|
In lugnet.general, Jeff Barnas wrote:
> A Gray Area?
> INSIDE THE LEGO SET BOX -- During the last couple of months, adult LEGO fans
> have expressed their interest about the brick color change, which you can see in
> some 2004 LEGO sets.
>
> The rest of the article is here...
>
> <http://club.lego.com/news/default.asp?locale=2057&pagename=newsitem&contentid=4532>
Lego is basically a monopoly, they can do whatever they want because they're the
only ones doing what they do.
I wouldn't be so sure that the adult consumer group is much smaller than the
minor group, and in any case, adults are the ones buying toys for their
children.
I don't know how they tested the new colors or with whom, why didn't they also
use places like Lugnet to test people's opinions? The only reason I can think of
is because those opinions didn't matter that much.
It is a mistake to think that cooler grays could be better than warmer grays.
These grays look like blues almost. A warm gray is extremely more modern and
refined than a blueish gray.
Grays are not secondary colors, they are the core colors along with white,
that's why this change means so much. It's hard to understand how it would be so
expensive to keep both versions, epecially when knowing how many new and
probably ugly and irrelevant colors they have introduced over the years. Isn't
there more than one red? Or more than one orange?
Because they can do whatever they judge best and the only thing we can do is
consume, the terms of any discussion realtive to these issues are always going
to be absolutely disbalanced.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jeff Barnas wrote:
> A Gray Area?
> INSIDE THE LEGO SET BOX -- During the last couple of months, adult LEGO fans
> have expressed their interest about the brick color change, which you can see in
> some 2004 LEGO sets.
>
> The rest of the article is here...
>
> <http://club.lego.com/news/default.asp?locale=2057&pagename=newsitem&contentid=4532>
WOW! TLC just does not grasp what is going on....
"From comments made by adults on LUGNET.com it is apparent that many fans do not
think that the new colors match the old colors they have been collecting for
years"
We do not think they will match? There is no thinking about it - THEY DO NOT
MATCH!!!
"and they would prefer to have both the new and the old colors."
Actually, AFIK we would raqther have the old colors back and for the new colors
be returned to the Mega Blok company.
Sad, just sad.
Mark P
LOB
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
|
and they would prefer to have both the new and the old colors.
Actually, AFIK we would raqther have the old colors back and for the new
colors be returned to the Mega Blok company.
Sad, just sad.
|
Its graytarded.
--Todd
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jeff Barnas wrote:
> A Gray Area?
> INSIDE THE LEGO SET BOX -- During the last couple of months, adult LEGO fans
> have expressed their interest about the brick color change, which you can see in
> some 2004 LEGO sets.
>
> The rest of the article is here...
>
> <http://club.lego.com/news/default.asp?locale=2057&pagename=newsitem&contentid=4532>
"What do you think? Do you miss the old gray bricks? Go to the message boards
and let us know!"
Anyone else get a 404 when trying to get to said message board?
--
Best regards,
/Tobbe
<http://www.lotek.nu>
(remove SPAM when e-mailing)
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Tobbe Arnesson wrote:
> Anyone else get a 404 when trying to get to said message board?
404 owns LEGO
--Todd
|
|
|
"Todd Lehman" <tsl@tsl.bu.edu> wrote in message
news:HtKw0y.103r@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Tobbe Arnesson wrote:
> > Anyone else get a 404 when trying to get to said message board?
>
> 404 owns LEGO
>
> --Todd
If this is indicative of the types of product testing they did, no wonder we
ended up with the new grays!
Apparently they don't really want anyones opinions on the color changes....
Troy
|
|
|
Jeff Barnas wrote:
> adult LEGO fans
> have expressed their interest about the brick color change
Wow. Almost political. To call a never-seen-before storm of rage
"expressing ones interest" is a sure sign how little they care for their
customers.
Nuff said.
Christian
|
|
|
"Christian Treczoks" <ct@braehler.com> wrote in message
news:HtL5nM.8Kt@lugnet.com...
>
> Wow. Almost political. To call a never-seen-before storm of rage
> "expressing ones interest" is a sure sign how little they care for their
> customers.
That's one way of looking at it. Sure, the language is understated, but
personally, I am amazed that a corporate giant such as Lego will acknowledge
this in public at all. I find it quite refreshing.
Jennifer
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jeff Barnas wrote:
Here is the text if you dont want to sign-in to read it:
FEBRUARY 2004
ISSUE 16
A Gray Area?
INSIDE THE LEGO SET BOX -- During the last couple of months, adult LEGO fans
have expressed their interest about the brick color change, which you can see in
some 2004 LEGO sets.
From comments made by adults on LUGNET.com it is apparent that many fans do not
think that the new colors match the old colors they have been collecting for
years and they would prefer to have both the new and the old colors.
LEGO Design Manager Dorthe Kjaerulff had this to say: We have been aware of the
reactions on LUGNET. We have implemented the new colors to give better support
to the LEGO brand and the basic LEGO colors and I am sure that the new colors
will appeal to the consumers in general.
She adds that even though she acknowledges the concern shown by the LEGO fans,
it has not been possible to take all consumer reactions into consideration when
planning these kinds of changes. The new colors have been tested with very
positive results among families in Germany and USA, before the final decision
about the color change was made.
She also adds that it would be very expensive for LEGO Company to have bricks in
both the old and the new grey colors.
What do you think? Do you miss the old gray bricks? Go to the message boards and
let us know!
end of article
Too bad the message boards link isnt working....
My favorite quote: it has not been possible to take all consumer reactions
into consideration. Sounds to me like corporate speak for oops, we never
even thought about what our most loyal fans might think...
<sigh>
JohnG, GMLTC
|
|
|
Tobbe Arnesson <StPnAtM@lotek.nu> wrote:
> "What do you think? Do you miss the old gray bricks? Go to the message
> boards and let us know!"
> Anyone else get a 404 when trying to get to said message board?
Yes. But not just from there; from less obscure pages too, like
<http://www.lego.com/eng/play/>. Hopefully it'll be back up soon.
--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Christian Treczoks wrote:
|
Wow. Almost political. To call a never-seen-before storm of rage
expressing ones interest is a sure sign how little they care for their
customers.
|
Interesting to me is that the only thing (other than off-topic.debate) that
seems to have ignited such a storm of expressing interests lately has been the
proposal of LegoFan.net. Seems LUGNetters dont want anyone messing with our
greys, or our web sites! James Wilson Dallas, TX
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Nicolas D'Angelo wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jeff Barnas wrote:
> > A Gray Area?
> > INSIDE THE LEGO SET BOX -- During the last couple of months, adult LEGO fans
> > have expressed their interest about the brick color change, which you can see in
> > some 2004 LEGO sets.
> >
> > The rest of the article is here...
> >
> > <http://club.lego.com/news/default.asp?locale=2057&pagename=newsitem&contentid=4532>
>
> Lego is basically a monopoly, they can do whatever they want because they're the
> only ones doing what they do.
It is certainly not a monopoly. MegaBlocks is a huge competitor, and is causing
them an immense amount of grief. Not to mention they have to fight an
increasingly shrinking portion of the toy market in general. Just because you
are brand loyal, does not make them a monopoly. Sure, they are the best at what
they do. Your not gonna get better from MegaBlocks or BestLock, and that is
probably why everyone is upset. There really isn't a better product to turn to.
But there are other products.
> I wouldn't be so sure that the adult consumer group is much smaller than the
> minor group, and in any case, adults are the ones buying toys for their
> children.
> I don't know how they tested the new colors or with whom, why didn't they also
> use places like Lugnet to test people's opinions? The only reason I can think of
> is because those opinions didn't matter that much.
> It is a mistake to think that cooler grays could be better than warmer grays.
> These grays look like blues almost. A warm gray is extremely more modern and
> refined than a blueish gray.
> Grays are not secondary colors, they are the core colors along with white,
> that's why this change means so much. It's hard to understand how it would be so
> expensive to keep both versions, epecially when knowing how many new and
> probably ugly and irrelevant colors they have introduced over the years. Isn't
> there more than one red? Or more than one orange?
Yea, I don't buy it either. I think they are trying to save a little face, and
this is the first step of them admitting any kind of mistake. Take it as a
hopeful sign. They do pay attention to us, but what are they going to say?
"Lego makes huge mistake in color change! Loyal supporters leave in droves!"
And those wouldn't really be true either. But of course you are going to have
spin on a company press release.
> Because they can do whatever they judge best and the only thing we can do is
> consume, the terms of any discussion realtive to these issues are always going
> to be absolutely disbalanced.
The less you consume, the more they will listen.
