 | | Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets —Jeff Szklennik
|
| | | (...) SNIP (...) SNIP This is an example of unwise marketing/pricing on the Lego Co.'s part (IMHO). To make these more widely accessible, the sets should have been sold per individual winner (just the pirate ship, just the Statue of Liberty, etc.) (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets —Didier Enjary
|
| | | | | (...) As you are, I am a bit disappointed by the range of size TLC have chosen for the LEGOfactory products (too big - 130$ is just an incredibly high upper limit to me for a System and "no licence" product) but I think that choice is due to the (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets — Jake McKee
|
| | | | | | (...) Interesting idea, but I'm not sure that I would agree with you. --off-topic personal viewpoint-- This is a similiar line of thinking to the way that the record industry believed (still believes?) that digital music and filesharing was going to (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets —Adrian Egli
|
| | | | | (...) One thought came to mind as to a "Why"- Star Wars minis. There are still, what, one or two more years left till the Star Wars licence ends? When the Star Wars line does come to an end TLG will have to fill the store shelves with something and (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets —Leonard Hoffman
|
| | | | | In lugnet.build.microscale, Jeff Szklennik wrote: -snip- (...) -snip- I'd like to voice agreement with this. Personally, I drop about ~$20 on LEGO every pay day. I don't drop more as I can afford more each pay day, and I dont save up to buy more (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets —Tim David
|
| | | | | (...) Yes. I agree, and thats not including the fact that they are even more expensive in the UK. The price per piece might not be high but the sets are just too big. If each winner was an indiviudual set I might end up buying most of them over a (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? —Jason Spears
|
| | | | | (...) I have to agree. While I'm delighted with the idea of the lego factory sets and keen on getting the models that are available, I'm just not liking the prices. I don't make a habit of buying $40, $70, & $130 sets. $15-20 sets are more my speed. (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm 80% sure (guesswise) that the reason is "we don't have enough SKUs"... This seems to me a sign of internal breakage, LEGO needs to fix their systems so they can have more SKUs without it costing them a lot more. (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? —Tim David
|
| | | | | | . (...) How much does it cost to have some more numbers?! Tim (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? —Jonathan Lopes
|
| | | | | | | (...) I work for a publisher here in NYC and one of the requirments from our Editor in Chief is 'keeping the sku count low' (number of different books we produce, not quantities of each title that we print). I'm not 100% sure this is the reasoning (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? —Scott Lyttle
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Having a manufacturing background, and having worked a little ops management.. the more SKU's you have, the more associated costs you're going to have (for example--just boxes alone: -more boxes to design and print--adds money to product, (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I think ones that used fixed burden accounting, yes, but many companies have switched to variable burden, or even Activity Based Costing. I believe the cost that LEGO fears lies elsewhere. FUT trimmed to just lugnet.dear-lego (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? — Jake McKee
|
| | | | | | (...) It's not a matter of simply adding more numbers to the system. As was pointed out elsewhere, each new product brings added complexity to the system, as well as additional development costs. Designing and printing one box, for example, is (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | SKUs (was: Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all?) —Marc Nelson Jr.
|
| | | | | | (...) Just looking at <shop.lego.com>, I find: 13 keychains 4 pens 4 backpacks 15 books 1 watch and 55 'other' - mostly Bionicle shoes, t-shirts, and costumes Even this listing leaves out tons of other items that can be found in a Brand Retail store (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: SKUs (was: Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all?) —Orion Pobursky
|
| | | | | | (...) I, for one, like some TLC's non-brick offerings. This one sticks out in my mind: (URL) (19 years ago, 24-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets —Gerhard R. Istok
|
| | | | | (...) I agree with you Jeff, These parts are VERY small, paying 5 cents per part for parts that are only a fraction of the size of 2x4 bricks seems rather pricey. And then grouping the designs together.... As a town person, I am disappointed that (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets —Mark Bellis
|
| | | | (...) SNIP (...) I think the grouping together of designs reduced the company's risk of getting left with shelves full of the least popular one. I'm not sure how many of you buy for parts like I do, but if I were just out for sand green bricks and I (...) (19 years ago, 25-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| | | | |
