| |
"Kelly McKiernan" <kelly@anagrafyxx.com> wrote in message news:Hx9zyp.13J@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.lego, David Laswell wrote:
> >
> > Why stop there? Call it Nazi Death-Slaver Grey and you get the whole
> > spectrum.
>
>
> OK, now that's just over the line. Assigning a color as "Nazi" is bad enough,
> but adding "Death Slaver" to it pushes it over. Don't like the color change?
> Fine. But I personally take exception when someone associates a relatively minor
> change in LEGO materials to WWII Nazi slavery. It's simply not appropriate when
> discussing a [toy], especially one with a massive market share in Germany as
> well as the rest of Europe.
>
> Kelly
Isn't it even worse when certain Nazis take a few newsgroup posts a little too seriously? ;) It's not like someone's really going
to connect LEGO with Nazis.
--
Markham Carroll
|
|
| |
You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color change
will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color change
(although, yes, the implementation fell flat), and as such we are going to stay
the course. I know this isn’t the answer you’re hoping for, and I know very very
well that many of you aren’t happy about this news. I also know the reasons why
you aren’t happy. Rather than cover them all again, I will skip straight to the
good news.
Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
several things have been agreed upon.
* The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
"universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
ones.
* A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
* We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
I know this isn’t the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but hopefully
this bears some good news for you.
Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
wounds. Thanks for your patience while we worked on getting this put to bed once
and for all. As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
internally who understand your passion and interest.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development Team
|
|
| |
(snippage)
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
9 volt track is a must. How about releasing different track geometry at the
same time. If you are going to make a special run any way....
Mike
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
>
> I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
>
> Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color change
> will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color change
> (although, yes, the implementation fell flat), and as such we are going to stay
> the course. I know this isn’t the answer you’re hoping for, and I know very very
> well that many of you aren’t happy about this news. I also know the reasons why
> you aren’t happy. Rather than cover them all again, I will skip straight to the
> good news.
>
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
>
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
>
> I know this isn’t the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but hopefully
> this bears some good news for you.
>
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
> wounds. Thanks for your patience while we worked on getting this put to bed once
> and for all. As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> internally who understand your passion and interest.
>
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
Hi Jake,
So, in summary, it was a slight screw-up borne of good intentions, it's too late
to fix it, but it'll never happen again, and further, future ideas borne of good
intentions will be bounced off everyone.
OK, then.
Tell you what. Hire me to design original Classic Space sets for
limited-edition, AFOL-targeted markets, and I will not only adapt to, but
develop a searing, passionate love for the new light gray.
Seeing that unreleased set #1526 box Huw Millington snapped a picture of made me
realize that it's not all about the colors that make me jazzed about Lego. The
vibe goes way beyond that. It's all about new, insanely cool designs that you
can look forward to every year. It's that you can just BANK on it. #1526
brought all of that back. It'd be so cool to feel that every year.
I desperately want that feeling again. And my head would just pop if I could be
a part of delivering that feeling to others! I don't build in any other style
than Classic Space. If you ever consider developing any new product in a
classic style, just know that I live only a few dozen miles from Enfield. :o)
--Dave
member #95
P.S. Sorry about the threadjack, especially since this is such an early reply
to Jake's note.
|
|
| |
Ok, all basic brick sizes are a must for old grey and brown. All basic plate
sizes are a must for old grey and brown. All basic style bricks and plates are
a must for old grey and brown (arches, slopes, tiles).
All Minifig accessories, technic pieces, bionicle pieces, specialty theme pieces
like star wars engines and star wars 'guns' can be new grey and brown.
LEGO has really let me down.
If they can make track pieces in the old grey, then they still have the ability
to make all bricks in that color, and presumably brown as well. Why going back
is so hard for them I'll never know.
I do know that I will never spend as much money on LEGO as I used to.
--Anthony
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
.....
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
.....
Thanks for the update Jake.
I think that the train track is a key item. Public displays of mottled layouts
would not look good. Buildings in new shades of gray sharing layouts with
buildings in old shades of gray would look a lot better side ny side than
layouts made of mismatched pieces of track.
I have no problem with the new grays in the sense that they are just another
color to use. Offering temporary packs of old grays is handy and I have taken
advantage of that to finish some items started in the older colors. Any chance
the lifetime of those packs could be extended? How is the 10,000 bag stock level
doing?
I had a brief chat with one of the park's model shop staff about the new colors
and was told that lack of supplies of old grays would cause problems for
mini-land maintenance. Any chance that runs of the older colors might be done
for the parks which might be used to replenish the S@H stock levels? I noted
that there were in fact nine or so colors which had been withdrawn from the
park's color chart, but that the other six were colors we don't see much of
anyhow.
In terms of the internal planning which goes on to schedule parts being produced
in specific colors, how long before we see a comprehensive range of all the
different parts available in the new grays? I noted that some parts weren't
scheduled for production for a couple of years yet. That means it may take us a
while to build up our stocks of different types to be able to finish creations
made of the new colors. Do the set designers try to use a broad selection of
parts to ensure they become available in different colors?
Again, thanks for keeping us in the loop,
JB
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
<snip>
> and for all. As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> internally who understand your passion and interest.
>
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
Hey Jake,
Many thanks for the 'heads up'. Like many others, I agree that the 9v track is
pretty important to keep as the original dk gray.
Other than that, I've got nothing.
As an aside, I agree with Mike on the track geometry--If you want a good start,
the modifications to the switches as shown on this page--
http://sparky.i989.net/ltrackmod.htm
would be nice :) This would accomplish a few things--you get the half curved
piece, and the wye can be put together in a variety of different ways, including
the original configuration. (and I wouldn't have to destroy any more curved
track pieces to make 'em)
Take care,
Dave K
|
|
| |
Hi, Jake,
first of all: I know you're only the messenger. Take the bullets to
those who are responsible for this.
Jake McKee wrote:
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
<sarcasm>
Translation: Even the dumbest managers can learn a little from an
outright desaster. It may be late, but what the f..., its only
customers. Just put up some policies for the next time we wreck something.
</sarcasm>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
OK. Now: which other colours are marked "universal" - or more important:
which are not? Could you clarify about the "universal" status of the
core colours, especially white, which was or maybe still is on the list
of colours to be replaced?
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Of course I can say "the whole range of parts!". Who are you to stop me? ;)
Bricks, plates, slopes, arches, most of the modified bricks and plates.
Anything short of "all" makes no real sense.
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
Well, at least none of the plans are known to you. The information
pathways at TLC are wonderous at best, and non-existing on average, so
the decision to make the studs square in the future will hit those who
are in the front like you when it is done and over. And, as you might
have noticed, the community will know this quite early (although we
learned about this desaster way too late...)
And the one and only conclusion they should have drawn from this
catastrophy is not "ask some more people before we do this" but "don't
do this at all".
Therefor, it is (again) too little, too late.
> I know this isn’t the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but hopefully
> this bears some good news for you.
Simply: No.
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
> wounds. Thanks for your patience while we worked on getting this put to bed once
> and for all. As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> internally who understand your passion and interest.
Maybe it is put to bed for the management. This just shows that those in
charge did not understand the issue.
But the issue is still alive and will burn on. At least with us.
Yours, Christian Treczoks
|
|
| |
Thanks for the update Jake, wish it was better news.
I have to say that I fall into the category of people that feel this change
is in no way acceptable. Your statement that "some good thinking" went into
this only strengthens my opinion that the designers and executives are
completely and totally incompetent. There is no possible explanation you,
or anyone else, could offer that would legitimize a change to colors that
are not compatible with their original versions. These new colors make the
old versions look terrible, and this could easily have been prevented! Are
the Lego designers and executives color blind?
Making these colors "universal" is not the answer. Making the original
versions of these colors "universal" is the correct choice, but it is clear
to me that this company has no idea what its own products are all about.
Proof is in the financial situation that Lego currently faces. I am sure it
will only get worse.
I can only hope that enough consumer faith remains in Lego that this mistake
will one day be corrected, however I do not think that will happen. Until
that time you have lost me as a customer. It is clear however that people
like myself are not at all important to this company anyway.
No longer a happy AFOL,
Greg
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:Hx8uCD.19rs@lugnet.com...
> You'd think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change • and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
>
> I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
>
> Bad news first - After much discussion and debate internally, the color • change
> will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color change
> (although, yes, the implementation fell flat), and as such we are going to • stay
> the course. I know this isn't the answer you're hoping for, and I know • very very
> well that many of you aren't happy about this news. I also know the • reasons why
> you aren't happy. Rather than cover them all again, I will skip straight • to the
> good news.
>
> Good news - based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are • clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly • aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your • concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be • classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these • universal
> ones.
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will • likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v • train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on • which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, • you
> can't say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
>
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, • we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that • there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
>
> I know this isn't the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but • hopefully
> this bears some good news for you.
>
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don't mean to • re-open
> wounds. Thanks for your patience while we worked on getting this put to • bed once
> and for all. As I've said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> internally who understand your passion and interest.
>
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term.
IMO train track (you can ignore the cross track) and the current "retro" brick
and plate packs, plus the 2x4 brick packs, would suffice. Those cover most of
what folks tend to use in bulk. For most everything else we're just going to
have to rely on the aftermarket - which fortunately is pretty good these days.
I'd like to suggest another avenue for keeping the old colors alive: continue to
use them in future Legends sets. That would broaden - but hopefully in a more
controlled manner for TLC - the range of available parts and hopefully go a long
way (?) toward appeasing e.g. the castle builders. Yes, it's more runs of more
parts with yet another color, but as long as you're maintaining the pellet
supply stream for the above anyway, it shouldn't be any different than switching
to one of the umpteen-dozen other colors in use today.
Steve [GMLTC]
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
Why not a Lego bunker - there's a few here who could help you build one ;0)
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
I think we'd all like clarification on which current colours will be
"universal"...
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Well yes, all of them, but I have a suggestion. Why don't Lego release a few
different elements in the classic colours each year on a limited run, changing
the elements each year so that people can "look forward" to seeing what elements
Lego decides to choose each year. Creates a limited supply for the demand...
Tracey
|
|
| |
> > Bad news first - After much discussion and debate internally, the color • change
> > will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color change
Jake - get ready for some more griping. I hope you will continue to forward
these gripe emails to the decision makers on this matter.
Yes, this did open new wounds and I'm still astounded that TLC does not get
it.
But I would also be interested in what kind of "good thinking" went into
this. Why did Lego do this? Why take something that has been stable for 25+
years and suddenly change it?
There has to be a better reason than "focus groups, etc." Reasons given up
to now are still not satisfactory.
It comes down to this - my collection and my children's collection of gray
pieces, amassed over 20 years, no longer matches what Lego is producing. We
have a hard enough time finding the right pieces in the right color in the
sets that are currently produced.
Now I have to go to the secondary market for gray and other changed colors.
__This is money that would otherwise be going to purchase new TLC
products.__
And I don't like the hints that other colors may be changed. I purchase sets
for parts. And often I will purchase multiple copies of a set to get parts
that are complimentary to those I already have in my collection. (Roof
pieces are a good example.)
Why should I purchase new sets if the colors are going to change?
SYSTEM has been broken.
Bryan
|
|
| |
Jake-
Very good news! Thanks. Light and dark grays are our favorite colors for making
large real-world models. Here is what would keep us building for a long time to
come in dark gray:
- 1x1 bricks
- 1x2 bricks
- 1x3 bricks
- 1x4 bricks
- 1x6 bricks
- 1x8 bricks
- 1x1 plates
- 1x2 plates
- 1x3 plates
- 1x4 plates
- 1x6 plates
- 1x8 plates
- 2x2 plates
- 2x3 plates
- 2x4 plates
- 2x6 plates
- 2x8 plates
- 4x4 plates
- 4x6 plates
- 4x8 plates
- all tiles including 2x2 round
- 1x4 plate hinge
- 1x4 brick hinge
- 8x8 modified plate grille
- RR track straight, curve, cross, switches
- 1x2s with horizontal grooves on one side and vertical grooves on the other
- 1x1 headlight bricks
- all Technic Bricks (1x1 through 1x16)
- all straight lift arms
- 1x1 round plates
- 1x1 round bricks
- 2x2 round plates
- 2x2 round bricks
Considering there are 3,500+ elements out there, this is a pretty short list!
My concern: We buy 10s of thousands of new bricks each year, but mostly on
Bricklink. The promise of “bulk” buying from LEGO Direct never materialized --
not for those of us who think “bulk” starts at 1000 pieces. (I have bought as
many as 3000 2x4 dark gray plates at one time). If these limited edition old
gray parts are only made available via S@H at current retail prices, then to me
it’s like they don’t exist. Why not recognize that since this is going to be a
niche/specialty product that it can be sold in lots big enough that let you get
the price down? Perhaps you could just accept quarterly automated orders in
units of 1K or 10K pieces and build-them-to-order. Perhaps LUGNET or ILTCO or a
“blessed” few BrickLink stores could handle aggregating orders from the small
fry.
Thanks for staying with this!
Check out our latest dark gray creation at
http://www.scltc.org/pages/galleries/images.asp?ImageID={E6998D92-8EBF-4CEA-BD33-050A2D810DF7}
We thought it might be our last large dark gray construction, but now maybe not.
This assembly of structures is captioned “Ode to Dark Grey”
http://www.scltc.org/pages/galleries/images.asp?ImageID={9E125241-7BA2-4CA6-BFAD-D5495893B0CE}
-Ted
|
|
| |
Hello!
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
Fine. Becoming aware of something usually is a good first step into a better
direction.
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
Yeah, great! We (the AFOLs) fight against those new colours and you (TLC) make
them even more solid and declare them made for eternity? Calling that "good
news" is sheer sneer, isn't it?
Bye
Jojo
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Christian Treczoks wrote:
> Jake McKee wrote:
>
> > * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> > "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> > course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> > ones.
> OK. Now: which other colours are marked "universal" - or more important:
> which are not? Could you clarify about the "universal" status of the
> core colours, especially white, which was or maybe still is on the list
> of colours to be replaced?
I was wondering about white...can white be anything other than...well, white?
:0?
Tracey
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
>
> I come to you with a final update • SNIP
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
This is fairly disheartening. Comming up with names like "Universal colors" is a
big part of the financial problems Lego is having. Duplo for instance has been
stuck with so many diffrent labels that many consumers can't find it if they
want to. That being said it is not a question of "which parts" but of "which
situation". Fantasy parts IE: bionicle can be any color you want. The Lego
dolphin would look ridiculous in blue-grey. The Santa Fe sets would looks
rediculous in blue grey. I could go on and on but hopefully at some point
someone will get it.-Ken
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
The first item on your list of "good news" confuses me. Are you saying that
these three colors are now instant classic colors and only they will remain
unchanged? What about white, black, red, yellow, blue and green? Those are
also core colors.
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Triangular and rectangular BURPS along with the basic brick packs you already
have are a must, I think:
http://peeron.com/inv/parts/6082
http://peeron.com/inv/parts/6083
The old dark gray makes these parts much more useful for organic MOCs like
landscaping.
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
I have participated in a focus group before. I am not convinced of their
legitimacy for determining anything worthwhile. I'm sure that some are better
designed than others and it is encouraging that you want to broaden the audience
in them. Has TLC considered using a LUGNET newsgroup as a focus group? That
would give them a broad range of opinion in at least the AFOL segment.
--
Thomas Main
thomasmain@myrealbox.com
|
|
| |
Tracey Greenwood wrote:
> > OK. Now: which other colours are marked "universal" - or more important:
> > which are not? Could you clarify about the "universal" status of the
> > core colours, especially white, which was or maybe still is on the list
> > of colours to be replaced?
I was about to ask the very same question, Christian was faster...
>
> I was wondering about white...can white be anything other than...well, white?
Actually LEGO white is slightly creamy. They can make it a bit bluish,
colder. That would match 'cold' gray better.
--
Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Bryan Kinkel wrote:
> But I would also be interested in what kind of "good thinking" went into
> this. Why did Lego do this? Why take something that has been stable for 25+
> years and suddenly change it?
Well, somewhere in all the "good thinking" you will probably find the word
"Bionicle". Not even Jake would be able to put enough spin on that for us AFOLs
to swallow it... ;-) Hence, the reasoning will remain a mystery to us.
At least I have Classic Coke,
Mark
BTW, you can buy train track in dark bluish gray now:
http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=2865
http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=2867
|
|
| |
Mark Riley wrote:
> Well, somewhere in all the "good thinking" you will probably find the word
> "Bionicle". Not even Jake would be able to put enough spin on that for us AFOLs
> to swallow it... ;-)
But, I know it's a blasphemy, but I think for Bionicle and Technic the
new colours will look better. I've got new Toa Nuju and it looks good
with the new colours.
> BTW, you can buy train track in dark bluish gray now:
Anybody knows why Peeron is calling the new colors DkStone and MdStone?
DkSteel would be better, wouldn't it?
--
Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
|
|
| |
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:Hx8uCD.19rs@lugnet.com...
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will • likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v • train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on • which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, • you
> can't say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
> Jake
I had a good think, purely and selfishly as a castle builder, armour,
weapons etc, they will be fine in the new grey, no problems there. Without
being obtuse and asking for grey horses or brown doors ('Door 1 x 4 x 6')
which have never been made (and would be equally good in the new colours),
I'd have to say keep the new bulk packs in production and maybe throw an
'arches; set or the like into the mix. Basic bricks is what people want :)
.. oh and keep them coming in the Pick a brick
--
James Stacey
------
www.minifig.co.uk
Lugnet Member #925
I'm a citizen of Legoland travellin' Incommunicado
|
|
| |
Jake contacted me and has asked me to post my opinion as to what specific parts
I'd like to see offered in Bulk that would make the Castle people happy, much
like the old grey train track makes the train people happy.
He suggested maybe Castle Wall pieces. Old grey Castle Wall pieces, in my
opinion, are rather meaningless without the basic bricks in the same color to
use along side them. A New grey Castle Wall Piece bulk pack (which he later
suggested) would be nice for builders, I'm sure, but I would imagine only for
those builders who are just now starting to build Castle MOCs and don't have a
substantial amount of old grey, and wouldn't be a big hit with the long time
castle builders more fond of the old grey.
He then suggested maybe an armor accessory. Old grey Castle Armor bulk packs
would be great, but in my opinion, New grey Castle Armor bulk packs would be
great too. Minifig accessories are, to me, the only thing that I'd be willing
let LEGO change the color of. The new dark and light greys are very metallic
looking, and would work well for armor and weapons which, of course, are
supposed to be metal.
We castle people would love more armor and weapon bulk packs, but I think we'd
want them regardless of which color of grey they were made in.
So the question then was, what specific part would I want? Well, like Train
Track, only those parts that you do not actually use in conjunction with new
grey would be acceptable in old grey. What I mean is, you don't use train track
in a MOC, typically. Train track is used with other train track, but for the
most part all other MOCs are not a permanent part of the track and vice-versa.
That being said, the only real parts that I can see LEGO releasing in the old
grey that would work well for Castle would be Minifig accessories. My reasoning
is that all other possible Castle Parts are typically used along side other
bricks, there are no real stand alone Castle parts that I can think of that
would be a good release in a bulk pack in old grey.
HOWEVER...
I don't think it'd really be worth a special production run of old grey to make
minifig (Castle) accessories.
So my official suggestion? I have two.
1. Least important. Big Grey Baseplates in the original color.
2. Most important. Make the bulk packs offered in the 10,000 limited production
run in the old light grey, old dark grey, and old brown (were they offerend in
old brown?) a permanent offereing from LEGO Direct.
As for other Castle people, I'm sure they'll reply here on Lugnet as to their
opinion.
The members of Classic-Castle have been asked to share their opinion as to what
part or parts they'd like to see in a bulk old grey or brown pack, and you can
see that thread here:
http://www.classic-castle.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13521
--Anthony
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Bryan Kinkel wrote:
>
> > But I would also be interested in what kind of "good thinking" went into
> > this. Why did Lego do this? Why take something that has been stable for 25+
> > years and suddenly change it?
>
> Well, somewhere in all the "good thinking" you will probably find the word
> "Bionicle". Not even Jake would be able to put enough spin on that for us AFOLs
> to swallow it... ;-) Hence, the reasoning will remain a mystery to us.
I'm going to be answering some of the questions brought up in this thread as
best as I can throughout the day and week. But let me say that I take issue with
that idea that I "spin" anything.
I don't try to, nor do I feel like I spin or in any way lie to this community. I
have a mantra that I maintain an "open and honest relationship" with this
community. Over almost 4 years of working for LEGO and with this community, I
feel like I've done a very good job of sticking to that mantra.
There are times when I've delivered answers/updates that you don't like, or
perhaps don't even believe. But that fact is, I've never, ever lied to this
community. But please don't equate me delivering an answer to you don't like
with me dealing in half-truths, lies, or spin.
To the question about "good thinking", no matter what the answer is, anything I
say will upset many of you. I can fully and totally understand that. Please
don't think I'm trying to get anyone to stop sharing their thoughts on this, or
any other issue. (Anyone who knows me, knows that I'm nothing if not completely
open to hear and pass along your concerns) I will work on answering this
question soon, but I want to make absolutely sure I am saying what I mean by
"good thinking" exactly right. Text is a hard medium to communicate in, and I
want to make sure I'm being clear. (This isn't spinning, it's ensuring clarity
in a charged situation)
OK, back to reading this thread! :)
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
(snip)
This is a fairly radical opinion, I guess, but I'm not convinced that the 9V
track is one of the "key" pieces to keep in production in old dark grey. I know
it's different but frankly, this is an area where reality DOES vary. Railroads
replace ties all the time, and ties weather at different rates, even concrete
ones.
Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more important, than
the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
|
|
| |
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:Hx8uCD.19rs@lugnet.com...
[ ... snipped ... ]
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will • likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v • train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on • which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, • you
> can't say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
All five of the current 9v track elements should continue to be produced in
the original dark grey color. Just producing straights and/or curves
(although there are probably enough curves floating around) isn't
sufficient.
Additionally, like Thomas Main suggested, I'd like to see BURPs, both
shapes, available in both light gray and dark gray. I'd also like to see
the large grey baseplate remain available in the original color as well
although that one wouldn't be nearly as high on the wish list as train track
and BURPs.
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, • we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that • there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
That is good news.
[ ... snipped ... ]
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don't mean to • re-open
> wounds. Thanks for your patience while we worked on getting this put to • bed once
> and for all. As I've said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> internally who understand your passion and interest.
[ ... snipped ... ]
While I know many in the community hoped the answer would be for TLC to
issue a response such as "you were right, we were wrong, we're switching
back" or something to that effect, I didn't expect it would happen.
While I don't agree with the color change I am willing to accept it an move
on but I would like TLC to make it easier for me to embrace the color
change. Right now I have a few parts in these new colors. I don't have
enough of them to make much use of them so they are no different to me than
some of the oddball Belville colors I have in my collection.
I would like to see TLC issue a bulk tub which contains a good assortment
(not a tub of 1x1s like 4407 is) of bricks, plates, slopes, in the new
colors. I don't know how well these would sell on the shelf at Target,
probably not well at all. If they were augmented with some castle walls,
turets, and some castle figs, they could be marketed as a Castle "Designer
Set". For those of us who are not castle people, we could still get a good
quantity of bricks and plates and probably find "homes" for the other stuff
we didn't want.
So I am asking TLC to help me make lemonade out of what is now a small
basket of lemons. If you want me to embrace the new colors, make them
readily available in a broad palette of elements and I'll get on board. If
I need to part sets out to get them, then it will be years before I have a
suitable supply to build with.
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, Johannes Koehler wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> > Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> > the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> > the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> > several things have been agreed upon.
>
> Fine. Becoming aware of something usually is a good first step into a better
> direction.
...and ensuring issues like this don't happen again.
> > * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> > "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> > course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> > ones.
>
> Yeah, great! We (the AFOLs) fight against those new colours and you (TLC) make
> them even more solid and declare them made for eternity? Calling that "good
> news" is sheer sneer, isn't it?
Only if you choose to view it that way. (I tend to be a "on the bright side...."
kind of guy) To me, this is the AFOLs saying something (we're upset that things
changed suddenly), and the company reacting ( locking these new colors so that
you feel confident that we aren't going to change them again, and never again,
will we make changes like this without AFOL input)
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> Only if you choose to view it that way. (I tend to be a "on the bright side...."
> kind of guy) To me, this is the AFOLs saying something (we're upset that things
> changed suddenly), and the company reacting ( locking these new colors so that
> you feel confident that we aren't going to change them again, and never again,
> will we make changes like this without AFOL input)
>
> Jake
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
With all due respect, Jake, this doesn't make me feel better. Saying 'Oops,
it'll never happen again' doesn't really mean anything to me, because the change
has already happened. If LEGO changes the colors again, what do I care, I don't
plan to have a huge number of the new grey bricks anyway, another change to a
third color won't affect me.
However, again with all due respect, nothing against you, Jake, changing back
the colors and THEN saying 'Oops, it'll never happen again' would have meaning,
would have value, and would build goodwill between LEGO and the AFOL community.
At least that's my opinion.
--Anthony
|
|
| |
"Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@ascentialsoftwareDOTcom> wrote in
message news:Hx91Ap.Cx9@lugnet.com...
> (snip)
>
> This is a fairly radical opinion, I guess, but I'm not convinced that the • 9V
> track is one of the "key" pieces to keep in production in old dark grey. I • know
> it's different but frankly, this is an area where reality DOES vary. • Railroads
> replace ties all the time, and ties weather at different rates, even • concrete
> ones.
Hmm, if we're going to do anything with the track, how about brown? New
brown would be fine. Black would work also.
Of course more and more track these days is being laid on concrete ties,
even in the US.
> Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more important, • than
> the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
My problem with the whole bit is that you need a wide selection of parts.
What I would actually most like to see is parts in the old colors that were
not released. I haven't decided yet to buy any of the brick packs (which
means they'll probably sell out before I decide to - oh well, I probably
have enough grey brick to last me for a while).
I'm not sure where my buying is going to go in the future. I expect to be
buying a lot less, but that's as much because my collection has reached a
size that it's hard to deal with. The color changes will probably mean that
some future projects will die still born because they either depend on old
parts that will never be available in the new colors (for example, old style
hinges), or require a diversity of parts that won't exist in the new colors
for several years, or require a quantity of brick that makes it impossible
to do with the new colors with my current budget, and requires more of some
part than I currently have in the old colors. Some of the projects may be
doable by buying off BrickLink, but the prices of old color parts are going
to start to skyrocket.
So mostly I've been staying quiet on the color change because honestly, all
I can do is grumble. The only thing I can promise that would make me happy
is to revert to the old colors, but that's not going to happen. So I spend
my energy thinking about other stuff.
Actually, to be honest, right now I'm more bugged by the flesh tone minifigs
than the other color changes. I do tend to buy one of each new set in the
themes I'm interested in, but I see myself buying far fewer of the Harry
Potter and Spiderman sets than I would have in the past. I know I'm never
going to have the diversity of minifig heads in flesh tones that I will have
in yellow, so I just can't imagine using the "Caucasian" heads (the brown
ones I at least feel like I can use even though they will mean a dramatic
minority). What's even more bothersome is that some torsos have flesh tone
printing, which means they will look funny if I swap out the hands and head
for yellow.
On the bright side, minifigs is where I least mind the new colors, though
the "metallic" greys do look a little funny for tweed suits and feathers and
such...
Sigh.
Frank
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
>
> > * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> > "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> > course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> > ones.
>
> The first item on your list of "good news" confuses me. Are you saying that
> these three colors are now instant classic colors and only they will remain
> unchanged? What about white, black, red, yellow, blue and green? Those are
> also core colors.
Easy now. Saying the three new colors are locked doesn't equate to others not
being locked. It's a very good question about what colors are considered
"universal" though, and I'll get back to you ASAP on that.
> I have participated in a focus group before. I am not convinced of their
> legitimacy for determining anything worthwhile. I'm sure that some are better
> designed than others and it is encouraging that you want to broaden the audience
> in them. Has TLC considered using a LUGNET newsgroup as a focus group? That
> would give them a broad range of opinion in at least the AFOL segment.
I didn't really mean to imply that we would "focus group" (as in two way mirrors
and bean bags), necessarily. Just that we would find the right way to include
AFOL input, and then include it.
As far as using LUGNET (and other community sites) as "focus groups".... well,
we're already doing that. Believe it or not, many people in the company read
these forums (including this thread, I'm positive). I've thrown out ideas here
to get feedback. I'm actually working with colleagues on a few cool, top-secret
ideas coming up soon along these lines.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
Hello!
> However, again with all due respect, nothing against you, Jake, changing back
> the colors and THEN saying 'Oops, it'll never happen again' would have meaning,
> would have value, and would build goodwill between LEGO and the AFOL community.
>
> At least that's my opinion.
And so is mine. Thanks, Anthony!
Bye
Jojo
|
|
| |
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:Hx918L.CEz@lugnet.com...
> To the question about "good thinking", no matter what the answer is, • anything I
> say will upset many of you. I can fully and totally understand that.
Yes, it will most likely be upsetting.
But it is my personal belief that we just have not heard the whole story as
to how and why this change came about. I still have a difficult time
wrapping my brain around the idea of Lego replacing a core color. I can
understand making new colors and shades. Variety is good. But replacement is
bad.
Replacing colors just because a focus group says "they look better" does not
seem to be a strong enough reason to generate this type of upheaval.
While it has generated upheaval in the consumer LEGO arena - I can only
imagine the effect the color changes has generated internally at LEGO (new
raw materials, changes to instructions, dealing with producing older sets in
the new colors, supplying the model shops with old vs. new colors, handling
consumer questions, etc.)
So somebody must have determined that whatever the reason was, it was good
enough and the pros outweighed the cons.
The LEGO community has pretty much identified every consumer related "con"
as to the color change.
And I'm sure there are "cons" internally at TLC (mentioned above).
But what are the "pros" that TLC came up with to warrent the color changes?
(1)
There must have been some really big "pros" on the list to upset the SYSTEM
in this manner.
And I'm sure many LEGO fans would like to hear more about the pros for the
color change. Seeing a list of reasons might make some folks step back and
say "OK - now I can sort of understand why."
Jake - thank you for your continued communication with us on this topic.
Bryan
(1) I'm sure some of the reasons are labeled "corporate secret" - but please
share.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> (snip)
> Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more important, than
> the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
What kind of detail parts? I'm hoping to put together a list that I can pass
along.
Thanks!
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
> Additionally, like Thomas Main suggested, I'd like to see BURPs, both
> shapes, available in both light gray and dark gray. I'd also like to see
> the large grey baseplate remain available in the original color as well
> although that one wouldn't be nearly as high on the wish list as train • track
> and BURPs.
Hmm, BURPS. Actually, I think you could almost get away with the rectangular
ones. The triangular ones aren't that useful in bulk. I did use a bunch in
my cliff scene, but only because I wanted to conserve rectangular BURPS. If
I had twice as many rectangular ones, I would not have used any triangular
ones.
Grey baseplates is another good one. Hmm, while we're at it, could we have
the 48x48 baseplate in a few other colors (blue would be way cool).
> While I know many in the community hoped the answer would be for TLC to
> issue a response such as "you were right, we were wrong, we're switching
> back" or something to that effect, I didn't expect it would happen.
Agreed.
> While I don't agree with the color change I am willing to accept it an • move
> on but I would like TLC to make it easier for me to embrace the color
> change. Right now I have a few parts in these new colors. I don't have
> enough of them to make much use of them so they are no different to me • than
> some of the oddball Belville colors I have in my collection.
Agreed.
> I would like to see TLC issue a bulk tub which contains a good assortment
> (not a tub of 1x1s like 4407 is) of bricks, plates, slopes, in the new
> colors. I don't know how well these would sell on the shelf at Target,
> probably not well at all. If they were augmented with some castle walls,
> turets, and some castle figs, they could be marketed as a Castle "Designer
> Set". For those of us who are not castle people, we could still get a • good
> quantity of bricks and plates and probably find "homes" for the other • stuff
> we didn't want.
>
> So I am asking TLC to help me make lemonade out of what is now a small
> basket of lemons. If you want me to embrace the new colors, make them
> readily available in a broad palette of elements and I'll get on board. • If
> I need to part sets out to get them, then it will be years before I have a
> suitable supply to build with.
This is definitely true. If I could buy tubs with a wide variety of parts in
the new colors at 5 cents a brick or less (at least 75% greys and brown, but
hey, if you want to throw in some of the other colors, that would be cool
also), I would buy a bunch of those right off the bat to be able to create
decent constructions in the new colors. Heck, price them right, and I might
acquire more brick in these colors than I have in the old colors.