-Alfred
|
|
|
This one time, Jennifer Clark wrote:
> "Christian Treczoks" <ct@braehler.com> wrote in message
> news:HtL5nM.8Kt@lugnet.com...
> > Wow. Almost political. To call a never-seen-before storm of rage
> > "expressing ones interest" is a sure sign how little they care for their
> > customers.
> That's one way of looking at it. Sure, the language is understated, but
> personally, I am amazed that a corporate giant such as Lego will acknowledge
> this in public at all. I find it quite refreshing.
Jennifer, I would too, but when TLC asked us what we think of the
new grays, giving us an ear thinking we could possibly make a change
and acting like they care (no, I'm not shooting Jake, the messanger).
All this does is show TLC management change hasn't done anything.
They just keeping going downhill, and not really care about their
customers after all.
I have younger brothers (ages 12, 15, and 16) who still build with
LEGOs. They aren't happy about this either. TLC makes it sound like
just the adults who are unhappy with this, but the little people usually
only buy bricks through their parents.
It's very sad, especially since TLC was here on Lugnet under the guise
that they actually do care--when in fact, they don't.
-Anne
--
I always said I wanted to be (\`--/') _ _______ .-r-.
somebody. Perhaps I should >.~.\ `` ` `,`,`. ,'_'~`.
have been more specific. (v_," ; `,-\ ; : ; \/,-~) \
stripes at tigerlair dot com `--'_..),-/ ' ' '_.>-' )`.`.__.')
stripes at brickbox dot com ((,((,__..'~~~~~~((,__..' `-..-'fL
|
|
|
The Lego Tiger <stripes@tigerlair.com> wrote:
> I have younger brothers (ages 12, 15, and 16) who still build with
> LEGOs. They aren't happy about this either. TLC makes it sound like
> just the adults who are unhappy with this, but the little people usually
> only buy bricks through their parents.
Get your younger brothers to write letters. Hand written is probably
ideal.
--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
|
|
|
Christian Treczoks wrote in message ...
> Jeff Barnas wrote:
> > adult LEGO fans
> > have expressed their interest about the brick color change
> Wow. Almost political. To call a never-seen-before storm of rage
> "expressing ones interest" is a sure sign how little they care for their
> customers.
I agree with the other opinions expressed in this thread - BUT - given that
this blurb is obviously written by someone whose first language is not
English, I don't think we should get too subtle in our interpretations. Many
meanings we could give to this text were probably quite unintended!
Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Farmhouse kit: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com/cat-farm.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
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Tobbe Arnesson <StPnAtM@lotek.nu> wrote:
> > "What do you think? Do you miss the old gray bricks? Go to the message
> > boards and let us know!"
> > Anyone else get a 404 when trying to get to said message board?
>
> Yes. But not just from there; from less obscure pages too, like
> <http://www.lego.com/eng/play/>. Hopefully it'll be back up soon.
Looks like the message board is back up.
<http://boards.lego.com/default/category.jsp?cat_id=000802b3b625000000f392081ac95975&>
But the color change isn't listed as a topic (well, at least not yet).
Adr.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Troy Cefaratti wrote:
> If this is indicative of the types of product testing they did, no wonder we
> ended up with the new grays!
> Apparently they don't really want anyones opinions on the color changes....
Has anyone tried manually creating a new topic, I see there is a button to do so
on the bottom of the page.
Simon Denscombe
|
|
|
Carbon 60 <carbon60@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> Has anyone tried manually creating a new topic, I see there is a button
> to do so on the bottom of the page.
I tried, but it just "spun", and eventually timed out.
--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Simon Denscombe wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Troy Cefaratti wrote:
> > If this is indicative of the types of product testing they did, no wonder we
> > ended up with the new grays!
> > Apparently they don't really want anyones opinions on the color changes....
>
> Has anyone tried manually creating a new topic, I see there is a button to do so
> on the bottom of the page.
>
> Simon Denscombe
I subimtted a new topic "A Gray Area?" yesterday, but it says the topic has to
be approved first.
It took me almost an hour to get through maybe 4 screens, in order to post a
message on the existing forums (I posted in the Monthly Brick thread), but it
also says the messages are moderated, so who knows if it will appear or not, or
how long it will take.
Oh well, in the meantime, play well, with your old gray's. 8^)
Tim Strutt
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Troy Cefaratti wrote:
> "Todd Lehman" <tsl@tsl.bu.edu> wrote in message
> news:HtKw0y.103r@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.general, Tobbe Arnesson wrote:
> > > Anyone else get a 404 when trying to get to said message board?
> >
> > 404 owns LEGO
> >
> > --Todd
>
> If this is indicative of the types of product testing they did, no wonder we
> ended up with the new grays!
>
> Apparently they don't really want anyones opinions on the color changes....
Now now. All sites have problems from time to time. This one was just really bad
timing! Everything *should* be back up and running now. If not, the techs are
still working on it, but it should be back up very soon.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
|
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:HtnI4t.22yK@lugnet.com...
>
> Now now. All sites have problems from time to time. This one was just really bad
> timing! Everything *should* be back up and running now. If not, the techs are
> still working on it, but it should be back up very soon.
Just out of curiosity, what cities are the Lego servers in?
A friend was on a tour of a Qwest datacenter once and was told that Lego
servers were hosted there. I'm not sure if they ment "in that city" or just
"with Qwest somewhere".
----------
"I don't love the new grays - I just hate the people who have more of the
old grays than I do."
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Nicolas D'Angelo wrote:
< good speaking snip >
> It's hard to understand how it would be so
> expensive to keep both versions, epecially when knowing how many new and
> probably ugly and irrelevant colors they have introduced over the years.
Yeah, I find this line absurd too! TLC is not understandable anymore, I'm
afraid. I don't buy that excuse! Who are they kidding? If you wanna know, I
don't buy that focus groups thang too. And, what do they mean by "new colors
doing well in Germany and US"?
Let me see if I understand TLC reasoning: "This product don't atract children,
what are we going to do? Get more to the brick? Bring back old themes, therefore
todays adults (that are yesterday kids) may feel willing to buy those to their
kids? Try to feel some gaps in the market, like battle ships for instance, like
our successful adversary is doing? Mmmmm, EUREKA!, let's change a bit some
colors and there you have, we'll start selling tons of Lego. Maybe we'll sell
more if you don't even advertise it, then we get kids by surprise! Great idea,
now we don't have to change nothing else, our product sells are saved because of
the new blues!" (1)
> Isn't
> there more than one red? Or more than one orange?
The words they say and the excuses they give make less and lesser sense... (To
me, at least.)
> Because they can do whatever they judge best and the only thing we can do is
> consume, the terms of any discussion realtive to these issues are always going
> to be absolutely disbalanced.
Absolutely! I think that there isn't really a discussion happening.
Shame on TLC!
(1) I took a bluisj light gray to college and asked about twenty people what
color it was. Aswers were:
11 - blue or bluish;
4 - light blue;
3 - gray;
1 - banana blue;
Paulo Renato
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jeff Barnas wrote:
> > A Gray Area?
> > INSIDE THE LEGO SET BOX -- During the last couple of months, adult LEGO fans
> > have expressed their interest about the brick color change, which you can see in
> > some 2004 LEGO sets.
> >
> > The rest of the article is here...
> >
> > <http://club.lego.com/news/default.asp?locale=2057&pagename=newsitem&contentid=4532>
>
> WOW! TLC just does not grasp what is going on....
>
> "From comments made by adults on LUGNET.com it is apparent that many fans do not
> think that the new colors match the old colors they have been collecting for
> years"
>
> We do not think they will match? There is no thinking about it - THEY DO NOT
> MATCH!!!
>
> "and they would prefer to have both the new and the old colors."
>
> Actually, AFIK we would raqther have the old colors back and for the new colors
> be returned to the Mega Blok company.
>
>
> Sad, just sad.
>
> Mark P
> LOB
You are right. It is just sad. It is even sadder when obviously TLC knows what
is going on here but just can't admit it. For the record: If I had to choose
between both colors (old and new) and just the new colors, I would prefer both,
obviously, but that doesn't mean I'd like to have both colors. I don't even like
the new grayish blues. I would prefer *only* the old colors. Me don't need tons
of colors. I'm tired of sorting, you know!
I know i said it before and i'll say it again. 2004 products will note enter my
home. Even if they go 50% off. (Very rare in Portugal.) That is how I intent to
"talk" with TLC...
