 | | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all?
|
|
(...) 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?
|
|
(...) 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?
|
|
. (...) 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?
|
|
(...) 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?
|
|
(...) 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? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
(...) 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? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
In lugnet.build.microscale, Jeff Szklennik wrote: -snip- (...) -snip- I'd like to voice agreement with this. Personally, I drop about ~$20 on LEGO every pay day. I don't drop more as I can afford more each pay day, and I dont save up to buy more (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
(...) As you are, I am a bit disappointed by the range of size TLC have chosen for the LEGOfactory products (too big - 130$ 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: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
(...) I think the size of those PDF files, there should be an indication on the download page so that people on dialup know it's gonna take a while. ROSCO (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
(...) 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)
|
