure if you could call that a success.
LEGO Sports! Now there's an idea! Bring all the action, excitement and
exercise of sports indoors! Tested well with the focus groups, right? I've
heard bad things about NBA in Europe, and I've seen bad things about Soccer here
in the states. A partial success, to say the most.
LEGO Studios, Jurassic Park, Dinosaurs! HERE's a multi-million idea! Give kids
a camera, let them make their own movies, throw in some dinosaurs and big names.
These HAD to have tested well in the focus groups. But the camera was too
expensive, and I always saw all the sets in large quantities on sale. A
success?
Mindstorms! Ok, now we're getting somehwere. Mindstorms is a great product. I
bet it tested fantastically. I don't own Mindstorms, but I've seen that they're
great. But there's the problem: Price prohibitive. Now Minstorms is almost
entirely limited to schoolastic endevours, and out of the hands of the general
public. A fantastic success for schools, a mild success overall.
Video games! Bring LEGO home to your Playstation, build in virtual reality! I
bet that tested very well. LEGO sure knew what it was doing with that, right?
Recent press releases have stated LEGO is dropping all it's electronic products,
so I guess this wasn't a success.
Star Wars! Harry Potter! Big success stories, right? Tested well with the focus groups. LEGO must have hit it square on the head. Recent press releases have stated that LEGO is dropping or limiting their licensed products. I guess fees are getting too much? Perhaps set design with so many pieces for the lower cost is cutting into profits? I don't know. I do know that there are original Harry Potter sets still on sale at my Wal Mart and my TRU, and a few of the other Star Wars sets from seasons passed as well. A used-to-be-a success?
Bionicle, LEGO's golden goose... right? Tested well with focus groups, I'm
sure. LEGO KNOWS what it's doing, right? I'm not so sure. All of my local
stores are DESPERATELY trying to get rid of older bionicle sets. They're just
not selling. MY TRU is running a sale: Buy a new bionicle get any old bionicle
off the shelf for free. I guess the market is saturated with ball and socket
technic bits, I'm no expert. I just call em as I see em. A success, yes. But
is it STILL a success? Many kids, but more parents to be sure, I've overheard
in stores have said that they're fed up with Bionicle. Definately, though, a
success.
I'm sure I've missed something, so feel free to correct me for any of my
opinions that mis-interprate the facts and heresay as I see/hear them. Feel
free to correct me if I've left a success out.
The color change? Tested well with focus groups. LEGO knows what it's doing.
But let's look at the record here: In the last ten years or so, I've listed 13
or so big risks LEGO has taken on, and so far of those 13 I say 3 (1 + 0.5 + 0.5
+ 0.5 + 0.5) have been successes. Only 1 was a true, honest, success. All in
my opinion of course.
Yes, Bionicle was attacked by AFOLs. Unpure! Unclean! Evil! Yes, we called
that one wrong. But I think it's fair to say that overall, we AFOLs know what
we're talking about. I'd wager we have a higher success rate for calling good
and bad ideas that LEGO has had in the last ten years. Can you really say,
LEGO, that you KNOW what you're doing because ONE of your experiements happened
to be a big success?
There's the thing. LEGO keeps taking these risks, trying to set new trends, be
better, different, cutting edge. I'm sorry to tell you LEGO, ten, twenty years
ago, your sets were better. You set the bar. You constantly set the bar. All
other sets are compared to the bar. All clone bricks are compared to the bar.
The height of the bar is why LEGO is synonymous with 'construction toys'.
The bar does NOT go down!
For some people, the color issue is LEGO missing the bar. LEGO set the bar very
high after having 30 years of never changing an existing color. 30 years is a
long time. Changing a core color, even if it wasn't a core color 30 years ago,
is vaulting way under the bar for these people. LEGO bricks from 30 years ago
match perfectly with the color of bricks from a year ago, I know it, I own 30
year old bricks, I own Classic Space and Classic Town sets.
Current LEGO set design, aside from Licensed sets, is very spotty and
questionable in my opinion. LEGO set the bar ten, twenty years ago. LEGO can't
seem to reach the bar without a push from an outside source (Star Wars, Harry
Potter). The 80's and early 90's in Castle, Space, Town, and most all other
themes are, arguably, the best sets LEGO has produced in 20 years.
How can you raise the bar when you can't reach the bar? This isn't limbo I'm
talking about, this is not a question of 'How low can you go?'
Therein lies the problem, I think. Some people's problem with the color change
lies in LEGO letting them down... again. And again. (and again).
And I could be wrong. I could be wrong about everything I've said. I have
merely posted to maybe bring up a thought. And that is that even though your
focus groups tested your products well, and even though you 'KNOW' what you're
doing, the past does not lie. AFOLs could hold the key to what the public would
purchase over your competitors.
Yes, AFOLs have no right to expect anything from you. Yes, LEGO is it's own
company. Yes, LEGO does not have to listen to the ranting and raving of a very
small percentage of it's consumers.
However...
In my humble opinion, LEGO does not KNOW what it's doing. LEGO does not KNOW
what's best for the company.
In my humble opinion, LEGO THINKS it knows what it's doing. LEGO THINKS it
knows what's best for the company.
I'm not asking (or telling) LEGO to do change the colors back, or to build
better sets. I mearly ask that LEGO turn around and see where the footprints in
the sand come from.
Please, learn from the past LEGO. A they say, those who fail to learn from the
past are doomed to repeat it. I'd rather not repeat parts of the last ten
years.
--Anthony
Lugnet Member #1312
http://www.ikros.net
|
|
Message has 9 Replies:
 | | Re: The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
| Anthony Sava wrote: > Please, learn from the past LEGO. A they say, those who fail to learn from the > past are doomed to repeat it. I'd rather not repeat parts of the last ten > years. Thank you, Anthony, I could not have said it better than your (...) (20 years ago, 10-May-04, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
| Very well put, I couldn't agree more. Another analogy of the whole situation is that Lego is like a blindfolded kid desperately swinging at the pineata with no luck at all. --member 1893 (20 years ago, 10-May-04, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
| (...) They were "following the trends in the children's toy market". Look at Pokemon, Power Rangers, and the like. Enormous success stories with incredible revenue from toys over the years. The stinking Pokemon toy market won't die! My kids bought (...) (20 years ago, 10-May-04, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
| (...) More than five decades as a successful company. Um, make that a successful company with global name recognition, fan clubs & conventions, etc. (...) Hmmm... that, I thought, was a point in LEGOs favor. (...) OK, fair enough. But keep in mind (...) (20 years ago, 10-May-04, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
| In lugnet.dear-lego, Anthony Sava wrote: lots of good points and rambling snipped (...) I agree with most of your post, but I must take issue with this. I'm 40, and I got my first LEGO as a gift in 1969 or 1970 (that's the only one I still have the (...) (20 years ago, 10-May-04, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
| | | Re: The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
| In lugnet.dear-lego, Anthony Sava wrote: Anthony, Coming from another industry driven by fan interest and marketing to children (video games), I can agree with a lot of what you say. TLC has made some very, very bad choices over the past couple of (...) (20 years ago, 10-May-04, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
| | | Re: The Bar Does Not Go Down
|
| (...) I'm definitely not saying that Lego has made wise descisions lately. However, maybe what we're seeing is based on simple economics. Most of the problems I see with sets these days has to do with too few parts, which cause lame designs, etc, (...) (20 years ago, 11-May-04, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
59 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
