Results 1 – 5 of about 8400.
|
Search took 0.00 CPU seconds.
|
|
| |
So yeah, I'm posting in l.general...
Anyway, using my amazing powers of prognostication (1), I believe that we NA
fans o' LEGO are in for a few nasty surprises in the future with regards to our
relationship, as LUGs and organizations, with TLC.
I've heard various rumours and undercurrents that TLC may be looking at
overhauling their outreaches to fan-run events and even maybe revamping their
previous 'special' commitment to lugs (that I won't talk about 'cause, well,
whatever)
Anyway, having been around long enuf to see the proverbial sewage hit the fan
when 9v disappeared, the colour change, the discontinuation of certain lines
(and sometimes the start of otehr lines *cough* jack stone *cough*), I think I'm
on pretty safe ground that these 'rumoured' changes will cause as equal, or
probably moreso consternation from fans--'weeping and gnashing of teeth outside
the city walls', as it were...
Here's the thing--I really have to understand that there are as many types of
fans in our chosen hobby as there are fans. i.e. everyone has their ideas and
beliefs when it comes to being an adult fan of lego.
So I am just speaking from myself here. And I wanted to get *MY* idea out there
before the furor.
Straight up--TLC is a corporation. It's not *our* corporation, it's *A*
corporation. As such, even though we can speak our minds, they, as a
corporation, will do what they want as a corporation.
Can we be upset? They can't stop us.
Can we rally? why not?
Can we spew venon, shake our fists at the general direction of denmark? Sure,
if you so desire.
Boycott?? Sell your collection?? Knock yourself out.
Can we expect TLC to change their corporate decisions? No. And that's the rub
right there.
This is where I've always had a tough time reconciling 'the fan base' vs ' the
corporate direction'. Did I believe the colour change and the 9v
discontinuation was dumb? Sure. whatever. Did I expect them to reverse their
decisions? Absolutely not. It's *their* company, not mine.
I've heard from many ppl that because we do these shows, that we put on
displays, that we work at bringing the LEGO hobby into the mainstream (a la
comic/sci-fi/etc. conventions) that this makes TLC somehow beholden to us.
Do we, by doing our shows and presentations, increase the revenue of TLC? I
think so. There's probably metrics out there that back that up. I mean, at
every single show, kids and parents are inspired by our displays and one of the
main questions we always get at every single presentation, besides 'how many
pieces is that?', is 'where can we buy LEGO?' Seriously, it is.
So our shows must contribute to a positive bottom line for TLC.
However, that does not give us that entitlement to dictate decisions to the
company.
It really doesn't
We don't do our shows for the proverbial 'pat on the head' from TLC. I don't.
None of my friends do. We do shows because we're fans of LEGO, we love
displaying our builds, we love interacting with the public. There's a litany of
reasons for doing shows and presentations that have absolutely nothing to do
with the manufacturer of our product beyond the fact that they produced the
medium of choice for our shows. They made the bricks, we bought the bricks.
So ask yourselves this question--if TLC suddenly folded shop tomorrow and there
were no new LEGO sets ever produced, would you or your lug still do shows? Of
course you would. We all would. It'd be different to be sure--the secondary
market would explode, but we would still do shows. Most of us wouldn't jump
over to MB or BTR or Tyco or whatever... We'd still build with our LEGO bricks.
I know this to be true because at some of our shows there are meccano guys,
there are guys that have long discontinued toys and stuff that they love
presenting. They're still out there doing shows long after the manufacturer has
disappeared.
That right there is the key. I would still be a fan of LEGO even if the company
wasn't around. I'm a fan of the Commodore 64 and that company's been gone for
years...
Would it change? absolutely. Thankfully TLC is still here so we don't have to
worry about that bit.
So what I'm telling you in the final analysis is that, with whatever TLC comes
out with for us North American AFOL's, sure rant, sure rave, sure get it off
your chest. Don't do any of that to affect change on the company, though.
Don't expect them to change *just because* of our say-so. They don't owe us
because we don't own the company.
I'm a fan of the brick. Have always been, will always be. I've surrounded
myself with pretty much like minded individuals.
The good bit is that *if* TLC is getting out of directly supporting LUGS and
shows in NA (and again, I could be wrong), then these shows and LUGs truly are
ours to direct as we want. It's a consolation, to be sure. Having the support
of the company is nice, is a perk, is a showing from the company that they
appreciate our efforts, however, it's not necessary for us to be fans of the
brick.