Paulo Renato
P.S. - Today is the color, tomorrow who knows?
|
|
|
|
LEGO Design Manager Dorthe Kjaerulff had this to say: We have been aware of
the reactions on LUGNET. We have implemented the new colors to give better
support to the LEGO brand and the basic LEGO colors and I am sure that the
new colors will appeal to the consumers in general.
|
What a bucket load of %$#*... Sounds like someone had her mind made up before
the project was off the drawing board.
|
She adds that even though she acknowledges the concern shown by the LEGO
fans, it has not been possible to take all consumer reactions into
consideration when planning these kinds of changes.
|
Translation: Ive made up my mind dammit...now go along with the program.
|
The new colors have been tested with very positive results among families in
|
Germany and USA, before the final decision about the color change was made.
|
|
Load number 2... Its been tested over and over again that consumers like warmer
colors (ie. no blue cast) which is why all the Lego stores use warm lighting.
Id like to know how the room was lit when they tested this as it would
drasticly skew the test subjects color perception. As it seems the results were
pre-determind its highly likely they could have presented a Lego brick and a
cinder block and come up with results that prove people like cinder blocks
better than ABS.
|
She also adds that it would be very expensive for LEGO Company to have bricks
in both the old and the new grey colors.
|
Ok this takes the cake. How stupid do they think we are!?!?!? It would be no
more expensive to produce grey and bley than it is to produce bley and pink or
any other of the multitude of colors that have come along lately.
|
What do you think? Do you miss the old gray bricks? Go to the message boards
and let us know!
end of article
Too bad the message boards link isnt working....
|
Im sure they were working until they found out that they werent going to get
the support they were looking for! It seems the cuts that were recently made in
upper Lego managment should be extended to middle managment as well... starting
with a certain design manager!!!!! Perhaps then they could afford to make the
very expensive color. -Ken
|
|
|
Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Troy Cefaratti wrote:
> > Apparently they don't really want anyones opinions on the color changes....
> Now now. All sites have problems from time to time. This one was just really bad
> timing! Everything *should* be back up and running now. If not, the techs are
> still working on it, but it should be back up very soon.
As the discussion forums at the LEGO site are moderated, I'd bet that a
a new discussion area about the new grey will never happen, and that
postings about this topic in other areas will not be moderated and made
public, except when they are positive about the change.
By the way, what do the moderators do with declined applications for
postings or new topics? Will the author be informed, or are they just
thrown away?
Yours, Christian
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
Load number 2... Its been tested over and over again that consumers like
warmer colors (ie. no blue cast) which is why all the Lego stores use warm
lighting. Id like to know how the room was lit when they tested this as it
would drasticly skew the test subjects color perception.
|
Nah, I doubt it was the lighting so much as the questions they were asking.
Warmer colors are more likable and inviting, but cooler colors are, well,
cooler; theyre perceived as newer, more high-tech, and exciting. Im trying to
find the post where somebody transcribed the questions from a Lego marketing
survey a couple of days ago, but I seem to remember that coolness was the
overriding factor being measured (Is this toy cooler than your other Lego toys?
Is it cooler than your friends toys? etc.).
This coolness-worship is probably a result of everyone buying so much Bionicle.
Come on, dont tell me you didnt know it was wrong.
|
|
She also adds that it would be very expensive for LEGO Company to have
bricks in both the old and the new grey colors.
|
Ok this takes the cake. How stupid do they think we are!?!?!? It would be no
more expensive to produce grey and bley than it is to produce bley and pink
or any other of the multitude of colors that have come along lately.
|
The difference being, if you spend the money making bley and pink, the customer
sees two separate colors and gets excited. If you spend the money to make bley
and gray, 95% of your customers see only one color anyway, so you might as well
never have spent the extra money at all. (The same argument is true for
replacing Lego ABS with Mega-Bloks-like PVC, which is why I think were seeing
so many new Lego elements in the substandard-grade plastic lately.)
But I think the production expense is the least of their worries, the biggest
hit to Legos pocketbook would be the marketing hassle. Theres no easy way to
get the average consumer to know that there are two different grays, and to be
able to differentiate between them when theyre making their buying decisions.
In fact the mere knowledge that there are two incompatible gray colors on the
shelf adds enough extra complication to the consumers experience, that it acts
as a deterrent to them buying Lego at all.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Mike Rayhawk wrote:
|
The difference being, if you spend the money making bley and pink, the
customer sees two separate colors and gets excited. If you spend the money
to make bley and gray, 95% of your customers see only one color anyway, so
you might as well never have spent the extra money at all. (The same
argument is true for replacing Lego ABS with Mega-Bloks-like PVC, which is
why I think were seeing so many new Lego elements in the substandard-grade
plastic lately.)
|
Wait a minute. I thought I was imagining this. What elements have
appeared in cheaper plastic? I thought some of the plastic in the
$10 Harry Potter sets with the cheesy cardboard backdrops seemed to
be made of cheaper stuff. The sound that the door made when it was
closed on the prefab wall part didnt seem right, but I just couldnt
bring myself to believe that it was because of cheaper plastic.
Hmmm, I did just make my first MegaBlok purchase, an Alien Agency set,
to compare the greys. Now that you mention it, the MegaBlok plastic
does remind me of the cheesy seeming lego elements. Ill have to
do some more comparisons.
By the way, the new Lego dark bley is a much closer match to the
MegaBlok dark bley. The light grey in the Alien Agency set is kinda
silvery so it doesnt really match the new Lego light bley.
Also, if you look at inclued MegaBlok catalog, the knights kingdom
maxifigs (especially the hands) look just like the Blok Bots. (except
perhaps the Lego knights dont transform?)
Looks like Lego is now following MegaBloks lead. Yikes!
Don
|
|
|
"Christian Treczoks" <ct@braehler.com> wrote in message
news:Htoryw.6s0@lugnet.com...
[ ... snipped ... ]
>
> By the way, what do the moderators do with declined applications for
> postings or new topics? Will the author be informed, or are they just
> thrown away?
>
> Yours, Christian
It has been a while since I have posted but when the boards first started,
there was no feedback what so ever if your post was not accepted. After a
couple of posts, neither of which were ever "accepted", I have never been
back until this thread appeared the other day.
One thing I noticed in poking around the LEGO Boards is how frequently the
date of the last post was quite some time ago. Most of the topics haven't
been posted to this year and there are several which haven't been posted to
since 2002.
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, Mike Rayhawk wrote:
|
But I think the production expense is the least of their worries, the biggest
hit to Legos pocketbook would be the marketing hassle. Theres no easy way
to get the average consumer to know that there are two different grays, and
to be able to differentiate between them when theyre making their buying
decisions. In fact the mere knowledge that there are two incompatible gray
colors on the shelf adds enough extra complication to the consumers
experience, that it acts as a deterrent to them buying Lego at all.
|
I know that is a chief deterrent for me right now. I am reluctant to buy sets
from late last year that may contain grey because I am afraid they will actually
have bley instead. And I have already shipped enough bley back to Lego to
hopefully make a point.
If Lego decided to bring back grey (and brown) then I would probably go seeking
some bley since a little bit could come in handy. But until then, I am in my
grey ages...
-Matt :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
She also adds that it would be very expensive for LEGO Company to have
bricks in both the old and the new grey colors.
|
Ok this takes the cake. How stupid do they think we are!?!?!? It would be no
more expensive to produce grey and bley than it is to produce bley and pink
or any other of the multitude of colors that have come along lately.
|
The difference being, if you spend the money making bley and pink, the
customer sees two separate colors and gets excited. If you spend the money
to make bley and gray, 95% of your customers see only one color anyway, so
you might as well never have spent the extra money at all. (The same
argument is true for replacing Lego ABS with Mega-Bloks-like PVC, which is
why I think were seeing so many new Lego elements in the substandard-grade
plastic lately.)
But I think the production expense is the least of their worries, the biggest
hit to Legos pocketbook would be the marketing hassle. Theres no easy way
to get the average consumer to know that there are two different grays, and
to be able to differentiate between them when theyre making their buying
decisions. In fact the mere knowledge that there are two incompatible gray
colors on the shelf adds enough extra complication to the consumers
experience, that it acts as a deterrent to them buying Lego at all.
|
She didnt mention marketing she said it would be expensive to make both
colors. Words mean things... dont try to read into them whats not there.
There would be no marketing needed. A given model would use the appropriate
color and its that simple. The Super Chief would look absurd in blue-grey.
However bley might make for good castle parts. Some Star Wars models would
problably look good with parts in both colors.
They recently had a press release touting record number of Harry Potter castles
sold. The most expensive part of this castle is the licencing. They could have
sold many many more just adding to the profit. Instead they have to re-number
the set. Switch things around a bit to try and make it look new and all
because of the new color. THAT was expensive!
