Subject:
|
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 1 Dec 2005 22:01:33 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
dan miller <DANBMIL99@nomorespamYAHOO.COM>
|
Viewed:
|
2929 times
|
| |
|
|
this may sound a bit dumb, but give it a few seconds of consideration (and
try to supress your own prejudices):
One of the problems with being an AFOL is that the bright, happy colors of
Lego pieces make everything look like a preschool toy. If I could replace
all my pieces with a few shades of grey and battleship green, I would do it
in a heartbeat.
Another factor that could even help make AFOL's and older children better
(ie paying more) customers would be to focus on making models that are
permanent rather than transitory. This would encourage more purchasing of
sets (I've bought 5 already mainly to avoid taking apart complex robots).
I know some of these ideas fly in the face of the hard-core Lego culture and
aesthetics, but the point is, this market is potentially much larger than
TLG is assuming, and they are just giving it away -- to Technics, to Vexx
(both of which are $300+ btw), and it just seems sad.
One final piece of advice that will surely not be listened to: Stop being
so anal about people selling sets that interoperate with Lego. As far as I
can tell, vendors like Charmed Labs still have to be careful not to actually
sell pieces that can snap together with Lego -- you have to strip wires and
so on. This is diametrically in opposition to how new technology paradigms
succeed -- think of open source, or the IBM PC and clones.
In summary, I think they just don't have the imagination to make this work,
but it's sort of sad. I guess we'll just buy the stuff on Ebay for 20 or 30
years, and kluge up our own electronics. Oh well.
-dbm
--- danny staple <orionrobots@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> While I personally love to see that, I just dont see them putting
> their neck out on that one. As stated before, we (AFOLs and advanced
> users) are barely a blip on the register of the bean counters, and it
> is to them that any business development will now fundamentally answer
> to. I suppose the good thing is, if they really can make the right
> decisions (and I am not sure what faith I have) that win them more
> money and profitability in the market, then later on they will have
> the strength to get as bold as they have been before again.
>
> Look at it this way, Lego are/have sold off the theme parks - which
> have been apart of the Lego experience for as long as I can remember.
> This is not a company in rude healt (expression meaning very good
> health over here), but a company who are becoming very timid and
> careful as they are seeing a market migration. Of course- one thing
> that may dawn upon them is that their traditional market of younger
> kids is drying up, while the 20-40 year olds who grew up with Lego are
> dyed in the wool followers, and better targetting/support of that
> market - and aiming squarely at the 20 somethings who havent done a
> lot with Lego yet, may yeild furthar sales. New markets are a good
> thing to have when old ones are beginning to stagnate.
>
> A lot of parents see Lego as expensive. Not all kids (as Mr S points
> out) dont have the patience, or the "building bug" to want Lego, and
> that seems be slowly dwindling in that cross section. However -
> websites like thinkgeek show that a healthy geeky market of people
> willing to spend money online on cool and interesting gadgets,
> including construction toy ranges. AFAIK - thinkgeek have no bricks
> and mortar sites, and have displaced (in the uk) the Gadget shop
> fairly well here. Lego really could move in to making a good market by
> carrying the most comprehensive range online, and getting the more
> electronic toys carried on sites like thinkgeek as well.
>
> I do remember the star-wars mindstorms tie-ins as disappointing (being
> based on the low-spec microscout). Maybe they could reuse the
> electronics from the SpyBots to get more interesing star wars bot
> tie-ins - again aimed at the 200something market.
>
> Anyway I still feel that crossposting to .dear-lego (or continuing the
> thread there) would be a good step here. I have therefore added it in
> to my response.
> --
> Danny Staple MBCS
> OrionRobots
> http://orionrobots.co.uk
> (Full contact details available through website)
>
>
> On 29/11/05, Mr S <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote:
> > Personally, I believe that the discussions on business
> > models for TLG are a bit off key. Lego already has
> > solid products, and sells to a defined market segment.
> > Their bread and butter product lines sell because of
> > novelty in many cases. Those film related lego sets
> > sell because of the film tie-in novelty *AND* because
> > of the puzzle value. Some people need instructions,
> > and are unable to simply begin creating things like
> > the Harry Potter sets on their own.
> >
> > With the advent of some robot toys (that need no
> > construction) the appeal of Lego loses some luster.
