Subject:
|
Re: Comment Now at LEGO.com: New Grey and Brown
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:35:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2654 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Jake McKee wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Christian Treczoks wrote:
> > Hi, Jake,
> >
> > Jake McKee wrote:
> > > In lugnet.lego, Christian Treczoks wrote:
> > > > And 99% of the posts will go straight to the bin.
> > > Boy... you're harsh! :)
> > Well, I just took into account how the whole issue has been handled so
> > far. Decisions from the corporate ivory tower were surrounded by a cloud
> > of holyness (Mantra: The colour change will not be reversed, the colour
> > change will not be reversed,...), and, as such, are not to be criticised.
> >
> > Obviously - and I am very happy about this! - this seems to have
> > changed, and, for once, this is a good change.
>
> Good to hear you're happy about this!
>
> I'm not sure that I would agree that there is a "cloud of holyness" surrounding
> this issue. Just because we've said that we're not reversing the decision,
> doesn't mean that we're stupid or clueless.
>
> I know people are quite upset with the color change, and for valid reasons. But
> we've made a decision (right or wrong is another thread) based on real thought,
> and we have to stick with it long enough to see what happens over all. Remember,
> Bionicle was flamed more months (perhaps years) here, and turned out to be our
> best selling product of all time.
>
> (And before I start a flame war directed straight at me, no, I'm not saying one
> way or the other what the success of the color change is or is not going to be.)
Jake,
Just out of idle curiosity... can you speak as to how LEGO will measure the
success of the color change ? I think it is obvious that sales are problematic
(for lack of a better word) is some areas. I presume that is, at least partly,
responsible for the change. Are there other measurement metrics at play here
(other than a change in sales number, which could be affected by more than just
the color change) ? Just curious.
I can understand the logistics involved in making this change in the first
place. I don't even want to think about how much sea space it would require to
turn the ship around once again. From other remarks, I have the impression that
this was not a snap decision, it took quite a bit of careful planning. Somewhere
back there in the beginning, someone saw what they thought was/were valid
reason(s) for doing this. A lot seems to be riding on proving those reasons. My
suspicion is that the rational did not take into account the AFOL part of the
LEGO buying/building community. Not really a slight, more like an omission.
Ray
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Comment Now at LEGO.com: New Grey and Brown
|
| (...) Good to hear you're happy about this! I'm not sure that I would agree that there is a "cloud of holyness" surrounding this issue. Just because we've said that we're not reversing the decision, doesn't mean that we're stupid or clueless. I know (...) (20 years ago, 11-Mar-04, to lugnet.lego) !
|
29 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
