Subject:
|
Re: CEO-Letter // The answer
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.color
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Mar 2005 22:29:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3227 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.color, Joe Strout wrote:
> In lugnet.color, Christian Treczoks wrote:
>
> > What value has an apology even from a CEO on behalf of his company, if
> > there is no intent whatsoever to remedy the situation? Sorry, but I
> > can't accept this "apology".
> > ...
> > The biggest mistake is not to fix a mistake once it is found.
>
> No, a bigger mistake would be to attempt to fix it, and go out of business. Do
> you *really* feel you would be better off in that case? Start buying Mega-Bloks
> to continue your hobby, would you?
>
> Be realistic. Whether you accept it or not, they've got a bottom line to
> maintain, and if they can't afford to switch back, they can't afford to switch
> back.
>
> Assuming you still can't accept this, can I have your LEGO? I'll even pay for
> the shipping!
Actually, I agree with Christian.
Admitting to a mistake and then stating that you aren't going to do anything to
resolve the issue isn't the best way to regain lost support. For many fans,
LEGO ceased to be a viable product post-2003. From my point of view,issuing
this statement was a mistake. It doesn't do anything to alleviate the problem
for colour purists (such as myself). Instead, it calls into question the
competence of LEGO's market researchers, and exposes LEGO as being a company
that has been grossly mismanaged. To completely overlook a core group of
consumers when making a decision as significant as this colour change is a
serious oversight. I am a bit confused as to why the CEO would publicly admit
to these errors.
Also, why does everybody always ask for somebody's LEGO when they complain about
the colour change? And more to the point, would that colour purist really want
their collection contaminated with the new grey? Just because you don't support
LEGO post 2003, doesn't mean that you have abandoned the hobby.
Later.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: CEO-Letter // The answer
|
| (...) Well, I don't think anything they CAN do short of forcing the company into bankrupcy would satisfy color purists. They can't afford to bring back the old colors. You guys want the old colors. Either way, someone's going to be sad. (...) While (...) (20 years ago, 8-Mar-05, to lugnet.color)
| | | Re: CEO-Letter // The answer
|
| (snip) (...) Ok, it's a known fact that AFOL's make up from 1-5% in sales for TLG. How does 5% translate to a "core group of consumers"? Now, if you managed to get 40%, that would be a stronger point for debate... Scott (20 years ago, 9-Mar-05, to lugnet.color)
| | | Re: CEO-Letter // The answer
|
| (...) I think the CEO thinks he can lure some of us back into their thrust with an apology. Since they don't plan on doing anything for AFOLs, a well-written apology and some respectful words is the cheapest, most effective way for them of gaining (...) (20 years ago, 9-Mar-05, to lugnet.color)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: CEO-Letter // The answer
|
| (...) No, a bigger mistake would be to attempt to fix it, and go out of business. Do you *really* feel you would be better off in that case? Start buying Mega-Bloks to continue your hobby, would you? Be realistic. Whether you accept it or not, (...) (20 years ago, 8-Mar-05, to lugnet.color)
|
79 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
|
|
|
|
