 | | | | | |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
snip picture
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
(re-posting from BL)
Hmm...
The prophecy is coming true....
I was wondering when this would be made public and if it would be made public.
!!start warning!!
I do not know the full story behind the pictures (like what sets they came from,
etc) But I do think this is very true.
!!end warning!!
Back at Brickswest 2003 somebody whou WOULD know let a few in on some shocking
news - and I think this is part of it. From what a few were told there were some
very basic and popular colors that would come to an end as we know them... and
these 2 (dark and light grey) were on that list. From what I was told some of
these colors were being discontinued in a way... Lego is still making the basic
color - but they are calling it a new name in-house. The person who told us said
he was not aware if we would be able to see the difference (he was not able to
see any on his computer screen swatches). But it looks like you can tell the
difference.
So this could very well be the start of it. And if the rest plays out like this
then there are going to be some sweeping changes. I will not - repeat *will not*
say the rest of the colors on this list. If this is true we will all find out
soon enough. And I will not say who told us - but I would never repeat it if he
would not be in the position to know what was going on - he deals with colors in
his job everyday.
And about the rounded edges - I am going to keep my mouth shut on that. Because
if it really does deter from the sturdyness of the connections if I said what I
want to say I would be banned from Lugnet.
Mark P
http://www.landofbricks.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
(pic in original post)
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
Okay.... what happened? Did Lego hire fired workers from clone brands like
MegaBloks, Best Lock? This is really sad.....
I think each of us should start making emails and letters expressing our
concerns as loyal Lego customers.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
As I replied ON BL, i still think this is attributed to either light or air
quality. The old peices have what i consider “Smokers tinge”, my peices from my
youth have simlar discoloring, and my father smokes... I think its the tar in
the cigarette smoke. Josh
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Josh..in my house NO ONE SMOKES and I have noticed some 6 months ago that when
you put alot of dark gray tiles together they do not match( I used a large
number on that pepsi building roof edge and a ton on that road in my flatiron
block) This is not a new thing with dark gray and most deff. not a smoke
thing.Look at at this picture of my flatiron road and you can see the different
shades of dark gray..these this raod is some 4 months old and the all from new
tiles in early mid 2003.When the road was done this is how it looked not after
exposure. http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=481673
| |
| |
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
As I replied ON BL, i still think this is attributed to either light or air
quality. The old peices have what i consider “Smokers tinge”, my peices from
my youth have simlar discoloring, and my father smokes... I think its the
tar in the cigarette smoke. Josh
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Josh Baakko wrote:
| |
As I replied ON BL, i still think this is attributed to either light or air
quality. The old peices have what i consider “Smokers tinge”, my peices from
my youth have simlar discoloring, and my father smokes... I think its the
tar in the cigarette smoke. Josh
|
I disagree. I took a look at my Mini Star Destroyer and noticed the blue tinge
to the dark grey, but initially thought it was the light of the room. But the
color is quiet different, and I can pretty much say that I don’t smoke, and
neither does Gareth.
I can understand some subtle color ‘sway’, but this is a definite deviance.
Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Josh Baakko wrote:
> As I replied ON BL, i still think this is attributed to either light or air
> quality. The old peices have what i consider "Smokers tinge", my peices from
> my youth have simlar discoloring, and my father smokes... I think its the
> tar in the cigarette smoke. Josh
Sorry, Josh, but it's not. The discoloring effect does
happen in odd environments, but not like this. I noticed the
"bluing" in the dark grey when I bought the Star Destroyer the
other day; I initially wondered if it was the light, but yester-
day I parted out about 30 HP sets from 2002 and 2003 and
all show a darker, colder grey than that in the SD. I
hadn't noticed the adhesion question; I'll be very upset
if this is indeed the case. I'm confused about the reason
for the change in color; the adhesion question might be
an easier one, but consistency of color is pretty important!
It's pretty sad if LEGO is heading towards Megabloks ter-
ritory instead of concentrating on the level of quality
and precision that makes them LEGO and not MB. MB keeps
getting better--I was actually quite impressed by the
new releases in the Dragons line. When this comes from
a guy with nearly a metric ton of LEGO (yours truly), I
hope it carries a little bit of weight (nudge nudge, LEGO
company lurkers). Kids do actually notice this stuff.
Oh well, time to stock up on my dark grey now, so at least
my ships will match!
best
LFB
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Looks like The Lego Group is finally cutting corners (literally) in order to
compete with cheap clone brands. Is this the end of good-quality Lego?, or is
this merely a bad batch of product?
-HRH
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Harvey Henkelman wrote:
| |
Looks like The Lego Group is finally cutting corners (literally) in order to
compete with cheap clone brands. Is this the end of good-quality Lego?, or is
this merely a bad batch of product?
|
Yeah, this is bad juju.
Nobody wants grey elements that don’t match with light and dark grey as we have
known them. I don’t necessarily mind additions to the color scheme as we know
it, but to eliminate the greys is just madness. I don’t even have any of those
ultra-light greys from the mosaic sets, nor do I want any.
The greys are THEE pair of colors not to mess with -- everyone loves the greys.
Everyone needs those precise colors to make larger projects work. It just won’t
do to have most of one kind of grey and then some few odd pieces of new grey
mixed into the design. It means you will have to build in old and new grey
separately. It means you will have to collect a lot of new grey to make your
designs color matched. It means you will have to buy new grey versions of
elements you already have to color match your designs.
Can it be a scheme to make us buy lots more of the new grey? I hate to think
that TLC thinks this way, but maybe it’s true...?
The rounded corners thing has to be a considered engineering choice -- not a
good one, but a thoughtful one nonetheless. I mean, they have to make the mold
that way for the elements to end up with the overly rounded edges on the studs,
right? That much has to have been intended on purpose!
If this all turns out to be true and greys as we know them are on the way out, I
may just have to pay more attention to my other hobbies. TLC seems to take as
many steps backwards as forwards lately. Not knowing what greys to expect in a
set kind of pushes the limits for me. I thankfully have most of what I need or
wanted anyway, but maybe now I will try to purposefully pull back from this
nonsense.
I am more than annoyed that TLC works against us this way -- it’s just too hard,
too much energy, too much time, and too much money for them to play “bait and
switch” with us now.
What can they be thinking?!
-- Hop-Frog
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
Can it be a scheme to make us buy lots more of the new grey? I hate to think
that TLC thinks this way, but maybe it’s true...?
|
Dunno, but does have me wondering how this change plays vis-a-vis the light and
dark gray elements in the 4400 tubs that just hit the street. There are 50-ish
lt-gray 2x2 bricks per tub.
Is Lego dumping old-color parts ? Will these continue as is ? Are these bricks
the old lt-gray (I think they are) or the new one ? Some of the lt-gray pcs are
mentioned on the side of the tub, some are not. Also not that there are a nicely
number of 33 3x2 lt-gray slopes in the tub. Same questions apply.
So far (if I understand this), the new colors have only been observed in “MINI
Star Destroyer” set:4492 ... Perhaps this is something that Lucas Films asked
Lego to do and is not a system wide change. Only time will tell. If anyone is
seeing this in other sets, please mention it.
Ray
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
Further more, the studs are rounded, making
| |
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
|
Yes, working on a machine shop floor it looks as the NEWER 2004 plate/s is of
a different mold note the chamfered edges of the stud the reason for this and I
must say firstly that I Have very little to do with injection molding.
But it looks as if the wrong cutting tool was used or the final cleaning and
checking of the mold never happened, which it should have due to the high level
tolrance of Lego elements ~0.002mm tolrance, or that it is as set of molding
dies that are at the end of their production life.
As for the colour all that I can say is that TLC is well known in the industry
for material/s research and are always looking for better materials for there
elements.For more infomation on this subject enter into your search engine Lego
plus any of these cnc milling,cad,molding,injection molding there is really a
lot of interesting stuff on this matter and it gives a better understanding to
people outside the toolmaking industry a better idea of how it works .
On a last note if you go to lego.com and visit -about us - press room and read
the listings there are of about 3/4 notes that have to do with staff cuts at
Lego toolmaking centers namely switzland,Denmark and Germany all up of about 150
plus have had ties cut to TLC to put it nicely,Also don’t forget there is also a
new production plant in East Europe, so maybe corners are be cut or it’s just
all new to them.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
Thanks for the scan.
Bad news to say the least. :(
I’m crossing my fingers that it’s all a bad mistake and the bulk of 2004 sets
won’t be plagued by this.
If Lego truly wants to get rid of colors that have been in production for ~25
years, just because one of their “focus group” prefered the new colors, they
truly have lost the plot.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
See these posts on bricklink: Clark and Mine.
The light gray has changed a bit, but the dark grey is a whole new color, which
I think Clark is right about; it’s stone gray.
The new studs are slightly looser, but seem to work well.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
Just a thought with no evidence to back it up, but....
Assuming that this is not simply an error, like bent cypress trees or
low-quality train wheelsets, could there be a technical reason? One reason that
occurs to me is the colourfastness of the product. Perhaps they’re changing to
dyes or plastic formulations that wear better? Do we have any way of telling if
it’s the same old ABS?
In my experience, old blue and gray (from classic space era) are among my most
fragile pieces, far more likely to break than my old red or white bricks from
the same period. I’ve always wondered if the dyes (which yellowed far more than
either the white or the red) had something to do with it.
If they changed the plastic in some way, the same dyes may come out differently.
Can anyone attribute this to a set other than the mini SD?
Jeff
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
|
Well, if it’s true about the connections being weaker, I’d say that’s bad news.
But in all honesty, as a town building and landscape builder, I welcome a
slight color variation! Mix up all of those color variations and you have
buildings and scenery that look even better and more realistic!
Half full, people;-)
JOHN
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Three things:
1. I don’t think anyone objects to additional colors, they object to color
replacement with a different colors.
2. You might well be in a minority in not minding a mottled look to your MOCs, I
think many others would be more than annoyed. In some ways, having a properly
color coordinated design distinguishes a “refined” design from one that is built
up from multiple colored elements as if one didn’t have enough elements of a
particular color!
3. Replacement greys would mean that your investment in old greys has been cut
off in terms of future elements; it would also mean a period of reinvesting in
new greys in order to build in new greys.
Further, I really object to the “Half full” comment -- the greys are fundamental
colors to many builders. Losing access to the greys for further building does
not leave a glass “half full” -- it leaves it entirely empty!
Let’s just hope that these new greys are additions to the color line and not
replacement colors as suggested by some.
FWIW, while some of my building is done in grey, I have more commonly been
working in black and yellow lately (for quite some time). My concern is for
other builders whose entire stake in lego building is predicated on access to
the traditional greys. For myself personally, I do not need or want access to
other than the traditional light and dark greys. My castle/forestmen/13.13 witch
MOCs do not require any other greys.
