| |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Dave Low writes:
> [...]
> Here's my summary of the views expressed above:
>
> LUGNET has been established by fans, for fans. Postings by TLC employees, as
> representatives of TLC/LEGO Direct, don't belong in the regular newsgroups,
> as their contributions:
>
> (a) are part of a marketing strategy, not fan-fan dialogue. Such postings
> make LUGNET a tool for TLC, when it is supposed to be a place for LEGO fans;
> (b) come from a place that is permanently and necessarily beyond the AFOL
> community;
> (c) represent the 100% Official LEGO Position, which is expressed in LEGO
> Direct announcements, something like highly customised press releases (eg
> "The LEGO company announced that as of today bulk packs of brown bricks are
> available from Shop at Home...").
>
> I've probably missed something here, and if so welcome any corrections.
That sounds about right to me.
> I have a slightly different opinion. Not everything we might hear from TLC
> is marketing.
Whoops, wait...I need to interject something: I agree with you that not
everything we might hear from TLC is marketing. However, it's all part of
the _marketing strategy_, including the fact that AFOLs were hired by LEGO
Direct and that LEGO Direct showed up here at all. Not that there's
anything wrong with that...I think that's a Good Thing. Let's just not
confuse "everything is part of the marketing strategy" with "everything is
marketing." (Notwithstanding, anything an AFOL LEGO employee posts in an
unofficial manner should be understood not to be necessarily part of the
marketing strategy.)
> LUGNET is already a tool for TLC.
That may be true, but I can assure you that isn't a major reason why was
started! It's surely a nice side-effect, however, if the tool is put to use
the right way.
> I look forward to a time when TLC realises it can use our brains as well as
> our money.
I agree, and I'm sure TLC has realized that. Brad Justus gets it. He
understands it well and he has said that he has worked hard over the past 18
months since LEGO hired him to drive that point home to upper management.
However, let's not lose sight of the fact that the reason they'd want to use
our brains as well is our money is to make more money. (Not that there's
anything wrong with that.)
> When proposed themes, products and even company strategies are
> actually discussed with fans, and fans' ideas and creations have an impact
> on what TLC produces. I think we're already seeing slow steps in this
> direction, particularly in Trains. I think there's room on LUGNET for spaces
> where fans and TLC can build new ideas together. If TLC chooses to do this
> through Summits with the cream of the AFOL crop, that's their prerogative: I
> guess I'd like to see something a bit more democratic, especially when the
> online forum would cost TLC nothing. I'd also rather take part in such a
> forum on LUGNET, where I feel like part of the fan community, rather than on
> lego.com, where I would feel much more constrained in the contributions I
> could make.
>
> By looking at the R&D aspects of TLC's business I think we break out of the
> concept of the company as a krone-driven vending machine with a single
> public face. If we can integrate our creativity and enthusiasm with the
> company's experience and resources, who loses? A deeper symbiosis between
> the LEGO community and the LEGO corporation could benefit us all, but it's
> up to both parties to make it happen.
Well said, Dave.
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Open Source Lego
|
| I'd like to extract one issue from the "LEGO and its Fans" thread. How do we, the fan community, want to interact with TLC? And in what ways can TLC, or parts of TLC, interact with the fan community? Some background, for those disinclined to throw (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