Frank
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > Yeah, great! We (the AFOLs) fight against those new colours and you (TLC) make
> > them even more solid and declare them made for eternity? Calling that "good
> > news" is sheer sneer, isn't it?
>
> Only if you choose to view it that way. (I tend to be a "on the bright side...."
> kind of guy) To me, this is the AFOLs saying something (we're upset that things
> changed suddenly), and the company reacting ( locking these new colors so that
> you feel confident that we aren't going to change them again, and never again,
> will we make changes like this without AFOL input)
It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
accepted AFOL input...
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Bryan Kinkel wrote:
> And I'm sure there are "cons" internally at TLC (mentioned above).
>
> But what are the "pros" that TLC came up with to warrent the color changes?
> (1)
>
> There must have been some really big "pros" on the list to upset the SYSTEM
> in this manner.
>
> And I'm sure many LEGO fans would like to hear more about the pros for the
> color change. Seeing a list of reasons might make some folks step back and
> say "OK - now I can sort of understand why."
>
> (1) I'm sure some of the reasons are labeled "corporate secret" - but please
> share.
Yes, please share. I noticed there was never an official denial to
the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
Is this the real reason why you can't go back? It's the only "good reason"
I've ever heard that makes any sense.
Don
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will
> likely be created as service pack type items. An example of this would
> be the 9v train track. I am interested in getting feedback from you
> (via this thread) on which elements MUST be produced in the old colors
> for the long term.
Please add:
48x48 baseplates
--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com
|
|
| |
"Frank Filz" <ffilz-lists@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:Hx922u.IIp@lugnet.com...
[ ... snipped ... ]
>
> Actually, to be honest, right now I'm more bugged by the flesh tone • minifigs
> than the other color changes. I do tend to buy one of each new set in the
> themes I'm interested in, but I see myself buying far fewer of the Harry
> Potter and Spiderman sets than I would have in the past. I know I'm never
> going to have the diversity of minifig heads in flesh tones that I will • have
> in yellow, so I just can't imagine using the "Caucasian" heads (the brown
> ones I at least feel like I can use even though they will mean a dramatic
> minority). What's even more bothersome is that some torsos have flesh tone
> printing, which means they will look funny if I swap out the hands and • head
> for yellow.
[ ... snipped ... ]
We had a similar conversation at the NCLTC GATS show a couple of weeks ago.
I don't care for the flesh colored minifigs either. They look "odd" after
seeing yellow LEGO people for all of these years.
The thing that concerns me the most about the flesh colored minifigs is the
bigger chance that someone will build something without intending to offend
someone yet someone will be offended. We never had that issue when all of
the figs were the same color. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned but I like all
my LEGO people as classic smileys.
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, Jake McKee wrote:
| |
What kind of detail parts? I’m hoping to put together a list that I can pass
along.
|
Headlight bricks
1x1 round bricks
basic plates & bricks in various sizes (as
Ted mentioned)
1x1x2 brick with
hinge
arches - 1x6, 1x6x2, 1x4, 1x8x2, 1x5x4, 1x3, 1x12x3
windows - 1x4x3 (brown) and the 1x2x2 2/3 with rounded top (all 3)
Parts like that could help us a lot.
Jason Spears | BrickCentral | MichLUG
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > (snip)
>
> > Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more important, than
> > the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
>
> What kind of detail parts? I'm hoping to put together a list that I can pass
> along.
Mostly the modified plates and bricks that give you good greeblization.
The plate-modifieds for starters...
1x1 plate with clips (all three kinds),
1x2 plates with handles, with rods, with offset studs
1x2 tile with rod, 1x2 tile with one stud
The 1x2 grille tiles
The 1x2 grille bricks
1x2-1x4 brackets
1x1 brick with side stud (headlight or washing machine brick)
1x1 round brick, 2x2 round brick and plate, 2x2 macaroni brick
Rod system stuff.
The antennas and rods in various sizes
Stuff like that. Non theme specific but useful for detail.
More later if I have time, kinda heads down at my client right now (in NJ
actually, rather than MA where I thought I'd be the rest of the week)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
> It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
> AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
> AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
> accepted AFOL input...
Ah, good to see you finally "noticed the color change". ;^)
|
|
| |
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:Hx92GJ.LJy@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > (snip)
>
> > Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more • important, than
> > the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
>
> What kind of detail parts? I'm hoping to put together a list that I can • pass
> along.
Hmm, the problem is that there are probably >1000 parts that really need to
be available in a color to allow good flexibility in creation.
That would be an interesting task, what is the minimum palette of pieces for
a color to really be worthwhile to use? There are probably several palettes
depending on type of construction (for example, sculptures can be done with
a palette with less than 10 bricks, though 20-30 is probably nicer).
Frank
|
|
| |
Hi Jake,
I just want to add my comments on offerings for castle fans
Since the color decisions seem to be final, I think that the best option is to
ease this transition into the new colors. Castle builders will need basic
bricks, wall pieces, arches, plates, etc in the new light grey color. In my
opinion, the best option would be another castle legend in new grey. Another
run of Black Falcon's Fortress or a castle like 6080 King's Castle would allow
castle fans to quickly build up new grey supplies. Future "modular" legends
like Armor Shop and Battering Ram would also be nice choices.
I do not think that old color wall pieces would be very popular or sell well at
shop at home. Sets seem to do much better than some bulk packs (ie: Castle
Accessories vs. Guarded Inn)
Castle fans would also like improved selection in minifigure accessory packs.
Popular items in a pack (in new or old colors) would be round shields, euro
breastplate armor, archery targets, forestmen caps and peasant cowls (in colors
like green, black, brown, grey, tan, and red), plumes in new colors (orange,
tan, etc) grill helmets, bullet helmets, flared helmets, axes, swords - in brown
or black perhaps ;) These are just a few ideas off of the top of my head.
Basically - with existing molds and new colors - LEGO could make the best castle
accessory pack ever.
Another popular idea could be making a "classic" accessory pack in old light
grey of weapons, shields, armor, and helmets (substituting new pointed visors)
of the 1978-83 castle sets. Instead of releasing a legend of Yellow Castle, how
about a minifig pack or accessory pack with these pieces and stickers.
Many castle fans would also like more accessory packs for buildings. This could
be curved top windows in several colors, brown doors (rectangular), steep roof
peaks (we have been waiting forever to get more of these...) or a good roof
pack, 1x4x3 windows with lattice panes in colors like black and brown, folliage
(in orange perhaps), and another food pack.
These are just a few of my ideas. But there are alot of options available. I
think we want more variety to add to our minifigs, buildings, and villages.
Ben Ellermann
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
>
> "Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@ascentialsoftwareDOTcom> wrote in
> message news:Hx91Ap.Cx9@lugnet.com...
> > (snip)
> >
> > This is a fairly radical opinion, I guess, but I'm not convinced that the 9V
> > track is one of the "key" pieces to keep in production in old dark grey. I know
> > it's different but frankly, this is an area where reality DOES vary. Railroads
> > replace ties all the time, and ties weather at different rates, even concrete
> > ones.
>
> Hmm, if we're going to do anything with the track, how about brown? New
> brown would be fine. Black would work also.
>
> Of course more and more track these days is being laid on concrete ties,
> even in the US.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooo! Chocolate brown track would be a total disaster!
The track colour should emulate reality. Old dark grey for steel, old light
grey for concrete or old brown for wood, but the new colours are totally
unsuitable.
Any change to the track at all, shape or colour, would be a total disaster. It
cost me £2000 (almost $4000) to change from 12V to 9V in 1996, plus overcoming
the lack of power in the new system etc...
Train track must stay the same, with anything new as an addition, never a
replacement. Either that or TLC will have to give me $5000!
Mark
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
> Grey baseplates is another good one. Hmm, while we're at it, could
> we have the 48x48 baseplate in a few other colors (blue would be
> way cool).
It is available in blue
http://guide.lugnet.com/set/4509
just not as a service pack.
The 48 x 48 baseplate is the most important choice for a part to have
in gray, and it would be great to see service packs of that baseplate
in gray, blue, and maybe tan, green, and clear.
TWS Garrison
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
> Hmm, BURPS. Actually, I think you could almost get away with the rectangular
> ones. The triangular ones aren't that useful in bulk. I did use a bunch in
> my cliff scene, but only because I wanted to conserve rectangular BURPS. If
> I had twice as many rectangular ones, I would not have used any triangular
> ones.
>
> Grey baseplates is another good one. Hmm, while we're at it, could we have
> the 48x48 baseplate in a few other colors (blue would be way cool). • - SNIP -
> Frank
Yes.. BURPS is a good suggestion. Most of us have enough old grey Lego to
connect these together to make decent size hills. I think the same is true
for the castle walls from another post (Anthony's I believe). To suggest
that these are irrelevant without the corresponding basic bricks seems
unwarranted. We'd all like the bricks in the old colours but there are still
large numbers of us who have the basic bricks and are very worried about a lack
of interesting larger pieces to attach them too. (just my opinion of course)
Also... monorail track... he says ever hopefully.
- Jeff
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
> Grey baseplates is another good one. Hmm, while we're at it, could we have
> the 48x48 baseplate in a few other colors (blue would be way cool).
That's a fine suggestion--I'd love to see (or perhaps love to sea) a modular
ocean base a la the modular space base. I wouldn't even mind a green 48x48,
while we're at it. And was it ever determined if the trans-white was officially
available?
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
> > AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
> > AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
> > accepted AFOL input...
>
> Ah, good to see you finally "noticed the color change". ;^)
Doh! Uh, well, er, I just, um, wanted to stay current re: LEGO developments.
Hey, you're supposed to be in ot.debate! What are you doing here?
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> I know this isn’t the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but hopefully
> this bears some good news for you.
So maybe the fact that many AFOLs will not buy these rubbish colours for having
no mud in their collections bears some good news for you.
I think you will agree that i.e. a clear castle-wall in unique grey looks much
better than a wall with strange spots in it.
So the people who visit our MOCs at our shows must not ask why we use some
Megabloks bricks (and that's what the new colours look like).
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
> wounds.
I hope it does not upset you and your company that TLC will make less money with
the new colours in this year and the future.
> As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive.
For sure you will even find some positive in the above written as well.
Best regards
Ronald
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Mark Bellis wrote:
> Train track must stay the same, with anything new as an addition, never a
> replacement. Either that or TLC will have to give me $5000!
Why? I hear the WHINE, but I'm not hearing the WHY. WHY is this important,
compared to other things (assume you're making a priority list here)
Track varies in color in real life. It just *doesn't* make a high priority list
of things in my view. If you have a ship or a vehicle or a building (non stone,
that is, a painted grey building that you're modeling) where some parts are OFF,
that looks a *lot* more jarring than having some ties different colors...
LEGO doesn't owe you (or any other consumer) anything merely because you bought
stuff from them in the past, unless you had some specific contract.
If you don't like their policies, vote with your wallet, but it seriously
degrades your argument to say that LEGO owes you 5000 USD or whatever because
they made a product change, and you're enabling execs to tune you right out. Why
give them that excuse? Don't foam!
To Frank's point, I don't think you need 3000 different parts but you do need
50-100 different detail parts.
I forgot hinges in my last post, the 2x2 -1x4 brick and plate, the 1x2 brick
slant top, the 2 finger - 3 finger hinges, the roof plate, wagon tailgate etc
etc 5 finger hinges and so on...
|
|
| |
Hello!
| |
What kind of detail parts? I’m hoping to put together a list that I can pass
along.
|
Well, you said “you can’t say ‘the whole range of parts!’”, so leave out this:
 and make
all of the remaining parts available in the old colours. Make them also
available not only in special bulk sets but in every set* you (TLC) is going to
release. So everybody will be able to participate in the good old colours and
the poor kids that can’t buy their LEGO-needs on the internet are not going to
be discriminated.
Thanks!
Jojo
.* and yes, I’m aware what I’m saying here.
|
|
| |
Hello Jake,
I know that you have heard a lot of... concerns, but I would like to add some
praise along with my input.
I am glad that TLC has decided to retain the gray, brown, drk gray colors. I was
terribly afraid that TLC had done away with these and so I immediately went to
the secondary market and started to purchase what I could. Now, I have hope that
we will see those three colors return in the pieces that we were used to so that
Castle builders and Space builders and other AFOL builders can continue to build
their castles, etc.
I forsaw TLC adding new colors to the palette about a year or so when the very
first "alternative" colors started to appear on the market. It was the opening
of a flood gate and I knew that shortly there would be a vast range of colors.
And, it is so easy to tell that there will be more. That is okay; AFOLS have an
imagination that is endless, and I believe that those colors will find their
place amongst AFOLS and their creations.
As for your question of what further pieces that TLC might do... That is hard to
say; TLC in recent years has been creating many new pieces, details, bricks of
all shapes. I myself am still spinning from the variety offered in recent times.
It is hard to imagine what more there could be.
As for systems... It would be absolutely lovely to see the return of the Classic
Castle circa 1980's to early 1990's. It was at the arrival of the King's Kingdom
that Classic Castle began to slide. I know that there are others who cry out for
the return of Classic Space and what-have-not, but the return of the castle
style (Crusaders, Black Monarch, Wolfpack, Dragon Hunters, Forestmen, Black
Falcon) I am sure would see revenue enough to pay for TLC's troubles. And, if
TLC is more interested in leaving the past in the past, then a new line of
castle in the style and design of that past era would also be acceptable.
Perhaps, this is a crazy idea that I have to throw out, a line of ancient
civilizations? I thought at first that this might be too much of a niche market,
but the idea is no different that having medieval Europe castles, or sets from
the Samurai era of Japan (I believe that the Samurai/Ninja sets are a high
demand line). So, to avoid this from becoming a niche market, the line of
ancient civilizations would have to be generalized. So many civilizations had
chariots, for instance, so one general chariot type of set could be used across
the board for all ancient civilizations. Then there could be one or two specific
sets, like a specific set for building a pyramid, or a roman-esque building, or
a Choson temple. Specific pieces could be limited to torsos, minifig head
apparel, a few special decal bricks, and maybe a few specific weapons. Other
than that, horses, birds, the vast array of colored pieces, other animals,
plants, utensils, are all already there for use as TLC already makes what would
be needed.
Anyway, there are a few ideas. I think that what other ideas I have are already
expressed by the outcry for the three colors, and the out cry for the return of
space and castle stuff. This was my one big original idea.
Thanks, Avery
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> LEGO doesn't owe you (or any other consumer) anything merely because you bought
> stuff from them in the past, unless you had some specific contract.
That's your point of view - the consumer buys a product from LEGO.
Other's point of view - the consumer buys a product from LEGO which
belongs to SYSTEM.
--
Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Ted Michon wrote:
| |
Jake-
Very good news! Thanks. Light and dark grays are our favorite colors for
making large real-world models. Here is what would keep us building for a
long time to come in dark gray:
- 1x1 bricks
- 1x2 bricks
- 1x3 bricks
- 1x4 bricks
- 1x6 bricks
- 1x8 bricks
- 1x1 plates
- 1x2 plates
- 1x3 plates
- 1x4 plates
- 1x6 plates
- 1x8 plates
- 2x2 plates
- 2x3 plates
- 2x4 plates
- 2x6 plates
- 2x8 plates
- 4x4 plates
- 4x6 plates
- 4x8 plates
- all tiles including 2x2 round
- 1x4 plate hinge
- 1x4 brick hinge
- 8x8 modified plate grille
- RR track straight, curve, cross, switches
- 1x2s with horizontal grooves on one side and vertical grooves on the other
- 1x1 headlight bricks
- all Technic Bricks (1x1 through 1x16)
- all straight lift arms
- 1x1 round plates
- 1x1 round bricks
- 2x2 round plates
- 2x2 round bricks
Considering there are 3,500+ elements out there, this is a pretty short list!
My concern: We buy 10s of thousands of new bricks each year, but mostly on
Bricklink. The promise of “bulk” buying from LEGO Direct never materialized
-- not for those of us who think “bulk” starts at 1000 pieces. (I have bought
as many as 3000 2x4 dark gray plates at one time). If these limited edition
old gray parts are only made available via S@H at current retail prices, then
to me it’s like they don’t exist. Why not recognize that since this is going
to be a niche/specialty product that it can be sold in lots big enough that
let you get the price down? Perhaps you could just accept quarterly automated
orders in units of 1K or 10K pieces and build-them-to-order. Perhaps LUGNET
or ILTCO or a “blessed” few BrickLink stores could handle aggregating orders
from the small fry.
Thanks for staying with this!
Check out our latest dark gray creation at
http://www.scltc.org/pages/galleries/images.asp?ImageID={E6998D92-8EBF-4CEA-BD33-050A2D810DF7}
We thought it might be our last large dark gray construction, but now maybe
not.
This assembly of structures is captioned “Ode to Dark Grey”
http://www.scltc.org/pages/galleries/images.asp?ImageID={9E125241-7BA2-4CA6-BFAD-D5495893B0CE}
-Ted
|
First- a “thank you” to Jake for giving us this update.
What Ted has said here matches my thoughts. For my creations, plain o’l
retangular sizes are what matter to me the most. As long as I can get the old
color, I’m happy.
The detailing parts question- let those who use them most often decide.
(Heck, Ted was show’n the dark grey)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Bryan Kinkel wrote:
> >
> > > But I would also be interested in what kind of "good thinking" went into
> > > this. Why did Lego do this? Why take something that has been stable for 25+
> > > years and suddenly change it?
> >
> > Well, somewhere in all the "good thinking" you will probably find the word
> > "Bionicle". Not even Jake would be able to put enough spin on that for us AFOLs
> > to swallow it... ;-) Hence, the reasoning will remain a mystery to us.
>
> I'm going to be answering some of the questions brought up in this thread as
> best as I can throughout the day and week. But let me say that I take issue with
> that idea that I "spin" anything.
>
> I don't try to, nor do I feel like I spin or in any way lie to this community. I
> have a mantra that I maintain an "open and honest relationship" with this
> community. Over almost 4 years of working for LEGO and with this community, I
> feel like I've done a very good job of sticking to that mantra.
Jake,
You chose to take the worst possible meaning of "spin" (despite my winking
smiley) and I am sorry for that. The definition I intended was merely the
interpretation of facts to put the best possible face on a bad situation. That
doesn't automatically mean lying or half-truths (and I am not trying to redefine
the word "is" here, either). Phrases like "good news" and "classified as
universal" come off as the usual PR you get from many institutions nowadays so
you can see why my view on this whole situation is somewhat cynical.
Nevertheless, please accept my apologies for any offense taken.
Regards,
Mark
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > LEGO doesn't owe you (or any other consumer) anything merely because you bought
> > stuff from them in the past, unless you had some specific contract.
>
> That's your point of view - the consumer buys a product from LEGO.
> Other's point of view - the consumer buys a product from LEGO which
> belongs to SYSTEM.
It's more than just *my* point of view, it's the law, at least in the US.
There is typically no implied warranty of suitability to purpose or fitness that
is attached to any good sold here. You would need an express warranty to have
any rights, which, if I am not mistaken, LEGO hasn't given, w.r.t. colors. In
fact LEGO, (as do many manufacturers) no doubt explicitly reserves the right to
make changes in specifications without prior notice as it deems necessary.
So saying "the company owes me 5000 USD" is hogwash, in my view, and dilutive of
getting anything resolved, especially when *requested* not to go there in this
thread.
I'd rather see a prioritised list of parts that need to be made in the old
colors developed than debate, yet again, why changing the colors was a Bad Idea.
It was, but the company owes *no one* anything over it, except as it chooses to
grant in order to retain customer loyalty. I think it made a foolish change, I
think it should value our loyalty a lot, I think it should take big steps to
undo this change and ameliorate it and I can make a business case why it's a
good idea but the company doesn't HAVE to if it doesn't want to.
So again, why track over, say 1x1 headlight bricks. Why 48x48 baseplates over
1x2 slant top hinges? Why BURPs over 1x4x3 windows?
Track and baseplates come out low on my priority list. Baseplates represent
poured concrete or ground, not metal or painted surfaces. Ground color varies.
Rock color varies. Tie color varies. None of that matters as much as
metal/painted details
Sure, I'd like it all. Sure I wish it never changed. But a prioritised list was
asked for.
Justify your priority, give a business case, say why your item matters more than
mine, that's what you should do, not foam about what LEGO owes you.
If I had more time I'd write this a bit softer, I guess, but I don't.
|
|
| |
"Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@ascentialsoftwareDOTcom> wrote in
message news:Hx93pr.vHI@lugnet.com...
> To Frank's point, I don't think you need 3000 different parts but you do • need
> 50-100 different detail parts.
>
> I forgot hinges in my last post, the 2x2 -1x4 brick and plate, the 1x2 • brick
> slant top, the 2 finger - 3 finger hinges, the roof plate, wagon tailgate • etc
> etc 5 finger hinges and so on...
I bet if you add this up, and add a good brick selection, you wind up in the
several hundred parts range.
Other "detail" parts to add: windows and doors
That's why I'd love to see some real attempt made to work out some good
parts palettes.
I think they're both bigger and smaller than we might think (for example, my
suggestion that you can probably do well with about 10 different bricks for
sculptures).
Frank
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
> ...but the prices of old color parts are going to start to skyrocket.
Maybe.. but perhaps not. In some cases, BL sellers may have sufficient stock of
older sets that they are waiting for things to sort out a bit. As an analogy..
some oil wells remain idle until the crude trading reaches a certain level. I
think somethng similar may apply here. When certain thresholds are crossed,
previously unknown stock of certain parts may appear.
Ray
fut to .market.theory
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Johannes Koehler wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> > Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> > the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> > the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> > several things have been agreed upon.
>
> Fine. Becoming aware of something usually is a good first step into a better
> direction.
>
>
>
> > * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> > "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> > course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> > ones.
>
> Yeah, great! We (the AFOLs) fight against those new colours and you (TLC) make
> them even more solid and declare them made for eternity? Calling that "good
> news" is sheer sneer, isn't it?
>
>
> Bye
> Jojo
My thoughts exactly
Yaron "Webrain" Dori
|
|
| |
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:Hx92GJ.LJy@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > (snip)
>
> > Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more • important, than
> > the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
>
> What kind of detail parts? I'm hoping to put together a list that I can • pass
> along.
>
> Thanks!
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
1 x 1 headlight bricks
1 x 2 jumper plates
But Jake already knows this - I've been nagging for decent bulk amounts of
those two pieces for as long as I can remember! ; )
I'm surprised no-one has mentioned technic pins yet, especially as LEGO are
making most of them in blue and tan now.
Personally, I'd like to see some of the discontinued parts such as 1 x 2
hinge plates (NON Clicky of course!).
Richard.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
> It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
> AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
> AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
> accepted AFOL input...
Wow. That's harsh.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
<snip>
>
> Justify your priority, give a business case, say why your item matters more than
> mine, that's what you should do, not foam about what LEGO owes you.
>
> If I had more time I'd write this a bit softer, I guess, but I don't.
See, you sit around long enuf and it shows up :)
Anyway, I completely agree with Larry--when you buy something, you own what you
purchased, but that does not, in any way, shape or form imply that the company
that sold the product to you cannot change the product, or even cancel the
product at some point in the future.
I mean, I love the 'old' Crest toothpaste (the non-minty kind). Been buying it
for years. Try to fon a non-minty Crest toothpaste that isn't directed at kids
these days--as far as I can see, it can't be done. Does P&G 'owe me' all my
money that I spent on the 'old' Crest?
A more permanent thing--I like the '57 Chevy. Can I demand that the Chevrolet
Motor Company retool their lines so I can buy one of these? They made it at one
point in their history--do I have the right to buy a new one 50ish years later?
Work within the guidelines set up by Jake--let him know what pieces you want to
remain in the 'old colour'. He's doing his job to the best of his ability and,
imho, doing an excellent job.
If there is a rant, please take it to another thread.
Dave K
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
>
> > It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
> > AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
> > AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
> > accepted AFOL input...
>
> Wow. That's harsh.
Heh.
Well, what can I say? I tend to be an "on the dark side" kind of guy...
Harsh, perhaps--but is my assessment inaccurate? Aside from the bottom line,
corporations love nothing as much as preserving wiggle room.
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Mike Kollross wrote:
> (snippage)
>
> > * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> > created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> > track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
>
> 9 volt track is a must. How about releasing different track geometry at the
> same time. If you are going to make a special run any way....
>
>
> Mike
Here's a thought...make the current 9V track with the "old" dark gray. Any new
track geometries---make them the "NEW" Gray.
Result--those who want new track geometries will eventually wind up filtering
into new gray colors...and you can easily distinguish what kind of curvature you
have by comparing colors of track...
Scott Lyttle
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> I noticed there was never an official denial to
> the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
Consider this an official denial. :)
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
<VERY LARGE SNIP>
Hi Jake,
Well, I know you've been reading this thread; I've seen a few responses already.
I think there are two reasons why AFOLs are angry and/or upset with the color
change:
(1) The new colors don't match their current selection, look awful, etc.
(2) The lack of communication of these changes. Somebody had to open a set to
find out.
I'm going to talk about reason (2). You've heard a lot about reason (1).
The LUGNET community is rather informed about Lego's upcoming products. The
fact is that the color change caught us completely off-guard, and when people
are startled, we act emotionally.
Communication to the general public is something that TLC really needs to work
on. For example, I remember when I was a kid in the 80's, that in the Lego
aisle at a department store or TRU, a little flip display showing all the
current products was mounted on the shelves (pretty much just the large
brochure). I haven't seen one of those since I became an AFOL a few years back.
Those flip displays usually also had some info about each product line.
I'm not sure why these displays are gone. There have been some effective
displays recently. For example, the basketball shooter was a great display, at
least once I was a TRU, and saw a kid try it, and picked up the Streetball set.
The display for the 1st wave of SW MINI sets was also effective: after seeing
it, I knew that to make the TIE bomber, I needed all four sets.
But where were displays for the whole general line, or more importantly, for
Jack Stone and Explore? My mom was shopping for my 1-yr old cousin this past
winter, and was going batty looking for a Duplo set. This is someone who's been
receiving the S@H catalog since the early 80's. I had to explain afterwards
(she didn't tell me she was looking before the holiday season) what Explore was,
and even I'm not clear on the concept. As for Jack Stone (now 4+), I still
don't understand the need for "transitional" sets; I highly doubt many of your
main purchasers of these sets do, either.
I hope the lesson learned is that communication with all of your consumers is
vital. I'm more upset with the lack of communication regarding various product
changes than with the actual changes themselves. A lot of tech companies have
this same problem: you'll note that the PC companies with the best tech support
ratings also have the highest number of repeat buyers.
This communication is a two-way street. I think what's occuring right now is:
1) AFOLs get a lot of information out from TLC, but put in very little input.
2) The main consumer base is receiving very little information from TLC about
product features, changes, enhancements, etc.
Most of the responses have been addressing issue 1. This response has been
addressing issue 2, and I think issue 2 will the stronger influence on TLC's
future success.
I hope this gets passed along, because not every TRU has an AFOL wandering
around the Lego aisle, available to answer questions on every set.
And Jake, thanks for keeping us informed. Not every company would be willing to
communicate with us; that's what keeps Lego above everyone else.
John Riley
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> > I noticed there was never an official denial to
> > the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> > the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
> Consider this an official denial. :)
Jake, how long would it take to present us with some real reason for
doing the change?
I can accept something like this: some higly positioned **** in the
management thought it was a great idea. There was nobody brave enough to
tell him that it's stupid.
See Duplo -> Explore -> Duplo.
If somebody else bitches about me hijacking the thread - I can't buy the
old colour packs from LEGO anyway, so what... :-/
--
Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
I'm shocked no one has asked the following question:
Just which colors are "universal" and which colors aren't? I'm assuming from
what you write that non-universal colors can be changed, from time to time.
As an AFOL, it would be great to know what colors are universal and won't
change. That way, if we choose to invest a lot of time and money in buying
pieces for large projects, we'll know what colors will be around "forever".
If its isn't already, this should be up on a web site somewhere, with pictures
of all the universal colors along with their official color names.
Thanks,
Jeff
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
Hi Jake
Thx for the update. Sounds like LEGO is trying to make the best of a situation
that went bad unintentionally.
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Regarding the service packs. While I appreciate the gesture, I'm not sure it is
necessary. My question is, how long will the service packs be made available?
For something like the Train Track, or grey baseplates, these are products that
have been around for a long time in LEGO time, and will presumably be around for
even longer in LEGO time.
I guess, what I would rather see is the following, parts that are long term
candidates are only produced in the old color. There is already a significant
inventory of these parts in the public domain. If the parts are going to be
available in both colors for a long period of time, there could be some consumer
reluctance to having the other color available.
For example, if you include track with a train set, will the track be the old or
the new color? If you use the new color, and the consumer has existing
inventory of the old color only, they will be reluctant to buy the set, since it
will have track that is the wrong color. About the only solution I see to this
is to not offer track with a train set. Which might not be so bad, as the speed
regulator is only included sometimes.
As grey baseplates are already sold as individual units, the issue is not as
big. But for some element, such as track, that may be combined with other
elements, you need to be careful.
Dave
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Richard Morton wrote:
>
>
>
> "Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
> news:Hx92GJ.LJy@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > > (snip)
> >
> > > Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more important, than
> > > the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
> >
> > What kind of detail parts? I'm hoping to put together a list that I can pass
> > along.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Jake
> >
> > ---
> > Jake McKee
> > Community Liaison
> > LEGO Community Development
>
>
> 1 x 1 headlight bricks
> 1 x 2 jumper plates
>
> But Jake already knows this - I've been nagging for decent bulk amounts of
> those two pieces for as long as I can remember! ; )
>
> I'm surprised no-one has mentioned technic pins yet, especially as LEGO are
> making most of them in blue and tan now.
>
> Personally, I'd like to see some of the discontinued parts such as 1 x 2
> hinge plates (NON Clicky of course!).
>
> Richard.
Technic pins are generally hidden from view; their colors rarely matter (sole
exception I've seen: the penny flag last year, where white technic pins were
stars in the US Flag).
Technic connectors, on the other hand... I look through my entire collection,
and I don't think I have all 6 angle connectors in any single color.
John
John
|
|
| |
<snip>
>
> Anybody knows why Peeron is calling the new colors DkStone and MdStone?
> DkSteel would be better, wouldn't it?
Those names are what Lego has given to them...pure and simple.
Scott Lyttle
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
> I can't buy the old colour packs from LEGO anyway, so what... :-/
Why not? There are always ways to get things. There are always fans that would
help out friendly, helpful people in other countries if asked nicely.
But thread hijacking, especially hijacking really busy threads that are
apparently bringing LUGNET to its knees, and using profanity (even mild
profanity that hardly anyone would object to) may not be the best way to make
friends. IMHO anyway.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
| |
Jake, how long would it take to present us with some real reason for
doing the change?
|
Just because you and some others don’t accept that Marketing thought it was a
good idea to change the colors doesn’t make it not the “real reason”.
| |
I can accept something like this: some higly positioned **** in the
management thought it was a great idea. There was nobody brave enough to
tell him that it’s stupid.
|
I’m sure that some people within the company thought it was a bad idea. But
those people are probably not the ones making the decisions. Now that they have
made the change, they are going to stick with it for a while (at least one or
two years) and see how things go, before switching back. However, based on what
Jake said, currently it looks like they will never change back.
| |
If somebody else b***hes about me hijacking the thread - I can’t buy the
old colour packs from LEGO anyway, so what... :-/
|
I understand you are upset about the change. Heck I’m pretty upset too, but
watch the language.
Jason Spears | BrickCentral | MichLUG
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Mark Bellis wrote:
>
> > Train track must stay the same, with anything new as an addition, never a
> > replacement. Either that or TLC will have to give me $5000!
>
> Why? I hear the WHINE, but I'm not hearing the WHY. WHY is this important,
> compared to other things (assume you're making a priority list here)
>
> Track varies in color in real life. It just *doesn't* make a high priority list
> of things in my view. If you have a ship or a vehicle or a building (non stone,
> that is, a painted grey building that you're modeling) where some parts are OFF,
> that looks a *lot* more jarring than having some ties different colors...
I'm just eager that the track should not change *again*. OK, new light grey
would be OK, and new dark grey tolerable at a push (it makes old dark grey look
silly) but given that track pieces are some of the most expensive ones, changing
them costs the consumer a lot of money. As long as compatibility is maintained
then OK. The track geometry debate belongs elsewhere!