I could certainly use more traditional light and dark greys though, just as I
could use more of all of the more traditional colors. And I will be just as
annoyed if and when rather than adding to the color line, they replace
traditional yellow, black, blue, red, etc. When I reach for an element of a
certain color, I really want it to match with the rest of what I am building.
An imprecise color match is a long-time complaint from many against clone bricks
-- if the color will not match, and the clutch adhesion of the studs will be
compromised, then TLC’s reign as the maker of the best elements will be OVER!
Now I love clone stuff, but “Lego” has always been the standard for the best
made stuff. I have never argued that point.
I don’t think replacing colors is a small thing -- it’s a huge thing. And I
think long-time consumers will feel betrayed and abandoned.
-- Hop-Frog
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
richard marchetti wrote in message ...
> When I reach for an element of a
> certain color, I really want it to match with the rest of what I am • building.
> An imprecise color match is a long-time complaint from many against clone • bricks
> -- if the color will not match, and the clutch adhesion of the studs will • be
> compromised, then TLC's reign as the maker of the best elements will be
OVER!
I think this is crucial. IF it's really so that there will be
not-quite-matching replacements for some of the standard colors, and IF the
new stud design is really less clutchy (and accurate?) than the current
design and propagates throughout the line... why then, the reasons to pay
more for LEGO vs a cheaper clone become fewer and LEGO will lose even more
of its market share to clone brands. That's a bad thing for us and for LEGO.
Here's hoping that the fears and rumors turn out to be less serious than we
think.
Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Railroad Depot kit: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com/cat-rrd.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGO TOWN PLANNING information:
http://www.lionsgatemodels.com/COntent/Townplan/townplan.htm
BrickLink Lego parts store: http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=Kevinw1
The Guild of Bricksmiths(TM): http://www.bricksmiths.com
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Kevin Wilson wrote:
> I think this is crucial. IF it's really so that there will be
> not-quite-matching replacements for some of the standard colors, and IF the
> new stud design is really less clutchy (and accurate?) than the current
> design and propagates throughout the line... why then, the reasons to pay
> more for LEGO vs a cheaper clone become fewer and LEGO will lose even more
> of its market share to clone brands. That's a bad thing for us and for LEGO.
>
> Here's hoping that the fears and rumors turn out to be less serious than we
> think.
2 words: Coke II. But I doubt it is that drastic. As for clutch, I don't think
they would have done anything major without hordes of focus groups expressing
their joy at how much easier it is to disconnect two plates. For some adults
that's all they remember about Lego: how hard it was to separate two plates.
Have we seen this on a brick or just plates?
Perhaps the new color also masks an anti-fading agent? (seems unlikely.)
-Erik
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Erik Olson wrote:
> Perhaps the new color also masks an anti-fading agent? (seems unlikely.)
I wonder if some of the older dyes have become either unobtainable or have been
outlawed in Europe. Some of the older dyes, even food colourings, are now deemed
harmful. TLC may not have any choice in the matter.
As far as rounded edges on studs, it may make it easier to assemble bricks
without such a high level of manual dexterity. Perhaps TLC is having to appeal
to kids with such short attention span that they will not play with interlocking
bricks if the have to concentrate on aligning them. Sad, but a possibility ....
JB
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, John Barnes wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Erik Olson wrote:
>
> > Perhaps the new color also masks an anti-fading agent? (seems unlikely.)
>
>
> I wonder if some of the older dyes have become either unobtainable or have been
> outlawed in Europe. Some of the older dyes, even food colourings, are now deemed
> harmful. TLC may not have any choice in the matter.
I did some goolging and found this interesting page.
http://www.mst.dk/project/NyViden/2001/12010000.htm
Apparently LEGO has been spending serious bucks into the plastics recycling
business. Now, the way I see it, if LEGO is putting all this money into this
then I'd think they did some serious research to make sure what they are doing
is consumer safe.
In the past LEGO has taken the measures to make sure their product is as safe or
more safe than laws state. Waaaaay back when the government said trace amounts
of Cadmium were allowed in yellow and red ABS LEGO put in the effort to use
absolutely none in its ABS (pg. 78 in "The World of LEGO Toys")
Adr.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Adrian Egli wrote:
> In lugnet.general, John Barnes wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Erik Olson wrote:
> >
> > > Perhaps the new color also masks an anti-fading agent? (seems unlikely.)
> >
> >
> > I wonder if some of the older dyes have become either unobtainable or have been
> > outlawed in Europe. Some of the older dyes, even food colourings, are now deemed
> > harmful. TLC may not have any choice in the matter.
>
> I did some goolging and found this interesting page.
>
> http://www.mst.dk/project/NyViden/2001/12010000.htm
>
> Apparently LEGO has been spending serious bucks into the plastics recycling
> business. Now, the way I see it, if LEGO is putting all this money into this
> then I'd think they did some serious research to make sure what they are doing
> is consumer safe.
This article is a quite interesting read. What jumped out at me was the mention
that different colors of ABS have different specific gravities (within a small
overall range). I wonder if the saline solution would have a detrimental effect
on the surface quality of parts. Might be an interesting way to sort your pcs by
color. Also might make a neat & non-jugemental way to code colors (by the
specific gravity).
Ray (rambling off on a Sunday morning)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Adrian Egli wrote:
http://www.mst.dk/project/NyViden/2001/12010000.htm
>
> Apparently LEGO has been spending serious bucks into the plastics recycling
> business. Now, the way I see it, if LEGO is putting all this money into this
> then I'd think they did some serious research to make sure what they are doing
> is consumer safe.
>
> In the past LEGO has taken the measures to make sure their product is as safe or
> more safe than laws state. Waaaaay back when the government said trace amounts
> of Cadmium were allowed in yellow and red ABS LEGO put in the effort to use
> absolutely none in its ABS (pg. 78 in "The World of LEGO Toys")
Wonders what LEGO molds with the new bricks ?
Plus what colours are the result ?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Well if you actually READ the article, it is clear that they mold whatever they wish,
as the granules are used in the standard process. And the colors are grey and black.
pete white wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Adrian Egli wrote:
> http://www.mst.dk/project/NyViden/2001/12010000.htm
> >
> > Apparently LEGO has been spending serious bucks into the plastics recycling
> > business. Now, the way I see it, if LEGO is putting all this money into this
> > then I'd think they did some serious research to make sure what they are doing
> > is consumer safe.
> >
> > In the past LEGO has taken the measures to make sure their product is as safe or
> > more safe than laws state. Waaaaay back when the government said trace amounts
> > of Cadmium were allowed in yellow and red ABS LEGO put in the effort to use
> > absolutely none in its ABS (pg. 78 in "The World of LEGO Toys")
>
> Wonders what LEGO molds with the new bricks ?
> Plus what colours are the result ?
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Stangl wrote:
> Well if you actually READ the article, it is clear that they mold whatever they wish,
> as the granules are used in the standard process. And the colors are grey and black.
WHICH grey genius ? READ the thread.
>
> pete white wrote:
In lugnet.general, Adrian Egli wrote:
http://www.mst.dk/project/NyViden/2001/12010000.htm
> >
> > Wonders what LEGO molds with the new bricks ?
> > Plus what colours are the result ?
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> As far as rounded edges on studs, it may make it easier to assemble bricks
> without such a high level of manual dexterity. Perhaps TLC is having to appeal
> to kids with such short attention span that they will not play with interlocking
> bricks if the have to concentrate on aligning them. Sad, but a possibility ....
That's my guess about what's happening. Chamfering would make parts somewhat
easier to assemble (just like in carpentry, the dowels for a dowel joint are
chamfered for easier insertion) at a cost of some gripping. I'll have to buy
some of these sets to see how bad the change is.
In any case, cannot be TLC "cheaping out"--this would mean a major tooling
change which would be expensive. If they did this intentionally (and it's not
just some bad molds, which I'd find hard to believe if every part in the set is
like this) then it's got to be based on some serious market research that says
it will improve sales.
Peter
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Peter F. Guenther wrote:
> > As far as rounded edges on studs, it may make it easier to assemble bricks
> > without such a high level of manual dexterity. Perhaps TLC is having to appeal
> > to kids with such short attention span that they will not play with interlocking
> > bricks if the have to concentrate on aligning them. Sad, but a possibility ....
>
> That's my guess about what's happening. Chamfering would make parts somewhat
> easier to assemble
Two questions:
a) At what point in history did LEGO bricks become so difficult to assemble
that a fundamental change was required to the very mechanism upon which this
construction system was based?
b) If you are already having difficulties aligning and pushing together LEGO
bricks, is this 1/2 millimeter or so of camfering really going to make your life
easier?
> In any case, cannot be TLC "cheaping out"--this would mean a major tooling
> change which would be expensive. If they did this intentionally (and it's not
> just some bad molds, which I'd find hard to believe if every part in the set is
> like this) then it's got to be based on some serious market research that says
> it will improve sales.
The questions in this case would be, "can we save money somehow by changing all
the studs on new bricks?" Making new molds to do this? We've been told time
and again by LEGO Direct that this is a hideously expensive task.
But... a slightly more realistic question might be, "are the molds being changed
to help secure new patents?" In the light of recent court proceedings I would
put my money on this answer.
Bottom line.... I can't believe the speculating and panic mongering that has
gone on in this thread (and a similar one in .castle). Worst of all, I can't
believe I just became part of the thread. :)
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allan Bedford wrote:
> But... a slightly more realistic question might be, "are the molds
> being changed to help secure new patents?" In the light of recent
> court proceedings I would put my money on this answer.
The chamfering could also help the finished piece get out of the mold
faster/easier, maybe the plates got stuck in the machine?
--
Anders Isaksson, Sweden
BlockCAD: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/proglego.htm
Gallery: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/gallery/index.htm
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Anders Isaksson wrote:
> Allan Bedford wrote:
> > But... a slightly more realistic question might be, "are the molds
> > being changed to help secure new patents?" In the light of recent
> > court proceedings I would put my money on this answer.
>
> The chamfering could also help the finished piece get out of the mold
> faster/easier, maybe the plates got stuck in the machine?
Wouldn't you then also surmise that you'd have to round off the edges of the
plates/bricks too?
I just can't imagine that after 40+ years the cylindrical stud with the more or
less flat top has suddenly become difficult to manufacture. Is the LEGO company
de-evolving their technology?
I don't mean to sound so negative, but some of the arguments/reasons being
presented in this thread are somewhat irrational.
The truth is that we may never know. The LEGO company is under no obligation to
release any information of this type. I am willing to sit back and wait to see
how things play out. This may be an experiment, a bad batch... who knows? The
history of other toys and construction systems suggests that this kind of thing
is almost certain to happen given enough time. Look at how many iterations of
color, sizes and shapes the Meccano system has gone through over the years. If
LEGO didn't change from time to time we'd still be in a world without minifigs,
Technic parts, Mindstorms, and the list goes on.
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> I just can't imagine that after 40+ years the cylindrical stud with the more or
> less flat top has suddenly become difficult to manufacture. Is the LEGO company
> de-evolving their technology?
