Subject:
|
Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.castle
|
Followup-To:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 11 Jun 2001 17:51:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1324 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.castle, Brian Kasprzyk writes:
> Thanks for responding! I can clarify this as such: In order to produce a
> set, they have to schedule it, run it, package it and all the other things
> that go into it. While this occurs, they can't run 'x' set now. They can
> only do 1 or the other, not both. The production line doesn't allow for it.
> I have been told by someone that used to work for Lego that Lego only has
> funds for so many molds. If this is so, then that reduces money for tooling
> new molds for new sets. The person also said they usually run a mold until
> it is no longer usable and the extras are stored for parts replacement and
> other such needs (master model building, etc).
Yes, there are always production costs - my bet is that this cost them
considerably less to put back into production than designing a new set.
As to production logjam - this is only significant if they are currently at
their maximum production. I rather suspect they aren't at that point or
they wouldn't have scheduled this.
> You are right. I did not need to combine the issues. They are 2 seperate
> issues. But, (sorry, everyone knows a 'but' comes) I am addressing an issue
> that has come up in this thread about quality of sets and it ability to be
> used in several ways. The older style sets could easily be made into
> several different designs. I don't know who said it, but it was great,
> something to the effect, "why have a building made out of 21 pieces!" Lego
> just needs to start creating more sets like the classic sets! I think
> people would be happier if they came out with a mini-fig scale Inn, done in
> red tudor walls then just reproducing an old set. What I mean by minifig
> scale is larger with bedrooms, a common room, chairs, a bar and stools, etc...
Look at my first response up at the top and I think you have your answer.
They have something that fits the bill, that the fans want to see
re-released, and has a low production cost. Why re-invent the wheel?
You want everything to go back to the old school design philosophy? So do
I. The only way that is going to happen is if the Power That Be at Lego
decide they can make more money with old school design rather than new
school ("juniorized"). That is more likely to happen if they put some Old
School designs on the market.
You want to skip the intermediary step. Can't blame you, but: 1) Lego may
be right that the mass market wants juniorization (as much as that may be
upsetting to Lugnet members); 2) this may be political internal
game-playing/butt-covering (sometimes known as test marketing); 3) best to
have a bone rather than nothing; 4) The divisions in Lego may be autonomous
to the point that one area is listening to us, and another isn't.
I rather suspect #4. Brad (or whomever - I'm crediting Brad for convenience
sake rather than endlessly speculating)) may not be able to directly affect
the design philosophy, but does have the pull to reissue an old set. This
may lead to greater influence by Brad, but then again, this may be the
extent of what he wanted (throw us the bone that he could). I'll happily
take the bone, even if I sniff around for more. :-)
>
> Last comment. I don't see cost being an issue. If they re-released it at
> $30-35, I bet people would still have bought just as many, considering all
> the comments about them costing $80+ on auction sites. $35 for a brand
> spanking new one is still a great deal!! I would be curious to know how
> they did on the Expert Builders Star Wars sets. I picked up my Millinium,
> The Tie-Bomber and the X-wing all for under $50 each. This would really
> help us understand why they don't build full scale Lego buildings. (Making
> my earlier point moot).
>
> BK>
I suspect that Lego is passing along the lack of design costs and middlemen
costs to us. Thank you, Lego! How classy! Yes, you are probably right
that they could have asked more for the Guarded Inn and not been thought
less of for doing such.
Bruce
(hmmmm, no specific castle stuff, so let me fill in that request followups
to lugnet.general)
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
| (...) #4 is correct Bruce. As Brad pointed out to me, what people don't seem to realize is that when Lego Direct started a year or so ago, LD consisted of Brad and just Brad. He had to come up with a business plan and figure out a way to implement (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.castle)
| | | Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
| (...) I agree with you on all points above. My problem is, I have no money!!! Releasing classic sets for original price, plus inflation (and not all of it) is great. I am afraid they are going to produce more classic sets I don't have and then I (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-01, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
| (...) That reminds of the story of Tom Clancy. After releasing one of his books (the Hunt for Red October I think), the U.S. Navy started investigating him for military leaks. Seem that they felt he knew too much about their subs. Then he showed him (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-01, to lugnet.castle)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
| (...) Thanks for responding! I can clarify this as such: In order to produce a set, they have to schedule it, run it, package it and all the other things that go into it. While this occurs, they can't run 'x' set now. They can only do 1 or the (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-01, to lugnet.castle)
|
53 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
|
|
|
|
