Subject:
|
Re: General session Q&A
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Tue, 17 Feb 2004 01:06:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4425 times
|
| |
|
|
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!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: General session Q&A
|
| (...) 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 (...) (20 years ago, 17-Feb-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: General session Q&A
|
| (...) ~~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 (...) (20 years ago, 17-Feb-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
70 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
|
|
|
|