Lego has CONSTANTLY been perfecting the designs of pieces. Witness the hole in
the minifig head; the slots in the sides of the Technic pin; etc., etc., etc.
The camfering is another step in the ongoing development of product, though for
what reason we don't know, and as you say may never.
Which pieces in the MINIs are camfered? I bought a Mos Eisley and couldn't find
it on any pieces.
I have to say, after looking at the color differences, I'm disappointed but not
going to stop buying Lego, even if they're permanent. I actually like the new
colors better--but I don't like the fact they don't match what I've got.
Peter
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Peter F. Guenther wrote:
> > I just can't imagine that after 40+ years the cylindrical stud with the more or
> > less flat top has suddenly become difficult to manufacture. Is the LEGO company
> > de-evolving their technology?
>
> Lego has CONSTANTLY been perfecting the designs of pieces.
I totally agree.
What I didn't agree with was the logic being used to suggest why these changes
were being made. I was trying to express my disbelief that changes were
happening because parts were getting too difficult to manufacture. If these
changes are, in fact, happening the likely reason is either cost/profit or
patent related.
> Witness the hole in
> the minifig head; the slots in the sides of the Technic pin; etc., etc., etc.
> The camfering is another step in the ongoing development of product, though for
> what reason we don't know, and as you say may never.
Many changes over the years. Not at all unlike the Meccano system. The key
(for the company) is to make sure that each change is better than what it is
replacing. New hinge plates are an example of where they might have been better
off not making a change.
> I actually like the new
> colors better--but I don't like the fact they don't match what I've got.
But to follow some of the other suggestions in this thread I should be giving up
LEGO bricks and building. Why? Well, I only have 1 1x3 pink brick. Time to
stop building, sell my collection and take up knitting. No offense to any
knitters in the audience, but this ain't happening. Quite the opposite, I'm
trying to figure out a use for that one pink 1x3 brick in a model someday. This
is a construction toy, not a coin collection that needs to be complete to be
interesting. :)
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> What I didn't agree with was the logic being used to suggest why these changes
> were being made. I was trying to express my disbelief that changes were
> happening because parts were getting too difficult to manufacture. If these
> changes are, in fact, happening the likely reason is either cost/profit or
> patent related.
Right--I don't agree with that either. It's not a manufacturing issue or a
cost-saving issue, it's a marketing thing probably based on ease of assembly (if
it's not a mistake, which I'm still willing to believe based on my Mos Eisley
experience and other pieces.
> The key (for the company) is to make sure that each change is better than what it is
> replacing. New hinge plates are an example of where they might have been better
> off not making a change.
Right--but "better" is relative to the audience, and they have another audience
in mind than us AFOLs. (Whether the change is better for kids either is
debatable.)
> But to follow some of the other suggestions in this thread I should be giving up
> LEGO bricks and building
I'm not about to. If other AFOLs do, then hey! More Lego pieces for me. I've
put the new color pieces together with old ones and while I wouldn't have chosen
the effect, it's not unpleasant.
Peter
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Peter F. Guenther wrote:
> > What I didn't agree with was the logic being used to suggest why these changes
> > were being made. I was trying to express my disbelief that changes were
> > happening because parts were getting too difficult to manufacture. If these
> > changes are, in fact, happening the likely reason is either cost/profit or
> > patent related.
>
> Right--I don't agree with that either. It's not a manufacturing issue or a
> cost-saving issue, it's a marketing thing probably based on ease of assembly (if
> it's not a mistake, which I'm still willing to believe based on my Mos Eisley
> experience and other pieces.
So this microscopic change to the studs makes them easier to assemble? Worse
yet, this suggests that today's kids are not as dexterous as we were 25 or 30
years ago? This is really hard to believe. Any average 6 year-old can use
their superior eye --> hand co-ordination to beat me at just about any slick new
video game. And to watch them build with LEGO bricks it's easy to see that
today's kids can still function perfectly well with them. In fact, I once had a
young person tell me that she, "could have built something better if she'd had
the little bricks instead of the big ones." That was the last time I offered
her Duplo bricks with which to build. :)
Rather than being frustrated or over-challenged by LEGO I think kids are as
capable of building with it today - in it's current form - as they were 20, 30
or 40 years ago. Again, I can't possibly fathom that a change to the knob and
tube system is a result of the marketing folks running to management screaming,
"kids can't put the bricks together anymore!!! We must make it simpler for
them!!!"
To hint that kids are having trouble aligning LEGO bricks is to not give credit
to today's very smart children.
From the stories I hear from parents with whom I work today's kids don't have
trouble putting bricks together. Is someone else aware of this being a problem?
Is the company besieged with calls and emails proclaiming, "my child can't get
their LEGO bricks lined up so that they will stick together!!!" Is there
evidence that this is happening?
> > The key (for the company) is to make sure that each change is better than what it is
> > replacing. New hinge plates are an example of where they might have been better
> > off not making a change.
>
> Right--but "better" is relative to the audience, and they have another audience
> in mind than us AFOLs. (Whether the change is better for kids either is
> debatable.)
Kids are more likely to use the click hinges over and again... possibly more
than adults... possibly wearing them out sooner. It was just an example, but I
think it actually holds water in this context. I wasn't attempting to preach a
pro-adult agenda, merely suggesting that companies need to pay attention to what
types of changes they make. The history (and in part the decline) of the
Meccano system was ripe with good and bad changes.
> > But to follow some of the other suggestions in this thread I should be giving up
> > LEGO bricks and building
>
> I'm not about to. If other AFOLs do, then hey! More Lego pieces for me. I've
> put the new color pieces together with old ones and while I wouldn't have chosen
> the effect, it's not unpleasant.
And I'm not about to either. :)
I was using hyperbole to suggest that if I listened to all of the panic
mongering that has gone on in this thread I would be following a ridiculous
course of action. I don't think anyone will or should give up LEGO building
because of these changes. If the changes are good, they will be adopted as a
long-term solution. If they don't, then the company is just as likely to try
something else... for reasons likely unknown to any of us. It's just not worth
fussing over these changes, especially when there's little any of us could do to
alter the natural progression of a consumer product like this.
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Again, I can't possibly fathom that a change to the knob and
> tube system is a result of the marketing folks running to management screaming,
> "kids can't put the bricks together anymore!!! We must make it simpler for
> them!!!"
Not that kids can't put them together, but to make it easier--just like holes in
the minifig heads made them easier to pull off and slots in the technic pins
made them easier to pull out. Making a change to make something easier for the
user doesn't imply that the user is incompetent or less competent than in the
past.
Peter
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:37:39 GMT, "Peter F. Guenther"
<peterg1974@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Again, I can't possibly fathom that a change to the knob and
> > tube system is a result of the marketing folks running to management screaming,
> > "kids can't put the bricks together anymore!!! We must make it simpler for
> > them!!!"
>
> Not that kids can't put them together, but to make it easier--just like holes in
> the minifig heads made them easier to pull off and slots in the technic pins
> made them easier to pull out. Making a change to make something easier for the
> user doesn't imply that the user is incompetent or less competent than in the
> past.
>
> Peter
I thought the holes in the minifig heads were for safety reasons, to
prevent choking if a child were to attempt to swallow them. I think I
saw that mentioned in a LEGO book somewhere...
C
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Peter F. Guenther wrote:
> > Again, I can't possibly fathom that a change to the knob and
> > tube system is a result of the marketing folks running to management screaming,
> > "kids can't put the bricks together anymore!!! We must make it simpler for
> > them!!!"
We now know that this is a moot point, but something worries me about your
logic:
> Not that kids can't put them together, but to make it easier--just like holes in
> the minifig heads made them easier to pull off and slots in the technic pins
> made them easier to pull out. Making a change to make something easier for the
> user doesn't imply that the user is incompetent or less competent than in the
> past.
Your statements are true.... IF we are talking about a product or design that is
relatively new... perhaps only a few years old. Then there is the
expectation/obligation for the company to respond to consumer
complaints/requests and fix parts of the product's design that are not working.
But the tube/stud design is more than 40 years old! Does this suggest that LEGO
is really really slow in changing bad designs?
Had this change actually been true it's highly unlikely it would have been a
result of consumer complaints. Those complaints would have been coming in since
before man landed on the moon! But if the change had been made to help kids,
then it suggests either kids who aren't as agile as they were decades ago
(completely untrue) or it suggests a way to either save money or protect product
patents etc.
What really worries me though is that apparently the change to the grey color
was partly driven by consumer feedback. Who are these people? Who called the
company to express discontent over the shades of grey their kids were building
with. I've heard parents complain that Mega Bloks don't click together well,
that LEGO is too expensive, that there aren't play sets for Bionicles... and the
list goes on. I've never heard a kid, parent or adult builder complain that
light grey was making their LEGO building less enjoyable. :)
Signed,
Head still spinning Bedford
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, John Barnes wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Erik Olson wrote:
>
> > Perhaps the new color also masks an anti-fading agent? (seems unlikely.)
>
>
> I wonder if some of the older dyes have become either unobtainable or have been
> outlawed in Europe. Some of the older dyes, even food colourings, are now deemed
> harmful. TLC may not have any choice in the matter.
With all the new coloring products coming on the market, it would be strange if
Lego could not get exactly what it wanted in a color. Having played with them
now, I think the new colors are great.
> As far as rounded edges on studs, it may make it easier to assemble bricks
> without such a high level of manual dexterity. Perhaps TLC is having to appeal
> to kids with such short attention span that they will not play with interlocking
> bricks if the have to concentrate on aligning them. Sad, but a possibility ....
Having purchased said SW minis, I did not observe any change in the studs.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Erik Olson wrote:
> With all the new coloring products coming on the market, it would be strange if
> Lego could not get exactly what it wanted in a color. Having played with them
> now, I think the new colors are great.
replying to myself.. the new gray is not very earthy. I tried to add the 2x2
tiles to a landscape which has a lot of gray. The new gray looks very
antiseptic. How appropriate for a Star Destroyer. It looks like the float on
newly poured cement. The original gray looks like cement 3 days later. The new
gray looks like ashes. The original gray looks like clay.
The two are close enough that mixing them in a wall would be very attractive.
I wonder what users of 2x2 gray tiles will do in the next year?
Thought-provoking colors. Certainly not the end of the world.