It seems clear that Lego made a decision, came up with a survay to support that
decision, became compleately flustered when it blew up in their face, and now is
still looking for ways to explain themselves. -Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
|
|
|
She also adds that it would be very expensive for LEGO Company to have
bricks in both the old and the new grey colors.
|
|
|
She didnt mention marketing she said it would be expensive to make both
colors. Words mean things... dont try to read into them whats not there.
|
Not at all, she said it would be expensive to have both colors. She didnt
mention production either, you just assumed it.
|
There would be no marketing needed. A given model would use the appropriate
color and its that simple.
|
By the very fact that you can propose that with a straight face, I can tell
youve never worked for Billund. I cant even express to you how contrary that
is to the way things are run. To even suggest this would only result in your
having to buy cake for the design floor.
|
They recently had a press release touting record number of Harry Potter
castles sold. The most expensive part of this castle is the licencing. They
could have sold many many more just adding to the profit. Instead they have
to re-number the set. Switch things around a bit to try and make it look
new and all because of the new color. THAT was expensive!
|
Theyve been releasing redesigns of old sets long before the invention of bley.
I mean look at Star Wars. It has nothing to do with a new color, it has to do
with people being more likely to make license-based purchases of toys that have
the word new on them.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
They recently had a press release touting record number of Harry Potter
castles sold. The most expensive part of this castle is the licencing. They
could have sold many many more just adding to the profit. Instead they have
to re-number the set. Switch things around a bit to try and make it look
new and all because of the new color. THAT was expensive!
|
They did no such thing. The new HP Hogwarts Castle is a 100% new design. The
intent was to provide something that would appeal to those who had already
bought the original Hogwarts, but that could still serve as a focal set for
those who hadnt. The original Hogwars was primarily built around the main
hall, IIRC. Heres a pic of the new Hogwarts, which focuses primarily around
the front entrance, and includes a motorized clock that causes the main gate to
open:
|
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Mike Rayhawk wrote:
Not at all, she said it would be expensive to have both colors. She didnt
mention production either, you just assumed it.
|
Youre splitting hairs. In order to have them they have to produce them. However
you want to split it does not cost any more to have bley and grey than it does
to have bley and (any color). The main point should be that while developing
bley has problably cost a small fortune it will not ad anything to the bottom
line. It is clear though that even if they think it insignifigant dropping grey
will cost them.
|
|
There would be no marketing needed. A given model would use the appropriate
color and its that simple.
|
By the very fact that you can propose that with a straight face, I can tell
youve never worked for Billund. I cant even express to you how contrary
that is to the way things are run. To even suggest this would only result in
your having to buy cake for the design floor.
|
They should spend more time on the company then and less on cake. I really dont
care how they see fit to do business. The fact is that compared to other
companies they do a very poor job at marketing. Dont try to argue that as its
the reason they are whining about loosing money when the rest of the business
world is looking up. And yet still, it would, in a properly run company require
no additional marketing to choose between bley & gray for any given model.
|
Theyve been releasing redesigns of old sets long before the invention of
bley. I mean look at Star Wars. It has nothing to do with a new color, it
has to do with people being more likely to make license-based purchases of
toys that have the word new on them.
|
Actually it has everything to do with the color and if you dont like my term of
switched around pick your own, it still has the same end result. The fact is
that they hadnt scrached the surface of the available market and now they are
starting over. This would be why they cant make money on licenced products an
this would be why Harry and Luke are (as far as Lego is concerned) DOOMED after
this go-around. -Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
|
They did no such thing. The new HP Hogwarts Castle is a 100% new design.
The intent was to provide something that would appeal to those who had
already bought the original Hogwarts, but that could still serve as a focal
set for those who hadnt. The original Hogwars was primarily built around
the main hall, IIRC. Heres a pic of the new Hogwarts, which focuses
primarily around the front entrance, and includes a motorized clock that
causes the main gate to open:
|
OK so nobody likes my term Switched around. Matters not. The point is that
they had nowhere near sold the original castle to all the people who would
likely buy one. They couldnt keep going with it though because of the color
change. So instead of lapping up the gravy from the first one they had to
develop another one, new artwork and so on and so on. This very poor business
decision and others just as bad are why they cant seem to make money off
licenced lines and why it is that this is Harrys last hurrah.-Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
|
In lugnet.general, Mike Rayhawk wrote:
Not at all, she said it would be expensive to have both colors. She
didnt mention production either, you just assumed it.
|
Youre splitting hairs. In order to have them they have to produce them.
|
In order to have them they have to be able to sell them. I dont think Im
splitting hairs at all. I was just responding to your accusation that I was
reading more into the word have than you were, which I still think was not the
case.
|
However you want to split it does not cost any more to have bley and grey
than it does to have bley and (any color). The main point should be that
while developing bley has problably cost a small fortune it will not ad
anything to the bottom line. It is clear though that even if they think it
insignifigant dropping grey will cost them.
|
I dont think anybodys trying to say that bley was a good idea (or even an
excusable mistake).
Yes, dropping gray will cost them. Im just saying that there are good reasons
that having both bley and gray might very well cost them more.
In the same way (since you seem to feel more strongly about this than about the
actual color change), a continued run of the previous HP Hogwarts Castle would
have made continued sales, maybe even posted good figures. But all the people
most excited about it have already bought it, and a continued run takes up a
specific amount of shelf space and mindshare that would otherwise be occupied by
new products that would sell better. Theres a very limited number of models
that the market will support in any category, and its in Legos best interest
to cycle out old products once the blush is off. More of that set would have
earned money, but replacing it earns them more money, even accounting for the
additional development costs.
Even if there were no color change, they have to recycle their product lines in
general, and they have to recycle the HP castle in specific in order to better
match the action of whatever we see in the latest movie.
|
They should spend more time on the company then and less on cake. I really
dont care how they see fit to do business.
|
Whether or not you approve or disapprove, I dont think ignoring reality is
going to help your argument. Its still the Lego company thats making the
colors, and theyre a real place that operates according to real methods. We
might not think its ideal that they take cake-breaks five times a day, but
thats what were stuck with.
(The first Danish phrase they tried to teach me, even before I learned the words
for ordering trays of bricks, was four oclock! time for cake! I gave up on
trying to buy cake after the first couple tries though, since my poor ability to
navigate in a Danish bakery usually resulted in something nasty like
chocolate-frosted carrot cake.)
|
The fact is that compared to other companies they do a very poor job at
marketing. Dont try to argue that as its the reason they are whining
about loosing money when the rest of the business world is looking up.
|
I could argue this point but its secondary to the issue. Even if Legos
marketing department did as poor a job as you suggest, it doesnt change the
fact that the company has to spend money on it.
|
And yet still, it would, in a properly run company require no additional
marketing to choose between bley & gray for any given model.
|
Im not even sure what youre trying to argue anymore. If Legos entire product
line consisted of that one model, then sure, but that model is part of a system
with other models. When the grays dont match between models, then consumers
get confused and angry; preventing that from happening is a marketing issue.
Nobody gets confused when bley doesnt match with pink.
|
are starting over. This would be why they cant make money on licenced
products an this would be why Harry and Luke are (as far as Lego is
concerned) DOOMED after this go-around. -Ken
|
Well Luke is doomed because Lucas is done putting out new Star Wars movies, so
thats the end of the license. Im not as familiar with the HP side of things
so I cant really speak to that.
|
|
|
Mike Rayhawk <mike@brikwars.com> wrote:
> splitting hairs at all. I was just responding to your accusation that I was
> reading more into the word "have" than you were, which I still think was not the
> case.
Hey, if you're gonna be arguing about the meaning of the word "have", take
it to .off-topic.debate. :)
--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
OK so nobody likes my term Switched around. Matters not. The point is that
they had nowhere near sold the original castle to all the people who would
likely buy one. They couldnt keep going with it though because of the color
change. So instead of lapping up the gravy from the first one they had to
develop another one, new artwork and so on and so on. This very poor business
decision and others just as bad are why they cant seem to make money off
licenced lines and why it is that this is Harrys last hurrah.-Ken
|
If they tried to keep milking the original Hogwarts for every last drop, theyd
be bleeding money to the Law of Diminishing Returns. Theres a point where
continued production of a set becomes a liability, and when the vast majority of
stores have the same copies sitting on their shelves for months on end, its
time to move on. Im sure the original Hogwarts will be available through S@H
for a while yet, but my local Target doesnt care if there are 20 people in
California who still want to buy this set. They care about whether theres
someone there right now buying one of their copies and clearing out a space on
the shelf for a new set.
