Subject:
|
Re: Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:09:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6865 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
| |
- Would you buy LEGO toys for children 0-11? Y/N
|
Definitely. In fact, LEGO is essentially the ONLY toy I buy as gifts for
children.
It is a great toy. It teaches creativity and should be part of everyone’s
childhood. And I give it as gifts because many parents do not buy it due its
high price. Several times I’ve heard, “Thank you, this is my child’s first LEGO
set”.
| |
- What feature(s) would you add if you were the marketing director of LEGO?
|
Here is where I think LEGO needs the most work. I was never a believer in
advertising, but now I think I am. As far as I can tell, LEGO’s advertising is
essentially non-existant. I have two toddlers, who watch 1.5 hours of TV a day
(Nickelodean: The Backyardigans, Dora the Explorer, and Blue’s Clues). How
many Dora the Explorer DUPLO commercials have they seen? ZERO. One would think
that during the Dora the Explorer show would be the perfect time to advertise
the Dora Duplo.
How many people know of the “LEGO” bricks that were on the two Mars rovers?
This is probably the most amazing example of “product placement” ever achieved.
Yet it was never emphasized by the LEGO company.
When the Mars rovers landed, the Technic LEGO Mars Rover was on CLEARANCE at
Target. When Spirit landed, I was hoping to see a advertisement in
TRU/Target/Wal-mart/anybody’s weekly store circular: “Celebrate the historic
landing of the Mars Rover with the LEGO MER, on sale now for 25% off!”.
Instead, there was nothing.
As far as I recall, LEGO was Fortune Magazine’s “Toy of the Century”. Let me
repeat that: “TOY OF THE CENTURY”! Why isn’t there a sticker on EVERY box of
LEGO proclaiming this incredible distinction? Rather than a ton of blurred
action graphics, every box should have listed on it the awards that the LEGO set
has won.
Make promotional banners for stores, promoting LEGO’s involvement in the First
LEGO League, in classrooms, etc. Show how the LEGO company contributes to
education, and by extension how your (the consumer’s) purchase will help educate
their own kids, now and in the future.
I understand the value of being humble ... and the danger of being cheapened by
poor advertising, but it will not hurt to toot your own horn a little. LEGO is
a great company and makes a great product!
| |
- How would you change existing LEGO products if you wanted to sell them for
|
First off, I don’t think you’ll ever be able to sell LEGO for more money.
(What planet are you guys on?) The main reason that MEGABLOCKS is taking your
market share is that it is substantially cheaper. Definitely cheaper quality,
but also a substantially cheaper pricetag. I firmly believe that LEGO should
NOT lower its quality. But you have to educate consumers as to WHY they should
pay extra for LEGO vs Megablocks.
Have a sticker on each box that says “Quality so high, you’re childrens’
children will be playing with these bricks.”
I think LEGO should institute a lifetime (or maybe 25 or so year) guarantee.
“If any of these bricks crack or break, we’ll replace them FREE!” Add some fine
print if you’re worried about the guarantee being abused (must keep original
receipt; subject to availability; certain exclusions apply; etc.).
Emphasize the SYSTEM aspect: On 4+ sets, put wording like “These bricks are
compatible with the LEGO bricks your child will be buying as teenagers.” On
Technic sets, put wording like “These bricks are compatible with the LEGO bricks
you played with as a young child.” Show pictures of creations made by combining
sets from different lines to emphasize the System aspect.
All things being equal, people will naturally buy the cheaper toy. You must
convince them that all things are NOT equal, that LEGO is in fact a superior
product, both in quality and in educational value/opportunites (there are no
Megablocks robotics competitions).
If anything, I think you should lower prices by about 20%. There’s a saying
“Fast nickel; slow quarter”. I don’t know how regular consumers think, but I
know that I can eventually get almost any retail set at 20-50% off MSRP ...
eventually ... either through a sale or clearance. The base MSRP is simply too
high.
I also think there should be many more sets in the $5 - $10 range. I’m sure
this is part of the accessibility/penetration/success of Bionicle.