-Erik
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
3. Replacement greys would mean that your investment in old greys has been
cut off in terms of future elements; it would also mean a period of
reinvesting in new greys in order to build in new greys.
|
We both know that the grays do not fare well with time-- they yellow, and many
times older grays look crappy anyway. In the same vein, I would never build
with white from the 70’s.
| |
Further, I really object to the “Half full” comment -- the greys are
fundamental colors to many builders. Losing access to the greys for further
building does not leave a glass “half full” -- it leaves it entirely empty!
|
We must consider the possibility that the apparent changes may be by necessity--
perhaps a change in ABS suppliers? Perhaps they have been matched to the best
of TLC’s ability?
| |
Let’s just hope that these new greys are additions to the color line and not
replacement colors as suggested by some.
|
The “new” grays are so close to the originals that I doubt they were intended as
separate, new colors in and of themselves. Time will tell (if TLC doesn’t)
JOHN
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
In some ways, having a
properly color coordinated design distinguishes a “refined” design from one
that is built up from multiple colored elements as if one didn’t have enough
elements of a particular color!
|
Richard,
With no offense intended, this sounds as if those builders out there who
are “stuck” with the bricks they have (for whatever reasons) just can’t be as
good at MOC-ing as those who can buy the bricks they need to make the “refined”
designs look better. I disagree, and think it’s entirely a matter of
application; the perfect color scheme seems more like icing on the cake for a
good design. This isn’t to say that color isn’t important, but I don’t believe
it’s as important as building itself.
Of course, I say this from the standpoint of one who’s obviously no expert.
I do understand your point about those who base their collections on these
greys, but I believe those people - the expert MOC-ers - are in the minority.
Most of us will still play just fine.
Maybe I’m just one of those in the minority who think it’s not such a bad
thing to have new colors with which to play. With hope for those for whom this
is an important point, perhaps the new greys are merely extensions of the color
palette rather than replacements.
The glass just is.
Peace and Long Life,
Tw0nst3r
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Tony Alexander wrote:
| |
With no offense intended, this sounds as if those builders out there who
are “stuck” with the bricks they have (for whatever reasons) just can’t be as
good at MOC-ing as those who can buy the bricks they need to make the
“refined” designs look better. I disagree, and think it’s entirely a matter
of application; the perfect color scheme seems more like icing on the cake
for a good design. This isn’t to say that color isn’t important, but I don’t
believe it’s as important as building itself.
|
Well, I have no problem with those that build in whatever way they choose at all
-- in my view, playing and building is the point of it all. I think we’re on the
same page there. I also don’t have a problem with additions to the color line,
but I don’t necessarily need a color of which there are limited elements
available (is the mosaic grey available only as a 1x1 plate? That’s crazy
limiting...).
I’m so easy going that I even use clone bricks of various kinds. No problem
there either. My dirty little secret is that I probably have more bioknuckle
sets than I care to admit -- I remain staunchly opposed to what bioknuckles
represents overall, however. I think “collector” stuff is wrong-headed in the
extreme. It just turns children into mindless, obsessed “collectors” rather
than builders. Such is the case that no one even questions the reason for
“dumbing down” lego sets -- it is assumed as a motive on the part of TLC -- kids
don’t build, they just consume! I also object to replacement of the technic line
with a lot of this junk. YMMV -- whatever.
And you’re right -- a good build is still a good build regardless of the colors
used. And as you say, full color coordination is icing on the cake. But some of
us have been stocking up on the icing for quite a while...
Yes, we might as well see how this plays out -- but I never really wanted to see
any of the basic colors change or get replaced. I also never wanted to see a
change in the appearance of the tubes or studs. I think we had already reached
a point of engineering stability with those issues, and I as a consumer would
have preferred they left those aspect of things alone.
My one big point is that colors should not change. Really it’s as simple as
that. TLC can add colors if it must, no problem. But don’t mess with success
in the old colors. Like I have stated elsewhere already -- when I reach for an
element of a particular color, I really want it to be a particular color and not
something else.
I have one area where I am probably less complete in traditional light grey than
with any other kind of element -- that would be slopes. Sure, I have a lot by
most people’s standards already, but I could use more of certain types for sure.
If TLC changes the color of the grey, however subtley, they will be screwing me
in terms of my previous investment in light grey slopes. I don’t want to work
with a mottled effect -- I don’t go for that kind of realism. I am not
emulating the world at large, I have a little world of plastic toys of
particular colors that I play in. I would have much preferred that things had
remain static color-wise within that world.
I really don’t think I have to make much of an argument in pointing out that the
greys are probably a building color of choice for many. The greys photograph
well, probably far better than my black and yellow stuff. You can build
everything from spaceships to battleships to castle with the greys and they make
perfect sense. You don’t have to color coordinate per se -- the greys have been
the de facto neutral colors for any and all kinds of MOCs.
You don’t have to agree with me, but I think many do -- changing the grey colors
is a huge mistake and people aren’t going to be happy about it if that’s what
TLC has done. It’s not as if the bar to professional looking MOCs hasn’t been
made high enough already in terms of skill, money, and time.
-- Hop-Frog
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, John Neal wrote:
| |
Well, if it’s true about the connections being weaker, I’d say that’s bad
news. But in all honesty, as a town building and landscape builder, I
welcome a slight color variation! Mix up all of those color variations and
you have buildings and scenery that look even better and more realistic!
Half full, people;-)
JOHN
|
I kinda agree. A slight variation in color will make things look beter. Mechs,
for instance, will look dirtier if two different shades are used. And it will
add to “brick” effects on buildings. But, over all, I like the old stuff
better. It just looks dirtier, grittier. By adding minute traces of blue tinge
to the plastic, it gives the color a look and feel that is too new. I will stay
in the camp that the colors are only Lucas Arts tm deep.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Mike Oliver wrote:
> In lugnet.general, John Neal wrote:
>
> > Well, if it's true about the connections being weaker, I'd say that's bad
> > news. But in all honesty, as a town building and landscape builder, I
> > {welcome} a slight color variation! Mix up all of those color variations
> > and you have buildings and scenery that look even {better} and {more}
> > realistic!
> >
> > Half full, people;-)
> >
> > [JOHN]
>
> I kinda agree. A slight variation in color will make things look beter.
> Mechs, for instance, will look dirtier if two different shades are used. And
> it will add to "brick" effects on buildings. But, over all, I like the old
> stuff better. It just looks dirtier, grittier. By adding minute traces of
> blue tinge to the plastic, it gives the color a look and feel that is too
> new. I will stay in the camp that the colors are only Lucas Arts tm deep.
I really don't like the new dark grey very much,
and I finally figured out why. Well, there are a
few reasons, one of course relating to the fact
that I've become a bit notorious for my consumption
of that particular color. But it's a bit more than
that, and I think you've touched upon it here:
It's too close to the old dark grey.
That's what has me all messed up; I agree that two
off greys would mottle very well, but these two are
just way too close, and the blue effect makes it
mismatch way too much. To see perhaps a "better"
case, look at the "old" and "new" light greys; those
might look OK together, if handled judiciously, but
those two dark greys? Heck no.
I'll stay in the hopeful camp, believing that this
is just a one-off goof or experiment to find out
how color formulation might go over. HEY, LEGO,
IT DOESN'T WORK. PLEASE STOP IT. STOP STOP STOP.
Or else I'll just start building in yellow MegaBloks,
by which I mean I'd throw myself from a bridge some-
where, because that'd happen way before I'd build
with yellow MB.
Regarding the locking capacity: It doesn't seem
too impaired, at least not among the newer parts
themselves; I haven't tried too much with older
style brick, but it really seems fine so far as
strength of connection goes.
(Say, did this same debate rise up to nibble on the
collective community when they added grooves to the
tiles...? I don't recall; I wasn't on ATL yet when
that happened.)
best
LFB one-two-oh
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I think it's fine if LEGO wants to ADD more colors to their spectrum, but
REPLACING colors is a bad idea; especially staple colors like light and dark
gray. Those 2 colors are heavily used by everyone--space, town, castle--we all
need gray. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who want their present
gray pieces to match any gray they buy in the future. Jeff Elliott made a good
point in suggesting that this change might just be in the new mini Star
Destroyer sets. However, if different colors are going to be replacing old
grays for good, then that means LEGO has opened a 55 gallon drum of worms.
I find it hard to believe that LEGO would be switching everything to have
rounded (bevelled) studs. Firstly that would mean a step backwards in product
quality. Second, it would mean making new molds for all the pieces, which would
be expensive. Let's all hope that this deformed stud thing was just a mishap.
If TLG is going to be getting rid of the original grays and rounding the
studs, then Jake McKee and Brad Justus are going to need to wear riot gear and
bring bodyguards to any future LEGO gathering that they attend.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
(snip)
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
One idea did pop to mind: What if we have a batch of “lemons” here?
Maybe it’s just some bad bricks that slipped through the system. We’ve seen
elements of poor quality gone to market before; remember the first batch
“hydrolic” cylinders that went sour (pun intended) after a couple of weeks but
LEGO had the smarts to fix and replace to those who bought them. Maybe this is
just one of those things and LEGO will recognize the screw up (thanks to us) and
fix. After all, wasn’t it us who brought up the bad cylinders to LEGO?
My own $0.02
Adr
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
|
Pic snipped; see original post.
| |
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
This is in actuality, NOT a ‘dear lego’ letter as it is a COMMAND to Lego: If
this cheaper quality is the new standard, I, as a Customer who is absolutely
correct in this matter, ORDER you to cease & desist IMMEDEATELY making the
cheaper molds (and stop using cheaper plastic if you’re using it)& replacing
traditional colors (adding new colors is fine.) Any refusal to do so will
result in economic sanctions (people not buying your new junk) which would
unfortunately cripple TLG.
Jeff
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I havent even seen the new colors i life, but....
IS this is really true LEGO SHAME ON YOU. CORE colors in ANY SPACE set change.
How could you? Building with Lego will never be the same again.
I was so much looking forward to the new 2004 line. Now I think I will check
colors FIRST. Does my Lego SW colletion really stop here?
I just hope that someone will post the building instructions so I can build the
models in REAL GREY.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Per Langkilde wrote:
| |
I havent even seen the new colors i life, but....
IS this is really true LEGO SHAME ON YOU. CORE colors in ANY SPACE set
change. How could you? Building with Lego will never be the same again.
|
To your average 8 year olds?
| |
I was so much looking forward to the new 2004 line. Now I think I will check
colors FIRST. Does my Lego SW colletion really stop here?
|
I think that’s your decision.
I picked up the new Snowspeeder today. It uses the new grays (both of them).
I think the new dark gray is a fantastic color.
| |
I just hope that someone will post the building instructions so I can build
the models in REAL GREY.
|
No worries. They will be widely available in about three years.
(FUT: general. SW-only readers, check lugnet.general for a big thread on some
interesting changes to Lego brick colors.)
Kevin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Kevin Johnston wrote:
| |
I picked up the new Snowspeeder today. It uses the new grays (both of them).
I think the new dark gray is a fantastic color.
|
hi, quick q:
does it use the new greys exclusively, or in conjunction with the old greys?
thanks!
hoping its the former... I can’t wait to get some new grey!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joel Kuester wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Kevin Johnston wrote:
| |
I picked up the new Snowspeeder today. It uses the new grays (both of
them).
I think the new dark gray is a fantastic color.
|
hi, quick q:
does it use the new greys exclusively, or in conjunction with the old greys?
|
Entirely the new colors (the set is largely white, recall). That’s to be
expected, I think, the light grays in particular are very close and there’s
really no reason to ship both of them in the same set.