I'm going to still put on shows, still attend other shows, still hang out with
AFOL's, still build... So really, what has changed? Is like the first
BrickFest from oh so long ago--Fan shows run by fans for the fans. Should have
always been that way, anyway.
As a final note, seriously, if you are in a LUG or attend shows just for the
'pat on the head' from TLC, if you can't pay full freight to buy a LEGO set that
you want, if you're doing shows just for the discounted other things, then
rethink why you're in this hobby. We're adults here. That's the A in AFOL.
I've hung out with ppl with all sorts of different interests and hobbies, and
this is the only hobby that I can think of that, for some, comes with the
expectation that the company owes them. Really, TLC doesn't.
Will I continue to support TLC? Well, I'll still buy the sets I want, I'll
still do shows, and I'll still build. None of that is predicated on TLC giving
me anything.
All this said, if TLC wants to support LUGs and shows, I'm good with that.
However, I'm not signing an NDA or changing how my show is run to conform with
whatever corporate policies they may have. It's *their* company, but it's *our*
show. If the corporate policy for support for my show falls in line with what's
going on at my show, then everything's good.
I've gone on long enuf. There were other points but I think I've said enuf.
Whatever happens, know that I appreciate all of you. I truly do. And if you
vehemently disagree with me on any of the above, that won't change my
appreciation.
Dave K
1. after all, I did let y'all know about a LEGO store at sherway before anyone
else believed it to be true ;)
|
|
|
| 
jack, stone
(score: 2.733)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, David Koudys wrote:
> So yeah, I'm posting in l.general...
Hi David,
just by chance I came across your loooong article and found it very interesting
to read, even if you mention North America and I live in Europe.
But maybe I can comment from the distance as a person being in the community of
LEGO fans for more than 15 years now. I myself have not been very active in
exhibitions, shows and Lugs over the past 5 years. Blay gave me a hard time.
Then the chareer took it's tribute....
So I have not heard anything from LEGO and no rumors about LEGO cutting costs or
support on LUG support (in whatever manner).
But I did never care for that in the first line. I have always appreciated
independency and valued this higher than a money worth support of LEGO (which I
in fact never received personally#). But what you call the "pat on the head" has
been in fact a nice extra in past shows. I loved the more symbolic recognition
more than money worth supports.
Lego being at a show to give inside information or first sneak views on future
sets. Designers speaking in front of an audience. At maximum support with some
goodies for a public lottery. This has been great. Today Lego uses YouTube to do
part of this (and in result it's not us AFOLs to be the first target). But from
cost and output that might the way to go for them?
I fully agree on your thinking: we are AFoLEGO - it is their hardware that we
use even if the company would not be around any longer.
For me it is even the more: they do not just offer a couple of bricks but a
mindset and ethics as well. They offer (still) very good quality (although this
has been even better in the mid-eighties). They take care for the enviroment.
The product is one of a few, which is really safe to kids (compare this with
typical china made trash). They actually DO care. They still offer jobs in our
more and more de-industrialzed First World. They still have a concept ("System")
behind their original and 8mm x ÂÂÂÂ8mm x
ÂÂÂÂ9.6mm grid. Even if clones do exist and are legal today: I
do not like clones.
And for me: I have been really upset about blay/gray desaster. For PF-trains I
realized the benefits this offers in play value at least at home. Running
multiple trains independently is a benefit for me. I run it still on metal track
an can now combine 9V plus battery AND 12V running on PF-battery. This mix is
the best train system I ever had. (And the PF-system is the best within this mix
and I feel confident to promote this against any public audience).
But even the better: in review of 15 years I see a lot of former dreams having
become true:
(1)
communication:
LEGO has been as open as the Mossad 15 years ago.
Today there is comunication on many levels.
(2)
sets:
There has been "Town Junior" and "Jack Stone".
Today we have Emerald Night, Maersk Train, Cafe-Corner-Modulars, Mindstorms,
Technic, Sculptures, Star Wars...
All of these are so advanced. They exceed the dreams I had 15 years ago by far.
(3)
company policies "against" AFOLs - that's in fact a professional view and not a
dream becoming true:
But there has been just nothing 15 years ago.
10 years ago we all have been very enthusiastic.