In the end, TLC has to be more concerned about what the store chains will buy
than what the end consumer will buy. It doesnt do any good to develop a set
that everyone wants if the stores wont stock it (hence the reason the ISD still
hasnt shipped to retail), and it doesnt do any good to dedicate production
resources towards a set that store chains stop ordering.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
|
If they tried to keep milking the original Hogwarts for every last drop,
theyd be bleeding money to the Law of Diminishing Returns. Theres a point
where continued production of a set becomes a liability,
|
The problem is that due to poor marketing they havent begun to scratch the
surface. You may hit TRU and make it a point of checking the Lego display but
most parents dont, they scoot in buy what the child wants and leave. I know for
a fact that there is a huge amount of kids who are Harry Potter fans that have
no idea the Lego HP line exists.
|
majority of stores have the same copies sitting on their shelves for months
on end, its time to move on. Im sure the original Hogwarts will be
available through S@H for a while yet,
|
Again the average comsumer doesnt go to S@H and the sets will be gone or
relegated to the outlet stores before the new set is released so as to not
interfere with it.
|
It doesnt do any good to develop a set
that everyone wants if the stores wont stock it (hence the reason the ISD
still hasnt shipped to retail), and it doesnt do any good to dedicate
production resources towards a set that store chains stop ordering.
|
Give me a break you cant compare a $300 collectable to a $90 toy. Every kid
wants a Ford Explorer too but they arent going to get one. The stores would not
have any trouble selling the product if Lego was any good at marketing. -Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Mike Rayhawk wrote:
|
I dont think anybodys trying to say that bley was a good idea (or even an
excusable mistake).
|
You havent been listening to lego then. They seem to be willing to defend this
with their dying breath. (wich is what I would like to avoid)
|
Yes, dropping gray will cost them. Im just saying that there are good
reasons that having both bley and gray might very well cost them more.
|
You havent made that point though. They have a virtual spectrum now. If more
colors cost more money they should just drop every thing except the original
red, white, and black.
|
In the same way (since you seem to feel more strongly about this than about
the actual color change), a continued run of the previous HP Hogwarts Castle
would have made continued sales, maybe even posted good figures. But all the
people most excited about it have already bought it,
|
Wrong! I know for a fact that huge numbers of kids who are HP fans have no idea
this product line exists. If they knew about it they too would be exited.
|
Whether or not you approve or disapprove, I dont think ignoring reality is
going to help your argument. Its still the Lego company thats making the
colors, and theyre a real place that operates according to real methods. We
might not think its ideal that they take cake-breaks five times a day, but
thats what were stuck with.
|
It seems you are ignoring reality, its Lego thats whining about all the money
theyve lost. particularly troubleing in a time when the rest of the
industrialized world is moving upword.
|
I could argue this point but its secondary to the issue. Even if Legos
marketing department did as poor a job as you suggest, it doesnt change the
fact that the company has to spend money on it.
|
Its not secondary its the whole kit n kaboodel! Lego is by their own
admission on a multi-year downhill run. Its poor marketing that caused this!
|
Im not even sure what youre trying to argue anymore. If Legos entire
product line consisted of that one model, then sure, but that model is part
of a system with other models. When the grays dont match between models,
then consumers get confused and angry; preventing that from happening is a
marketing issue. Nobody gets confused when bley doesnt match with pink.
|
You cant argue it because its absurd. They have red & dark red. They have
light blue & blue. They have lime & original green.They have orange & dark
orange. They had very light grey, light grey, & dark grey. Adding blue-grey to
the list increases operating cost no further than developing the original mix.
|
Well Luke is doomed because Lucas is done putting out new Star Wars movies,
so thats the end of the license. Im not as familiar with the HP side of
things so I cant really speak to that.
|
Lucas may be done but theres still 3 more movies in the cooker. Harry is going
to carry on for years. It has nothing to do with that though, LEGO has publicly
said they feel they cant make money off licenced products and therfor they are
going to quit trying. This decision came about at the same time they started
chopping executive heads. The current new releases were already committed by
then. I find this very sad because the failure of Lego to make money on licenced
products if the falure of Lego to properly market them and not a failure of the
market.-Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Troy Cefaratti wrote:
> Now now. All sites have problems from time to time. This one was just really bad
> timing! Everything *should* be back up and running now. If not, the techs are
> still working on it, but it should be back up very soon.
>
> Jake
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
Saturday the 29th....10am CST. Still not working or down again? I hope they pay
you well because it can't be fun making excuses for this bunch...-Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Troy Cefaratti wrote:
> > Now now. All sites have problems from time to time. This one was just really bad
> > timing! Everything *should* be back up and running now. If not, the techs are
> > still working on it, but it should be back up very soon.
> >
> > Jake
> > ---
> > Jake McKee
> > Community Liaison
> > LEGO Community Development
>
> Saturday the 29th....10am CST. Still not working or down again? I hope they pay
> you well because it can't be fun making excuses for this bunch...-Ken
I got in fine 2/29 1130. It's probably your connection
-Orion
|
|
|
Orion Pobursky <orion@dontaddthis.pobursky.com> wrote:
> I got in fine 2/29 1130. It's probably your connection
I have a really good connection, and I'm having trouble getting it to
load. Two different good connections, in fact, with the same result.
When it *did* load the other day, it was so miserably slow to actually try
to post that I gave up. (Minutes to load a page!)
Looks like the boards are actually outsourced to "informative.com" --
$ host boards.lego.com
boards.lego.com is an alias for discuss001.informative.com.
so that's probably where the technical blame lies. But it does seem like
Lego ought to consider switching -- or at least giving them a real good
talking to.
--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
|
|
|
Ken Nagel <knandjn@hotmail.com> wrote:
> You haven't made that point though. They have a virtual spectrum now. If more
> colors cost more money they should just drop every thing except the original
> red, white, and black.
For what it's worth, I just saw something on lego.com saying that Lego's
current (no year given) lineup has 84 different colors.
--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
You havent made that point though. They have a virtual spectrum now. If more
colors cost more money they should just drop every thing except the original
red, white, and black.
|
...and yellow and blue. Im sure there are people who would be happy if every
piece that was produced from now on would be a 2x4 in one of the original five
colors, but that would pretty much drive the company into the ground. They do
have too many colors right now. How useful is light-yellow? Light-orange?
What about bright-green? Of course, if they go back to the original five
colors, that means no green, no, tan, no brown, and no greys. Granted, the
original brown and greys are gone anyways. Still, going with too few colors is
just as bad as going with too many. They need to have a good representative
array of colors, but as popular as it would be amongst certain ranks of AFOLs to
have both dark-grey and gunmetal-grey produced at the same time, I have to agree
that theyre still too similar to make economic sense for TLC to keep both.
|
Wrong! I know for a fact that huge numbers of kids who are HP fans have no
idea this product line exists. If they knew about it they too would be
exited.
|
Ive been told face-to-face that TLC has purposefully underadvertised when sets
are selling fast enough to keep up with their production rates. Takanuva sold
well enough on his own, so all of the US BIONICLE advertisement was geared
towards the Rahkshi sets. Some areas of the world didnt get any advertisement
at all because everything sells pretty much as fast as they can stock it. Its
possible that this is the case with the HP sets.
|
You cant argue it because its absurd. They have red & dark red. They have
light blue & blue. They have lime & original green.They have orange & dark
orange. They had very light grey, light grey, & dark grey. Adding blue-grey
to the list increases operating cost no further than developing the original
mix.
|
It all depends on how much the coloring agents cost. Black is the second
cheapest color to produce, after natural (which has a slightly translucent light
beige color). Clear is extremely expensive, which is why clear LEGO elements
are made from a different plastic. Without knowing what chemicals are used to
color the grey/bley colors, theres no way of knowing which one is more
expensive to produce. MOBS (makers of brown stuff) got hit pretty hard when the
brown coloring agent they relied on was banned with many other heavy-metal
pigments, and thats why brown and tan outlet covers arent nearly as common as
they used to be. They still make them, but the big selling point used to be
that they were a lot cheaper than any other colors. Hence the reason why entire
companies would devote themselves to producing brown stuff.
|
Lucas may be done but theres still 3 more movies in the cooker. Harry is
going to carry on for years. It has nothing to do with that though, LEGO has
publicly said they feel they cant make money off licenced products and
therfor they are going to quit trying. This decision came about at the same
time they started chopping executive heads. The current new releases were
already committed by then. I find this very sad because the failure of Lego
to make money on licenced products if the falure of Lego to properly market
them and not a failure of the market.-Ken
|
They have stated on more than one occassion that they will not be dropping the
Star Wars or Harry Potter lines, both of which are in the top five best-selling
themes, and pulling in more money than they cost to produce. What they said was
that they would not be relying primarily on licensing deals, but that they would
continue to make them when they seemed appropriate (like Dora the Explorer).