> > Straight forward building toys of any manufacturer
> > have lost ground over the last few years. What I
> > believe that Lego needs to do is repackage the RCX in
> > a "Lego Advance" product line. All of the sets that
> > AFOLs want would be in that product line. It requires
> > little manufacturing change, and creates revenue with
> > little or no distribution issues as most AFOLs are
> > willing and able to purchase on-line.
> >
> > As for the on-line forum, this one is quite handy, and
> > would be quite suitable for "Lego Advance" products.
> > Lego wouldn't even need to do anything but
> > monitor/contribute to this forum.
> >
> > Using both the forum, and their ability to repackage
> > Lego parts into Lego Advance kits, they could
> > revitalize that segment of the populace that *IS*
> > interested in straight forward building toys.
> >
> > By showing support for this market segment, Lego would
> > benefit from all the ideas that would be supported.
> > That would take part of their product line out of the
> > 'toy' category and place it firmly in the 'inventor
> > systems' category, even though it is arguably already
> > so.
> >
> > Looking at the big picture, robots and systems with
> > embedded processors around the house have specific
> > developmental requirements. By this I mean that toys
> > are already being produced that are a shortcut to what
> > Lego offers. Could you build a robot vacuum from Lego?
> > A sentry robot? A system that monitors your house? The
> > Aibo (even though I'll never buy from Sony again) is a
> > certain winner for the kids in deciding which they
> > want for the holidays. How much would you pay for a
> > Lego kit that creates something similar to the Aibo?
> > 1500, 2000?
> >
> > TLG will not generate huge revenues by simply
> > reinventing what Lego has already. They need to aim at
> > a more technically savvy and technically aware
> > audience. TLG needs to create the Lego Advance line of
> > products and develop further on that so that
> > tomorrow's kids will be building things that are not
> > yet available in the same market segment/place today.
> >
> > Sure, there are lots of things that you can build with
> > Lego now, but imagine if TLG were to turn the volume
> > up by several notches?
> > All the things that we (AFOLs) would like to be able
> > to buy would help do that, but there has to be a
> > business model that fundamentally fits with the creed
> > of Lego in general. The Lego Advance has to be more
> > than a toy, but less than a home security system.
> > Along with sales, they must avoid legal issues, and
> > trying to sell into markets that are already well
> > attended.
> >
> > Some suggestions (workable or not) would be:
> >
> > 1 - A tie-in with X-10 products for control of those
> > products
> > 2 - Wireless communications with sensors (bluetooth?)
> > 3 - More advanced sensors (get out of the experimentor
> > stage)
> > 4 - Ready made shells for home-brew parts/sensors
> > 5 - Products that link systems together at home in
> > ways that are not available to home users in general.
> > For example, look at new home construction products
> > and how they function over networks.
> >
> > All of that would have to be Lego Advance products,
> > and not cut into their other business of movie tie-ins
> > etc. It also requires that Lego begin competing in
> > areas that they have never tried before.
> >
> > Anyway, the Lego Advance systems is what I would like
> > to see.
> >
> > --- Steve Hassenplug <Steve@TeamHassenplug.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, November 28, 2005 5:12 pm, Steve Lane
> > > yahoo.co.uk@qs483.pair.com> wrote:
> > > > I think a business approach that can never fail is • to take a popular product ie
> > > > "Mindstorms" and just re-invest some of the • profits to develop the basic idea,
> > > > eg, an improved RCX every five years or so.
> > >
> > > How long has the current version of the RCX been
> > > around?
> > >
> > > > ... and an online forum would be the icing on the
> > > cake.
> > >
> > > What would you want to see in an online forum? What
> > > would it include that's not
> > > available here (LUGNET) and/or on LEGOfan?
> > >
> > > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
|
| (...) That's a very interesting point "should Lego allow others to make Mindstorms pieces". It would mean a big culture change. On the one hand they could lose sales to an outside company, but on the other hand they could generate sales by selling (...) (18 years ago, 2-Dec-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
|
| While I personally love to see that, I just dont see them putting their neck out on that one. As stated before, we (AFOLs and advanced users) are barely a blip on the register of the bean counters, and it is to them that any business development (...) (18 years ago, 29-Nov-05, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
33 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
|
|
|
|