Personally, I think the Jack Stone/4+ line is a good idea. I have two toddlers,
one 3 years old, one 1 year old. Although the 3-year-old is dexterous enough to
manipulate regular LEGO bricks, it’s not yet safe to have such small pieces
around my 1-year-old. The 4+ line is perfect for my situation, as they are
enjoyable for both my children. But, the juniorized pieces-made-of-other-pieces
should not crop up into the higher lines, for many reasons. If nothing else,
having more individual pieces drives up the piece-count, which makes the sets
compare better to Megablocks. (i.e. A consumer might say: This $20 LEGO set
has 180 pieces, whereas this $20 Megablocks set has 300. So the Megablocks is a
better value.)
| |
- What new products would you launch?
|
I would definitely emphasize the Designer sets, like land busters, air blazers,
building bonanza (the cottage house), etc. These are the types of sets that I
give out as gifts (question 1), rather than less-general sets like alpha team.
The toy market to 30-year-olds is booming. TLG: Realize this. Everywhere you
look are products marketed at 30-year-olds: Atari 2600/5200 reissues, Muppet
show figures, Original Transformers reissues, etc. TLG: make more AFOL-oriented
sets; and not just sets that are focused on your primary target (kids) but also
happen to appeal to adults. Make some sets that target adults only: Make a
$400-$500 UCS Millennium Falcon or UCS AT-AT. (People pay $1200 for the Code 3
(or is it Master Replicas) collectible AT-AT.) I’m not saying that TLG should
abandon the primary (kids) market but rather should expand to include an
adult-only focused line (ie expand UCS).
You saw the high sales of the Imperial Star Destroyer. Now, however, I think
the sales of the UCS Death Star will be lackluster, and TLG will view this as a
reason to kill the UCS line. (The house-of-plates model is not overwhelmingly
appealing and the gray color-change has really soured many AFOLs, the prime
market for the all-gray Death Star.) Do a little bit of AFOL focus grouping,
and you’ll learn that people want a UCS Sandcrawler, or UCS Darth Vader bust, or
UCS Millennium Falcon, or AT-AT, or A-Wing, or Eiffel Tower, or Apollo CSM or
Lunar Module, or ...
I think TLG should license more AFOL creations: Regarding the UCS models
suggested above: Gareth Bowler or Shaun Sullivan or Reto Geiger or many others
have amazing UCS creations. (Nathan Sawaya’s Death Star II would have been a
much better model for production.) License some of their creations for low-run
S@H exclusives: It would generate an incredible feeling of goodwill from the
AFOL community. And AFOLs WILL buy them.
Make AFOL-only contests like the LEGO Factory, that are open only to adults.
| |
- What should LEGO be doing that it isn’t now?
|
One word: Marketing
(See discussion above)
Two words: Old Gray
(Remember just a few years ago, when LEGO was introducing new colors at the drop
of a hat. Well I suggest that you introduce 3 new colors, which just happen to
be identical to the old gray, dark gray, and brown. And simply use up the
remaining supply of new grays and brown, and when they are depleted, discontinue
the new colors. Or designate the new colors as different names, and restrict
them to say Bionicle, which I’m sure was the driving force in the color change
decision in the first place.)
Three words: Studded Technic Beams
(The studless system is more like building with K’Nex than with LEGO. Keeping
the Technic system primarly studded emphasizes the System aspect and consistency
with the rest of the LEGO line.)
Four words: More UCS sets please
I hope TLG will be back in the black soon. And thanks for listening.
-WWWally
(PS: Please change the grays back.)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
| (...) A point worth mentioning is that the difference between LEGO quality and MEGABLOKS quality is not as great as the difference in price, and that's the real problem. As long as the consumer perceives that MEGABLOKS are good enough relative to (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
| All, I know that some of you have attempted to fill out the survey announced yesterday on LEGOfan.org, only to be turned away with a message about the survey being complete. After some late night phone calls and early morning emails, I've been to (...) (19 years ago, 16-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego) !!
|
68 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