Kevin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
Everyone should take a deep deep breath and answer the following questions...
How many sets have these ‘new’ colors been seen in ?
How many themes have these ‘new’ colors been seen in ?
How many 2004 sets have been examined to determine if they have new or old
colors ?
So far, from what I have heard here, the answer to all three questions is... 1.
Much to do and hand wringing is being expended before the full extent of the
issue is known. Because of the lead times required to produce these sets, if
this is an intentional change (maybe yes, maybe no) then it already a done deed.
Not much we can do except to evaluate the actual situation and decide how to
react to it. Much ranting and raving at this point is not going to repeal
changes which have already occured.
Lets find out the true situation (on more than 24 hours knowledge) and then see
where to go.
Ray (who is getting a little tired of all the knee-jerk reactions)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Ray Sanders wrote:
| |
Much to do and hand wringing is being expended before the full extent of the
issue is known. Because of the lead times required to produce these sets, if
this is an intentional change (maybe yes, maybe no) then it already a done
deed. Not much we can do except to evaluate the actual situation and decide
how to react to it. Much ranting and raving at this point is not going to
repeal changes which have already occured.
|
even if its true that the greys are being changed, this is not the first time or
the last during Lego’s long heritage of producing building blocks that a change
has been made.
I would imagine that if the internet had been around when they changed from
cellulose or whatever they used to made bricks from, there would have been
people to protest it as an unwelcome change.
and besides, Ray is correct in that we have no official evidence of what changes
are even being made at this point.
Play well all :)
Joel K
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Relax, then rush out and get some of these new colors, and look at them side by
side with your old colors.
The grays are different. I like them. There is no chance I will confuse them
when they are mixed with the old.
Remember the excitement when the Mosaic came with a new gray? This is an
opportunity to expand your color palette. We don’t know that Lego won’t make the
old colors. Maybe George Lucas and Lego decided on this together just for “Star
Wars”.
The new light gray is much more “platinum” than the original one which looks
greenish by comparison (I’m in white flurorescent light.) It’s pearly. It is the
color you think your gray bricks are, but aren’t.
The new dark gray is like slate, or gunmetal blue. Next to the original dark
gray it looks almost like a color, or sand blue. Say halfway from dark gray to
sand blue.
Geez, suppose we had all gone off half cocked like this when the Statue of
Liberty green came along. Oh no! Lego is stop making green! Icky!
I asked my wife to look at them and point to which ones she liked. She picked
the two new ones.
As for the studs, the studs I got are exactly the same as the old ones.
-Erik
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Ray Sanders wrote:
| |
Everyone should take a deep deep breath and answer the following questions...
How many sets have these ‘new’ colors been seen in ?
|
I have 3 of the new Star Wars Mini sets (Mini ISD, AT-TE, and Imperial Shuttle),
and they have the ‘different’ grey. The new X-Wing, though, has the ‘old’ grey.
| |
How many themes have these ‘new’ colors been seen in ?
|
So far, it appears to be the Star Wars sets.
| |
How many 2004 sets have been examined to determine if they have new or old
colors ? • I did 3, and others on other boards (FBTB, for one) have examined their sets.
So far, from what I have heard here, the answer to all three questions is...
1.
|
Check the forum at FBTB.
| |
Much to do and hand wringing is being expended before the full extent of the
issue is known. Because of the lead times required to produce these sets, if
this is an intentional change (maybe yes, maybe no) then it already a done
deed. Not much we can do except to evaluate the actual situation and decide
how to react to it. Much ranting and raving at this point is not going to
repeal changes which have already occured.
|
Unless, it’s a glitch in the system, which can be fixed and changed. The point
here is not to rant, but to point out that we noticed the color change. There
are pretty strong implications from this, though, if this is a ‘done deed’.
| |
Lets find out the true situation (on more than 24 hours knowledge) and then
see where to go.
|
Actually finding this out on a Friday wasn’t the best timing.
Joe
.space paparazzi!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Ray Sanders" <rsanders@svic.net> wrote in message
news:HoF20M.21xM@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
[ ... snipped ...]
>
> Lets find out the true situation (on more than 24 hours knowledge) and • then see
> where to go.
>
> Ray (who is getting a little tired of all the knee-jerk reactions)
Good points.
I decided to go to TRU and buy the 4492 to see what all of the fuss was
about. There is no doubt that the colors are different. To my eye, the
dark grey is visibly different, it has a hint of blue to it. The light grey
I probably would not have noticed had it never been mentioned in this
thread. That said, when you place it side by side with a current grey
element, you can see the color difference.
As for the stud difference, I don't see any. The studs look the same as all
of the other loose elements I have laying here on my desk. The parts went
together with the same "feel" that I have experienced in the past - I didn't
notice any looseness or anything like that.
Mike
--
Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring.com
http://www.ncltc.cc - North Carolina LEGO Train Club
http://www.carolinatrainbuilders.com - Carolina Train Builders
http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=mpw - CTB/Brick Depot
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
|
snip
Falling in the wait and see camp, I do wonder, how valid are the rumors of color
*replacement*? Additional colors (as already mentioned) do lead to neat ideas
of having 4 grays to work with. But if the original LT and DK grays are being
replaced I would quickly be disappointed.
Jeff
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Just to add my humble 2 cents here, I bought a used gamma-V (6891) from brick
link recently, and when I was putting it together, I was disappointed to see at
least 2 different greys which didn’t quite match each other. I assumed the
seller had assembled the set from parts and hadn’t paid close attention to
whether they matched (or didn’t care). I don’t know if this was because of aging
or real production differences. But anyway, it seems that even before these new
sets came out, there was already a variance in the greys.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Cynthia Bradham wrote:
| |
Just to add my humble 2 cents here, I bought a used gamma-V (6891) from brick
link recently, and when I was putting it together, I was disappointed to see
at least 2 different greys which didn’t quite match each other. I assumed the
seller had assembled the set from parts and hadn’t paid close attention to
whether they matched (or didn’t care). I don’t know if this was because of
aging or real production differences. But anyway, it seems that even before
these new sets came out, there was already a variance in the greys.
|
Cynthia, this is almost certainly aging. Any collection of gray bricks going
that far back will have variations from contact with UV light. (I have not
checked vs unopened sets.) White bricks are the worst agers.
There is also such a thing as factory discoloration - I have a bulk tub from
1998 which contained a mixture of 2 yellow tones, neither of which match other
bulk tubs that year. I believe these indicate traces of blue plastic in the
machine.
-Erik
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I just bought the 2004 Mos Eisley Cantina this afternoon (#4501), and was
disappointed to find that this set also has the new off colors. It wasn't just
the 2 grays either; brown is a lighter shade now. The dark red, verdigris
(sometimes called "sand green"), mauve (sometimes called "sand red"), dusty blue
and tan all seemed to be the same shades as always. I didn't notice any
difference in the studs.
I'm starting to wonder if buying bulk pieces from Shop At Home is going to
be a color gamble from now on. Is this the Beginning of the End?
David "Fuzzy" Gregory
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
Color me.. disappointed.
I think it’s kind of entertaining that several folks have counseled either a
‘wait and see’ approach or that they personally were just going to sit back and
see how it pans out. Honestly, what choice do we have? TLC has said on
numerous occaisons that AFOLs are just not a big enough market segment. Given
that, then we shouldn’t factor into this decision much if at all. If we write
letters or whatever.. seems unlikely we will get an answer (hopefully I’m wrong
on that).
I’m not convinced that the color change or chamfering is based on anything other
than economics. I’m can’t see why tweaking colors will sell more lego to the
8yr old boy market segment. Perhaps the chamfering (if it’s there) shaves
1/1000 of the weight of the brick (stretching here).. ? Saved weight means less
plastic and saves money?
In terms of color, perhaps they are trying to make the colors more stable or
perhaps they subcontracted and that’s how they came out. It seems they have had
other subcontracting problems such as the train wheels. However, someone posted
that they had word from an insider that it was intentional.. and there was more
to come... that was the most ominous/worrisome non-information on this topic!
Perhaps cheaper dies or cheaper process that affects the color are the cause?
I just have to believe it’s direct production ecnomics more than anything else.
On a side note, I came across some mega blocks I had from the early 1990’s.
This set had light yellow, dark red and navy blue. To my knowledge TLC only
introduced these in fairly recent times. Is that true? Or were those out by
TLC even at that time?
I concur with the sentiment that the two grays are colors they really should not
mess with. A lighter brown.. okay, I often desire a color between tan and
brown. I would much rather see them just transition the use of the basic colros
to alternate if color shifting is a goal of some kind -- like light yellow for
regular yellow. It is interesting that sets like knockturn alley and privets
drive have almost none of the historic basic lego colors in them.
Even if this is some short term glitch in the subcontracting or whatever, then
there is still the hassle that peeron and bricklink will probably need to
address this. Also, knowing what you are getting on ebay is a hassle already,
is it faded, is it light or dark etc. some of the images are horrible.
If someone could get a solid answer out of lego -- seems that’s all we can try
for at this point.
Ken
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ken Koleda wrote:
> TLC has said on
> numerous occaisons that AFOLs are just not a big enough market segment.
Are you serious???
If by "big enough" they mean more than 50% of the actual head-count,
they may be right... but I'd bet anything that if they looked at the
bottom line, how much money gets spent, they'd find that more is spent
annually on LEGO that ends up being in the hands of adults than kids
(simply because adults actually _have_ more money than kids in the first
place).
If you ask me, it's probably completely the opposite and LEGO knows it.
But if LEGO began to appeal too much to the AFOL market, the adult
LEGO consumption could conceivably end up dominating the market (with
expensive specialized parts and sets, and serious hobbyist magazines),
with kids feeling somewhat left behind, sort of like what's happened
with the hobby of playing with electric trains.
>> Mark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Ken Koleda wrote:
>
> > TLC has said on
> > numerous occaisons that AFOLs are just not a big enough market segment.
>
> Are you serious???
>
> If by "big enough" they mean more than 50% of the actual head-count,
Yes, he's serious. By "not big enough", if memory is serving me correctly (too
lazy to go digging through Lugnet's back catalogue of conversations), they mean
"less than 5% of our sales volume"
95% of the Lego that leaves the shelves ends up in the hands of a kid.
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, James Brown wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> > Ken Koleda wrote:
> >
> > > TLC has said on
> > > numerous occaisons that AFOLs are just not a big enough market segment.
> >
> > Are you serious???
> >
> > If by "big enough" they mean more than 50% of the actual head-count,
>
> Yes, he's serious. By "not big enough", if memory is serving me correctly (too
> lazy to go digging through Lugnet's back catalogue of conversations), they mean
> "less than 5% of our sales volume"
>
> 95% of the Lego that leaves the shelves ends up in the hands of a kid.
Same reasoning why they don't cater to the Macintosh with their computer
products - too small an audience.