> If you don't like their policies, vote with your wallet, but it seriously
> degrades your argument to say that LEGO owes you 5000 USD or whatever because
> they made a product change, and you're enabling execs to tune you right out. Why
> give them that excuse? Don't foam!
>
> LEGO doesn't owe you (or any other consumer) anything merely because you bought
> stuff from them in the past, unless you had some specific contract.
The $5000 was tongue in cheek, though the previous cost of changing *to* the 9V
system was a true figure. If I have to be much more pessimistic in my
expectations of obsolescence of Lego pieces, I might have to find another hobby!
I fully realise that no-one owes me anything on the products I've bought, but
the feeling of it being in extremely bad faith won't go away. The figure was
given as the estimated cost of replacing all my train-specific parts, if that
were ever necessary.
In the meantime, fulfilling the original request, other parts that should stay
in old colours include the two cliff scenery chunks from castle sets and the
pieces to make SNOT (hinges, brackets, bricks with studs on the side etc...), as
well as bricks, plates and tiles.
Mark
|
|
| |
The solid news is appreciated. Personally, I still don’t believe that the
Lugnet community knows the true reasons for the color change. Also, I don’t
think we have heard of the “good” effects these changes were supposed to
produce.
I have been buying Lego for over 25 years. Throughout those 25 years I have
remained hopefull year after year that parts I was looking for in certain colors
would be produced. Sometimes that happened, sometimes not. Now with the color
changes, all hope has been lost. Sadly, many of the parts I had wanted for
years had recently become available in the right colors. But, then, like a bad
dream, the colors were changed thus turning those desired parts into junk!
I DO remain optimistic that, given enough time to see the bad sales effect of
these new colors, the color changes will be reversed. I predict that sometime
in the year 2006 Jake will be coming here to tell us that the traditional
colors are coming back and the new colors have been discarded. Remember, the
Lego Company takes a long time to make decisions sometimes.
I have tried to use the new Nazi grays and muddy chocolate brown colors for
making my creations and I still find those colors unacceptable.
Now, as for parts I consider essential in the old colors, everyone has forgotten
to mention the parts I use the most:
SLOPES
S L O P E S
SLOPES
For years and years I wanted to build brown roofs for buildings. Just as soon
as I got a good supply of Brown slopes, Lego ruined the color. And the same for
Light and Dark Gray. Dark Gray roofs slopes roofs are awesome! But NOT roofs
built the the new Nazi Gray! BLECH!!!
If I could request some bulk items in the traditional colors, it would be
comprehensive roof slopes in 45 degree and 75 degree assortments. These
comprehensive packs should contain the whole complimentary spectrum of useful
slopes including inside and outside corners and apex pieces.
Just this week I took delivery of a BrickLink order worth $400 that was one
hundred percent slopes. And 60 percent of that was Dark Gray. (Thanks, Troy).
I have spent countless hundreds of dollars buying slopes, but I hope I never
have to buy any in the new Nazi Grays and Muddy Brown colors.
Sincerely
Kevin Salm
LUCNY
PS. I don’t care what the offical names for the new colors are, I will always
refer to them as Nazi Grays and Muddy Brown. Those names are suitably evil for
colors that truly deserve them. If TLC wants to be known as the company the
produces toys in Nazi Gray colors, so be it!
.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Kevin Salm wrote:
| |
Now, as for parts I consider essential in the old colors, everyone has
forgotten to mention the parts I use the most:
SLOPES
|
Good catch!
I agree, a well rounded pack including concave and convex corners and caps, in
each of the popular slope factors (33, 45, 75), and another one with the basic
slopes themselves, would be well received.
|
|
| |
Speaking of baseplates, U agree that 48 x 48 in Trans-clear would be fantastic
(I could easily buy a couple dozen).
But more importantly, can we have some BROWN large baseplates?? The 32 x 32
baseplate in brown was only available in one set (#232), so there aren't that
many of them kicking around.
Please make 48 x 48 baseplates in (any) brown and clear.
Paul Sinasohn
LUGNET #115
BAYLUG / BAYLTC
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
>
> I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
>
> Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color change
> will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color change
> (although, yes, the implementation fell flat), and as such we are going to stay
> the course. I know this isn’t the answer you’re hoping for, and I know very very
> well that many of you aren’t happy about this news. I also know the reasons why
> you aren’t happy. Rather than cover them all again, I will skip straight to the
> good news.
Thanks for listening and understanding. Sorry your ears are taking a bashing!
You're doing better than other companies would do. Please explain the "good
thinking" though. IMHO "good thinking" would be to make future new colours more
realistic for creating lifelike models (wood brown, concrete grey etc...).
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
Please would you list the "universal" and "non-universal" colours, so we can
gauge what colours have limited or unlimited lifespan and parts range. This
greatly affects some people's buying habits, and IMHO would help the AFOL market
to stabilise.
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
IMHO there is limited value in having only a small range of parts in a colour.
If the supply of granules is limited, the parts you *do* make will be in limited
supply because some AFOLs will bulk buy. I'm familiar with obsolescence in
electronics and lifetime buys of parts are commonplace. The same goes for old
grey and brown brick and plate packs.
In the light of this I suggest the following parts / packs as a must:
All bricks 1-wide (1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x4, 1x6, 1x8, 1x10, 1x12, 1x16 plus 2x2
corner) in old brown, light grey and dark grey, as one service pack per colour,
~100 parts per pack for economy of scale.
All bricks 2-wide (2x2, 2x3, 2x4, 2x6, 2x8, 2x10) in old brown, light grey and
dark grey, as one service pack per colour, ~100 parts per pack for economy of
scale.
All plates 1-wide (1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x4, 1x6, 1x8, 1x10, 2x2 corner) in old brown,
light grey and dark grey, as one service pack per colour, ~100 parts per pack or
continue pack 10064 for ever!
All plates 2-wide (2x2, 2x3, 2x4, 2x6, 2x8, 2x10, 2x12, 2x16) in old brown,
light grey and dark grey, as one service pack per colour, ~100 parts per pack or
continue pack 10060 for ever!
I suggest that 1-wide and 2-wide bricks and plates be in separate packs as
different people use different amounts of each width, depending on what they're
building. Generally more 2-wide ones for scenery, more 1-wide ones for moving
models, though each person has their own preferences.
more packs:
Tiles in sizes 1x1, 1x2, 1x4, 1x6, 1x8 and 2x2, as one service pack per colour
(old brown, old light grey and old dark grey). I suggest 100 pieces in the
pack, with 20 of 1x1 and 1x2 and 15 of the other sizes. The bigger the pack,
the better the economy of scale (?). While we're at it, this pack in all
colours please!
BURPS from castle sets, both triangle and rectangle shapes in old light grey and
dark grey, perhaps two of each type in each colour per pack (total 8pcs).
Singles might be uneconomic, but packs better. Larger pack if other people
think that would be better, or split between the two greys.
Baseplates 16x16 16x32, 32x32 and 48x48 in old light grey. Please note that
availability of other colours of all these sizes (especially green (grass), blue
(sea), tan (sand), white (snow)) separately, without bricks, would be most
desirable. Old light grey is good for railway trackbeds, and all four sizes are
worth keeping - I use all of them and have sought out the smaller sizes for
flexibility of layout baseplate colouring.
I suggest that if the 9V railway track *really* *has* to be changed then it
could be in new light grey. New dark grey would make the old dark grey look
silly, but new light grey would look like concrete sleepers. This suggestion
may provoke a debate of its own!!! It would be easier to keep the track as old
dark grey though.
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
>
> I know this isn’t the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but hopefully
> this bears some good news for you.
That's good to hear, but you must already know that there are as many opinions
as there are AFOLs! I suggest at least one AFOL from each major theme (space,
train, castle, technic etc...) be involved.
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
> wounds. Thanks for your patience while we worked on getting this put to bed once
> and for all. As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> internally who understand your passion and interest.
>
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
Sorry, it's still sore, but I'm glad you're listening and I hope that
communication will continue to improve. Production of the packs I have
suggested will be like ointment to the wounds! Thinking positively, if TLC do
the right things, and take notice of the feedback you bring to them, sales to
AFOLs will go up.
Mark Bellis
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Mike Walsh wrote:
>
> "Frank Filz" <ffilz-lists@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:Hx922u.IIp@lugnet.com...
>
> [ ... snipped ... ]
>
> >
> > Actually, to be honest, right now I'm more bugged by the flesh tone minifigs
> > than the other color changes. I do tend to buy one of each new set in the
> > themes I'm interested in, but I see myself buying far fewer of the Harry
> > Potter and Spiderman sets than I would have in the past. I know I'm never
> > going to have the diversity of minifig heads in flesh tones that I will have
> > in yellow, so I just can't imagine using the "Caucasian" heads (the brown
> > ones I at least feel like I can use even though they will mean a dramatic
> > minority). What's even more bothersome is that some torsos have flesh tone
> > printing, which means they will look funny if I swap out the hands and head
> > for yellow.
>
>
> [ ... snipped ... ]
>
> We had a similar conversation at the NCLTC GATS show a couple of weeks ago.
> I don't care for the flesh colored minifigs either. They look "odd" after
> seeing yellow LEGO people for all of these years.
>
> The thing that concerns me the most about the flesh colored minifigs is the
> bigger chance that someone will build something without intending to offend
> someone yet someone will be offended. We never had that issue when all of
> the figs were the same color. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned but I like all
> my LEGO people as classic smileys.
>
> Mike
I like my Lego people as classic yellow smilies too. I don't really like the new
minifigs with different expressions and stuff. I like them yellow, smiling and
maybe with sunglasses or a pirate face. But then I'm a 1970s-mid-90s kinda
gal... ;0)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> (snip)
>
> This is a fairly radical opinion, I guess, but I'm not convinced that the 9V
> track is one of the "key" pieces to keep in production in old dark grey. I know
> it's different but frankly, this is an area where reality DOES vary. Railroads
> replace ties all the time, and ties weather at different rates, even concrete
> ones.
You HAVE to be joking.... there's NO railroad tie, either wood, concrete or
whatever other material that has such a blue tone in it. They'd even do better
to simply convert it to brown than to use the new dark grey color.
--
Jan-Albert van Ree
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
I look forward to the list of 'universal' colors!
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
I'd like to see train wheelsets (trucks)(2878c01) and decorative sides (2871)
maintained in the old gray color. It would be nice to have some variety for
train modeling.
I agree that the all detailing pieces mentioned in other posts would be nice to
have in the old gray.
Parts 6081 and 6091 (2x4x1 1/3 and 2x1 with curved top) and 6215 (2 x 3 w/
curved top) would be nice to have in the old gray for a while.
Paul Sinasohn
LUGNET #115
BAYLUG/BAYLTC
|
|
| |
Ooops - *** I *** agree. I can't speak for you.
In lugnet.general, Paul Sinasohn wrote:
> Speaking of baseplates, U agree that 48 x 48 in Trans-clear would be fantastic
> (I could easily buy a couple dozen).
Paul Sinasohn
LUGNET #115
BAYLUG / BAYLTC
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Mark Bellis wrote: (and it bears repeating)
> In the light of this I suggest the following parts / packs as a must:
>
> All bricks 1-wide (1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x4, 1x6, 1x8, 1x10, 1x12, 1x16 plus 2x2
> corner) in old brown, light grey and dark grey, as one service pack per colour,
> ~100 parts per pack for economy of scale.
>
> All bricks 2-wide (2x2, 2x3, 2x4, 2x6, 2x8, 2x10) in old brown, light grey and
> dark grey, as one service pack per colour, ~100 parts per pack for economy of
> scale.
>
> All plates 1-wide (1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x4, 1x6, 1x8, 1x10, 2x2 corner) in old brown,
> light grey and dark grey, as one service pack per colour, ~100 parts per pack or
> continue pack 10064 for ever!
>
> All plates 2-wide (2x2, 2x3, 2x4, 2x6, 2x8, 2x10, 2x12, 2x16) in old brown,
> light grey and dark grey, as one service pack per colour, ~100 parts per pack or
> continue pack 10060 for ever!
>
> I suggest that 1-wide and 2-wide bricks and plates be in separate packs as
> different people use different amounts of each width, depending on what they're
> building. Generally more 2-wide ones for scenery, more 1-wide ones for moving
> models, though each person has their own preferences.
(snipping of more great ideas)
I agree with all of this. Very well written, Mark. There is really nothing
else for me to add.
Jake, listen up!
~Kevin Blocksidge
|
|
| |
(this is pretty much a translation of what I wrote on 1000steine.de already)
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
Sorry I can't see ANY good news, all I see is a big PR blurb in a desparate
attempt to regain some lost ground.
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
So much for your corporate values then.... where's the reliability here? You
lost most of the trust already with the first shift, how can we trust LEGO now
that they won't pull a similair stunt again in a few years, making whatever I
might have collected in the new shades by then worthless again? Besides, many of
the parts we need aren't even produced at all anymore, let alone in the new
colors. And we'll need to wait at least 3-4 more years before a decent
assortment of parts becomes available at all to use for MOC's.
Right now LEGO still has a chance to go back, in 2-3 years it's impossible, both
for LEGO and for the AFOL's.
Why weren't the new tones first introduced as addons and let the consumer
decide? It's not as if Billund was afraid to introduce a new tone here or there
recently (specially compared to my childhood, 1980's, when every lightgrey brick
was treasured and anything darkgrey apart from train stuff was unthinkable!)
And if LEGO really believed the new colors to be better, why didn't they come
out to us first in a positive way (like bringing something along to community
gatherings to gauge opinions)?
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
That last line is the only correct answer however!
Also, how do the LEGO set designers think they'll do landscaping/castles with
the new dark-grey? Nothing in nature has such weird blue tones.
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
Too little, too late. And again, how can we trust LEGO not to change anything
again? LEGO broke that trust, and will need to do some serious work to regain
that trust, but so far it has done little, if anything, to do so.
Sorry, but my policy of not buying any sets containing new greys will stay in
place. And if such actions mean LEGO will be hurting even more at the end of
2004, so be it.
It seems as if the people in Billund still haven't learned a thing. They CANNOT
push stuff down our throats we don't want. If they don't believe me, they should
look up the results for Galidor, how well NBA and such sold in Europe etc etc.
LEGO should stop thinking it can push stuff on the market, even if it is clear
the customer has no intention to buy such products. Number 1 rule of business :
the customer is king.
At the end, I can say only one thing... it's very sad, both for LEGO and the
AFOL alike.
--
Jan-Albert van Ree
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
> >
> > > It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
> > > AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
> > > AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
> > > accepted AFOL input...
> >
> > Wow. That's harsh.
>
> Heh.
>
> Well, what can I say? I tend to be an "on the dark side" kind of guy...
>
> Harsh, perhaps--but is my assessment inaccurate? Aside from the bottom line,
> corporations love nothing as much as preserving wiggle room.
I suppose, you could be right, but I think it misses the entire point of why we
would ask for feedback in the first place. Why would we even bother to ask if we
didn't think we would somehow use it? The point of us agreeing to include AFOLs
was to avoid another situation like we've had here.
Of course, that said, sure, we might not follow your feedback 100%. After all,
there's always multiple things to consider. If we'd listened only to AFOLs about
Bionicle, we'd have never moved forward with a much loved, incredibly cool
product.
Corporations are not big Matrix-like computers. Corporations are made up of
people. In fact, I'd guess that a huge percentage of people reading this now are
doing so from work at a "corporation". We're trying to do good things here
folks. There are real people behind the decisions and changes that are made. You
may not like them, you may not agree with them, some will fail and some will
succeed. But at the end of the day, the motivations are driven more by people
trying to do good. Good for the company, for the consumer, and for themselves.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
> > I would like to see TLC issue a bulk tub which contains a good assortment
> > (not a tub of 1x1s like 4407 is) of bricks, plates, slopes, in the new
> > colors. I don't know how well these would sell on the shelf at Target,
> > probably not well at all. If they were augmented with some castle walls,
> > turets, and some castle figs, they could be marketed as a Castle "Designer
> > Set". For those of us who are not castle people, we could still get a good
> > quantity of bricks and plates and probably find "homes" for the other stuff
> > we didn't want.
> >
> > So I am asking TLC to help me make lemonade out of what is now a small
> > basket of lemons. If you want me to embrace the new colors, make them
> > readily available in a broad palette of elements and I'll get on board. If
> > I need to part sets out to get them, then it will be years before I have a
> > suitable supply to build with.
>
> This is definitely true. If I could buy tubs with a wide variety of parts in
> the new colors at 5 cents a brick or less (at least 75% greys and brown, but
> hey, if you want to throw in some of the other colors, that would be cool
> also), I would buy a bunch of those right off the bat to be able to create
> decent constructions in the new colors. Heck, price them right, and I might
> acquire more brick in these colors than I have in the old colors.
>
> Frank
I'll add my voice in with Frank and Mike on this one. The bulk tubs in the new
color (as some suggest, maybe even with Castle-specific parts) would be an
excellent way to get the new colors into circulation. Maybe as a S@H exclusive
or something. I'm not a castle builder, but I wouldn't turn down all the nifty
castle pieces if I got them with a bunch of other useful pieces in the same
color themes. Bulk is bulk, and bulk is good.
- Kelly
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jeff Findley wrote:
>
> I'm shocked no one has asked the following question:
>
> Just which colors are "universal" and which colors aren't? I'm assuming from
> what you write that non-universal colors can be changed, from time to time.
>
> As an AFOL, it would be great to know what colors are universal and won't
> change. That way, if we choose to invest a lot of time and money in buying
> pieces for large projects, we'll know what colors will be around "forever".
>
> If its isn't already, this should be up on a web site somewhere, with pictures
> of all the universal colors along with their official color names.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
A few of us asked way back at the beginning of the thread this very question...
Tracey
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
| |
I’ll add my voice in with Frank and Mike on this one. The bulk tubs in the new
color (as some suggest, maybe even with Castle-specific parts) would be an
excellent way to get the new colors into circulation. Maybe as a S@H exclusive
or something. I’m not a castle builder, but I wouldn’t turn down all the nifty
castle pieces if I got them with a bunch of other useful pieces in the same
color themes. Bulk is bulk, and bulk is good.
|
Adding my voice to this, a new bulk castle tub would be fantastic. Bulk as in 3
cents per part, or lower mind you. Also, if adding the cost of the tub made the
set prohibitive, I still think it would sell if packaged otherwise.
Those tubs are great (I use 100+ in my sorting system) but they aren’t the part
we really want. It’s all about the bricks.
Jason Spears | BrickCentral | MichLUG
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
| |
I’ll add my voice in with Frank and Mike on this one. The bulk tubs in the new
color (as some suggest, maybe even with Castle-specific parts) would be an
excellent way to get the new colors into circulation. Maybe as a S@H exclusive
or something. I’m not a castle builder, but I wouldn’t turn down all the nifty
castle pieces if I got them with a bunch of other useful pieces in the same
color themes. Bulk is bulk, and bulk is good.
|
Yes!
The 6 packs that were done for us recently used up 6 SKUs. We’ve been told in
the past that there’s an SKU shortage. Bulk tubs use up a LOT less SKUs than
their equivalent in service packs, ne?
Run off 2 or 3 bulk tubs with a decent assortment (take the average of what
everyone asks for) of parts and the excess to one person (like Kelly’s castle
pieces, etc) will be quickly sold off to the person that needs it desperately...
You could even do a space bulk tub, heavy in greebles and plates, with a mix
that’s predominantly dark/light grey weighted, and a castle bulk tub, weighted a
bit more in the brown direction and the brick direction, and a town tub, or a
landscape tub, or whatever.
Heck I think MichLUG’s own Ken Koleda already gave you
the mockup for what a castle tub might look like!...
That should save your marketing department a few cycles...
|
|
| |
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message
news:Hx9Aox.251s@lugnet.com...
> But at the end of the day, the motivations are driven more by people
> trying to do good. Good for the company, for the consumer, and for
themselves.
Jake, then why can't we hear from TLC, the people driven company, why they
thought reversing 20+ years of product design was "good." ?
We have yet to hear, besides the focus group reason, why replacing colors
was a good idea.(1)
If LEGO shared their thinking on this, it would be a lot easier to swallow.
But nobody understands the change or the reasons why.
Did LEGO think the new colors would sell more?
Does LEGO have designs on the table that need the new colors?
Did market research of 10,000 children say the colors were better?
Did the Pantone & color industry people say "grayish blue" was "in" and
"stock gray" was "out"?
Is it because MegaBlok colors are almost neon and you are losing market
share to them?
I find it very, very frustrating.
Bryan
(1) OK, we can eliminate the recycle reason, as you discounted that earlier
today.
|
|
| |
I thank you for continuing to advance this news to us. I suppose it's really
not so bad, as long as LEGO colors don't bounce all over the rainbow range every
few years. Given enough time, I will be able to build a collection of the said
colors in the "new" shades to offset any creation.
To train heads, I suppose the track would be a pretty big issue of contention.
I would also like to add that many of the baseplates we have all become common
users of should fall into the "don't ever change" category. Varied landscape
colors would be difficult to explain.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> Only if you choose to view it that way. (I tend to be a "on the bright side...."
> kind of guy) To me, this is the AFOLs saying something (we're upset that things
> changed suddenly), and the company reacting ( locking these new colors so that
> you feel confident that we aren't going to change them again, and never again,
> will we make changes like this without AFOL input)
But how can we trust those words, if you already broke those words, despite your
corporate values and such? Sorry Jake, but apart from changing the stud
dimension LEGO committed one of the worst mistakes any such company could make
and it seems it hasn't learned from it. Like Jojo said, you slap us and then
again afterwards, just to make sure the point comes across.
Look at how for instance model railroading companies introduce changes. Marklin
decided to stop making the old Marklin M track (the metal bedding) around 1990
if memory serves me correct. However the supplies lasted for several more years,
solutions were introduced so people could transfer gradually etc etc.
--
Jan-Albert van Ree
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > Harsh, perhaps--but is my assessment inaccurate? Aside from the bottom line,
> > corporations love nothing as much as preserving wiggle room.
>
> I suppose, you could be right, but I think it misses the entire point of why we
> would ask for feedback in the first place. Why would we even bother to ask if we
> didn't think we would somehow use it? The point of us agreeing to include AFOLs
> was to avoid another situation like we've had here.
I should take a moment to thank you for your courtesy in addressing my concerns,
since I flatter myself to think that you might know my MO here on LUGNET, so I'm
hardly the biggest income source for TLG. Thank you.
I don't mean to lay a big anti-corporate screed on you, either, except to voice
my concern that companies always work to improve profits; if that coincides with
increased customer satisfaction, great. If not, it's no big deal, as long as
profits are satisfactorily maintained. I don't think corporations should even
be criticized for this, unless they use deceptive means to get there (and some
may disagree with me even on that count).
So to answer the current question, if TLG solicits and ignores AFOL input, then
TLG can still claim that it took input from adult fans of the brand. Sure, that
might annoy the AFOL's who feel ignored, but if the "working with the customer"
angle boosts sales overall, then TLG's margin is served.
> Of course, that said, sure, we might not follow your feedback 100%.
That explains why you guys never listened to me, way back here:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/fun/?n=7342
but I keep hoping.
> After all, there's always multiple things to consider. If we'd listened only
> to AFOLs about Bionicle, we'd have never moved forward with a much loved,
> incredibly cool product.
Conversely, if you'd listened to AFOL's you wouldn't have bothered with Galidor,
for example. But I understand your point.
> Corporations are not big Matrix-like computers. Corporations are made up of
> people. In fact, I'd guess that a huge percentage of people reading this now are
> doing so from work at a "corporation".
I'm one of them, which is why I'm hyper-sensitive to what I perceive as
corporate spin.
Thanks again for taking the time to reply so thoroughly and patiently.
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, John Riley wrote:
>
> I think there are two reasons why AFOLs are angry and/or upset with the color
> change:
>
> (1) The new colors don't match their current selection, look awful, etc.
> (2) The lack of communication of these changes. Somebody had to open a set to
> find out.
>
> I'm going to talk about reason (2). You've heard a lot about reason (1).
> <snip>
I want to emphasize (2) as well with respect to the future of classic colors vs.
new colors. Whatever classic color parts may be supplied it is of utmost
importance to clearly identify them. This was obviously done with the limited
edition 10,000 series packs, but the consumer is still in the dark on
pre-existing service packs and such sets as the mosaic line. I love the idea of
more purchase possibilities, but I'd like to see the pre-requisite communication
avenues in place first.
Classic color part priorities:
basic brick, slope, and tile selections
As much as I'd like to continue to build a stock of classic colors, I'd also
like to be able to quickly establish a stock of the new colors. A comprehensive
range of service packs in the new colors, or a big 'ole tub would go a long way
towards getting some of us past the color change hurdle.
Thanks, Jake!
John
#388
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
[sniparoo]
> So to answer the current question, if TLG solicits and ignores AFOL input, then
> TLG can still claim that it took input from adult fans of the brand. Sure, that
> might annoy the AFOL's who feel ignored, but if the "working with the customer"
> angle boosts sales overall, then TLG's margin is served.
I understand the point, but I don't exactly follow it. The only way that sales
are boosted by paying attention to AFOL feedback is with the AFOL market. There
really isn't a way we can take your (AFOL) feedback and meld it into something
for the kids market. Kids/parents won't really care much about whether or not we
listened to AFOLs or not.
But if we take in your feedback, and react, then in theory your (AFOL) sales
goes up. Why would we not want to listen? Why would we bother asking for your
feedback if we weren't going to use it? I just fail to understand how we could
use AFOL for anything other than addressing AFOL desires.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
Well ideally they would just go back to making everything in the original
colors. I really wanted to like the new Spiderman and Harry Potter sets too.
The mini-Star Destroyer set really irks me though. The perfect space accessory
pack ruined by new neon grey. Anyway back to the topic at hand...
> > > (snip)
> >
> > > Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more important, than
> > > the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
> >
> > What kind of detail parts? I'm hoping to put together a list that I can pass
> > along.
>
> Mostly the modified plates and bricks that give you good greeblization.
I agree the specialized yet still generic non-theme specific parts are the most
useful aside from basic bricks.
> The plate-modifieds for starters...
>
> 1x1 plate with clips (all three kinds),
> 1x2 plates with handles, with rods, with offset studs
> 1x2 tile with rod, 1x2 tile with one stud
>
> The 1x2 grille tiles
> The 1x2 grille bricks
>
> 1x2-1x4 brackets
> 1x1 brick with side stud (headlight or washing machine brick)
> 1x1 round brick, 2x2 round brick and plate, 2x2 macaroni brick
>
> Rod system stuff.
> The antennas and rods in various sizes
>
> Stuff like that. Non theme specific but useful for detail.
>
> More later if I have time, kinda heads down at my client right now (in NJ
> actually, rather than MA where I thought I'd be the rest of the week)
The only other thing I would add is 1x1 brick with 4 side studs and the similar
1x2 "rocket" multi-stud piece. (I would like the old space jet with 1x2 plate
but only if the above was done first. Of course placing them end to end could
look interesting on a castle or town building too.)
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
| |
Frank, I'm surprised you didn't mention one of the brown parts we love: Ship
hulls. The primary problems with the new colors is that the new greys look like
metal, not stone. In the same way, the old brown looks like wood.
But a chocolate-colored barrel? What the heck?
Boat hulls pieces, barrels, doors, rigging, cannon bases, treasure chests...
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Wesley Davis wrote:
> Frank, I'm surprised you didn't mention one of the brown parts we love: Ship
> hulls. The primary problems with the new colors is that the new greys look like
> metal, not stone. In the same way, the old brown looks like wood.
>
> But a chocolate-colored barrel? What the heck?
>
> Boat hulls pieces, barrels, doors, rigging, cannon bases, treasure chests...
Yes, old brown is wood, new brown is chocolate, sadly as much use for realistic
modelling as a chocolate teapot. Rather edible looking too :)
Mark
|
|
| |
Well, Jake, I admire your willingness to again appear before a mob to weather
another volley. Those above you at TLC can learn a great deal from your genuine
devotion to the product and its loyal (until now) users.
I believe TLC has made its greatest blunders - galvanizing their decision to
forge ahead with the new colors, and not admitting to a bad decision. SO, since
that’s no longer even up for argument, I’ll try to be constructive with my
opinion of what might prompt me to buy anything produced after 2003....
I really like the idea of classic grey/brown tubs. This would help appease many
castle and space folk, and I would most certainly buy multiple tubs...then revel
in the fact that I didn’t have to scour Bricklink for classic grey!
Somebody earlier in the thread suggested that any future LEGO Legend release
consist of the classic greys and brown - how could it be called a “Legend”
otherwise? I like that idea, too. I would resume purchases of Legend sets if
this were the case.
Lots of other great ideas in this thread as well, but MY point is make sure you
do your part to ensure TLC does SOMETHING to keep alive an on-going flow of
classic grey/brown. Sets, bulk, tubs, SOMETHING. In the meantime I’ll be sure
to do my part by speaking with my wallet...a closed one.
Thanks again Jake!
-Matt
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:
<Frustration Warning!>
> > Only if you choose to view it that way. (I tend to be a "on the bright side...."
> > kind of guy) To me, this is the AFOLs saying something (we're upset that things
> > changed suddenly), and the company reacting ( locking these new colors so that
> > you feel confident that we aren't going to change them again, and never again,
> > will we make changes like this without AFOL input)
>
> But how can we trust those words, if you already broke those words, despite your
> corporate values and such?
First off, when did I (or anyone from LEGO) ever previously say we were locking
colors and no changes would ever be made? I don't recall ever having done that.
And I'm not sure our corporate values make any stance about never changing our
core system in any way. (In fact, if they did, since the values were developed
well before the LEGO system, we wouldn't have a LEGO system at all)
> Sorry Jake, but apart from changing the stud
> dimension LEGO committed one of the worst mistakes any such company could make
> and it seems it hasn't learned from it. Like Jojo said, you slap us and then
> again afterwards, just to make sure the point comes across.
OK, I have to tell you, this frustrates me a bit. Because we have maintained our
decision and not backed away from it, you are saying that we aren't learning
anything? Despite having announced several things this morning that very very
clearly show that not only have we a) admitted the mistake (repeatedly), b)
taken actions to avoid these mistakes in the future, and c) announced these
intentions publicly in writing, we are still "slapping" you on the face?
Then in an effort to ensure that you (the AFOLs) are completely informed and
kept in the loop on on what's going on, we are "slapping" you again??
Honestly, I think that approaching this as "LEGO has slapped the AFOL" is
completely off base. That makes it sound like we purposely went out of our way
to upset the AFOLs. Nothing is further from the truth!
> Look at how for instance model railroading companies introduce changes. Marklin
> decided to stop making the old Marklin M track (the metal bedding) around 1990
> if memory serves me correct. However the supplies lasted for several more years,
> solutions were introduced so people could transfer gradually etc etc.
So they still made the change, right? They made the change, but they did it in a
way that is more acceptable to you, right? Let's focus on the productive and
talk about ways to ease our transition.
Let me, once again, say this very clearly so that no one can ever say LEGO
hasn't apologize for the problems.
====
Representing the LEGO Company, I apologize for a poor implementation of a major
change. We made a mistake in the way that this change was made, and we are
taking all efforts to ensure we don't end up in this same situation again.
====
Now, from your Marklin example, they made the change, and they did it in a way
that made it easier for their hobbyists to make the switch. I've been asking
for, digging for, and trying to pry info from the global AFOL community about
the best way, moving forward, to ease this transition.
I know this change is not welcomed, and was implemented poorly (see apology
above). But since we can't turn back time, and since the change is here to stay,
let's focus on the best way to ease into the transition.
*Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the forseeable future?
*Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
*Is it by some other concept?
I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU think
is the best way to ease into the switch over.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
>
> [sniparoo]
>
> > So to answer the current question, if TLG solicits and ignores AFOL input, then
> > TLG can still claim that it took input from adult fans of the brand. Sure, that
> > might annoy the AFOL's who feel ignored, but if the "working with the customer"
> > angle boosts sales overall, then TLG's margin is served.
>
> I understand the point, but I don't exactly follow it. The only way that sales
> are boosted by paying attention to AFOL feedback is with the AFOL market. There
> really isn't a way we can take your (AFOL) feedback and meld it into something
> for the kids market. Kids/parents won't really care much about whether or not we
> listened to AFOLs or not.
>
> But if we take in your feedback, and react, then in theory your (AFOL) sales
> goes up. Why would we not want to listen? Why would we bother asking for your
> feedback if we weren't going to use it? I just fail to understand how we could
> use AFOL for anything other than addressing AFOL desires.
