| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Kevin Salm wrote:
snipped
> I know I only have NEGATIVE things to say about it, and as such may have trouble
> in future being diplomatic about it. In a big way, I don't even want to do
> public events with Lego anymore because I don't want to be put in that
> situation. If I cannot say anything good, perhaps I should not say anything at
> all, which means I stay home!
>
> Most sincerely,
>
>
> __Kevin Salm__
> LUCNY
Maybe public events are what we need to do most.
As you said, LEGO is doing a rather poor job getting word out to the public of
this color change. I have told many of my cousin's kids if they buy a new set
with grey bricks it might not match what they have.
Events give us AFOLs who do these shows the opportunity to tell the public of
this screw up. Right now, it appears only those who are on LUGNET and similar
sites are making our opinions expressed to LEGO. But as for that kid looking at
the sets in a Target, TRU, wherever, he has no clue of this color change. At
events or stores we can tell those kids (or better yet their parents!) what they
will get if they buy that new set.
Someone has to educate the consumer and if it's not LEGO or us, who will it be??
Adr.
|
|
| |
Problems is that if AFOL's took this approach, it would then be our fault
Lego continued to have a financial decline. No doubt in my mind that is how
it would go down. Clearly TLC has no intention of admitting the severity of
the color changes.
Greg
"Adrian Egli" <aegli@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Ht6ytt.97s@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.events.brickfest, Kevin Salm wrote:
>
> snipped
>
> > I know I only have NEGATIVE things to say about it, and as such may have • trouble
> > in future being diplomatic about it. In a big way, I don't even want to • do
> > public events with Lego anymore because I don't want to be put in that
> > situation. If I cannot say anything good, perhaps I should not say • anything at
> > all, which means I stay home!
> >
> > Most sincerely,
> >
> >
> > __Kevin Salm__
> > LUCNY
>
> Maybe public events are what we need to do most.
>
> As you said, LEGO is doing a rather poor job getting word out to the • public of
> this color change. I have told many of my cousin's kids if they buy a new • set
> with grey bricks it might not match what they have.
>
> Events give us AFOLs who do these shows the opportunity to tell the public • of
> this screw up. Right now, it appears only those who are on LUGNET and • similar
> sites are making our opinions expressed to LEGO. But as for that kid • looking at
> the sets in a Target, TRU, wherever, he has no clue of this color change. • At
> events or stores we can tell those kids (or better yet their parents!) • what they
> will get if they buy that new set.
>
> Someone has to educate the consumer and if it's not LEGO or us, who will • it be??
>
> Adr.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Adrian Egli wrote:
> In lugnet.events.brickfest, Kevin Salm wrote:
>
> Maybe public events are what we need to do most.
>
> As you said, LEGO is doing a rather poor job getting word out to the public of
> this color change. I have told many of my cousin's kids if they buy a new set
> with grey bricks it might not match what they have.
>
> Events give us AFOLs who do these shows the opportunity to tell the public of
> this screw up. Right now, it appears only those who are on LUGNET and similar
> sites are making our opinions expressed to LEGO. But as for that kid looking at
> the sets in a Target, TRU, wherever, he has no clue of this color change. At
> events or stores we can tell those kids (or better yet their parents!) what they
> will get if they buy that new set.
>
> Someone has to educate the consumer and if it's not LEGO or us, who will it be??
>
> Adr.
This is actually a very valid point. We can make our own "marketing" campaign at
any public display. We (as AFOLs) can raise the issue that Lego has created. Be
as negative as you want to be. Tell kids that their old sets no longer are
“compatible” with the new sets. Tell them that they are wasting their money
buying new sets. Heck even point people to alternatives vs. buying new sets –
show them Bricklink as a way that they can buy old gray and brown colors. Get
the message out there! We can even do radio spots like "public service
announcements" -- maybe even getting on talk radio/TV and let them hear our
outcry!
In the manner that we can positively affect kid's opinions, we can just as
easily put a negative spin on their opinions.
Of course we don’t have to do this.
-mark
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Mark Rideout wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Adrian Egli wrote:
> > In lugnet.events.brickfest, Kevin Salm wrote:
> >
> > Maybe public events are what we need to do most.
> >
> > As you said, LEGO is doing a rather poor job getting word out to the public of
> > this color change. I have told many of my cousin's kids if they buy a new set
> > with grey bricks it might not match what they have.
> >
> > Events give us AFOLs who do these shows the opportunity to tell the public of
> > this screw up. Right now, it appears only those who are on LUGNET and similar
> > sites are making our opinions expressed to LEGO. But as for that kid looking at
> > the sets in a Target, TRU, wherever, he has no clue of this color change. At
> > events or stores we can tell those kids (or better yet their parents!) what they
> > will get if they buy that new set.