Mark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Ken Koleda wrote:
>
> > TLC has said on
> > numerous occaisons that AFOLs are just not a big enough market segment.
>
> Are you serious???
>
> If by "big enough" they mean more than 50% of the actual head-count,
> they may be right... but I'd bet anything that if they looked at the
> bottom line, how much money gets spent, they'd find that more is spent
> annually on LEGO that ends up being in the hands of adults than kids
> (simply because adults actually _have_ more money than kids in the first
> place).
Actually, Brad Justus and Jake McKee have always told us that they believe
the adult LEGO buyers to make up less than 5% of the retail market. We AFOL's
think it's a bit higher, but not much. A good way to put it into perspective is
this: go to a store where you buy LEGOS and look at everything on the shelf.
Then ask yourself what percentage of that store's stock you buy in a year. It's
probably less that 5%.
Of course, AFOL's buy WAY more than the average kid, but kids who buy LEGOS
outnumber adults who buy LEGOS by so much that we're not LEGO's main focus
group.
David "Fuzzy" Gregory
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, David Gregory wrote:
> Actually, Brad Justus and Jake McKee have always told us that they believe
> the adult LEGO buyers to make up less than 5% of the retail market
While I agree with this, what keeps adults buying Lego instead of the cheaper
clones which have appealing set designs than when we were kids?
The answer is brand loyalty. The parents played with Lego when they were kids,
not MegaBlocks. These are the same parents who grew up knowing that typical
Lego clones were clearly inferior.
The challenge for Lego is to maintain that image of superiority in the current
generation of kids. If kids today don't think Lego is superior, they won't
become adults that buy Lego for their kids, which is 95% of Lego's current
customers. Unfortunately, for AFOL's, this doesn't necessarily mean higher
quality bricks. It could mean sets that are more "fun" or "easier to build".
It could also mean sets that contain other brand images such as Star Wars or
Spiderman (I can still recall how I wished for official Star Wars Lego back in
the late 70's).
It could very well be that this is a very forward looking change in order to
maintain and build Lego's brand image with today's children.
Jeff
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Ken Koleda wrote:
>
> > TLC has said on
> > numerous occaisons that AFOLs are just not a big enough market segment.
>
> Are you serious???
Mark... they're serious.
Speaking as someone who used to share your opinion it's important to note that
this argument has come up many times in the past. The general opinion has
always ended up that this statement is correct.
> If by "big enough" they mean more than 50% of the actual head-count,
> they may be right... but I'd bet anything that if they looked at the
> bottom line, how much money gets spent, they'd find that more is spent
> annually on LEGO that ends up being in the hands of adults than kids
> (simply because adults actually _have_ more money than kids in the first
> place).
It might be more accurate to say that more money is spent on LEGO by adults vs.
children. However, do all those bricks end up in the hands of adults? No,
probably not. It's safe to say that the vast majority of adults buying LEGO are
doing so for their children, not for themselves. Adult fan builders really are
the minority, there is no getting around this fact.
> If you ask me, it's probably completely the opposite and LEGO knows it.
But ask yourself this question: If LEGO knew it, wouldn't they immediately
change marketing tactics and put out sets aimed exclusively at adults?
> But if LEGO began to appeal too much to the AFOL market, the adult
> LEGO consumption could conceivably end up dominating the market (with
> expensive specialized parts and sets, and serious hobbyist magazines),
> with kids feeling somewhat left behind, sort of like what's happened
> with the hobby of playing with electric trains.
This contradicts your earlier statement. If the adult fan base who buy bricks
is so large (as you suggest) then the scenario above is a good one, not a bad
one.
It needs to be said that many people feel the company (especially the LEGO
Direct arm of the group) has, in fact, embraced the fan community in many ways.
The Event Kits, the recent Designer, Advanced Designer and Inventor sets, as
well as some of the Legend series of sets are examples of positive changes.
Several of these things suggest a shift not necessarily toward the adult
community but at least toward the core values that made LEGO so special to begin
with. This is a good thing and to someone who use to gripe about this stuff on
an almost daily basis, this is good enough. I am delighted with many things the
company has done in the last couple of years. There has been much change and we
need to recognize that.
So you began your post by asking if the comment about adult fans and the market
share they represent was serious; I think you can see that it is. LUGNET is a
slanted view of the adult LEGO community. Look at another point of view. I
work with around 45 people in my office. There is one adult LEGO fan.... me!
But there are probably 12 - 15 kids getting LEGO for birthdays, Christmas etc.
Do I buy as much for me as those parents are buying for those dozen or more
kids? Not by a long shot. My vote doesn't count as much as theirs does. The
good news, as noted above, is that things seem to be changing in ways that are
exciting and will continue to please both kids and many adults for a long time
to come.
All the best,
Allan B.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Allan Bedford wrote:
> It might be more accurate to say that more money is spent on LEGO by adults vs.
> children. However, do all those bricks end up in the hands of adults? No,
> probably not.
Kid fans of LEGO eventually grow up... and they either become adult fans
of LEGO, pass them on to their kids (in which case not as much LEGO is
bought for the successive generation, as there is already ample supply),
sell them via bricklink, ebay, or some other place, or (perish the
thought) the garbage. So all LEGO either ultimately ends up in one of
two places: the trash bin, or the hands of adults.
It would be interesting to actually do some population sampling and find
out exactly how big the numbers are and where.
> If the adult fan base who buy bricks
> is so large (as you suggest) then the scenario above is a good one, not a bad
> one.
As I said... the playing with electric trains began as a children's
hobby many years back and as adults began to get interested in it, a
market was specifically developed to cater to it (at higher markup
rates, typically). This adult market now _DWARFS_ the child's market in
for hobby railroading. It is perfectly reasonably for TLC to be leery
of inadvertently starting down this one-way road and might explain their
refusal to cater to the adult market.
> So you began your post by asking if the comment about adult fans and the market
> share they represent was serious; I think you can see that it is. LUGNET is a
> slanted view of the adult LEGO community. Look at another point of view. I
> work with around 45 people in my office. There is one adult LEGO fan.... me!
> But there are probably 12 - 15 kids getting LEGO for birthdays, Christmas etc.
> Do I buy as much for me as those parents are buying for those dozen or more
> kids? Not by a long shot.
Not at any one time, no... but over the course of an entire year?
Maybe... just maybe.
> All the best,
> Allan B.
Thanks Allan.
>> Mark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Allan Bedford wrote:
>
> > It might be more accurate to say that more money is spent on LEGO by adults vs.
> > children. However, do all those bricks end up in the hands of adults? No,
> > probably not.
>
> Kid fans of LEGO eventually grow up... and they either become adult fans
> of LEGO, pass them on to their kids (in which case not as much LEGO is
> bought for the successive generation, as there is already ample supply),
> sell them via bricklink, ebay, or some other place, or (perish the
> thought) the garbage. So all LEGO either ultimately ends up in one of
> two places: the trash bin, or the hands of adults.
>
> It would be interesting to actually do some population sampling and find
> out exactly how big the numbers are and where.
>
> > If the adult fan base who buy bricks
> > is so large (as you suggest) then the scenario above is a good one, not a bad
> > one.
>
> As I said... the playing with electric trains began as a children's
> hobby many years back and as adults began to get interested in it, a
> market was specifically developed to cater to it (at higher markup
> rates, typically). This adult market now _DWARFS_ the child's market in
> for hobby railroading. It is perfectly reasonably for TLC to be leery
> of inadvertently starting down this one-way road and might explain their
> refusal to cater to the adult market.
I am no expert on this aspect, but I don't think the logic is that sound here.
I recall an article in a train magazine noting the 'graying' of the hobby. They
worried that the average age of subscriber was like 56yrs old. I don't think
catering to the older hobbyist killed the child market. I suspect that other
competing diversions killed the train hobby market. Kids watch more TV (I
think), they have video tapes/dvds, TV, handheld and computer based video games,
and probably other distractions that did not exist when I was in my formative
years. I think the fear is that as the train hobbyist began litterally dying
off, where is the next geneartion of hobbyists .. not growing up on trains...
they will long for PS1 and what not for notalgia.
I think that even as they embrace the AFOL, they know full well the kid market
is the bread and butter. My suspicision is that a fair amount of what appears
to be catering to AFOLs is actually catering to adults that buy not fo
themselves but for their kids or other's kids. I don't think star wars means to
kids now what it means to me, a 40yr. I know when I shop for my kids it's
easier for me to be drawn to something thinking.. 'man I wish I had that when I
was a kid." Or in the case of the legends how about... "Wow, I always wanted
that one." Those thoughts, I think translate into increased sales... to adults
for kids.. adults that are no longer builders.
> > So you began your post by asking if the comment about adult fans and the market
> > share they represent was serious; I think you can see that it is. LUGNET is a
> > slanted view of the adult LEGO community. Look at another point of view. I
> > work with around 45 people in my office. There is one adult LEGO fan.... me!
> > But there are probably 12 - 15 kids getting LEGO for birthdays, Christmas etc.
> > Do I buy as much for me as those parents are buying for those dozen or more
> > kids? Not by a long shot.
>
> Not at any one time, no... but over the course of an entire year?
> Maybe... just maybe.
>
> > All the best,
> > Allan B.
>
> Thanks Allan.
> > > Mark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/Guybrush/Official/colordiff.jpg
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
Hey All,
After not sleeping last night due to being pissed off about this, I went out
today and bought myself the mini star destroyer just to see what I was getting
upset about. Upon opening the set I noticed the different colors and put them
next to some brick I pulled directly from one of the famous red buckets.
A side veiw of the new colors. the new colors are the top and bottom plates.
My original opinion on this by just reading Lugnet (yea I should know better)
was that this sucked and totally screwed me. However that has changed slightly.
The new light Grey is the old light Grey without the yellow “engine oil” tinge.
This yellow tinge was a huge problem industry wide back when the Lego Company
first started making bricks, but with new technology comes pure color tones.
This is probably something they have been working on for years and it obviously
cost them an arm and a leg. I really do have to say I like it but for those who
all ready have a large if not huge supply of the old Grey it will be a huge
setback not only for there wallet but also for there creations.
The new dark Grey is very different from the old so I can consider it a new
color. I don’t like this new dark Grey but I think I will in time.
Honestly I hope this is a limited run since I have invested so much into the old
colors. I do however like the opportunities it will give me to add more color to
my layout. Let’s just hope that if this is permanent that the new colors appear
in Pick-A-Brick really soon so we can rebuild our collections.
OnDrew
p.s. I think the 4th color may be white. any thoughts?
words to live by:”Only the best is good enough”- Ole Kirk Christiansen
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
At 07:21 PM 11/17/2003, you wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
>
> The new dark Grey is very different from the old so I can consider it a new
> color. I don't like this new dark Grey but I think I will in time.
>
> <<http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/roj2323/newcolors/img_8268.jpg>>
Actually this contrast almost suggests to me that it's not a replacement,
but a new color. It's such a drastic difference.