I guess I'm thinking about it like this (and please correct me if I'm wrong):
AFOL's are among the most die-hard fans of the brand (low flight-risk)
AFOL's account for a low percentage of overall sales (low dollar-risk)
Kids (& non-AFOL parents) have no particular loyalty to LEGO (high flight-risk)
Kids (& non-AFOL parents) are a large percentage of sales (high dollar-risk)
So TLG can solicit AFOL input and heed or ignore it at TLG's whim, all the while
claiming (not incorrectly) to have solicited input from fans in designing a
product, a theme, or what-have-you. I can even imagine an ad along the lines of
"The new LEGO (insert item), designed with input from fans." If this works as a
selling point, then TLG benefits from the solicitation of input whether the
input is used or not. I don't even think TLG would have to specify which fans
gave input about which products, unless that was a goal (like the extremely cool
Blacksmith's Shop 3739).
TLG can also reliably gamble that AFOL's are sufficiently dedicated to the brand
not to quit the hobby or flee to the competition, even if those AFOL's feel
marginalized by the use/non-use of their input. The color change is the current
prime example of this--how many AFOL's are going to be lost? Very few, I'd
wager.
Kids and their non-AFOL parents are less established in LEGO-brand loyalty, so
TLG must naturally play to that audience, if that's where the most money comes
from (I can't imagine, for instance, that AFOL's account for the majority of
Bionicle sales). If non-AFOL parents are positively influenced to buy LEGO by
the claim of fan-design, then TLG benefits from increased sales to a customer
who might just as easily have bought K'Nex or the like.
So my concern isn't based on hard dollar figures, but on an awareness of how
some corporations work and how some consumers select one product versus another.
Thanks again for your time.
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> Yes, please share. I noticed there was never an official denial to
> the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
>
> Is this the real reason why you can't go back? It's the only "good reason"
> I've ever heard that makes any sense.
You can't simply "mix" ABS like that.
The colors will never blend 100% and you'll get swirling patterns such as
McDonalds "Flurry" icecreams :)
--
Jan-Albert van Ree
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
>
> [sniparoo]
>
> > So to answer the current question, if TLG solicits and ignores AFOL input, then
> > TLG can still claim that it took input from adult fans of the brand. Sure, that
> > might annoy the AFOL's who feel ignored, but if the "working with the customer"
> > angle boosts sales overall, then TLG's margin is served.
>
> I understand the point, but I don't exactly follow it. The only way that sales
> are boosted by paying attention to AFOL feedback is with the AFOL market. There
> really isn't a way we can take your (AFOL) feedback and meld it into something
> for the kids market. Kids/parents won't really care much about whether or not we
> listened to AFOLs or not.
>
> But if we take in your feedback, and react, then in theory your (AFOL) sales
> goes up. Why would we not want to listen? Why would we bother asking for your
> feedback if we weren't going to use it? I just fail to understand how we could
> use AFOL for anything other than addressing AFOL desires.
I know you mean well, (read: don't take this personal) but I completely disagree
with this. I know for a fact the the only thing that has changed in my 'wants'
since I was 8, is the quantity. AFOLs are AFOLs because we were addicted as
kids. While I have no problem with Bionicle as a money-maker, I realize that it
is a fad whose time will pass, and I don't think TLC understands this. Kids who
like construction toys are supposed to be TLCs core market. While TLC may have
gotten lucky in the fad lottery with Bionicle, what are the plans when that cash
cow dries up? As someone who worked in a toy store, I can tell you without
doubt that most of the kids who like Bionicle are not fans of construction toys
or LEGO in general. Meanwhile the kids who like construction toys and LEGO in
general know they are getting the short end of the stick as most of them have
older siblings/parents who were or are FOL. Maybe this is different in other
geographic areas but it is the case in my small corner of the Earth.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
| |
Jake,
I have been quiet on the color issue since it was announced because I have been
trying to determine how it would personally affect the hobby for me. This is my
conclusion: I support Lego because I enjoy it for what it is, a good product
that gives me hours of entertainment. Lego is a company that will have to
evolve to stay competitive in the toy industry and I am sure that the color
change will not be the last change to occur in order for Lego to do so. I am in
this hobby for the long haul. Every change that has occurred I have gladly
accepted and enjoyed adapting my building to incorporate. The color change will
be the same. So to answer your question about what parts to make in what color:
I would rather have parts available in the new color so I can have easier access
to them. I would rather Lego move forward then try to balance production
between the old and the new. Fully embrace the new and move ahead.
I realize that my opinion may not be supported by others in the AFOL community
and some may say that perhaps I don't have enough invested in the old colors for
this change to really affect me. My response would be talk to the people that
know me (my favorite color is gray) and check my brickshelf account
(http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=jfoulds) you'll notice my
investment into the old gray colors!
Keep Building,
- Jim F.
|
|
| |
okay, strike from the record the second blunder about not admitting the bad
decsion. I’m reading apologies, pardom me.
|
|
| |
| |
Run off 2 or 3 bulk tubs with a decent assortment (take the average of what
everyone asks for) of parts and the excess to one person (like Kelly’s castle
pieces, etc) will be quickly sold off to the person that needs it
desperately...
You could even do a space bulk tub, heavy in greebles and plates, with a mix
that’s predominantly dark/light grey weighted, and a castle bulk tub,
weighted a bit more in the brown direction and the brick direction, and a
town tub, or a landscape tub, or whatever.
|
I can’t help but see the irony in getting something like this. We have wanted
things like this for a while but if we were to get them now it would be to build
up a stock of the new colors. It would definitely help with accepting and being
able to use the new colors, though I still wish they would just go back. If they
are not going to go back altogether or produce items in the old greys then do
this with the new greys please.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
| |
> I know this change is not welcomed, and was implemented poorly (see apology
> above). But since we can't turn back time, and since the change is here to stay,
> let's focus on the best way to ease into the transition.
>
> *Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the forseeable future?
> *Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
> *Is it by some other concept?
>
> I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU think
> is the best way to ease into the switch over.
>
> Jake
Jake,
I for one really appreciate the considerable effort by yourself and LEGO in
listening and responding to the feedback from a small group of consumers. I hope
the negative responses here don't adversely affect future LEGO community
interaction.
Here is my short list of suggestions for moving forward, in order matching your
question above:
1. Let the AFOL community know what colors are "locked" forevermore and will not
change (barring unforseen circumstances with vendors, etc). This will provide a
sense of stability that appears to have eroded recently.
2. LEGO providing cost-effective bulk product in the new colors in some manner
(tubs or whatever) with at least a minimum of bricks, plates, slopes, and some
specialty pieces (see http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=47229);
3. Other things: a definitive answer on why the change was made. I'm sure it's a
combination of factors: focus group discoveries, material cost, quality, vendor
or supply issues, matching competition, focusing on the future, and so on. As
detailed an explanation as possible would go a long way toward at least getting
understanding if not acceptance in the AFOL community.
4. Make a silk purse out of a perceived sow's ear by touting the change rather
than appearing to slide something in below consumer radar. "LEGO Blahblah: Now
With New Brighter Colors!" If this is a good change from the consumer point of
view, it has value in being advertised.
I'm sure there won't be a lot of agreement here with my fourth suggestion, but
from a larger viewpoint it defuses any quality control issues that could pop up
because of the change.
- Kelly
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> since the change is here to stay, let's focus on the best way to
> ease into the transition.
>
> *Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the
> forseeable future?
> *Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
> *Is it by some other concept?
<My opinion>
The 'natural' transition to the new colors would be to have as many
different elements as possible available in the *new* colors as soon as
possible (bulk, mixed packs, etc).
As long as only a few different parts are available, it's very difficult to
build as one wishes, and mixing old and new greys doesn't look too good in
many circumstances. Frustration follows...
So, as it's impossible to continue the old colors (may they rest in peace!),
make sure the new ones gets bulk packs, and lots of different parts. Give
the community a couple of years, and most of the problem is gone...
</My opinion>
--
Anders Isaksson, Sweden
BlockCAD: http://w1.161.telia.com/~u16122508/proglego.htm
Gallery: http://w1.161.telia.com/~u16122508/gallery/index.htm
|
|
| |
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
snip
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
snip
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
Thank you for the update. Being classified as universal colors really doesn't
matter to me. I have no use for the new gray given their inorganic nature and
it really wouldn't matter to me if they changed years from now.
I am pleased to see the possibility of certain elements being available in old
colors. 9v track in the old gray would be absolutly wonderful. Besides the
loss of stone colors I was most upset about color change in the track. So
definately yes to 9v track!
The other parts that I would most like to see would be basic bricks (1x2s
especially) and plates. Even just a small selection would go a long way.
Arches and 1x4x5 windows would be nice too if ever possible.
David Kohrman
|
|
| |
Jake,
First let me say thank you again and again for all your time and patience
dealing with what seems to be an endless number of cranky old weirdos.
Okay, now to the nasty stuff.
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
> wounds.
Honestly, every time I open a new set with New Grey - the wound is re-opened.
Everytime I see my bag of New Grey and New Brown, the wound is re-opened. I
want to cry.
Partially because there are quite a few parts that were never made in old grey
that are now available in new grey. Some parts that were rare in OG, and now
common in NG (the light saber hilt, for example).
And partially because I won't be able to add the new parts to my existing
collection.
I have bought new sets, and will continue to do so. But perhaps not at the same
rate I once did. I definately will focus on Designer Sets as they don't have as
much NG, not to mention they are great sets all around.
It really upsets me that this happened when it did. Just a point when TLG was
beginning to respect and trust the Fans, this happens and now Fans may never be
able to really trust TLG again. Of course, things will slowly get better over
time, but this scar will be seen for a long time coming. Everything else aside,
this is the biggest mistake ever (if not the color change, then the errors
around communication of the color change, etc).
Still faithfully,
Lenny Hoffman, Adult Fan of LEGO
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
<<snipped>>
> So they still made the change, right? They made the change, but they did it in a
> way that is more acceptable to you, right? Let's focus on the productive and
> talk about ways to ease our transition.
>
> Let me, once again, say this very clearly so that no one can ever say LEGO
> hasn't apologize for the problems.
>
> ====
> Representing the LEGO Company, I apologize for a poor implementation of a major
> change. We made a mistake in the way that this change was made, and we are
> taking all efforts to ensure we don't end up in this same situation again.
> ====
Let me say seeing this apology shows this AFOL that Lego does care about us.
>
> Now, from your Marklin example, they made the change, and they did it in a way
> that made it easier for their hobbyists to make the switch. I've been asking
> for, digging for, and trying to pry info from the global AFOL community about
> the best way, moving forward, to ease this transition.
>
> I know this change is not welcomed, and was implemented poorly (see apology
> above). But since we can't turn back time, and since the change is here to stay,
> let's focus on the best way to ease into the transition.
>
> *Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the forseeable future?
No doubt there. The parts packs being offered now are a very good start IMO.
By "locking" in certain parts in old colors I'm given a feeling of security that
I will be able to get my hands on parts I may need in the future, be it one year
or five from now. (I was at LLCA's PAB the other day and seeing a sign marked
"discontinued colors" was not a pleasant thing.)
> *Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
At first, I felt a bit uneasy about the tub idea for bringing the new colors to
market but was suddenly struck by one of those "duh" moments. The AFOL
community of 2004 is certainly not the same as that of 1994. If this were 1994,
I'd say I would have been screwed (after all, I didn't know other AFOLs or had
access to the web) but it's not. I have the option in this day and age of
getting together with others and trade my "new" with someone who would like to
get rid of their "old". Sure, it's not perfect but an option.
Having both a "new" color and "old" color tubs on the market should be done with
caution- like make it as clear as possible to the consumer that he/she is buying
the "new" or the "old".
> *Is it by some other concept?
Well, as some have already mentioned, if packets of parts used for detailing are
looked into then getting those who are "in the know" when it comes to using them
in themes like space, castle, town, train, etc. should play a role in what those
packs come with.
Something else also came to mind. I remember reading something about LEGO
wanting to get out of the lincensing market and go back to traditional lines.
Maybe these tubs could play a part in doing so.
>
> I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU think
> is the best way to ease into the switch over.
>
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> OK, I have to tell you, this frustrates me a bit. Because we have
> maintained our decision and not backed away from it, you are saying that
> we aren't learning anything? Despite having announced several things this
> morning that very very clearly show that not only have we a) admitted the
> mistake (repeatedly), b) taken actions to avoid these mistakes in the
> future, and c) announced these intentions publicly in writing, we are
> still "slapping" you on the face?
Read Jojo's statement, that's pretty much my point of view as well...
> > Look at how for instance model railroading companies introduce changes.
> > Marklin decided to stop making the old Marklin M track (the metal
> > bedding) around 1990 if memory serves me correct. However the supplies
> > lasted for several more years, solutions were introduced so people could
> > transfer gradually etc etc.
> So they still made the change, right? They made the change, but they did
> it in a way that is more acceptable to you, right? Let's focus on the
> productive and talk about ways to ease our transition.
They managed to back it up with reasonable facts and managed to convince
people it was a better product (and at a similair price level, which in
that case was important too)
> *Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the forseeable
> future? *Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
> *Is it by some other concept?
> I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU
> think is the best way to ease into the switch over.
Sorry but I see no way, apart from keeping the old next to the new. If you
keep making parts a and b but not c at some point we'll run out of c and
the problem is back. And the longer this goes on, the worse it actually
gets, as many of us have very much changing needs and since various stock
slowly dwindles down. The transition to click hinges have already caused me
enough frustration :( (I hate them, sorry but I can't descibe it
otherwise... set 4512 being the prime example of all that's bad about them)
Now purely my point of view
- Don't bother with packs of the new colors, waiste of SKU's which I'd
rather see appear in old colors. I won't buy ANY new colors (so if there
will be more Adventurers/Orient Expedition sets, I'll just accept the fact
that I'm incomplete, same with Designer, already replaced the parts from
the X-Pods with "proper colors" and won't be buying more 2004 stuff with
new greys.
- If you want to keep doing old colors, a minimum in terms of parts would
be:
* all 1*n and 2*n plates + bricks
* 4*n and 6*n plates, L-plates, plates without corner, wedge plates/bricks
* slopes, normal in 33,45 and 75, as well as inverse 33 and 45 degrees.
With convex/concave and top pieces
* hinges, clips, SNOT converters, centerstud tiles, brackets
* all tile sizes
* train track remains darkgrey
* 48*48 baseplates remain old grey (although that might be a problem for
normal retail again....)
* windows/doors
--
Jan-Albert van Ree | http://www.vanree.net/brickpiles/
Brick Piles | Santa Fe B-unit
GnuPG key | http://www.vanree.net/~javanree/publickey.asc
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
<snip>
> I'd rather see a prioritised list of parts that need to be made in the old
> colors developed than debate, yet again, why changing the colors was a Bad Idea.
Then why debate? You have continued this conversation far longer than it needs
to be. Maybe one response if you really feel the urge, but honestly, I felt his
claim that Lego owes him money so absurd that it really didn't merit further
debate, and here I am reading your _second_ reply and you are against debating!
Truely, you are only giving his arguement more weight because readers of your
posts have to think about it one more time.
> If I had more time I'd write this a bit softer, I guess, but I don't.
I wonder where you get any time to write all the volumes you have written here
and in other lists. Seriously.
-Alfred
|
|
| |
Jake,
Thanks for the update!
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
This doesn't really make sense to me. What's the point of having mottled looking
light/dark grey trains running on a nicely matched dark grey track? Since the
color change is permanent, start producing all elements in new grey so that we
can cut our losses and amass a variety of pieces to be able to build creations
with the new colors.
>
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
Good!
Is anything being done about the variations within colors that we have been
seeing with the new HP sets? You can clearly see them on the Knight's Bus on the
cover of the latest catalog, and I have seen them with the dark greys in my new
Hagrid's Hut (in low light with crusty contacts even). In general, quality
control is slipping, which is *even* more dissapointing to me than the color
change to tell you the truth.
James
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Anthony Sava wrote:
| |
Jake contacted me and has asked me to post my opinion as to what specific
parts I’d like to see offered in Bulk that would make the Castle people happy,
much like the old grey train track makes the train people happy.
|
I’d like to say I agree with Anthony has to say.
Castle Walls I dont use as much as I use basic bricks (2xn and 1xn) and plates.
Minifig accessories don’t bother me as much because I don’t army build.
Furthermore, many of my accessories now come from the Customizers - Jeff Byrd
(Blasterman) and Isaac Yue - which are not true Old Grey. I realize that the
customs they make could not be made by TLG because of the different market
(Adults vs. Children-safe-toys).
I agree with Anthony’s dreaming about the perfect minifig pack.
I agree that the 48x48 baseplate should be made in OG as this is the standard
plate size for the Moonbase.
Ironic that the brick packages in Old Grey made available for fans was the first
time those packages were available in several years. Also, making a minfig pack
based on fan suggestions is only now being proposed. It’s as if only now, when
TLG does such a bad thing, do they honestly begin asking for what we’d like and
giving it to us.
One thing I would like would be Bulk Packs of Slopes - perhaps a pack of 45
degree and a pack of 33 degree slopes (or maybe 33 degree + 75 degree) and
include Roof Peaks, Convex and Concave double-slopes (inner and outer turns) -
especially concave double-slopes, 1 long, 2 long, and 4 long. 3 long and 8 long
would be cool, but not necessary.
Hmm..
I’ll let you know if I think of anything else.
-Lenny
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
//SNIP//
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
Ok, what parts HAVE TO stay the old greys? And we can't say "everything"? How
about everything but technic, because I don't buy technic and some of them seem
to enjoy the new colour?
What does Lego expect the AFOL community to say to something like this? We all
want everything to be back the way it was, with the old grey. Now we have to
pick and choose. Maybe you'll let the trainheads have their good old grey for
track, but why do you leave out castleheads or spaceheads who also want the old
grey, since I'm assuming not everyone is going to get their way with this.
And how is anyone supposed to feel better when the 'good news' is that Lego
realizes that they screwed up by changing the greys and brown, and tell us it
won't happen again? Woop-de-friggin'-do guys. Change it back and then tell us
its universal.
Plus add me to the list of people completely baffled by the "good thinking" that
went into the colour change, because I can't think of anything good about it,
like the rest of the AFOL community. Maybe if we got something concrete from
Lego why they actually did that, they maybe it would be reasonable, but right
now it seems that Lego changed the colours, and said "tough, deal with it, you
big AFOL babies, we have our secret reasons." And we complain but our good news
is that we're stuck with the new colours. Thanks guys. Maybe I'll go another
12 months without buying any Lego sets at retail, along with who knows how many
other people, and see how much more TLG can go into the red.
Jake, I'm not trying to attack you here, but it seems that TLG is making some of
the worst decisions possible in the last few years.
|
|
| |
Jake,
That brings about an interesting question that may have already been asked.
What are the universal colours?
Some seem obvious to me... but what about green or tan?
Thanks,
- Jeff
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
>
> [sniparoo]
>
> > So to answer the current question, if TLG solicits and ignores AFOL input, then
> > TLG can still claim that it took input from adult fans of the brand. Sure, that
> > might annoy the AFOL's who feel ignored, but if the "working with the customer"
> > angle boosts sales overall, then TLG's margin is served.
>
> I understand the point, but I don't exactly follow it. The only way that sales
> are boosted by paying attention to AFOL feedback is with the AFOL market. There
> really isn't a way we can take your (AFOL) feedback and meld it into something
> for the kids market. Kids/parents won't really care much about whether or not we
> listened to AFOLs or not.
>
> But if we take in your feedback, and react, then in theory your (AFOL) sales
> goes up. Why would we not want to listen? Why would we bother asking for your
> feedback if we weren't going to use it? I just fail to understand how we could
> use AFOL for anything other than addressing AFOL desires.
>
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
Jake, I feel people may be cynical due to the experience of being
"short-changed" by other large companies. Take eBay, for example. they always
like to give the impression they are listening and "taking the community's ideas
on board", when really they jump first and ask questions later. It's all too
obvious most of the time that changes are decided and implemented a long time
before the community ever gets their say or even gets to hear about it....by
that time, any community feedback or workshop session is just a token to quiet
the masses.
If Lego could prove to AFOLs that they indeed ARE listening and WILL listen and
DO listen to AFOL views, ideas and opinions, I'm sure that some people here will
love (well, "RESPECT") you for it ;0)
Tracey
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> >
> > > * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> > > "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> > > course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> > > ones.
> >
> > The first item on your list of "good news" confuses me. Are you saying that
> > these three colors are now instant classic colors and only they will remain
> > unchanged? What about white, black, red, yellow, blue and green? Those are
> > also core colors.
>
> Easy now. Saying the three new colors are locked doesn't equate to others not
> being locked. It's a very good question about what colors are considered
> "universal" though, and I'll get back to you ASAP on that.
>
>
> > I have participated in a focus group before. I am not convinced of their
> > legitimacy for determining anything worthwhile. I'm sure that some are better
> > designed than others and it is encouraging that you want to broaden the audience
> > in them. Has TLC considered using a LUGNET newsgroup as a focus group? That
> > would give them a broad range of opinion in at least the AFOL segment.
>
> I didn't really mean to imply that we would "focus group" (as in two way mirrors
> and bean bags), necessarily. Just that we would find the right way to include
> AFOL input, and then include it.
>
> As far as using LUGNET (and other community sites) as "focus groups".... well,
> we're already doing that. Believe it or not, many people in the company read
> these forums (including this thread, I'm positive). I've thrown out ideas here
> to get feedback. I'm actually working with colleagues on a few cool, top-secret
> ideas coming up soon along these lines.
>
> Jake
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
Jake:
I recall a somewhat controversial (as always!) survey that you announced in the
past few months. The main focus of it was Legends. We were asked to rate
possible future Legends releases. There were also questions about potential
future themes. I also recall one lego.com survey asking AFOLs about our
spending habits.
Having gone through a number of surveys, I sure would be interested in seeing
some of the results. Obviously, releasing some of the results might give your
competitors or potential competitors some advantage, but some tidbits would be
nice to receive. Anything in the works to release anything to us? I assume
participation rates by AFOL's are high in these surveys, despite our griping
about their design?
Thanks,
Markus
|
|
| |
Jake & All,
> I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
First, thanks for posting information for us on this subject, I am sure you feel
like drinking pink fluid sometimes when you do. : ) Seriously, I know a lot of
people in the clubs I am involved with are upset about this, as I think this is
one of the largest issues I have seen come up since I have been online around
1998.
(One of my first memories is meeting Larry P. via a bidding war on a E-bay lot
with a bunch of space parts!)
Anyway, there have been a lot of good suggestions on how to use the older
colors, here are a few of mine:
1) Santa Fe - It should have the old dark gray
2) Train Track - should be the same dark gray
3) I like some kind of tub approach - castle, SW, town, etc.
I guess my biggest concerns I have had in regard to color, both now and before
the color change for grays and brown, has to due with availability. A good
example are are two colors that are really nice, dark blue, and brick / dark
red. There have been a handful of sets with these colors in them, but are not in
enough to really make some creations outside of smaller details.
Chris Leach managed to pull together a brick red building:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=311480
but Chris hard a hard time building it - if you look inside, it is all the small
wedge plate and some 1x3's, which took hundreds of sets off of Bricklink to get.
My view would be something along the lines of when you get a new color, whatever
it is, make a few packs of different elements to launch it better:
Bricks:
1x pack, 2x pack, Brickplates
Plates:
1x plates, 2x plates, large plates
Cylindrical pieces:
1x1 cyl. brick, 2x2, curved 1x1 bricks like on Flash Speeder, 4x variety as well
Slopes:
45D pack, 33D pack, corner slopes!!!!, Inverted!!!!
TILES:
1x pack, 2x pack, cyl
2x2 tile pack of every color - I don't care what gray it is, but I would like
some kind of gray for sidewalks and spaceports!)
I think if there is a way to get some of the more basic parts in the new color,
and offer it in a cost effective manner, 20.00 tubs or whatever, I think people
would not mind as much.
My 2x2 brick's worth of thought, anyway.
Thanks again, Jake for giving us some information.
Sincerely,
Scott S.
--
Scott E. Sanburn
President, Michiana-LUG http://www.michiana-lug.org
Webpages: http://www.scottesanburn.org
LEGO Pages: http://www.scottesanburn.org/legoindex.html
|
|
| |
<snippage>
> Jake:
>
> I recall a somewhat controversial (as always!) survey that you announced in the
> past few months. The main focus of it was Legends. We were asked to rate
> possible future Legends releases. There were also questions about potential
> future themes. I also recall one lego.com survey asking AFOLs about our
> spending habits.
>
> Having gone through a number of surveys, I sure would be interested in seeing
> some of the results. Obviously, releasing some of the results might give your
> competitors or potential competitors some advantage, but some tidbits would be
> nice to receive. Anything in the works to release anything to us? I assume
> participation rates by AFOL's are high in these surveys, despite our griping
> about their design?
>
> Thanks,
> Markus
I agree. I careless for this color change issue more as I see what the
colors look like. The only thing that I really find irritating about the
colors is the decision to go with pasty skin tones instead of classic ones.
That, and a coincidental (maybe or maybe not) incident that happened to
sell out of Black Sea Barracuda, Blacksmith Shop (My Own Creation),
Black Falcon Fortress, Guarded Inn all at the same time at Lego
Shop@Home... errrr!!! :(
Also its been ages (since March/April 2003) since either a Legend or
a My Own Creation has been released (the latter being September 2002,
Sante Fe Cars I and II)
I can truly say, however, that I really love most of the retail sets that has or
will have come out, and I am impressed with the exclusives that have
been released lately to a very large extent...however, no Legends or
MOC sets... :(
just posting/venting my feelings,
Ben Medinets
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
| |
You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
|
Given your position, that would pretty much require having to resign, wouldn’t
it?
| |
I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color
change will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color
change (although, yes, the implementation fell flat)
|
So did the thought process...
| |
and as such we are going to stay the course. I know this isn’t the answer
you’re hoping for, and I know very very well that many of you aren’t happy
about this news.
|
I hereby dub this the “Understatement of the Millennium”.
| |
The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified
as “universal”, and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
ones.
|
Clearly “dark purple” is not a “universal” color. ;)
| |
A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely
be created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v
train track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread)
on which elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And
no, you can’t say “the whole range of parts!” :) )
|
All track and all baseplates. Train track, Racers track, and Monorail track
(hey, a guy can hope, can’t he?). Regardless of what a few individuals might
think about “realistic” looks, people want to be able to lay out their track in
a single uniform color, and it would look especially stupid if you had two
colors of track that were deliniated by which pieces they are (dark-grey
straights, light-grey curves, nazi-grey splits...). 48x48 baseplates, crater
plates, Space landing plates, 16x32 plates, and 16x16 plates. These are the
five grey baseplates that are most useful for doing Moonbase layouts, which have
become a very popular way to set up a Space-oriented display. Anyone who dares
say that color-consistency in baseplates doesn’t matter had best show me proof
of a moon that has color blotchiness that’s arranged in a nice, orderly,
square-based grid. The only times I’ve ever seen color variance of that type is
on farms, with fields that are growing different crops (something which has
proven to be quite rare on atmospherically-challenged moonscapes).
I’d suggest BIONICLE parts, but at this point the color-based damage is so
extensive as to encompass every last opaque color except black and white (unless
you count the tan and blue axle-pins, which are a mistake in their own right).
And since we’ve been given a completely new shade of brown that’s got to be the
most stomach-churning color in the entire history of the LEGO System, switching
back would only mean that half of the current color pallete matches with sets
from the first three years.
| |
As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something positive. In this
case, the positive is that there are many more people internally who
understand your passion and interest.
|
Understanding is but a small step towards what really matters. Let us know when
they start to care.
|
|
| |
Yes, and release it in an "Old Gray" colored tub, as pictured!
Better yet, use the OLD glue for the labels - the new stuff doesn't peel off easily
like the old, resorting to chemical use to remove them, resulting in dull sides to
the tubs. None of my tubs keep the original contents in them (and I doubt many
other people keep parts sorted into the tubs by the labels either), so the inventory
labels are useless to me (I do, however, keep the LEGO labels on the ends).
Daniel Barrett wrote:
> Thank you for the follow up on this issue Jake.
>
> As for what to continue to produce in the classic gray's and brown please review
> this closely:
>
> <http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=46757>
>
> Daniel
--
Tom Stangl
*http://www.vfaq.com/
*DSM Visual FAQ home
*http://www.vfaq.net/
*Prius Visual FAQ Home
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Thanks Jake, for once again reaching out to the community. I understand how the
company works, and I am glad to hear that they are allowing some parts to be
continued in the old colors!
Having said that, I think the following would be great to keep in the old
colors:
Service packs of basic brick, basic plate, and tiles in light grey, dark grey,
and brown
Specialized pieces that are associated with that paticular color, light grey
wall peices, brown arched doors, ect.
How about limited edition runs of groups of bricks? Something like a connector
pack with washing machines, technic bricks, 5 stud 1x1, and others? Or the
before mentioned arches. There's a lot of possibilties in what could be produced
and sold.
Now what about light pink, dark pink, and purple!?! Man, I can't build ANYTHING
without those colors! Kidding aside... What is the possibilities of having THOSE
released in bulk packs!?! Wheres the outrage??? Where is the indignation!!! Oh
woe is me!!! :)
Bill Vollbrecht
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
> Actually LEGO white is slightly creamy. They can make it a bit bluish,
> colder. That would match 'cold' gray better.
No, the only thing that would make sense would be to shift the handful of truly
"cool" colors toward the warmer end of the spectrum. That way {[NO]} colors
would look good next to the bleys. Looking through the various colors I have on
hand, it's actually quite shocking to see how many of them are warm colors that
utterly clash with the bleys. White shouldn't clash with anything...but it does
with bley. Every shade of green except sand-green clashes with dark-bley. Even
classic blue looks like it might be slightly warm! The only old colors that
I've seen that do work with dark-bley are dark-blue, black, and the three cool
sand-tones (green/blue/purple). That's only five colors, and four of them are
too rare to be of any help. Heck, light-bley is probably more common than
sand-blue, sand-purple, or dark-blue by now. Sand-green at least has the Yoda
and Statue of Liberty sculptures.
|
|
| |
Wow! looks like I missed all the fun! I guess there's disadvantages being
upside-down after all...
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
I think the main thing most AFOLs are worried about is unintentional changes,
and bad quality, as seen in the new Knights Bus.
Also I'd be interested:
1. Are there other colours you've classified "universal"?
2. What (if any) other colours may become "universal" in future?
3. How do you decide what colours become "universal"?
I realise you may not be able to answer these questions, but I'm still
interested if you can....
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Well train track, yes, definitely. Guess I can't really think of any others.
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
Yes, I think we're all now agreed it was handled very badly, but at least it
looks like we all learned from it :)
ROSCO
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> I understand the point, but I don't exactly follow it. The only way that
> sales are boosted by paying attention to AFOL feedback is with the AFOL
> market. There really isn't a way we can take your (AFOL) feedback and meld
> it into something for the kids market. Kids/parents won't really care much
> about whether or not we listened to AFOLs or not.
AFOLs contribute a lot of free advertising about LEGO product by doing shows,
running websites, and helping parents/kids out in the toy aisles. The tone of
that advertising is very much dependant on how well our concerns are being
addressed. Furthermore, AFOLs often provide you with practical real-world
insight into the desires of kids/parents, through our interaction with them at
shows, on websites, and in the toy aisles.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Scott Lyttle wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Mike Kollross wrote:
> > (snippage)
> >
> > > * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> > > created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> > > track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> >
> > 9 volt track is a must. How about releasing different track geometry at the
> > same time. If you are going to make a special run any way....
> >
> >
> > Mike
>
> Here's a thought...make the current 9V track with the "old" dark gray. Any new
> track geometries---make them the "NEW" Gray.
>
> Result--those who want new track geometries will eventually wind up filtering
> into new gray colors...and you can easily distinguish what kind of curvature you
> have by comparing colors of track...
>
> Scott Lyttle
I don't want to start a flam war but using color to identify track geometry is
probably a bad idea. This is mostly because it breaks up the continuity at least
in a color sense. A better solution would be to mold an identifying mark on the
under side of the track. Now this brings up the new track geometry so rather
than start a side thread I will end with this: This is just my opinion in
response to Scott’s post, please don't start a thread with it.
