Subject:
|
Re: Whither LEGO Steam Trains? (was Re: QT Movie of 4565)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:32:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2192 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> > ...it kills any discussion when a select few know some of the answers and
> > just say 'I can't discuss that'. Don't then. But don't stamp on the
> > discussion.
>
> If my posts came off as "stamping on the discussion" (and I don't think they
> did, but if...) I apologise, that was not at all my intent.
It's not exactly the tone. I guess it's just that no-one else can really
follow an answer along the lines of 'I know, but I can't tell'.
> > ...
> > I'm sure there'd be more take-up if parents could buy something
> > simple, then get more if their kids get hooked.
>
> I think that you're spot on in that sentiment. I dunno how much market there
> is for push trains, though. If you assume power, you have a certain barrier
> to entry in that you have fixed costs (a circle of track, controller, motor)
> that any starter set has to have.
> > Jason J Railton.
>
> PS I never did say what a neat last name you have, you should have been a
> trainhead from birth, you know...
>
> ++Lar
Well, thanks Larry. I've always had model trains, just not LEGO ones
because they're too expensive. Of course, you're forgetting our very own
_night_ train head:
In lugnet.trains, James Brown writes:
> A <$100 train set, especially around the $60 mark would be less of a risk
> for the stores, so would be stocked better
Good point. I don't know of any stores around the South of the UK that
stock trains.
> An unpowered train can be entrusted entirely to a child, without having to
> check if the controller is actually off, or if the motor is left running on
> the track all night. Any toy that involves plugging in is less attractive
> to a parent, for any number of reasons.
Yes! Get 'em hooked as young as possible (sorry to re-order your post, but
I'll take this one last...).
> At $60, a train set is within (although barely) the buying power of many
> children, although it would typically be a 'save up for' thing. $120 leaves
> the kids behind, and means a train set isn't very likely to happen without a
> birthday or Christmas.
Pardon?!? I know you're said to have more disposable income in the US, but
I find it hard to believe that's the norm for kids. Now, Frank's analysis
of the cost of a push-along train was pretty good, but I did originally say
'Engine'. Something along the lines of <set:133> I had one without any
track - you can quite happily push it along the carpet. This would be
around the 15 quid / $20 point, which is what I mean by an affordable
startup. You could then get, say, a couple of wagons for the same price,
then go for the track. Then you get the motors, controller and other stuff.
Then, you can go on to some big unique full set as your save up / Christmas
/ Birthday blag.
Jason J Railton.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Whither LEGO Steam Trains? (was Re: QT Movie of 4565)
|
| (...) This would be a great way to break in, and an even more affordable price point. As to the income thing...That's what I meant by saying "barely" - 60 bucks is a lot of money to a kid, but can be done; a $5 a week allowance is not uncommon, I (...) (23 years ago, 9-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Whither LEGO Steam Trains? (was Re: QT Movie of 4565)
|
| (...) I certainly don't think so! Discussion is great. Asking questions is great. Intelligent speculation using what is publicly known and what business literate people know about how businesses run is great. And you can divine some remarkable (...) (23 years ago, 9-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
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
|
|
|
|