> >
> > Someone has to educate the consumer and if it's not LEGO or us, who will it be??
> >
> > Adr.
This is a very good idea and it does work.
I have informed many people in the Lego aisles of many stores about the color
change. Many of them leave without purchasing anything, or they just decide to
buy the MB. Not all of them care. But I feel it is my duty to inform every
person I come in contact with in those aisles about this.
The last child I purchased sets for wanted me to take every one of them back to
the store. He is 8 years of age. But as soon as he opened the first new set, he
noticed that the colors did not match. I ended up taking $300.00 worth of Lego
sets back to TRU to exchange for older sets. He is a happy 8 year old now.
So, informing the general public does work. Not always, as I said, but if this
case of corporate stupidity hurts them enough, they may have no choice but to
reverse the decision.
Enough said,
Steven Weiser
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Steven D. Weiser wrote:
> I have informed many people in the Lego aisles of many stores about the
> color change. Many of them leave without purchasing anything,
Do you find that they they just nod politely, smile feebly, and then start to
back away slowly, without making any sudden moves which might alarm you?
Cheers
Richie Dulin
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Gregory Muri wrote:
> Problems is that if AFOL's took this approach, it would then be our fault
> Lego continued to have a financial decline. No doubt in my mind that is how
> it would go down. Clearly TLC has no intention of admitting the severity of
> the color changes.
>
> Greg
I wouldn't like to see TLC going down but, what else would it take to them to go
back on this issue?? (Once they can't hear us...)
Paulo Renato
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Richie Dulin wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Steven D. Weiser wrote:
> > I have informed many people in the Lego aisles of many stores about the
> > color change. Many of them leave without purchasing anything,
>
> Do you find that they they just nod politely, smile feebly, and then start to
> back away slowly, without making any sudden moves which might alarm you?
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Richie Dulin
Actually, most of them have given me that"huh? Why would the Lego company do
something so stupid after all these years" look.
Some do just give that "yeah, whatever" look.
But no one has ever fainted from the disbelief after being told. Well, not
including me anyway.
Steve
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Mark Rideout wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Adrian Egli wrote:
> > In lugnet.events.brickfest, Kevin Salm wrote:
> >
> > Maybe public events are what we need to do most.
> >
> > As you said, LEGO is doing a rather poor job getting word out to the public of
> > this color change. I have told many of my cousin's kids if they buy a new set
> > with grey bricks it might not match what they have.
> >
> > Events give us AFOLs who do these shows the opportunity to tell the public of
> > this screw up. Right now, it appears only those who are on LUGNET and similar
> > sites are making our opinions expressed to LEGO. But as for that kid looking at
> > the sets in a Target, TRU, wherever, he has no clue of this color change. At
> > events or stores we can tell those kids (or better yet their parents!) what they
> > will get if they buy that new set.
> >
> > Someone has to educate the consumer and if it's not LEGO or us, who will it be??
> >
> > Adr.
>
> This is actually a very valid point. We can make our own "marketing" campaign
> at any public display. We (as AFOLs) can raise the issue that Lego has
> created. Be as negative as you want to be.
~~snip~~
It is NOT my intention or goal to be negative. TLC does NOT need my help to
ruin their brand image. They have proven they can do it all by themselves.
As evidence, TLC threw out a perfectly good 25-year old trademark when they
stopped using the name DUPLO for their preschool products. The name Explore, as
someone else pointed on on Lugnet several weeks ago, sounds like a program on
your computer, not a building toy by Lego. I will never understand the
marketing 'genius' behind that ill-fated decision. Someone should be taken out
back and shot to the death for that one, IMO.
__Kevin Salm__
PS. I am happy to report that the latest batch of packaging for Explore
products is now dual-branded. The Duplo name and logo have proudly returned.
Finally, someone at TLC got some sense!
|
|
| |
That is just it Kevin, nobody at Lego got any sense. They just responded to
the one and only thing that corporate robots instantly respond to. The loss
of money, especially on the scale that Lego did last year, is a powerful
thing. It will likely take a much bigger loss than 2003 for them to change
back this color fiasco.
Greg
"Kevin Salm" <kdsalm@dreamscape.com> wrote in message
news:Ht7EvH.u6B@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.lego, Mark Rideout wrote:
> > In lugnet.lego, Adrian Egli wrote:
> > > In lugnet.events.brickfest, Kevin Salm wrote:
> > >
> > > Maybe public events are what we need to do most.
