Subject:
|
Re: 2001 Set info
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Mon, 7 Aug 2000 22:15:30 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
2768 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> LEGO has respectfully requested that the leaked information on this thread be
> deleted or otherwise removed from view.
Ahh, hmm. So, the information has been released to Target Stores, and Target
has placed it in their computer. An employee of Target who has access to that
information legally (ie, he was not sneaking into his bosses' offices) shared
it with us, just as he could by store policy if we walked into the store, and
Lego says we can't discuss it?
That's more than slightly ridiculous.
If LEGO feels so strongly about this, I'd be interested to know if they are
going to be speaking to Target about changing when the information gets placed
into their computers. For that matter, I'd like to know if they will be
speaking to Toys R Us, who has been the source of this kind of information in
the past as well.
My guess, of course, is that neither Brad nor anyone else from Lego Direct will
address this issue here and now, nor will anyone at LEGO speak to these stores
about their policies. In other words, we are being asked to not talk about
something that is well within the public domain, by LEGO's own actions.
I wonder if LEGO would or would not feel it was important to speak to Target,
TRU et al if the information from this thread found its way into the hands of
the admins of several Star Wars Fansites, where it could still be easily
confirmable by having their contacts in these stores look it up in their
computer. My guess is that even with the wide distibution that would give the
info, LEGO *still* wouldn't take thoe actions- after all, that's real work,
whereas just asking us to not talk about it is a simple decision they don't
have to do anything to enforce.
eric
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) Gotta agree with Eric here. And wow, I guess I either need to spend more time reading various groups again or give up entirely. In fact, I'm a little scared after looking at the little dots view of this thread. Most of what I'm seeing are (...) (24 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) No, Lego asked Todd not to publish information they consider "confidential", and he agreed to not do that. You're still free to discuss it. But, if you want to *publish* it somewhere, you'll have to find a publisher that won't honor Lego's (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| You've got a point. IF Jorge Rodriguez was honest about Targets policy I don't think Lego would be so tight up about their sets for next year. Of course, Lego seems pretty bottled up abut everything now a days. ANY WAY, someone's gonna be really (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
Message is in Reply To:
176 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