Thanks,
OnDrew
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
| |
But, I know it’s a blasphemy, but I think for Bionicle and Technic the
new colours will look better. I’ve got new Toa Nuju and it looks good
with the new colours.
|
Ugh! No! Dark-bley even clashes with white. The only one that actually
doesn’t clash is Toa Nokama (even Toa Whenua looks a bit off with the white and
blue connector pieces on an otherwise black/bley design)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
> I don't want to start a flam war but
I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
of each other.
;-)
-Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Richard Morton wrote:
> I'm surprised no-one has mentioned technic pins yet, especially as LEGO are
> making most of them in blue and tan now.
They're just making the two axle-pins in blue (friction) and tan (non-friction).
That's bad enough. The only pin that's ever been made in dark-grey is the 1.5
pin, and light-bley is close enough to light-grey that what few pins they'll
actually make in that color shouldn't stick out too much.
|
|
| |
I have the answer:
Castle Wall Pieces that are mixes of old grays and news. No, not four types
of pieces. ONE wall piece that contains all four colors in it. Think about
it, if you make the wall pieces look like bricks made of all four colors,
you can make great looking castles that USE all four colors! This is the
answer to bridging the gap between old and new gray.
I'm sure this would be difficult to mold, but hey, I don't have to worry
about the manufacturing aspect. :D
-Aaron
"Anthony Sava" <savatheaggie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Hx90A3.5KF@lugnet.com...
> Jake contacted me and has asked me to post my opinion as to what specific • parts
> I'd like to see offered in Bulk that would make the Castle people happy, • much
> like the old grey train track makes the train people happy.
>
> He suggested maybe Castle Wall pieces. Old grey Castle Wall pieces, in my
> opinion, are rather meaningless without the basic bricks in the same color • to
> use along side them. A New grey Castle Wall Piece bulk pack (which he • later
> suggested) would be nice for builders, I'm sure, but I would imagine only • for
> those builders who are just now starting to build Castle MOCs and don't • have a
> substantial amount of old grey, and wouldn't be a big hit with the long • time
> castle builders more fond of the old grey.
>
> He then suggested maybe an armor accessory. Old grey Castle Armor bulk • packs
> would be great, but in my opinion, New grey Castle Armor bulk packs would • be
> great too. Minifig accessories are, to me, the only thing that I'd be • willing
> let LEGO change the color of. The new dark and light greys are very • metallic
> looking, and would work well for armor and weapons which, of course, are
> supposed to be metal.
>
> We castle people would love more armor and weapon bulk packs, but I think • we'd
> want them regardless of which color of grey they were made in.
>
> So the question then was, what specific part would I want? Well, like • Train
> Track, only those parts that you do not actually use in conjunction with • new
> grey would be acceptable in old grey. What I mean is, you don't use train • track
> in a MOC, typically. Train track is used with other train track, but for • the
> most part all other MOCs are not a permanent part of the track and • vice-versa.
>
> That being said, the only real parts that I can see LEGO releasing in the • old
> grey that would work well for Castle would be Minifig accessories. My • reasoning
> is that all other possible Castle Parts are typically used along side • other
> bricks, there are no real stand alone Castle parts that I can think of • that
> would be a good release in a bulk pack in old grey.
>
> HOWEVER...
>
> I don't think it'd really be worth a special production run of old grey to • make
> minifig (Castle) accessories.
>
> So my official suggestion? I have two.
>
> 1. Least important. Big Grey Baseplates in the original color.
>
> 2. Most important. Make the bulk packs offered in the 10,000 limited • production
> run in the old light grey, old dark grey, and old brown (were they • offerend in
> old brown?) a permanent offereing from LEGO Direct.
>
> As for other Castle people, I'm sure they'll reply here on Lugnet as to • their
> opinion.
>
> The members of Classic-Castle have been asked to share their opinion as to • what
> part or parts they'd like to see in a bulk old grey or brown pack, and you • can
> see that thread here:
>
> http://www.classic-castle.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13521
>
> --Anthony
|
|
| |
"Ironic that the brick packages in Old Grey made available for fans was the
first
time those packages were available in several years. Also, making a minfig
pack
based on fan suggestions is only now being proposed. It's as if only now,
when
TLG does such a bad thing, do they honestly begin asking for what we'd like
and
giving it to us." - Lenny
Hey, guilt is a powerful ally. Be glad something good may come from this!
"Lenny Hoffman" <lahoffma@*NOSPAM*mailer.fsu.edu> wrote in message
news:Hx9Ip5.1Dy8@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Anthony Sava wrote:
> > Jake contacted me and has asked me to post my opinion as to what • specific
> > parts I'd like to see offered in Bulk that would make the Castle people • happy,
> > much like the old grey train track makes the train people happy.
>
> I'd like to say I agree with Anthony has to say.
>
> Castle Walls I dont use as much as I use basic bricks (2xn and 1xn) and • plates.
>
> Minifig accessories don't bother me as much because I don't army build.
> Furthermore, many of my accessories now come from the Customizers - Jeff • Byrd
> (Blasterman) and Isaac Yue - which are not true Old Grey. I realize that • the
> customs they make could not be made by TLG because of the different market
> (Adults vs. Children-safe-toys).
>
> I agree with Anthony's dreaming about the perfect minifig pack.
>
> I agree that the 48x48 baseplate should be made in OG as this is the • standard
> plate size for the Moonbase.
>
> Ironic that the brick packages in Old Grey made available for fans was the • first
> time those packages were available in several years. Also, making a • minfig pack
> based on fan suggestions is only now being proposed. It's as if only now, • when
> TLG does such a bad thing, do they honestly begin asking for what we'd • like and
> giving it to us.
>
> One thing I would like would be [Bulk Packs of Slopes] - perhaps a pack of • 45
> degree and a pack of 33 degree slopes (or maybe 33 degree + 75 degree) and
> include Roof Peaks, Convex and Concave double-slopes (inner and outer • turns) -
> especially concave double-slopes, 1 long, 2 long, and 4 long. 3 long and • 8 long
> would be cool, but not necessary.
>
> Hmm..
>
> I'll let you know if I think of anything else.
>
> -Lenny
|
|
| |
It's not harsh. It's just a clear statement of what *could* happen.
Judging by this color debacle, it's not much of a stretch, either. I have yet to see
a clear Business Case answer for the color change. Everything stated to date has
been pretty much shot down in here.
Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
>
> > It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
> > AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
> > AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
> > accepted AFOL input...
>
> Wow. That's harsh.
>
> Jake
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
--
Tom Stangl
*http://www.vfaq.com/
*DSM Visual FAQ home
*http://www.vfaq.net/
*Prius Visual FAQ Home
|
|
| |
What colorblind IDIOT named the New Dark Grey stone? It is anything BUT
stone in color. I haven't seen a single person liken it to natural stones.
All liken it to metals.
Scott Lyttle wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > Anybody knows why Peeron is calling the new colors DkStone and MdStone?
> > DkSteel would be better, wouldn't it?
>
> Those names are what Lego has given to them...pure and simple.
>
> Scott Lyttle
--
Tom Stangl
*http://www.vfaq.com/
*DSM Visual FAQ home
*http://www.vfaq.net/
*Prius Visual FAQ Home
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > > (snip)
> >
> > > Personally, I think the detail parts are as important, or more important, than
> > > the bulk bricks... although bulk bricks matter too!
> >
> > What kind of detail parts? I'm hoping to put together a list that I can pass
> > along.
>
> Mostly the modified plates and bricks that give you good greeblization.
>
> The plate-modifieds for starters...
>
> 1x1 plate with clips (all three kinds),
> 1x2 plates with handles, with rods, with offset studs
> 1x2 tile with rod, 1x2 tile with one stud
>
> The 1x2 grille tiles
> The 1x2 grille bricks
>
> 1x2-1x4 brackets
> 1x1 brick with side stud (headlight or washing machine brick)
> 1x1 round brick, 2x2 round brick and plate, 2x2 macaroni brick
>
> Rod system stuff.
> The antennas and rods in various sizes
>
> Stuff like that. Non theme specific but useful for detail.
>
> More later if I have time, kinda heads down at my client right now (in NJ
> actually, rather than MA where I thought I'd be the rest of the week)
It is my unresearched opinion that the Bracket 1x2 - 1x4 2436 has NEVER appeared
in dark gray. Perhaps that's a quality that could nudge it up in the list?
Constantine
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, great! We (the AFOLs) fight against those new colours and you (TLC) make
> > > them even more solid and declare them made for eternity? Calling that "good
> > > news" is sheer sneer, isn't it?
> >
> > Only if you choose to view it that way. (I tend to be a "on the bright side...."
> > kind of guy) To me, this is the AFOLs saying something (we're upset that things
> > changed suddenly), and the company reacting ( locking these new colors so that
> > you feel confident that we aren't going to change them again, and never again,
> > will we make changes like this without AFOL input)
>
> It might be worth noting that this doesn't suggest that TLG will actually take
> AFOL input into consideration--merely that TLG won't make the change without
> AFOL input. The input might easily be ignored, but TLG can still claim to have
> accepted AFOL input...
>
> Dave!
I don't agree with that statement. It clearly means that AFOL input WILL be
taken into consideration. Clearly that does not mean that TLG won't make
changes contradictory to the wishes of the AFOL community... nor should it.
TLG will make its decision based on its best understanding and judgement of
what is best for TLG. It seems to me that maintaining the current "new"
colours is a good example of this. It appears to me that TLG has re-reviewed
this decision based on our retrospective input and demands (and... I'm sorry
to say constant threats and non-constructive complaints as well). It would
also appear that they made a decision to stick with the new colours. I am
fairly confident they did this believing it to be a wise business decision.
(Yes... time will ultimately tell whether or not the decision was indeed wise).
Now... in my own personal opinion... I really enjoy building. Lego gives me
and my son the ability to do that together. I am more concerned with the
juniorization and (seeming) lowering of quality standards of the newer kits
than with the colours themselves. Perhaps, as a community, we should try
and provide input and guidance to TLG on how and what we would like to see in
the future so their strategy can reflect our wishes (again... should it make
business sense to do so).
- Jeff
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
> Ironic that the brick packages in Old Grey made available for fans was the
> first time those packages were available in several years. Also, making a
> minfig pack based on fan suggestions is only now being proposed. It's as if
> only now, when TLG does such a bad thing, do they honestly begin asking for
> what we'd like and giving it to us.
< Begin Humorous Sarcasm >
Well, besides the
- MOT sets
- Santa Fe sets
- Metroliner
- Club Car
- Guarded Inn
- Black Falcon's Fortress
- USS Constellation
- Countless other various Legends sets
- Legends voting
- Blacksmith Shop MOC
- Santa Fe Cars MOC
- Current Bulk Program
- PaB
- Imperial Star Destoyer
- Rebel Blockade Runner
- UCS Snowspeeder
- Wright Flyer
- Sopwith Camel
- Red Baron
- Shell sets
- Seasonal sets (turkey, pumpkin, US flag, Christmas ornaments, etc.)
- Statue of Liberty
- Minifig Sculpture
- Darth Maul bust
- Special purchasing deals
- LEGO Mosaic
- Last shot of Cypress trees
- ...and whatever else I have up my sleeve
Other than that, you're right, we don't list much! :)
< /End Humorous Sarcasm >
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
>
> > I don't want to start a flam war but
>
> I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> of each other.
>
> ;-)
>
> -Tim
Or a flan war. Of course food fights tend to get messy.
;-)
Maggie C.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> I noticed there was never an official denial to
> the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
Now that you got your official denial, consider: Lego makes more black bricks
than they do gray bricks. In the recycling article they said recycled plastic
goes into black bricks.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Kevin Salm wrote:
| |
I have tried to use the new Nazi grays and muddy chocolate brown colors for
making my creations and I still find those colors unacceptable.
PS. I don’t care what the offical names for the new colors are, I will
always refer to them as Nazi Grays and Muddy Brown. Those names are suitably
evil for colors that truly deserve them. If TLC wants to be known as the
company the produces toys in Nazi Gray colors, so be it!
|
Awesome naming method! I had just gotten used to calling old/classic Grays &
Browns “True Gray” & “True Brown,” and the new grays and browns “false gray” and
“false brown.” I like your nomenclature better though. I think I’ll start
using it.
We could also call the new dark gray “Confederate gray” and thus
equate it with the evilness of slavery.
|
|
| |
>
> Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color change
> will stand.
I figured as much. Oh well what can I do about it except stop purchasing brick
or act like a spoiled 5yr old. Personally I don't want to do either so you can
consider this a positive reply to your post
> There was some good thinking that went into the color change
> (although, yes, the implementation fell flat),
well that's an understatement (sorry couldn't resist)
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again.
I as well as others are very interested in what other colors made it to the
universal list. I look forward to reading your findings in the future as
promised.
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Humm "the whole range of parts" J/K I know this isn’t a realistic option and I
wish everyone understood this.
My parts list:
Train track
In the normal product range verses a service packs. Basically this is so that
all train track from 1990 on up will match even if other parts of sets don't.
Color continuity on train track seems like a minor issue since colors vary in
real life but, Lego isn’t real, it's a toy. Basically in short; Lego set a
standard, whether they realized it or not, on the color of Lego train track and
they need to stick to it
Large baseplates
Since it wouldn't affect sets this is a minor request that is very important to
afol's and easy to do.
Burps
I didn’t realize until I read this thread but burps are something I use all the
time and would be lost without. A bulk pack with more rectangular burps than
triangular burps would be very useful to a lot of people including the non adult
Lego community and would likely prove to be a huge hit as long as it wasn't
overtly expensive. $1 a burp would probably be the price you would want to shoot
for when assembling a service pack. Anything more than $1 per burp would defer
interest from most customers including me.
>
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system.
Thank you, however I hope this doesn't happen any time soon.
> I know this isn’t the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but hopefully
> this bears some good news for you.
Well it's more of a lead covering but hey I’m a lot cooler than I was when I
first posted on this issue so it must be working.
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
> wounds.
Well it's more like a scar now but hey I’ll live.
Thanks again for including us even if it was a little late. I if not all afols
do value the time and effort you put into your job and I hope you don't take
things too personally as a lot of us are simply venting our frustrations with
the Lego company through you. If I have done this in the past I apologize.
Later,
OnDrew
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, John Riley wrote:
> Technic pins are generally hidden from view; their colors rarely matter (sole
> exception I've seen: the penny flag last year, where white technic pins were
> stars in the US Flag).
They're usually hidden enough that light-bley shouldn't matter, but even just
the pin tips on the blue/tan axle-pins stick out pretty bad compared to the old
black/light-grey versions. Build a red TECHNIC creation and you'll see what I'm
talking about.
> Technic connectors, on the other hand... I look through my entire
> collection, and I don't think I have all 6 angle connectors in any single
> color.
I know I've got all six in black and white (SW TECHNIC sets are pretty good for
that, between DV/3PO and R2/Stormie), but that appears to be it. I'm missing
the #2 dark-grey and #6 light-grey, or I'd have both of those colors in all six
shapes. Green, red and yellow exist in all six shapes, but I don't have more
than three shapes in any one color (and I only have four of those shapes because
I picked them up on the secondary market).
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:
> You can't simply "mix" ABS like that.
Yes you can. It's done all the time. Any color of ABS can be easily recycled
into black, because the carbon used to color it will overpower any other dyes.
Other colors are entirely dependant upon what you want to recycle them into.
You can't recycle blue into red, but you can recycle many shades of red and/or
yellow into many shades of orange. The key is that you need to know exactly
what color you're starting with, how much you've got of that color, and exactly
which color you're going to produce (and you need to know that anyways). Once
you know all of that, you can figure out what color/quantity you need to mix
into the off-color to make it look like the color you want. We've spent quite a
while discussing the merits of having FDA White ABS reground into OSHA Yellow or
black, because you can't regrind any post-consumer plastic into FDA-approved
plastic, and we don't use any non-FDA white plastic.
> The colors will never blend 100% and you'll get swirling patterns such as
> McDonalds "Flurry" icecreams :)
As long as your regrind chunks and new pellets are thoroughly mixed by the time
they're dumped in the hopper, everything between that point and the output point
should provide more than enough opportunity for a true color to come out the
other end.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
SNIP
> Jake
>
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development Team
Leave ALL colors untouched from now on. I can understand producing more or less
of certain colors a year for manufacturing restraints, spicing up designs or
producing other parts in rarer colors, but permanently deleting colors is silly
& detracts from the 'system' interchangeability of the product. It's like me
handing in a paper in college with 2 different color inks & telling the
professor "it's just the way it is".
Why EXACTLY were the colors changed? just the focus group? using recycled
materials? Why EXACTLY can it NOT be changed back? If it were just a focus
group thing, it should be changeable, but the uncangeability of it seems to
suggest a significant expense in new manufacturing processes. If so, will these
processes lead to any other permanent changes that will undermine LEGO quality?
Thanks very much for keeping us informed. I REALLY liked the old colors better
at first, but since i didn't have a large collection of any of the
grays/brown/purple already, it's getting easier FOR ME to 'warm' up to the new
'cooler' colors. I just want to make sure Lego doesn't jerk us around on other
(more important) quality issues. If someone can't be trusted in small matters,
why trust them with large matters? LEGO has kept the trust pretty well for many
years, but this was a significant shake-up. It's the LEGO Co.'s job to keep the
trust (in the sense of quality control), my job to pay for it (buying the
quality building block toys).
Jeff
|
|
| |
> Jake wrote:
> I know this change is not welcomed, and was implemented poorly (see apology
> above). But since we can't turn back time, and since the change is here to >stay,
> let's focus on the best way to ease into the transition.
>
> *Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the forseeable >future?
> *Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
> *Is it by some other concept?
>
> I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU >think
> is the best way to ease into the switch over.
Personally, for myself, the only problem the new colors represent is storage. I
cannot possibly mix them in with the old colors. What I don't like is how the
new Strata 1000pc tub comes with the stupid lime, orange and light blue colors.
It means less pieces in the core colours.
I think TLG should also make the limited edion tub of old grey and dark grey
more available than just having it in Billund (North America perhaps?).
But as a Town collector mainly, I have a few concerns.
1) Why make the road plates 6 wide when 90% of the cars are only 4 studs
wide? Isn't that brand new ambulance in the Spiderman 2 set only 4 wide? YES
2) Dislike the minifigure's head color change. Keep it yellow. If I want realism
I'll buy McFarlane toys.
3) And please leave the train tracks alone
I much appreciate the time you take to let us know what's up with Lego
--member 1893
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> First off, when did I (or anyone from LEGO) ever previously say we were
> locking colors and no changes would ever be made? I don't recall ever having
> done that. And I'm not sure our corporate values make any stance about never
> changing our core system in any way. (In fact, if they did, since the values
> were developed well before the LEGO system, we wouldn't have a LEGO system
> at all)
The simple answer is you didn't. Ever. Not in so many words, at least.
However, to quote the last sentence on p16 of the 2002 LEGO Brand Guide, "All
LEGO elements, whether produced in Denmark or Switzerland, in 1958 or 2001, are
fully compatible". "Fully compatible", to us, includes color consistancy every
bit as much as it does shape/size. The very concept of building up a collection
over a lifetime of play relies just as much on color compatibility as it does on
piece compatibility. Try building a good firetruck when only 1/2 of the parts
you need come in red, and you have to fill in the rest with sand-red, dark-red,
and pink.
> OK, I have to tell you, this frustrates me a bit. Because we have maintained
> our decision and not backed away from it, you are saying that we aren't
> learning anything? Despite having announced several things this morning that
> very very clearly show that not only have we a) admitted the mistake
> (repeatedly), b) taken actions to avoid these mistakes in the future, and c)
> announced these intentions publicly in writing, we are still "slapping" you
> on the face?
You (collectively) are indeed admitting a mistake, but it doesn't seem to be the
same mistake that many of us are most concerned about. I can't speak for
everyone, but I know that I'm more concerned about the fact that the colors were
changed in the first place than the lack of input from the AFOL community during
the decision making process. The latter mistake seems to have been sufficiently
dealt with, but the former mistake has gone from finely scripted parchment to
chiselled stone. At this point, I think I'd rather have been told that our
opinions on the matter would be weighed along with any negative impact on sales
to determine if the colors should be switched back in a couple of years.
Instead, we get "Yeah, we shouldn't have done it this way, but now we're
guaranteeing that certain core colors will never change again...starting with
the only three that you really want changed."
> *Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the forseeable
> future?
> *Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
> *Is it by some other concept?
>
> I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU
> think is the best way to ease into the switch over.
Shifting gears into Reverse sounds good to me. We will {never} be collectively
happy with the new colors. The three biggest issues that have to be dealt with
are the lack of pieces in the new color (that can be fixed), the lack of color
compatibility between the old and new colors (that cannot be fixed), and the
fact that the new bleys clash with over 90% of the existing color pallete in a
way that the old greys didn't (that can only be fixed by skewing the entire
color pallete towards the cool spectrum, thereby sucking the life out of all the
other colors as well). One out of three may not be bad, per se, but it's a far
cry from good.
Why does this color change have to be set in stone? What's so hard about
agreeing to see if this color change has a negative impact on sales or results
in a lot of compaints being registered through Consumer Affairs, and then
agreeing to change it back if that appears to be the wisest course of action?
If, as we've been told on many occassions, the sole reason for changing the
colors was to make the consumers happier, does it seem very wise to guarantee
that the decision will never ever be repealed, even if, as we've been
predicting, the color change proves to have a negative impact on sales or result
in even more complaints being registered through Consumer Affairs? Even the US
Government repealed Prohibition when they realized that the public wasn't happy
with the results.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Constantine Hannaher wrote:
> It is my unresearched opinion that the Bracket 1x2 - 1x4 2436 has NEVER
> appeared in dark gray. Perhaps that's a quality that could nudge it up in
> the list?
Peeron supports your opinion. If we're getting into unproduced pieces, I've got
a MOC that is now on permanent hiatus because I need four of these in classic
light-grey:
http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=x140
I bought a bunch of pieces to complete the MOC, and I've just recently
discovered that they don't exist. I ordered the only four listed, and I can
tell you that those are not the pieces I got.
|
|
| |
I’m glad to hear that TLC might continue service packs in the original colors.
Could you give us an idea of how the current original-color packs are doing,
sales-wise?
This is what I would like to see continue to be sold in the original colors:
- current brick packs (#10145-#10147)
- current plate packs (#10148-#10150) with the addition of 1x1 plates and ‘L’ plates
- an arches and slopes pack: would include various arches, and slopes/inverse slopes in 33°, 45°, and 75°
- a bits and bobs pack: would include tiles (1x1 to 1x8), as well as headlight bricks, “dalek” bricks, and various modified tiles and plates (especially the 1x2 with one stud)
Alternatively, to cut down on SKU’s, three original-color tubs containing all
the above parts would be great.
- the 48x48 baseplate in light grey
- all Legends of sets originally released before the color change
As for the color change itself:
I’ve asked these questions to every post you’ve made on the subject, without an
answer so far.
1. Where is the publicity? Where are the “New Colors!” stickers? Why did TLC
try to sneak this supposedly positive change past its customers?
2. How do you square this statement:
Keep in mind that the non-AFOL consumer (especially the kids on the
boards) probably hasn’t realized there IS a color change. Many of this
year’s products aren’t out yet (Harry Potter for instance, isn’t out
until the movie time around May). If they have the products, it may
take them a while to notice a difference. If they notice a difference,
I’m not sure a large percentage will care. Think about what the
creations kids build typically... many many of them are multi-, mixed-
color. Browse the galleries in the online LEGO Club, and you’ll not
see much color consistency.
with the official TLC reason for the color change (improving sales to kids)? And
has the color change succeeded in improving sales to kids?
I think everyone on LUGNET would appreciate an answer to these questions.
Marc Nelson Jr.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, David Gregory wrote:
| |
Awesome naming method! I had just gotten used to calling old/classic Grays &
Browns “True Gray” & “True Brown,” and the new grays and browns “false gray”
and “false brown.” I like your nomenclature better though. I think I’ll
start using it.
We could also call the new dark gray “Confederate gray”
and thus equate it with the evilness of slavery.
|
Why stop there? Call it Nazi Death-Slaver Grey and you get the whole spectrum.
|
|
| |
More feedback from me, since there doesn't seem to be enough general
feedback on this topic. :P
I really like the idea of releasing a bunch of castle Legends in new gray.
This would be a great way for us to start building our new gray collection.
I would also like to see a old brown "house building" set consisting of
windows with lattices, plates, slopes and various doors. Throw in a
pitchfork or two also and you'll sell a bunch I would think.
Thanks for reading!
-Aaron
"Anthony Sava" <savatheaggie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Hx90A3.5KF@lugnet.com...
> Jake contacted me and has asked me to post my opinion as to what specific • parts
> I'd like to see offered in Bulk that would make the Castle people happy, • much
> like the old grey train track makes the train people happy.
>
> He suggested maybe Castle Wall pieces. Old grey Castle Wall pieces, in my
> opinion, are rather meaningless without the basic bricks in the same color • to
> use along side them. A New grey Castle Wall Piece bulk pack (which he • later
> suggested) would be nice for builders, I'm sure, but I would imagine only • for
> those builders who are just now starting to build Castle MOCs and don't • have a
> substantial amount of old grey, and wouldn't be a big hit with the long • time
> castle builders more fond of the old grey.
>
> He then suggested maybe an armor accessory. Old grey Castle Armor bulk • packs
> would be great, but in my opinion, New grey Castle Armor bulk packs would • be
> great too. Minifig accessories are, to me, the only thing that I'd be • willing
> let LEGO change the color of. The new dark and light greys are very • metallic
> looking, and would work well for armor and weapons which, of course, are
> supposed to be metal.
>
> We castle people would love more armor and weapon bulk packs, but I think • we'd
> want them regardless of which color of grey they were made in.
>
> So the question then was, what specific part would I want? Well, like • Train
> Track, only those parts that you do not actually use in conjunction with • new
> grey would be acceptable in old grey. What I mean is, you don't use train • track
> in a MOC, typically. Train track is used with other train track, but for • the
> most part all other MOCs are not a permanent part of the track and • vice-versa.
>
> That being said, the only real parts that I can see LEGO releasing in the • old
> grey that would work well for Castle would be Minifig accessories. My • reasoning
> is that all other possible Castle Parts are typically used along side • other
> bricks, there are no real stand alone Castle parts that I can think of • that
> would be a good release in a bulk pack in old grey.
>
> HOWEVER...
>
> I don't think it'd really be worth a special production run of old grey to • make
> minifig (Castle) accessories.
>
> So my official suggestion? I have two.
>
> 1. Least important. Big Grey Baseplates in the original color.
>
> 2. Most important. Make the bulk packs offered in the 10,000 limited • production
> run in the old light grey, old dark grey, and old brown (were they • offerend in
> old brown?) a permanent offereing from LEGO Direct.
>
> As for other Castle people, I'm sure they'll reply here on Lugnet as to • their
> opinion.
>
> The members of Classic-Castle have been asked to share their opinion as to • what
> part or parts they'd like to see in a bulk old grey or brown pack, and you • can
> see that thread here:
>
> http://www.classic-castle.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13521
>
> --Anthony
|
|
| |
What colors do you grind up and mix to get Purple Dave?
:D
"Purple Dave" <purpledave@maskofdestiny.com> wrote in message
news:Hx9uMx.15LG@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:
> > You can't simply "mix" ABS like that.
>
> Yes you can. It's done all the time. Any color of ABS can be easily • recycled
> into black, because the carbon used to color it will overpower any other • dyes.
> Other colors are entirely dependant upon what you want to recycle them • into.
> You can't recycle blue into red, but you can recycle many shades of red • and/or
> yellow into many shades of orange. The key is that you need to know • exactly
> what color you're starting with, how much you've got of that color, and • exactly
> which color you're going to produce (and you need to know that anyways). • Once
> you know all of that, you can figure out what color/quantity you need to • mix
> into the off-color to make it look like the color you want. We've spent • quite a
> while discussing the merits of having FDA White ABS reground into OSHA • Yellow or
> black, because you can't regrind any post-consumer plastic into • FDA-approved
> plastic, and we don't use any non-FDA white plastic.
>
> > The colors will never blend 100% and you'll get swirling patterns such • as
> > McDonalds "Flurry" icecreams :)
>
> As long as your regrind chunks and new pellets are thoroughly mixed by the • time
> they're dumped in the hopper, everything between that point and the output • point
> should provide more than enough opportunity for a true color to come out • the
> other end.
|
|
| |
I'd say I have to agree that the parts packs of basic bricks, plates and tiles
would be a good permanent setting. However, I would like to see those same
packs in the new colors ALSO. I have room for both of the dark and light grey
tones, as well as the brown shades. Around here, we have a naturally occuring
blue granite, that is the hardest thing next to diamonds, in terms of
construction. You cannot chip it, jackhammer it or smash it. You can only
blast it, so that'd be a fine stone color to add to tower creations of MOC
quality. Just make both old and new light/dark grey and brown packs available,
makes a nice pebbled wall effect.
Make some darn 1x1 brown tiles in the old brown shade!!
As far as accessories for minifigures go, I don't really take issue with that.
I would like to still see old colors on accessories, but the new colors would be
welcome there.
For baseplates, you have to stick to the same old colors, or the landscapes will
get odd in blocky patterns that would not be natural.
I really don't care about the wall pieces, they don't matter that much to most
of my creations. If you are a pre-fab wall builder it might be a bad thing to
change colors in the middle of a MOC, so consider that a fan possibility.
What about brown horses? I'd certainly welcome the new brown there. Any
variation on a three-color breed is GOOD!
DONT'T ever change the tan and green (all shades current) available, those are
UNIVERSAL COLORS in my mind's eye. I'm lovin' every bit of the tan out there.
I cannot really think of that much else that'll push me over the edge into rabid
death lunges at TLC folk. If I do, I'll letcha' know.
:o)
-Aaron-
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Daniel Warren wrote:
> 1) Why make the road plates 6 wide when 90% of the cars are only 4 studs
> wide? Isn't that brand new ambulance in the Spiderman 2 set only 4 wide? YES
If the roads are only 4-wide, the cars will clip each other as they drive past
in opposing lanes (ask Steve Ringe how much of a problem that is). Also, not
everyone builds 4-wide cars. The only one I've ever built uses the 5-wide twin
bucket-seat piece, the "trunk" (such as it is) is 6-wide, and the rear tires are
slightly over 7-wide. 4-wide lanes just aren't going to work for my little
roadster.
> 2) Dislike the minifigure's head color change. Keep it yellow.
Okay, _this_ I've actually heard a believable explanation for. At Toy Fair, I
was told that the reason for shifting to skin-tones in the licensed sets is
because the major retail chains have been leaning on TLC to do just that. If
the retail chains aren't happy, they'll stop ordering as much product, and that
will have a severely negative impact on TLC's bottom line. It doesn't matter if
the consumers care one way or the other if the big retail chains make their
orders based on a perception that they do.
> If I want realism I'll buy McFarlane toys.
Accounts of their realism are greatly exaggerated. They've got detail out the
wazoo, but very little of it is realistic, and the paint jobs are often
hideously blotchy.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, David Laswell wrote:
| |
In lugnet.lego, David Gregory wrote:
| |
Awesome naming method! I had just gotten used to calling old/classic Grays
& Browns “True Gray” & “True Brown,” and the new grays and browns “false
gray” and “false brown.” I like your nomenclature better though. I think
I’ll start using it.
We could also call the new dark gray “Confederate
gray” and thus equate it with the evilness of slavery.
|
Why stop there? Call it Nazi Death-Slaver Grey and you get the whole
spectrum.
|
OK, now that’s just over the line. Assigning a color as “Nazi” is bad enough,
but adding “Death Slaver” to it pushes it over. Don’t like the color change?
Fine. But I personally take exception when someone associates a relatively minor
change in LEGO materials to WWII Nazi slavery. It’s simply not appropriate when
discussing a toy, especially one with a massive market share in Germany as
well as the rest of Europe.
Kelly
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Aaron Muhl wrote:
> What colors do you grind up and mix to get Purple Dave?
I'm actually quite partial to the standard LEGO purple, though I've noticed that
the Throwbot limbs aren't the same shade as all of the other pieces, and they've
used three slightly different shades of purple rubber (two shades for purple
Krana and another for Kraata). The violet doesn't do much for me (it's too blue
for my tastes), and I'm waiting on an order of dark-purple so I can't comment on
that yet. Sand-purple isn't bad, though, and trans-purple is quite pleasant
when backlit (it's a bit dark otherwise). I even have custom-tinted sunglass
lenses that coincidentally turned out the same shade as trans-purple bricks (I
was actually hoping for a much redder tint like in an old pair of Lennons that I
used to wear).