> > >
> > > As you said, LEGO is doing a rather poor job getting word out to the • public of
> > > this color change. I have told many of my cousin's kids if they buy a • new set
> > > with grey bricks it might not match what they have.
> > >
> > > Events give us AFOLs who do these shows the opportunity to tell the • public of
> > > this screw up. Right now, it appears only those who are on LUGNET and • similar
> > > sites are making our opinions expressed to LEGO. But as for that kid • looking at
> > > the sets in a Target, TRU, wherever, he has no clue of this color • change. At
> > > events or stores we can tell those kids (or better yet their parents!) • what they
> > > will get if they buy that new set.
> > >
> > > Someone has to educate the consumer and if it's not LEGO or us, who • will it be??
> > >
> > > Adr.
> >
> > This is actually a very valid point. We can make our own "marketing" • campaign
> > at any public display. We (as AFOLs) can raise the issue that Lego has
> > created. Be as negative as you want to be.
>
> ~~snip~~
>
> It is NOT my intention or goal to be negative. TLC does NOT need my help • to
> ruin their brand image. They have proven they can do it all by • themselves.
>
> As evidence, TLC threw out a perfectly good 25-year old trademark when • they
> stopped using the name DUPLO for their preschool products. The name • Explore, as
> someone else pointed on on Lugnet several weeks ago, sounds like a program • on
> your computer, not a building toy by Lego. I will never understand the
> marketing 'genius' behind that ill-fated decision. Someone should be • taken out
> back and shot to the death for that one, IMO.
>
> __Kevin Salm__
>
>
> PS. I am happy to report that the latest batch of packaging for Explore
> products is now dual-branded. The Duplo name and logo have proudly • returned.
> Finally, someone at TLC got some sense!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Paulo Renato wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Gregory Muri wrote:
> > Problems is that if AFOL's took this approach, it would then be our fault
> > Lego continued to have a financial decline. No doubt in my mind that is how
> > it would go down. Clearly TLC has no intention of admitting the severity of
> > the color changes.
> >
> > Greg
>
>
> I wouldn't like to see TLC going down but, what else would it take to them to go
> back on this issue?? (Once they can't hear us...)
>
> Paulo Renato
I think it would be interesting to know just how much each and every AFOL spends
each week/month/year on Lego. Just to try to gauge how much in potential lost
sales the company would incure. Would it be significant?
Have any Bricklink stores curbed their spending? I know they buy dozens or more
sets at a time.
For instance, I know I spent just over $11,000.00 last year. Most of that was
spent at the retail level, but not at retail prices. HAIL, the clearance sale.
A smaller amount was spent on the secondary market such as BL and evilbay.
Now I realize not everyone here is just going to stop buying new sets because of
the color change. I for one will not be buying any new sets. Well, until they
are 75% off.
Steve
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Gregory Muri wrote:
| |
That is just it Kevin, nobody at Lego got any sense. They just responded to
the one and only thing that corporate robots instantly respond to. The loss
of money, especially on the scale that Lego did last year, is a powerful
thing. It will likely take a much bigger loss than 2003 for them to change
back this color fiasco.
Greg
|
See... I disagree with you on this point. The poor sales of 2004 will have
nothing to do with color change. We, the AFOLs may cease buying because of this
fact, but that is a drop in the bucket of problems, a mere 5% loss in a world of
hurt for TLG.
To h@#$ with the color change, let’s say it never happened. OK, now look at the
product lines for what they are. They’re action figures. There is no building
or creativity.
The New Castle (Big Figs): Galidor Redux.
(OK, so maybe not as bad as Galidor, but still a far cry from LEGO’s core
values)
The New Castle (Minifig): Can You Say Playing Our Children For Imbeciles?
Make & Create - Creator: Closest to Core Value We Have
Make & Create - Designer: Nothing But Specialized Bits and Bobs
(To me, these sets are equivalent to selling an older bucket with nothing but
Antennae and Radar Dishes; wonderful for the collector, wonderful for flashy
factor, horrid for creativity without basic bricks to augment)
Make & Create - Technical Wonders: A Beast Slain
(This is the carcass of what LEGO Technic used to be. Not a studded beam in
sight, not a Technic trademark look at all.)
Racers: The This-Theme-Should-Have-Been-Killed-Long-Ago Theme
(Again, great for a collector adding to a collection, horrid for a child just
starting one. I also have a big question about the K’nex construction of the RC
Cars.)
