Subject:
|
Re: Palm Tree Junior
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Tue, 7 Mar 2000 20:19:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1605 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, James Brown writes:
> In lugnet.dear-lego, Shiri Dori writes:
> > In lugnet.dear-lego, Steve Bliss writes:
> > > In lugnet.dear-lego, brickhead wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yeah LEGO,
> > > >
> > > > those juniorized palm trees are disgusting. My 4- and 6 year old children
> > > > don't like them either. Think of it. I don't EVER will buy another set that
> > > > includes those trees. NEVER.
> > >
> > > Good plan. We bought one set bearing a mono-palm, <set:5976>, but we
> > > never will again! EVER.
> >
> > Yep, me either. For a while I was planning on buying the big one <set:5986>
> > but after getting the 5976 I decided against it. The palm tree was a major
> > reason why.
>
> I bought a second 5976, on clearance, and *threw out* 2 of 3 pieces of the new
> palm tree. (I kept the 2x2 round plate.) This is the only Lego element I've
> ever discarded so. I even keep broken pieces around.
I remember playing with my first tree and thinking how fabulous it was, that
wasn't LEGO a great toy because it was inventive and managed to create a tree
from the most unlikely looking bits. Then I had fun bending them and shaping
them to my will.. used the leaves to make other scenary, made tall trees,
shorter trees, trees with 8 leaves etc.
Seeing the vulgar new tree really put a dent in my day - the old tree is
everything LEGO should stand for (playability, quality, creativity), the new
tree is everything it shouldn't (cheapness and stifling creativity).
And that goes for all the POOPs - the 1x2 brick with side clip, the HORRIBLE
castle archway, the ABOMINABLE Rock-Raiders chassis etc. Cut costs in other
ways if you need to - but skimping on quality is stealing from the children
that you claim to care so much about. I do believe that you care more than
most, but POOPing on us in this way, is not the way to show it!
Sorry for the rant - if your original Palm Tree hadn't been so great in the
first place then taking it away from us wouldn't have been such a cruel thing
to do!
Richard
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Palm Tree Junior
|
| Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) that (...) tree (...) shaping (...) new (...) HORRIBLE (...) If you want people to buy LEGO kits as opposed to your competitors toys, then you need to add value - the values of LEGO are summed up in the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: Palm Tree Junior
|
| (...) Strictly speaking, the 1x2 brick with side clip isn't a POOP--you can't build it out of other pieces. But it is a juniorized, un-lego-ish nightmare. Should have been a 1x2 plate with a side clip. Steve (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Palm Tree Junior
|
| (...) I bought a second 5976, on clearance, and *threw out* 2 of 3 pieces of the new palm tree. (I kept the 2x2 round plate.) This is the only Lego element I've ever discarded so. I even keep broken pieces around. James (URL) getting paid for this (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
23 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
|
|
|
|
