Subject:
|
Re: Commentary on Recent Lego Direct Marketing Moves
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build
|
Date:
|
Sat, 9 Jun 2001 16:34:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
417 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.build, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Like I've said before, I wish they WOULD move faster, but doubt that they
> are *capable* of it without organizational change.
Such a pity...I have no first-hand experience with TLC such that I can
actually comment with any real force. I will defer to your greater
knowledge and first-hand experience here, Larry. I still think some changes
should be happening more quickly. Why it doesn't happen is of less interest
to me...
> Again, we may need to agree to disagree. I think there is value in
> speculation about why stuff is more or less likely to be possible. I'll be
> blunter than I was in my comments about airport shuttle... I sincerely
> believe, for good and sufficient reason, that the monorail motor is going to
> be a very tough part to revive. I'd be delighted to be wrong. But why get
> your hopes pinned on something that isn't likely to happen if you can wish
> for things that MIGHT?
I am not actually disagreeing with this either, but I would like to point
out that we were referencing slightly different items as our examples. As
you have pointed out elsewhere, your example item is a complex element with
internals that is far more than just some plain, old, molded element. My
example item, the castle pitchfork, IS a plain, old, molded item.
There is often a lot of speculation revolving around whether an element mold
still exists, is it usable, can it go right into production or is it of
another type and must needs be "knocked off" first to fit the new molding
equipment, etc. etc. I don't have any problem with speculation for the sake
of speculation -- I DO have a problem with claims of authority on this
subject without people knowing the situation from "inside the castle"
itself, and I mean from inside TLC having borne witness to the manufacturing
process from design to full implementation. Would it be feasible for TLC to
bring back the pitchfork element? I don't know, nor does anyone else here on
lugnet whose comments I have read.
But I DO know this -- everything TLC does has a cost, but that's their
business. They are ACTUALLY in the business of molding little plastic stuff
so that buyers of their products can build things with the plastic stuff
they just manufactured. TLC is in the business of making these plastic
items, distributing these items internationally, and then marketing them
such that people know these items are available for sale -- and there are
lots of attendant costs in doing these seemingly simple things. Sure there
are costs in making a pitchfork, just as for everything else TLC does. Is
it worth it to them to manufacture this element again. I don't know,
without a lot more information to hand it's a matter of speculation. But I
and others can wish for it and I don't see how such a simple thing can get
up anyone else's snout...
-- Hop-Frog (Join the Lar and Hop-Frog "love-in"!)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Commentary on Recent Lego Direct Marketing Moves
|
| (...) On this we can both agree. (...) We have slightly different portfolios of hobbies, I guess. I love studying organizations and groups and group dynamics to try to understand why they are the way they are. But ya, you're right. Understanding why (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.build)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Commentary on Recent Lego Direct Marketing Moves
|
| Snipped the stuff I agree with (most of it) (...) I think we may have to agree to disagree on this. Like I've said before, I wish they WOULD move faster, but doubt that they are *capable* of it without organizational change. And like I and some (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.build)
|
7 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
|
|
|
|