Alpha Team - Arctic: The Award Winner for Closest to LEGO Core Values
(The transformations really show what LEGO is about: Transience and Change)
Spiderman: Dumbing Down The License and Tossing Bones
(compare the lamppost and hydrant in 4853 with last year’s models. Complexity
wise, they are down the tubes. Add to this the 4+ sets based on a movie rated
PG-13 and a decidedly realistically violent comic. “Train Rescue” is a bone to
say that Train is still alive in Town, other than Potter.)
Bionicle: Et Tu, Technic.
(Bionicle, IMHO, was the rifle blast that killed traditional Technic, and the
new sets are just the final nails in the coffins.
Color Change Aside, TLG can’t blame this years losses on 5% of the market. When
they lose this next year, the blood isn’t on the Color R&D Workers’ hands, but
rather the Set Designers and Management who have killed the brand’s creativity
by failing to CHALLENGE today’s children, instead, feeding them cookie cutter
fads and nothing else.
The color revert will never occur. There are far bigger problems at hand.
-John Rudy
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, John M. Rudy wrote:
| |
In lugnet.lego, Gregory Muri wrote:
| |
That is just it Kevin, nobody at Lego got any sense. They just responded to
the one and only thing that corporate robots instantly respond to. The loss
of money, especially on the scale that Lego did last year, is a powerful
thing. It will likely take a much bigger loss than 2003 for them to change
back this color fiasco.
Greg
|
See... I disagree with you on this point. The poor sales of 2004 will have
nothing to do with color change. We, the AFOLs may cease buying because of
this fact, but that is a drop in the bucket of problems, a mere 5% loss in a
world of hurt for TLG.
|
a few idle remarks from the peanut gallery
Many (most ?) AFOLs buy at clearance. Because certain AFOLs stop buying at
clearance, doesn’t mean that the stuff will just sit there and go unsold
forever. Some clearanced stuff moves back up the food chain to EB, some to BL,
and some to places like flea markets. That one destination decides to boycott,
will have little or no effect on the parent 2-years hence trying to find that
discontinued (and needed) set which WM, KM, TRU, Target (et al) have dumped to
clearance. They will buy *that* set because the kid wants it. The stuff will
still most likely percolate thru the food chain, just that AFOLs won’t be taking
so much from the ‘clearance’ buffet. (and we are 6-12-18 months from when the
new colors actually make it to clearance.)
| |
To h@#$ with the color change, let’s say it never happened. OK, now look at
the product lines for what they are. They’re action figures. There is no
building or creativity.
The New Castle (Big Figs): Galidor Redux.
(OK, so maybe not as bad as Galidor, but still a far cry from LEGO’s core
values)
The New Castle (Minifig): Can You Say Playing Our Children For Imbeciles?
|
I still prefer the term ‘Castleonicle’. Bionicle has won the battle for hearts
of minds of many of the primary target audience, now TLC is trying to work the
same magic with Castle. It may be heresy to some, but it may be a smart move to
others.
Ray
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Mark Rideout wrote:
> This is actually a very valid point. We can make our own "marketing" campaign at
> any public display. We (as AFOLs) can raise the issue that Lego has created. Be
> as negative as you want to be. Tell kids that their old sets no longer are
> “compatible” with the new sets.
Wow. You mean all of a sudden the bricks stopped fitting together? You mean
all of a sudden the new dark gray can't be used with the old blue, red, and
black? Do the new gray bricks actually REPEL the old gray colors?
Amazing! I didn't know that!
> ... Tell them that they are wasting their money
> buying new sets.
Wow! You mean if they buy a $10 Alpha Team set, it isn't actually worth $10?
Fascinating!
If they buy ANOTHER, $20 World City set, the two together are *ACTUALLY*
*WORTHLESS*, and whatever they buy next year *ACTUALLY* *WILL* *NOT*
*INTERCONNECT* with what they bought this year?
Wow! Incredible revelations abound!
> ... Heck even point people to alternatives vs. buying new sets –
> show them Bricklink as a way that they can buy old gray and brown colors.
Wow! You mean the average buyer in the aisles of Toys R Us - say, for example,
Grandma buying a burthday gift for Johnny - would actually respond positively to
the suggestion of going to website, and buying some nice dog-chewed light grey
(that's CLASSIC LIGHT GRAY (c)2004 ANAL-RETENTIVE LEGO FANS, INC.) 1x2s, in lots
of 50 or more, would be a g-r-r-R-REAT alternative to picking up a nice colorful
World City boxed set for Johnny?
> ... Get
> the message out there! We can even do radio spots like "public service
> announcements" -- maybe even getting on talk radio/TV and let them hear our
> outcry!