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
Give me a break you cant compare a $300 collectable to a $90 toy. Every kid
wants a Ford Explorer too but they arent going to get one. The stores would
not have any trouble selling the product if Lego was any good at marketing.
|
Sets in the $90+ range sell in such small quantities that most stores wont even
stock them, which is why TRU can get away with jacking the price another $10
over MSRP. Comparing a $300 toy to a similar $90 toy is simply a matter of
scale. The Blockade Runner sold very well through S@H, but even with an
exclusive retail release, it sat on store shelves until Target got nervous
enough to clearance it. The Yoda sculpture did well at S@H, and probably about
as well in its exclusive retail release as most similarly-priced sets. The more
expensive a set is, the less likely it is that every store can sell even one
copy, and the more stores that get stuck clearancing their first shipment, the
more sense it makes to go exclusive through S@H. Once they sell through a few
batches, each store risks having to clearance the next shipment, and they know
it. In the end, its not what TLC wants to ship that matters so much as what
the major store chains want to buy. You cant put everything on TLCs shoulders
in this one. Stores want product that will sell fast enough to keep ahead of
the cost of having that shelf space available, and the original Hogwarts is
fading in popularity. They want something new, so theyre getting it.
And, BTW, there has never been a single moment in my life that I would have
wanted an Explorer. If I ever get a 4WD vehicle, Id want one thats not prone
to flipping, which pretty much rules out all SUVs except the H1. And when I was
a kid, it was all about having a Testarosa.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
|
In the end, its not what TLC wants to ship that
matters so much as what the major store chains want to buy. You cant put
everything on TLCs shoulders in this one. Stores want product that will
sell fast enough to keep ahead of the cost of having that shelf space
available, and the original Hogwarts is fading in popularity. They want
something new, so theyre getting it.
|
The store only sells merchandise. If its not selling then somebody is doing a
pretty poor job of marketing it. That would be... oh, yea the guys with the weak
shoulders... Hogwarts was expensive to produce because of the licencing fees.
Instead of selling to the maximum market thus maximizing the profit they are
watching it fade in popularity. That takes us back to marketing and those guys
with the weak shoulders again. You can can argue this but its foolish as by
Legos own admission they are failures at making a profit with licenced
lines.-Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
|
They do have too many colors right now. How useful is light-yellow?
Light-orange? What about bright-green?
|
I have no idea what brought you to that conclusion. One of the hottest sellers
keeping the Lego stors afloat right now is the pick a brick. People are
gobbeling up the colors you seem to not find useful.
|
as popular as it would be amongst
certain ranks of AFOLs to have both dark-grey and gunmetal-grey produced at
the same time, I have to agree that theyre still too similar to make
economic sense for TLC to keep both.
|
That is the whole point of this thread and you failed to make a single argument
supporting your opinion. I like gunmetal though. If we keep calling it that
instead of bley Lego is sure to get rid of it!
|
Ive been told face-to-face that TLC has purposefully underadvertised when
sets are selling fast enough to keep up with their production rates.
Takanuva sold well enough on his own, so all of the US BIONICLE advertisement
was geared towards the Rahkshi sets. Some areas of the world didnt get any
advertisement at all because everything sells pretty much as fast as they can
stock it. Its possible that this is the case with the HP sets.
|
Im sure the hundreds of people theyve layed of from their jobs with Lego
production would be happy to know this.
|
They have stated on more than one occassion that they will not be dropping
the Star Wars or Harry Potter lines, both of which are in the top five
best-selling themes, and pulling in more money than they cost to produce.
What they said was that they would not be relying primarily on licensing
deals, but that they would continue to make them when they seemed appropriate
(like Dora the Explorer).
|
You arnt keeping up with current events. With the layoffs at the top of the
company they said with no uncertain terms that they were dropping ALL licenced
lines as they were not making enough money. The new sets like the multi-purple
bus and Dora were planed far in advance of that anouncment. Once the licences
already paid for expire so do the associated lines.-Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
I have no idea what brought you to that conclusion. One of the hottest
sellers keeping the Lego stors afloat right now is the pick a brick. People
are gobbeling up the colors you seem to not find useful.
|
Theyre selling because theyre rare colors, not because theyre particularly
useful. And Id be surprised in a large number of them werent bought
specifically to put on Bricklink. I still dont see many MOCs that actually use
them.
|
That is the whole point of this thread and you failed to make a single
argument supporting your opinion. I like gunmetal though. If we keep
calling it that instead of bley Lego is sure to get rid of it!
|
You want supporting arguments? Fine. Theyd have to keep double stock of grey
resin on hand, since theyd have to purchase minimum quantities of each color.
That means theyd not only have to pay twice as much up front, but theyd also
have to devote twice as much space to storing the resin pellets. Theyd have to
devote twice as much space to storing finished parts, both in the manufacturing
plants and for the various Consumer Affairs divisions to pull replacement parts
from. Theyd have to keep track of which was which, and thats not as easy with
the light-greys as it is with other colors. Furthermore, having two colors that
are so similar would either mean that one of them would get used less in favor
of the other, or theyd both get used about half the time. In the former case,
the shorted color would be a lot less useful than the more heavily used color,
and in the latter case, both colors would be half as available as one unified
color would be, making it twice as hard to collect either of them. And, when
you look at the long history of the original colors, they are clearly more
useful at present than the new versions will be for years, so it makes more
sense to switch back now. As time goes on, and the new colors see use in higher
quantities and a wider variety of parts, it will stop making as much sense to
abandon them in favor of the original colors, and it will therefore be less
likely to happen. Good enough for you, or do you need more?
|
Im sure the hundreds of people theyve layed of from their jobs with Lego
production would be happy to know this.
|
As has been stated plenty of times before, the 2003 loss was every bit as much a
matter of flagging toy sales in general as it was bad business practices for
their specific company. Advertising might have helped boost business somewhat,
but they still would have had losses, and people still would have been laid off.
It still doesnt change the fact that a new Hogwarts is going to seriously
outsell a 2-year old Hogwarts in the current market, and well enough that the
extra cost of developing a new version will be reclaimed in short order. Kids
have had over two years now to find out about and purchase the original version.
If they still dont own it yet, the company shouldnt bank its future on them
all buying it sometime this year. The lifeblood of a toy company is new
product. Id still love to be able to buy the original Toa and Turaga sets, but
they had to make way for newer sets that would appeal to a wider range of fans
(i.e. those who already had the first batch).
|
You arnt keeping up with current events. With the layoffs at the top of the
company they said with no uncertain terms that they were dropping ALL
licenced lines as they were not making enough money. The new sets like the
multi-purple bus and Dora were planed far in advance of that anouncment. Once
the licences already paid for expire so do the associated lines.
|
They never said any such thing. The moment they announced that they were going
to concentrate on their core productes, there were rampant (and unfounded)
theories that this meant all licensed lines would be dropped immediately, and it
didnt take very long before such rumors were squashed (though, apparently, not
as effectively as theyd hoped, if you still believe theyre all going away).
If you read
this press release, the third paragraph reads:
This does not mean that the company will exclude that kind of stories and
themes, but just that the growth should be based on the fundamental products,
where sales do not to the same extent go up and down, depending on whether or
not there is a new movie this year.
I run a news site, so I try to keep regular tabs on major press releases like
this on general principle, but the instant the future of BIONICLE looked
uncertain (despite the fact that its the best-selling line in the entire LEGO
catalog), you better believe I paid extra close attention to this specific turn
of events.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
The store only sells merchandise. If its not selling then somebody is doing
a pretty poor job of marketing it.
|
Thats not always true. Ever heard of something called the Law of Supply and
Demand? Demand has dropped because all of the people who absolutely had to buy
it did. Then the people who kinda had to buy it did. Then the people who sorta
wanted to buy it did. Finally, people who were holding out until it hit
clearance prices did. The market for the original Hogwarts has shrunk
dramatically, whether youre willing to admit it or not. A brand-new Hogwarts
will enjoy the benefit of an mostly-unsaturated market. Yes, there will be
people who tell their kids that they already have a Hogwarts Castle and dont
need another, but there is no way on earth, short of selling it at reduced
price, that the original Hogwarts could possibly outsell a refreshed Hogwarts in
2004.
|
Hogwarts was expensive to produce because of the licencing fees.
|
Yup, the design process for a set of that size, the development of new pieces,
and the cost of actually manufacturing it have no bearing on how expensive it
was to produce. None whatsoever.
|
Instead of selling to the maximum market thus maximizing the profit they are
watching it fade in popularity.
