Subject:
|
Re: Improving the adult image of LEGO
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:21:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
10743 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Eaton wrote:
> In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
> > TLC is still trying to come to grips with the fact that we _do_ still
> > collect. You'd think it would be a no-brainer.
> > ...
> > And this is a _time_ when ubergeeks have grown up, and toy collecting has
> > actually become something of a mainstream hobby. It simply astonishes me
> > that noone before Jake managed to figure out that 1+1=2.
>
> I'm not sure that's really a fair assessment-- or, rather, the tone implies that
> everyone else at Lego was clueless until Jake showed them how it's done. But
> that's not really the case.
>
> I think it was more true that certain groups within the company (Jake being one
> of the ones we're the most familiar with) started to understand that the adult
> community would be worth MARKETING to. And a few groups understood how to do
> it, while others didn't. Adult fans were clearly known to the company already.
> They even gave Gary Istok a quick mention in the _World_Of_LEGO_Toys_ book,
> which came out in 1987. And that was a good 6 years before the alt.toys.lego
> newsgroup appeared online, and LONG before there was as substantial of an adult
> presence in the hobby.
>
> But that started changing in 1999-- probably even in 1997 or 1998, since 1999
> was the first time when LEGO Direct announced itself to the community. The goal
> was clearly to begin communicating with the emerging adult hobbyist community,
> and to see what was going on. I'm not sure who within the company started that
> initiative, but clearly LEGO was paying attention.
>
> From there, it took a few years for the company to figure out how to market to
> us. Bulk bricks, UCS sets, LEGO Legends, etc. Some things did really well (Cafe
> Corner, anyone?), while others didn't (various Legends sets, for example). It
> took some time for the company to switch gears from being purely a toy company
> for today's kids to being a product that spanned generations.
>
> DaveE
This is a little off-topic, but I gotta agree with Mr. Eaton here. I don't
think it's fair to blast LEGO for "not catering to the adult market". If we do
a real quick review of sets geared more towards adults in the past 5-6 years I
come up with a great list.
10020 Santa Fe Super Chief
10025 Santa Fe Cars I
10022 Santa Fe Cars II
10182 Cafe Corner
10181 Eiffel Tower
10189 Taj Mahal
8275 Motorized Bulldozer
10177 Boeing 787 Dreamliner
10143 UCS Death Star II
10188 Death Star
10179 UCS Millennium Falcon
10133 BNSF GP-38 Locomotive
10152 Maersk Sealand
10185 Green Grocer
10190 Market Street
8527 Mindstorms NXT
...and the list goes on and on
I think LEGO has done a phenomenal job of catering to the adult fan since at
least 2002 (if not before) and they continue to get better each year. Like Dave
mentions, they had to transition between being a "toy company" to appealing to a
wide age range while still maintaining their core customer group which is
children. All of the community involvement initiatives have been great and have
really helped to improve the community and their community development team
actively listens to our concerns and ideas. I don't know of any other toy
company that has this relationship with its fans.
Now I'm not going to go all fanboy and say that the situation is perfect as
there is always room for improvement. However, I genuinely believe that LEGO is
striving for continuous improvement and sustainable improvement in marketing to
and developing for AFoL's. They now have a business model that allows them to
market to children as well as adults...and (here's the key point)...still remain
profitable. This year was a great year for LEGO and I am even more excited for
2009 based on the "rumor mill".
-Dave
ToT-LUG
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Improving the adult image of LEGO
|
| (...) To be honest, in my opinion there’s nothing particularly "adult" about those sets - they’re just models (albeit rather impressive models) with a high brick count and an even higher price tag. What I would really like to see, is the possibility (...) (16 years ago, 17-Sep-08, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Improving the adult image of LEGO
|
| (...) Well, let's check the math on this, shall we? Now, you'll have to excuse me, but I'm going to reorder your list by year of release, because it'll help me to make my point, but I will not be omitting anything: (...) 2008 (...) 2007 (...) 2006 (...) (16 years ago, 17-Sep-08, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Improving the adult image of LEGO
|
| (...) I'm not sure that's really a fair assessment-- or, rather, the tone implies that everyone else at Lego was clueless until Jake showed them how it's done. But that's not really the case. I think it was more true that certain groups within the (...) (16 years ago, 15-Sep-08, to lugnet.general)
|
63 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
|
|
|
|