Hmm, reminds me of some gun barrels I've seen that have a "blued" finish.
The first thing I thought of when I saw that color was something along the
lines of blued steel...
I'm in the optimistic, wait-and-see camp. Exploding and chewing out LEGO
won't do any good at this stage of the game.
~Mike
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
> Hey All,
> After not sleeping last night due to being pissed off about this, I went out
> today and bought myself the mini star destroyer just to see what I was
> getting upset about. Upon opening the set I noticed the different colors and
> put them next to some brick I pulled directly from one of the famous red
> buckets.
>
> <<http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/roj2323/newcolors/img_8261.jpg>>
>
> A side veiw of the new colors. the new colors are the top and bottom plates.
>
> My original opinion on this by just reading Lugnet (yea I should know better)
> was that this sucked and totally screwed me. However that has changed
> slightly. The new light Grey is the old light Grey without the yellow "engine
> oil" tinge. This yellow tinge was a huge problem industry wide back when the
> Lego Company first started making bricks, but with new technology comes pure
> color tones. This is probably something they have been working on for years
> and it obviously cost them an arm and a leg. I really do have to say I like
> it but for those who all ready have a large if not huge supply of the old
> Grey it will be a huge setback not only for there wallet but also for there
> creations.
After going though my buttloads of light grey I recognize my "very old" light
grey (the "engine oil" shown) from my "current" ones bought in new condition
(SAH, BL, sets) the last decade or so. That light grey plate ("new" version)
looks much like the ones I have so much of.
That picture you've taken used a flash and will generally put out a color temp
of around 5000 Kelvin (a "white" light, no apparent "cooling" or "warming" bias)
and should give us a very accurate idea of what we get when we hold one.
As long as I can still get the light grey I've got the most of (non-"engine
oil") then I'm happy.
> The new dark Grey is very different from the old so I can consider it a new
> color. I don't like this new dark Grey but I think I will in time.
The dark grey would take some getting used to if all future dark grey will be
that shade.
> Honestly I hope this is a limited run since I have invested so much into the
> old colors. I do however like the opportunities it will give me to add more
> color to my layout. Let’s just hope that if this is permanent that the new
> colors appear in _Pick-A-Brick_ really soon so we can rebuild our
> collections.
>
> OnDrew
>
> p.s. I think the 4th color may be white. any thoughts?
>
> words to live by:"Only the best is good enough"- Ole Kirk Christiansen
Maybe this just is one of those "only in a few sizes" kind of things. (Can I
get 1x16 Technic beams in sand red? And don't say LDraw!)
Adr.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I saw this posted by ‘guybrush’ on the FBTB forums:
“I’ve started a new topic so that this one can be free of doubt, wait and see
type comments, etc.
I have confirmation in my inbox this morning. I’m not sure yet if the person
wants to be quoted or identified, so for now I’m only paraphrasing.
The color changes ARE intentional and meant to be permenant.
My contact did not address the issues of part quality, so I can only assume
these are either accidents or just a result of using lower-grade plastic.
Incidentally, the other color being changed is what we usually refer to as
Very Light Grey, from the mosiacs.
And to those of you who don’t get why this is a Very Bad Thing, please keep
your snide comments to yourself. To many of us, this feels like a very real
betrayal, and telling us to “get over it” or that we have no right to
complain is just assinine.
Here again is the link for LEGO’s feedback form;
www.lego.com/eng/service/...usform.asp “
:(
Jeff
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Jeff Szklennik wrote:
> I saw this posted by 'guybrush' on the FBTB forums:
>
> ["I've started a new topic so that this one can be free of doubt, wait and
> see] [type comments, etc.]
>
> [I have confirmation in my inbox this morning. I'm not sure yet if the
> person] [wants to be quoted or identified, so for now I'm only paraphrasing.]
>
> [The color changes ARE intentional and meant to be permenant.]
>
> [My contact did not address the issues of part quality, so I can only assume]
> [these are either accidents or just a result of using lower-grade plastic.]
>
> [Incidentally, the other color being changed is what we usually refer to as]
> [Very Light Grey, from the mosiacs.]
>
> [And to those of you who don't get why this is a Very Bad Thing, please keep]
> [your snide comments to yourself. To many of us, this feels like a very real]
> [betrayal, and telling us to "get over it" or that we have no right to]
> [complain is just assinine.]
>
> [Here again is the link for LEGO's feedback form;]
> [www.lego.com/eng/service/...usform.asp "]
>
> :(
>
> Jeff
To quote Swiper Fox: Awww MAN! (Why yes,
my sister *does* have small children, why
do you ask?)
Well, not much chance of me stopping building,
but it does put a serious kink in my plans to
build a life-size model of the Death Star in
dark grey for Brickfest 2004. (No, not really.
As in, not really planning one, that is.)
But so long as the community remains what it
is, joy will remain in the Brick for me. So
in the end that's what's important. Thanks for
sharing this tidbit, Jeff--however sad it may
be for the chromatic (or, in my case, grayscale)
purists among us.
best
LFB
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Aside from the perspectives already mentioned, two other issues worry me:
1 Replacing or augmenting existing colors with slightly different colors will
cause confusion and bad publicity.
- We will have a harder time sorting out pieces and need more storage
compartments (Or we just toss them together and deal with the differences during
building)
- When rebuilding sets from instructions later on, after the pieces got mingled
with other sets, we won't be able to tell from the picture which shade of grey
is meant, especially given the modern instruction graphics with shadows and
highlights instead of consistent reference colors.
- When we buy a new set, from now on you don't know which colors you will get,
since you can't tell from the box. It's one thing to consult Peeron, but box art
should be able to show us what we buy.
- The general public will not be aware of the differences, hence second-hands
sets will be a random mix of right and wrong shades.
- Many buyers may want to return sets if they discover the colors don't match,
without knowing this is actual TLG policy.
- Consumer organisations and tv-shows will love to have a bite at this, LEGO
suddenly producing off-colored bricks 'No, no, this is not bad quality, the
newer bricks were *intentionally* colored slightly different. Research shows
kids like them better'. Explain that to your market.
-...
2 TLG is wasting effort
Regardless if the new greys look 'better', I find it uncomprehensible that in
these difficult economic times for TLG, some product developer was lend an ear
at all by management when he or she raised this issue "Hey guys, now we have all
that grey in Star Wars and Harry Potter, focus groups say our product line tends
to look a bit dull. So why don't we spice up the grey colors, so the sets will
look a little more crisp?!" Yeah, that will safeguard the future of TLG, right.
I'm sorry this all seems harsh and I sincerely hope this will prove to be too
pessimistic. But remember ZNAP, GALIDOR and the name change of the DUPLO brand.
All those were major strategic failures based on some optimistic marketing
belief, and TLG had to discard product lines or change back.
While I don't doubt the sound intentions of TLG designers and marketeers, and
their valid arguments, recent history shows how changes can backfire because
certain effects (such as mentioned above) were overlooked or underestimated.
Eric
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Eric Brok wrote:
> 1 Replacing or augmenting existing colors with slightly different colors will
> cause confusion and bad publicity.
> - We will have a harder time sorting out pieces and need more storage
> compartments (Or we just toss them together and deal with the differences during
> building)
Two new colours shouldnt be a big issue for sorting. If you are keen eyed, it'll
be easy, and if not, then you won't care about the difference.
> - When rebuilding sets from instructions later on, after the pieces got mingled
> with other sets, we won't be able to tell from the picture which shade of grey
> is meant, especially given the modern instruction graphics with shadows and
> highlights instead of consistent reference colors.
You will be able to figure this out simply by referring to the date of the set.
Also, Lugnet, Bricklink, Peeron etc can help out here.
> - When we buy a new set, from now on you don't know which colors you will get,
> since you can't tell from the box. It's one thing to consult Peeron, but box art
> should be able to show us what we buy.
The AFOL community will surely help handle this.
> - The general public will not be aware of the differences, hence second-hands
> sets will be a random mix of right and wrong shades.
Well, second hand sets are always a bit dodgy. I personally hate getting the new
thin walled bricks in old sets but hey that's life.
> - Many buyers may want to return sets if they discover the colors don't match,
> without knowing this is actual TLG policy.
Very doubtful. Apart from a few AFOLs who shouldn't be surprised.
> - Consumer organisations and tv-shows will love to have a bite at this, LEGO
> suddenly producing off-colored bricks 'No, no, this is not bad quality, the
> newer bricks were *intentionally* colored slightly different. Research shows
> kids like them better'. Explain that to your market.
<sarcasm>Oh yeah, I am sure this will be on 60 Minutes. Its right up there with
New Coke </sarcasm>
> 2 TLG is wasting effort
> Regardless if the new greys look 'better', I find it uncomprehensible that in
> these difficult economic times for TLG, some product developer was lend an ear
> at all by management when he or she raised this issue "Hey guys, now we have all
> that grey in Star Wars and Harry Potter, focus groups say our product line tends
> to look a bit dull. So why don't we spice up the grey colors, so the sets will
> look a little more crisp?!" Yeah, that will safeguard the future of TLG, right.
>
> I'm sorry this all seems harsh and I sincerely hope this will prove to be too
> pessimistic. But remember ZNAP, GALIDOR and the name change of the DUPLO brand.
> All those were major strategic failures based on some optimistic marketing
> belief, and TLG had to discard product lines or change back.
Its the Toy business! You have to try a few things out! What about their gambles
that have succeeded, such as (ahem) Bionicle - despite dire warnings from AFOLs?
Yeah Znap was kinda dumb, Galidor probably would have suceeded if the series it
was based on didn't blow, and I am not aware of the Duplo rebranding being
withdrawn.
> While I don't doubt the sound intentions of TLG designers and marketeers, and
> their valid arguments, recent history shows how changes can backfire because
> certain effects (such as mentioned above) were overlooked or underestimated.
Because Lego is a privately held company, locked in a battle for survival with
brands such as Hot Wheels, Fisher Price and Barbie, plus all the Hasbro brands,
we really never find out what failed or succeeded.
I will be very surprised if the colour change causes more than a blip in sales.
Until I have some of the new greys in my hands (digitised pics can be very
misleading) it looks like the new light grey is near enough not to worry. The
old dark grey was useful for "earthy" things it really doesn't go well with the
other colours.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Mark Jordan wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Eric Brok wrote: • (snip)
> > I'm sorry this all seems harsh and I sincerely hope this will prove to be too
> > pessimistic. But remember ZNAP, GALIDOR and the name change of the DUPLO brand.
> > All those were major strategic failures based on some optimistic marketing
> > belief, and TLG had to discard product lines or change back.
>
> Its the Toy business! You have to try a few things out! What about their gambles
> that have succeeded, such as (ahem) Bionicle - despite dire warnings from AFOLs?
> Yeah Znap was kinda dumb, Galidor probably would have suceeded if the series it
> was based on didn't blow, and I am not aware of the Duplo rebranding being
> withdrawn.