|
So you think that maximizing the profit on a single set makes more sense than
maximizing the profit of the company as a whole? Why not switch over to only
producing new sets for a given theme every three years? That way you can make
sure that every possible customer will have a shot at buying one. Of course,
all of the buy everything customers will buy 1/3rd as much stuff, but who
cares? Its all about making sure that theres not one unsatiated customer left
on the face of the earth, even if it requires calling every family and asking
them if they still need a copy.
|
You can can argue this but its foolish as by Legos own admission they are
failures at making a profit with licenced lines.
|
Show me concrete proof of that statement. Show me where they specifically
stated that they cant make a profit at licensed lines. Star Wars is
profitable. Harry Potter is profitable. Theyre two of the top five
best-selling themes. Spiderman...well, Im sure its bringing in sales, but Im
not sure how many compared to the other two movie licenses (two sets wasnt
enough to hit the Top 5 list for 2002, and I havent seen one for 2003). Winnie
the Pooh was a bit problematic, but thats because Disney sold them the rights
to produce it when they didnt actually own said rights to sell. Galidor was a
flop, but thats because the TV show was, not because the sets were designed
poorly. Bob the Builder sold well, as Dora the Explorer likely will. The
Ferrari sets are drawing a lot of attention already, though some of the NASA
sets (the Mars mission sets, in particular) should have been released much
closer to the Rover landings.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
|
Theyre selling because theyre rare colors, not because theyre particularly
useful. And Id be surprised in a large number of them werent bought
specifically to put on Bricklink. I still dont see many MOCs that actually
use them.
|
Awfuly bullheaded of you just because YOU dont find them useful. Ive
wittnessed hundreds of PAB purchases and the overwelming majority of them are
because the people buying them because they enjoy them. As for MOCs Ive seen
many including a large scale Wizard of OZ Emerald City made largly of trans
green brick.
|
You want supporting arguments? Fine. Theyd have to keep double stock of
grey resin on hand, since theyd have to purchase minimum quantities of each
color. snip...yada yada yada...
Good enough for you, or do you need more?
|
Nice dissertation however it doesnt hold water. The Harry Potter car had to be
light blue. It the sense of the over all operation it didnt cost them any more
to make it in light blue instead of the original dark blue. Need more? Two words
Maersk Blue. They cant use it on models made for the public due to licencing
restrictions however they still make it for the model shops.
|
As has been stated plenty of times before, the 2003 loss was every bit as
much a matter of flagging toy sales in general as it was bad business
practices for their specific company. Advertising might have helped boost
business somewhat, but they still would have had losses, and people still
would have been laid off. It still doesnt change the fact that a new
Hogwarts is going to seriously outsell a 2-year old Hogwarts in the current
market, and well enough that the extra cost of developing a new version will
be reclaimed in short order. Kids have had over two years now to find out
about and purchase the original version. If they still dont own it yet, the
company shouldnt bank its future on them all buying it sometime this year.
The lifeblood of a toy company is new product.
|
If it was only 2003 it would be fine however 2003 was just the worst of its
mulit year decline. By the end of 2003 there were plenty of toy manufacturers
seeing sunny day ahead. The new Hogwarts will take off only due to sales to the
same customers. You seem to keep thinking every one knows what you know and
thinks what you think. There is a huge market out there that was never made
aware of the Lego Harry Potter line and that is where the stagnation came from.
|
|
You arnt keeping up with current events. With the layoffs at the top of the
company they said with no uncertain terms that they were dropping ALL
licenced lines as they were not making enough money. The new sets like the
multi-purple bus and Dora were planed far in advance of that anouncment.
Once the licences already paid for expire so do the associated lines.
|
They never said any such thing.
|
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=44690
QUOTE:
profits stagnated because of the higher cost of producing the new products. The
company now plans to stop making the electronics and movie tie-in products and
return to its core mission: producing colored plastic building blocks for
children.
When they say in their own words: The company now plans to stop making...
...movie tie-in products I would think they are going to stop making movie tie
in products.
|
I run a news site, so I try to keep regular tabs on major press releases like
this on general principle, but the instant the future of BIONICLE looked
uncertain (despite the fact that its the best-selling line in the entire
LEGO catalog), you better believe I paid extra close attention to this
specific turn of events.
|
Bionicle has never been in danger but you better watch the news closer.-Ken
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
The store only sells merchandise. If its not selling then somebody is doing
a pretty poor job of marketing it.
|
Thats not always true. Ever heard of something called the Law of Supply and
Demand? Demand has dropped because all of the people who absolutely had to
buy it did. Then the people who kinda had to buy it did. Then the people
who sorta wanted to buy it did. Finally, people who were holding out until
it hit clearance prices did. The market for the original Hogwarts has shrunk
dramatically, whether youre willing to admit it or not. A brand-new
Hogwarts will enjoy the benefit of an mostly-unsaturated market. Yes, there
will be people who tell their kids that they already have a Hogwarts Castle
and dont need another, but there is no way on earth, short of selling it at
reduced price, that the original Hogwarts could possibly outsell a refreshed
Hogwarts in 2004.
|
Of corse Ive heard of supply & demand. Im the first to admit the castle sales
slowed. That left Lego with two choices... 1)redesign the set 2)increase the
demand. One of these choices is signifgantly more costly. Since they are whining
about monetary loses the sensible thing to do would have been to make more
people aware of the original product thus increasing the demand.
|
So you think that maximizing the profit on a single set makes more sense than
maximizing the profit of the company as a whole? Why not switch over to only
producing new sets for a given theme every three years? That way you can
make sure that every possible customer will have a shot at buying one. Of
course, all of the buy everything customers will buy 1/3rd as much stuff,
but who cares? Its all about making sure that theres not one unsatiated
customer left on the face of the earth, even if it requires calling every
family and asking them if they still need a copy.
|
You dont seem to know as much about business as you think you do. Keeping the
original set would have greatly increased the profit margin while all the new
surrounding sets would have kept the buy everything crowd ocupied. I dont think
saving themselves from a very poor marketing plan would require calling every
family.
|
|
You can can argue this but its foolish as by Legos own admission they are
failures at making a profit with licenced lines.
|
Show me concrete proof of that statement
|
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=44690
profits stagnated because of the higher cost of producing the new products. The
company now plans to stop making the electronics and movie tie-in products...
Concrete enough?-Ken
|
|
|
"Ken Nagel" <knandjn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:HtwMIE.4CE@lugnet.com...
[ ... snipped ... ]
>
> Nice dissertation however it doesn't hold water. The Harry Potter car had to be
> light blue. It the sense of the over all operation it didn't cost them any more
> to make it in light blue instead of the original dark blue. Need more? Two words
> "Maersk Blue". They can't use it on models made for the public due to licencing
> restrictions however they still make it for the model shops.
[ ... snipped ... ]
Maybe but I don't think so. Over the years there has been speculation that
the use of Maersk Blue was restricted my Maersk, has there ever been any
sort of official statement to the fact?
See this article: http://news.lugnet.com/lego/?n=748
From what I understand, the Model Shops can't get Maersk Blue any more
either making it another "retired" color. Since there isn't any "official"
word on this, it is based on hearsay but IMHO, the introduction of medium
blue is a change in color very similar to the changes made to the greys.
YMMV.
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, Mike Walsh wrote:
>
> "Ken Nagel" <knandjn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:HtwMIE.4CE@lugnet.com...
>
> [ ... snipped ... ]
>
> >
> > Nice dissertation however it doesn't hold water. The Harry Potter car had to be
> > light blue. It the sense of the over all operation it didn't cost them any more
> > to make it in light blue instead of the original dark blue. Need more? Two words
> > "Maersk Blue". They can't use it on models made for the public due to licencing
> > restrictions however they still make it for the model shops.
>
>
> [ ... snipped ... ]
>
> Maybe but I don't think so. Over the years there has been speculation that
> the use of Maersk Blue was restricted my Maersk, has there ever been any
> sort of official statement to the fact?
>
> See this article: http://news.lugnet.com/lego/?n=748
>
> From what I understand, the Model Shops can't get Maersk Blue any more
> either making it another "retired" color. Since there isn't any "official"
> word on this, it is based on hearsay but IMHO, the introduction of medium
> blue is a change in color very similar to the changes made to the greys.
> YMMV.
>
> Mike
Hope you don't mind if I chime in on the subject!
The Maersk blue color was made to match exactly the official color of the Maersk
company to use in sets using the Maersk name.
The color was not available to the LEGOLAND modelshops until the Danish park
wanted to make a large airplane for their miniland airport cluster, a Maersk
Seeland airplane that is...