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
| |
In lugnet.lego, David Laswell wrote:
| |
In lugnet.lego, David Gregory wrote:
| |
Awesome naming method! I had just gotten used to calling old/classic Grays
& Browns “True Gray” & “True Brown,” and the new grays and browns “false
gray” and “false brown.” I like your nomenclature better though. I think
I’ll start using it.
We could also call the new dark gray “Confederate
gray” and thus equate it with the evilness of slavery.
|
Why stop there? Call it Nazi Death-Slaver Grey and you get the whole
spectrum.
|
OK, now that’s just over the line. Assigning a color as “Nazi” is bad enough,
but adding “Death Slaver” to it pushes it over. Don’t like the color change?
Fine. But I personally take exception when someone associates a relatively
minor change in LEGO materials to WWII Nazi slavery. It’s simply not
appropriate when discussing a toy, especially one with a massive market
share in Germany as well as the rest of Europe.
|
FYI, you might find this post of interest:
http://news.lugnet.com/lego/?n=731
Though I get the impression that “Wehrmachtsgrau” doesn’t necessarily imply
“Nazi” but military or army gray, instead. At least Babel Fish says it means
“Armed forces-grey”.
Mark
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
| |
OK, now that’s just over the line.
|
It was intended in a sarcastic vein, which I appear to have failed to adequately
express. I fully understand the logic behind calling it “Nazi grey” (I actually
prefer “gun-metal grey”), on the basis that it’s reported to be very close to
the colors used on their military vehicles. The concept of calling it
“Confederate grey” in an attempt to equate it with slavery, on the other hand,
appears more motivated by negative association with the Confederates themselves
than with the colors they wore. The shade of grey cloth known as “Confederate
grey” appears to be closest to the old light-grey with a tinge of brown. The
blue-grey shade currently associated with the Confederates is called Richmond
Grey, and it’s quite a bit darker than either dark-grey shade. There’s simply
no chromatic justification for calling the new dark-grey “Confederate grey”.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
| |
But, I know it’s a blasphemy, but I think for Bionicle and Technic the
new colours will look better. I’ve got new Toa Nuju and it looks good
with the new colours.
|
Ugh! No! Dark-bley even clashes with white. The only one that actually
doesn’t clash is Toa Nokama (even Toa Whenua looks a bit off with the white
and blue connector pieces on an otherwise black/bley design)
|
There’s been no mention of whether white is “universal” or not. But since it
clashes so much with the new permanent colors, I think it’s only a matter of
time before we can kiss it goodbye, too.
Mark
|
|
| |
Purple Dave wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:
> > You can't simply "mix" ABS like that.
> Yes you can. It's done all the time. Any color of ABS can be easily
> recycled into black, because the carbon used to color it will overpower
> any other dyes. Other colors are entirely dependant upon what you want to
> recycle them into. You can't recycle blue into red, but you can recycle
> many shades of red and/or
> yellow into many shades of orange. The key is that you need to know
> exactly what color you're starting with, how much you've got of that
> color, and exactly
> which color you're going to produce (and you need to know that anyways).
Wow....
I've been an intern for 4 months at a Dutch injection moulding company but I
never knew it was possible, apart from the black (as has been done for
years with car bumpers and such)
But unless you do this in HUGE quantities, how can you guarantee exact
colors such as with LEGO with each batch?
--
Jan-Albert van Ree | http://www.vanree.net/brickpiles/
Brick Piles | Santa Fe B-unit
GnuPG key | http://www.vanree.net/~javanree/publickey.asc
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
snip
> < Begin Humorous Sarcasm >
>
> Well, besides the
> - MOT sets
> - Santa Fe sets
> - Metroliner
> - Club Car
> - Guarded Inn
> - Black Falcon's Fortress
> - USS Constellation
> - Countless other various Legends sets
> - Legends voting
> - Blacksmith Shop MOC
> - Santa Fe Cars MOC
> - Current Bulk Program
> - PaB
> - Imperial Star Destoyer
> - Rebel Blockade Runner
> - UCS Snowspeeder
> - Wright Flyer
> - Sopwith Camel
> - Red Baron
> - Shell sets
> - Seasonal sets (turkey, pumpkin, US flag, Christmas ornaments, etc.)
> - Statue of Liberty
> - Minifig Sculpture
> - Darth Maul bust
> - Special purchasing deals
> - LEGO Mosaic
> - Last shot of Cypress trees
> - ...and whatever else I have up my sleeve
>
> Other than that, you're right, we don't list much! :)
>
> < /End Humorous Sarcasm >
Sorry Jake but I have to point out that all of the items listed above are/have
been only available to those who are able to use S@H or have a Lego brand name
store close to them ie; NOT the majority of shoppers.
For those of us that do not (or can't, for whatever reason) shop from S@H and
who do not have a Lego brand shop in their country, those items might as well be
on the moon.
From the impulse/casual buyer's viewpoint, Lego has done none of those things,
nothing special/extra has been provided for those buyers at all.
Personally, I think Lego is missing a rather significant part of the market
here, I realise some (most/all?) of these items have been created as
"exclusives" for S@H, but if that exclusivity were for, say the first year, and
then the models etc were supplied to normal retail outlets, either as generally
available items, or perhaps listed in the catalogs as "special items that you
can ask your retailer to order for you" then I believe Lego would not be
dissapointed with the sales figures.
So, I guess this is a plea for Lego to consider those of us who, like I said,
can't or won't use S@H and don't have a Lego brand shop nearby.
Thanks - Ken
|
|
| |
Jake,
Again, it is not against you but those who made the decision.
Jake McKee wrote:
> First off, when did I (or anyone from LEGO) ever previously say we were locking
> colors and no changes would ever be made? I don't recall ever having done that.
> And I'm not sure our corporate values make any stance about never changing our
> core system in any way. (In fact, if they did, since the values were developed
> well before the LEGO system, we wouldn't have a LEGO system at all)
Just for reference, freshly from the lego.com site:
"Quality for the LEGO Company is about product quality, ethical values
and a consistency in all of our actions that engenders an ongoing
feeling of trust." (www.lego.com/eng/info/default.asp?page=values)
"product quality", "consistency". I can't imagine a more creative way to
screw these values than the colour change did.
> OK, I have to tell you, this frustrates me a bit. Because we have maintained our
> decision and not backed away from it, you are saying that we aren't learning
> anything?
Yes, of course. Thats *exactly* the point of the whole discussion. (Now
this is directed at you, Jake: do you really not understand this?)
> Despite having announced several things this morning that very very
> clearly show that not only have we a) admitted the mistake (repeatedly), b)
> taken actions to avoid these mistakes in the future, and c) announced these
> intentions publicly in writing, we are still "slapping" you on the face?
If I write a program (or do whatever...), and I make a mistake, I do not
just say to the customer "Well, yes, it's a mistake, and we won't repeat
it.". I fix it!
> Then in an effort to ensure that you (the AFOLs) are completely informed and
> kept in the loop on on what's going on, we are "slapping" you again??
Not by keeping us informed. Only by the decision itself.
> Honestly, I think that approaching this as "LEGO has slapped the AFOL" is
> completely off base. That makes it sound like we purposely went out of our way
> to upset the AFOLs. Nothing is further from the truth!
Maybe this was not out of purpose. It's a punch in the face nontheless,
and hurts like one.
> Let me, once again, say this very clearly so that no one can ever say LEGO
> hasn't apologize for the problems.
And this is going to help us how?
> ====
> Representing the LEGO Company, I apologize for a poor implementation of a major
> change. We made a mistake in the way that this change was made, and we are
> taking all efforts to ensure we don't end up in this same situation again.
> ====
And did a big mistake by just cementing, not fixing the first mistake. I
just can't believe corporate stupidity and stubbornness.
> Now, from your Marklin example, they made the change, and they did it in a way
> that made it easier for their hobbyists to make the switch. I've been asking
> for, digging for, and trying to pry info from the global AFOL community about
> the best way, moving forward, to ease this transition.
>
> I know this change is not welcomed, and was implemented poorly (see apology
> above). But since we can't turn back time, and since the change is here to stay,
> let's focus on the best way to ease into the transition.
>
> *Is that by "locking" certain key parts in old colors for the forseeable future?
> *Is that by focusing on getting wider access to the new colors?
> *Is it by some other concept?
>
> I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU think
> is the best way to ease into the switch over.
Jake, your company is heading full speed into a dead end. There is no
real way to ease the pain of the transition except by taking it back.
Sorry.
Christian Treczoks
|
|
| |
Anthony Sava wrote:
> Jake contacted me and has asked me to post my opinion as to what specific parts
> I'd like to see offered in Bulk that would make the Castle people happy, much
> like the old grey train track makes the train people happy.
>
> He suggested maybe Castle Wall pieces.
Yuk. I am an avid builder of things that would fit into the castle area,
but I don't want to caught dead with such a thing as a "castle wall
element". Or wooden palisades. Or BURPs (The "U" in BURP is not a joke...).
Walls are supposed to be made of bricks, plates and arches. Anything
else ist evil ;D
Yours, Christian Treczoks
|
|
| |
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Personally, I think that the best way to go is to take the 6 main themes
(Castle, Space, Town, Train, Pirates, Technic) and figure out, for each of
them, what parts builders of those themes most want (and for each part,
whether they want old lt grey, new lt grey, old dk grey, new dk grey, old
brown or new brown or some combination of them)
Then, combine those lists (there will be a fair bit of duplication for some
parts I suspect). The result will be a list of parts that should be made in
the old colors.
Also, the idea of releasing buckets instead of service packs is a very good
one (I for one would buy a Space bucket in old grey)
Plus, I think that there should be 1 legend (or something equally as good
like the Santa Fe or Blacksmiths shop) in each of the "core" themes
mentioned above per <insert period that is possible to do> and that those
sets should be done in the old colors.
For example, for the first go for pirates, you could do either another run
of the Barracuda or you could do another set such as the Skulls Eye
Schooner or the Rock Island Refuge. Certainly the Black Seas Barracuda
contains pretty much all of the pirate-specific parts commonly used by
pirateheads and which normally come in brown/grey/dk grey
In castle, you could do another run of the Black Falcons Fortress or
alternativly something like the Kings Castle.
And so on.
Anyhow, anyone want to start the ball rolling by comming up with a
suggested set of parts for <insert one of the 6 themes here>?
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Aaron Muhl wrote:
| |
I would also like to see a old brown “house building” set consisting of
windows with lattices, plates, slopes and various doors. Throw in a
pitchfork or two also and you’ll sell a bunch I would think.
|
Well I think it’s pretty obvious that I would buy a ton of this pack if it was
ever made. And I could think of at least a ½ dozen other builders in my club
that would as well.
Jason Spears | BrickCentral | MichLUG
|
|
| |
Hello David!
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
> many reasonable things that I fully agree to and that explain my thoughts in the best possible manner.
Thanks.
Bye
Jojo
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Ken Bailey wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
snip huge list of examples where LEGO listen to us
Sorry Jake but I have to point out that all of the items listed above
are/have been only available to those who are able to use S@H or have a
Lego brand name store close to them ie; NOT the majority of shoppers.
For those of us that do not (or can’t, for whatever reason) shop from S@H
and who do not have a Lego brand shop in their country, those items might
as well be on the moon.
So, I guess this is a plea for Lego to consider those of us who, like I said,
can’t or won’t use S@H and don’t have a Lego brand shop nearby.
|
Well not sure about in your area, but the MOT Cars & the Sopwith Camel were
available at Targets and the Santa Fe Engine, Rebel Blockade Runner, Pizza To
Go, & Breezeway Cafe were available at TRU.
Jason Spears | BrickCentral | MichLUG
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Ken Bailey wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> snip
> > < Begin Humorous Sarcasm >
> >
> > Well, besides the
> > - MOT sets
> > - Santa Fe sets
> > - Metroliner
> > - Club Car
> > - Guarded Inn
> > - Black Falcon's Fortress
> > - USS Constellation
> > - Countless other various Legends sets
> > - Legends voting
> > - Blacksmith Shop MOC
> > - Santa Fe Cars MOC
> > - Current Bulk Program
> > - PaB
> > - Imperial Star Destoyer
> > - Rebel Blockade Runner
> > - UCS Snowspeeder
> > - Wright Flyer
> > - Sopwith Camel
> > - Red Baron
> > - Shell sets
> > - Seasonal sets (turkey, pumpkin, US flag, Christmas ornaments, etc.)
> > - Statue of Liberty
> > - Minifig Sculpture
> > - Darth Maul bust
> > - Special purchasing deals
> > - LEGO Mosaic
> > - Last shot of Cypress trees
> > - ...and whatever else I have up my sleeve
> >
> > Other than that, you're right, we don't list much! :)
> >
> > < /End Humorous Sarcasm >
>
> Sorry Jake but I have to point out that all of the items listed above are/have
> been only available to those who are able to use S@H or have a Lego brand name
> store close to them ie; NOT the majority of shoppers.
Certainly, minus as Jason says, the times when they do come to retail.
> For those of us that do not (or can't, for whatever reason) shop from S@H and
> who do not have a Lego brand shop in their country, those items might as well be
> on the moon.
Sure, but saying they don't exist, and saying they exist in a channel you don't
feel like using is much different.
> From the impulse/casual buyer's viewpoint, Lego has done none of those things,
> nothing special/extra has been provided for those buyers at all.
Well, besides the entire What Will You Make? line....
More importantly, the comment I responded to had eveything to do with AFOLs. The
comment was that TLC hasn't listened to AFOLs or paid attention to their needs.
My comment was meant to show that we have, in fact, listened to the AFOLs, and
listened in a big way.
> Personally, I think Lego is missing a rather significant part of the market
> here, I realise some (most/all?) of these items have been created as
> "exclusives" for S@H, but if that exclusivity were for, say the first year, and
> then the models etc were supplied to normal retail outlets, either as generally
> available items, or perhaps listed in the catalogs as "special items that you
> can ask your retailer to order for you" then I believe Lego would not be
> dissapointed with the sales figures.
Well, we can't force anything at all on retailers. It's up to them to decide,
ultimately, what they accept and what they don't. When retailers have been
interested in the exclusives, we've worked out deals to get them to them. (As
mentioned by Jason's examples)
I'm not saying that some of these exclusives wouldn't do well in retail, but I'm
also not convinced that it's an absolute no-brainer, slam-dunk.
> So, I guess this is a plea for Lego to consider those of us who, like I said,
> can't or won't use S@H and don't have a Lego brand shop nearby.
I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > I understand the point, but I don't exactly follow it. The only way that
> > sales are boosted by paying attention to AFOL feedback is with the AFOL
> > market. There really isn't a way we can take your (AFOL) feedback and meld
> > it into something for the kids market. Kids/parents won't really care much
> > about whether or not we listened to AFOLs or not.
>
> AFOLs contribute a lot of free advertising about LEGO product by doing shows,
> running websites, and helping parents/kids out in the toy aisles. The tone of
> that advertising is very much dependant on how well our concerns are being
> addressed. Furthermore, AFOLs often provide you with practical real-world
> insight into the desires of kids/parents, through our interaction with them at
> shows, on websites, and in the toy aisles.
Agreed, and if you stand around me in person more than 10 minutes, you'll
probably hear at least 3 big "thank you!" for that.
But I don't think I did a good job of explaining my point. I'm not saying that
AFOLs are not worth listening to. I'm saying that I don't understand the
original point about how TLC might be "using" the AFOL feedback to further goals
with other audiences (aside from implementing the AFOL feedback, which leads to
product enhancements for general audience products).
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
It's more expensive than anywhere else. We have to pay tax AND
shipping on top of full retail prices.
Don
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Tracey Greenwood wrote:
> Jake, I feel people may be cynical due to the experience of being
> "short-changed" by other large companies. Take eBay, for example. they always
> like to give the impression they are listening and "taking the community's ideas
> on board", when really they jump first and ask questions later. It's all too
> obvious most of the time that changes are decided and implemented a long time
> before the community ever gets their say or even gets to hear about it....by
> that time, any community feedback or workshop session is just a token to quiet
> the masses.
Yeah, I can understand this. You make a good point.
> If Lego could prove to AFOLs that they indeed ARE listening and WILL listen and
> DO listen to AFOL views, ideas and opinions, I'm sure that some people here will
> love (well, "RESPECT") you for it ;0)
See, this is where I scratch my head. I'm not sure what more I can do to
convince people, or prove to people that we do listen. We've developed tons of
products that are extremely AFOL friendly (ISD, RBR, Wright Flyer, etc.), we've
issued Legends, some of them even based on AFOL voting, we've solicited feedback
on what kinds of Legends you'd like to see, we've created a bulk program via
SAH, we've launched general consumer concepts like WWYM, and PaB.
But we make a mistake (albeit an honest one) with the color change, and people
start talking as if we've shunned not embraced the community in the last 4+
years.
Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
to "prove" that we are listening?
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Christian Treczoks wrote:
> Anthony Sava wrote:
> > Jake contacted me and has asked me to post my opinion as to what specific parts
> > I'd like to see offered in Bulk that would make the Castle people happy, much
> > like the old grey train track makes the train people happy.
> >
> > He suggested maybe Castle Wall pieces.
> Yuk. I am an avid builder of things that would fit into the castle area,
> but I don't want to caught dead with such a thing as a "castle wall
> element". Or wooden palisades. Or BURPs (The "U" in BURP is not a joke...).
>
> Walls are supposed to be made of bricks, plates and arches. Anything
> else ist evil ;D
>
> Yours, Christian Treczoks
I agree. Castle wall pieces are not nearly as universally useful as plain old
bricks and plates. You can make a Castle wall piece with bricks, plates, and an
arch - but it's tough to make a car or a mecha out of Castle wall pieces.
Marc Nelson Jr.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
Ironic that the brick packages in Old Grey made available for fans was the
first time those packages were available in several years. Also, making a
minfig pack based on fan suggestions is only now being proposed. It’s as if
only now, when TLG does such a bad thing, do they honestly begin asking for
what we’d like and giving it to us.
|
|
Umm.. You list several things twice - or in two categories (ie. “Countless
Legends Sets” and “Guarded Inn”, “Black Falcon’s Fortress”). Several of those
are just sets (UCS ISD and RBR) - and I can hardly count those as fitting of the
bill of “asking for what we’d like and giving it to us.” If you count those,
then why not count all sets ever? Because I buy those as much or more than the
special offerings!
And I’m not trying to say LEGO has never done anything in our favor, but usually
it is from a top-down approach rather than a down-top approach. Meaning, TLG
gives us a Legend Set, and the Community collectively wonders how/why that
Legend Set was selected. Some Fans have valid complaints or suggestions that
never get really listened to because those thoughts are added after the
decisions have been made.
Now that you’re asking us what pieces should be continually made in Old-Grey
colors - well, now I feel like I’m being able to add my voice to the mix BEFORE
the decision is made - thus, I have the ability to effect what that change is.
I think it is fairly clear why this is happening: TLG was amazed by the Fan
back-lash against the New-Grey and is interested in getting with the Fans to
produce some sort of compromise. This is a wonderful thing, of which I am so
happy to see - I just find it ironic that this level of interaction wasn’t
possible before.
| |
Well, besides the
- MOT sets
- Santa Fe sets
- Metroliner
- Club Car
- Guarded Inn
- Black Falcon’s Fortress
- USS Constellation
- Countless other various Legends sets
- Legends voting
- Blacksmith Shop MOC
- Santa Fe Cars MOC
- Current Bulk Program
- PaB
- Imperial Star Destoyer
- Rebel Blockade Runner
- UCS Snowspeeder
- Wright Flyer
- Sopwith Camel
- Red Baron
- Shell sets
- Seasonal sets (turkey, pumpkin, US flag, Christmas ornaments, etc.)
- Statue of Liberty
- Minifig Sculpture
- Darth Maul bust
- Special purchasing deals
- LEGO Mosaic
- Last shot of Cypress trees
- ...and whatever else I have up my sleeve
Other than that, you’re right, we don’t list much! :)
|
Some of this stuff only really affects the “rich AFOLs” (like the high cost UCS
sets, the Bulk Deal, etc)- people who can spend several hundred dollars in one
sitting. Most AFOLs at Lugnet would fit that bill, I’m sure. But most of my
LEGO spending is in the $20-50 range, with occasional exceptions of me saving up
for the ISD or getting a bonus from work.
Other things on this list are area specific - such as PaBs. PaBs are great
things, but if you don’t live near a LEGO store then it really doesn’t help you
at all. If something like a true PaB was made available through SAH - then it
would go from Great to ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!! because it would affect not just a
few Fans but all Fans. I know this isn’t really something that is possible, but
I think the point is valid.
Let me re-state my point: I’m not talking about the cool things TLG does for
Fans, but the act of actively involving Fans in the decision making process.
Oh, and I suppose someone my point out the Legends vote - my rebuttal - It was a
forced choice between five sets. Forced choice doesn’t equate with a open-ended
question like “What Parts should we keep making in Old Grey?” - which is the
difference between quasi-voice and a true voice in decisions.
-Lenny
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Tracey Greenwood wrote:
>
> > If Lego could prove to AFOLs that they indeed ARE listening and WILL listen and
> > DO listen to AFOL views, ideas and opinions, I'm sure that some people here will
> > love (well, "RESPECT") you for it ;0)
>
> See, this is where I scratch my head. I'm not sure what more I can do to
> convince people, or prove to people that we do listen. We've developed tons of
> products that are extremely AFOL friendly (ISD, RBR, Wright Flyer, etc.), we've
> issued Legends, some of them even based on AFOL voting, we've solicited feedback
> on what kinds of Legends you'd like to see, we've created a bulk program via
> SAH, we've launched general consumer concepts like WWYM, and PaB.
>
> But we make a mistake (albeit an honest one) with the color change, and people
> start talking as if we've shunned not embraced the community in the last 4+
> years.
>
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
> to "prove" that we are listening?
You mean besides reversing the color change?
Marc Nelson Jr.
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
Why should I? Too difficiult, too expensive (plus shipping!), and it is
an Online Shop, for heavens sake. There is nothing better for shopping
decisions than to go into a real shop and lay your hands on the product.
Besides, nobody files, records and dissects my shopping preferences in a
Brick and Mortar shop. At least not in the depth like S@H can do (and
propably does!).
Yours, Christian Treczoks
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Erik Olson wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> > I noticed there was never an official denial to
> > the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> > the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
>
> Now that you got your official denial, consider: Lego makes more black bricks
> than they do gray bricks. In the recycling article they said recycled plastic
> goes into black bricks.
I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me. Please explain further. Or
maybe I just need some coffee.
I really wish they would just tell us the real business decision behind the
change. Then we could move on.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
> Jake McKee wrote:
> > > I noticed there was never an official denial to
> > > the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> > > the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
> > Consider this an official denial. :)
>
> Jake, how long would it take to present us with some real reason for
> doing the change?
>
> I can accept something like this: some higly positioned **** in the
> management thought it was a great idea. There was nobody brave enough to
> tell him that it's stupid.
If you accept this theory - then what would make you think Jake is brave enough
to publically rebuke said highly positioned ****? If everyone else is afraid,
then they have good reason to be afraid (meaning=fired) - and I'd rather have
Jake working for TLG than fired from it.
Personally, I'm not that concerned with reasons (especially the conspiratorial
ones) because really, I just want my grey.
-Lenny
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> See, this is where I scratch my head. I'm not sure what more I can do to
> convince people, or prove to people that we do listen. We've developed tons of
> products that are extremely AFOL friendly (ISD, RBR, Wright Flyer, etc.), we've
> issued Legends, some of them even based on AFOL voting, we've solicited feedback
> on what kinds of Legends you'd like to see, we've created a bulk program via
> SAH, we've launched general consumer concepts like WWYM, and PaB.
Yes, you listened to us in this respect, and we are thankful for what
TLC did here. And it propably sold good, too.
> But we make a mistake (albeit an honest one) with the color change, and people
> start talking as if we've shunned not embraced the community in the last 4+
> years.
Because the mistake itself, the way how the issue was handeld, the
results that have been drawn and the suicidal "we stick to this
error"-attitude made all previous efforts and successes worthless. TLC
literally burned the trust we AFOLs had into a product that was worth to
be a fan of.
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
> to "prove" that we are listening?
Well, listen is just one side. TLC might have listened, but they did not
understand. They really did not understand, and this makes me sad.
Revert the colour change before it is too late. Not for us - but for TLC.
YOurs, Christian Treczoks
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> See, this is where I scratch my head. I'm not sure what more I can
> do to convince people, or prove to people that we do listen. We've
> developed tons of products that are extremely AFOL friendly (ISD,
> RBR, Wright Flyer, etc.), we've issued Legends, some of them even
> based on AFOL voting, we've solicited feedback on what kinds of
> Legends you'd like to see, we've created a bulk program via
> SAH, we've launched general consumer concepts like WWYM, and PaB.
All that was very good. Thank you! But you do realize the color
change makes all those good things less compatible with your new
products. Right?
> But we make a mistake (albeit an honest one) with the color change,
> and people start talking as if we've shunned not embraced the
> community in the last 4+ > years.
I'm curious. I'm not sure I caught it in all the talk, but what
exactly is the mistake you're admitting to here? Is it that you
changed the colors and made your new products less compatible with
your old products? Or is it that you didn't let us in on it until
all hell broke loose? Or is it something else entirely.
If it's already here somewhere, just point me to the post. Thanks.
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this:
> What can I do to "prove" that we are listening?
Maybe you shouldn't spin it. We don't really care if you're
just listening. We want you to listen and then take action. In
this case the only action that really matters is TLC making the
original colors available in sufficient quantities, and the only way
that's going to happen is if they appear in the new sets.
Don
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
>
> > I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
>
> It's more expensive than anywhere else. We have to pay tax AND
> shipping on top of full retail prices.
So it's really nothing to do with S@H, but has to do with the concept of online
shopping in the first place?
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
>
> I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
>
> Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color change
> will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color change
> (although, yes, the implementation fell flat), and as such we are going to stay
> the course. I know this isn’t the answer you’re hoping for, and I know very very
> well that many of you aren’t happy about this news.
Bah... I'm simply leaning towards finding a different hobby to spend my money
on. I've got enough bricks to continue to build for a while, but after that
maybe I'll just stop buying your products. There are a few sets that I think
are pretty spiffy, but I've lost faith in TLC.
Time to start clearing those MISB sets out of my basement to make room for
something else. <sigh>
JohnG, GMLTC
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Christian Treczoks wrote:
> Jake McKee wrote:
> > I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
> Why should I? Too difficiult, too expensive (plus shipping!), and it is
> an Online Shop, for heavens sake. There is nothing better for shopping
> decisions than to go into a real shop and lay your hands on the product.
Agreed that there's nothing like putting your hands on it. But since 99.9% of
retailers wouldn't carry the ISD, for instance, would you prefer that we simply
don't do it, and concentrate only on things that a retailer *may* decide to
stock? (Remember, we don't and can't _force_ retailers to sell anything)
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
<big snip>
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can • I do
> to "prove" that we are listening?
First Jake, it is not something you can do.
It is something that Lego as a company has to do. Return to the original
colors
and make them the "universal" from this point forward. Accept and realize
that
this mistake is on a scale that out weighs any good things that have been
done
in the past. It is the right thing to do, but it is clear me that doing the
right thing is not what Lego is willing to do. At the very least,
reformulate
these colors to be compatible with the older colors.
Greg
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz wrote:
>
> "Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@ascentialsoftwareDOTcom> wrote in
> message news:Hx91Ap.Cx9@lugnet.com...
> > (snip)
> >
> > This is a fairly radical opinion, I guess, but I'm not convinced that the 9V
> > track is one of the "key" pieces to keep in production in old dark grey. I know
> > it's different but frankly, this is an area where reality DOES vary. Railroads
> > replace ties all the time, and ties weather at different rates, even concrete
> > ones.
>
> Hmm, if we're going to do anything with the track, how about brown? New
> brown would be fine. Black would work also.
SNIP
Would that be "Classic" brown or the new "Universal" Mega-Blok looking brown?
-Ken
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > > I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
> >
> > It's more expensive than anywhere else. We have to pay tax AND
> > shipping on top of full retail prices.
>
> So it's really nothing to do with S@H, but has to do with the concept of online
> shopping in the first place?
Or TLC's concept of it. I do plenty of shopping online, but usually
when I get notified of a 25% off sale so I know I'm getting at least
as good a deal as walking into a store. SAH used to have more unique
items. But now most of that is available at the LEGO stores without
the extra shipping charges. Now, if only they weren't so far away...
Don
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> So it's really nothing to do with S@H, but has to do with the concept of online
> shopping in the first place?
One word: Yes.
Yours, Christian
|
|
| |
<SNIPPAGE>
> The $5000 was tongue in cheek, though the previous cost of changing *to* • the 9V
> system was a true figure. If I have to be much more pessimistic in my
> expectations of obsolescence of Lego pieces, I might have to find another • hobby!
> I fully realise that no-one owes me anything on the products I've bought, • but
> the feeling of it being in extremely bad faith won't go away. The figure • was
> given as the estimated cost of replacing all my train-specific parts, if • that
> were ever necessary.
> Mark
I'm sorry, I just don't get this, When I look at a train layout, I'm not
looking at the damn track... I'm looking at what's running on the track.
And when you think about it, the 'consumer' is a far distance from being
able to see the actual color of the track. Now if the color was changing to
purple or some hot pink color, I'd say we'd be able to see the difference
from a distance.
If the track can stay the old dark grey, than every part can stay that
color. That's just not fair in my mind, we all have parts we've spent lots
of money on that we want to have continuity with building. I've tried to
embrace the change best as possible, and have actually gotten some of the
new sets (x-pods and Designer only) I don't have enough to build anything
with the new colors yet to totally rule them out. Though I have to say,
hearing that track will/might stay dr. grey really made me think this
through again... and made me pretty upset about the whole mess. I think
almost more than the inital shock of the whole deal.
I'm sorry, when it comes to this change, right now I feel it's all or
nothing, it's not fair to give one group what they want and not the rest of
us. I can understand doing a limited run of the track now like you did with
the bricks and when they are gone, they are gone just like for the rest of
us.
Tamy
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> Agreed that there's nothing like putting your hands on it. But since 99.9% of
> retailers wouldn't carry the ISD, for instance, would you prefer that we simply
> don't do it, and concentrate only on things that a retailer *may* decide to
> stock? (Remember, we don't and can't _force_ retailers to sell anything)
Just don't make them so damn exclusive. I'm among the lucky people who
have a brand store in less than an hours drive away, but even *they*
don't carry the sets that I'd like to buy there.
Take bulk packs. The PAB in Cologne has a mediocre selection of mostly
useless (for me) bricks, most of them too bulky (as they are selling by
volume). They could sell bulk packs at least of the smaller parts that
would be too bad for volume-based sales. Instead, they squander space by
selling sword and bionicle claws made from styrofoam (SP?)...
And even S@H does not sell the things I'd really love to buy - and the
brand store actually *has* them, but doesn't want to sell them...
It is a mad, mad world in Billund. If I look up into the Danish sky,
what colour will I see? Pink? Yellowinsh green? A shade of Purple? Who
knows...
Yours, Christian
|
|
| |
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
> to "prove" that we are listening?
Some people won't ever be convinced - but I'd like to say this:
The very fact of this question, this thread, and this discussion all supports
one thing:
TLG listens to the Fans.
Jake is a paid professional who's sole job (it seems) is to argue on our behalf
to TLG, and to argue on TLG's behalf to us. This means it is very important to
TLG that there are communication lines open between TLG and the Fan community,
because they are putting real money into those communication lines. I respect
both TLG and Jake for the effort they are putting into this situation.
Having said that, the color-change is perhaps one of the biggest TLG-AFOL
problems ever. And it is definately strikes at an issue of trust. This isn't
about Fans not understanding or agreeing with why TLG did something -> its that
from now on, when a Fan opens a brand new set, the fans will check twice to make
sure all the colors are the same, that the pieces are correct. No longer will I
just dump the new pieces into the "To-Sort" bin and go happily about my day.
Don't get me wrong - I really do love LEGO, and will always love LEGO. I'm very
happy to see the level of interaction we currently have, and hope that it grows.
But I can't ignore that there has been hurt trust here.
-Lenny
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
>
> > I don't want to start a flam war but
>
> I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> of each other.
I propose a FRAME war, in which the opposing sides smash pictures over their
opponents' heads. I see great opportunity for Covert Photo Ops.
