Subject:
|
Re: Will Lego Learn a lesson?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Tue, 15 Aug 2000 17:20:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1247 times
|
| |
|
|
"David Eaton" <deaton@intdata.com> wrote in message
news:FzCAHo.J6A@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Santosh Bhat writes:
> > [snip]
> In general, I agree... I think there's a lot of reasons Lego's losing • money,
> though.
>
> 1. Legoland Theme Parks - The plan was (as I recall) to release parks • every 3
> years around the world. Certainly the most recent in Carlsbad cost them • FAR
> more than they've made off of it. From everything I've heard, it's done • nothing
> but loose them lots of money (probably the reason they were so eager to • hold an
> event there this summer). Further, I've heard that they even limit • attendance
> for a particular day to avoid crowds--- good in theory, but I think that • hasn't
> helped either... It makes me wonder how successful Legoland in Winsor was?
I don't know how well the parks do. I have been to Legoland Billund five
times and I liked it very much, then again I'm biased :-)
> 2. Growing competition - Things like K'Nex, Mega Bloks, Best-lock, etc., • have
> been growing on the market. Or so I assume from all their products that I • see
> on the shelves. They look exactly like Lego from the boxes (so parents • can't
> tell the difference), they're cheaper (parents can see that), and they • make a
> lot of models that Lego won't (army stuff, Nascar stuff, etc) that kids • WANT,
> and MAKE anyway (kids see that, parents see the price difference between • Lego,
> and it's a no brainer which they'll choose-- especially since several are
> compatible with Lego).
Agreed... It's also hard to find a nice LEGO birthday present for a fair
price - in the 80ies there were lot's of little town and space sets for
about $2-$3 (fl 4.95). The sound of rattling presents is becoming more and
more rare on birthday parties
> 3. Znap - Znap. Silly, and pretty useless. It probably cost Lego huge • amounts
> to research, develop, test, produce, and market this product, rather than
> enhance their current one. It seemed rather dubious to me that they'd come • out
> with a product that would compete with their existing product. Also, I • think
> the Znap system is very similar to another old construction toy (Construx, • I
> think?) which also seemingly failed. Anyway, for whatever reason, Znap has • cost
> them lots more money that they couldn't afford to loose.
I think it was designed to compete with K'Nex etc. because with those toys
you can build huge constructions in very little time. The failure proves
once and again that you should stick to what you do best...
> 4. Poor set design & juniorization - Certainly from a retailer's • perspective
> and a customer perspective, this is the biggie; and most notably the one • that
> we as fans comment on the most. From what I've seen, set design from • roughly
> 1997-1999 was pretty lacking. Themes like Fright Knights, Wild West,
> Insectoids, UFO, Hydronauts, Aquanauts, Stingrays, Town Jr, Cyber Slam, • and
> even some of the Ninja sets simply get put on the shelf at the toy store • and
> remain there. For the most part, the themes are either ugly or • uninteresting
> for most Lego buyers, causing a major loss in sales, and even more • discounts on
> Lego-- something that I certainly saw only very rarely before; which in • turn
> causes retailers not to want to buy more Lego for their customers. In • addition,
> juniorization has made the few themes that ARE worthwhile a lot worse for
> collectors to buy. I've even seen several parents in toy stores looking at • Lego
> and commenting on how little could actually be done with the pieces that • they
> give you.
LEGO does not need just better design but also to stick longer to a theme.
From a consumer point of view, the Aquazone stuff doesn't match the Rock
Raiders stuff, even though the bricks can be mixed etc. a parent will
probably choose a theme and stick to that. You probably won't buy all themes
but just a few, killing off a theme means losing some fans on that front, if
the theme that replaces that one isn't as interesting or doesn't really
match another theme you're losing consumers.
On a side note: the Rock Raiders have a lot of potential IMHO but are just
too expensive to start collecting :-(
> Anyway, I could rant for another four hours on juniorization, and I'm not • sure
> that it's THE major reason for Lego's recent losses, but it certainly • hasn't
> helped. I can only hope that the trends we've seen in the 1st release of • the
> Star Wars sets and the Ultimate Collector's series will be followed in • other
> Lego themes.
The Starwars sets were indeed a welcome surprise and found their ways into
not SW-loving collections because of the good selection of parts. Hopefully
they'll make more sets like these in other themes. Unfortunately I think
most of the themes are marketed to different target audiences - Starwars was
bound to be a hit by the older LEGO generation because they love the movies
that much. The TownJr stuff is aimed at younger kids so chances are slim
that it will include complex sets in the future... Oh well, we can only hope
that Town sets will be as good as they were in the eighties and early
nineties, I find myself willing to spend more money on older sets than on
the newer sets...
--
Frank Buiting
Visit the LEGO Lexicon: http://members.chello.nl/~f.buiting/lego/
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Will Lego Learn a lesson?
|
| (...) finished one MOC, and started on a second, but they use basic RR parts and figs. They other stuff comes from my collection of standard parts. The result? Non-junorized Rock Raiders!!!! Rob (24 years ago, 15-Aug-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: Will Lego Learn a lesson?
|
| (...) Totally agree with you on this point. All you do when you kill off a theme is fustrate your customers. Why kill off good selling themes like Pirates. Even Wild West sold pretty well and it was way short lived. It looks like Ninja will be (...) (24 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