Maybe in the past years the many NDAs have become a concern (I signed NDAs on
10183 and Power-Function workshops - but I regard tham to be timed out since
long). And I heard that Lego does not want to see certain content (sex, violence
...) at shows (or shows of Lugs) that they support officially. Until today I
always saw this more as a theoretical set of laws to protect LEGO against abuse
of their well-reputated brand. They learned the lesson out of e.g. that old
KZ-theme sets many years ago.
So in the end it is up to each Lug of course: can you live with a level of
"censorship" that obliges you to be in-line with LEGO ethics - for me that is
(until now) no problem. If LEGO ever asks for more than that: We are free to do
our own thing, as you mention.
In fact I enjoy some decent sex+violence content in fan-displays - especially
when it is more in comedy/parody style. But LEGO does not want to appear in
newspapers in conection with such topics. So just hide it well enough or do your
very own show.
Maybe I completely missed your point of changes in collaboration LUGs vs. LEGO.
I would appreciate more specific information then....
Leg Godt
Ben
*******************
#) In fact I did received minor compensations for working on the 10183 project
group and in a PowerFunctions workshop.
And I had the chance for bulk-orders as part of 1000steine.
=> This never had an impact on my thoughts on LEGO as a company.
The main payment has been the chance to look behind the courtains and have
access to the Lego Vault in Billund. And this has changed my mindset positively.
|
|
|
|
jack, stone
(score: 2.721)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
Have you accounted for the Galidor factor?
|
Is that a corollary to the Jack Stone Effect?
|
|
|
| 
jack, stone
(score: 2.671)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.build.minifigs, Christoph Bartneck wrote:
| |
For now I would like to keep it open. Meaning that I do not want to exclude
any minifigure. I believe that these exotic examples are also a rather small
proportion of all figures and hence it might not matter that much.
|
By a quick count at BrickLink, I found 235 “iffy” minifigs-- But I knowingly
skipped Fabuland, Jack Stone, Technic, Belville, Scala, Galidor, and Bionicle.
Knowing the above, I’d guess it’d be in the ballpark of 300-500 borderline
minifigs?
| |
Would you be interested in collaborating in this project?
|
Yes and no-- I’m not in Europe, but I’d of course be happy to see such an
endeavor, especially if the logistics are handled well. For instance, will they
be kept in a searchable online database? How will they relate back to years of
release and sets? How will it be maintained going forward? Will it denote
differences in part variation (like hollow/solid stud head, torso design, arm
design, etc)?
I’ve got an extensive collection, although it’s not overly distinctive from
other people’s in Europe. I’m sure it’s easier for you to find (say) BlackTron
figures or ResQ figures in Europe. I expect my value added would be in the few
“special” minifigs I own, like the Red Sox promotional figure pictured above.
Do you have a catalog of “missing” figures that you KNOW are missing, and/or a
catalog of figures that you already have?
DaveE
|
|
|
|
jack, stone
(score: 2.444)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, John Neal wrote:
| |
Hey Dave, thanks for that info; I was wondering about the exact height of
the new, longer legs.
|
I’d actually been wondering about that for quite a while before actually
being able to buy my first Toy Story sets. Everyone showed Woody from the
front, but nobody posted a pic of the back of his legs that I could find, so
I wasn’t sure if they were going for standard brick/plate height when
standing, or brick-length when seated. In the case of the former, they’d
have to leave the base of the heel open so it would fit around a stud, but
the way they did it, it just looks like they added another hole between the
two on a standard leg.
| |
Yes, there will be a lot of blue jeans and cowboy boots in my new, larger
scale world;-) But luckily, I will really only need a dozen or so figs
standing around to accent the MOC’s.
Here’s to hoping that TLC decides that some more height variation in the MF
world is a Good Thing™ and that more colors will follow.
|
Note that the 2x2x2 slope that they like to use for skirts is about two
plates shorter than the height of the new legs assembly, so that’s always an
option that will give you a little more variety there. Besides, if all the
men are wearing cowboy boots while standing around a train, it would look
period appropriate if all of the women are wearing skirts of some sort.
|
Well, I’m not really modeling any particular period, so cowboy hats en masse
won’t be happening, but the slope idea is a good one to keep in mind. I’ll be
using regular, fleshie heads, not Woody, et al., and I’ll be swapping out the
torsos, too. All that I really need are the legs and arms. That is why I’m so
glad that they are interchangeable/compatible and removable (as opposed to the
Jack Stone configurations).
Now I’m getting all excited about it; I might have to go and visit BL! :-)
JOHN
|
|
|
|
jack, stone
(score: 2.379)
|
More: Next Page >>
|