NPR is waiting!
> In the manner that we can positively affect kid's opinions, we can just as
> easily put a negative spin on their opinions.
>
> Of course we don’t have to do this.
You mean you *don't* have to lie to Lego consumers? Yay!
No wonder most large companies considers most AFOToys opinions to be worthless.
Turns out they actually are!
Kevin
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Kevin Johnston wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Mark Rideout wrote:
> > In the manner that we can positively affect kid's opinions, we can just as
> > easily put a negative spin on their opinions.
> >
> > Of course we don’t have to do this.
>
> You mean you *don't* have to lie to Lego consumers? Yay!
>
> No wonder most large companies considers most AFOToys opinions to be worthless.
> Turns out they actually are!
I am so with you on this one Kevin. AFOLs with big collections and intentions of
building very special MOCs are a totally different consumer to the average kid
or parent buying Lego.
A lot of the AFOLs here are annoyed about losing the opportunity to buy more
bricks in some useful colours. That's reasonable.
TLC has made some mistakes in the past. Some of them were "called" accurately by
AFOLs (such as Duplo->Explorer) and others were not (Bionicle). And some sets
which were applauded by AFOLs have probably not been a runaway success for TLC.
This is also reasonable.
Its bordering on reasonable to imagine a flawed focus group process to validate
the new colors.
But its not reasonable to assume that the needs, wants and tastes of a kid or
parent are anything like that of an AFOL.
Kids don't have as many bricks in their collection, so less they have less
"investment" in the old colors.
Kids aren't planning on artistic or accurate MOCs like AFOLs.
Kids may actually like the new brighter colours better.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Kevin Johnston wrote:
(snip)
Very harsh/sarcastic tone, Kevin(1) but I have to agree with the substance. I do
not like the color change one bit but I don't see myself standing in aisles
telling people not to buy stuff!
The bricks still interlock, people.
We can suggest that LEGO did this wrong, that they should have
researched/marketed/communicated (internally/externally) better... but actively
trying to drive sales to competitors?
That just seems excessively harsh to me. This whole thread seems a bit strident,
actually. Any chance for a bit calmer approach, people?
I have lots more to say about this and other topics but am still trying to dig
out from under. I am going to try to reconstruct from memory the questions and
answers that I lost, unless someone else with better memory does it first...
1 - kinda goes hand in hand with some of the other very harsh tones used by
others in this thread, I guess... so I'm not actually complaining, just
remarking.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> Very harsh/sarcastic tone, Kevin(1) but I have to agree with the substance. I do
> not like the color change one bit but I don't see myself standing in aisles
> telling people not to buy stuff!
>
> The bricks still interlock, people.
Having seen the new colours for the first time when I got out here, I have to
agree. Yes, the colours changed. Yes, I would prefer if they had stayed the
same. No, the world has not come to a crashing halt because of it.
Will I buy "new" (post 2003) lego? Yes. Will this affect what I purchase? Not
much, I don't think. Will this affect what I build? No, because I have enough
bricks that it is getting to be excessive for me to purchase more without a
project in mind anyway.
YMMV, but I don't find this the end of the world. I already have several
variant colours in my bins, and don't worry TOO much about it.
James Powell
(and thanks Lar++ for trying to transcribe for those of us who could not attend
BF PDX -we live in a inperfect world, and sometimes stuff happens...)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Kevin Johnston wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> Very harsh/sarcastic tone, Kevin(1) but I have to agree with the substance. I do
> not like the color change one bit but I don't see myself standing in aisles
> telling people not to buy stuff!
>
> The bricks still interlock, people.
>
> We can suggest that LEGO did this wrong, that they should have
> researched/marketed/communicated (internally/externally) better... but actively
> trying to drive sales to competitors?
>
> That just seems excessively harsh to me. This whole thread seems a bit strident,
> actually. Any chance for a bit calmer approach, people?
>
> I have lots more to say about this and other topics but am still trying to dig
> out from under. I am going to try to reconstruct from memory the questions and
> answers that I lost, unless someone else with better memory does it first...
>
> 1 - kinda goes hand in hand with some of the other very harsh tones used by
> others in this thread, I guess... so I'm not actually complaining, just
> remarking.
I do not, and have not, in any way, shape, or form, told people not to buy the
new sets. I do not even mention compatability because that is not an issue. I
simply tell them that the colors will not match previously purchased sets and
leave them to their own volition.
I have never mentioned to anyone in the aisles my personal distaste of the new
colors. With the exception of the manager at KB.
Steven Weiser
|
|
|