I wasn't sure when I wrote that (TLG just put DUPLO stickers on EXPLORE boxes as
a temporary clarification), but now it turns out to be very clear, with DUPLO
and QUATTRO now officially (re)launched.
Eric Brok
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Joe Meno wrote:
| |
Hi all,
This is from a friend of mine, Gareth Bowler:
Got into my first 2004 sets today; the MINI star destroyer set, and
promptly scrapped them for parts, only to find, to my shock and dismay,
that the colors don’t match. Further more, the studs are rounded, making
connections significantly weaker, and the parts overall just have a cheaper
feel to them.
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/Guybrush/Official/colordiff.jpg
The two parts labelled “old” are both from 2003 sets, and have never had a
chance to yellow or been exposed to sunlight. The photo was not altered in
any way and is the raw output from my scanner.
|
Now I haven’t actually seen the new grey colors in person yet but based on the
pictures it looks like LEGO is now matching their light and dark grey colors to
the ones Mega Bloks uses. Now if the new colors are in addition to the existing
colors then I think that is awesome. If the new colors are replacements, I think
that is the single greatest act of stupidity TLC has commited. LEGO quality is
suppossed to be above that of Mega Bloks.
-Mike Petrucelli
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
Now I haven’t actually seen the new grey colors in person yet but based on
the pictures it looks like LEGO is now matching their light and dark grey
colors to the ones Mega Bloks uses.
|
That was my initial thought on seeing the new dark gray, too. Now it won’t be
so obvious when Lego and Mega Bloks are blended together in a MOC. :-P
Mark (ducks)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> > Now I haven't actually seen the new grey colors in person yet but based on
> > the pictures it looks like LEGO is now matching their light and dark grey
> > colors to the ones Mega Bloks uses.
This would not be unprecedented. After all, New Coke was an attempt to make the
product taste more like Pepsi.
In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> That was my initial thought on seeing the new dark gray, too. Now it won't
> be so obvious when Lego and Mega Bloks are blended together in a MOC. :-P
There's an easy way to identify the MegaBloks -- shake the model gently and see
which pieces fall off!
- Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Chris Phillips wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> > > Now I haven't actually seen the new grey colors in person yet but based on
> > > the pictures it looks like LEGO is now matching their light and dark grey
> > > colors to the ones Mega Bloks uses.
>
> This would not be unprecedented. After all, New Coke was an attempt to make the
> product taste more like Pepsi.
>
> In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> > That was my initial thought on seeing the new dark gray, too. Now it won't
> > be so obvious when Lego and Mega Bloks are blended together in a MOC. :-P
>
> There's an easy way to identify the MegaBloks -- shake the model gently and see
> which pieces fall off!
Well that was the case 4 or 5 years ago. As of 2 to 3 years ago Mega Bloks is
much improved. Only the occasional 1x1 part suffers this problem now but there
are usually 10 to 20 extras so you can get one that makes the model work. I am
very happy with the navy ships I own. (TLC dosent' make them, their loss)
-Mike Petrucelli
FUX to lugnet.off-topic.clonebrands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Chris Phillips wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> > > That was my initial thought on seeing the new dark gray, too. Now it won't
> > > be so obvious when Lego and Mega Bloks are blended together in a MOC. :-P
> >
> > There's an easy way to identify the MegaBloks -- shake the model gently and see
> > which pieces fall off!
>
> Well that was the case 4 or 5 years ago. As of 2 to 3 years ago Mega Bloks is
> much improved. Only the occasional 1x1 part suffers this problem now but there
> are usually 10 to 20 extras so you can get one that makes the model work. I am
> very happy with the navy ships I own. (TLC dosent' make them, their loss)
I have to agree. I'm holding a chunk of dark gray blocks from a recent MB set
and they all stick together very well, the colors of the various parts match and
the bricks themselves line up nicely so that surfaces that are supposed to be
smooth are smooth. Unfortunately, I have recently noticed that my Lego blocks
do not always create smooth surfaces. Take a look at this picture and see how
uneven the surface created by the blocks is:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=519085
I've noticed this on many of my models and it is disturbing, to say the least.
A lot of people tout Lego quality, but I don't think it's the same as it once
was. Another example is the straition (or tiny grooves) that appear on the
surface of some bricks and plates. It's as if they are manufacturing the bricks
too fast and the part isn't cooled down enough when they push it out of the
mold. This effect is quite pronounced on some parts, but almost absent on
others so it appears to be a quality control issue to me.
Mark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Chris Phillips wrote:
> > > In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> > > > That was my initial thought on seeing the new dark gray, too. Now it won't
> > > > be so obvious when Lego and Mega Bloks are blended together in a MOC. :-P
> > >
> > > There's an easy way to identify the MegaBloks -- shake the model gently and see
> > > which pieces fall off!
> >
> > Well that was the case 4 or 5 years ago. As of 2 to 3 years ago Mega Bloks is
> > much improved. Only the occasional 1x1 part suffers this problem now but there
> > are usually 10 to 20 extras so you can get one that makes the model work. I am
> > very happy with the navy ships I own. (TLC dosent' make them, their loss)
>
> I have to agree. I'm holding a chunk of dark gray blocks from a recent MB set
> and they all stick together very well, the colors of the various parts match and
> the bricks themselves line up nicely so that surfaces that are supposed to be
> smooth are smooth.
And to be fair, my experience with Mega Bloks consists of picking them out of
yard-sale lots of LEGO, so I've really only dealt with MB pieces that are
relatively old and worn. I must admit that more than one recent MB set design
has caught my eye on the toy store shelf. But I haven't mixed brands, and still
have no intention of doing so, even if my favorite color goes the way of the
Dodo.
> Unfortunately, I have recently noticed that my Lego blocks
> do not always create smooth surfaces. Take a look at this picture and see
> how uneven the surface created by the blocks is:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=519085
>
> I've noticed this on many of my models and it is disturbing, to say the least.
>
> A lot of people tout Lego quality, but I don't think it's the same as it once
> was. Another example is the straition (or tiny grooves) that appear on the
> surface of some bricks and plates. It's as if they are manufacturing the bricks
> too fast and the part isn't cooled down enough when they push it out of the
> mold. This effect is quite pronounced on some parts, but almost absent on
> others so it appears to be a quality control issue to me.
I had noticed this effect on several occasions and had just written it off to my
paying more attention to those kinds of details than I once did. But I have
definitely seen numerous examples of poor quality LEGO pieces. One example is
that the 1x1 plate from the mosaic sets frequently have excess plastic around
the bottom edge. I've also found plenty of outright deformed brick in new sets,
but I buy a lot more LEGO than I ever did as a kid (!!!) so I think my sample
population is a bit larger than it once was.
- Chris.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> Unfortunately, I have recently noticed that my Lego blocks do not always
> create smooth surfaces. Take a look at this picture and see how uneven the
> surface created by the blocks is:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=519085
>
> I've noticed this on many of my models and it is disturbing, to say the
> least.
>
> A lot of people tout Lego quality, but I don't think it's the same as it once
> was. Another example is the straition (or tiny grooves) that appear on the
> surface of some bricks and plates. It's as if they are manufacturing the
> bricks too fast and the part isn't cooled down enough when they push it out
> of the mold. This effect is quite pronounced on some parts, but almost
> absent on others so it appears to be a quality control issue to me.
Well, if I understand the tide of sentiment here on LUGNET (as well as the
corporate Newspeak dished out by TLG), you need to maintain a special
perspective while exmining this issue:
When LEGO demonstrates wide (and random) variations in color, clutch strength,
joint-evenness, plastic resilience, or juniorization, then these variations are
called “design innovations to enhance value, creativity, and playability.” But
when MEGA BLOKS or another competitor demonstrates the same variations, then
these variations are decried as signs of a cheap, shoddy knockoff that pales
before the righteous quality of the Almighty LEGO Brick.
Corporate propaganda, thy name is profit.
Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Mark Riley wrote:
> Take a look at this picture and see how uneven the surface created by the • blocks is:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=519085
Ouch! That looks like when I use my old bricks (cellulose acetate from
~1960) to build something. The 'modern' bricks I have are much better.
I *did* like the effect, though, when I built a roof with a mix of old,
slightly curved, CA slopes, and modern bricks. It looked more 'live'.
--
Anders Isaksson, Sweden
BlockCAD: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/proglego.htm
Gallery: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/gallery/index.htm
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
Now I haven’t actually seen the new grey colors in person yet but based on
the pictures it looks like LEGO is now matching their light and dark grey
colors to the ones Mega Bloks uses.
|
That was my initial thought on seeing the new dark gray, too. Now it won’t
be so obvious when Lego and Mega Bloks are blended together in a MOC. :-P
Mark (ducks)
|
Hi, Ducks:
I haven’t trumpeted the virtues of MEGA BLOKS for about twenty minutes, so I’m
long overdue...
Whatever else one might say of MEGA BLOKS, it must be admitted that they have
always offered a wider range of colors than LEGO. I would assert, in fact, that
the broadening of TLG’s palette over the past few years has been driven by the
awareness that their competitor was beating them on this front. Some have
claimed that MEGA BLOKS lacks color consistency even within a single set, but
I’ve never encountered this problem.
I care not one jot about TLG’s desperate ventures into new colors, since I
haven’t found reason to spend more than $15.00 total on LEGO in over a year.
Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
Now I haven’t actually seen the new grey colors in person yet but based on
the pictures it looks like LEGO is now matching their light and dark grey
colors to the ones Mega Bloks uses. Now if the new colors are in addition to
the existing colors then I think that is awesome. If the new colors are
replacements, I think that is the single greatest act of stupidity TLC has
commited. LEGO quality is suppossed to be above that of Mega Bloks.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
What about the new / replacement colors is “low quality” ??? Is the ABS used in
those colors of lesser quality than the “old” greys? Or are you just upset that
LEGO is following the lead of another company?
James Wilson
Dallas, TX
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
If you dare, write to them!!!!
As I have seen, petition runs here on LUGNET.
Many peole are thrilled some way. There is also feeling of betrayal and some
craving that TLG doesn't listen to AFOL's alhough it's 5% of the market.
If you dare, spend 80 cents in international letter and write to
LEGO Danmark A/S
Consumer Services
DK-7190 Billund
Denmark, Europe
- Phone calls and e-mails are ok, but only letters have desired effect because
they are very real when lying on the office's floor.
- People in Great britain did it several times ant such a mailing action had
positive results, but we need to be united
- If you still think it's rumor - it's better to prevent it. If you think it's
too late as the production already started 1/2 a year ago - It's NEVER too late.
Write a letter to TLG and clearly state that you wish to keep the old colors
Some good reasons are here
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=43644
PLUS The newbies to Lego don't care, but WE do!
When everybody who cares writes to them, I hope we can change it. At least you
cannot say that you didn't try.
Robert
| | | | | | |