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Tracey Greenwood wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jeff Findley wrote:
> > Just which colors are "universal" and which colors aren't?
>
> A few of us asked way back at the beginning of the thread this very question...
I don't know how I missed that.
Anyway, I'm really hoping that Lego decides to let the AFOL community know what
colors are "universal" and what colors are not. I personally thought that the
grays would be "universal" since they've been around for so long and they're
used in such key pieces as Lego Train track (as others have mentioned before,
these aren't cheap pieces to buy).
Looking forward to Jake getting back to us on this issue. This is something
that would cost Lego nothing to publish, but would go a long way towards
rebuilding the trust with the AFOL community that was lost.
Jeff
|
|
| |
Lenny Hoffman wrote:
> > I can accept something like this: some higly positioned **** in the
> > management thought it was a great idea. There was nobody brave enough to
> > tell him that it's stupid.
>
> If you accept this theory - then what would make you think Jake is brave enough
> to publically rebuke said highly positioned ****? If everyone else is afraid,
> then they have good reason to be afraid (meaning=fired)
Because there were some fires in the top management recently, so it's
non-zero probability the person is not there or not in that high
position ;-)
--
Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jeff Findley wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Tracey Greenwood wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Jeff Findley wrote:
> > > Just which colors are "universal" and which colors aren't?
> >
> > A few of us asked way back at the beginning of the thread this very question...
>
> I don't know how I missed that.
>
> Anyway, I'm really hoping that Lego decides to let the AFOL community know what
> colors are "universal" and what colors are not. I personally thought that the
> grays would be "universal" since they've been around for so long and they're
> used in such key pieces as Lego Train track (as others have mentioned before,
> these aren't cheap pieces to buy).
>
> Looking forward to Jake getting back to us on this issue. This is something
> that would cost Lego nothing to publish, but would go a long way towards
> rebuilding the trust with the AFOL community that was lost.
I mentioned yesterday (but has probably gotten lost in the multitude of posts)
that I'm working on getting this. I hope to publish an update today, but it may
be Monday as there is a Danish holiday tomorrow, and it's already getting late
in the day today.
Hang tight.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> >
> > > I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
> >
> > It's more expensive than anywhere else. We have to pay tax AND
> > shipping on top of full retail prices.
>
> So it's really nothing to do with S@H, but has to do with the concept of online
> shopping in the first place?
>
> Jake
> ---
> Jake McKee
> Community Liaison
> LEGO Community Development
I'm not sure thats entirely accurate.
It makes sense to me that certain items or kit are only exposed through an
on-line store as retailers are reluctant to carry them.
It makes sense to me (from a business point of view) to ensure that you do not
undercut retailers' prices for those kits which ARE carried by retailers.
What starts to make less sense to me is the high prices of Lego kits (bulk or
specialty) that are offered only or primarily through the on-line store.
Bulk/Accessory kits in particular seem over-priced. Why do I believe that?
It would make sense to me that Lego enthusiasts are the most likely to
purchase bulk or accessory kits. (It seems unlikely that someone would
give 100 2x2 bricks out as a gift to a non-enthusiast). It also seems to
me that this group helps to promote Lego to a younger and wider group of
consumers. I can not forsee an erosion of
the retail marketplace by lowering these prices.
I'd be interested in others opinions on this.
- Jeff
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker. Nope, not that bright I think!
>
> I come to you with a final update, and some good news, as well as bad.
>
> Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color change
> will stand.
Bummer.
>
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
Translation: it will embarrass too many people to change back, and now we
guarantee that we won't change back and embarrass them!
(Humor alert! Do not take seriously! Jussssssssst teasing...)
:-)
>
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Really basic bricks: 1x(1-8), 2x(2-8). Slopes and reverse slopes. Arches.
Plates in the same general sizes. Literally, the kind of parts packs that have
been offered in the past!
>
> I know this isn’t the silver bullet update you were hoping for, but hopefully
> this bears some good news for you.
Thanks for bringing the concerns of the open-ended builder (adult or child) to
The Powers That Be. I'm not always pleased by the results, but I always
appreciate the effort.
-->Bruce<--
|
|
| |
Hello!
> See, this is where I scratch my head. I'm not sure what more I can do to
> convince people, or prove to people that we do listen. We've developed tons of
> products that are extremely AFOL friendly (ISD, RBR, Wright Flyer, etc.), we've
> issued Legends, some of them even based on AFOL voting, we've solicited feedback
> on what kinds of Legends you'd like to see, we've created a bulk program via
> SAH, we've launched general consumer concepts like WWYM, and PaB.
Yes, by doing all the mentioned above you gave us sugar.
But by changing the greys and brown you stole our bread.
Bye
Jojo
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
> >
> > > I don't want to start a flam war but
> >
> > I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> > products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> > of each other.
>
> I propose a FRAME war, in which the opposing sides smash pictures over their
> opponents' heads. I see great opportunity for Covert Photo Ops.
>
> Dave!
But, he said 'flam war', which sounds to me like drummers battling over
rudiments(1), which should quickly descend into the throwing of sticks, cymbals,
etc. Highly entertaining...;-)
Peace and percussion,
Professor Whateverly
(1) Do look up 'flam' if you are puzzled.
|
|
| |
> > 2) Dislike the minifigure's head color change. Keep it yellow.
>
> Okay, _this_ I've actually heard a believable explanation for. At Toy Fair, I
> was told that the reason for shifting to skin-tones in the licensed sets is
> because the major retail chains have been leaning on TLC to do just that. If
> the retail chains aren't happy, they'll stop ordering as much product, and that
> will have a severely negative impact on TLC's bottom line. It doesn't matter if
> the consumers care one way or the other if the big retail chains make their
> orders based on a perception that they do.
So what you're saying is only on sets like Spiderman, Harry Potter, Star Wars
and the new Ferarri ones will this be in affect? Wasn't aware of the above,
thanks.
>
> > If I want realism I'll buy McFarlane toys.
>
> Accounts of their realism are greatly exaggerated. They've got detail out the
> wazoo, but very little of it is realistic, and the paint jobs are often
> hideously blotchy.
And sometimes they even use the same sculpt on multiple figures (Lalime of NHL
series 8 is exactly the same as Thibault of series 3)
|
|
| |
John Gerlach wrote:
> Bah... I'm simply leaning towards finding a different hobby to spend my
> money
> on. I've got enough bricks to continue to build for a while, but after
> that
> maybe I'll just stop buying your products. There are a few sets that I
> think are pretty spiffy, but I've lost faith in TLC.
>
> Time to start clearing those MISB sets out of my basement to make room for
> something else. <sigh>
My sentiments exactly. About 5 years ago I packed up my h0 layout, due to
time shortage and high cost. Right now LEGO is almost as expensive and I'll
have loads more time now that I won't be doing much MOC's anymore either.
--
Jan-Albert van Ree | http://www.vanree.net/brickpiles/
Brick Piles | Santa Fe B-unit
GnuPG key | http://www.vanree.net/~javanree/publickey.asc
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
| |
There’s been no mention of whether white is “universal” or not. But since it
clashes so much with the new permanent colors, I think it’s only a matter of
time before we can kiss it goodbye, too.
|
I doubt it very much. Natural ABS is a slightly translucent cream color, and
white is probably the hardest color to achieve. Heavy metal pigments are no
longer legal in the US (which is why brown/tan plastic electrical fixtures are
no longer cheaper than any other color), and you can’t exactly combine two other
colors to get white. I’ve never seen a true white ABS. It’s always slightly
warm, and yellows with time. The only way I can see for them to make true white
pieces is to switch those bricks over to a different plastic, like straight
polystyrene. Of course, if we were interested in buying dirt-cheap plastic with
low resistance to breaking, we’d be discussing this on MUGNET, not LUGNET.
Aside from all of that, white ABS matches very well with the rest of the array
of colors (including the new reddish-brown), so what’s the point in screwing
that up just to get it to look better with just six colors?
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:
> Wow....
> I've been an intern for 4 months at a Dutch injection moulding company but I
> never knew it was possible, apart from the black (as has been done for
> years with car bumpers and such)
>
> But unless you do this in HUGE quantities, how can you guarantee exact
> colors such as with LEGO with each batch?
That's part of the problem. You do get much greater accuracy as you increase
the size of the batch. It's also probably a lot easier to do with sheet
extrusion than with injection molding, where you have a constant flow of a large
amount of material, rather than a rapid start/stop with small quantities in each
spurt. Of course, most extrusion plants won't even touch post-consumer regrind
unless it's in batches of half a ton or more, if they're the ones who have to
regrind the scrap and/or (in the case of hygroscopic plastics) dessicate it.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Ley Ward wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > > In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't want to start a flam war but
> > >
> > > I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> > > products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> > > of each other.
> >
> > I propose a FRAME war, in which the opposing sides smash pictures over their
> > opponents' heads. I see great opportunity for Covert Photo Ops.
> But, he said 'flam war', which sounds to me like drummers battling over
> rudiments(1), which should quickly descend into the throwing of sticks, cymbals,
> etc. Highly entertaining...;-)
Ah, yes--invoking the cymbals of war to drum up a little spirit. How could I
forget?
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> Agreed, and if you stand around me in person more than 10 minutes, you'll
> probably hear at least 3 big "thank you!" for that.
>
> But I don't think I did a good job of explaining my point. I'm not saying
> that AFOLs are not worth listening to. I'm saying that I don't understand the
> original point about how TLC might be "using" the AFOL feedback to further
> goals with other audiences (aside from implementing the AFOL feedback, which
> leads to product enhancements for general audience products).
Ah, I see now. You were trying to say that the only market that cares strictly
about the commitment to listen to AFOL feedback is the AFOL market itself, which
I can agree with. Noone else has any reason to care why you did something so
much as they do about what you actually did. The way I read it, however, was
that the only market that ever benefits from the actual implementation of AFOL
advice is the AFOL market, which is not true, as AFOLs often pass on feedback
from the general consumer market.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Christian Treczoks wrote:
> Instead, they squander space by selling sword and bionicle claws made from
> styrofoam (SP?)...
When BIONICLE accounts for 25% of all LEGO product turnover, investing a little
space in special items for that powerful market hardly counts as "squandering"
space. It might surprise you to know that the biggest complaint about them is
not that they're made in the first place, but that the range is incredibly
limited. Only five tools have been released in child-sized foam-rubber form,
out of a whopping total of 144 possible subjects (not counting any of the ones
that come with Matoran or Bohrok Va sets, or any as-yet-unreleased tools like
the Vahki blades). No masks or other body parts have been released either, and
there's a serious demand for BIONICLE halloween costumes that has been going
unfilled for too long as it is. The only way they're squandering that space is
by not expanding the range of tools offered. Many kids are very loyal to their
favorite elements, and when offered the choice between a Fire tool and an Earth
tool, will walk away and wait for the day when they can buy a Stone, Air, Water,
or Ice tool.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Mark Riley wrote:
| |
There’s been no mention of whether white is “universal” or not. But since
it clashes so much with the new permanent colors, I think it’s only a matter
of time before we can kiss it goodbye, too.
|
I doubt it very much. Natural ABS is a slightly translucent cream color, and
white is probably the hardest color to achieve. Heavy metal pigments are no
longer legal in the US (which is why brown/tan plastic electrical fixtures
are no longer cheaper than any other color), and you can’t exactly combine
two other colors to get white. I’ve never seen a true white ABS. It’s
always slightly warm, and yellows with time. The only way I can see for them
to make true white pieces is to switch those bricks over to a different
plastic, like straight polystyrene. Of course, if we were interested in
buying dirt-cheap plastic with low resistance to breaking, we’d be discussing
this on MUGNET, not LUGNET.
|
In all seriousness, do you suppose that this is how MEGABLOKS does it? I’ve
noticed for years that their “white” is more “white” than LEGO “white,” but I
never knew the underlying reason.
Is there a simple, reliable way to discern the difference between ABS and
straight polystyrene without damaging/destroying either in the process? They
both taste the same, AFAIK...
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
Check-By-Phone. I don't use credit cards, and I don't want to wait for my
payment to arrive by snail-mail before my shipment can be sent to me. In
addition to the fact that S@H usually costs more because of S&H charges, it'd
take over a week for me to get my purchases in hand, whereas I can go to local
stores and get them in an hour or less.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Daniel Warren wrote:
> So what you're saying is only on sets like Spiderman, Harry Potter, Star Wars
> and the new Ferarri ones will this be in affect? Wasn't aware of the above,
> thanks.
That's what we've been told. Licensed characters (SW, HP, Spiderman, Dora,
etc.) and real-world personalities (Ferrari drivers). Of course, with how badly
the NBA minifig 3-pack sold, you have to wonder why the retail chains would
still be pushing for this...
> And sometimes they even use the same sculpt on multiple figures (Lalime of
> NHL series 8 is exactly the same as Thibault of series 3)
That's a long-standing trick of the toy industry. Marvel-based action-figures
are infamous for this, with many less popular characters only having seen
production because they didn't require any new sculpting. Even playsets end up
being reused. The Ewok Village ended up seeing new life with the Robin Hood:
Prince of Thieves toy line, and a rock-flinging siege weapon actually went from
Kenner Star Wars to Dragonheart back to Hasbro Star Wars. And, I mean, geez,
look at how many times TLC has retreaded that tired old 2x4 brick. ;P
|
|
| |
[snipped lots of not positive blabla]
> and for all. As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
> positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> internally who understand your passion and interest.
I do not feel understod at all. If this is your final update, you have finally
lost a consumer, a big fan, a big supporter and promoter.
My buys for this years sets is less than 1% of what I bought in the same period
last year. I only bought the mini-ISD as reference so far, I realized I deeply
dislike the new grey and I stop buying anything in new colors. That's it!
Good bye LEGO,
Ben
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In all seriousness, do you suppose that this is how MEGABLOKS does it? I’ve
noticed for years that their “white” is more “white” than LEGO “white,” but I
never knew the underlying reason.
|
Absolutely. Different plastics have different natural colors. Some start out
clear, others start out white, and those are basically the only colors that can
achieve a true white (since hobby shops generally only sell white styrene, I’d
guess that it’s naturally white). Everything else will be affected by the
underlying natural color tone, much like the look of paint will be affected by
the color of the underlying coat. However, I expect economic factors were
behind the decision to use PS over ABS, and the whiter white was merely a side
effect.
| |
Is there a simple, reliable way to discern the difference between ABS and
straight polystyrene without damaging/destroying either in the process? They
both taste the same, AFAIK...
|
I’ve never done a taste test on them, but polystyrene weighs less by volume, and
it has a different feel to it (it’s hard to explain in words alone, but ABS
actually seems to feel more “glossy” than polystyrene). Color spectrometry will
probably be the best harm-free way to figure it out...provided you have access
to a spectrometer (and they’re quite expensive). Beyond that, scratch tests,
burn tests, and corporate espionage might tell you what you want to know
(provided you don’t get caught attempting that last one).
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
First, Jake, let me say that I really appreciate you keeping this communication
with the AFOLs going. I feel utterly betrayed by TLC as a loyal customer and
from their behavior thus far regarding some of the recent quality issues and
such I wouldn't have been surprised if TLC never again took the time to send any
information back this way. Also, I'm going to try not to shoot the messenger
here. ;)
> Bad news first – After much discussion and debate internally, the color change
> will stand. There was some good thinking that went into the color change
> (although, yes, the implementation fell flat), and as such we are going to stay
> the course.
I really have to agree with others on this- I can't think of any possible "good
thinking" that would have produced a change that so fundamentally and negatively
affects TLC's customers. I really am curious to see what additional information
you can provide to us about that.
> Good news – based on the discussions and debates, many colleagues are clear that
> the color change dramatically affected the AFOLs. They are also clearly aware of
> the reasons it has upset you. In order to help address some of your concerns,
> several things have been agreed upon.
>
> * The three new colors (light gray, dark gray, brown) will now be classified as
> "universal", and these colors will NEVER be touched again. There will, of
> course, be colors that change over time with trends, but not these universal
> ones.
Good news? Well, OK... sure, we'll try to be very, very optimistic and say that
it's good news. I really feel a strong desire to know what other colors will be
"universal" now as well, because if this happens again with another core color
I'm fairly certain I'll enter another, permanent, Dark Ages. Other's have asked
for this as well, so I'll move on...
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
> elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long term. (And no, you
> can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Others that have more track and make more frequent us of it than I may disagree,
but I'm also of the mind that the train track is actually one of the less
important
things to maintain. Who's been asked about that so far? Personally I think that
the track trains run on isn't the focus - I never find myself looking at a train
layout (LEGO or otherwise) and being distracted by the track. Sure, it won't
match, but it'll really only be noticeable right where the two meet and I don't
think that'd be that big of a deal so long as you weren't mixing old and new
colors every other track section.
So, what do I, personally, feel *is* important to keep? That's an awfully hard
question, but I'd have to say nearly all of the basic bricks and plates. This is
especially true for brown as the new grays can be arguably useful for some MOCs,
the new brown is dreadful and to my mind doesn't accurately represent 90% of the
things I used it for (wood, namely). As far as other elements (I really think
they'd only need to be kept in light gray), I'd just point to what's in most
older Castle sets - panels, arches, slopes, and some of the slightly more unique
pieces like the 1x1 headlight.
> * We also have received confirmation from colleagues that in the future, we will
> include both the adult and kid enthusiasts in any testing related to
> modification or change of the core building system. (Please note that there are
> not any plans whatsoever in the works for making changes)
This is very good to hear! While I no longer have any faith that TLC listens to
it's customers, at least the possibility of providing feedback that will
actually be considered provides a faint glimmer of hope. :)
> Again, I know the color change upset many of you, and I don’t mean to re-open
> wounds.
Frankly, you didn't open an old would as I think for many of us it's one that
will never heal. I do appreciate that you understand and are sensitive to the
feelings on this issue, though.
Now, my final thoughts for now and something that might actually matter to TLC:
Your message about the "resolution" of this issue made me think about how this
change has affected my buying habits. Average retail LEGO purchases roughly a
year ago? $100/month. Amount spent at retail on LEGO since the color change
issue was posted? $0. I haven't spent _a_single_cent_ on new retail LEGO because
the the color change unnerved me so much. I think initially I thought I'd just
hold out for a while and see if TLC came to their senses and keep myself
supplied from the secondary market in the meantime. Now I realize that since it
took so long to get a final answer I've simply been weaned off new LEGO. Am I
going to give up and start buying again? I really don't think so. I received a
set as a gift not long after the change happened which is where I got my
firsthand impression of the new colors, and they're simply awful when I try to
use them with what I already own. Why buy from TLC who may change any other
fundamental aspect of their product with no warning at all when I know exactly
what to expect from the secondary market?
Now, I'm not totally pigheaded. :) I'd probably pick up a new retail set if it
looked interesting enough and didn't contain (or had very little) of the new
colors in it, but at this point I don't think I'd even buy Classic Space Legends
if they came in the new grays.
I think TLC is saying "We said we won't change them again. Isn't that good
enough?" while thinking "Now you can all start buying your collections all over
again since we've given you that paltry assurance!" I mean no offense by that,
it's just really how I feel.
As someone else alluded to - if you've still got the pellet supply in the old
color and are willing to produce some pieces, why not all? Why make the change
at all? The only reasons I can come up with from a corporate perspective are:
-Not wanting to lose face by backing down (I'd hope TLC's bigger than that,
though) while also trying to stem the tide of angry AFOLs and keeping their
options open for resupplying the parks and such.
-Cost savings. The new colors are cheaper, so if the bulk of pieces are produced
with them instead of the old ones TLC saves some cash.
In reality it's probably a combination of the two, which saddens me.
If there are other reasons that you can divulge, Jake, I'd honestly love to hear
them. If they didn't get a heavy amount of backlash from the move, why keep the
old colors around at all? If it's not a cost issue, what's the problem with
keeping the old colors? I've yet to hear a single plausible reason for the move
to the new colors other than the "kids like brighter grays!" hogwash. Inventory
management problems? Come on! Who here would lament the loss of one of the
shades of orange or green to keep the total numbers of colors constant for TLC
but retain our beloved grays and brown? Perhaps you can enlighten us... please?
Lastly:
> I'm honestly looking for your feedback on this issue. I'm asking what YOU think
> is the best way to ease into the switch over.
This is akin to saying "You're a carpenter, but you can no longer use wood. Now,
what's the best way we can ease the 'transition' for you?" - you can't. If the
new colors stand, they simply can't be used to represent stone, concrete, wood,
or anything that's more natural than steel or more "brown" than "chocolate"
anywhere near as well as the old colors. I can only hope for some seriously
great bulk packs of the old colors (think tubs!), but we didn't get them before
when those were the "standard" colors soo... *sigh*
Wow. That was longwinded. Sorry, I'm just passionate about it. :)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Ley Ward wrote:
> But, he said 'flam war', which sounds to me like drummers battling over
> rudiments(1), which should quickly descend into the throwing of sticks,
> cymbals, etc. Highly entertaining...;-)
Maybe he meant to type "fflam war", which would also be of the musical variety,
but waged between the musician and his harp.
|
|
| |
Dave Schuler wrote:
> In all seriousness, do you suppose that this is how MEGABLOKS does it?
> I've noticed for years that their "white" is more "white" than LEGO
> "white," but I never knew the underlying reason.
>
> Is there a simple, reliable way to discern the difference between ABS and
> straight polystyrene without damaging/destroying either in the process?
> They both taste the same, AFAIK...
Density (PS is lighter IIRC, check with Google or something), strength (ABS
is more resistant to bending and such) or surface (PS is a bit porous, try
a microscope or high-power magnifying glass)
--
Jan-Albert van Ree | http://www.vanree.net/brickpiles/
Brick Piles | Santa Fe B-unit
GnuPG key | http://www.vanree.net/~javanree/publickey.asc
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will
> likely be created as service pack type items. An example of this would
> be the 9v train track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via
> this thread) on which elements MUST be produced in the old colors for
> the long term. (And no, you can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Monorail track.
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Erik Olson wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> > > I noticed there was never an official denial to
> > > the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> > > the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
> >
> > Now that you got your official denial, consider: Lego makes more
> > black bricks than they do gray bricks. In the recycling article
> > they said recycled plastic goes into black bricks.
>
> I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me. Please explain further. Or
> maybe I just need some coffee.
>
> I really wish they would just tell us the real business decision behind the
> change. Then we could move on.
Oh wait, I think I get it now. Maybe the first question was too specific.
Let's make it a game of it and see if we can gather a few more "official
denials". How about 20 questions?
Was there a cost savings component in the decision to change colors?
Was recycling of raw materials a factor in the decision?
Was anybody involved in the decision recently sacked?
Does Jake actually know the reason for the change?
Was the location of the factories (China, wherever) a factor?
Did the old colors have toxic ingredients?
Was there a bad environmental impact from the old colors?
Is bionicle involved?
Does TLC upper management prefer coke, or pepsi?
Uh, I'm no good at this. Can someone else come up with the rest of
the 20?
Don
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Ley Ward wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > > > In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't want to start a flam war but
> > > >
> > > > I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> > > > products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> > > > of each other.
> > >
> > > I propose a FRAME war, in which the opposing sides smash pictures over their
> > > opponents' heads. I see great opportunity for Covert Photo Ops.
>
> > But, he said 'flam war', which sounds to me like drummers battling over
> > rudiments(1), which should quickly descend into the throwing of sticks, cymbals,
> > etc. Highly entertaining...;-)
>
> Ah, yes--invoking the cymbals of war to drum up a little spirit. How could I
> forget?
>
> Dave!
Sticking it to him with cymbalic logic to drum a little sense into the thick
skin stretched over his head?
These puns have to be done properly, you know.
-->Bruce<--
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > I am interested in getting feedback from you (via
> > this thread) on which elements MUST be produced in the old colors for
> > the long term. (And no, you can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
>
> Monorail track.
You assume that the monorail will be coming back. Do you know something I don't
know, or is this an example of whishful thinking? :-)
I'd love for the Monorail to come back. I've got the expansion track set
(bought long ago at a Toys R Us on final clearance), but no Monorail to run on
the track. The parts seem to be very expensive second hand.
Jeff
|
|
| |
I have to say I am not happy with the final outcome. But, if Lego is serious
about makeing a select few parts avaible in the old color schem I could live
with the followling:
1) train track
2) 1 x 2 brick
3) 1 x 4 brick
4) 2 x 2 brick
5) 2 x 4 brick
6) 1 x 4 arch
7) 1 x 6 arch
I do have to say with the current colors I will be buying fewer new sets and
doing most of my purchesing on the second hand market.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.pun, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Ley Ward wrote:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > > > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > > > > In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I don't want to start a flam war but
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> > > > > products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> > > > > of each other.
> > > >
> > > > I propose a FRAME war, in which the opposing sides smash pictures over their
> > > > opponents' heads. I see great opportunity for Covert Photo Ops.
> >
> > > But, he said 'flam war', which sounds to me like drummers battling over
> > > rudiments(1), which should quickly descend into the throwing of sticks, cymbals,
> > > etc. Highly entertaining...;-)
> >
> > Ah, yes--invoking the cymbals of war to drum up a little spirit. How could I
> Sticking it to him with cymbalic logic to drum a little sense into the thick
> skin stretched over his head?
>
> These puns have to be done properly, you know.
Yes, sorry. I always get caught in that snare--I hadn't considered the
re-percussions of my hasty posting.
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Mike Kollross wrote:
> (snippage)
>
> > * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will likely be
> > created as service pack type items. An example of this would be the 9v train
> > track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this thread) on which
>
> 9 volt track is a must. How about releasing different track geometry at the
> same time. If you are going to make a special run any way....
I think 9V track should NEVER be made in New Dark Grey. If 9V track in the old
colors is discontinued, switch to Brown instead.
--Bill.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jason Spears wrote:
Snip
| |
Well not sure about in your area, but the MOT Cars & the Sopwith Camel were
available at Targets and the Santa Fe Engine, Rebel Blockade Runner, Pizza To
Go, & Breezeway Cafe were available at TRU.
|
snip
Hi Jason
My “Area” happens to be New Zealand - no Targets, no TRU, not much of anything
(unless you count the sheep), so I think I am right in saying that all of these
specials are (for the casual NZ shopper) un-obtainable.
Thanks - Ken
|
|
| |
Jake McKee wrote:
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
> to "prove" that we are listening?
This question simply proves that you aren't. This thread has had several people
mention that the problem isn't that you're refusing to admit the mistake. The problem
is that you refuse to back out of it and switch back to the old colors. "Cementing
the new colors for all time" is NOT fixing anything.
And another widespread question of when are you going to tell us the REAL reasons for
the switch (focus groups ain't it, so don't cop out with that)?
--
Tom Stangl
*http://www.vfaq.com/
*DSM Visual FAQ home
*http://www.vfaq.net/
*Prius Visual FAQ Home
|
|
| |
Purple Dave wrote:
> Aside from all of that, white ABS matches very well with the rest of the array
> of colors (including the new reddish-brown), so what's the point in screwing
> that up just to get it to look better with just six colors?
You can ask this, after they switched dark grey, just to make it look WORSE with
virtually every other color made?
--
Tom Stangl
*http://www.vfaq.com/
*DSM Visual FAQ home
*http://www.vfaq.net/
*Prius Visual FAQ Home
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
snip out humorous sarcasm list
> > Sorry Jake but I have to point out that all of the items listed above
> > are/have been only available to those who are able to use S@H or have a
> > Lego brand name store close to them ie; NOT the majority of shoppers.
>
> Certainly, minus as Jason says, the times when they do come to retail.
Unfortunately, the stores Jason mentions (Target and TRU) do not have branches
here in New Zealand, and apart from 2 Pirate ships re-issued several years ago,
I have seen nothing else in the shops here.
> > For those of us that do not (or can't, for whatever reason) shop from S@H
> > and who do not have a Lego brand shop in their country, those items might
> > as well be on the moon.
>
> Sure, but saying they don't exist, and saying they exist in a channel you
> don't feel like using is much different.
True, but I was also generalising to a certain extent, many, if not most, casual
shoppers do not know about S@H, and there are still many shoppers who do not
like or trust, shopping via the internet, and we definitely do NOT have a Lego
brand shop in this country (and with the size of the country, somehow I don't
think we will be getting one).
> > From the impulse/casual buyer's viewpoint, Lego has done none of those
> > things, nothing special/extra has been provided for those buyers at all.
>
> Well, besides the entire What Will You Make? line....
I agree about that line, . . . but you missed it out of your list ;-)
> More importantly, the comment I responded to had eveything to do with AFOLs.
> The comment was that TLC hasn't listened to AFOLs or paid attention to
> their needs. My comment was meant to show that we have, in fact, listened to
> the AFOLs, and listened in a big way.
True, but I was attempting to point out that there are also others out here who
have not really benefited from that listening.
> > Personally, I think Lego is missing a rather significant part of the market
> > here, I realise some (most/all?) of these items have been created as
> > "exclusives" for S@H, but if that exclusivity were for, say the first year,
> > and then the models etc were supplied to normal retail outlets, either as
> > generally available items, or perhaps listed in the catalogs as "special
> > items that you can ask your retailer to order for you" then I believe Lego
> > would not be dissapointed with the sales figures.
>
> Well, we can't force anything at all on retailers. It's up to them to decide,
> ultimately, what they accept and what they don't. When retailers have been
> interested in the exclusives, we've worked out deals to get them to them. (As
> mentioned by Jason's examples)
That works well, IF the retailers know about the exclusives etc. I have spoken
to some of the local retailers, and they did not even know about S@H and the
exclusives, maybe our local Lego reps need to brush up on their sales skills .
>
> I'm not saying that some of these exclusives wouldn't do well in retail, but
> I'm also not convinced that it's an absolute no-brainer, slam-dunk.
I didn't say it was a guaranteed no-brainer, but considering Lego has been
losing money, surely even moderate sales are better than no sales ?
For the last 2 years during the christmas period, I have noticed in one of my
local retailers, several pallets of Megablock Dragon sets, these have
consistently sold very well, I have also seen shoppers looking (in vain) for
comparable Lego castle/fantasy models. A missed opportunity ? After all, the
Black Falcon Fortress, Blacksmith's Shop and Guarded Inn were still being made
at that time, just not available for casual shoppers.
> > So, I guess this is a plea for Lego to consider those of us who, like I
> > said, can't or won't use S@H and don't have a Lego brand shop nearby.
>
> I'm actually more interested to know why you won't use S@H.
For me personally, not so much won't use S@H, at the moment can't use S@H (My
credit card can't handle it) also, even though Lego managed to change the
original post and packing to an option for a cheaper post and packing, that is
still money I would far rather be paying to Lego for more bricks than paying to
UPS.
Sorry for rambling on like this Jake, but maybe every bit of information you can
get will help.
Thanks - Ken
|
|
| |
Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will
> > likely be created as service pack type items. An example of this would
> > be the 9v train track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via
> > this thread) on which elements MUST be produced in the old colors for
> > the long term. (And no, you canÂ’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
>
> Monorail track.
OMG, ROTFL! That absolutely is the most funny reply I've seen in this
thread :D
--
Jan-Albert van Ree | http://www.vanree.net/brickpiles/
Brick Piles | Santa Fe B-unit
GnuPG key | http://www.vanree.net/~javanree/publickey.asc
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Stangl wrote:
> Jake McKee wrote:
>
> > Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
> > to "prove" that we are listening?
>
> This question simply proves that you aren't. This thread has had several people
> mention that the problem isn't that you're refusing to admit the mistake. The problem
> is that you refuse to back out of it and switch back to the old colors. "Cementing
> the new colors for all time" is NOT fixing anything.
>
> And another widespread question of when are you going to tell us the REAL reasons for
> the switch (focus groups ain't it, so don't cop out with that)?
>
>
> --
> Tom Stangl
> *http://www.vfaq.com/
> *DSM Visual FAQ home
> *http://www.vfaq.net/
> *Prius Visual FAQ Home
Boy... you folks just don't get it do you.
Changing colours is a business decision!!! The fact that TLG decided to
keep the new colours simply can not possibly indicate that they did not listen
to AFOLs... only that they believe the new colours to be a better business
decision.
As for telling you the REAL reason... what possible business sense could
that make?!?! And what business is it of yours anyways. They are a
company... they have responsibilities to those who own the company to decide
what is best for their company.
I personally would like to have the old colours back, selfishly because
I have many thousands of old light gray. But in the end TLG thinks the new
colours to be a good business decision so that is what they should make.
Whether it turns out to be wise or not only time will tell.
