 | | Factory suggestions
|
|
Jake et al I am very excited about the new factory, especially the train factory I would like to suggest that TLG take a serious look at the moonbase module and castle wall standards. By this I mean that you should consider making some reference to (...) (19 years ago, 18-Aug-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.castle, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: attn Jake/TLC/whoever, about Lego Digital Designer file format/SDK
|
|
(...) I think I've already commented on that. I've partially reverse-engineered the format, but since the libraries are incompatible (the 'rotation' point of brick in Ldraw formate is somewhere else than the rotation point in LDD library), you'd (...) (19 years ago, 14-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: attn Jake/TLC/whoever, about Lego Digital Designer file format/SDK
|
|
(...) I'm already on this issue. After last night's (Sat 13th) annoucement regarding LEGO factory, I'm looking to at least pull Jake aside to talk while I'm still hear at Brickfest. -Orion (19 years ago, 14-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | attn Jake/TLC/whoever, about Lego Digital Designer file format/SDK
|
|
When Lego Digital Designer was first announced/released, the community was told that the file format specs or a SDK so that people can read and write the LDD files would be made available. What is the status on this? I am sure that if this was to (...) (19 years ago, 14-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Vikings in North America... Please?
|
|
Dear Lego, I can guess that the Lego Group has probably heard the old rant by now of Adult Fans of Lego and Adult Lego Enthusiasts who would love very much so to partake of the new Viking Lego line here in North America. Yes, we have been told that (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Being critical of LegoLand Günzburg
|
|
(...) Wow, I didn't expect a reply so fast. Thank you, Jake. And... don't worry, we did have fun too otherwise we wouldn't have visited the park so often (queues were not extremely long off season and because of the bad weather, so we had plenty of (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Being critical of LegoLand Günzburg
|
|
(...) Oh boy, sorry you had some many issues with the park, Maarten. That's a bummer. I've routed your notes to the General Manager of the LLD park. I'm not sure what the follow-up will be, but rest assured that your comments are in his inbox. (...) (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.general, lugnet.legoland.deutschland, FTX)
|
| |
| | Being critical of LegoLand Günzburg
|
|
From July 1 until July 11, 2005 we stayed in Germany. With our seasonpasses we paid several visits to LegoLand Günzburg (nine to be exact: we had planned many other excursions in the area but the kids didn’t like to sit in the car for hours every (...) (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.general, lugnet.legoland.deutschland, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
(...) 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)
|
| |
| | Re: SKUs (was: Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all?)
|
|
(...) 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)
|
| |
| | SKUs (was: Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all?)
|
|
(...) 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: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
In lugnet.build.microscale, Ross Crawford wrote: download the building instructions>, including a PDF or the .lxf file. (...) Um, there is. eg (URL) I want to know is why don't any of the sets have those new cool 8x8 road plates that were in the (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
(...) 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?
|
|
(...) 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?
|
|
(...) 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
|
|
(...) 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?
|
|
(...) 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)
|