So, they were able to get elements produced in Maersk that were not previously
available in the sets. The Lego people can do this for a small fee for switching
the presses around. This was around the time that models were being produced for
the soon to be opened Windsor and Carlsbad parks. The model builders liked the
option of a different color (at this time the majority of the models being
produced used only 10 basic colors: white, beige, light grey, red, yellow, blue,
brown, black, dark grey, and green).
Since, Maersk blue is the "official" color of the Maersk company, it cannot be
used in any set that can make money for the Lego company, unless it is a Maersk
promotional set. That meant, that any set they would want to produce with a
light blue color would have to a different light blue than Maesrk!
This all happened way before any of the color changes we are dealing with now
took place. The color was officially discontinued once the Maersk promotion was
done (not being in the LEGO color pallet for around 3 years). Model shops were
then allowed to use the remaining stock of brick that had been produced, but
could not get more made as was possible before.
Hope this helps!
Bill
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
Of corse Ive heard of supply & demand. Im the first to admit the castle
sales slowed. That left Lego with two choices... 1)redesign the set
2)increase the demand. One of these choices is signifgantly more costly.
Since they are whining about monetary loses the sensible thing to do would
have been to make more people aware of the original product thus increasing
the demand.
|
Both cost considerable amounts of money. In fact, Id be surprised if designing
a new Hogwarts didnt cost significantly less than a huge advertising campaign
would (and anything less isnt going to have the impact that you seem to
desire). Major advertisers are capable of spending millions of dollars per day
just to push their product, and if you want to really hit a nation-wide audience
(much less a world-wide one), youve got to play with the big boys. Hogwarts
Castle costs $90 in the US. Retail products generally have a 50% markup over
manufacturer price, so that means about $45 per Hogwarts goes back to TLC.
Well be (very) generous and pretend that half of that is clean profit about
production/packaging/shipping costs. Thats $22.50 per set that would stick
around after expenses. At that level of profit (which is unreasonable), theyd
need to sell about 45,000 copies per day just to recoup their investment on a
measly $1 million/day advertising campaign without actually making any profit.
The entire run of the set was only about 22 times that amount, which means that
a 1-month ad campaign would have exceeded the amount of revenue that they pulled
in with the entire original run. When you consider that theyre probably only
pulling in a few dollars of profit per Hogwarts, they start losing money in
under a week. And that assumes that the major store chains would even bother to
reorder it (and, since they probably wouldnt, all that advertising would be
wasted money). Or they can invest a much smaller amount of money in designing
and producing a completely new Hogwarts that will attach to the original
section, and know that theyve got a 100% unsaturated market that should buy
well enough copies to turn a profit.
|
You dont seem to know as much about business as you think you do. Keeping
the original set would have greatly increased the profit margin while all the
new surrounding sets would have kept the buy everything crowd ocupied. I
dont think saving themselves from a very poor marketing plan would require
calling every family.
|
You dont seem to understand the economics of selling an expensive toy.
Hogwarts nearly broke 1 million copies produced. Impressive, huh? Well, for a
$90 toy, yes it is. However, as of a year ago, the BIONICLE line has sold as
many as 34 can/pod sets per minute (number quoted to me at Toy Fair 2003), which
equates to roughly the same dollar value as the entire Hogwarts run in about 20
days, and an average of about 1.5 million total copies of each can/pod set
produced. And, given the way things usually work, a higher percentage of profit
on all of those sets. Judging by my own experiences as a kid, the biggest value
of the larger $90+ sets is that they generate a lot more interest in the rest of
the line, and thereby cause the smaller sets to sell a lot better. In other
words, its advertisement that you get paid for instead of the other way around.
|
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=44690
profits stagnated because of the higher cost of producing the new products.
The company now plans to stop making the electronics and movie tie-in
products...
Concrete enough?-Ken
|
Nope. TLC trumps Business Newswire when it
comes to statements about what products they will or will not continue to
produce, and theyve confirmed that SW, HP, and mindstorms are all still part of
TLC. Besides, you pay for the full term of the license whether you actually
produce anything or not. Dropping movie licenses like those at this stage would
be a horrifically bad business decision. Theyre both selling very well (top 5
best-sellers in 2002, as I keep mentioning), theyre both profitable (despite
what Business Newswire assumed from the various quotes that they included), and
theyve both got years left to go before the licenses run out.
|
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
|
Awfuly bullheaded of you just because YOU dont find them useful. Ive
wittnessed hundreds of PAB purchases and the overwelming majority of them are
because the people buying them because they enjoy them. As for MOCs Ive seen
many including a large scale Wizard of OZ Emerald City made largly of
trans green brick.
|
Go back and reread exactly what I said, as Im pretty sure you didnt understand
it. I mentioned specifically light yellow, light orange, and bright green.
Why? Because theyre all about the different from basic yellow, basic orange,
and basic green as gunmetal grey is from dark-grey. Those three specific colors
dont have much added value over the original three, and I dont see the point
in their continued use (I also dont see many instances of MOC use).
Trans-green, however, is a completely unique color. There is no other
transparent color that at all resembles trans-green. Im not sure I entirely
sure why they felt the need to have both trans-light blue (which looks
flourescent) and trans-flourescent blue (which doesnt) at the same time, since
theyre pretty close, but at least they look very different under black-light.
|
Nice dissertation however it doesnt hold water. The Harry Potter car had to
be light blue. It the sense of the over all operation it didnt cost them
any more to make it in light blue instead of the original dark blue.
|
I didnt say anything about light-blue, either. Light-blue looks significantly
different from basic blue, and Im fine with its continued use. Again, reread
what I wrote, because I dont think you understood it the first time.
|
Need more? Two words Maersk Blue. They cant use it on models made for the
public due to licencing restrictions however they still make it for the
model shops.
|
Actually, word is that they stopped producing it even for them. Oddly enough,
those guys pretty much universally went with Maersk Blue over light-blue, from
what I understand, but that still leaves them in a situation where they
preferred one color over a very similar color, but they had the advantage of
being able to choose their favorite solely on which shade they actually
preferred because they never had to worry about whether a specific piece had
ever been produced in that color.
|
If it was only 2003 it would be fine however 2003 was just the worst of its
mulit year decline. By the end of 2003 there were plenty of toy manufacturers
seeing sunny day ahead. The new Hogwarts will take off only due to sales to
the same customers. You seem to keep thinking every one knows what you know
and thinks what you think.
|
No, but after collecting Star Wars action figures for close to ten years
straight, Ive heard the same complaints coming from the fans, and the same
explanations coming from the company.
|
There is a huge market out there that was never made aware of the Lego Harry
Potter line and that is where the stagnation came from.
|
Possibly, but you cant know that for sure. You say there are a lot of kids who
dont even know that LEGO HP exists. Does that mean that if they did each and
every one of them would own a Hogwarts by now? Very likely not. Id actually
venture a guess that the people who are still unaware of the LEGO HP line this
far down the road would be even less likely to buy the larger sets than those
who knew about it earlier in the game.
|
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=44690
QUOTE:
profits stagnated because of the higher cost of producing the new products.
The company now plans to stop making the electronics and movie tie-in
products and return to its core mission: producing colored plastic building
blocks for children.
When they say in their own words: The company now plans to stop making...
...movie tie-in products I would think they are going to stop making movie
tie in products.
|
Ah, but they didnt say that in their own words. That portion of text was
written solely by Business Newswire, which apparently got the story wrong. They
also said that TLC would stop making any electronic toys (in the portion that
you clipped out of the middle), but weve since received confirmation
specifically that both Mindstorms and Harry Potter would continue in the press
release I linked to. Star Wars has also been confirmed to not be in danger,
along with reaffirmation of MS and HP, in this post by Jake McKee. If hes willing to risk his good name, on LUGNET, by
stating point blank that none of those three lines are going away (again, no
mention of Spiderman...), Im betting he really, really, really means it.
|
Bionicle has never been in danger but you better watch the news closer.-Ken
|
Theres a log in your eye. From the way the very first statements were issued,
BIONICLE was very much in a risky situation. Everything pointed to TLC
returning to their core products. Whats a core product? BIONICLE features a
huge number of new pieces each year (more in 3 years than Star Wars in 5), it
uses very few basic System bricks, it relies heavily on collectibility as a way
of generating interest, and there is a certain amount of fad status to it.
Core products looked like it might not include BIONICLE. Since then weve
found out that core products includes nearly everything they produce, and that
no radical changes are being implemented. Theyre just going to be a bit more
careful about securing new licenses.
For the record, the instant the future of BIONICLE was uncertain in my eyes, I
e-mailed one of my contacts in the PR department, and was assured that neither
BIONICLE nor Star Wars would be cancelled as a result of this turn of events.
|
|
|