Jeff
|
|
| |
Hello Jake,
First to respond to your request: At a minimum, I would request all bricks,
plates and slopes in all three classic colours. I would further stand behind the
requests others have made for specialty pieces. I would add the new pieces which
have not yet been produced in the old colours. Yes, I know this may be a tall
order, and I may be dreaming, but this is all about dreams.
Thank you, Jake, for all that you do for the community. I know it’s a difficult
position you are in, but surely the asbestos suit comes with the job. I am glad
to know that you are one of us AFOLs and that you are listening. I know that you
are the messenger, so I will give you my message. I hope that the recipients may
understand it. Please pass this on to The LEGO Company.
Dear LEGO
This latest bit of news is not good; it is a further big mistake added to the
previous big mistakes.
If I may clarify:
Mistake number one was the changing of the colours. Mistake number two was the
apparent attempt to slide mistake number one past all the consumers. (Between
the surprise at the AFOL response and the suggestion that the younger kids won’t
notice, it looks like a ‘slide’) In response to mistakes one and two, we get
mistake three, the ‘cementing’ of mistake one and the assurance that mistake two
will never happen again.
Surely the vehemence and anger of the responses here should have no one terribly
surprised. Trust was betrayed and that will take a long time to rebuild,
regardless of assurances. And, I’m not belittling the assurances stated thus
far, I’m just saying that ‘walking the talk’ takes time. The pain, the wounds,
the scars are not going away for many people here because mistake number one has
not been corrected. Stating that it will never be corrected will keep those
wounds tender for quite some time.(1) Calling these new colours ‘universal’
simply throws salt in those wounds and makes many here feel misunderstood and
unheard.
Strong and passionate words, indeed, but we AFOLs(2) are a passionate lot. Such
is the result of creating a toy of such quality and possibility. Would anyone
there rather work for one of those cut-rate competitors?
I know the times are difficult and changing back would be expensive, but even
the assurance that the company will add(3) the classic colours in the near
future, would be far more productive than this bull-headed adherence to a bad
choice. I think that I can safely say that if TLC were to set a return to the
original colours in motion, the AFOL ‘publicity machine’ would do all we can to
support the company in all the ways we have in the past and then some. (If I’m
promising too much here, let me know.) We have been excited about LEGO for many
years; we’ve missed that excitement recently, but we could feel it again if we
are able to believe in LEGO again.
I’ve gone on rather longer than I’d intended and please excuse the threadjack.I
will say more later...elsewhere...
Peace and the tiniest glimmer of hope despite everything,
Ley Ward (Aka Professor Whateverly), AFOL, Lugnet member #2305 (late bloomer)
and owner of over 60,000 pieces of LEGO
(1) And, yes they will heal sooner or later, depending how deep they are for
each ‘victim’
(2) And that includes Jake, of course.
(3) Yes, add. We can use or trade the new colours along with the old.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Don Heyse wrote:
> > I noticed there was never an official denial to
> > the rumor that the real reason was so TLC could recycle blue ABS into
> > the greys, and red ABS into the browns in order to save money.
>
> Consider this an official denial. :)
OK... that what is the real reason for the change? Please don't tell me TLC is
applying patent for the new colour... :p
And why can't TLC switch back for the mean line, but can still produce old
colour if needed? If the new colour is really cheaper to mass produce, you can
just say so without disclosing any technical or financial detail, right?
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Stangl wrote:
> You can ask this, after they switched dark grey, just to make it look WORSE
> with virtually every other color made?
*sigh* I'm doing my best to be optimistic about this, just like when I'm hoping
that this whole "universal color" thing isn't just something they came up with
to milk free AFOL PR out of the fact that they might never have intended to make
any more color changes beyond the four that have already been hit.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.pun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.pun, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Ley Ward wrote:
> > > > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > > > > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > > > > > In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't want to start a flam war but
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> > > > > > products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> > > > > > of each other.
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose a FRAME war, in which the opposing sides smash pictures over their
> > > > > opponents' heads. I see great opportunity for Covert Photo Ops.
> > >
> > > > But, he said 'flam war', which sounds to me like drummers battling over
> > > > rudiments(1), which should quickly descend into the throwing of sticks, cymbals,
> > > > etc. Highly entertaining...;-)
> > >
> > > Ah, yes--invoking the cymbals of war to drum up a little spirit. How could I
>
> > Sticking it to him with cymbalic logic to drum a little sense into the thick
> > skin stretched over his head?
> >
> > These puns have to be done properly, you know.
>
> Yes, sorry. I always get caught in that snare--I hadn't considered the
> re-percussions of my hasty posting.
>
> Dave!
Yes, one must beware of traps. ;-)
Peace and paradiddles,
Professor Whateverly
|
|
| |
"Tom Stangl, VFAQman" <talonts@vfaq.com> wrote in message
news:409AA24C.CFA08DF0@vfaq.com...
> Jake McKee wrote:
>
> > Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What • can I do
> > to "prove" that we are listening?
>
> This question simply proves that you aren't. This thread has had several • people
> mention that the problem isn't that you're refusing to admit the mistake. • The problem
> is that you refuse to back out of it and switch back to the old colors. • "Cementing
> the new colors for all time" is NOT fixing anything.
Hmm, by this logic then, I could claim TLC hasn't been listening since 1991
when they introduced the 9v train system, after all, clearly it was a horrid
mistake to abandon the 12v system with all it's accessories.
If your feeling is that Jake can't do any good because he can't convince the
folks at HQ to revert to the old colors, then I guess we should just all
give up.
I'm annoyed by the color changes. I wish they hadn't changed. I wish they
would go back. I wish for a lot of things in life. Unfortunately, the
reality of the business world is that sometimes things change in ways we
don't like. We can either accept them for what they are, and move on or we
can gte caught up in whining and moaning and not feeling good.
Frank
|
|
| |
> See, this is where I scratch my head. I'm not sure what more I can do to
> convince people, or prove to people that we do listen. We've developed tons of
> products that are extremely AFOL friendly (ISD, RBR, Wright Flyer, etc.), we've
> issued Legends, some of them even based on AFOL voting, we've solicited feedback
> on what kinds of Legends you'd like to see, we've created a bulk program via
> SAH, we've launched general consumer concepts like WWYM, and PaB.
>
> But we make a mistake (albeit an honest one) with the color change, and people
> start talking as if we've shunned not embraced the community in the last 4+
> years.
Jake,
All the sets you have listed in this post (and another previous one) were great
additions for the AFOL. Many thanks to whoever was responsible for bringing them
to us! I don't think anyone would disagree that AFOL treatment was at an all
time high from 2000-2003.
This treatment made my enthusiam soar with each new set release. It began to
plateau last spring when releases slowed down (at least of sets that I thought
were cool: legends, mocs, etc.). So things were already slowing down, and now,
because of the color and minifig changes, my enthusiasm for new sets seems to be
in a freefall.
Maybe the color change was an honest mistake, but aren't honest mistakes usually
corrected ASAP? Plus, imho, it is the second worst mistake the company could
have made (the first being making new bricks that do not connect with the old
ones).
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
> to "prove" that we are listening?
Make some cool new sets that have lots of small pieces (instead of 6 special
ones, and yes TLC is doing much better at this lately) that match with our
existing elements (maybe even in color). Bring back more legends and do more MOC
sets. Do more bulk that is affordable. Why are bulk packs so expensive? There is
no set design in them whatsoever. No new molds. I always feel ripped off when I
order $50 worth of bulk parts and get only a small pile of pieces. PaB is great
*if* you live near (or can visit) one of the handful of spots that offer it.
With the ammount I (used to) spend on lego, I can do just about any hobby I
want,so I guess at this point, to put it simply, it's up to the company to make
me want the product or my cash will go elsewhere.
James
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Johannes Koehler wrote:
| |
Hello!
| |
What kind of detail parts? I’m hoping to put together a list that I can pass
along.
|
Well, you said “you can’t say ‘the whole range of parts!’”, so leave out
this:
|
Crap - that is the only piece that I really care about! ;)
-mark
|
|
| |
>
> But we make a mistake (albeit an honest one) with the color change, and people
> start talking as if we've shunned not embraced the community in the last 4+
> years.
I can't help but cynically joke (by rearranging words) that LEGO has embraced
the "4+" community and shunned the minifig this year. Since you're in
apology-mode anyway...
>
> Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I do
> to "prove" that we are listening?
Keep the all of the wood-like pieces the old brown (Barrels, treasure chests,
ship hulls, rigging, ship's wheel and put them in a pirates service pack.
Actually, I'd like to see the pirates theme revived (A greencoat version of the
Imperial Guards would be cool). I know that may not be feasible, but more
legends runs of the 10040 and the pirate tub certainly could be.
A pirates tub would include pieces similar to the ones found in the 10040 in
similar (but smaller) quantities and one of each of the normal 12-stud-wide hull
sections (fore, middle, aft), plus a handful of minifigs and accessories.
Basically, supplies to build a great little ship. If this sounds like it has
potential, give me a number of pieces and I will create and propose a list.
|
|
| |
Hi Jake,
I didn't bought any of the 2004 sets and i think i will not. I'm really
frustrated with this color change.
I was thinking what - apart for changing back the colors (the wiser move: if
there's anything worst than making a mistake it is not correct it) - would make
me start buying new sets. And i came to this:
What about just selling packs of old colors corresponding to the new colors
coming in a new set? I mean, imagine that you have a new set that comes with:
20 x brick 1x4 in bluish-lightgrey;
10 x plate 2x2 in bluish-darkgrey;
15 x arch 1x3 in redish-brown;
plus other bricks in other colors.
My sugestion is to make a pack of just the 20+10+15 parts but in the old colors.
You (TLC) could even make a single pack for a whole theme and sell it through
Lego.com (since the people who feel hurt the most by this color change are able
to buy through Lego.com).
I don't know if this is feaseble. (Of course i think «anything» is, depending on
good will) But if it was to come true i could possibly not only buy these packs
but also buy the new sets as well, since i could complete them with my old
beloved colors and could throw the new colors to a bin without worries. It would
be expensier to me but i would prefer that than simply stop buying Lego for
good.
Does it make sense to you?
Best regards from Portugal,
Paulo Renato
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
>
> > I don't want to start a flam war but
>
> I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> of each other.
>
> ;-)
>
> -Tim
doh!
lol ondrew
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Ken Bailey wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> snip
> > < Begin Humorous Sarcasm >
> >
> > Well, besides the
> > - MOC sets
> > - Santa Fe sets
> > - Metroliner
> > - Club Car
> > - Guarded Inn
> > - Black Falcon's Fortress
> > - USS Constellation
> > - Countless other various Legends sets
> > - Legends voting
> > - Blacksmith Shop MOC
> > - Santa Fe Cars MOC
> > - Current Bulk Program
> > - PaB
> > - Imperial Star Destoyer
> > - Rebel Blockade Runner
> > - UCS Snowspeeder
> > - Wright Flyer
> > - Sopwith Camel
> > - Red Baron
> > - Shell sets
> > - Seasonal sets (turkey, pumpkin, US flag, Christmas ornaments, etc.)
> > - Statue of Liberty
> > - Minifig Sculpture
> > - Darth Maul bust
> > - Special purchasing deals
> > - LEGO Mosaic
> > - Last shot of Cypress trees
> > - ...and whatever else I have up my sleeve
> >
> > Other than that, you're right, we don't list much! :)
> >
> > < /End Humorous Sarcasm >
>
> Sorry Jake but I have to point out that all of the items listed above are/have
> been only available to those who are able to use S@H or have a Lego brand name
> store close to them ie; NOT the majority of shoppers.
>
> For those of us that do not (or can't, for whatever reason) shop from S@H and
> who do not have a Lego brand shop in their country, those items might as well
> be on the moon.
I have to disagree. Shop@Home is available in enough countries that I'm sure
that the majority of shoppers DO have access to a method of buying them. Buying
an exclusive set is always more fun to in a LEGO brand name store, but buying
the same set through Shop@Home isn't really all that bad. (Trust me--I've done
it several times.)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, David Gregory wrote:
> > For those of us that do not (or can't, for whatever reason) shop from S@H
> > and who do not have a Lego brand shop in their country, those items might
> > as well be on the moon.
>
> I have to disagree. Shop@Home is available in enough countries that I'm sure
> that the majority of shoppers DO have access to a method of buying them.
> Buying an exclusive set is always more fun to in a LEGO brand name store,
> but buying the same set through Shop@Home isn't really all that bad. (Trust > me--I've done it several times.)
Yes, it might be ok, but you are missing several points here, without a LEGO
brand name store, there is absolutely zero chance of casual/impulse shoppers
buying an exclusive (never mind the fact that people like me never get the
chance to drool over a PAB wall) also the majority of casual/impulse shoppers
have never heard of Shop@Home.
Believe me, once I get my credit card down to manageable levels, I will
certainly be using Shop@Home (assuming they have anything I want by then ;-))
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, David Gregory wrote:
> I have to disagree. Shop@Home is available in enough countries that I'm sure
> that the majority of shoppers DO have access to a method of buying them.
Same coin, different side. He's not talking about places where S@H is
available, but places where it isn't. S@H is available in a whopping 19
countries, which are currently restricted to portions of North America, Oceania,
and Western Europe (including both Germany and Austria, which at various times
have been associated with Western, Central, or Eastern Europe). The Czech
Republic and South Korea can't even order S@H even though they actually make
some of the bricks now. Central/South America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia,
and the eastern majority of Europe are out of luck (and you can bet that LEGO
Stores are few and far between in those regions). And from everything I've
heard, Oceania's access to S@H isn't really worth considering for casual orders.
Not only are the prices roughly twice as high in AUD as they are in USD, but
since their orders are processed in Europe instead of locally, they have to pay
exhorbitant shipping rates (20-40 AUD if you don't mind waiting up to 18 days
for your shipment to arrive, and 50-90 AUD if you absolutely need it within 4-8
days) whenever they do use the S@H service.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> [snipped lots of not positive blabla]
>
> > and for all. As I’ve said before, out of all bad things comes something
> > positive. In this case, the positive is that there are many more people
> > internally who understand your passion and interest.
>
> I do not feel understod at all. If this is your final update, you have finally
> lost a consumer, a big fan, a big supporter and promoter.
> My buys for this years sets is less than 1% of what I bought in the same period
> last year. I only bought the mini-ISD as reference so far, I realized I deeply
> dislike the new grey and I stop buying anything in new colors. That's it!
>
> Good bye LEGO,
>
> Ben
Ben and also John Gerlach have summed up how I feel exactly. Goodbye Lego - it
was a great 30 years, and I'll still enjoy my existing collection. But I sure
won't be able to be a big supporter, fan, promoter or consumer any more. You let
us down and it hurts. :(
-Matt
In my grey ages...
|
|
| |
> Yes, it might be ok, but you are missing several points here, without a LEGO
> brand name store, there is absolutely zero chance of casual/impulse shoppers
> buying an exclusive (never mind the fact that people like me never get the
> chance to drool over a PAB wall) also the majority of casual/impulse shoppers
> have never heard of Shop@Home.
I totally aggree with this.
Take for example, the Shop @ Home only minifig scale Lunar Module.
If it was available from somewhere in australia, I would have definatly
bought it by now.
But because it has to come all the way from denmark, takes ages to get here
and costs big $$$ for the item and shipping, I havent bought one yet.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
-snippage-
| |
Maybe I should spin this around and ask the AFOLs to answer this: What can I
do to “prove” that we are listening?
|
Jake,
I’ve resisted jumping in and flogging the dead horse, but I also want to add my
voice to the chorus. Sorry - this isn’t as organized as I would like, but I
have tired-head.
You don’t need to prove that you’re listening, that’s obvious; you need to
prove you’re understanding.
The way it strikes me, personally, is that LEGO is being insincere, and somewhat
two-faced. We get word of a color change from a fan, not the company. AFOL
public opinion runs wildly against the color change. LEGO addresses the AFOL
community somewhat, says they’re listening, but the color change is permanent,
etc. Then, they decide to offer a limited run of some parts in the old colors.
Now we hear the new colors (and others) are “almost certainly” (or whatever
words you used to that effect) not going to change, but that LEGO wants to know
what parts we really, really want in the old colors.
I strongly disagree with the color change, and I don’t really believe the
reasons being given are 100% of the reason the change was made. I could live
with it and move on. But the fact that LEGO keeps demonstrating that they
could make elements in the old colors (and will make some elements in them),
but chooses not to, in the face of strong demand from a vocally loyal market
segment, is infuriating.
As an AFOL, I now see LEGO in a much more cynical light than I did before. I
truly believe that the old colors will come back in a “limited edition” or
“classic colors” sense so that LEGO can charge a premium, or in some way other
than in the standard product stream. We will wind up paying more for old
colors, because LEGO now sees the demand. You (LEGO) realize that the only
segment of the market that really cares about the colors happens to be the one
with jobs, so why not charge a bit more - after all, it’s a “limited run.”
James Wilson
Dallas, TX
Lugnet Member #1783
|
|
| |
Keep the original grey colors for
- the minifig torso/arms/legs colors
- all the train parts (tracks, doors, windows, etc
- all the basic bricks and plates (as sold in the bulk packs)
- the 48x48 building plate
I have not posted anything yet regarding the color changes, so I just want to
say that a case like this is a good example which in my opinion explains why TLG
turns out with hundreds of millions of $$ minus. Hiring people who know nothing
about Lego, nothing about their history, nothing about LEGOs founder's
philosophy, thus making wrong decisions like this one all the way. Today a kid
doesn't need much brain capacity to be able to put together a Lego car coming
with a set, as it consists of 5 pieces. Do you (TLG) think tbe kids growing up
today are completeley stupid? Just wondering.
Now I'm just waiting for an announcment presenting plans on making a 0,05 mm
adjustment to the size of the bricks knobs.... Hopefully that new knob size
will be locked and considered "universal"!
Fredrik,
Norway
|
|
| |
Tom Stangl, VFAQman wrote:
>
> And another widespread question of when are you going to tell us the
> REAL reasons for the switch (focus groups ain't it,
Throw a lot of bricks in old and new colors in a heap on the floor, and then
let in a number of kids and take note of which pieces are used first, and
most.
Mixing old and new gray *really* makes the old look 'dirty', the new are
much 'sharper' - and you know that sharp colors get kids attention. And new
brown looks quite edible.
Also, any kid that knows anything about Lego would recognize the new colors
as new, and start looking closer at them, just to check them out.
Heureka! The focus group prefers the new colors!
--
Anders Isaksson, Sweden
BlockCAD: http://w1.161.telia.com/~u16122508/proglego.htm
Gallery: http://w1.161.telia.com/~u16122508/gallery/index.htm
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Anders Isaksson wrote:
> Tom Stangl, VFAQman wrote:
> >
> > And another widespread question of when are you going to tell us the
> > REAL reasons for the switch (focus groups ain't it,
>
> Throw a lot of bricks in old and new colors in a heap on the floor, and then
> let in a number of kids and take note of which pieces are used first, and
> most.
It's fairly obvious that TLG's goal of profit is the main motivation for the
change. To use an example like your own, tell a focus-group-kid that she has
five dollars to spend on a either of two sets, one of which has 10 pieces, while
the other has 100 pieces. Assuming that the production values (box design,
etc.) are comparable, on which set will the kid choose to spend her five
dollars?
Eureka! The focus group prefers a higher piece:price ratio! Do you think that
TLG is therefore likely to sell sets with higher piece-counts for the same price
as low piece-count sets? Probably not.
Clearly, TLG expects to enjoy a financial benefit from this color change, and
*THAT'S* why they did it. Focus groups are subordinate to that fact, and AFOL
feedback is certainly subordinate to it.
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:
>
> > I don't want to start a flam war but
>
> I think it would be funnier if we started a FRAM war. Build weapons from the
> products of our favorite generic auto parts manufacturer, and blast the poop out
> of each other.
>
> ;-)
>
> -Tim
I call dibbs on the Truck and Bus filters! (Coming from somebody who has worked
in the auto manufacturing business and has been to the Fleetguard facility where
they make filters).
Scott
P.S. If you've never seen a Truck or Bus oil filter...think of the size of a car
vs. a Truck/Bus...the filters are of corresponding scale as well...
Next question...load the filters with regular or synthetic oil? (hm..for
greater damage...probably go with the heavier stuff...would have to go with
regular oil...or used, regular oil...)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Wesley Davis wrote:
>
> Keep the all of the wood-like pieces the old brown (Barrels, treasure chests,
> ship hulls, rigging, ship's wheel and put them in a pirates service pack.
I agree, anything that should be made out of wood should be available in the old
color. The old brown looks more like actual wood to me than the new one. Along
with that things like 1x1 brown cylinders and 2x2 round bricks and plates for
use in trees and logs. Maybe the 1x2 and 1x4 log bricks, and the palisade wall
as well.
Jason
|
|
| |
> Keep the all of the wood-like pieces the old brown (Barrels, treasure chests,
> ship hulls, rigging, ship's wheel and put them in a pirates service pack.
Perhaps just keep the 10040 on as a "permanent" item in the old colors...
Would that satisfy pirate builders?
|
|
| |
With respect to the old light grey, I cannot figure out which set cannot be
build in the new light grey. I like the new light grey much better. When I can,
I will probably sell all my old light grey parts and obtain new light grey
parts. This however poses a problem: will all parts that right now exist in old
light gray also be available in the new light gray? And how then to obtain these
parts? I mean a bulk order is nice, but simple service packs as LEGO used to
have about a decade ago are much better (and cheaper...).
(One particular element that has my attention in this is the 1x2 silver brick
from the 10022 and 10025 sets)
For the new dark grey and the new brown, I don't think you will get a clear or
maybe even a helpfull answer from us. There are too many people with too many
different needs. Therefore your best bet would be to try to convince the
management to cancel the new colors. Of course you will have no succes, and
then, imho, the next best thing to do is to run ALL elements in the old colors
for a limited time period in a number of service packs. Since that will probably
cost far too much, it is, I am afraid, not done.
Hence we are stuck with colors some of us won't like and some of us think their
creativity is now over and they need to tell the world.
Well, suprise, it isn't. It just takes time to get some idea's wrt to the new
colors, meanwhile we keep on mourning.
And so the story ends.
Grtz,
Marck
|
|
| |
> * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will
> likely be created as service pack type items. An example of this would be
> the 9v train track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via this
> thread) on which elements MUST be produced in the old colors for the long
> term. (And no, you can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
Jake, thanks for the update. I appreciate your efforts in communicating with us,
and I see you take a lot of unnecessary abuse on here because of it.
Anyway, I believe you are asking the wrong question here.
I don't think there is a part that will solve the problem. Aside from train
tracks and baseplates, any part you give us in old grey will not be too useful
unless the rest of the parts are also available in old grey to surround it.
I believe you should be asking "What can be done to make the transition
smoother?"
The way I see it, there are two camps right now.
Camp 1: People with lots of old grey who want it to remain available so they can
add to their existing collection.
Camp 2: People who are ready to start using the new grey but are unable to
obtain the parts they need in sufficient quantities.
I believe the best thing to do is to speed the transition. As some people switch
from old grey to new grey, they will put their old parts on the secondary market
where they can be purchased by people who want to stick with old grey. That way,
both camps will be able to get what they want.
So, how would you speed the transition to new grey? Part availability, of
course!
Make a lego set. Call it "castle tub" or something. Include a bunch of parts
typically used to build castles. Bricks, facets, slopes, inverted slopes, wall
sections, hinge bricks, doors, headlights, corners, and baseplates. It doesn't
have to be all new colors, but the majority of the parts should be in those
colors to aid us in getting them. The tub should also include as many different
parts as possible for that reason.
This tub should include instructions for multiple models: one main one and a
couple smaller ones - much like the designer sets. Maybe the main model could be
a grey version of the yellow castle (replace red with brown and get rid of the
brick horses).
You could also do another set called "space tub" and include parts that the
space fans want.
Minifig packs that complement these two tubs would be appreciated, since I do
not envision these tubs coming with minifigs.
This solution only uses a couple SKUs and will make it easier for people in both
camps to find the parts they need.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > * A certain few parts that are crucial to keep in the old colors will
> > likely be created as service pack type items. An example of this would
> > be the 9v train track. I am interested in getting feedback from you (via
> > this thread) on which elements MUST be produced in the old colors for
> > the long term. (And no, you can’t say "the whole range of parts!" :) )
>
> Monorail track.
>
> --Todd
Oh, since you're at it:
Tall Spruce Trees.
-Aaron-
|
|
| |
-Snip!-
| |
PS. I don’t care what the offical names for the new colors are, I will
always refer to them as Nazi Grays and Muddy Brown. Those names are suitably
evil for colors that truly deserve them. If TLC wants to be known as the
company the produces toys in Nazi Gray colors, so be it!
.
|
I wonder what the Crayola company would have said about this. I think that the
proper terms are definitely not the same as the old, but as you have said have
new names.
It’s as though we are being “Enron-ed” by LEGO into accepting that the same
colors are still available. I think that’s where the majority of my gripe comes
from. Blue-Light Grey, Blue-Dark Grey and Red-Brown simply are not the same
colors as those they replace. No box of 64 Crayola’s would suggest it be so, no
art student/teacher would accept it, and no child will say they are the same.
Only LEGO (the Company Entity) says that This is That. If you watch the TV
series “Angel”, LEGO is pulling a Goddess Jasmine on us.
For the record, I am not intending to rant. I am not complaining about the
availablity of colors. The only complaint I have is how they are being sold as
“the same”.
Other than that, sheesh, this topic just won’t go away. No matter how hard I
try to avoid it.
Sorry for the blah-blah.
-Aaron-
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Aaron West wrote:
> Tall Spruce Trees.
You want grey trees? ;P
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Aaron West wrote:
| |
I wonder what the Crayola company would have said about this.
|
“Look: new colors!” They do it all the time, especially on the 64-crayon box (I
can’t remember exactly how often they do it, but the box always has some
sort of graphic designed to catch your attention when they rotate new colors
in). Of course, unless you’re building stuff with them like Lincoln Logs, or
making drawings the size of your lawn, color compatibility between one year’s
batch and the next is hardly important. By the time you get a new box of
crayons, most of the previous batch should be fairly well used up and ready for
outright replacement with new crayons, or donation to someone who’s stuck with
one of the dinky boxes.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, David Gregory wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Kevin Salm wrote:
> >
> > PS. I don't care what the offical names for the new colors are, I will
> > always refer to them as Nazi Grays and Muddy Brown. Those names are
> > suitably evil for colors that truly deserve them. If TLC wants to be known
> > as the company the produces toys in Nazi Gray colors, so be it!
> ¬
> Awesome naming method! I had just gotten used to calling old/classic Grays &
> Browns "True Gray" & "True Brown," and the new grays and browns "false gray"
> and "false brown." I like your nomenclature better though. I think I'll
> start using it.¬ ¬ We could also call the new dark gray "Confederate gray"
> and thus equate it with the evilness of slavery.
I have been having a bit of trouble with the Bricklink
convention, that is the use of "bluish grey" (less with
"reddish brown" however). It seems to me like a better
solution would be to call them *cold* greys--which they
really do seem to me to be, as a former and occasional
graphic designer. Yes, the blue is there, but the big
difference is really in warmth apparent.
So yeah, I'm all for just "cold grey." It's accurate, it's
succinct, and if you're into character assassination of the
new bricks, it's COLD, man, just cold.
Everybody's happy! (or at least less unhappy.)
best
LFB
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> You’d think I would have learned my lesson by now about the color change and
> just taken refuge in a concrete bunker.
Would that be an old grey coloured bunker or a new grey coloured bunker?
Steve
|
|
| |
Yes we do have a life besides the hobby, and in the grand scheme of life the
Color Change is trivial. But within the realm of our hobby, the change is
severely annoying on a daily basis, probably for years to come. That’s why the
issue can’t be ‘put to bed’ even after we have heard all the arguments.
As an addition to general complaints about the color change, which we indeed
know by now, I’d like to start a new thread, inviting solely *specific real-life
experiences* concerning the color change. Without rants and personal attacks
these experiences may add to the palette of consumer complaints wich Jake can
bring to TLG’s management. I’ll start off with two examples.
Headache in large project
Within the Dutch LEGO society De Bouwsteen, we have been building a huge
(45.000+ pieces) model of a brewery plant, measuring about 6.5 x 2.7 meter.
Besides the building itself, I was involved in designing it and acquiring most
parts.
At two points I came across the Color Change:
1. Normally we would have bought many of the new 4410 Creator set for general
parts. However we only bought one, sorted out the grey and brown pieces and put
them in a seperate container with a warning notice on it (‘Warning: new colors’)
so noone on the project would accidentally mix them in with ‘old’ grey, of which
we acquired most other parts (from pre-2004 products and from Bricklink). Too
bad for an otherwise great new parts pack (4410).
2. I realised we were lucky the project started while most supply (e.g.
baseplates) was still in ‘old’ grey. This project would have been a real
headache about a year later, when supplies from different sources don’t match.
We will actually have to count this in as a project risk for future projects.
(E.g. what if supplies don’t match unexpectantly when time and budget is tight).
No multiple sets
The other day I bought 4855 Spiderman railcar set. Look at the picture: normally
this would have been a superb train parts pack! I would have bought multiple
copies over time. However, most of the set (left pile) will go into my Color
Quarantain Bin of pieces I won’t be using. Ofcourse I can use them in MOC’s
where color differences work well, but it would be very cumbersome to sort
everything out again later. And no, I won’t give away the offcolored pieces :-)
because I still want to be able to rebuild the original set. I just won’t be
using them in mocs and therefore I won’t be buying multiple copies.
Even worse, I probably won’t be buying any other SPII or HP sets, because I
don’t want to pay that kind of money for sets that *only* have value as its
original model, without added value of usefulness in moc’s.
This may change in a couple of years, but for now, I will primarily buy sets
that I find worthwhile as a model to keep together. This will approximately cut
the number of sets I buy in half. I will spend more money on the aftermarket and
pieces.
Please note, this cut-down is not an act of protest! Much to my regret it’s
simply the result of how the new colors fit in (or don’t fit in) in the way I
buy and use LEGO sets.
Eric Brok
LEGO On My Mind
http://home.zonnet.nl/ericbrok/legomind/
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Stangl wrote:
SNIP
| |
Tom Stangl
*http://www.vfaq.com/
*DSM Visual FAQ home
*http://www.vfaq.net/
*Prius Visual FAQ Home
|
howbout this?:
http://news.lugnet.com/lego/?n=1685
Jeff
|
|
| |
Dear Jake,
I'm sure you have likely had your fill of AFOLs micromanaging TLCs business, but
I really can't resist here. There are two things off the top of my head that I
hope that you and TLC will consider:
1. Master Builders get any part in any color, so should we.
I am under the impression that the builders of Miniland and Sculptures fill out
a form for any part with an extant mold in any color, within their alloted
budget. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is that major Bricklink
vendors are unable to do the same exact thing.
You have offered to continue producing some parts in the old colors. This is a
sales risk for TLC and I appreciate that. But why not allow custom, bulk orders
and let major Brinklink stores assume the risk for you? No need for you to spend
weeks navigating how best to address the hundreds of suggestions of parts here.
Not only does this solve the color issue, it can solve nearly every AFOL
complaint about the unavailability of parts (blown molds excepted ;) It's
simpler packaging reducing packaging costs, higher revenues per order, profit
would of course be built in your pricing - this is a no-brainer business-wise.
Offer this service with old and new colors and you've reversed the damage done
and offered something new and exciting to AFOLs as well.
2. Focus groups can not make major decisions for you.
I'm sorry, but the way this decision has been described makes me really worried
about the business viability of TLC. The fact that a focus group contributed
strongly to this change is horrifying - totally amateurish marketing behavior. A
focus group will tell you strongly that they would really like a pony - despite
the fact that they do not have the money, the time to care for it, anywhere to
put it or know how to ride it. Focus groups are ideal for making sure business
decisions are not adverse to consumers or whether there is confusion about your
product. Focus groups will cheerfully run your company into the ground if they
are leading your decisions. This goes for any focus group, AFOLs included.
Furthermore, I am completely terrified by this "universal color" talk, as it
only seems to include the new colors. My apologies in advance Jake, but I'm
thinking the cynicism here about your promise about there being AFOL input in
any further changes is because you already know the answer will be. AFOLs will
say no to any further color changes and we're guessing TLC will be as stubborn
as they are being now.
Further color changes are going to force even more of us exclusively into the
secondary market. If TLC insists upon doing it, why not supply it?
|
|
|
